The Dreadnought has a higher armor value than the Predator.

'Nuff said.

EDIT: Me, I'd say the best thing would be to tie it to the total of the front and side arcs in 40K, while tying TRA to the rear arc value. Vehicle AVs have been pretty stable in 40K over the years.

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread

I found out that RA is usually applied for vehicles with a 14 front armour value and TRA usually only for vehcles with all around armour value 14.
Side armour seems to be generally ignored and only the front armour matters.
14 = 4+RA
13 = 4+
12 = 5+
11 = 5+
10 = 6+ (or 4+ if a speed 35cm skimmer)

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

If LV it would be more much more vulnerable, so 4+
IF AV, then 5+ is too strong (but being small, fast etc could be argued),
AV 6+ arguably too weak (but perhaps RA??)
(Don't forget the 'soap-bubbles here guys)

However I'm intruiged by this whole concept. Is the 'Hornet' something that existed in the 'fluff' that was not manufactured by GW, or is this a completely new concept by FW? Also, the model seems to be a WH40K size beast - so presumably this would be a scratch build exercise?! (and I am not sure it would work in 6mm - wouldn't all the flying surfaces be nightmarishly fragile?)

On the concept as a whole, it seems to be a mixture of Falcon, Vyper and Warwalker. So, does this warrant Vyper armour, Skimmer, and Warwalker level weaponry (30cm range, scatter laser and Lance)?

BUT, I have to say that in any configuration it is likely to replace one of the existing units, and thus - is it really needed???

• Falcon level armour (2x Pulse laser) replaces Falcon
• Vyper armour and Warwalker weapons in Jetbikes relplace the Vypers
• As a separate scout formation with Vyper armour it replaces Warwalkers

So, my only suggestion is that it be used in some of the alternative lists as the replacement for the relevant unit.

So BL, what are the 40K stats for the Hornet?

New, AFAIK.

By eyeballing it, I think it would be practical to make in metal.
Resin might also be workable but would undoubtedly be fragile.


The "default" weapons fit is likely to be 2x pulse lasers, being as that's all they made in resin (Though it is designed to be able to use the 40k plastic Eldar heavy weapons from the "heavy weapons sprue").

2x pulse lasers does of course make it one hell of a slegehammer on a tiny hull.



I think it would fit best in an "Eldar Tank Craftworld" army list.
Forgeworld are probably going to be coming out with some more Eldar tanks before long.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

See, I think we should be paying some attention to side armor. Side armor could be used for determining whether something got reinforced armor, or what the save was overall.

For example, you could use something like this:

Front AV:
14 = 3+
13 = 4+
12 = 5+
11 = 6+

If side AV is equal to front AV, then vehicle may have either RA or increase its overall save by 1 (so a Land Raider could either be 2+ or have 3+RA, a Rhino could have 6+RA or 5+, a Falcon could choose between 5+ RA or 4+, etc.)

If rear AV is equal to front AV, then vehicle may have TRA.

That, or you could use the total of front and side to decide what the percentage toughness should be, and then decide if RA was warranted based on the vehicle's toughness in-game.

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread

You can do this kind of stat-crunching, but at some point, "art" has to get involved.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Since art tells us that a Russ is almost as tough as a Land Raider, which is ludicrously tough and has an AI to help it, and that Rhinos are apparently as durable as Falcons, and that Dreadnoughts are tougher than both of those...

Yeah. I'd say art is a little lacking right now.

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread

Epic is about feel as much as raw translation. If it just took a reference chart to translate from 40k to Epic, BL would be the sole writer of virtually every list out there. And it would have taken him a week to do. A Dread, for instance, needs a higher armor to survive the hits it will take in CC more than a gun platform than a pred does.

Also, it's worth remembering that the difference between say, 2+ and 3+ RA is fairly large. 3+ RA is 1/9 (.111) chance of a wound, 2+ is 1/6 (.1666). That's a 50% difference.

_________________
SG

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

@Ginger: Already postet the link to the rules in the first postung. But here again:
http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Downloads/P ... netexp.pdf

@SK: You know, regardless how good this idea is, that this never going to be adopted by the NetERC as it would change a lot of armour saves in the game. Same as introducing variable numbers for the re-roll RA provides.

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

Oh, I know. I just find it kinda irksome that some of the armor saves appear to have been decided using a dartboard.

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread

True. And furthermore i don't like the huge gap between 4+ and 4+RA saves.

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

I have no opinion on the armour but I think it should use twin pulse lasers as they are the default/characteristic weapons fit for it.

Guys, I am still not convinced there is a slot for the Hornet - unless it replaces one of the other 'staple' ones.

However, to continue the discussion, BL - could you also post the stats for Vyper, Falcon and War-Walker for comparison with those proposed for the Hornet.

Given the varied weapons load-out, I presume there is not guidance on which is the most usual - - - if not, I still think
2x pulse laser is OTT for E:A. IMHO 1x Pulse laser and 1x scatter laser at most (or go for the Warwalker loadout of scatter laser and bright lance). 2x PL is way OTT

I stand by the comments on armour. AV5+ or perhaps LV4+ (to provide the distinction)

Speed is an intruiging question - would you want to put anything in for the 'star engines' boost?

Then there is the formation size and cost - the list suggests 3x (I am not sure this is viable) so perhaps 150? Note the costs of the equivalent units suggest 35pts ea, or ~100 points for 3x, but IMHO that is too little and will result in spamming. I would recommend 4x-6x units for 150pts - 200pts (so falling into the same slot as Warwalkers and Bikes).

If going with a "light" weapons fit I'd probably suggest going with 6 units in a formation, just because the Eldar have a thing about 3's (And *presuambly* also multiplications thereof).

If going with a "heavy" weapons fit, 3 units in a formation would probably be fine, as they'd end up fairly expensive on a per-unit basis I suspect.


No guidance is given on the "standard" weapons configuration, but I rather suspect that 2x Pulse Lasers will become the most common fit in 40k, purely because that's what the FW model comes with (You have to use a worse-quality plastic weapon if you want to use other weapons, rather than those nice resin guns); I don't disagree that 2x Pulse Lasers would be massive firepower... soap bubbles with four sledge hammers each!

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter