In Wh40k the Lightning Interceptor has a single Long-barelled Autocannon (note: the Hydra has 2 Twin-linked Long-barelled Autocannons).
Wh40k stats: Range 72", Strength: 7, Armourpiercing: 4, Heavy 2
This would give a 75cm range! But because the Hydra has a 360° arc of fire and is a ground based AA-platform the range is reduced by -30cm to 45cm.

The Marauder Destroyer has "only" 3 Twin-linked (generic) Autocannons.
Wh40k stats: Range 48", Strength: 7, Armourpiercing: 4, Heavy 2, Twin-linked

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

Honda,

My suggestion is that you just make a decision and we'll roll with it for now.  Label them Weapon A or Twinlink B or Twinkie C for all I care.  The stats are all we really need, the names can be ironed out down the road as you mentioned.

I'd hate to see this get derailed over a name and I think there is enough opinion for you to digest and make a decision.  If something seems too powerful, just price it accordingly and I think we'll be fine.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

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

Mosc got in there before I finished typing

BL is saying that the Autocannon stats are identical apart from the range. So presumably they do the same damage to ground targets. However, we envisage these things having radically different stats depending upon whether it is hung on an Interceptor (AA only, no ground capabilities) or the Marauder (ground only, no AA capabilities). To abuse Honda's earlier analogy, we seem to be talking "Apples and Oranges" here where there should be different weapons on the two a/c to make this distinction. So, (folowing Mosc's lead ), could we designate them as "Light Autocannon" for the Interceptor and "Heavy Autocannon" for the Marauder?

As to the Marauder formation stats, Presuming we are looking to emulate or even exceed those of the IN equivalent, and assuming that you have 3 units under a template, the IN 'standard' Marauder kicks out a maximum of ~3.0 AP and ~3.0 AT.

Given we are using 4x Underwing Rockets (for the formation), the 6x "Heavy Autocannon" (on both A/c) will need to provide ~3.0 AP hits and ~1.0 AT hits, so each will have the following stats:- AP4+/AT6+ giving the following proposals:-

Marauder Destroyer (Formation 2, cost 300)
Bomber, Armour 4+
Twin Heavy Bolters         - 15cm   AA5+
Twin Light Autocannon    - 30cm   AA4+            Rear Arc
3x Heavy Autocannon     - 30cm   AP4+/AT6+    Fxf
2x Underwing Rocket       - 30cm   AT4+            Fxf

Marauder Colossus  (Formation 300, with two Lightning Interceptor fighters escort)
(0-1 per army to represent rarity of the Colossus Bomb)
Bomber
Armour 4+
Twin Heavy Bolter           - 15cm   AA5+
Twin Heavy Bolter           - 15cm   AA5+            Rear Arc
2x Heavy Autocannon      - 30cm   AP4+/AT6+    Fxf
2x Underwing Rocket        - 30cm   AT4+
Colossus Bomb                - 15cm   4BP              MW, One Shot
Notes:- The unit cost includes two Lightning Attack Interceptors as escort which must accompany the Collossus on its missions. Also, because the Collossus is a bomber, the formation may not use CAP or Interception activations until the Collossus is shot down.

And for completeness, the Lightning stats now look like this

Lightning Attack Interceptor (Formation 4, Cost 300)
Fighter
Armour 6+
Wingtip Multilasers    - 30cm   AP5+/AT6+/AA5+    Fxf
Light Autocannon     - 30cm   AA5+                     Fxf

Lightning Strike Fighter   (Formation 2, Cost 200)
Fighter/Bomber
Armour 6+
Wingtip Multilasers      - 30cm   AP5+/AT6+/AA5+    Fxf
2x Underwing Rockets  - 30cm   AT4+                    Fxf

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

I don't think we want the MD having the exact same damage profile as the regular Marauder.  If we do that, why bother having 2 different units?

