| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| The Stormhammer SHT http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=74&t=15205 |
Page 1 of 6 |
| Author: | Moscovian [ Sat Mar 21, 2009 4:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | The Stormhammer SHT |
The Stormhammer Super Heavy Tank appears on the Minervan list with the following stats: STORMHAMMER (ACACIUS PATTERN) Type Speed Armour Close Combat Firefight War Engine 15cm 4+ 6+ 3+ Weapons Range Firepower Notes 2 x Twin Snub Battlecannons 45cm AP3+/AT3+ - 4 x Lascannons 45cm AT5+ - 4 x Twin Heavy Bolters 30cm AP4+ Damage Capacity 3. Critical Hit: The Stormhammer’s magazine explodes. The Stormhammer is destroyed, and any units within 5cm of the model suffer a hit on a D6 roll of 6+. Notes: Reinforced Armor Without going into the gory details as to how it came to be as such, it has been regularly pointed out as overpowered. Even if people didn't say it was overpowered, you can tell by the frequency of which the unit is fielded alone. The Raiders review will be coming up soon, but I do want to address this unit specifically because it is one of the prominent stumblingblocks to the Minervan list. Left to my own devices, I would simply take the unit off the list and categorize it as a collector's model only. Since I have gotten some negative feedback on that choice, I am throwing it out to you folks to help me make some decisions. Here are the rules though: No special rules (other than the classic ones available in the E:A book), no special pricing. The whole idea is to balance it against the other SHTs in the list with a minimal amount of changes. I'd also like justifications for your changes or -better yet- playtested examples of them. Why such strict parameters? We're dealing with a printed book now and any changes that apply to it need to be done with considerable care. Any FAQ/errata sheet I put together I would like to fit on a single page for the entire book and I think this is a reasonable goal. Last request: I'd like to get more than two or three people's ideas before we start swinging the hammer and smashing other player's concepts. Discussion is important but I don't want anyone feeling they are being shouted down right out of the gate. Post your ideas, let others post their ideas, and ask open ended questions. Then we'll get into the more critical debate of what to do. Thanks! |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Sat Mar 21, 2009 4:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | The Stormhammer SHT |
Well, I'm still in favour of returning the Minervan Stormhammer's speed to 10cm, where it will find it harder to bring its awesome firepower to bear. Failing, or in addition to that, +50 points per Stormhammer chosen might not be terrible. --- In the Mossinian list, TRC went for a much lower-tech Stormhammer, which is more balanced for its points cost, but isn't as damned punchy as the Minervan Stormhammer. And punchy is cool |
|
| Author: | BlackLegion [ Sat Mar 21, 2009 4:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | The Stormhammer SHT |
The Mossinian Stormhammer is this: MOSSINIAN STORMHAMMER (NICEA PATTERN) Type Speed Armour Close Combat Firefight War Engine 15cm 4+ 6+ 3+ Weapons Range Firepower Notes 2 x Twin Snub Battlecannons 45cm AP3+/AT3+ - 4 x Heavy Stubbers 30cm AP6+ - Defensive Boltgun Array (15cm) Small Arms Extra Attacks (+1) Damage Capacity 3. Critical Hit: The Stormhammer’s magazine explodes. The Stormhammer is destroyed, and any units within 5cm of the model suffer a hit on a D6 roll of 6+. Notes: Reinforced Armor, Thick Rear Armour, Walker |
|
| Author: | Flogus [ Sat Mar 21, 2009 5:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | The Stormhammer SHT |
Walker is too much IMO. But [/i]Thick Rear Armour[/i] is mandatory (SM/TL Stormhammer fluff tells about improved rear armour). FF3+, or FF4+ with +1 extra FF attack. I would even say FF4+ with +2 extra FF attacks, but it may be to much. The sides sponsors shouldn't carry lascannon. Only heavy bolters. |
|
| Author: | Moscovian [ Sun Mar 22, 2009 12:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | The Stormhammer SHT |
The sides sponsors shouldn't carry lascannon. Only heavy bolters. So, Flogus, how would you stat out the whole unit? Write it out so that everyone can easily see what you are suggesting. ------ BlackLegion, by posting the Mossinian stats are you suggesting that is what you prefer or simply that is what the Mossinian stats are? ------ I know there are other people playing Minervans as well, so my hope is to have more than three people chime in. 
