| Brood Brother |
 |
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
(Markconz @ Aug. 14 2006,18:33)
QUOTE
RE: epic's need to adhere to 40k design concepts.
1. Yes I agree with you that it is important to consider the relative strengths and weaknesses of units in 40k and use these as guidelines in epic - I have argued as such many times on various epic forums. However, at the same time I would prefer to avoid transmitting flaws in the 40k system, to the epic system.
Fair enough, and I would agree that we should not migrate flaws from one system to the other.
I believe the jetbike classification is such a flaw, or at least a major inconsistency in 40k.
This is where we disagree. I say 40K is in its 4th edition version. Over time, the developers have made it what it is for reason. Afterall, its been around since second edition. I've seen them represented in many fashions, only now do they appear to have bikes "working" in general.
So I see now problem using 40K as a guide here because I do not agree with you on your claim that they are flawed in 40K. Thus, I embrace Sotec's suggestion to make them what they are in 40K by comparison to other units that operate differently.
Next, you ask,
Tactica - when it comes to HTH why should there be any difference between a jetbike and a slightly bigger jetbike (the vyper)? Both have exposed crew, similar size and dimensions, and the same system of propulsion.
Well, my first response is I feel your assesment of the relative difference between the bike and vehicle are lacking. I do not mean that out of disrespect, its just my opinion that your comparison doesn't fully appreciate the more significant differences between the units.
I don't have the Eldar 40K codex in front of me. However, I'll do what I can to convey my feelings on differences from the more cognative thinking side since I don't have the dex in hand. I don't know if you've seen the 40K models side by side, but there is a rather large if not extremely noticable differences between the models and their ability to fight in close combat IMHO...
1) Jetbikes are smaller in dimension, so you can first see a weight difference. I don't know if they use the same propultion system or not, but the body on a viper appears noticably larger than a jetbike. One can only assume that with a 50%+ increase in size, that larger propultion systems are required without having any data in front of me to guide that opinion further one way or the other.
2) Jetbikes have a single guy handling the directional navigation, the propultion, the altitude, and the pitch as well as nose lift and tilt. He has no cockpit. He is as exposed as a guy on a harley. Asking him to navigate this thing at top speeds as well as efficiently combat has its challenges, but at least he can wield a weapon and attack to either side.
3) A Viper is not only 50%-100% larger than a Jetbike, but it also has a 2-man crew on board the vessel.
3-a) First, its pilot is in a cockpit. He's not exposed at all. You can't see his arms and legs because he's surrounded by armor of the vehicle. He is also encased in a canopy. There is a large aircraft like visor that has a rim of metal which encases the pilot within. There is no chance this guy is going to wield a CC weapon of any kind. Its just not going to happen.
3-b) Second, there is a gunner. This guy sits back behind the cockpit in what is effectively a WWII AA chair. It traverses like a turret 360' on a horizontal plane, but it also tilts forward and backward on a vertical plane but with restricted rotation forward and back. He is approximately 50%+ encased in metal and has his hands on controls working the weapon. He sits up much, much higher than the pilot. Not only does he not have any hope for range of motion to wield a weapon in combat, but he's far to high up in the air to swing down on anything in CC.
4) The Vyper mounts heavy weapons with which the pilot and gunner fire. The Gravitic system on the Vyper has to be more robust not to only move the large pieces of armor, but also to support any kickback from the weapon systems and to suppor the additional load of two crew members.
5) As one is a smaller infantry unit with a bike assisting them for speed to get to grips and the other is a weapons platform with armor encasing the pilot and gunner crew not to mention the support of larger heavy weapons, I think the picture is rather clear on who can fight in Close Combat, and who is a vehicle and cannot fight in close combat. 40K did not get this wrong - at all - they have it spot on in fact!
Therefore, due to armor, larger size, and fireing platform of larger weapons, I think its clear why the Vyper is a Vehicle and why the Jetbike is infantry.
