Tactical Command
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

Hellblades
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=82&t=17308		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  The_Real_Chris [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 6:18 pm ]
Post subject:  Hellblades
Ok I've used them and faced them a fair bit now and they are a great choice. When unopposed they pump out a large amount of firepower and when intercepting, espcially against Eldar and other races fighters, they are the bees knees, pumping out a shed load of AA shots.

I reckon the AA is good but the ground firepower overshadows the Helltalons (which are another good choice I'm going to start taking in batreps to try and demonstrate their appeal more widely). To that end I still feel the twin reaper is the way to go, probably with a stat line like AP3+/AT5+/AA3+.

As this would be a downgrading of the firepower the cost could easily drop to 175, maybe even 150 if it loses its armour save.
Author:  Morgan Vening [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 8:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Hellblades
I think AA3+ is a bit much. On CAP or Intercept, that's 3x2+. Given most fighter formations are twins, anything that doesn't have all round AA is toast more often than not. Yes, it's inferior to what it is now, but I think it's too good at the moment.

I'd much rather see it converted the same way all existing twin-mounts get, with the AA getting +1 for a 4+ (3+ on CAP and Intercept).

I'd much rather see them reduced to twin fighter formations, but that's not going to happen, so we're stuck with something that is a lot harder to balance (triple fighter formations).

Morgan Vening
Author:  frogbear [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Hellblades
Yes. Helltalonjs are very nice indeed   :agree:
Author:  Honda [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:18 pm ]
Post subject:  Hellblades
Quote: 

AP3+/AT5+/AA3+.


Seems like where AA4+ is Eldar territory that all others aspire to, this seems quite excessive.

I would rather they had "reasonable" AA stats, and perhaps a solid armor save to reflect their high degree of maneuverability.
Author:  Ginger [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:32 pm ]
Post subject:  Hellblades
AA3+ is way OTT. Don't forget that the 2008 amendments add a further +1 for CAP and Intercept!

AA5+ is the more appropriate stat - even Eldar don't get get AA4+!!
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:34 pm ]
Post subject:  Hellblades
I've also tested them extensively, and also found them very, very good.

I've previously recommended keeping the stats as they are, but raising the points cost.
Author:  Blish [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:35 pm ]
Post subject:  Hellblades
All I know is that Hellblades are way to cheap for what they can do.

:cool:
Author:  hello_dave [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:36 pm ]
Post subject:  Hellblades
Personally I think they're fine as they are, the weapons reflect the twin reapers as is.
If anything maybe bump the armour to 5+.
Author:  The_Real_Chris [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:41 pm ]
Post subject:  Hellblades
Quote: (Morgan Vening @ Dec. 02 2009, 19:38 )

I think AA3+ is a bit much. On CAP or Intercept, that's 3x2+. Given most fighter formations are twins, anything that doesn't have all round AA is toast more often than not. Yes, it's inferior to what it is now, but I think it's too good at the moment.

So 2x4+ is too good, 2+ is still too good, what's next, 3+? :)

Quote: 

I'd much rather see it converted the same way all existing twin-mounts get, with the AA getting +1 for a 4+ (3+ on CAP and Intercept).


That's pretty poor though. Same hits as a thunderbolt formation, less range, ground firepower slightly worse. You would want them as 150 for 3?

Personally I do like them as 3 strong formations though since they are meant to be light fighter swarms (hell, I'd prefer them with no save for the same reason).
Author:  The_Real_Chris [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:41 pm ]
Post subject:  Hellblades
Quote: (Honda @ Dec. 02 2009, 20:18 )

Seems like where AA4+ is Eldar territory that all others aspire to, this seems quite excessive.

? Eldar have AA5+, two shots per plane, so 2 4+ on intercept. 3/2 is worse by any calculation.

Quote: 

I would rather they had "reasonable" AA stats, and perhaps a solid armor save to reflect their high degree of maneuverability.



They are supposed to be in swarms, high save wouldn't allow that :) And again having a lower AA stat than Eldar and Imperial planes seems to fit the swarm approach.
Author:  The_Real_Chris [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Hellblades
Quote: (Ginger @ Dec. 02 2009, 20:32 )

AA3+ is way OTT. Don't forget that the 2008 amendments add a further +1 for CAP and Intercept!

AA5+ is the more appropriate stat - even Eldar don't get get AA4+!!

Just to point out Eldar have 2 4+ when intercepting. A 3+ would be less when intercepting - a 2+. So it is in fact a worse interceptor, not a better one. AA5+ would be when intercepting half the firepower of a nightwing at half the range.
Author:  Honda [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Hellblades
Quote: 

even Eldar don't get get AA4+!!


Ok, I didn't realize that even Eldar had been downgraded. Prior to my sabbatical (Epic) Eldar were the only race that had AA4+. If even they have lost ground, then it makes even less sense to give Hellblades AA3+.

From a fluff perspective, they were really good, but a determined defense by the Phantine XX (Double Eagle) eventually fought them back, ala Battle of Britain.
Author:  The_Real_Chris [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 10:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Hellblades
Quote: (Honda @ Dec. 02 2009, 20:48 )

Ok, I didn't realize that even Eldar had been downgraded. Prior to my sabbatical (Epic) Eldar were the only race that had AA4+. If even they have lost ground, then it makes even less sense to give Hellblades AA3+.

? I can cut and paste their stats but to summarise a nightwing is

30cm AP4+/AA5+
30cm AT4+/AA5+ Lance

On intercept AA4+ Lance and AA4+.

Currently Hellblades are 2 x AP4+/AT6+/AA5+

On intercept 2 x AA4+

They would be at these stats AP3+/AT5+/AA3+

On intercept 2+.
Author:  Morgan Vening [ Wed Dec 02, 2009 10:16 pm ]
Post subject:  Hellblades
I think people are missing the point on number vs quality here. There was some confusion in the World Eaters discussion about it as well.

A single 2+ roll is inferior to 2x4+.

It doesn't mean that a 2+ represents quality. It can, but it doesn't have to. It can mean that there is a cap on just how effective that weapon system is.

I think the biggest problem with the formation is the seeming 'formation discount' applied. I'd have no problem with the initial stats if the units were costed at 75pts each, and purchasable as a 2-3 (2-4?) formation. The problem with air (and to an extent, AntiAir), is that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. The effectiveness of these formations is exponentially better the larger they are, due to the mechanics involved.

Morgan Vening
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/