Page 11 of 15

[ 218 posts ]

Go to page Previous  1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next

Manta Tweaking - correct points or not?
Tactica	Post subject: Manta Tweaking - correct points or not? Posted: Thu May 25, 2006 1:13 am
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am Posts: 2241	Sorry Tac' - I'll get back on topic now. LOL - ...   _________________ Rob

Top

clausewitz

Post subject: Manta Tweaking - correct points or not? Posted: Thu May 25, 2006 5:26 pm

Brood Brother Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm Posts: 916 Location: Glasgow, Scotland

4th... So until we see Demiurg with IG, Chaos, and the host of other races on the ground in 40K - that is core design for E:A, *I* don't have any reason to contemplate them in Epic. Tactica, I feel the need for a slight rant on this.  Please dont take it personally though as no offense is intended. [rant] The concept of 40K being "core design" for EA is something that I just cannot agree with.  And, IMHO, this idea has caused a lot of problems is various parts of the EA army design process.  With people expecting/wanting EA units to function in the same way as 40k units, trying to match armour/speed/weapons to 40k counterparts especially. I don't believe that EA/BFG/Inquisator/Necromunda are "spin offs" from the 40k game.  They are each different games in their own right, that happen to be based on the same ficitional background material.  Just as The Battle of Five Armies can't be viewed as a spin off of the LOTR game, the two of them are different games based on the same fantasy background.  IMO, labelling them as spin offs is doing these games a great injustice. We should not (again IMO) limit EA based on what has been done for 40k.  If that were true there may never have been things like Shadowswords, Eldar SHGTs, and many others (all of whom made their debut at the Epic scale).  40k is a different game, primarily targetted at a different customer base.  What works in one game will not necessarily work in the other.  Here on the epic discussion forums we shouldn't need to worry about whats been done in the 40k game, so long as we have justification from the background material (which, I know, does often happen to be 40K, but should not be limited to that). [/rant] Apologies for taking this OT once again.  I very rarely post my ranting, I hope you can forgive me for this one. Otherwise I do agree with Tactica.  I don't think we have any/enough justification for Demiurg in the Tau list.  And no, it has nothing to do with the Manta.

Top

Nerroth	Post subject: Manta Tweaking - correct points or not? Posted: Thu May 25, 2006 11:30 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 12:00 pm Posts: 573 Location: Canada	I'd agree with that sentiment - BFg is not an inferior system to Epic, in terms of background relevance or in the game's worth as a sytstem. I was less polite the first time I attempted to write this. On the other hand, the way in which Gothic has been handled in comparison to Epic has severely soured the water... Gary _________________ Gue'senshi: The 1st Kleistian Grenadiers v7.3 pdf Human armed forces for the greater good.
Top

CyberShadow	Post subject: Manta Tweaking - correct points or not? Posted: Fri May 26, 2006 11:41 am
Swarm Tyrant Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:22 pm Posts: 9349 Location: Singapore	Hi. I dont want to derail this thread, as I think that it should concentrate on the proposed changes to the Manta. Anyway, I agree with the sentiment expressed. 40K is a representation of one aspect of the 40K universe. Epic and BFG are others. None are more valid than the others (40K should bow to Epic regarding mass battles, etc). However, we should also be aware that the majority of players have some experience of 40K and will use this as a reference. But, that should not drive our development solely. Back to the Manta... _________________ 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

