Quad Storm Bolter....imagine, they look like autocannon barrels
| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| Thunderbolts poll and review http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=74&t=9791 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Dave [ Wed Jun 27, 2007 5:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Thunderbolts poll and review |
Now that we're done with the ground pounders all that's left is the Navy and Titan Legions. First up is the Thunderbolts. I haven't had too much experience with aircraft so I'll let you guys take it from here. What is your take on how the Thunderbolt performs? It's essentially a fighta bommer with a multi-laser and slightly improved heavy shootas. Is that really worth 25 more points? |
|
| Author: | orangesm [ Wed Jun 27, 2007 6:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Thunderbolts poll and review |
I really think that we should move away from the SG Thunderbolts and adopt the FW Thunderbolts as the standard. This would mean keeping it a Fighter, giving it Twin-Linked Lascannons and Quad Autocannons. However at the same time improving aircraft may require a look at the majority of aero units from Flak to other Aircraft. |
|
| Author: | Irondeath [ Wed Jun 27, 2007 7:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Thunderbolts poll and review |
T-Bolts are just excellent, really coming into their own against mixed formations. I love ?em. No change required. |
|
| Author: | Charad [ Wed Jun 27, 2007 7:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Thunderbolts poll and review |
They are damn good and really worth every point. That storm bolter with AP4 still amazes me, how many are them? |
|
| Author: | Soren [ Wed Jun 27, 2007 7:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Thunderbolts poll and review |
Quad Storm Bolter....imagine, they look like autocannon barrels
|
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Wed Jun 27, 2007 10:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Thunderbolts poll and review |
Looks like the name at least could be changed to Quad Autocannon rather than StormBolter. 
|
|
| Author: | hazpak [ Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | Thunderbolts poll and review |
I would like to see the option of adding up to two more thunderbolts to a formation. |
|
| Author: | J0k3r [ Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | Thunderbolts poll and review |
I like tbolts as they are. Pack the punch of 4 Ork FB into a smaller packet which seems very imperial. Formations of 4 would be a terrifying concept.... |
|
| Author: | NOVAGUARD [ Thu Jun 28, 2007 1:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Thunderbolts poll and review |
i like them as they are... Bakka 'bolts are just one type so FW weapon fits can be added in other lists... |
|
| Author: | Shadowsword [ Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | Thunderbolts poll and review |
A bigger formation would be interesting when fighting Ork FB. Perhaps 4 for 250? |
|
| Author: | Markconz [ Fri Jun 29, 2007 1:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Thunderbolts poll and review |
(Shadowsword @ Jun. 29 2007,10:56) QUOTE A bigger formation would be interesting when fighting Ork FB. Perhaps 4 for 250? No way should they get a discount for a 4 strong squadron. 300 points. |
|
| Author: | Moose Cloud [ Fri Jun 29, 2007 2:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Thunderbolts poll and review |
Thunderbolts are great as it is. The small formation size is justified by the background that the navy took a severe pounding early on in the battle for Armageddon. Also from a rules point of view a larger formation would make them extremely powerful and considering you'd presumably get four for the cost of two marauders(which I know have their own issues) I don't think it's a particularly good idea. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|