Yeah, don't look at stats. Never. Look at the background description.

Looking at stats will give you Falcons with 4+ RA.

The Marauder already has Twin Lascannons and these have 45cm AT4+/AA4+. They are also Fixed Forward Arc same as on the Lightning.

The Hydra has Twin Hydra Autocannons. Which are the same as Twin Longbarelled Autocannons by another name.

Mounting a weapon on an AA-Mount decreases its range by -15cm if the firing arc is 180° or greater (see the Thunderhawk's Twin Heavy Bolters).
Is this AA-Weapon also on a ground vehicle the range is decreased by a further -15cm for the 360° fire arc.
This way the Hydras Longbarelled Autocannon's range of 75cm is reduced to 45cm.

Is the AA-weapon mounted on an Aircraft in the Fixed Forward Arc position no range reduction takes place (see Twin Lascannons on the Marauder).

Also interesting:
The Thundebolt's Twin Autocannons and the Lightning's Lb Autocannon have an AA-Mount, while the Twin Lascannons haven't.

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

It might be good to get multiple AC feedback on this regardless of whether or not the Lightning appears on a particular list.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Ok, so if we accept that maybe the Lightning should have slightly worse AA stats but longer range, how about:

45cm AA6+
30cm AT4+/AA5+

So on intercept it's 4+/5+ rather than 4+/4+ like the thunderbolt, but has the benefit of being able to do that at 30cm instead of 15cm, and has the option for the 45cm shot if it needs protection. The long range of its autocannon is one of the defining features of the unit, and I'd really like to keep it.

That, combined with Speed: Fighter and no save really focuses on the need to use range and manouverability to win dogfights, which is perfect for the Lightning.

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

I would greatly prefer the unit to be better at interception, discarding the longer range. Lightnings should be able to down enemy craft much easier than Thunderbolts, especially since they're far more vulnerable to CAP, Interception, and AA fire (with their now-lower armor) AA can be avoided somewhat with the longer range (negated in many cases) but they are still vulnerable to being destroyed without completing their mission. For armies with no available ground AA, they need something which can pose an effective deterrent to enemy air activations: 4+/5+ is not it, regardless of how far away you are when shooting.

The key activation to examine for the Lightning Attack Fighters, in my opinion, is the CAP. On CAP they are often the only unit which has a chance of stopping a dangerous air assault, and if they aren't able to perform that role better than the thunderbolt, they have no purpose for existing.

They're more likely to be able to make it home from a CAP mission than Thunderbolts, as they're more manouverable, and able to attack at a longer range.

Personally I'd like them to be on par with thunderbolts in AA ability, but with a range boost, but that doesn't seem palatable to some.

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

Personally if the Lightning Attack is an interceptor then it should really be AA focused (no GA ability) and I do not like 45cm AA most planes get 30cm weapons. I would rather see extra AA shots at 15-30cm (again focussing it on CAP) than 1x 45cm. I think 6+ armour is fine when you take into account agility.

I agree with Signal. We should stop trying to base things solely on GW or FW stats(we seem to be trying to do that more and more lately) and should take an Epic approach to stats and balance them for this game.

The word is ABSTRACTION and we should use it more often.

Let me put it like this:
Regardless of all other fluff concerns or stat comparisons, what the Harakoni list needs in its aircraft selection is a fighter that is highly capable at intercepting attacking aircraft,at the expense of its ground attack abilities.
To me, that sounds like the Lightning. I'm concerned entirely with how the craft behaves on the table, and fulfills the needed role. Without any Ground AA available, my only chance for placing a BM on an incoming Air Assault is to do at least a single point of damage to the WE Transport. Having extended range doesn't really help that ability in the slightest. In my experience, the Elysians also had this need.

You place a BM just for firing at it don't you?

If we don't attempt to match the background, then why bother playing a game set in the 40k universe at all?

So your logic is: "Why bother to look at what the lightning actually is, why not just make up some stats that fit the list's needs, and call it a lightning."

Well, my list needs a TK(D6) armed plane. Can I call it a lightning?

----

If your list needs a close in but powerful interceptor, include Thunderbolts. If it needs a fast and manouverable interceptor with long range, include Lightnings.

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

Yes, and also extended range does help damage the WE transport, as it won't get defensive AA to shoot your planes down before they attack.

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

Yeah, that sounds good.



You may want that, but they really shouldn't, that's simply not how the two units are. The Thunderbolts is heavier and a fair bit better armed, while the Lightning is lighter and more manoeuvrable, with a longer ranged, but less effective, primary weapon.

The background in Forge World Imperial Armour is clear that “lascannons are mainly used in the ground attack role to engage enemy vehicles, whilst the autocannons are the weapons of choice for dog fighting and strafing enemy units.” As the Thunderbolt has 4 autocannons compared to the Lightning’s 1 it most certainly should have better firepower, while the Lightning has the range advantage. It being able to stay further back and attack from a safer range in epic would also fit with it being able to do this due to it's greater manoeuvrability.

Also having longer range but slightly worse AA stats does help differentiate Lightning from thunderbolt. Otherwise if they are too similar then might as well stick with Thunderbolt.

If that's the case maybe the 6+ armor should stay.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Armour can stay at 6+ I guess, as long as 45cm stays too.

Seriously, in the background (other than speed) that's the one thing that makes it different in role to the Thunderbolt; it has a much longer ranged autocannon.

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