Again, I know that you don't know the background of these units, but is does give us a guide to aim towards.  In this case the MD should be much better than a regular Marauder at AT work.  So, normal autocannon stats will work fine.  We don't need to invent any new weapons for the MD in this case.

How about these as design concept?

Mrauder Bomber = jack of all trades master of none
Marauder Destroyer = Anti-Tank specialist
Marauder Colossus = Anti-Infantry speclialist

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

As I understand it, the 'normal' Autocannon stats are AP5/AT6. OK, if we go for Twin linked Autocannon on the MD to make it more AT orientated, the stats would be:-

Marauder Destroyer (Formation 2, cost 300)
Bomber, Armour 4+
Twin Heavy Bolters               - 15cm   AA5+
Twin Light Autocannon         - 30cm   AA4+            Rear Arc
3x Twin-linked Autocannon  - 30cm   AP4+/AT5+    Fxf
2x Underwing Rocket            - 30cm   AT4+            Fxf

Marauder Collossus  (Formation 300, with two Lightning Interceptor fighters escort)
(0-1 per army to represent rarity of the Colossus Bomb)
Bomber
Armour 4+
Twin Heavy Bolter           - 15cm   AA5+
Twin Heavy Bolter           - 15cm   AA5+            Rear Arc
2x Autocannon               - 30cm   AP5+/AT6+    Fxf
2x Underwing Rocket      - 30cm   AT4+
Colossus Bomb               - 15cm   4BP              MW, One Shot
Notes:- The unit cost includes two Lightning Attack Interceptors as escort which must accompany the Collossus on its missions. Also, because the Collossus is a bomber, the formation may not use CAP or Interception activations until the Collossus is shot down.

And the stats work out something like:-
Marauder Destroyer formation (2x MD)
AP ~3.0 hits from 6 dice
AT ~4.0 hits from 10 dice

Marauder Collossus formation (1x MC, 2x LI)
AP ~1.3 hits from 4 dice           OR  ~4.3 hits (~3.0 MW) from 10 dice
AT ~1.3 hits from 4 dice           OR  ~3.3 hits (~2.0 MW) from 10 dice

Indeed, given these stats and the fact that it is a 'one-shot' wonder, is it worth removing the '0-1' restriction? The point being that the formation can only ground-attack while the bomber is still flying, and has limited effect once the bomb is used up. IMHO these restictions will tend to self-limit excessive numbers of the formation.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

If you check out the rough hit ratios, I think that is what you are now getting

IN Marauder    AP ~3.0, AT ~3.0
M Destroyer    AP ~3.0, AT ~4.0
M Collossus    AP ~4.3, AT ~3.3 (for one shot)

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

You would have problems to justify all the weapons on the Marauder Colossus. The model has only Twin Heavy Bolters in the nose and the aft and the Colossus Bomb in the belly. Nothing more.

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

Umm, put that down to 'artistic license' or creativity.  

Here I think it is justified in to give the Collossus some conventional weaponry for the other turns when it does not use the bomb. Otherwise the formation becomes limited to a couple of AP shots from the Fighters, which is effectively negligible. Don't forget that in game terms, the E:A a/c formation represents three or more 'real' air formations each flying around the battlefield for a short time, delivering their attack and returning to R&R.

IMHO it is simpler to put it in these terms rather than putting an 'OR' in the stats to force the use of either the conventional weapons or the bomb.


I might also add that in comparitive terms, the IN Marauder will be better aginst 'clumped' targets where you get more under the template while the MD will be be better against dispersed target due to the 30 cm range. The Collossus will just be downright vicious having the best of both worlds, but only for one shot. However, on a really lucky day, those 10 dice could conceivably wipe out a Leman Russ formatioin in one go

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

Ok, the plane has landed.

