Why should the Crusader get to have +2 EA? Given the MM weapon, I would have thought a single EA would suffice - or have I completely missed the point here?

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

yes the current stats give it 3 5+ attacks in FF one of which is MW Extra attack from the pintle multi-metla and the other is an extra attack from the hurrican bolters, all the new stats would be doing is removing the MW ranged shot and making the MW on the base attack so the bolters give the two extra attacks (this is the FF config that the Crusader was a while ago) which the crusader has always had

_________________
"Dyslexia is a Privilege, not a right"

Form Lord I:
Now, that said, I will fight the inclusion of a multi-melta on any vehicle with a FF of anything other than 5+ - all multi-melta tanks have a FF of 5+ - otherwise you end up with the oddity of a multimelta FF attack that is better than the shooting attack.

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

Giving it a different name allows it to have, slightly, different stats.

That is, "15cm MW5+, and +1EAMWFF", whereas a "regular" Multi-Melta gives MW to the "basic" firefight value of the unit... which has caused some confusion when said unit gets *other* extra attacks added.

Making the Crusader's weapon this "new" one means the tank has one normal "basic" attack, +1 FF attack from the Hurrican Bolters, and +1 MWFF attack from the "pintle-mounted" Multi-melta.  Same number of attacks, but no confusion as to which are MW or not.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

A simple note in the Notes would suffice too
But if the end result is the same...

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

All of which is really a matter of semantics - I don't think anyone would be confused by a multi-melta with an extra attack. But yes, I agree with Hena, a "pintle multi-melta" would be good to satisfy the "one weapon one profile" pedants without making the datasheet needlessly convoluted. This is all dressing though - we're still talking about 3 FF5+ attacks, one of which is a MW.

The Fire Dragons are another kettle of fish as a single weapon is used to represent multiple attacks as an abstraction. That doesn't necessarily mean we can give a single multi-melta any damn thing desired.

I'm not sure I like the idea of giving a multi-melta only ranged attack or only FF attack. It might be balanced, but it starts throwing consistency to the wind.

I think they should aim to be the same as all lists have a landing craft, and a Land Raider 'hull' is worth a certain amount with its save, speed and transport. I think lists with thunderhawk transports might upset that a bit with the crusader but thats their list specific issue. Yes of course given a certain list structure the points could deviate widely. For instance what is the LR's value as a formation as compared to a heavy transport? And so on.

Land Raider Redeemer
Type Armoured Vehicle, Save 4+, Speed 25cm, CC5+ FF3+
Frag Launchers; (base contact); Assault Weapons
Twin assault cannon; 30cm; AT5+/AP5+
2 x Flamestorm cannons; Range 30cm; Firepower AP3+; Ignore Cover
Notes: Reinforced Armour, Thick Rear Armour, Transport (1 Terminator or 2 other)

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

I disagree here; we don't need to pay the W40k stats over-much attention, but roughly representing the overall effect and function of the weapons and unit is IMO more important than you seem to give credit.

Players coming over from W40k should recognise the overall feel and function of the unit and this differs too much - though both are big flamer weapons a Redeemer's Flamestorm Cannons are nasty close range weapons that spray out of the guns, while a Hellhounds Inferno Cannon sprays a jet of flame high into the air to land a distance away. I think 15cm should be the maximum in-line with other similar weapons - i.e. heavy flamers.

A Flamestorm Cannon has the same range as a Heavy Flamer, zero inches.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Yep, the Flame template has to touch the firing vehicle/model.
It is different with the Hellhound. He can place the flame template anywhere withing 18".

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

Regarding the Crusader and 15cm MM, by itself it is probably not overporwered. But, when considered as an upgrade to formations in a Landing Craft, it adds considerable punch to an already powerfull assault. The question then is whether that is OTT or not.

- - - Just askin as they say

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

The hellhound weapon is identical in strength and such (so AP3+, ignores cover), but the hellhound is much, much, much longer ranged.

Regarding the crusader's multimelta - the vehicle must either have both a MW shot and MW FF or have neither of them. Having just the MW FF is not an option because that's completely inconsistent with what a multimelta does on other vehicles. Renaming it isn't enough to get away with it, sorry. Either it has a full MM (named "pintle mounted" or otherwise), or it doesn't. A halfway house is not acceptable to me.

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

I agree with Zombocom on the Multi-Melta.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Well, its been used with 2 15cm guns and the MM at FF2+ and was fine. But thats in a list that pays a large premium to air move them so they are stuck on the ground for 85 points each (meaning you can't really field more than 4 at a pinch and still have a competitive army).
Its either 2 15cm shots or 1 30cm one. Both really need the MM though otherwise they are sub par, no extra transport capacity or anything else to boost it. The 30cm one is worse than the 2x15 one so couldn't be considered without the MM.

The MM seems to be, at least on the web, all over peoples Redeemers.

That between FF ability seems to indicate MW4+ or IC3+ (or maybe a straight 2+) to be between the regular 4+ and the Crusader 2x5+ 1xMW5+

I guess it could be the 30cm/MM version and maybe cost 10p points less or so than the regular land raider for sallies. In air move lists it would probably even out.
Or the 2x15cm version. Without the MM again drop the price for sallies, otherwise keep as is. Other air cav lists would have the salamander stated one at a higher cost (or probably the same if without the MM and FF3+IC or so).

If you are determined to go without the MM that means the 2x15cm version, prob with FF2+, though it still mucks up the Salamanders list somewhat as it will have to come down in cost, maybe forcing the Landing Craft up a bit more. Other lists might be alright with it, they would have to try. I would see it in an air attack as on par or better than the regular raider.

Crusader is too good at the moment. How much? I don't know. However that MW shot does mean that when in close range it is almost equal in shooting power with comparison to regular LR. On paper with math-hammer at least and I've noticed that I've kept on using that ability in games. Since I don't want to see that, dropping the ranged shot is simple solution. If it is still too good, then MW leaves completely.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x