Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 1
  [ 5 posts ] 

(percieved) AT gap and Narwhal deficiencies...
Nerroth
 Post subject: (percieved) AT gap and Narwhal deficiencies...
PostPosted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 12:05 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 12:00 pm
Posts: 573
Location: Canada
Hi!

I have noticed that the Narwhal (Scorpionfish, I'd agree with the name change) is not a highly favoured vehicle among some here, it seems to have not enough of a GM presence - even in pairs - in comparison to a formation of Stingrays, which are quite nice as AP dispensers.

Also, Tactica and others have commented on the relative lack of AT fire the list has available (while it's crawling with AP options!), and the nature of the main Tau units precludes overly dramatic stat line changes - at least if we want to maintain some sort of connection with the units' 40K representations.

Perhaps a revision of the loadout of the Narwhal could help increase the AT options for a Tau force, doing so in a way as to make use of the philosophy of using guided missiles to replace crude arty barrages:

NARWHAL SUPER-HEAVY MISSILE GUNSHIP


Type          Speed  Armour  Close Combat  Firefight
War Engine  20cm   4+        6+                5+
Weapon                         Range  Firepower  Notes
4 x Seeker Missiles           75cm   AT6+        Guided Missiles
2 x Smart Missile System   30cm   AP4+         Ignore Cover
Tracer Missiles                 75cm   MW6+        Guided Missiles

               
Damage Capacity 3. Critical Hit Effect: The Scorpionfish?s Missile stockpile explodes. The Scorpionfish is destroyed,
and any units within 5cm of the model suffer one hit on a D6 roll of 6.
Notes: Skimmer, Reinforced Armour, Markerlights



So a squadron of 2 would output as many Seeker Missiles as a Stingray formation would Submunitions Missiles, but don't get the advantages that the Submunition Missiles have against infantry in cover - or its +1 standard to hit.

How does this sound? OK, so it doesn't do very much to tip the scales, but it's not supposed to - just allow a squadron of 1 or 2 to help out a bit more in wiping out that enemy AV formation.

Gary

_________________


Gue'senshi: The 1st Kleistian Grenadiers

v7.3 pdf

Human armed forces for the greater good.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Honda
 Post subject: (percieved) AT gap and Narwhal deficiencies...
PostPosted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 12:27 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:44 pm
Posts: 1891
Location: Katy, Republic of Texas
1. Don't like the name at all. I know it sounds all "nautical", but phonetically, it drags. However, that can be addressed later. I still think Scorpionfish is fine or if you don't like that and a "fish" name is acceptable, how about "Stonefish". It's one of the deadliest fish in the sea.

2. Removing the AA missiles doesn't make sense to me. The whole idea (well, my concept of it that is) behind this vehicle as a missile carrier is to support all operations. Because we fielded the equivalent of four of these in my last battle, we really gave the SM player some concern when flying his Thawk around the battlefield. He knew that we not only blanketed our operations area with ML, but that we had vehicles who could reach out and knock him out of the sky. At the same time, we were able to severely bruise anything else the SM player put in our path.

The combination of ML umbrella + Sustained Fire were quite effective.

Which ever way we go, I'd be really hesitant to do something that would start driving up cost. It fits in very nicely right now.



I would strongly suggest that we keep that capability. Personally, this vehicles' capabilities are critical to my attack plan.

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Dobbsy
 Post subject: (percieved) AT gap and Narwhal deficiencies...
PostPosted: Fri Oct 21, 2005 12:50 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:24 am
Posts: 4499
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Just on the name - how about the Porpoise or Dauphin(dough-fan)? French word for dolphin. Or the Marlin?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tastyfish
 Post subject: (percieved) AT gap and Narwhal deficiencies...
PostPosted: Fri Oct 21, 2005 1:57 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 6:35 pm
Posts: 120
Whilst on the name, I think Narhal is too well known for its long tusk which this doesn't have - if there was a Heavy Rail varient then fair enough.
Perhaps Porpoise, Humpback (the drop ship does have a hump) or Beluga? Not sure on dauphan, seeing as there isn't any other french names and isn't it a courtly rank anyway?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Honda
 Post subject: (percieved) AT gap and Narwhal deficiencies...
PostPosted: Fri Oct 21, 2005 3:09 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:44 pm
Posts: 1891
Location: Katy, Republic of Texas
Oddly enough, I thought of Beluga as well. Pilot (as in whale) could also be a possibility. Dolphin sounds good as well, Porpoise for some reason doesn't sound right to me.

Ah well, what's in a name?

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 1
  [ 5 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net