junkstar wrote:
The Imperial Bunker
Would like it to negate IC weapons, it can survive blasts, pinpoint weapons, deathstrikes, but toasts troops and causes hits under a template? its always seem to me personally to be odd considering troops would go deeper into a notional bomb proof part of the bunker when under attack
Or perhaps allow troops inside an actual cover save with a modifier?
I found that the defensive armies like Imperial Fists, Baran Siege Masters that I have faced already been have almost impossible to defeat. Their defensive abilities already, and the small chance you can get into range to use IC weapons against the troops inside the bunker and similar defences, means you might actually get a chance to take the enemy out.
Few armies, apart from some Tau builds, about 1/3 of the guard armies, and the odd xenos army has the ability to perform seiges that will be able to defeat the defensive terrain of Imperial fists , etc.
Look at some of the Imperial fist defences. Troops get a 4+ re-rollable save in trenches, bastions & trenches. Bastions also get an imperial force field when you add a techmarine, automatically get a thunderfire cannon, transports 8, is fearless with DC3 - crits only remove an extra point of damage. Their bunkers get a 4+ RA save that replaces the normal 3+ save. Troops in trenches gain a first strike ability.
When you add in the fact that the defenders in these defensive armies normally have access to a lot artillery, close support and close combat troops. They also have enough tanks, heavy tanks, and other support they can get with long ranged attacks, and in many cases have MW or TK weapons.
I faced an Imperial fist army with a top tier Ork Feral army list which had 5 Orkasaurus mounted formations backed up by a formation of 3 steam gargants. Indirect fire broke the steam gargants who could not get inrange before they were taken out. The Orkasaurus had to deal with enemy flankers and the defensive line. So much un the way of thunderfire cannons, thudd guns and other indirect fire came my way. Disrupt weaponry, lots of ATSKNF or fearless.
I lost 2 steam gargants, my junka brigade, 2 boarboyz hordes, 3 orkasaurus, with the entire compliment of infantry that were mounted on them. My opponent had lost a landspeeder formation, a scout formation, I almost killed of his fellblade, and broke a tactical formation that was flanking. I could not get past his damnable defence line. I did not even get a chance to reach the defence line. Hell I had a 4th Orkasaurus going around the flank that reduced a marine formation set up in a building by 1/3, but lost half my troops on board, and 5 of my 6 DC to the Orkasaurus.
If I had some IC weaponry that had some range I would have had a chance, or could have taken the amount of fire coming towards my steam gargants some.
I think that bunkers, and bastions should lose 1D3 troops mounted in them when they suffer a critical hit, or if the bunker is hit by IC weapons. I also think the Bastion should explode in the same manner as most DC 3 War Engines, even though it is immobile.
I am building an Imperial fist army, so I say these things because I feel theat list is a bit OP.
I know the fists list is vulnerable to armies that have a lot of planetfall formations and unless you can get overwhelming support fire, thay can also suffer once they drop down and have finished their assault, as unengaged imperial first defenders hit the enemy who are sitting in the open and thus vulnerable to counter fire. Also the defenders can be set to overwatch, and the defenders may lose a lot too many before they assault.
EA is a game of rock, paper, scissors, with dice rolls, terrain, tactics and some luck involved.
Making a set of rules for a list that makes it too OP, or removing rules that make it OP are not fair to others,especially as the game and the various army lists are supposed to be balanced (well mostly).