Page 1 of 4

[ 60 posts ]

Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

V4.4 - AX-1-0 Resolution (I hope!)
CyberShadow	Post subject: V4.4 - AX-1-0 Resolution (I hope!) Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 12:18 am
Swarm Tyrant Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:22 pm Posts: 9349 Location: Singapore	OK. I have put this off as much as I could!   The Tiger Shark AX-1-0 I have given this a lot of thought. Firstly, a bit of background. I have basically split the Air Caste forces into two groups. These broadly relate to the aircraft and SHT in other lists. Aircraft Equivalents Barracuda - Relates to fighter/interceptor in other lists. Tiger Shark - Relates to bomber/ground support broadly in other lists. SHT Equivalents Manta - Relates to the heavier titans in other forces, but has the advantage of having transport and being more in line with ground troop support. Moray - Generally a medium titan role on the battlefield. AX-1-0 - A SHT equivalent. I think of this similar to a flying ShadowSword. It does not equate directly to light/scout titans. As I say, these are broad clasifications, and should not be taken too literally. Details I have looked at the AX-1-0 stats, and compared them to the FW 40K version. In the end, I find that there is little that has room for change. The weapon load is dictated by the 40K version, and to change the stats for these would impact on other vehicles in the list, and potentially change the role of the aircraft. The only real change that I have made is to swap in the seekers. So, the new stats are: Points: 225 Force List: Available individually (max formation size of one), any number of formations within 1/3 of total force limit permitted. Type: War engine, bomber Speed: Bomber Armour: 5+ Close Combat: n/a Firefight: n/a 2x Light Railcannon - 45cm - MW4+ - Titan Killer (1), FxF Twin-Linked Burst Cannons - 15cm - AP4+ Heavy Interceptor Missiles - 30cm - AT5+ - FxF Aircraft Seeker Missiles - 45cm - AT6+ - Guided missiles FxF - Fixed forward fire arc Notes: DC2, Critical effect as version 4.3.3 Notes The points cost has taken a hike. I am aware that it has gone up a lot, but I think that this is a reasonableprice for it. I have decided to keep the formation size as it is in version 4.3.3. This is only partially due to stubborness!    I do feel that pairing these up puts a lot of restrictions on them, while also at the same time making them tougher. Individually, they need to be committed with a little care, and with ground troops supporting and clearing the flight path in. I am open to changing the formation structure of these, but after a little more testing and feedback on use. I have taken off the AA stats, since there is no use in them. Fluff - OK, I know that there will be a few voices stating that this is not true to the background fluff, but I disagree. The sum total of background fluff consists of a single piece of colour text, from Forge World. I feel that this stat goes with the spirit of the text, and making the craft stronger would make it very expensive as a consequence, and not only price it out of many players budgets, but also encroach on the Moray. OK... deep breath... I am open to comments on this, but please be aware that I dont want to change too much at this point. I am happy to take comments and feedback, but please be constructive. Thanks. _________________ https://www.cybershadow.ninja - A brief look into my twisted world, including wargames and beyond. https://www.net-armageddon.org - The official NetEA (Epic Armageddon) site and resource.
Top

Tactica	Post subject: V4.4 - AX-1-0 Resolution (I hope!) Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:33 am
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am Posts: 2241	CS, Thanks for taking a stab at getting this done. I can only thank you for that. I think keeping the 2x 4+ main gun instead of a 2x 3+ was responsible if the points were not going to change. I might even be OK with it if the points were only going to go up 25 points. But when we used to have it at 3+ and the change was made to 4+ and it didn't get a lot of playtest following... to keep it at this and make a significant points hike... well, more later. I think the seeker adoption over the MW 6+ was a good one and much more in flavor with the real ship. Good move. I never understood the tracer on this craft anyway and thought we were paying for something we shouldn't even have - so bravo! I think the removal of the AA on the Heavy Interceptor missles and the Twin-linked burst cannon were both good ideas since they were basically unusable and meaningless points sinc on a vessel that couldn't make use of them. You'll need to change the names from something different than the weapons with the same name in the list though. This change will definitely allow enemy aircraft with 15cm AA weapons run right up on our tail. As you kept the 2x 4+ lightrailcannon instead of the 2x 3+ lightrailcannon... as you reduced the Tracer to a Seeker...  and as you eliminated the AA on the entire plane... an uptick of 50 points to 225 does seem hefty at first glance. I would have expected you to go back to the 'rightful' 2x 3+ if the points were going up this much. To keep the 2x4+ AND raise it 50 points along with the other changes... well... When I look at the following, (more to follow) ELDAR VAMPIRE RAIDER Price: 200 points Type: Aircraft/WE Speed: Bomber Armour: 5+ CC: 6+ FF: 4+ Weapon 2x Vampire Pulse Laser, R:45cm, Fp:AT4+, Pulse, FFA Scatter Laser, R:30cm, Fp:AP5+/AT5+/AA5+, FFA Notes: DC2. Planetfall. Reinforced Armor. May transport eight of the following units ....... ...I wonder how our v4.4 AX-1-0 is really going to measure up for 25 points more by comparison. Considering the amount of damage the Eldar Vampire can deal is one thing, but forget that it can get 6 hits (3 on average) from its main gun for a second... it can deliver a great assault formation, it can fight or deliver FF4+ supporting fire to disembarking troops, it can sustain fire once landed, it can planetfall, and it has Reinforced Armor for durability - heck, it can land and claim an objective! "Whoo-hoo! I want to trade our 225 for their 200! - heck, I'll even pay 225 for theirs over ours!" Seriously, even if you say the 2x Eldar Pulse Laser tech is roughly equal to our 2x lightrailcannon tech at MW4+ TK(1)... (which i don't think it is) we don't transport, we don't planetfall, and we don't have RA, and we don't support troops in FF, and we don't claim objectives with the AX-1-0... is 225 really the right price for what is essentially 2x 4+MW TK(1). Our 1 main weapon hit a turn on average must *really* be worth a lot more than I think it is by comparison. I understand handling this gently and being conservative - but wow - this definitely feels a bit on the side of overcompensating from a 175 point plane with 2x 3+ MW TK(1) + support weapons. All that said CS - I'm happy to playtest whatever you see fit. I wouldn't feel right if I didn't express my strong feeling that this adjustment is a bit over the top though. Hopefully this is the critisism & compare/contrast you were looking for. Cheers on getting something for us to look at. Looking very forward to v4.4, _________________ Rob
Top

