Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  Page 3 of 5
  [ 75 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Dreadnoughts
1. No. 45%  45%  [ 13 ]
2. Yes. 41%  41%  [ 12 ]
3. Yes, but make it a 0-1 formation (1 formation only allowed). 14%  14%  [ 4 ]
4. Any of these options, I don't have an opinion. 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Total votes : 29

Dreadnoughts
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Dreadnoughts
PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 1:34 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
I would support a 3+ armour save for Dreadnoughts without raising the current cost, or 5+ Reinforced Armour.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Markconz
 Post subject: Dreadnoughts
PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 2:00 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand

(pixelgeek @ Jul. 29 2007,12:24)
QUOTE

(Markconz @ Jul. 28 2007,23:47)
QUOTE
Naturally it makes sense that orks are smarter in figuring this sort of thing out than marines (who insist on making infantry formations vulnerable to AT by including a dreadnought or two, and dreadnought formations vulnerable to AP by taking infantry).  ???

Orks have Killa Kans in infantry formations all the time. They also add WEs and other vehicles.

Transports also do the same thing to an infantry formation. The difference being that the transports add an option that the player is willing to make the trade-off for.

Dreads just aren't good enough to make this a good idea for anything other than garrisons... in which case the Dread has typically already done its movement. The movement where I think it is typically most vulnerable.

The point is that it is  it is optional and they can be used in entirely AV walker formations if you want - which is more usefully in my experience (though the mix with stompas which are 4+ RA helps a lot too).

Dreads also do get blown away in 40K as quickly as they do in Epic. The reference I was making was simply to the background and fluff.

I think that overall the Dreads are meant to be tougher and they should be tougher. If only to make them useful.


Which leaves us with 3+ armour or something similar. Which wouldn't actually be outside the realms of possibility for the reasons I mentioned above.  However I still feel it is a shame to artificially hamper dreads by forcing them to tag along with infantry all the time.

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Dreadnoughts
PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 2:10 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
Oh, and Multi-Melta rules for dreadnoughts is a pretty sensible idea too, since the model is actually sold...

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
BlackLegion
 Post subject: Dreadnoughts
PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 2:17 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:13 am
Posts: 8711
Location: Leipzig, Germany, Europe, Sol III, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster, Universe
I love my Multi-melta Dreadnoughts *cradles his Salamanders Dreads* :D

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
pixelgeek
 Post subject: Dreadnoughts
PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 2:38 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm
Posts: 2642
Location: Edmonton, Alberta

(Markconz @ Jul. 29 2007,06:00)
QUOTE
The point is that it is it is optional and they can be used in entirely AV walker formations if you want - which is more usefully in my experience (though the mix with stompas which are 4+ RA helps a lot too).

The Stompa Mobs are in fitting with the background though. Critical difference.

And the 4+ RA does indeed make it a viable formation. Even in smaller or mixed units since you can use RA units to potentially shield units without RA.

_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
pixelgeek
 Post subject: Dreadnoughts
PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 2:44 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm
Posts: 2642
Location: Edmonton, Alberta

(Markconz @ Jul. 29 2007,06:00)
QUOTE
Which leaves us with 3+ armour or something similar. Which wouldn't actually be outside the realms of possibility for the reasons I mentioned above.  However I still feel it is a shame to artificially hamper dreads by forcing them to tag along with infantry all the time.

It isn't artificial. They are an infantry support platform. Its how they are defined in the game. They march around with marines and provide them with additional heavy weapon support.

At some point perhaps these things made some sort of sense in the game but since 3rd ed I don't think that they have been able to perform in the manner that they were developed.

They just need to be modded to allow them to stay on the field.

_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Dobbsy
 Post subject: Dreadnoughts
PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 12:16 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:24 am
Posts: 4499
Location: Melbourne, Australia
I believe that Dreads are almost right as they are, except they need to be droppable with the formations they are supporting and you need more than two as an upgrade option.

At present, if you buy them as an upgrade to a Tactical formation you can't drop them alongside those Tacs if you do go the Air Drop army option. I see them as a heavy support unit to the Tacs(or Devs) when the Tactical formation drops on its objective etc etc. I picture them as the heavy guns/Close Combat when they assault that objective...

