Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 7
  [ 103 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next

thoughts on jetbikes
jfrazell
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 2:40 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 1:21 pm
Posts: 144
under the V 1.3 version of Sotec's proposed changes it has been proposed to change the jetbike status from skimmer to jumppack.  For those who play with jetbike formations what are your thoughts on this proposed change?

Personally I think the jetbikes are slightly overpowered (especially in the larger formations Sam Hain can produce).  However, a modification to the armor save to 5+ or a price increase would be more appropriate than this somewhat drastic change.

_________________
"Advance to the Rear!"
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Chroma
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 3:22 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada

(jfrazell @ Aug. 04 2006,14:40)
QUOTE
Personally I think the jetbikes are slightly overpowered (especially in the larger formations Sam Hain can produce). ?However, a modification to the armor save to 5+ or a price increase would be more appropriate than this somewhat drastic change.

I use a lot of Jetbikes with my various Eldar armies and I've gotten to take them for a spin with the v1.3 proposals.  I agree, I've always felt Jetbikes were a little too good; the change to Hit-and-Run brings them down a bit, but still not quite enough.

Initially, I was really against the change to jump packs, but playing with them that way wasn't as drastic a change as I thought it would be and it does mimic their vulnerability in 40k.  As to their 4+ armour save, well, again, in 40k, they are just as "tough" as Space Marines, have the same armour as Space Marines, and also have the turbo-boost rule which makes them hard to kill... so, 4+ is justified for armour.

To me, the simple change that would balance them would be this:

FF5+

That's the only change they need, same as a unit of Guardsmen.  FF4+ for three twin-linked Shuriken Catapults and low Ballistic Skill is just a little too high, changing it to FF5+ and leaving everything else the same would balance them.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tactica
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 4:59 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
Chroma,

i've not tried this solution, but it does seem to have some merit based upon their core design impact in combat and considering their BS and weapon compliment.

FF 4+ does seem a bit too good on paper still.

_________________
Rob
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Markconz
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Sat Aug 05, 2006 2:53 am 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand
Well I've already expressed my opinion at the SG site but to add it here:

It should be hard to close combat someone on a flying bike! 40k has it wrong. Epic has it right.

Just increase the points.

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Lion in the Stars
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 12:46 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 11:01 pm
Posts: 1455
It's easy to CC someone on a flying bike. ?Throw gravel into the air intake, then beat the crap out of the guy after his bike crashes (assuming he's still alive). ?Just like sticking a stick into the spokes of a (wheeled) bike.

_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Ilushia
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 12:51 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 1189
Also remember that the melee stat represents short range (Arms length, maybe a bit longer) fire-fighting and grenades and similar things. Sure you can fly 8 feet in the air, outside my arm's reach so I can't swing at you... But I can still throw grenades, shoot and similar things towards you. Skimmers are actually real flying machines, capable of pulling up and away from the ground, 20-30 feet up, like modern helicopters. Jet bikes are much lower to the ground, and as far as I know we never see them in the fluff or the history of 40K flying higher then about 8-10 feet off the ground. High enough to avoid terrain for the most part, but not so high as to avoid being able to be assaulted.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Chroma
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 12:52 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada

(Lion in the Stars @ Aug. 07 2006,00:46)
QUOTE
It's easy to CC someone on a flying bike. ?Throw gravel into the air intake, then beat the crap out of the guy after his bike crashes (assuming he's still alive). ?Just like sticking a stick into the spokes of a (wheeled) bike.

Well, an Eldar jetbike floats via anti-grav and, probably, moves via some kind of directed thrust so, if "gravelled", the rider would probably just float upward and shoot down at ya!  *laugh*

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Markconz
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 1:47 am 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand

(Ilushia @ Aug. 06 2006,23:51)
QUOTE
Also remember that the melee stat represents short range (Arms length, maybe a bit longer) fire-fighting and grenades and similar things. Sure you can fly 8 feet in the air, outside my arm's reach so I can't swing at you... But I can still throw grenades, shoot and similar things towards you. Skimmers are actually real flying machines, capable of pulling up and away from the ground, 20-30 feet up, like modern helicopters. Jet bikes are much lower to the ground, and as far as I know we never see them in the fluff or the history of 40K flying higher then about 8-10 feet off the ground. High enough to avoid terrain for the most part, but not so high as to avoid being able to be assaulted.

Jetbikes have the same tech as other skimmers (like the grav tanks) which can force FF by opening the range over there opponents. Why should a vyper or falcon which use exactly the same tech be able to do this, but not a jetbike - it makes no sense.

Fluff and even pictures, show them flying high in the air over skyscrapers so I don't think the 'altitude ceiling of 8-10 feet' is correct at all.

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Ilushia
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 2:56 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 1189
On the contrary, it makes perfectly good sense. Just because the item in question uses the same technology does not give it the same functional limitations. I can build a model helicopter which uses the same technology as a real helicopter. But will never be able to fly as fast or as high as a real helicopter due to limitations on the motor of the machine. The assumption that eldar jet-bikes can do so is a little silly. I, personally, think they should move to being Save 5+ and maybe even FF 5+. After all, while it is hard to kill 3 eldar bikers, it's not as hard as killing 5 space marines or 3 space marine bikers. But I'm fine with the idea of bikes being Jump Pack instead of Skimmer units. I really don't see that as being much of a down-side except that now you have to actually worry about where you leave them post-assault to avoid being counter-assaulted.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Markconz
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 3:54 am 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand

(Ilushia @ Aug. 07 2006,01:56)
QUOTE
On the contrary, it makes perfectly good sense. Just because the item in question uses the same technology does not give it the same functional limitations. I can build a model helicopter which uses the same technology as a real helicopter. But will never be able to fly as fast or as high as a real helicopter due to limitations on the motor of the machine.

