For those who have given up trying to download (it just ain't working for me, but you could email it?) what stats?

I assume heavy mortars 30cm, 1BP, Indirect?

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

No that is four salvos for the Quad Launchers, six salvos from the Basilisks. Quad Launchers only have to reload after two turns of firing.

So in a six turn game they Fire-Fire-Reload-Fire-Fire-Reload.

Each time a Quad Launcher fires it lets off 4 3" templates, as opposed the Basilisk which lets off a single 5" template.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Can you not download the reference sheet either?


Stats are:

Quad Launcher:
Range 45cm, 2x AP4+, Indirect Fire

Heavy Mortar:
Range 30cm, 1BP, Indirect Fire

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

OK I've put the file up on a reliable host, no idea if it'll stay there as I was supposed to lose access to the host a month ago. Grab it while you can. *shrug*


I do need a new hosting service for files, has anyone got any suggestions?

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Ah yes got it.

So the stats are (4 + 4 Inf for 250)
Heavy Mortar 30cm, 1bp, Indirect
Quad launcher 45cm, 2xAP4+, Indirect.
Do they have a trenches and emplacement option? 5o points say for 4 emplacements and 200mm of trenches?

Compared to
3 Earthshakers with emplacements 200

(A wrong comparison is 9 thudds for 225 as they are spread out, but still its almost the same AP firepower and its concentrated).

I'd say the quad is better than the mortar. 2 tamplates at 60cm, hitting maybe 6-8 chaps on 3+, vs 8 shots at 3+ on any target (especially small elite formations) at 90cm. Downside no 5+AT shots. So against say a tactical formation thats 3AP 1 AT hit (mortars) that may not reach them in the deployment zone vs firepower that can hit a large part of the deployment zone getting 4AP hits.

Against earthshakers harder to compare, but I would go for the quads for the increased resilience.

Incidentally how about calling the fire support upgrade a Section or even better Platoon, rather than Battery, sine they are a tubed weapon?

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

What if the Quad Launcher was 2x AP5+?

That puts it as 5% better than the Baran Thudd Gun at AP, but entirely removes the AT 5+ attack.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

It would be a harder choice. Would go down to army selection I guess in what else was there. Mortars also would be under threat from cheaper bp weapons.

But why not have one as a company upgrade and one as a battery?

Iconic (more) Quads as the separate battery with gunpits, trenches, masses of crew, donkeys etc (irregular will be getting a lot of orders ), 4/4 for 250. Then the 4 (preferably 3 for easier to balance reasons) mortars for an upgrade, maybe 175 points?

Incidentally are we using the otterwears (fur) for these two weapons? Spud and pestle or whatever it was. It which case 4 of each is handier!

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

Otterman's Spudd and Pestle scratchbuild models make superb proxies, indeed they will be photographed for the army list document to replace the current pictures.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Oh also should the artillery company have an option for transports or emplacements?

Oh and has anyone tried the DK version of a broken pre publication sieger army (just infantry and AA guns)? In this I guess it would be 2 horses, 1 SC, 2 infantry, 9 AA batteries, 1 silo, 1 thunderbolts and 1 trenches with another 100 for trenches or 4 lots of emplacements, or more aggressive, scrapping the thunderbolts for 2 lots of gorgons.

So either
400 SC
300 Infantry
300 Infantry
250 Horse
250 Horse
125 AA battery, emplacements
125 AA battery, emplacements
125 AA battery, emplacements
125 AA battery, emplacements
100 AA battery
100 AA battery
100 AA battery
100 AA battery
100 AA battery
250 Silo
150 Thunderbolts
100 trenches
Or
525 SC, Gorgons
425 Infantry, Gorgons
300 Infantry
250 Horse
250 Horse
100 AA battery
100 AA battery
100 AA battery
100 AA battery
100 AA battery
100 AA battery
100 AA battery
100 AA battery
100 AA battery
250 Silo
100 trenches (or give 4 batteries emplacements or centaurs)

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

Totally.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Sorry. I was merely trying to illustrate a perceived problem, not to be snide.

So which gun covers more beaten zone? The answer is: Basilisk, but it's close.

6  * pi * (5/2)^2 = 37,5pi
16 * pi * (3/2)^2 = 36pi

However, the big 5" templates generally include a lot of unoccupied space, which means that the Quad Launcher would often get more targets inside its smaller beaten zone.

---

What we can learn from the 40K stats is that the beaten zones of these weapons are very close to each other in size, in the end.

---

Then, on to spitballing.

1) Have quad-launchers produce one half a BP each. A formation of four could fire for 2 BP, which is weak, but then it could be cheap, too.

2) I like the idea of including some inf units in a support formation. It'd be different from the other lists, such as Baran. Also possibly include entrenchments and so on.

3) Just use the same stats for both mortar and quad launcher. Something like 2*4+ AP, 30 cm, indirect. If you want BM, go with Earthshakers and Medusas.

4) Should we include some kind of infantry AT weapon?

If infantry stands in a thudd gun formation represent the crew then who's firing them when all the crew are dead?!
I would argue for merely giving the thudd guns a save and FF value to better represent the prescence of 5 crew then having those extra stands...
Lots to say on this list so will take a close look over lunch and get back to you.
R>

_________________
MoK's Painting Blog
Now Showing:
Mok's Modular Modern Messy Guard Army

That'd be the reason I didn't attach infantry in the current version.

But if balance requires a bigger formation, they can always be considered an attached infantry guard, rather than crew.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Close enough to be considered a BP weapon in some ways then, except that the Basilisk can easily damage tanks, whilst the Quad Launcher can only kill infantry and the occasional Sentinel if it gets lucky.

So the Quad is an AP only weapon...



Nah, I'd prefer to find something equal in worth to the Heavy Mortar. 2x AP5+ may fit that bill.


Yup.


I know they're close, but I'd like to find a different niche for the Quad Launcher.


Nope, the Death Korps Infantry are notable as being short on dedicated AT weapons (just the occasional Lascannon in a fire support squad), they mostly leave AT work to the tanks.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter