Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 65 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Demolishers

 Post subject: Demolishers
PostPosted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 5:09 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
2.2.6 states MW ignore cover.  Isn't IC a redundant factor here?  The only thing you get against MWs are cover modifiers. Eg. removing it won't change the effectiveness much and it will still remain overpowered.

Change to a MW5+?  AT2+/AP2+?  Disrupt as Ragnarok suggested?  Why does it HAVE TO BE a MW?

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Demolishers
PostPosted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 5:49 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:13 am
Posts: 8711
Location: Leipzig, Germany, Europe, Sol III, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster, Universe
Another reason for a more effective gun on the Vindicator:
The Wh40k Apocalypse Linebreaker Squadron: 3+ Vindicators which can combine their shots to generate a single shot which uses a template which is double the size of the standart ordenance tremplate and even can remove terrain features on a 4+.

Yes Disrupt would be abetter way thanIgnore Cover. Exspecially because MW already makes cover saves obsolete.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Demolishers
PostPosted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 5:58 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 1189
For MW FF but not shooting, the answer is simple: The weapon is NOT accurate at long range. Sure, it still packs one hell of a punch, but when your 'hell of a punch' is unlikely to catch more then maybe one guy most of the time, it's not a very functional AP or AT weapon at longer ranges. Now, in the case of the Demolisher it's got a pretty good AP and AT value, so it'll catch guys fairly often. I think this accurately represents the big AoE effect of the cannon, you're not hitting the squads dead-on, you're hitting the area NEAR the squads and the blast from it has a chance to wipe them out. Like firing shells out of a battleship into inland targets, even using shells which leave craters 30 feet across you'll rarely get a direct hit, but the effect of the shells is still similar: It breaks up enemy units to make them non-functional and seriously hampers their battlefield effectiveness. Heavy armor, however, is likely to resist the explosive force of the shells unless they hit pretty much dead on, hence armor saves.

In an assault, this is less of an issue. With short ranges to targets it's far easier to point your weapon straight at them and much less likely to miss, and with a weapon that powerful anything it hits should be pretty well hosed most of the time. Turns a squad INTO that 30 foot wide crater, essentially.

From a game standpoint this makes them good backup to assault marines, as the assault marines can handle the close-combat and the vindicators can handle the range. Or with basic Tacticals or Devastators to back up their significant FF attacks. At 25cm movement it's not a bad deal for either of those formations, either, as it's only a modest decrease in speed. And it makes Land Raiders a far more assault-oriented unit rather then a shooting unit. While at range they can still be used to place blast-markers and setup for assaults (For instance a unit of Assault Marines doubling forwards to shoot at something as the last action of a turn, then assaulting as the first of the next turn). The fact that they add 4 BM to the break-point of a unit doesn't hurt either.

There, some justification from a real-world and in-game standpoint towards MW in a firefight but not at range.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Demolishers
PostPosted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 6:05 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 11:18 pm
Posts: 876
Location: Edinburgh, UK
What about making it a dual purpose weapon with a choice between original stats and a 1BP, disrupt weapon? That makes it more like a short range siege gun without proliferating MW.

_________________
"Do not offend the Chair Leg of Truth; it is wise and terrible."
-Spider Jerusalem


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Demolishers
PostPosted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 6:10 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:13 am
Posts: 8711
Location: Leipzig, Germany, Europe, Sol III, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster, Universe
30cm, 1BP, Disrupt
AND
(15cm), Small Arms, MW-to-Base-Attack

Sounds more like the effekt Vindicators have in a game of Wh40k and Ilushas describet effect above.





_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Demolishers
PostPosted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 10:13 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand
Disrupt?  I see no reason why that should be introduced at all. Also the idea of different demolisher stats on different vehicles has been rejected numerous times before.

IC is still valuable to Demolishers  (because the no to hit modifier represents the Demolisher smashing the cover and it's occupants in fluffy fashion), but it is not as powerful as some people think (because the MW is already negating cover saves).

As I've said before, I don't think people complaining about this are evaluating the power of the MW or IC change correctly. I stuck numbers on kills in this old thread here:
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/cgi-bin....d218146
To me the numbers of kills with MW seem about right and worthwhile for the points. Something that certainly has not been the case in the past. Maybe the IC is too much but I don't think so for reasons I state there too.


The alternative to the current proposal is what can be seen currently in the present thread. The usual scattered brainstorming of solutions, all different, typically problematic, and typically repetitions of ideas that have already been examined and rejected previously.

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Demolishers
PostPosted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 10:57 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 12:44 pm
Posts: 123
Location: Finland

(Hena @ Dec. 13 2007,19:11)
QUOTE

(Crabowl @ Dec. 13 2007,17:34)
QUOTE
I suppose you forgot the 68.75 vs 40 unit cost. That's 1.7 speeders for the cost of a single vindicator. Using the 1.7 multiplier, fire fight is 0.5 vs 0.567MW, advance is 0.5MW vs 0.567MW (speeder loses 5cm in range) and double is 0.33MW vs 0.283MW (speeder gains 5cm in range). My gut feeling is that skimmer, scout and 10cm more speed is about equal to 15cm more range, IC and AV over LV.

Then you get to point where 30cm vs 15cm matters. Sustain. Also you must take account of FF4+ vs FF5+.

