Bump so the 2-3 of you who may be interested can have a say....
| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| Centurions Poll http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=73&t=29062 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | kyussinchains [ Tue Feb 17, 2015 3:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Centurions Poll |
So, in the spirit of pushing development of the Imperial Fists list onwards, I feel we should tackle the "burning" issue of the centurions if we can all put aside our vomit buckets for a minute, they are staying in the list, I know they look like stupid derpy tellitubbies/walking microwaves/boomboxes, but they're in the list now it's come to my attention that the devastator variant is significantly more potent than the assault version and the question has arisen as to why we have two versions at all.... nobody else wants to include them in a list so we may end up with the only NetEA list which uses them, and I would rather take the terminator approach where we assume the formation is typically made up of a mixture of the two types I've proposed we pick a single combined statline to merge the two versions into something useful, and have come up with the following Type - INF Speed - 15cm Armour - 4+ reinforced CC - 5+ FF - 3+ Hurricane bolters (small arms) 15cm EA+1 however I'm stuck on the ranged attack they should have, and have decided to put it to a poll.... any other suggestions please post below |
|
| Author: | kyussinchains [ Sun Feb 22, 2015 1:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Centurions Poll |
Bump so the 2-3 of you who may be interested can have a say....
|
|
| Author: | kyussinchains [ Sun Feb 22, 2015 1:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Centurions Poll |
Vaaish wrote: Centurions have +1 toughness and Strength plus an extra wound over regular terminators but don't get the terminator INV save. In 40k terms they need a S10 weapon to instagib them compared to a S8 weapon for regular termies. I guess in the end it makes them a bit tougher overall than a Termie but not enough that I think it makes much difference in Epic. Going by that I'd say its justifed, they dont have TRA either.... the other option is to make them light vehicles which makes them considerably more vulnerable, but as nobody has played any games with them yet I think a bit of data at the current stats would be useful before fiddling further Also for their role as frontline breaching troops they really need RA or they just arent worth taking.... |
|
| Author: | ortron [ Tue Feb 24, 2015 12:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Centurions Poll |
Mate I'm going with "other" because if you're doing them as a unit of 3 to confer "infantry" status, then they've access to as many weapons or more than a devastator squad - hence once weapons system seems insufficient. I suggest a combination like the Tau Crisis suits have if you're going for the mix of devs and assaults. Whilst I get that a decision to combine makes for a simplified roster and one less unit to create, its going to make a jack of all trades units which you already have in buckets in any SM list. Personal preference would be to keep them distinct or just pick one over the other and say that's the preferred load out for your list. As for the centurions' armour save debate that seems to come up every time, have you considered 3+ standard save? I suggest this after considering them for my own Badab War lists, the reason I went with 3+ was that there are less models per standard squad (3 as opposed to 5) but they have (by 40k stats) equivalent survivability to Terminators. However "fluff" wise its a standard marine in a power armour encased in a larger exo-skeleton with armour plates on the key areas (not the head mind you... though when your a post human killing machine your better off not protecting the brain box according to GW) Anyway.. the 3+ save represents the additional armour plates over the standard power armour, whilst the increase in wounds/toughness in 40k is countered by the average drop in manpower - hence the balance is a slight increase. Going back to your question on weapons, I would suggest something like: Dev Centurions INF 3+ 5+ 3+ Missile Launcher 45cm AP5/AT6 TL Heavy Bolters 30cm AP4+ Grav Cannons 15cm AP5/AT5 Lance Notes: Transport as per terminators (lance rather than disrupt as the 40k version gets better against heavy armour) Assault Centurions INF 3+ 4+ 5+ TL Flamers 15cm AP4+ Ignore Cover TL Melta Guns 15cm MW5+ Hurricane Bolters (small arms) EA+1 FF Siege Drills (close combat) EA+1 MW Notes: Transport as per terminators (lance rather than disrupt as the 40k version gets better against heavy armour) |
|
| Author: | Ginger [ Tue Feb 24, 2015 1:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Centurions Poll |
If Ortron has described it correctly, then this sounds like you should consider keeping different stat-lines like the Dreadnought for the different configurations, though I am ambivalent either way. However, I dislike three weapons on the unit; it is an infantry unit not a tank To distinguish this from the termies, I agree that 3+ armour with inv save is well worth consideration. This has roughly the same survivability as termie armour against standard weapons but is much weaker against MW. I would also consider 20cm movement to reflect the enhanced walker style frame they are in, which would also make them a more interesting option. As far as weapons go, I believe 15cm AP4+ is appropriate for Hurricane bolters (though you should check other lists for the stat line of this weapon). For the second weapon, IMO I don't think Disrupt fits the profile of infantry weapons. if you do give the unit enhanced mobility, Ignore cover on a 15cm flamer would work giving the unit slightly less reach than a termie. Alternatively you might consider something with 30cm AT5+ / AP6+ if you can find a current Marine weapon with this statline, which would also give it a slightly longer reach with the enhanced mobility. |
