| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| Stormhammers http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=74&t=23868 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | LordotMilk [ Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Stormhammers |
I love the miniatures. And I even play them sometimes, though each time they feel suboptimal as compared to either Baneblades or Stormswords. The more recent Cadian Stormlord completely outshines it, being better in pretty much all respects. Any chance it could get a stat upgrade? Suggestion (though anything would do): - 4 Snub Bane Battlecannons 45 cm AP 3+/AT3+ - 4 Twin Heavy Bolters 30cm AP 4+ or - 2 Twin Snub Battlecannons AP 3+/ AT 3+ - 4 Lascannons 45 cm AT 5+ - 4 Heavy Bolters 45 cm AP 5+ Thoughts? |
|
| Author: | Spectrar Ghost [ Sat Sep 08, 2012 11:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Stormhammers |
they don't need it when used properly, IMO. FF3+. 3DC. 4+RA. The ability to take a Commisar that makes it Fearless and adds an additional FF attack. And you can take it in companies. For 500 points I get ten FF3+ attacks that can almost always be used (remember WEs can split their attacks at will between FF and CC, with the caveat that FF attacks cannot hit units in BtB, and CC attacks cannot hit units that aren't.) with a 4+ RA save on 9DC. Oh, and 3DC are Fearless. Wait, they have guns too? With AP3+/AT3+? Icing on the cake, that. Pair it with a prepping formation like a lone Stormsword or even a ranged shooting formation like a company of the very viable Minervan Baneblades - which have all the advantages of Stormhammers plus a ton of guns (75cm AT3+/AP3+ cannon, mmm), but ten FF at "only" 4+ - and you have an Engagement monster. I'm a fan. |
|
| Author: | LordotMilk [ Sun Sep 09, 2012 12:00 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Stormhammers |
Between a Stormhammer and a Stormlord(empty), what would you pick? |
|
| Author: | Spectrar Ghost [ Sun Sep 09, 2012 12:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Stormhammers |
It's a hard choice. because if i were to take an empty Stormlord, it'd be priced at 250. The fact that it does not add an activation and the fact that it makes an infantry formation vulnerable to AT fire make the effective price somewhat lower in the Cadian list. |
|
| Author: | LordotMilk [ Sun Sep 09, 2012 12:20 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Stormhammers |
Fair enough. The Stormhammer still got shafted somewhere in the editions change with his Battlecannons becoming twinned. I have found an earlier thread where Moscovian was discussing a stat decrease from my proposal number 2. The actual decrease is impressive. |
|
| Author: | admiral_tee [ Thu Sep 13, 2012 4:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Stormhammers |
The Stormhammer was my favourite SHT of SM2 era. It seems to have lost a bit of what was in the fluff. In the fluff it states that the Stormhammer was designed for urban close rage combat. It had the most bolters of any SHT and, more importantly IMO, retained it's 1+ armour save from side shots and only got a - 1 armour save from hits on the rear arc. Other SHT's did not get this advantage. If there is to be a change to its stats then applying TRR is reasonable. It's not game breaking and adds further to the tanks' uniqueness. Tee |
|
| Author: | carlos [ Thu Sep 13, 2012 5:28 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Stormhammers |
TRR is such a small upgrade it'd be hard to oppose it |
|
| Author: | LordotMilk [ Thu Sep 13, 2012 5:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Stormhammers |
TRR would be a nice addon, and coherent with the historical stats and miniature. |
|
| Author: | Spectrar Ghost [ Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Stormhammers |
Stormhammers do have TRR in Raiders 2.0. As that is the source of the Minervan list in the compendium we may safely assume that it was left out as a typo. Off to the Compendium thread to report it! |
|
| Author: | Moscovian [ Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Stormhammers |
Late to the game... Sorry folks. The Minervan list changed hands prior to publication of Raiders and I was floundering. I consulted with the IG Champ at the time,TheRealChris, who guided me on many of the unit loadouts. The original stats TheRealChris came up with for the Stormhammer were over the top for sure. TRC mentioned later on that he made an error on that tank and didn't have anything to back up what we had. But it didn't take a statistical analysis to figure out the tank was overpowered. Just look at the batreps and army lists people chose for the Minervans at the time and it was all Stormhammers all the time. We went back, chewed on the stats and the background, and came up with what we have now. The result is a tank that is specialized for close quarter fighting. I agree that some of the other tanks will outshine the Stormhammer in standard tourney games with sparse terrain. However the game of Epic is not just about tourneys with 6-10 pieces of terrain. Those Stormhammers are wickedly deadly in a city fight which is what they were designed to do. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|