Tactical Command
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

Unit disappointment/balancing
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=25375		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  Berkut666 [ Mon Jun 17, 2013 8:45 am ]
Post subject:  Unit disappointment/balancing
For those of you who havent read any of my previous threads, I am a long time 40K player who has only recently got back into gaming, and specifically EA. Over the weekend just passed I played several games and noticed a few odd things about some units.

In 40K Predators and Dreadnoughts are to be feared. In EA they are rubbish. Unless your using Predators in the annihilator pattern specifically for hunting other tanks they are useless. And dreadnoughts are no better than a unit of tactical SM's. They only advantage a dreadnought has is the power fist in CC. I know they are not Titans but they should atleast have 2 points of damage, reinforced armour or something! They are the Chapters finest fallen warriors in a walking coffin of doom!!

Am I missing something? Or am I just not using them right?

The other thing is that if you are playing as a SM army, they appear to have no Titan killer weapons? The empires finest would surely have some weird and wonderful ways to take down Titans!

However Terminators and Assualt marines are briilliant :)
Author:  IJW Wartrader [ Mon Jun 17, 2013 9:23 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Unit disappointment/balancing
'Vanilla' Dreadnoughts in 40k are a bit bland/boring and cost almost exactly the same as a Combat Squad. I find Epic echoes this quite well. ;)

One issue is that while all the fancy Dreadnoughts like Ironclads and Librarians have been shoehorned into the last couple of editions of 40k, Epic has stayed with the original Dreadnought.
Author:  kyussinchains [ Mon Jun 17, 2013 9:44 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Unit disappointment/balancing
Bear in mind, epic is a game of abstraction, most of the dreadnought builds are too granular for epic and have been integrated into the two main variants (there are others in variant lists too)

Dreads aren't great, although they work well when podded in with devastators, they are Armoured vehicles which are moderately less vulnerable than infantry, and also as they are vehicles, infantry can hug them for cover

Also in a game of titans, macro weapons and war engines, a comparatively tiny robot man isn't really a big player....

Preds have their uses, they are fast and don't suppress that easily, a formation of annihilators is nasty against most vehicle formations and even stuff like lone shadowswords should be wary, as the formation puts out 12 shots

Destructors are also quite useful against infantry, another alternative is to mix the types so you have some decent AT firepower as well as solid AP

This being said however, Marines aren't renowned for their shooting, so they don't generally compare well to other races in that regard..... they're more based around getting up close and combined engagements and air assaults

Also as said, an assault cannon dread has the same firepower as a combat squad (better AT) as well as a macro attack in CC, so broadly in line with my hazy recollection of 40k, they're also immune to all AP attacks

I still think they should be better, chaos dreads are fearless AND have better firepower, but that's a discussion for another thread ;)
Author:  MrGonzo [ Mon Jun 17, 2013 9:46 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Unit disappointment/balancing
I think the dreadnoughts are a topic for quite a while already.

Personally, I would like them to have a reinforced armour save to boost their effectiveness and bring them in line with their fluff of being an fancy version of the terminator armour. (or is it the other way round?)
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Mon Jun 17, 2013 9:47 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Unit disappointment/balancing
Are you using the upgraded army lists found here?
http://www.net-armageddon.org/

Dreads got better, Predators got better and cheaper.
Author:  novemberrain [ Mon Jun 17, 2013 9:50 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Unit disappointment/balancing
Also you have to remember that while a SM Tactical Squad and a Dreadnaught both have a 4+ armour save, the Dreadnought is an AV - and therefore completely immune to anti-personnel weaponry.

That doesn't take away from the feeling that dreadnaughts suck, but I don't think it is armour that is holding back, rather a lack of decent places to put them outside a drop-podding formation.

For Predators, I agree with you on the bare shooting stats, especially with the regular destructor variant. However, they can be great to use their speed and decent resilience to initiate engages - allowing them to FF and anything else you have in support range. Getting this right means you can spring a surprise engagement on a formation the opponent had thought was safe.

It is true that Marines are lacking in TK ( and MW) firepower, but I think this is part of the army design (and is the same in 40k - compare Strength D weapons between guard and SM...). This lack does not mean that they cannot take on titans, just that they have to go about it in a different way - relying on combined engagements, teleporting terminators, or those Predator Annihilators!
Author:  GlynG [ Mon Jun 17, 2013 9:56 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Unit disappointment/balancing
Anhilators are probably better than Destructors, but Predators are good and I normally take at least one formation. They have a lot of firepower for a formation of their size and they're fast. If possible I'll try to maneuver them to get crossfire. I'll often hide them behind cover at the start and where they have a good target double and attack towards the end of the turn (after the opponent has run out of activations if they have less) and then sustained fire first this thing next turn as well (if there isn't anything else more priority to do) to get the most out of them.

Are you using the SM list from the rulebook or the current community rebalanced version in the Net-EA Tournament Pack? That has reduced the cost for Predators to 250 and increased the Destructor's FF to 3+. Also 3+ save for Dreadnoughts.

Dreadnoughts are a bit specialist in epic. Due to how much movement there is in a game and how much further away the armies start compared to 40k they're only really worth using with a garrisoned unit or Drop Podded into battle. The 3+ save helps and if you have a couple with a garrisoned or podded devestator detachment the devestators can take the cover -1 from the Dreadnoughts (they're vehicles like any other).

The lack of TK weapons is a challenge in the list, but you get MW from Termintors, Land Speeders and Warhound Titans. A Warhound isn't too hard to take out and a Warlord is best avoided but you can always assault with an Assault formation or either Tacical/Assault+Devesator + Chaplain + Thunderhawk.
Author:  Berkut666 [ Mon Jun 17, 2013 10:28 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Unit disappointment/balancing
Ah ok the updated NetEpic list will heap a bit I guess. I havent drop podded them (Cant find a battlebarge etc model :( ) but I do have a thunderhawk.....
Author:  MephistonAG [ Mon Jun 17, 2013 11:35 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Unit disappointment/balancing
You really don't need a spaceship model to use in the game. It only sits on your deployment edge till activated and then is removed. If you have one great, if not I wouldn't let that stop you.
Author:  Ulrik [ Mon Jun 17, 2013 1:29 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Unit disappointment/balancing
The problem with Destructors isn't their stats, but that their role (anti-personell) is a role Marines already got covered twice over. Annihilators, on the other hand, are very useful as one of the few ranged anti-tank formations in the list.
Author:  Berkut666 [ Mon Jun 17, 2013 1:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Unit disappointment/balancing
Hmm maybe I should make a force consisting of nothing but Terminators backed by Land Raiders.....
Author:  MephistonAG [ Mon Jun 17, 2013 2:29 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Unit disappointment/balancing
1st Company List, 5 Terminators, 5 Thunderhawks, Supreme Cmdr, Librarian, Chaplin and Captain. 3K on the nose.
Author:  Jaggedtoothgrin [ Mon Jun 17, 2013 2:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Unit disappointment/balancing
list works better with 5 chaplains instead (or 4 and a captain) but yeah, a pure airborne terminator list works fairly well against certain builds

and it looks cool
Author:  Berkut666 [ Mon Jun 17, 2013 3:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Unit disappointment/balancing
It would work even better if your enemy didnt know it was coming :)
Author:  MephistonAG [ Mon Jun 17, 2013 4:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Unit disappointment/balancing
5 chaplains may be better... but one of each is so much fluffier surely?

Played against this once. Lost but that was mainly my fault with poor target selection and a formation that wouldn't activate all game.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/