It's has the same armor as a Sentinel, but no OT. It is destroyed by any glancing or penetrating hit. IA1 lists it as 2.5m long by 1.8m wide by 1.2m high. It's a man sized target that can be destroyed relatively easily (6 hits on average, as opposed to 24 for a Sentinel) by small arms class weapons. Abstraction is not unreasonable here IMO.

For reference, a Sentinel is 5.34m tall, according to IA1. The silhouette is in an entirely different class.

_________________
SG

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

Like I said, its one teeny remote tank in a formation of 40 dudes that is rendered useless when its controller is killed, and is itself a one-shot weapon that is given a good enough av so as to be survived until sacrificed at warhammer 40,000 level. So why not epic abstract that to being a one shot weapon that is lost when the parent unit is lost at epic level? To me, it makes no sense at all to be able to rain a load of AT only weapons on the unit of 40 soldiers and kill a hull down profiled remote tank which, up until this latest version of 40k was released, but at the time rules for the cyclops were written, could be killed by bolter fire which falls under what you would expect of AP.

Guess what, that's *exactly* what happens in 40k.

Elysians have few-to-no vehicle targets on the battlefield, so Cyclopses are high priority targets for AT weapons.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

That rule no longer applies? I'd have thought since Glancing/Penetrating are still in use, it would still be a legit rule?

_________________
SG

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

But does it make sense? We all know that if it happens in 40k, it does not follow that it's logical...

_________________
SG

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

I do know that it makes the most sense to me from a gameplay perspective to treat it as a unit.

Otherwise you end up tracking multiple infantry units in multiple formations that may or may not have fired their one shot weapons.

Infantry units with one shot weapon does not sound practical to me.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

So restrict it to one a formation. Then you have a maximum of five-six to track in a 3k game, and don't have to worry about whether one/both have shot in a formation. This is no worse than Demolisher Plasma Cannon in Steel Legion...

_________________
SG

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

Considering that you can have 9 of them in a game of 40k, restricting them that much in a game of Epic makes no sense.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Nope, still makes no sense that in epic level combat a unit with at only weapons firing at long range into an infantry formation will kill a man sized tank only let alone be able to see it among the formation. Much more likely that it would be incedently destroyed among the unit it is attached to as they come under fire, as the cyclops do not venture far from the controller until they are launched off to destroy a target.
Could always swap out the cyclops inf stand for a normal inf stand when fired if one was memory impared.

It's VERY small to be a light vehicle, smaller than a broadside suit, which is already on the edge...

What if you put two of them an a couple of elysians on a base as an infantry unit?

Abstraction.

[rant] Why are we as a community so schitzophrenic? We say it's silly to follow the latest and greatest in 40k, that abstraction to what the units' roles are is better than constant revision. Then we turn around and argue against abstraction based on what happens/what is allowed in a single game of 40k! 40k should inform the choice of units, and their battlefield roles. It can inform unit sizes. Something as insignificant as a remote controlled bomb is not a good thing to add a unit for, IMO. [/rant]

But let's wait for Honda to weigh in, as the list developer...

Question - Can a unit have more than one character attached? For instance, could a Command stand have a Commissar and a Cyclops at the same time?

_________________
SG

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

It can venture 48" in 40k, which is 45cm in Epic. Plenty far enough.


If I may return to my previous point, having them as a one-shot weapons on infantry units is going to be *very* powerful. Enough to be worth 50pts per unit, at the least (And more like 75pts each, if you want to give them a FF2+ MW attack!), as they can then "hide" in infantry formations, and also can't be AT-sniped.

So, I'm not convinced that having them as infantry units won't be overpowered.


If we must do Infantry status, how about 3 on a base, that being how many you get in a squadron of them in 40k?

You're also allowed 1-3 squadrons in 40k, which then corrisponds to Honda's desire for 1-3 units for xpts each.

You can assume the controller is somewhere in the rest of the formation, and isn't running 20cm per move (Faster than an Eldar!) to keep up with his Cyclopses.

Or even better, 2-3 per base, with LV status.



Yes.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

45cm in epic does not equal 48 inches in 40k when you consider that a 15cm firefight in epic reprepresents a 40k table sized skirmish though. Sniper in firefight, being able to pick the tank target to blow up in an assault, represents the weapon best. I suggest you go watch some youtube videos of goliath training in ww2 to see how close they had to be to operate- fw of course liberally tributed this weapon with the cyclops.

Weapons with 48" range in 40k get 45cm range in Epic.

That's very consistent.


A - Combined with the Elysian ability to teleport that would be overpowered.
B - If you take the KISS path (Make it a unit) then you can do it properly, and only allow it to use its attack at close combat range.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

I ran into a very similar set of issues with Thralls in the Thousand Sons list. There are basically 2 choices:

1) Unit - Expendable, with a special "removed after use" rule.

2) Character - One shot weapon added to units.

#2 is by far the simpler, but it is also limited in what it can reasonably represent.

======

The Cyclops is about the size of a WWII/Korea era Jeep (8x5.5x4 versus 10x5x3.5, 1.5 tons each). That doesn't seem like something that would just blend into an infantry unit to me. It's something that could be pretty readily picked out by heavy weapons. It's clearly not just something that's factored into normal transport, so it should probably create special considerations for that.

Regardless of whether it's a unit or a character, I just don't see how it can be justified in terms of infantry.

So, to be a character it would have to be limited to being a vehicle upgrade, e.g. a Chimera + Cyclops "character". Obviously, that would prohibit it as an infantry formation upgrade, so that won't work.

I think you have to go with an expendable LV (probably with the Grot doesn't-count-in-assaults rule as well in this case) and work around the issues that adding on a unit causes.


A unit treatment has some advantages. You can customize its attacks better and abstract different types of actions into the stats. You can give it a faster speed so it can rush forward for assaults. So, for example...

LV, 30cm, 5+, 3+, 5+
Demolition pack, Assault Weapon, One shot
Expendable, Cyclops is removed from play after it makes one attack.

Rationale:

30cm - It's fast enough to rush to the front of the formation even if the formation changes directions. It should have something of an edge reaching CC and that gives it the max 10cm countercharge to help it counter an Engaging enemy. You don't have to worry about a dedicated formation of them rushing about. Most of the time it will be attached to infantry and chained by their speed.

5+ armor - roughly comparable to the Sentinel.

CC3+ - It's rushed forward to suicide and obviously made it to close contact.

FF5+ - In "reality" it is rushing forward ahead of its infantry controller to the extent of its remote control range. This lets it attack while avoiding problems with formation coherency. Lower stat is because it's just not as good when extending forward like that. It may get shot before it reaches the target because it has more territory to cover, bogged down by something the controller doesn't see, have its remote control lost to ECM, etc..

Demolition pack - Maybe MW, maybe a better CC. That was just an example. I'll let the 40K IG mavens fight that one out.