So the eldar make their tanks like a formula 1 racing car, and their bikes like a underpowered scooter rather than a racing bike? Not jetbikes - but toybikes  ???

I don't buy that for one second.  The more arguments I hear for this jump pack idea the more I dislike it, and the less sense it makes.

The eldar list is in the hands of crazy people I tell you!!  :D  :;):  Where's MC23 when you need him?

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Ilushia
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 4:01 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 1189
Heh. You may be right that it is silly. But I don't see it as a big issue myself. As I said, I'd be far more happy with a change in the unit-stats to represent their comparative fragility due to smaller numbers per stand compared  to something like Marine Tac-Squads, myself. The change to Jump Packs really don't make any difference to me, mostly because I wouldn't be banking on leaving these guys particularly close to the enemy line... And if I mess up bad enough to get them in melee range, I probably deserve to be punished for it.  :laugh:
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Dobbsy
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 4:19 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:24 am
Posts: 4499
Location: Melbourne, Australia

(Markconz @ Aug. 07 2006,03:54)
QUOTE
?Where's MC23 when you need him?

Being ignored like the rest of us...
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Chroma
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 1:44 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada

(Dobbsy @ Aug. 07 2006,04:19)
QUOTE

(Markconz @ Aug. 07 2006,03:54)
QUOTE
?Where's MC23 when you need him?

Being ignored like the rest of us...

Dobbsy,Dobbsy, Dobbsy!  Sotec isn't ignoring people, he's just assigning a low priority to people who are only talking and not playing and producing results.  I don't fully agree with that approach, but he's more than once expressed that "playtest results" are what are important to him, so that's how to get his attention.

Heck, just set up a couple of 2000 point games with *yourself* using proxies or whatever to show what you feel are problems and I'm sure Sotec will be more receptive to comments and criticisms.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
jfrazell
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 1:44 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 1:21 pm
Posts: 144

(Ilushia @ Aug. 07 2006,04:01)
QUOTE
Heh. You may be right that it is silly. But I don't see it as a big issue myself. As I said, I'd be far more happy with a change in the unit-stats to represent their comparative fragility due to smaller numbers per stand compared ?to something like Marine Tac-Squads, myself. The change to Jump Packs really don't make any difference to me, mostly because I wouldn't be banking on leaving these guys particularly close to the enemy line... And if I mess up bad enough to get them in melee range, I probably deserve to be punished for it. ?:laugh:

Well as the enemy is shooting back you are gong to be taking either FF or CC attacks - depending on whether this is a skimmer or jumppack.

I would be in favor of a reduction in save representing lower numbers or ability to "jink" whereas shining spears, being the aspect badboys that they are, have superior bikes and skills, allowing them to maintain a better save.

As proposed I would attempt to mitigate this by putting vipers in the front row with jetbikes in follow on rows in attempts to keep the CC down.

_________________
"Advance to the Rear!"
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tactica
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 8:17 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
If we look to core design for reference, on jump packs vs. skimmer in E:A for jetbikes in general...

In E:A, the JP vs. Sk really affects:

1) whether you can pop-up or not when shooting

2) if you can force FF in combat

In 40K, the jetbike really is infantry just like the SM or Chaos biker... the only difference is these can bound over terrain like vehicular skimmers can, but core design clearly identifies that jetbikes are NOT vehicles and they most definitely ARE infantry. They must move to engage and can be hit in combat by hand held enemy weapons without penalty. They must slow down to enter combat (cannot turbo boost the same turn they charge). Again - not vehicles.

If jetbikes are charged, they fight in combat as normal in 40K. The jetbike can be attacked as normal - even if it was going fast and was charged, where the viper cannot in 40K.

The viper is a light vehicle in 40K complete with vehicular armor value and really is a skimmer in that it can only be hit on a 6 if it was moving real fast the last turn it moved, explodes if immobilized and moving over 6",  and doesn't fight combat... i.e. just as other vehicles don't in 40K.

So, the jet bike, from core design, really does have to slow down and come to the ground in order to charge and be effective - unlike the viper. This may be contrary to some people's vision of what it should do - but core design is pretty clear on what really does happen in 4th edition, despite what some may want to believe.

Turning the jetbike into jumppacks in E:A actually corrects a problem in E:A as the systems did not align and since GW designers built 40K and 'we' built the E:A Eldar, I think we should yield to that system when conceptual functionality is being considered. Example: How should the concept of "Jetbike" function in E:A?

As the pop-up of skimmers in E:A is really a rule creation for vehicles with large anti-grav thrusters. Jetbikes aren't vehicles at all, and they don't have larger versions of the anti-grav engines. They are different from the viper which DOES have larger chassis and larger antigravitic power. I'm PERFECTlY ok with infantry jetbikes NOT getting the Vehicular pop-up attack ability that Vipers and other Vehicles actually get in E:A. It makes perfect sense actually.

These things are crouch-rockets afterall... they hover off of the ground and use speed and bursts to bound over terrain where much larger and more powerful gravitic engines could be used to sustain the vehicle high enough and provide the stability to generate a valid firing platform.

Unless somebody can convince me otherwise, I'm perfectly OK with the Jump Pack for Eldar Jetbikes in E:A as I think it solves some other problems. Frankly, it looks to be much more representative of how the unit performs in core design.

When I think of other "Jetbikes" like Necrons or Dark Eldar, this looks like it would serve as a practice that could be used across all of them. Its just infantry that can go fast, but fights combat as normal and is much more infantry than skimmer as core design clearly states. Perfect solution IMHO.

'wave'

_________________
Rob
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 7
  [ 103 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net