"Heavy Valkyrie" ?
Did I miss something ? Did GW/FW tell about a heavy Valkyrie ?

_________________
My gaming and painting blog : http://figsdeflogus.blogspot.fr

Transport variant, alledgedly.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Ah fromthe description in the newsletter:


So Scout is justified but the inclusion of the HK-Missiles not (as these are optional)

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

i think that 5+ armor is way tooo much for such a softskinned vehicle...if you compare it to Sentinel wich is more armored at the first sight or even if you compare it with Chimera wich has a 5+ save too. I think that 6+ armor is reasonable

But i bet it is fast. Land Speeders are as soft skinned and have a 4+ Save.

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

HK missiles are going to be a debate for sure.  Optional weapon loadouts don't necessarily translate into "not on Epic scale" since many units are armed with what is commonly used.  I'm not saying they are a must-have but they shouldn't be outright dismissed without more information.

As for the vehicle I'd agree 5+ is about right.  Light vehicles have often gotten great armor saves based on speed and maneuverability alone.  Unfortunately the fact that they are subject to AP and AT fire pretty much does them in no matter what armor save you put on them.

The scale from my head: 10-20cm move = 6+ armor, 25-30cm move = 5+ armor, 35cm+cm move = 4+ armor.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

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

Land Speeder are light, but very fast and their crew is heavily armoured.
Sentinel are not so fast, and the legs are very vulnerable.
The Tauros Venator  has quite the same armour than the Sentinel, crew seems to get the same light protection. But the 6-wheeled Venator is more massive and can get more punishement than the Sentinel and still be operational.
So Save 5+.

_________________
My gaming and painting blog : http://figsdeflogus.blogspot.fr

I bet the Tauros Venator is much faster than a Sentinel  

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

Honda is ignoring my original questions and issues.  

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

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

I believe the issue revolves not necessarily popcorn, because as you pointed out, other armies can popcorn, it is the fact that it is a teleporting popcorn list.

So as is the usual rule, we test, observe the results, and make adjustments where warranted.

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

Valkyrie heavy lift variant has been seen:

http://www.warseer.com/forums....4279669
http://www.warseer.com/forums....4279541

Equipped with rocket pods, 1x heavy bolter, and a transport cradle.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Reminds me of a Star Wars LAAT/c  

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

i didnt realise that it is LIGHT VEHICLE...sorry, my bad... 5+ armor is about right

I'm fine with that.  Now show me where this has been tested and observed to be abusive.  From how I see it though, 2.1.4 had 2 support per core and 2.1.5 had 1 support per core with nothing but a single army list posted by The Real Chris (or Hena?) as a theoryhammered army list with the possibility of abuse.  No playtest, no indication of the list being abusive, no min-maxing.

And if I can be so bold, I think I am the only other person besides you that is playtesting this list with any regularity.  So... Can we just change it back until it shows to be a problem?

---

EDIT


As expected, it is meant to carry the 6-wheeler and/or perhaps some heavier ordinance I suppose.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

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

Is it intended that a Drop Company that takes upgrades may not take addtional Valks? There is no provision for transport in addition to the four base on the list I have (2.1.5).

Would it be OTT to take enough to transport the entire formation @ 40pt ea? The only thing I can see that might be an issue here would be the Rocket Pods. A company w/ Infantry platoon, Vets, and Fire support could throw 18 BPs, but only once.

At 835 pt. It would be an absurdly expensive formation for its abilities. Other than the extra BMs, 18 BP is no different than the 8 BP a basic Drop Company can currently throw. It would also mean the troops would not get into FF where they belong due to shooting attacks. It would be an amazing formation to 'soften up' for assaults (5 BM+Disrupt!), but would be far to expensive to use in this manner.

SG

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.