That's ok with me, and I believe ok with signal too, so that gives us:





150ish points for a pair for Attack Fighter, 200ish for Strike Fighter?

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

I'd suggest 175 and 200, and revise downwards after testing if nessesary.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

That'd be fine too.

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

AA4+ meaning 3+ on intercept? Really?

It would have 1x3+ and 1x5+, statistically the same as the 2x4+ on the thunderbolt, just with a longer range as it's an AA specialist.

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

It's the Lascannons I really have a problem with. AA4+ does strike me as over the top. While it seems fine for the Attack Fighter, it seems out of place for the Strike Fighter. I understand that both have the same weaponry, so why can't we just make the lascannons AT4+/AA5+?

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

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

The exact same weapon already has AT4+ / AA4+ on the Marauder Bomber, however.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

I'm fine with that, Signal isn't.

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

Grrrr.. Damn you Epic for being so rich and full of many units!

I dunno what to do.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

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

If we give Strike Fighters AA3+ intercepts, you won't see the Attack Fighters taken unless there is a significant price difference. Say, 150 for Attack Fighters and 225 or 250 for Strike Fighters?

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

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

With speed fighter and extra AA range over a Thunderbolt, I'd say Attack Fighters are worth 175pts.

Strike Fighters as statted above are 16% better than Thunderbolts at AA at 30cm range, and 33% worse than Thunderbolts at 15cm range.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Then maybe removing the AP/AT shots from the autocannon would help drop that price down? I'm trying here...

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

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

No objection.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

It's not quite the exact same weapon. The Marauder has a twin lascanon is a turret at the front that can point anywhere in the front arc of the plane. The wingtip lascanons on the Lightning can't move to aim at all, they're fixed in place and so can only be used to attack an enemy plane straight in front of one or both lascanons. It is perfectly reasonable therefore for Wingtip Lascanons to have different stats to Twin Lascanons, since they are much more limited in their firing.

Okay, looks like we've got agreement on the Attack Fighter. Took us a bit, but I think everyone's mostly happy, at least AA6+ Autocannon and the AA4+ Lascannons it is.


Even though speed fighter has no effect on interception missions? Like Moscovian, I'd be happy with removing the ground attack capabilities of the Autocannon to drop the price. Makes the 45cm range weapon carry the fluff connotations of it being the primary AA weapon of the craft.


Pricing is independent, but I think we can all agree that this is at rough parity with Thunderbolts, yes?


Definitely more expensive than the Attack Fighter. The AA4+ does make it fairly decent at interception as E&C pointed out, but the Thunderbolts are still, on average, more capable. It's also very specialized at attacking Armored Vehicles, without any of the flexibility of the Thunderbolt. Regardless of the price, are we agreed on this statline?