Sorry, but I completely disagree. Ground attack stats:

Thunderbolt: AP4+, AP5+, AT4+ My Lightning AP5+, AT4+

Seems pretty clear to me which is better at ground attack.

Yes the lightning can ground attack at 45cm, with a mighty one autocannon. Oooo, dangerous. When you add the lack of any armour save on my version (which is again background-correct), you have a plane that sucks as ground attacks.

Now look at AA stats:

Thunderbolt: 2xAA5+ My Lightning: AA6+, AA4+ Your lightning: 2xAA5+

How exactly does your lightning put the focus of the fighter on interception, when it's barely better than a thunderbolt at it? Mine puts the focus purely on interception because it has the option for the 45cm AA attack on a 5+ (on interception), or can close in for the kill with a 3+ at 30cm. That's a dedicated interceptor.

Basically, the Elysian Lightning is not background representative, and is much worse than a thunderbolt. Mine's background representative and about on par with a 'bolt in terms of power, just with more of an interception bias, as it should be.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

I don't care about 40k stats; I care about matching the background, where the Lightning has weaker armour. It has 30mm hull armour as compared to 45mm on the thunderbolt.

The nimbleness is represented by it being a fighter rather than the thunderbolt's fighter-bomber.


"Whilst the lightning is faster, with better rates of climb and dive, it is also a lighter aircraft, less rugged in design and more demanding of maintenance crews." - IA1

"As an air superiority craft the Thunderbolt is better armed and armoured than the Lightning, but slower." - Lexicanum

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

I may switch to the Battle Conclave at some point, but I'm not convinced that death cult assassins or crusaders actually add anything to the formation. They'd just be slightly different CC specialists, and I don't see how that is really worthwhile. Not to mention that I don't like how people are now happy to hang around with arcos, since they always used to be madly flailing freaks who would accidentally kill anyone nearby.

I don't like them as an upgrade for the same reason; they're too dangerous to hang around near people, especially once activated.



Sorry, I like 'em. Some of them are official (Redemptionist Crusade for example), and the others are fitting. It's not like you actually need to use them ever, they're just there for a bit of flavour in the list.

Given that I'm inventing two giant tracked churches, I'm not that worried about inventing a few fitting fluff names.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

IIRC even in Aeronautica Imperialis the Lightning and Thunderbolt can sustain the same damage. The Lightning is more nimble but has less weapons.
Thats two rulesets which contradict the fluff. Even from the same company who invented the Lightning in the first place.
Thats arguments abotu armour alone.

Anyway: We should settle on a unified stats for the Lighning Interceptor/Strike. To have several versions of the same unit/model is just wrong.

For me the stats developed in the Imperial Guard subforum in conjunction to the Elysian army list are the NetEA official stats.
If you want to discuss any changes feel free to open a new thread

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

There are no official stats, as they've never been in an official list and there is no Imperial Navy AC. "Lightning Interceptor" isn't even a real thing; the Autocannon version is the Lightning Attack Fighter.

Until such a time as there are official stats, I'm sticking with the stats I have, which are better balanced and more representative.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

We should select an Imperial Navy AC
Not me as i would try to upgun the Thunderbolt to match the FW model

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

I'd guess it comes under Steve54's remit as human champ?

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

Hmm seems so.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Yeah, without any all navy army lists, it's pretty much making sure of naming conventions and standardizing loadouts. Not really worthy of an AC.

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.

Cool, I look forward to testing this out.

That being said however I have a few of points I think worth mentioning. Firstly was there not plans to change the cost of any of the sister's formations? I'm still of the opinion that retributors are largely useless in their current state. As an upgrade unit to other fms I'd maybe be tempted depending on cost but the formation packs very little punch for its cost.

I did have problems creating a BTS worth using before, though I still plan to take a maxed-out sisters mission at some point, now I think I'll just be bringing that new fangled cathedral seeing as its awesome.

I still hate the 1/4 rule. However the new WE additions make this less of an issue than before.

Re: Penitents, they're a harder choice now which is a good thing and the double Heavy flamer is a nice addition.

The modelling opportunities presented by the new units is pretty damn cool, here's hoping Ben is able to do resin again soon as I think he has one or two pieces perfect for the new units.

um, thunderbolts arent fighter bombers. they're pure fighters.
atleast they are in most lists i've ever seen

anyway, first reading of the list seems ok, (though i'm not at all convinced that the big chapel is worth more than the two little chapels, let alone so much more)

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~

I'm being cautious here. Most of the changes in this version were boosts of one kind or another, so I want to see how they pan out before looking at pricing. Bear in mind that the new Faithful rule makes sisters formations a lot better, though probably not as big a boost for retributors, so maybe they should get a price drop.



Fair enough! I'd like as much feedback on the chapel and cathedral as possible.



Shrug. I don't think it's that limiting unless you want battle titans, which should be rare for the sisters.



Yeah, the change in 40k to two heavy flamers gave be the justification I needed for a points boost, while taking the sting out of it. They should still be good but less of a default choice.



Hadn't thought of the "giant whale" as a proxy, but it's a good fit actually, and I think he has most of the components you'd need to make a chapel available (SHTs in metal and spare SWR Burninator guns).

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

Look again. They are, and always have been, Fighter Bombers.



The pricing on those is basically guesswork until I get a chance to try them out ingame. I erred on the side of caution. The extra range on the cathedral should make it a more appealing choice given the lack of ranged fire in the list.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

i had looked again at the compendium stat sheet before commenting. they're listed as F, not FB
perhaps its a bookwide typo (its listed that way on each instance, not just the one time) rather than a change to the eUK/original GW version. certainly the compendium is more up to date than the GW publication in regards to the eldar pulse rule etc. i guess it'll be sorted once the new book comes out.

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~

It's a mistake in the compendium then. Look at the online GW doc, or the original printed book, or EpicUK. All have FB.

The compendium was never "official".

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread