 
|
Page 1 of 1
|
[ 12 posts ] |
|
Dragonfish changes |
|
Honda
|
Post subject: Dragonfish changes  Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 6:57 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
 |
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:44 pm
Posts: 1891
Location: Katy, Republic of Texas
|
|
I'm still working through the new list, however, I noticed that the Dragonfish loadout had changed.
Not saying that the change is good or bad, however, some things to consider:
1. When we had a big discussion about pointing out the cost of the previous version of DrF, we generally settled on an upgrade of an existing vehicle because it was easier to cost the SC ability in isolation rather than a weapons trade for the SC ability. So, the basic assumption was that we use the existing Scorpionfish add an extra laptop to get the Dragonfish.
2. Uninteded consequence: We now have to evaluate whether the 300 points for the DrF is correct.
3. Were comments made that this was causing an imbalance? The only real comments I heard were that Neal thought the Scorpionfish weapons were a little light.
I'm interested in your thoughts.
_________________
Honda
"Remember Taros? We do"
- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: Dragonfish changes Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 11:29 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
|
That was my take as well.
_________________
Rob
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
CyberShadow
|
Post subject: Dragonfish changes Posted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 12:18 am |
|
| Swarm Tyrant |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:22 pm
Posts: 9349
Location: Singapore
|
The initial post/thread which lead to the Dragonfish stats is here:
Tactica Post - 14th Nov - 22:12
The only difference is that the deflector shield is retained, and that the cost is raised by +100 points (since the Shas'O is 100 points for a relatively minor stat increase/abilities).
_________________ https://www.cybershadow.ninja - A brief look into my twisted world, including wargames and beyond. https://www.net-armageddon.org - The official NetEA (Epic Armageddon) site and resource.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: Dragonfish changes Posted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:47 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
|
CS,
although I cannot find it right now, there was discussion about the dragonfish after this to go to scorpionfish stats only.
I agree, the 300 point value is appropriate to start testing with, however, the deflect doesn't feel right on this model.
Seems like a support craft / massive ship type item... i.e. tau titan item.
I'm happy to test the 4.3.2 scorpion CS - just wieghing in.
_________________
Rob
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
CyberShadow
|
Post subject: Dragonfish changes Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 9:27 pm |
|
| Swarm Tyrant |
|
|
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:22 pm
Posts: 9349
Location: Singapore
|
|
Can we test both the Scorpionfish and Dragonfish as presented in 4.3.2 and get some feedback on the various weapon fits and load-outs of these two? With them compared, and some quantitative feedback on the Scorpionfish, we can then discuss the future of the Dragonfish. I would like this to stand out a little from the Scorpionfish, and I see it as a command behemoth. It makes sense to me that the Tau would go to lengths to give their mobile command a good chance of surviving in the thick of it all.
_________________ https://www.cybershadow.ninja - A brief look into my twisted world, including wargames and beyond. https://www.net-armageddon.org - The official NetEA (Epic Armageddon) site and resource.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: Dragonfish changes Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 11:39 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
As you request CS.
Consider it done. 
_________________
Rob
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
clausewitz
|
Post subject: Dragonfish changes Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 12:33 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
|
|
Definitely worth testing the new version. At first glance it looks as though the new Dragonfish would work better as a single unit formation. The main advantage of mirroring the Scorpionfish weapon loadout was when the Dragonfish was in formation with a Scorpionfish, as the weapons meshed well.
The Dragonfish has a more AP balance to its weapons than the more AT loadout on the Scorpionfish.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: Dragonfish changes Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 11:55 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
|
Yeah, I was trying to work it into my 4K list recently and realized that a scorpionfish plus the dragon comes in at 500 points... thats some coin.
When I think about two manticore batties and what they can do for 250 each and to two different targets, then compare that to the scorpions, I just end up steering away from the scorpions.
So I thought about taking a Dragonfish by itself, but I hadn't considered running it with a deflector at the time (as we had pulled that out of v4.2.8 WIP and that's what I was using) so opted not to go that route either.
The deflector as stand alone may be worth trying, however, my early gut feeling is I'm probably not going to want this piece in my list until I'm playing 4K and above. Don't know for sure...
Maybe I really need to go against the grain and make a 2700 point list with the Dragonfish center stage and build from there. Hmph... except its a contingent, so it will never really be center stage. Heh... OK, that does seem wierd.
Right, anyway I'll work on playing this and see.
_________________
Rob
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
clausewitz
|
Post subject: Dragonfish changes Posted: Wed Dec 21, 2005 1:01 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
|
|
Just noticed they have different speeds as well. Was that intentional? Its the same chassis is it not?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Honda
|
Post subject: Dragonfish changes Posted: Wed Dec 21, 2005 2:51 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:44 pm
Posts: 1891
Location: Katy, Republic of Texas
|
|
@ Tac
Yeah, I was trying to work it into my 4K list recently and realized that a scorpionfish plus the dragon comes in at 500 points... thats some coin.