Dobbsy	Post subject: V4.4 - AX-1-0 Resolution (I hope!) Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 5:53 am
Brood Brother Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:24 am Posts: 4499 Location: Melbourne, Australia	On first glance CS, your changes are mainly good, but I agree with Tac' on the points issue - I would have preferred it to go to 200 max and test before the 50 point jump. Anyway, I'm gonna try and get some playtests with it for a better view.
Top

The_Real_Chris

Post subject: V4.4 - AX-1-0 Resolution (I hope!) Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 6:48 am

Brood Brother Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm Posts: 8139 Location: London

The comparison with a vampire is a bit strange Why? Well the main gun is a lot worse. Unless I misunderstand probability you get an average of 1 3/4 hits with it (1 from 2 dice, 1/2 from one dice etc). Against an ra taget that is 7/16 of a hit. Compared to the TS's 1 instant kill. Thats what you pay for. Points wise then can you kill enough to make you points back over the course of a game? That fundementally for me is the calculation that informs my choice of aircraft. In a 4 turn game I would expect 3 turns of flying. The old TS was no worries here - the new one is a bit trickier. From a purely powergaming point of view I wouldn't take it now as I reckon I can kill 200 points with it over the course of a game (on average, whereas against an army like marines with expensive RA vehicles and infantry I would take as many as possible!). Unsurprisingly I'm dissapointed, my main problems remain. 1. Unlike a shadowsword you are best shooting RA single hit targets not multiple dc targets - you simply kill more stuff quicker. 2. You still strike from outside the majority of flaks range. This does mean interceptors are better here, which is a metagame change and favours some armies more than others. 3. If the fluff is its a warengine hunter it doesn't match. In any analysis it is a tank hunter that can if it wants do okay against WE/Titans. I stick to the point that it would have been better to give it a shadowsword like gun, drop its armour so it is no longer the toughest bomber in the game (out of interest in forgeworld stats is it tiugher than a marauder? I though it was 2 'structure points' to 3 for a marauder - In Epic terms that would be a single 5+ DC to a marauders 4+ DC, though of course the marauder sucks and should be 2DC 5+ ) and stick it in a two plane squadon to bring its survivability and formation cost back up (keeping activations reasonable). I'll try and get Neil in Chittagon interested in a game to try it, otherwise General_Ng and Ginger may be seduced into giving it a go. Just to see if it is still blatently abusable it could try a four plane army against, say, the winning army of last years club challenge (was 26-30 players I think, the winner was an Imperial Guard army). I have looked at the AX-1-0 stats, and compared them to the FW 40K version. In the end, I find that there is little that has room for change. Just to point out here that as I noted above the plane has been made much tougher in reguards to other aircraft conversions, as why if (as air is a bit wierd in EpicA) they get so changed, why does the TS get a direct/boosted conversion? Oh, and something I'm in favour of powering up The Burst cannons getting the AA attack. I thought it was a signiture thing for tau to have the 360 drones covering their aircraft and am sad to see them go. It also further emphasises that interceptors should fight it, not ground flak, something I still feel is at odds with the ethos and feel of Epic. Not to mention Imperial Thunderbolts and Ork Fighter Bombers suck at intercepts Another edit - If you say in the fluff its a tank hunter the weapons make more sense than 'a shadowsword equivalent'. _________________ If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com! 'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913 "Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography." General Plumer, 191x

Top

Dobbsy	Post subject: V4.4 - AX-1-0 Resolution (I hope!) Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 7:02 am
Brood Brother Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:24 am Posts: 4499 Location: Melbourne, Australia	Quote (The_Real_Chris @ 01 Mar. 2006 (05:48)) Unsurprisingly I'm dissapointed, my main problems remain What a shock!   I stick to the point that it would have been better to give it a shadowsword like gun, drop its armour so it is no longer the toughest bomber in the game

Let's not go down this road again please TRC. CS has it set for now. Test it and see.

I'll try and get Neil in Chittagon interested in a game to try it

Excellent! That's the spirit.

Just to see if it is still blatently abusable it could try a four plane army

I'm guessing it won't be what you think it is. But I'm eager to find out.