Further Reference for your edifciation:
This is the best side by side shot I could find with a quick look - even at a distance, its without question which is noticably larger.
http://uk.games-workshop.com/eldar/getting%2Dstarted/5/
To get an idea of the differences I describe above, please see this link:
http://store.us.games-workshop.com/storefr....eNav=10
Notice the scale of driver to vessel differences from Jetbikes to Vypers. Notice the two crew scale to Vyper.
There is easily a 50% to 100% increase in size from bike to Vyper.
2. Epic is not just a small scale 40k. It is a higher level tactical wargame which emphasises aspects of modern warfare (realism factors?)
I don't know where all of this comes from - but I don't think anyone here is saying Epic should mirror 40K.
completely missing from 40k such as command and control (Initiative), flanking (Crossfire), and suppression (Blast Markers).
Noted, I would say both games have their own C&C elements and both have their own abstractions to convey aspects of realism. Each hits their own marks and fails at others.
40K for example is squad based and focuses on the elements that affect that level. Epic is not on the same micro scale, so ignores certain elements in favor of larger factors.
In 40K, Leadership and morale tests are used for tests of commitment of troops as fire commences, can show individual units breaking while others stick it out. 40K broken elements withdrawing can still open fire as they flee if weapons are not of the highest calibur, Epic ignores all of this and simply says - when BM are reached, the entire brigade of units is rendered ineffective.
Target priority tests are also used for command and control in 40K to determine if troops are going to follow firing orders of target priority and separates movement entirely. Epic rolls it all up into one roll for all units part of a formaion and says the entire force either follows orders or it doesn't... regardless of how many sergents / lt's may be in the force. Which is more Abstract?
All of this is really irrelivent though... we are talking about Jetbikes fighting as infantry - I really don't know why you went here anyway.
If we really were slaves to 40k design we would have to throw out all these rules. We don't because we expect and desire more, we want things better.
Hah, better is relative. Each game has its qualities and falicies.
Unless I'm mistaken, I've never proposed we become slaves to 40K.
Also, I've never said the element that E:A brings to the table are bad. I've never proposed we abandon any of these elements.
I feel I've brought a very logical argument for Jetbikes being mirrored after core design as they work for a reason. You may or may not disagree with that argument, but my claim has merit on a far different platform from, "we should be slave to 40K." If that's all you are getting out of this exchange, you really are missing all of my various points. I hope this post has clarified my position for you.
Do jetbikes really need more of a handicap to their stats than just a reduction to armour 5+?
You call it a handicap, I respect that, however there are those of us that do not feel its a handicap. We see it as bringing an overpowered unit back down to what it should have been all along. We see it as fixing a mistake. We see the jetbike infantry unit as a very VERY different unit from an armored vehicle Vyper with crew.
Personally I do not think so. Part of the problem in epic is that some units just cannot touch skimmers with FF at all - while all units have a slim chance of doing so in 40k. However, it is still possible to beat skimmers with non FF troops in epic (I have done so with bugs vs jetbikes several times), due to numbers, suppression, (morale factors) and dice rolls.
So, you are justifying an abstraction in E:A because you want them to be more powerful than they need to be. This is flawed logic. The end does not justify the rules.
A bloodletter should be able to combat a jetbike if he can reach him, and the jetbike should perish, plain and simple.
Jetbikes use speed and forward propultion with bursts to overcome obstacles. Vypers and other vehicles do not. They can hover over a forest for extended periods of time and deliver salvos from their weapons
In order for a jetbike to engage, he must be at ground level - franchise history has this clearly depicted.
Who knows though, maybe the new codex will change all this in favor of your desires to see skimming vehicles instead of infantry on a bike like they are today.
Since Sotec has already seen the new codex, I don't know if I'd get your hopes up though.
Cheers,
_________________
Rob
|
|
My jetbikes were basically in a bad way for an air assault and I had just retained to assault (but I needed too get rid of the Stingrays as they are vicious to infantry if unchecked)... 
In the end, he lost by 1 so this tactic has questionable merit. It did hamper my action on that flank though and the jetbikes are great for land grab, so who knows.
)