|
|
| Author: | BlackLegion [ Sun Mar 22, 2009 1:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | The Stormhammer SHT |
Only posted the stats for easy comparison. I didn't haver played with or against Minervans. Sowhat exactly are the perceived problems with the Stormhammer? The FF? The firepower? |
|
| Author: | Jonluke [ Sun Mar 22, 2009 2:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | The Stormhammer SHT |
Through extensive playtesting and differing variations on the Starmhammers use, I've found that limitig its availibility to 1 for each company of Minervans fielded (whether this be as inclusive within the company itself or as a support choice. This seems to balance the power of the stormhammer a little more as you are forced to use it in conjunction with other types of attack, rather than allowing it to rampage freely with the collosal numbers of attacks 3 Starmhammers bring to bear. If limiting the numbers doesn't cut it, then I suggest increasing the points value to 300 for a single 'hammer and +50points on the company price. If this is also not to your liking, the removal of the Lascannons and replacing them with Heavy Bolters would limit it's battlefield applications seriously. |
|
| Author: | Moscovian [ Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | The Stormhammer SHT |
I'm not picking on Jonluke here but the first two ideas are exactly the thing I am not looking for. Had I these suggestions prior to putting out Raiders I would have seriously considered them but I just don't like the idea of these changes now theat we're in print. Adjusting the stats is really what I am looking for. |
|
| Author: | zombocom [ Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | The Stormhammer SHT |
The trouble is that if we stat it even vaguely accurately it's worth more than the other super-heavies. We either have to totally cripple its shooting or (preferably) make it more expensive. Is is such an issue to have a price errata instead of a stat errata? Either way, drop it back to 10cm movement, which it was tested at before you altered it for raiders, and which the unit text still alludes to. |
|
| Author: | zombocom [ Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | The Stormhammer SHT |
Simple stat changes probably won't work to fix the necron list either, for example the core obelisk formation (which was only added with the release of raiders so was never playtested). An army consisting of 9 obelisk formations and a pylon is 2900 points, and has 54 AP4+/AT4+ 45cm ranged shots, all on fearless, teleporting skimmers with a 5+ reinforced save. The problem here is them being allowed as a core formation, not the stats. How can that be fixed with a simple stat change? |
|
| Author: | Moscovian [ Sun Mar 22, 2009 9:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | The Stormhammer SHT |
Necron stuff - interesting point but Off Topic. ---- How is it that the stat change works for the Mossinians but not for the Minervans? Perhaps I didn't make myself clear: I DON'T WANT TO CREATE SPECIAL PRICING.* I DON'T WANT TO CREATE SPECIAL RULES. I want to create a simple stat change. If it can't be done, the list will be just fine without Stormhammers. A speed change counts as a stat change so that recommendation is fine, but I'm not about to be badgered into it. Maybe that explains how I feel about the matter better? Are there other recommendations? *Two reasons for this: One is that I would like to have all the SHT's priced the same so that the pricing structure is kept simple. The other reason is I have a personal problem with an "inferior" SHT having superior firepower and higher pricing than the best the Forgeworlds can produce. |
|
| Author: | zombocom [ Sun Mar 22, 2009 9:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | The Stormhammer SHT |
Quote: (Moscovian @ 22 Mar. 2009, 20:20 ) How is it that the stat change works for the Mossinians but not for the Minervans?  The Mossinian stats have never been playtested as far as I know. The necron reference was off-topic, but included to show that stat changes alone may not be sufficient to fix all the raiders lists. Whatever, my proposed stats for the Stormhammer would be: Code Sample: STORMHAMMER (ACACIUS PATTERN) Type Speed Armour Close Combat Firefight War Engine 10cm 4+ 6+ 3+ Weapons Range Firepower Notes 2 x Twin Snub Battlecannons 45cm AP3+/AT3+ - 4 x Lascannons 45cm AT5+ - 4 x Heavy Bolters 30cm AP5+ Damage Capacity 3. Critical Hit: The Stormhammer’s magazine explodes. The Stormhammer is destroyed, and any units within 5cm of the model suffer a hit on a D6 roll of 6+. Notes: Reinforced Armor, Thick Rear Armour |
|
| Author: | Dave [ Sun Mar 22, 2009 9:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | The Stormhammer SHT |
I second Zombo's stats. |
|
| Author: | Flogus [ Mon Mar 23, 2009 12:52 am ] |
| Post subject: | The Stormhammer SHT |
Code Sample: STORMHAMMER (FLOGUSUS PATTERN) Type     Speed  Armour  Close Combat Firefight War Engine  15cm   4+    6+      4+ Weapons               Range  Firepower     Notes 2 x Snub Battlecannons Turret   45cm  2x AP4+/AT4+   - 4 x Heavy Bolter         30cm  AP5+       - Defensive Boltgun Array      (15cm)  Small Arms    Extra Attacks (+1) (or +2 ?) Damage Capacity 3. Critical Hit: The Stormhammer’s magazine explodes. The Stormhammer is destroyed, and any units within 5cm of the model suffer a hit on a D6 roll of 6+. Notes: Reinforced Armor, Thick Rear Armour Speed 15cm : this tank is heavier armoured than others SHT (thick rear armour), but it's weaponnery is more 'primitive' than on others SHTs : plasma reactors for Stormblades, big accumulators for the Volcano of the Shadowsword, loads of mega-battlecannon and demolisher big shells, ... Side sponsors : from lascannon & heavy bolters to heavy bolters and arrays of bolters. 4 lascannons will makes the Stormhammer to powerful IMO, and I see Stormhammer as a short range tank or even a FF-tank (so is the FF extra attack). And the un-twinning of the snub battlecannons is for giving the Stormhammer an antitank capacity even with the removal of the lascannons. FF3+ => FF4+ : FF short range capacity already represented by Defensive Boltgun Array. |
|
| Author: | zombocom [ Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:15 am ] |
| Post subject: | The Stormhammer SHT |
Quote: (Flogus @ 22 Mar. 2009, 23:52 ) And the un-twinning of the snub battlecannons is for giving the Stormhammer an antitank capacity even with the removal of the lascannons. The model is clearly armed with two twin main cannons. |
|
| Page 1 of 6 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|