Brood Brother |
 |
 |
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 7:20 pm Posts: 5483 Location: London, UK
|
(Lord Inquisitor @ Feb. 14 2008,17:13)
QUOTE Having two attacks, one FS and one MW is very, very powerful. I could post relative powers with scorpions, but I don't really see it worth my while right now. While it has the advantage that you can use the normal power weapons profile, it is MUCH more powerful than scorpions - making Banshees better against all types of targets. We are going to have to find some simple way of presenting stats for general use, so that we can work off the same stats! ? IMHO, this "double attack" is much less powerfull where the two attacks are resolved separately.
Now, CC4+, that makes more sense with a single First Strike Macro Weapon attack. If that was the intended profile, that would be a perfectly workable solution. While it unfortunately doesn't use the normal power weapons profile, but that's okay. Not sure here. This generates a 0.5 hit per unit against infantry and armour, and is obviously somewhat better vs RA, and the result is very generalist, possibly slightly weaker than the current stats though it is skewed towards an anti-armour profile.
I don't think two weapons would be a good idea, it's obviously confusing (since we are confused!), ?. I agree the mechanic of using two separate attacks, one of which is FS is complex, which is its main drawback.
Ok, out of perverse interest, I have tried to put some comparisons of the original CC3+, Scorpions and various alternatives with or without MW, the last two examples being with EA+1. They are all based on the example provided by Neal of 6x Banshees Vs 6x enemy. The figures indicate the average number of casualties that each unit configuration would give for the different armour values.
Armour ? ? Scorpions ? ? ? CC3+ ? ? CC4+, MW ? ? ? CC2+ ? ? CC4+, EA+1 ? ? CC4+, EA+1, MW ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? None ? ? ? ? ? ?6.00 ? ? ? ? ?4.00 ? ? ? ? ?3.00 ? ? ? ? ? ?5.00 ? ? ? ? 5.50 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 5.50 ? ? ? ? ? 6+ ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?5.00 ? ? ? ? ?3.33 ? ? ? ? ?3.00 ? ? ? ? ? ?4.17 ? ? ? ? 4.65 ? ? ? ? ? ? ?4.94 ? ? ? ? ? 5+ ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?4.00 ? ? ? ? ?2.67 ? ? ? ? ?3.00 ? ? ? ? ? ?3.33 ? ? ? ? 3.78 ? ? ? ? ? ? ?4.44 ? ? ? ? ? 4+ ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?3.00 ? ? ? ? ?2.00 ? ? ? ? ?3.00 ? ? ? ? ? ?2.50 ? ? ? ? 2.88 ? ? ? ? ? ? ?4.00 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 6+RA ? ? ? ? ? ?4.17 ? ? ? ? ?2.78 ? ? ? ? ?2.50 ? ? ? ? ? ?3.47 ? ? ? ? 3.93 ? ? ? ? ? ? ?4.20 ? ? ? ? ? ? 5+RA ? ? ? ? ? ?2.67 ? ? ? ? ?1.78 ? ? ? ? ?2.00 ? ? ? ? ? ?2.22 ? ? ? ? 2.57 ? ? ? ? ? ? ?3.09 ? ? ? ? ? ? 4+RA ? ? ? ? ? ?1.50 ? ? ? ? ?1.00 ? ? ? ? ?1.50 ? ? ? ? ? ?1.25 ? ? ? ? 1.47 ? ? ? ? ? ? ?2.13 ? ? ? ? ? ?
Note, the other idea of adding an ?Infantry power-weapon? to the existing stats would match the current CC3+ stats, save that they would kill 4.00 enemy infantry where the varying figures would then represent the effect Vs armoured vehicles.
Finally, it is interesting to compare the last column against the Scorpions, as CC4+, EA+1, FS with a separate MW attack seems to compare favourably. Also, it is suggested that, the Banshees weaker defensive armour will tend to act as a deterrent against attacking RA targets. The question is whether this deterrent is sufficient.
_________________ "Play up and play the game"
Vitai lampada Sir Hemry Newbolt
|
|