Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 2
  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Tigershark AA?
Dobbsy
 Post subject: Tigershark AA?
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 2:30 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:24 am
Posts: 4499
Location: Melbourne, Australia
I know we had this discussion before but I can't find it now the boards were updated and I forget what the outcome was.

Why do the Tigersharks have AA attacks? Being  bombers they can't intercept or CAP. Can they use their AA attacks if fighters end up in their arc, i.e the fighters fly on (stay till end phase) and then a TS flies on, and the fighters get caught in the arc..? Wouldn't this be classed as interception or the like?
I'm just curious about how many points this will add to the TS that's all.

Sorry, my memory isn't so good on this one. :blush:
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Dobbsy
 Post subject: Tigershark AA?
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 4:59 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:24 am
Posts: 4499
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Nevermind lads i think 4.2.3 covers  this. Aircraft can make Flak Attacks on engage or disengage... Is this correct?

Cheers
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
nealhunt
 Post subject: Tigershark AA?
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 2:11 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
I'm not entirely sure what you're asking, but I think that's wrong.

Aircraft do not make AA attacks in the end phase at all.

Aircraft only attack other aircraft if they are in the AA arc at the end of an approach move rather than at any point during the approach move.

So, it's possible (but extremely unlikely) that an enemy aircraft might choose to end its approach move in front of a Tigershark for some reason and the Tigershark would be allowed to fire.  In other words, it's mostly useless but not entirely.

The uses I can think of are:

1)  A player using bombers with AA values and good ranges/arcs can position 2 formations of bombers so as to give mutual AA coverage.

2)  Scenario play where a bomber formation could be "parked" so that its AA coverage could protect a ground target from destruction by an enemy air formation.

There may be others but they are few and far between.

_________________
Neal
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Lion in the Stars
 Post subject: Tigershark AA?
PostPosted: Sat Jul 22, 2006 12:09 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 11:01 pm
Posts: 1455
The Burst Cannons are 360 arc, so there's a good chance that a (list) Tbolt (not the FW ones) or Ork Fighta-Bomma will get close enough to get some return fire.

The AA missiles are almost not worth including, IMO, but if some yahoo flyboy gets in my front arc, I'll try to make sure he doesn't live to make that mistake again.  I think that it's just such a low probability it's not worth considering.

_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
CyberShadow
 Post subject: Tigershark AA?
PostPosted: Sat Jul 22, 2006 10:18 am 
Swarm Tyrant
Swarm Tyrant
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:22 pm
Posts: 9350
Location: Singapore
This is something that I went backwards and forwards over for a while, with various emails to get support. Initially, I took out the AA fire from the Tigershark. However, this meant that the guns had different stats to other vehicles in the list.

In addition, there was the issue that there are times when the AA fire could be used. So, that lead to the decision to keep the AA attacks in.

I think that we should compile a list of cases in which a bomber could use AA attacks to start with.

_________________
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
 Profile Send private message  
 
Lion in the Stars
 Post subject: Tigershark AA?
PostPosted: Sat Jul 22, 2006 11:07 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 11:01 pm
Posts: 1455
There's the obvious one for 360 defensive AA - any time it's been intercepted and the enemy strays within 15cm.

I believe that the only times a bomber would be able to fire Front-Arc AA is:  

a) when there is a formation of aircraft traveling more-or-less in line, and the opponent decides to intercept the lead plane.  The tailing plane could then fire AA missiles at the aircraft intercepting the lead plane of his formation.

or:

b) when some brave flier decides to go for a head-on interception.

I don't see any other times when a bomber would be able to use non-360 AA attacks.

_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tactica
 Post subject: Tigershark AA?
PostPosted: Wed Jul 26, 2006 6:01 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
CS,

Just something to consider - the Tiger is actually a Figher-Bomber.

For the purposes of E:A, you could leave the AX10 as a dedicated Bomber, but further distingushing the roles of each, you could make the Traditional Tiger back to what they both really are... a Fighter Bomber. After all, it moves as fast and handles like a Barracuda. Its just meant to be better at it than a Barracuda as well as drop drones into enemy lines or in place of need.

Then, the AA issue would go away as the weapons would be able to be used as intended per fluff. Forward AA could also be used.

No stat change or weapon conflicts this way. You also don't have useless points into weapon systems on a bomber.

I think it will be a rarity that somebody flies into your front arc of your bomber to get blasted, moreover, they probably aren't going to readily fly in your 15cm range to get shot at - unless they have a large unit of ork fighters and they really don't care if they lose one. So the AA value of any of these weapons on a bomber is pretty much a waste of points in the unit as Dobbsy indicates *if* it is to remain as a bomber only.

