Page 4 of 7

[ 104 posts ]

Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Dropship update!
nealhunt	Post subject: Dropship update! Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 4:39 pm
Purestrain Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm Posts: 9617 Location: Nashville, TN, USA	Back to the topic of issues specific to EA, I pulled this quote from the Tau-specific thread.  From JimmyGrill: At other times, flak was so tight (This happens in almost all games of 4K+) that air also had a very limited use... This illustrates very clearly why I see a problem in the direction of the EA army development. Why is the flak so heavy, especially in larger games?  Because everyone recognizes that it is suicide to skip it. At one point it was a viable choice to decide to keep just a bare minimum of flak/interceptors around.  Unopposed aircraft could do disproportionate damage, but a small amount of harassment fire was sufficient to reduce enemy air to the level where it was a real strategic decision about whether to go farther with flak assets. Not so any more.  Massed flak is basically a "no brainer" choice at this point. I'll use Orks as an example.  Until a few months ago, it had never occurred to me to use more than a handful of flakwagons.  In a 3000 point force I typically had 3-4 at most and a flight of fightabommaz.  Now when I look at an Ork list, I typically try to include 1 flakwagon in every formation with AVs and it seems like a very good choice to field a Blitz Brigade of all flakwagons - up to 12 in a single formation. ======== This is NOT simply a problem of "correct point costs."  No amount of point tweaks will fix this issue. The problem is that the core rules have CAS as an auxiliary mechanic, a mechanic meant to be as simple and streamlined as possible.  It's not flexible because it never was meant to be.  Formations that are outside the general scope of the original intent will change, and (imho) are in the process of changing, the landscape of the game. _________________ Neal

Top

Tiny-Tim	Post subject: Dropship update! Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 4:42 pm
Hybrid Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 1:32 pm Posts: 4893 Location: North Yorkshire	Why do people always have to deal with something. Aircraft I can accept, but Titans, if they're small overwelm them. If they're big leave them alone and concentrate on the rest of the army. I went to Call to Arms with only one unit capable of a MW attack and that was my Big Bad Mek. Tiny Beat me to it Neal   _________________ _________________ www.epic-uk.co.uk - home of the UK Epic tournament scene NetEA NetERC Xenos Lists Chair NetEA Ork + Feral Ork + Speed Freak Champion
Top

Tas

Post subject: Dropship update! Posted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 12:53 am

Brood Brother Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 10:01 am Posts: 7823 Location: Sydney, NSW

Not so any more.  Massed flak is basically a "no brainer" choice at this point. Then this is a good reflection of a real generals' thinking! A large battle - a main effort if you like - does attract the commitment of specialised resources to make sure it works.  That includes AA, Arty, CAS, Combat engineers, etc etc.  This has been true from ancient times (-4k), why wouldnt it be so in 40k? Not that I disagree with this issue of Aircraft, just think it is necessary to step back and think about this objectively for a moment. _________________ Tas My General blog: http://tasmancave.blogspot.com/ My VSF Blog: http://pauljamesog.blogspot.com/ My ECW Blog: http://declaresir.blogspot.com/

Top

JimmyGrill	Post subject: Dropship update! Posted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 1:08 am
Brood Brother Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 10:05 pm Posts: 61	Neal, I think you've gotten my comment down the wrong throat My opponent used a lot of flak in some recent high-points game, but it wasn't so much because he *needed* it, but because he wanted to effectively shut down any airforce I would come up with - and very effectively too. Actually, if those games proved anything, than that an airforce can rather easily be suppressed by investing in flak. And you can easily afford 6+ Hydras in a 4K game, for example.
Top

Legion 4	Post subject: Dropship update! Posted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 5:36 am
Brood Brother Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 5:13 pm Posts: 36947 Location: Ohio - USA	The gamer has to make that choice, AA for Aircraft, Deathstrikes for Titans, etc., etc.  Combined Arms, as Tas said ... _________________ Legion 4 "Cry Havoc, and let slip the Dogs of War !" ... "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
Top

The_Real_Chris

Post subject: Dropship update! Posted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 6:50 am