baronpiero	Post subject: Manta Tweaking - correct points or not? Posted: Fri May 26, 2006 12:52 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 1:38 pm Posts: 186	I have a game scheduled this evening, and I wish to give a go to this incarnation of the Manta, which is more of an all rounder. Power-up in yellow Power down in red Manta Missile Destroyer Cost: 750 points. Initiative: 1+ War Engine M 20cm ?Ar4+ CC6+ FF5+ (4+ appeared a bit too good for a 750pts chap') Damage Capacity 8. Deflector Shield. Critical Hit Effect: The deflector field generator mounted in the Manta?s prow is badly damaged and will no longer work. The Manta loses its deflector save for the rest of the battle. Any further critical hits will inflict an additional point of damage. Notes: Support Craft, Planetfall, Reinforced Armour, Fearless, Transport (may carry 16 of the following units: Fire Warriors, Pathfinders, Stealth, Gun Drones, Heavy Drones, Crisis, Broadsides; Crisis and Broadsides take up two spaces each; additionally, up to four of the following vehicles may be carried as well: Devilfish, Hammerhead, Swordfish, Skyray, Stingray, Piranha, Tetra). Weapons Rng Fp Notes 2 x Heavy Railcannons 90cm MW2+ Fixed Forward, Titan Killer(1) 2x Heavy Ion Phalanx 60cm 3x AP3+/AT3+ Fixed Forward 4x Long Barrelled Burst Cannons 30cm AP4+/AA6+ ?- 4x Seeker Missiles 75cm AT6+ Fixed Forward, Guided Munitions (Guided munitions lack today)
Top

colonel_sponsz	Post subject: Manta Tweaking - correct points or not? Posted: Fri May 26, 2006 1:03 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 6:14 pm Posts: 390	I like the sound that critical hit effect, simpler and easier and it sounds like it will really weaken it.  If the shield goes down then it's a going to be a prime target, which fits nicely with the fluff. Orde :-) _________________ "I'm smelling a whole lot of 'if' coming off this plan." Tau Army List Archive
Top

Honda	Post subject: Manta Tweaking - correct points or not? Posted: Fri May 26, 2006 1:38 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:44 pm Posts: 1891 Location: Katy, Republic of Texas	I agree with Orde, this proposal is quite intriguing. _________________ Honda "Remember Taros? We do" - 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment
Top

Xisor	Post subject: Manta Tweaking - correct points or not? Posted: Fri May 26, 2006 1:47 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 10:11 pm Posts: 515	That really sounds like an interesting proposal...but... I dunno, I'd rather see the multiple 'in game' options for the Railcannon, rather than reducing it's strength. It's adding more text, but it feels more plausible for the Manta. Those are TK[1]?   Doesn't sit right with me, but it *is* for the game, and not for Xisor...so who knows.... Xisor _________________ "Number 6 calls to you The Cylon Detector beckons Your girlfriend is a toaster"
Top

baronpiero	Post subject: Manta Tweaking - correct points or not? Posted: Fri May 26, 2006 6:03 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 1:38 pm Posts: 186	Thank you for the quick feedback. Much appreciated. Critical hit affecting the deflector is on the wish-list of my gaming group for quite some time. To answer Xisor, I considered the recent thoughts about submunitions for the railcannons, but I was a bit reluctant to give multiple shots to that weapon. And I'm not sure my opponents are ready to playtest such a thing. Indeed my opponents often field a big war engine so the Manta has a bad bad Titan buster reputation already.
Top

Tactica	Post subject: Manta Tweaking - correct points or not? Posted: Sat May 27, 2006 5:39 am
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am Posts: 2241	BaronP, With the exception that I think the FF 4+ should probably stay considering the weapons load out and the previous discussion already driving this thing to become FF 4+, I think I could try the rest of your proposed changes if CS embraced it. The proposal is intriguing as others have said, and does get the points closer where I currently think it should be (750-800 range). Cheers, _________________ Rob
Top