'wave'

_________________
Rob
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Dobbsy
 Post subject: Tigershark AA?
PostPosted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 9:01 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:24 am
Posts: 4499
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Just something to consider - the Tiger is actually a Figher-Bomber

Would there be a problem making the 'Sharks both fighter bombers? The weapons could stay the same really then. The Tau Kor Caste are supposed to be great pilots and have great aircraft afterall....

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
CyberShadow
 Post subject: Tigershark AA?
PostPosted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 10:26 am 
Swarm Tyrant
Swarm Tyrant
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:22 pm
Posts: 9350
Location: Singapore
To revisit this thread... I like the idea of making the TigerShark a Fighter-Bomber. It would tidy away the issue of the AA fire on this craft. As far as I can tell, the main effects of this would be to allow a greater turn (90 degrees instead of 45) and allow any air orders to be given to it. From a background point of view, I can see these things being used in CAP roles and not solely as a bomber.

I would prefer to keep the AX-1-0 as a dedicated bomber at this point, as I think that it defines the craft better and creats more differentiation between them.

Any further comments before I commit this to stone?

_________________
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
 Profile Send private message  
 
Honda
 Post subject: Tigershark AA?
PostPosted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 2:11 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:44 pm
Posts: 1891
Location: Katy, Republic of Texas

There's the obvious one for 360 defensive AA - any time it's been intercepted and the enemy strays within 15cm.


When I see AA attacks on these aircraft, Lion's comment is what immediately comes to mind. The idea of attack aircraft flying blindly into harms way is the opposite of smart.

Attack aircraft have been arming themselves for defensive purposes since the beginning of flight.

As far as them becoming fighter-bombers adn doing intercepts, I struggle with that a little bit.

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tactica
 Post subject: Tigershark AA?
PostPosted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 4:26 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241

(CyberShadow @ Aug. 04 2006,04:26)
QUOTE
To revisit this thread... I like the idea of making the TigerShark a Fighter-Bomber. It would tidy away the issue of the AA fire on this craft. As far as I can tell, the main effects of this would be to allow a greater turn (90 degrees instead of 45) and allow any air orders to be given to it. From a background point of view, I can see these things being used in CAP roles and not solely as a bomber.

I would prefer to keep the AX-1-0 as a dedicated bomber at this point, as I think that it defines the craft better and creats more differentiation between them.

Any further comments before I commit this to stone?

CS,

I think core design supports the Tiger being a Fighter Bomber considering it moves just as fast as a Barracuda and has the same systems to be just as agile.

I think the AX-1-0 does need to remain a bomber for sake of game balance.

I think the distinction between the two, one being a fighter-bomber and the other being a Bomber works for the E:A representation of both.

It also, as you said, justifies the AA needs of the Tigershark. Afterall, its just supposed to be a heavier engagement craft per IA:3 and duplicates the roles of barracuda. I think development is VERY much on your side here.

Cheers,

_________________
Rob
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Lion in the Stars
 Post subject: Tigershark AA?
PostPosted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 12:20 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 11:01 pm
Posts: 1455
I'll second that idea (Tigers are FB, while AX10s are Bombers).  Putting those big railguns in place of the Ion Cannons takes one of the big AA weapons away from a Tigershark, in addition to changing the flight characteristics dramatically.

_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tactica
 Post subject: Tigershark AA?
PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:29 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
I would also add... IA:3 actually says the Tiger is a Fighter Bomber in the point blank description of how its used - LOL.

CS - this is the logical solution and avoids any tampering of weapons.

The more I think about it, this is absolutely the way to go.

'wave'

_________________
Rob
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
nealhunt
 Post subject: Tigershark AA?
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:23 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
I haven't checked the recent stat lines, but 45cm AA on an interceptor could be a balance issue if that's the case.  That's far enough that there's very little chance of needing to enter the enemy AA umbrella to be effective.  If the aircraft can intercept with impunity something else needs to balance that.

_________________
Neal
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tactica
 Post subject: Tigershark AA?
PostPosted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 7:42 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
NH,

We'll be concious of what the Tiger can do as a FB. It is very adept at hunting enemy aircraft though.

Testing will prove one way or the other as we move forward. As more and more lists generate more and more AA opportunities inf flak and planes of their own, not to mention your proposed aircraft rule changes, I think there's a host of change on the horizone for aircraft which will offer opponents to deal with a tiger - even if it keeps any 45cm AA weapons.

Final thought, I'd like to see 45cm AA weapons on this plane in Tau lists with all the changes on the horizon in place and tested before I jumpted to a conceptual conclusion. Tau have a reliance on and weakness against air assets unlike any other list out there.

I'm mindful of your concern, but concept only in this case will not prove/disprove a weapon system IMO. I'm absolutely convinced that testing must occur, either way though.

In this case, I prefer to test as FB and no other changes on this unit, befor we move on. Again, I'm absolutely sympathetic to the concern you posted though - not dismissing that concern at all.

Cheers,




_________________
Rob
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 2
  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 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