I know Jaggedtoothgrin isn't a fan of the 45cm autocannon, but I think generally speaking everyone's mostly agreed with the stats on the Lightning Attack variant.

While I like BlackLegion's proposed variants, I think adding in completely new weapons systems is something to be avoided, especially as they won't appear anywhere else. If the Attack variant needs more AA punch, or the Strike is too powerful with twin rockets, it might be something to look into, though.

If we can agree on the Attack variant, poor Dobbsy can at least get that one entered into the NetEA document.

As for the Strike, can we provisionally agree on 2 x Hellstrike missiles for now? For those who want a 40k justification for everything, the Marauder Destroyer carries 8 Hellstrike missiles, which has been converted to 4 x AT4+ attacks. With this logic the Strike variant would have 1-3 shots, the median of which is 2. It also gives the Strike significantly more AT punch, which compensates for the loss of interception and anti-infantry power of the Thunderbolt. Cost increase might still be necessary for the Strike, but that's something that can be settled once we've narrowed down the actual profile. Zombo, you need the interceptor to share with the Sisters, but I think the only lists using the Strike variant are the two drop lists. Limited AT options in each require a dedicated Tank Hunting aircraft to help them out. (Moscovian: It's definitely true that the Elysians have easy access to Vendettas, but that's only if the list is being utilized as an air-cavalry option. If someone's trying to run the Elysians as an Arnhem-style airdrop, supplemented by aviation Close Air Support, their options are fairly limited.)

Without the two shots, the Strike will not be taken. I know I wouldn't take them, even if they were priced the same as Thunderbolts. Sacrificing the significant all-purpose utility of the Thunderbolt against other aircraft, infantry, and mixed-type formations isn't worth the upgrade from AT6+ to AT4+. Although two rocket shots will almost certainly require a price bump, it's better to have them cost more than be useless.

Again, disregarding pricing, can we please agree on the two rocket shots?

I don't agree with those stats, tbh. I think the 45cm shot should be AA6+, for balance and background reasons; overall the Lightning Attack Fighter should have less AA than the Thunderbolt, just longer range.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

Clarify? Do you want AP5/AT6/AA6 or just AA6? I'm okay with the first; I can live with the second.

Are you agreed on the 2x Underwing Rockets then?

_________________
SG

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

I'm not convinced that there's any balance need for reducing the AA at all. The Attack fighter is a dedicated interception craft, that's the whole point of its existence. Making it inferior to the generalist is the same as not having it at all, unless they're dirt cheap and flying in larger formations.

If it's background reasons, then the Lightning is more agile (allowing it to stay on target more effectively) and is able to sustain fire starting at longer ranges, which gives it the increased AA rating. There, does that work?

I should mention I'm also not sure it's needed, but that I'd be far more willing to accept it than an AA-only shot.

_________________
SG

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

I'm ok with either. I believe Mosc would prefer no AP/AT on it, which is fine since it's supposed to be the dedicated AA weapon.

Signal: It's not inferior, just a specialist. Because it can bring its full AA to bear at 30cm and has Speed Fighter, it's much less likely to take defensive or ground AA on the way in, so is more likely than the Thunderbolt that both planes will survive to shoot. On the whole it'll get more shots in.

If we REALLY have to keep the same firepower as the Thunderbolt it should be done as 6+/4+ rather than 5+/5+, as that gives a much stronger inclination to move into 30cm range rather than stay at 45cm.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

On interception:
Thunderbolt: AA4+, AA4+
Lightning: AA4+, AA5+

Looks inferior to me.

I understand what you're saying about the ability to avoid defensive fire, and I've accepted your logic as to why the Lightning doesn't need increased AA power over the Thunderbolt. Unless it has parity, however, it's a poor choice at its actual role. Fairly frequently, an enemy ground attack/air assault can't be allowed to succeed, and so you need to do your best to shoot it down. Dropping the AA value on the Autocannon means that the best aircraft for a desperate CAP mission would be the generalist. That's ridiculous. Not every craft has all-around flak, and most of the ones that do have a relatively small chance of actually succeeding. It's great that you can fire from outside a bomber's flak envelope, and that goes a long way to compensate for the inferior ground attack capability of the aircraft. It does not, however, compensate for the aircraft being inferior at its specialization.

That last bit you edited in works for me. 6+/4+ would be fine, so long as the Lightning's actually capable of shooting things down. Otherwise it doesn't perform its mission satisfactorily.

Exactly, that's the point Signal seems to be missing. It exchanges raw firepower for greater range and even for one pip of less AA hit chance it's not inferior but still a very good interceptor, in practice often better at it than a Thunderbolt would be. It needs to have a maximum of AA5+ AA6+, ground potential or not could go either way.

I'm not missing the point, I just vehemently disagree with with it. The Lightning Attack fighter cannot afford to be "often better" than the Thunderbolt, since it is "always worse" at everything else the Thunderbolt does. If we were talking only about interception capability, than I'd agree with what you're saying. As is, however, the Thunderbolt has so many other advantages over the Lightning Attack that if the latter is only "often better," than it is always a worse choice. Increased range is great, but it doesn't outweigh limited ground attack capability and limited interception capability. A Lascannon at 45cm AT5+ is pretty great, but it's not better than a 30cm AP3+/AT4+ Demolisher Cannon. That's what you're arguing here, and I disagree. Unless it is overall more proficient at interception (through equal firepower and extended range) it is not a suitable replacement for the Thunderbolt. The loss of flexibility has to be countered, and weakening the interception capability is not the way to do that.

The background is that the Lightning has less powerful AA weapons than the thunderbolt, but a longer range. If that means they need to be cheaper than thunderbolts then that's the option to go for, but we don't just change the background to what we want it to be for our lists.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

I'm not saying we should magically change the background, it just needs to fill a role in Epic.

The following are the options for compromise I see:

1) AA6+ AC/AA5+ LC (Cheap and ineffective Lightnings, I don't like this one, including it for completeness)
2) AA6+ Autocannon, AA4+ Wingtip Lascannons (has repurcussions with the Strike)
3) AA5+ Autocannon, AA5+ Lascannons (I know you don't like this one Zombo, just including it for completeness)
4) AA6+ AC, AA5+LC, and the inclusion of AA6+ Skystrike missiles (Unfortunately an extra new weapon)
5) something I've missed?

My personal preference would be for 3, followed by 4 and then 2. Your preferences?

1 then 2 then 4.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

Are you satisfied with limiting our debate to options 2 and 4, then?

Not until Mosc chimes in, it's in his list too.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

Just to be sure:
You guys know that on an Intercept or CAP mission a Fighter-bomber (Thunderbolt) is capable of the same 90° turns as a Fighter (Lightning)?

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