CyberShadow	Post subject: Manta Tweaking - correct points or not? Posted: Sat May 27, 2006 2:36 pm
Swarm Tyrant Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:22 pm Posts: 9349 Location: Singapore	I finally have the time to respond to this thread more fully, and some of this will be a recap for my own aging brain. But, anyway? Initiative: This will go up to 1+. I think that this is possibly the least contested change since I became AC! This will also help it to rally.   Planetfall: The Manta is allowed to Planetfall under its own power, and a space vessel is not required for this to occur. I think that this will go a long way to making the Manta more attractive without actually making any major changes to the unit itself. I do think that requiring a space vessel to use the manta Planetfall ability, and therefore to invest a round 1000 points (without the transport bays being loaded) is a lot to ask of any player. I suggest that the following ?Manta specific? text be placed after the Planetfall ability of the Manta: ?The Tau Manta is a true interplanetary craft in the sense that it is able to fly through space and enter atmospheric flight at will. The Manta does not require a space vessel in order to Planetfall. In effect, the Manta takes the role of the space craft and the Planetfall unit. The Manta is placed on the table edge and the operation turn is declared as for normal space craft. However, since the Manta is more flexible that most space craft, you  do not need to secretly set your drop co-ordinates at this stage. In the appropriate turn, the Tau player selects the Mantas drop point on the battlefield, and proceeds with the Planetfall procedure as normal. Note that activating the Manta and performing the Planetfall counts as its action for that turn.? I am then very tempted to say that the Manta counts as taking a Double action, with the Planetfall replacing the usual twice movement rate. I have also currently kept the Manta as a typical space craft in terms of what other craft can arrive that turn, as it reduces the complexity of the special rules (and I can imagine the Manta selecting a ?window? when enemy craft were not around to interfere with its operation). In addition, I am unwilling to increase the DC of the machine at this stage. Eight should be enough for most people! (Also, as an aside? no Kroot in the Manta.) The issue of the number of special rules does concern me. However, I would like to address that towards the end of development for version 4.4.1. I like the critical effect of disabling the deflector field? something to think about, certainly. My worry with this discussion is that it will turn into something similar to the AX-1-0, where we have people who want the thing at a reduced cost, but who are also hooked on the idea of the previous stats and the specified role of the craft. The changes which I am considering are: Initiative 1+ Planetfall without space craft Critical hit rewording Points remain at 850 (for now, with an option to review in a future version) Other issues? I have thought about the concern with the Manta being a Warlord equivalent/titan hunter. I would state that the Manta is not a Warlord equivalent in the same way that a Space Marine Landing Craft is not equivalent to a Terminator formation, although there is only 25 points difference between them. I seriously cant see much of a case for saying that the Manta is there as a substitute for the Warlord in the list. And, if the idea of large super-heavy fliers is not your cup of tea, then you are probably not a Tau player at heart. I guess that the point that I am making here is that the issue of the Manta being a ?Warlord equivalent? can be extremely distracting. It is not, and should not be. However, it should be a large craft, suitable for transport missions in which it is able to clear away a heavy enemy force (including potentially Titans and SHTs) in the proposed landing zone. For me, the Manta fills this role (but I am always willing to hear opinions on this). I have considered reducing the main armament to TK(1), but this then looks wrong when compared to the Moray! The issue of the Manta as a titan hunter is more problematic. While I agree that the Manta is more of an all-rounder, the problem is that, without the Manta, the Tau will have trouble dealing with enemy titans. My goal here is to create a flexible list that will allow the player to field the force that they like. If a player wants something lighter then a pair of Morays fit the bill. The Manta will need to remain as it is right now. I am willing to consider various points changes for it, but I do not want this to be in effect this iteration. I would like to keep the Manta at 850 points right now, and test the new version (incidently, I did order one myself!). The final point is that of the Demiurg. I can understand that these guys do have a history of working with the Tau. However, by contemplating giving something the size of a Titan to the Tau from another source, it changes the direction of the list. Having infantry in the list from other races is fine (and currently we don?t even have AVs from allied races) but the SHTs and titans tend to define a race, and the way that it fights, and have a stronger steering power over the view of the list. I have nothing against the Demiurg, but I am not willing to include something of this magnitude from them (or other races). This is a Tau list, and the Tau and their way of war should be at the center of it. _________________ 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