When I think about two manticore batties and what they can do for 250 each and to two different targets, then compare that to the scorpions, I just end up steering away from the scorpions.
|
I think the difference that needs to be evaluated, is that although the Manticores can deal out a lot of damage, they are not that difficult to take out and suppress. They depend on their massive range to protect themselves, yet remain in the game.
The Scorpionfish on the other hand is a different animal. It's harder to take down and to date, mine have always finished the game, so I see them having significant influence in the last two turns of the game, plus their mobility means I can move them where I need them the most.
Now, what I am looking at is whether or not they are delivering the results that I would expect, given the investment.
I will comment on your DrF+ScrF cost in another thread.
However, we should also keep in mind that the Manticores do not allow for a SC reroll, nor do they allow you to coordinate fire (should one value that ability). Also the leader on board the Dragonfish gets to take off a BM, whereas the Manticores do not.
So, all that to say that I don't think we're at an apples to apples comparison. However, if you are looking for overall blast effect (i.e. firepower, damage caused), then the Scorpionfish+Dragonfish does not necessarily measure up.
Just noticed they have different speeds as well. ?Was that intentional? ?Its the same chassis is it not?
|
The original logic that JG used, was that the Scorpionfish carried a heavier load than the Orca, therefore it must be slower. The Dragonfish was envisioned as an Orca carrying a bunch of laptops, hence the higher speed.
To be honest, although it is a "logical" assumption, I have come to the conclusion that the speed penalty is unwarranted and the chassis' should have the same speed.
JMO
_________________
Honda
"Remember Taros? We do"
- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment
| Top |
|
|
|
The_Real_Chris
|
Post subject: Dragonfish changes Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 10:24 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
|
|
I'd echo the direct firepower comparison. The DF after all isn't about raw (non armoured) firepower, rather its command and control. Habing a big tough SC is a boost for an army - especially one where people complain about BM build up (which can as I build the list sympasise with a bit, the amount of times I've got 2-4 commisars isn't funny!).
_________________ If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913 "Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography." General Plumer, 191x
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: Dragonfish changes Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 9:40 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
| Quote (Honda @ 21 Dec. 2005 (07:51)) | |
The Scorpionfish on the other hand is a different animal. It's harder to take down and to date, mine have always finished the game, so I see them having significant influence in the last two turns of the game, |
No question, their durability far out matches that of the Manticore. No question about that there. Good point.
plus their mobility means I can move them where I need them the most. |
Well, they can ignore terrain and all, but the manticores are not slow by any stretch. I've used them more than once to go work out objective grab manouvres in more desperate situations.
However, we should also keep in mind that the Manticores do not allow for a SC reroll, nor do they allow you to coordinate fire (should one value that ability). Also the leader on board the Dragonfish gets to take off a BM, whereas the Manticores do not.
IG receive 2D6 "inspiring and Leader" commissars. They get to join whichever units the IG player wants. I typically have 7 commissars which when you factor in my planes, is more than enough commissars to completely outfit every tank and infantry formation in my army. You better believe I give my Manticores Leader and Inspiring at every opportunity!!
So, all that to say that I don't think we're at an apples to apples comparison. However, if you are looking for overall blast effect (i.e. firepower, damage caused), then the Scorpionfish+Dragonfish does not necessarily measure up.
Well, I was simply saying the role that I see manticores and dragonfish playing for me - as per my needs for them - are very similar when I play Tau and IG. They are backfield artillery. IG artillery is less mobile if I want to use indirect fire, but LOF mobility is not a problem at all - it far outranges the Tau with direct fire and the movement speed is not an issue.
Durability is significantly - hugely different, but its somewhat irrelivent in either case. I need these pieces to sit back and lay waste. I don't want them moving all over the place and getting into lines of fire. So, the staying power of the scorpion is only relivent to the extent that I must place it in harms way. I only must do that due to its relatively much shorter range by comparison to the Manticore. Movement due to range means no sustained fire too. A problem I do not have with the Manticore Battery.
Now when I consider the bonus in durability and start comparing relative payload i.e. performance in the role I seek each formation to serve for me in the respective armies, I see the Manticores delivering much more of the needed bang for the proverbial buck than I see the Scorpion delivering.
The Scorpions - for me and my intended use, are overpriced for the payoff.
As a result - for me, I tend to always use the Manticores, and Never use the Scorpions.
Now - Is that a problem? 1) No, not for the unit, the formation, or the Tau list
2) Yes, for me in regard to the way I'd like to use the pieces.
Definitely nothing to change the units around for.
The Dragonfish was envisioned as an Orca carrying a bunch of laptops, hence the higher speed.
To be honest, although it is a "logical" assumption, I have come to the conclusion that the speed penalty is unwarranted and the chassis' should have the same speed.
Fully agree with you here Honda.