FF is taken into account. 0.5 = FF4+. 0.567 = 0.33*1.7. I didn't even consider sustaining at 30cm but if it would ever happen it would be very good. There's so many other choices that can do what vindis can do that I probably wouldn't take them even with MW on both FF and shooting. Speed 30 is much more important to me.

_________________
Gief more guns for less points!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Demolishers
PostPosted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:43 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
Mark, it appears by many accounts the MW function of the demolisher is overpowered.  There are some other issues like the Minervan list where the demolisher cannon effectively breaks the list.  This is the problem with changing weapon stats when there are multiple lists affected.  

Why is there resistance on breaking out the weapon to army specifics (I.e. a Marine Demolisher and an IG Demolisher?).  Really the Space Marines deficiencies were the catalyst for changing the weapon in the first place.  Had the unit not existed it is unlikely the conversation would ever have popped up.  It also occurred to me that most of the complaints about changing the demolisher stem from the fact that a univeral stat line isn't working.

With that said, there are several examples in the core armies where names have been used to differentiate essentially the same weapons that have different functions. Examples:
Twin Autocannon, Twin Hydra Autocannon (in order to add AA)
Big Shootas, Twin sawn off Big Shootas (reduce range, increase effectiveness)
Storm Serpent Pulse Lasers, Phoenix Pulse Lasers, Vampire Pulse Lasers (various)
Battlecannon, Ragnarok Battle Cannon (same thing just reduced range)

My point is this type of name changing 'tactic' is used religiously throughout Epic where weapons that are virtually the same or perhaps are exactly the same required a change of stats for playability sake.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Demolishers
PostPosted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 12:05 am 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand
But is it not the case that the demolisher cannons are specified as being the same weapon on the different systems? Same as lascannons for example. Not the case with those other weapon systems I believe.

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Demolishers
PostPosted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 12:12 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
I can't speak to the fluff, only the text on the army lists.  However I think most people would agree the game play comes first and the fluff comes a close second.  Without creating YET ANOTHER poll, I'd venture that a lot of people would be open to breaking the demolisher into two different weapons as long as they were similar enough to warrant being called the same weapon.  

A prime example is a shotgun.  You saw it off at the barrel and you just gave it an entirely different effect and usage.  But there is no doubt in my mind that they are the same exact weapon.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Demolishers
PostPosted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 12:42 am 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand
Certainly I wouldn't want to reverse decisions that have been based on majority decision, on this basis of problems with a fan list like Minervans rather than core lists. Other solutions to that list problem should be explored if it is really that much of problem.

From what I've heard people like the MW on vindis and baneblades (if not the Russ so much). So from that perspective the gameplay IS coming first, and it happens to be supported by the fluff also.

All these other ideas like dividing demolishers into different types have been discussed previously, and what I'm saying is that this really is all going around in circles again.  Nothing else I have seen makes as much sense as the current solution, and not enough time has elapsed to test that proposal properly yet.

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Demolishers
PostPosted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 8:40 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:13 am
Posts: 8711
Location: Leipzig, Germany, Europe, Sol III, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster, Universe
1. In Imperial Armour 1 the Vindicators Demolisher Cannon is describet as shooting rocket propelled shells.
In Imperial Armour 2 there is nothing stated about the mechanism of the Leman Russ Demolishers Demolisher Cannon.

2. The Phoenix Pulse Laser and ther Vampire Pulse Laser have the exactly same stats in Epic. Only the name is changed.

3. The Scorpion SHGT Scorpion Twin Pulsar has different stats to the Revenant Pulse Lasers (Scorpion = 1x 60cm  MW2+, Revenant = 2x 45cm MW3+). But in Imperial Armour 2006 Update they are the same weapons,only that the Scorpions two Pulsars are twin-linked, where the Revenant has two separate Pulsars.
Nevertheless the Reavenants Pulsar was, after the revision of the Eldar Armylist, changed to an even worser to hit number (MW4+) and as far as i now everyone seems to percive this as a good change. Now it has a shorter range and a worser to hit number than the Scorpions Pulsar but in Wh40k these weapons are the same!
Inepoic: Other unit = other uses.

4. The Night Spinner on the Night Spinner has 45cm 1BP Disrupt. But on the Phoenix Bomber it has only 15cm 1BP Disrupt. Other unit = other uses.

5. The Bright Lance on the Wraithlord has 30cm AT5+. But on the Nightwing it has 30cm AT4+. Other unit = other uses.

Conclusion: Name changes of Wh40k weapons in Epic are commoninEpic. So lets change the Vindicators gun to "Vindicator Demoilsher" and if you like the MW-Attackon the Banbelade too, then change the guns name to "Baneblade Demolisher". And leave the Leman Russ Demolishers gun untouched.

Voila!

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Demolishers
PostPosted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 10:47 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 8:27 pm
Posts: 451
Location: Finland
If you want to make Vindicator better/change it, but dont want to change something else, then why not just change Vindicator and not change something else. I fail to see what is so overly complicated in that.

"They got same gun".  They got different crew, different targeting systems, they could even have different ammo or just different explosive. What they seem to have common is same caliber/same pipe (is it pipe in english?). And if you look at 40K baneblade and 40K Vindicator you notice that those guns are not exactly the same. And would even humans of dark future even know differences between IG Demolisher and Adeptus Astartes Demolisher if they look quite same, both are "big short gunz".

_________________
Eradication of Earth's
Population loves Polaris


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 65 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 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