Lightning Interceptor    4 for 300
Fighter
Armour 6+
Lightning Autocannon - 30cm  AA5+  Fxf
Wingtip Lascannons - 30cm  AT6+/AA5+ Fxf

Lightning Strike    2 for 200
Fighter/Bomber
Armour 6+
Wingtip Lascannons - 30cm  AT6+/AA5+ Fxf
2x Underwing Rockets - 30cm AT4+    Fxf

Marauder Destroyer     2 for 375
Bomber
Armour 4+
3x Twin-linked Autocannon  - 30cm   AP4+/AT5+    Fxf
2x Underwing Rocket Barrage - 30cm AT3+    Fxf
Twin Heavy Bolters - 15cm   AA5+
Twin Assault Cannon - 15cm AA4+       Rear Arc

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

I think Honda hit the nail with the stats/formations/points cost.

But i would rename
3x Twin-linked Autocannons  - 30cm  AP4+/AT5+    Fxf
to
Autocannon Phalanx - 30cm  3x AP4+/AT5+    Fxf

Just because the "Autocannon" already has fixed stats so a "Autocannon Phalanx" could be something new without deluding what the MD is actually armed with.
Other possibility could be
Destroyer Autocannons - 30cm  3x AP4+/AT5+    Fxf

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

Black Legions point is correct and I think Destroyer Autocannons would be a good choice.

The rest looks good, although AT6+ for the Wingtip Lascannons might be a bit low.

So, hopefully we'll see someone actually use them soon in a Battle report.

Fairy-snuff Honda. Only two comments for you to take into consideration:-

1) The reason for including the AP stats on the Multilaser is that these are the stats that already exist on the other IN Tbolts. While I understand the desire to make the entire Elysian airforce into Tank-Hunters, IMHO you either need to rename that weapon to avoid the ire of 'fluffyphiles' or reinstate the AP5+.

2) Two ship formations are notoriously brittle - so I expect to hear a lot of Strike formations being ripped to shreds by ground AA. But you only need to register 2 hits on a MD formation to expect one a/c to fall. I understand this is one of the major factors behind the lack of interest in the IM Marauder which we have offset to some extent by the 30cm range. While I understand the logic behind your points hike to 375, do we have a 'plan B' should this prove too expensive?

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

1) The reason for including the AP stats on the Multilaser is that these are the stats that already exist on the other IN Tbolts. While I understand the desire to make the entire Elysian airforce into Tank-Hunters, IMHO you either need to rename that weapon to avoid the ire of 'fluffyphiles' or reinstate the AP5+.

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

Why did the Lightning Interceptor lose it's AP5+ and AT6+ attacks from the autocannon?  To differentiate it from the TBolt (ie, make it less effective as a ground-attack plane)?

Wingtip Lascannons should probably be AT5+/AA5+ (Marauder twin lascannons are 45cm AT4+/AA4+, but that's too much for a fighter)

Comments:

1. On the fighters, the two proposals (Ginger/Smitty) were very close to each other and only had slight differences, so I created a "middle" ground...which will probably tick off both of them.

However, it does focus their roles which is what I have attempted to do throughout the list.  

2. Marauder Destroyer: So, as you will be able to see, I set the range for the weapons to max at 30 cms AND bumped up the cost. At 300 pts each, I just couldn't see why you wouldn't take three formations of these (6 aircraft) in a 3000 pt game and then spray the ground with drop companies. So, I wanted to head off that abuse up front. If it turns out that they are too expensive, then we'll discover that in testing.

Also, I cut the AA range on the rear TL-Assault cannon to 15 cms. In 40K, a Heavy Bolter outranges the assault cannon, so it seemed hard to justify giving it higher range just because it flies. Now, all the AA ranges are at 15 cms.

What this vehicle shows me is that although still very strong, all the ranges have been pulled in. The intent is that the owner will need to decide carefully where to apply these guys to get the most bang for their buck.

4. Colossus: I am going to table this formation for this round. A recommendation was made by Shmitty that we do have our hands full just trying to get the other aircraft in line with the list and I think there is wisdom in his recommendation.

So, I am not cutting it out of the list, just pushing back it's development till later.

The usual still applies. If there is something in the decisions that really makes you barf, PM me why and I will take that into consideration.

_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"