jimmyzimms wrote:
remember that the HH series and 40k use the same system but are stated to be free from each others values meaning the same. Basically its designed to be internally balanced (hey, balanced and Gw
). Just saying that comparing IA and HH2 books are not necessarily equivalent.
Actually I was comparing 40k stats with 40k stats and then backing it up with HH stats – the latest 2013 version of Imperial Armour (a 40k book) has 40k stats for a Relic Fellblade and other relic vehicles. They seem to have changed the superheavies rules (probably in the new Escalation supplement which allows superheavies in regular 40k games to sell more of them) but the new numbers are all just 3 times the old ones. A 40k Baneblade has 9 Structure Points while a 40k Fellblade has 12. In the Horus Heresy books, which still work on the old numbering the Fellblade has 4 and though we don't officially have HH era Baneblade stats yet we can be 95+% certain it'll have 3 - other guard superheavies in the books have relatively the same numbers in both.
I corrected the wrong DC but otherwise copied the Fellblade stats from the HH list, which had 20cm move for some reason. I'm not really bothered what move it has. With DC4 it should perhaps drop to FF5+ rather than 4+ though, judging by it's armament I would expect it to be slightly worse than a Baneblade in FF rather than slightly better.
I'm really against the Fellblade having inspiring or causing blast markers when it dies. Inspiring should be something special reserved for the inspiring rhetoric of chaplains, not just an old tank. It would also make it too good – I would want it to be vulnerable in an assault not better than it needs to be.
kyussinchains wrote:
with all the dark experimental tech on board the fellblade it probably would go up in a giant mushroom cloud if someone hit the ammo storage or reactor.....
Fair enough. It has an Atomantic Arc-reactor, which sounds nuclear.