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

How can you 'point correctly' high powered aircraft. I'm not a developer, but if your asking me to guess... I'd say you take your best educated guess considering the various stats of the vehicle in question first. Then start playtesting the list with the hypothetical aircraft against various opponents. Then, after the game is resolved, switch sides and let the other guy play your army. After several games and tracking data, one should get the feel for how the list as a whole is working with the hypothetical craft. One should be able to glean whether certain tweaks in powers/points are necessary for the game to generally win ~50% of its games against various opponents regardless of who's playing the list. This assumes that there is a linear progression on the effect of air on a game and that all air abilities are able to be correctly costed against all armies. Factors such as range have a big importance here. Against most Orks flak (integral to fighting units) a 60cm stand off weapon cannot be replied to. You are 45cm or so out of range (flak tending to be in the centre of formations) and flak has a whole slew of other problems which I?ll address below. Further aircraft that are scared of flak have a disproportionate effect in low point games where countermeasures are low. In high point games it requires a lot of effort to clear enough flak for them to safely operate (assuming they need to close the range). The air rules are a bolt on to the game and don?t fit seamlessly. Look even at the rules in relation to themselves. Interceptors with 30cm+ weapons completely ignore defensive bomber flak from most angles and at 45cm and above ignore all defensive air flak on existing fighters. There are too many ways air can avoid/negate the threats against it if the stats get to high. How do you point such things, especially when a abnormally high flak army can bring it down? Of course such armies would become the norm and there goes the variety we currently see. Air that can avoid flak for instance - how to point that? Hmm... just move the flak after it enters the board or use CAP.

I assume you know the problems with this? Here?s a few.
1. Obvious one. Activations if you are out activating why give the flak a chance?
2. Integral flak. A lot of flak comes with other units. For instance attached Hydra, Eldar Titan defences and so on. Only the Orks can field big flak brigades (and are starting to). You can?t divert such defensive flak to hunt down enemy air, that?s a major fighting formation, the flak is there to give it some protection as it goes about its business.
3. Survivable moving flak. Move the flak. Even if you haven?t encountered the problems above most independent flak is fragile. Small formations. You are going to (assuming you don?t have to face subsequent activations shooting it) move it towards the enemy for one turn (hopefully) of fire?
4. Had to say it, not all flak can move (but its those foolish siegemasters insistence on digging things in).

If you want to talk extremes... in a hypothetical list that only had AP targets for its ground based formations and had no LV, tanks or WE's and all ground units had NO armor saves and the guns they carried were small arms only... how much airpower would be justified to support the infantry? I would say quite a bit if the list was to be formidable and compete with other lists.

So you would give it a very strong variable that in a tournament setting (the reason for these lists) would mean every army would have to go flak heavy just in case?

The point here is that Airpower and its cost is relative to the rest of the army it will be in support of.
My point is its effect isn?t and can be easily upped (and lowered) by a variety of factors. You can be unopposed, or you can be facing the all hydra army. Hmm, I wonder if an all flak wagon army would work?

Flak options are very limited in every list bar the eldar.
Hmm... we disagree here.
You list two options per list. I was talking variety. As the air threat increases from new enemy forces in a tournament you take more air defences - personally I already find 5 hydra/6blitzen + 2 thunderbolts not enough.

This would lead to more and more similar lists with a lot of hydra/hunters/thunderbolts (maybe not thunderbolts) because there is no other available weapon.

TRC, don't know what to tell you - we disagree. This is pretty much speculation here. I think you fear the arms race in airpower.

What do you do tactica if you are facing the 11th air armada? You take flak and fighters. What do you do when you are going to a tournament that you know will include the 11th air armada (and Tiny-Tim)? You take fighters and flak otherwise you risk being done.
It?s the same effect incidentally the WE lists have. Can the average army deal with such things or will it effect there army composition as standard?

Again, as long as playtesting was vigorously conducted trying to 'break' the new list with new hypothetical airpower against the gambit of lists - such issues would be avoided and rectified as necessary before the list hit the presses.
So the playtest shows all the enemy playtestors are taking more flak or simply not bothering with flak (as what would be the use vs the thunderhawk annihilator for instance). How much extra flak is acceptable for the list to cause? Instead of 5 Hydra at 3000 points it is now 8 on average?

[quote]Just a reminder, the lists are blind tournament lists. If a list is introduced to the tournament setting for which the lists are designed that does need air to win it would precipate a change in the armies fielded if they wished to defend against this and remain competitive.
>
I would say shame on the judge in question for designing a tourny/scenerio/setting where one or more lists can prosper out of the gate. Current lists in development have to be designed around a common element or expectation of play. The tourny environment as described in the book is that context. A rogue judge could make a scenerio that says he whom which has more infantry in the center of the board at the end of the game wins... how do you think IG and Tau would hold up against chaos in that mode? That's not a fault of the IG or Tau list or even a fault of the chaos list - it's a bad design for a tourny scenerio.[quote]

I?m talking abut the book tournament scenario. In that you face unknown lists. If those lists have heavy/effective air it affects everyone?s choices for the tournament. Not a change to the scenario. A change to the participants.