 
|
Page 1 of 1
|
[ 6 posts ] |
|
Ragnarok tank profil suggestion |
|
scream
|
Post subject: Ragnarok tank profil suggestion  Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2007 3:25 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2003 3:18 pm
Posts: 1619
Location: France
|
|
Hi, after the Siegfried profils here is the suggestion for the Ragnarok:
Ragnarok super-heavy vehicule class detachment:
- Unit size : 1 ragnarok tank
- move : 10cm
- save: 1+
- CAF: 8
> Main weapon (name to be defined)
- range: 50cm
- attack dice : 8BP
- to hit: 3+
- TSM: -3
Special: turret, normal barrage template, direct shot, ignore cover, damage building
> Secondary weapon (heavy bolters):
- range: 25cm
- attack dice: 4
- to hit: 5+
- TSM: 0
- PD(8)
- Break point: Model
- Morale: 3
- VP: 2
- Cost : 175
A Ragnarok company could be created with the following stats:
- Unit size: 3 Detachments of 1 Ragnarok (one is a CHQ)
- Break Point: 2
- Morale: 4
- VP: 5
- Cost: 500
Let me know what do you think about these stats, if you have an idea for the main weapon (with its stats, I feel that "battle-cannon" is not the good name for it)..
Thanks,
ScREaM
_________________ Fair players live longer Epic40k.fr Techpriest
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
zap123
|
Post subject: Ragnarok tank profil suggestion Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2007 5:37 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
 |
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 2:47 am
Posts: 3065
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
|
I use Ragnaroks as Mammoth proxies. Don't think they need their own stats.
If you were going to stat them, I don't think they are Superheavy. I don't really know what they are like in E:A but physically it looks like a big battlecannon (75cm -2) and 2 autocannon (50-75 -1) or maybe 2 hvy bolters. Speed 10 is probably right and maybe armour 2.
_________________
Fire bad, tree pretty - Buffy
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
scream
|
Post subject: Ragnarok tank profil suggestion Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2007 2:11 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2003 3:18 pm
Posts: 1619
Location: France
|
Was the mammoth an official GW/FW mini ? If it has never been released, we could imply rename the Mammoth as Ragnarok in the IG army book... 
_________________ Fair players live longer Epic40k.fr Techpriest
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
loofnick
|
Post subject: Ragnarok tank profil suggestion Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2007 6:51 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:35 pm
Posts: 246
Location: Sheffield, England
|
|
Mammouth's stats seem about right, except maybe the 2 autocannon are too good, and armour could be better).
Going on the E:A stats it has:
movement as infantry, but better in rough terrain: 10cm in netepic, and either a special rule to allow full movement in forests and rough terrain, or just 15cm;
Leman Russ equivalent battlecannon, slightly shorter range: so maybe 50/75cm 5+ -1 (yours is wayyyyyyyyyyy over the top!) ;
landraider armour: so armour 2+;
CC & FF are same as Leman Russs so +2 CAF (I'd give a bit higher though, maybe +4 cos of it's size);
autocannon are infantry equivalent-ish, should be quite small. I think at best: 2 50cm 5+ 0.
So,
15cm 2+ +4 battlecannon 1 75cm 5+ -1
heavy stubber/autocannon 2 50cm 5+ 0
Having said that the model probably looks more impressive then the EA stats, especially the big gun. How big is the modal compared to Leman Russ and Superheavies? Doesn't look big enough in the pics I've seen for your stats.
If your going to add stats for other siegemaster stuff, then it's worth adding this one, though I suppose there's only the Siegfried really missing an obvious Netepic entry. Otherwise I shouldn't bother and proxy as Zap does..
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
zap123
|
Post subject: Ragnarok tank profil suggestion Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 1:00 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 2:47 am
Posts: 3065
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
|
It is not as big as the Mk1 Superheavies, but maybe 50% bigger than an E:A Leman Rus. Nice model, pity they all have the same stowage.
_________________
Fire bad, tree pretty - Buffy
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
loofnick
|
Post subject: Ragnarok tank profil suggestion Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 1:33 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:35 pm
Posts: 246
Location: Sheffield, England
|
|
Thanks Zap, though I actually just spotted Warmaster Nice's recently posted epicomp entry which shows the size nicely (pun not intended). So maybe a little bigger then newer-style landraider size.
so I reckon EA downplays the main cannon size a fair bit.
so maybe 75cm 5+ -3
or 50cm 4+ -3 or similar?
Oh, and yes, i suppose I forgot to add (maybe) 3 PD's to my suggestion.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 1
|
[ 6 posts ] |
|
