Points would probably need to go up though. Are we happy about this? I'm not personally.

Well, it's a specialst vehicle, so maybe the points should go up. I'd propose that along the with the traint, the Close Combat goes back to that of a stock Land Raider. It is a specialist assault vehicle, not a main line fighter. Again, a proposal for folks to test out.

Now, being happy about the points going up,...while I leave it to those smarter the me, consider; these assault vehicle REALLY have nothing reaching out past FF ranges. So carrying Marines into CC range is a gamble,...without tactics. An Assault Vehicle, even a Land Raider variant, will need supporting fires to hope to effectively close to effective assault range. I'll let those smarter then me run the numbers. But at a guess, I am guessing that an armored assaulting over open ground is going to get hurt without support.

I see absolutely no need for such a special rule.

Okay. And please give the reasoning.

My own point is that the Frag Assault Charges do not fit as Close Combat Weapons and are more designed as a way for the AFV to allow it's dismounts free reign as they assualt. Otherwise, what point to keep units like the Crusader and Redeemer in EA? These are storm assault AFVs after all, neh?

For starters the LRCs carry 2 Terminator units.

The launchers would be so short ranged that they may as well be CC weapons - more point blank attacks. Remember CC isn't entirely base to base attacks like 40K. Epic is more abstract so the launchers as CC works fine I think and is enough.

First strike could work and is simple, but like I said I'd prefer not to have the extra cost associated with it.

Well, I haven't even given a cost yet. But what I am saying is that the Frag Launchers don't really work as a CC weapon. In normal WH40K the Crusaders and Redeemers aren't using their Frag Launchers to cause direct damage to defenders, even in the absract (as they are limited use launchers, not CC weapons),...they're being used to allow their dismounts an edge to come to grips on storm assaults. So it's not like the AFV itself should be given a better CC value, but the Frag Launchers to give an edge to the embarked troops.

Yep and that's where First Strike could work, as I mentioned. Not everything has to be an actual weapon, just have an effect in game. It's all about abstraction and simplification.

Which is what I was getting at.

Honestly, all credit to the creator of Scions of Iron (sorry, can't give a proper quote as it's late and I've had a long weekend of military duty), but I think the Frag Launchers need a try as equipment and less as a weapon. Currently they don't help the AFV in a close fight situation on their own, so in the absract they shouldn't in EA. But as a piece of equipment (as opposed to a weapon), they should give a benefit to the dismounts.

So,...if the trait workable? Can it be phrased better? Or is it just off (and please give supporting arguments to that)?

So how does one cover the special abilities of Land Raider variants like the Crusader and Redeemer, if not as a unit specific feature? It is not the fault of this author or anyone else that, so far, the only AFVs in WH40K that are purpose built for storm assaults are these variants of Land Raider. If such a feature is not given, then there should be no CC benefit either, since in regular WH40K such things like Frag Assault and Cerberus Launchers have no benefit unless accompanied by an assault by the dismounts.

So here is the criteria we are looking at:

Does equipment in the form of Frag Assault and Cerberus Launchers have a benefit? Yes

Do they have a benefit on their own, independent? No

Do they benefit something? Yes, assaults by dismounts.

How is this modeled? And now,....?

Now,...Epic is not about unit specific detail? Or special rules for unique units? I beg to differ. The only units in official EA that get any benefit from Teleport are Terminators and Swooping Hawks. That's pretty specific. And then we have the Eldar Storm Serpert which is the only recipient of the mobile Wraithgate ability. Here is a proposal for a Trait to three AFVs that have a piece of equipment specifically designed to support transported elements debarking for an assault. How is this modelled. I certainly don't see it as a CC bonus since in the smaller scale at WH40K this equipment only works in conjunction with an assault by an element debarking from the transporting AFV. Ergo, it should not provide it's own CC bonus. So how then to model this?

One could say remove any real CC factor and these Land Raider variants are solely close battle AFVs, with some transport ability. But this seems to undervalue them and take away their purpose. Close battle would be better handled by a Land Raider Ares and stock Land Raiders bringing in the dismounts. But Crusaders and Redeemers are special not just for their Hurricane Bolters or Flamestorm Cannons, but because they can debark their dismounts into the teeth of a defense with some advantage, and this equipment only works in conjunction with those troops dismounting into an assault situation. So if not with the proposed Trait, how is this done? Can we agree that realistically the unique equipment (Frag or Cerberus) does nothing unless in conjunction with an assault by the dismounts? So if not a First Strike on the first round, then what?

And certainly my proposed Trait is not without risks. These AFVs will be the focus of attacks as any opponent should know the danger of letting them close the distance. And both lack, on their own, a really effective way of suppressing the weapon systems (AT) that will cause them harm in trying to execute their mission. So it seems not an overwhelming Trait since it will require the player to use appropriate tactics to ensure it is carried off; supporting armor to suppress the armor-killers and barrage units to disrupt the infantry and other formations prior to the assault.

So how is it properly modeled?

Making the LRCs better in CC makes the formation as a whole slightly better in a close assault, which is exactly what frag launchers should do.

On top of this, LRCs are already notably better than normal LRs, so would have to go up hugely in points for such a huge benefit.

Note that frag launchers, (and all grenades) are already hugely abstracted in 40k to make units better in assaults. In older editions grenades of all types were actual weapons that could be thrown or fired rather than just giving arbitrary benefits to CC.

The effect of these at this scale is certainly not worth representing as a special rule. Teleport is completely different; a special rule is required in order for this major effect to work properly.

Representing every last special effect of every weapon and piece of equipment is the domain of netEpic, not EA.

As I opined earlier in the thread, I think it's best to "cheat" where possible and use appropriate pre-existing special rules.


Zombocom makes a good point in noting that the 40k special rules are already very odd because the way the 40k rule system handles grenades is very awkward.


In this specific case, I think that although your proposed special rule is kinda fun, a "cheat" would be a more elegant (And indeed, realistic) solution.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

So the "cheat" is the improved CC value?

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

If it's the best solution, yes.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter