Look good to me

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion

Thanks for the votes and comments guys.

We'll go with:

The Iron Warriors list will be updated within the week.

Cheers,
Steve.

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.

Surely it should have better than 6+ FF with those monster autocannon...

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread

There may be a problem – more recent rumours (supposedly from people who have a copy of next month's new SM codex) state the Stalker is purely an AA tank. As in it can't fire at ground troops at all.

You might want to wait to see a bit over a month to see what happens. If the SM Stalker is AA only it's always possible Forge World might create some other new 30k Horus Heresy AA tank for their next Horus Heresy Imperial Armour book (limited release at Games Day late September) that might be different.

You could make the tank 30cm 2 x AA4+ only (apparently it does have 4 shots in 40k per triple gun not 4 overall). Or you could rename the tank to something else instead rather than a Stalker. Or you could just ignore the 'can fire AA only' bit for epic, the same is true of the new 40k SM Hunter also and that's not going to change.

I think it's worth ignoring the 40k game balance rules since they're meant to handle turn by turn firing in a single event that takes place in a single engagement in Epic. Since epic firing is meant to represent something more akin to a sustained bombardment, I feel like its more reasonable to see actual kills from sustained suppressive fire from a hydra or a stalker. The skyfire/interceptor interplay in 40k is there to keep an AA tank from being as powerful against infantry as they historically have been (go figure).

A way to handle those rules in Epic would be to simply keep the firefight value high at 6, to represent an AA unit that could probably provide heavy suppressive fire against ground units when called upon, but wouldn't be able to handle the rapid shifts of a close-range firefight as easily.

_________________
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/armiger84/?hl=en

My General Modelling Blog: http://armiger84.blogspot.com/

This is a good point; being unable to fire on ground troops at all at 40k scale is more representative of firefight ability than potential long range shooting.

And don't forget to rename the weaponry to avoid confusion with other units, especially if you are intending to revise the stats

I've never quite understood the necessity for this; I'm perfectly fine assuming autocannon-lugged-around-by-a-dude-and-with-a-bipod operates differently to autocannon-mounted-in-a-turret-with-integrated-targeting-cooling-and-ammo-feed.

The weapon name has no actual in game affect; it's purely flavour text.

It's consistency.
One name = one stat

Same in Wh40k.

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

I like the FF6+ explanation mentioned by Armiger84.

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.

Me too actually, a good explanation that addresses the issue.

The Hunter also has FF6+ and the Stalker model does look like it should be able to fire at ground targets, maybe just not ones close by, fitting with it being represented by shooting.

so wait

we're going with the "Stalkers get AP and AT stats better than we voted on, because they would be awesome in 40k"
and also "but they have a terrible firefight, because apparently they're terrible in 40k" ?

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~

If it is deemed that the Stalker is better as a ranged weapon rather than close up, good shooting and poor FF / CC seems to fit the bill admirably. I think people might have a problem with removing these altogether, so CC6+ and FF6+ provide a reasonable balance to giving the Stalker the proposed shooting stats.

Is this a problem?

just that the reason for doing so is contradictory. smacks of "find an excuse to fit what i want to do"ism.
Using rumoured stats to justify power increases, then using the next version of the rumoured stats to also justify other stats, while keeping the original increase in place is terrible practice on many levels.

also, i didnt vote for AP4+AT5+AA5+ nor did any of the other 11 people who voted for 2 shots

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~

It wasn't an option when the original poll options were set, it was suggested afterwards and has seemed popular in the comments (and with the army champion and sub-army champion). Polls are useful to gather opinions and thought they don't need to be strictly followed.

The Stalkers proposed stats see it similar but slightly less shooty than a 50 point Hydra (no heavy bolter), but has only a 30cm range rather than 45cm, which is a significant limitation and allows for 30cm range aircraft to snipe edge units and stay out of range of it.