Xisor	Post subject: Manta Tweaking - correct points or not? Posted: Sat May 27, 2006 3:53 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 10:11 pm Posts: 515	That all sounds rather/absolutely fair enough! I'll still keep looking at the Demiurg stuff, but in that case the thread "So, you want a Tau Titan..." should best be moved elsewhere. Bear in mind though, that should another gaping[and unwanted] hole arise in the list, the Demiurg probably do have something to fill it! Otherwise, I'm perfectly happy looking at that solution to the Manta. Perhaps a bit of an addition, but it fits IMO, and fits wonderfully. Xisor _________________ "Number 6 calls to you The Cylon Detector beckons Your girlfriend is a toaster"
Top

Tactica

Post subject: Manta Tweaking - correct points or not? Posted: Sat May 27, 2006 8:01 pm

Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am Posts: 2241

CS, Thank you for giving us a thorough heads up on direction. Much appreciated. I think such level setting the group helps us stay focused on the vision at hand. Cheers for that. Regarding all of the actual proposed changes and justification sound reasonable to me CS. I see where you're coming from and I'm happy to give them a test as defined. Regards to your temptation - in summary, I'd say hold off for now with the temptation. Specifically to your temptation points, I'll try and respond individually below. I am then very tempted to say that the Manta counts as taking a Double action, with the Planetfall replacing the usual twice movement rate. A normal unit planetfalling may activate and sustain fire or engage the enemy if close enough. Forcing it to count as a double will means taking away normal options, thus, more text to explain how this occurs. I understand the intent, but immediately making it not have the option to sustain fire, forcing a 1- to shooting at units in open and then a -2 to units in cover may effectively be too much of a negative for the benefit of planetfalling without the Hero investment. Keep in mind, one of the current problems is the investment to play the Manta effectively in a 3-4 turn game is too high. If that investment simply shifts from Hero points to 1st turn effectiveness reduction in shooting - the net result is Manta is still 850 points, and its first turn in game effectiveness is still lack luster. I would not like to see the 'double action' penalty in place of planetfalling without spaceship. Removing the spaceship requirement is an attempt to make the Manta more effective for the points. Further imposing penalties will effectively 'trade' one lack luster penalty for another. I vote no. I have also currently kept the Manta as a typical space craft in terms of what other craft can arrive that turn, as it reduces the complexity of the special rules (and I can imagine the Manta selecting a ?window? when enemy craft were not around to interfere with its operation).

Hmm... this doesn't sound like "a temptation" so I'm not sure if this is part of the proposed. As it appeared in the 'temptation' paragraph, I'm assuming this is still just something you are thinking about.

So if a higher strategy init army has a space ship and designates turn 1, then the Manta cannot show up till turn 2. Well, I don't like it - but I understand the point and intention. The problem here is that in a three turn game, now it means at most I'll get my manta for 2 turns after paying 850 points for it.

I'm hoping you are only contemplating the impact of this second 'temptation' as I don't feel its going to make the 850 Manta prospect any more valuable to the Tau.

+ + +

To me, imposing the changes you've suggested plus allowing the Manta to arrive via Planetfall without a spaceship does work to justify the existing points - instead of lowering the points. However, the 'temptation' penalties above just work to counter the positive effects of 'self planetfall'. I also think they will raise further questions and cause more reason for the Tau general to not play the Manta.

I think you can 'cleanly' state....

The Manta may planetfall without a spaceship requirement. A DZ still should be picked at the beginning of the game if the Manta will be Planetfalling. (I think this part should stay for current playtest balance)

Place the Manta on the Tau table edge for a reference point of DZ measuring. Note, it is not a space craft in orbit and no turn designation needs to be made. When the Tau player wishes, the Planetfalling Manta is executed at any time in which the Tau has option to activate formations. Planetfall is executed as normal but measured from the Manta's initial placement instead of a normal space craft on the Tau board edge. Once the Planetfall deploy has completed, the Tau player may activate the Manta as normal.

Cheers CS.

PS - can't wait to see your Manta painted up - hopefully this rule rework will all give me motivation to get mine assembled and painted.