|
| Author: | ortron [ Tue Feb 24, 2015 1:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Centurions Poll |
Quote: If Ortron has described it correctly, then this sounds like you should consider keeping different stat-lines like the Dreadnought for the different configurations, though I am ambivalent either way. However, I dislike three weapons on the unit; it is an infantry unit not a tank Thats the problem though Ginger, 3 of these guys sport more heavy weapons than most tanks! Eg: if we assume a min of 3 per stand - to allow INF status, then there is potentially 9 Heavy weapons present on the one stand. Now sure not all need to be represented, but that's more than 3 times the firepower of a standard predator tank! A similar problem exits in the Tau list for how to address Crisis suits. From what I've seen (though rarely played Tau) the mix of 3 weapon systems works ok, with the crisis suits getting significantly better at 15cm or less. I'm personally not in favor of a speed increase - though the fluff is vague enough to allow such. I just see the suits as more about allowing greater weight carriage rather than providing a boost to the marines already superhuman athletic ability. |
|
| Author: | Ginger [ Tue Feb 24, 2015 1:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Centurions Poll |
I am a self avowed 'fluffyphobe',  merely spitballing some thoughts on how we might make the Centurions both similar to the Termies but sufficiently different to make them interesting. Indeed, you might keep both options of a speedy but less shooty unit, and a slower more shooty one |
|
| Author: | kyussinchains [ Tue Feb 24, 2015 1:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Centurions Poll |
I'd rather keep the reinforced armour, these guys are going to be getting in the face of the opponent as a spearhead/breakthrough formation and I think with the reduced save they will be too vulnerable to attrition, if we think they are too tough (and I'd rather base this discussion on the intended role of the troops rather than 40k fluff) then I think making them into light vehicles would be a logical step to increasing their vulnerability to a range of attacks I agree making a single statline is tough as the two variants are very distinct, as they are currently, the dev variant has a twin lascannon and two twin heavy bolters per stand, while the assault variant has a twin heavy flamer, and siege drill I'd rather keep ranged macro weapons out of the list as much as possible, and would prefer to stick to established weapons, the combined statline was suggested by osoi and with some discussion between us we hammered it out to INF 15cm 4+ 5+ 3+ twin short barelled lascannon 30cm AT4+ Siege Drills (close combat) EA+1 MW Hurricane Bolters (small arms) EA+1 + possibly heavy flamer 15cm AP5+ ignore cover reinforced armour, transport as terminators so they work best as a FF engagement/support unit, while they have MW combat attacks, the cc5+ will make them less effective, I'm reasonably happy to test them out at those stats, but wanted to see if there were other options for the main shooting attack that didn't involve inventing a weapon happy to try other stats out but so far nobody has used centurions in their games so we have zero data on how they perform! |
|
| Author: | jimmyzimms [ Tue Feb 24, 2015 1:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Centurions Poll |
Just curious that 47% of the poll went with graviton weaponry, the greatest plurality, but we're not going with it. Why have a poll then ? 
|
|
| Author: | kyussinchains [ Tue Feb 24, 2015 1:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Centurions Poll |
nothing has been decided yet.... I put those stats up as an example of where I was currently at, and the reason behind the poll |
|
| Author: | jimmyzimms [ Tue Feb 24, 2015 2:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Centurions Poll |
Ahhhhh. Why I should make posts after coffee, not before For the record, regardless of which variation is taken, I agree with Orton that picking one version and labeling it as such would be a good thing for those designers that come afterwards. I know you like termie-tubbies about as much as I do, that doesn't mean that someone in the future might not make a very themed list with them featuring quite prominently in it. Giving them room to figuratively maneuver might be nice, no? [thinking strategically here] I think you should pick a reasonable assault or devestator version and leverage that, leaving the other open for the future if need be. |
|
| Author: | novemberrain [ Tue Feb 24, 2015 2:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Centurions Poll |
The assault termie-tubbies (I love this  ) are pretty close to generic Terminators in stats right, whereas the Dev ones seem to fill a role that nothing else really does in the Marine list - maybe this points towards picking the one that is most divergent, leaving the assault ones to be proxied if players want?
|
|
| Author: | Mard [ Tue Feb 24, 2015 11:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Centurions Poll |
I selected Other for everything Orton said |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|