I would prefer to see a 1-4 Dread upgrade for any Marine infantry formation - barring Assault marines. It would bolster the Tactical/Dev formation numbers for dropping OR garrisoning.

I think the Marine list isn't flexible enough - which seems to fly in the face of how it's described. IMO, more units should be available as upgrades and in greater numbers. e.g Tacticals should be able to take Land Raiders as a support upgrade if they want... The Dread issue is all part of the greater problem with the Marine list.

As to the argument about them being weak etc it is part and parcel of the game. You lose troops to fire - it's what happens in war but people hate to lose cool minis in battle :D
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Chroma
 Post subject: Dreadnoughts
PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 12:34 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada

(Dobbsy @ Jul. 30 2007,00:16)
QUOTE
At present, if you buy them as an upgrade to a Tactical formation you can't drop them alongside those Tacs if you do go the Air Drop army option.

Er... why can't Dreads be dropped if they're attached to a Tactical formation?

You can fit a single Dread in a T-Hawk with Tacticals, and they can also be put in Drop Pods, so what am I missing?

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Dobbsy
 Post subject: Dreadnoughts
PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 1:16 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:24 am
Posts: 4499
Location: Melbourne, Australia
oops! I didn't know they were listed in the actual drop pod data sheet. I always thought they came as part of the transports rule in the Marine army list section. Oh well, you learn something everyday. :D

I still think they need more than 2 as an upgrade possibility...
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
pixelgeek
 Post subject: Dreadnoughts
PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 4:19 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm
Posts: 2642
Location: Edmonton, Alberta

(Dobbsy @ Jul. 29 2007,17:16)
QUOTE
I still think they need more than 2 as an upgrade possibility...

Dreads take two places in transports so two of them would take four places making it difficult to put many Marines in them... which is why, I think, that people have been asking for a formation.

_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Markconz
 Post subject: Dreadnoughts
PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 5:11 am 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand

(pixelgeek @ Jul. 29 2007,13:44)
QUOTE

(Markconz @ Jul. 29 2007,06:00)
QUOTE
Which leaves us with 3+ armour or something similar. Which wouldn't actually be outside the realms of possibility for the reasons I mentioned above.  However I still feel it is a shame to artificially hamper dreads by forcing them to tag along with infantry all the time.

It isn't artificial. They are an infantry support platform.

They are infantry support in the same way that all the other marine armoury is there to support the marines and allocated as necessary.

Furthermore 'infantry support' or whatever you want to call it, they would still work better in that role in their own formation IMO.

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
BlackLegion
 Post subject: Dreadnoughts
PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 9:47 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:13 am
Posts: 8711
Location: Leipzig, Germany, Europe, Sol III, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster, Universe
The Salamanders Armylist has the Dreadnought upgrad as a 0-4 choice.
Have yet to try out if this is too much.

Multi-melta Dreadnoughts would be the number one choice for droppod assaults due to their MW FF attack even if they would have FF5+ (currently they have FF4+ in the Salamanders list)

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Dobbsy
 Post subject: Dreadnoughts
PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 12:04 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:24 am
Posts: 4499
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Dreads take two places in transports so two of them would take four places making it difficult to put many Marines in them


I was thinking more for Drop pods or garrisoning actually. In a thunderhawk you'd only take 1.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Dwarf Supreme
 Post subject: Dreadnoughts
PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 4:20 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 8:45 pm
Posts: 11149
Location: Canton, CT, USA
Yes, I would like to have Dreadnought formations.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Soren
 Post subject: Dreadnoughts
PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 4:32 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 9:42 am
Posts: 694
Location: Austria
Don?t care about Dreadnaught formations. Pretty sure you get much better firepower and survivability with +50pts and buying Devas. No matter which solutions you prefer, they will only be used by a handfull of players and I don?t think we should edit the lists just for them.

Vote: NO

_________________
Attrition is the proof of absence of Strategy
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  Page 3 of 5
  [ 75 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net