Jump to content

I'd change that card and why


Mad Pat
 Share

Recommended Posts

So every once and awhile I like to poke the badgers and get their opinions on the cards in play.

 

So take this chance to Say "I'd change X card" But more importantly WHY. Please don't just say "Well it needs more guns" Give me an example of why the changes matter, what they will do for the game over all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 95
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Not sure if I have the latet Beta of RC08, but the Longbow needs a Repair at damage 2. Justification - every single other model in the game wih 2 damage gets one, and repairing is nice occasionally.

 

Faction Rhino - too overpowered, IMO. Drop the range on the guns back to 16! More of a rant and the fact that a Rhino with ECM and EST support can shoot anything even 6 feet away and still wipe it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While the Rhino is under discussion, I'd say the balance of all the superheavies needs to be looked at--mostly in issues of range. For example, the Ogre, while one of the more expensive ones, is also one of the slowest, and it can only outshoot a Rhino from outside 60" because of the large RAV difference between them.

 

The Dragonfly still needs to have that CFP removed, because it's totally useless and thus just inflating the cost, but I assume that's already in RC09.

 

sethoman--on the Longbow, not quite true--unarmored infantry can't repair either. It's possible the Longbow literally has no repair systems.

 

Didn't realize this until recently--Ritterlich is the only faction with Blaster models. I'm not saying it should be given to everyone, but maybe one other faction should get something with it?

 

Mentioned this at the time the alterations were released--the open market Sabertooth and Vanquisher are, well, puny. The upgraded versions are quite nice, but for those without access to them, their high-shredder options got kinda nerfed when the DVs dropped to 10 on both of those. I think I'd try to mix up the three Open AA CAVs--the Ghost, Sabertooth, and Vanquisher. As it is, the Ghost gets range and armor, but lower firepower, while the other two get firepower, but lower range and armor. It would be nice if they were a bit more varied--say, the Vanquisher gets 24" range (like the upgraded version), while the Sabertooth gets a small boost in armor.

 

On the Spider: I don't have a problem with its speed, except that the Recluse gets Mov11 and is basically the same (if anything, it's bulkier). So unless there's a fluff justification (significantly more powerful breeder in the Recluse) they should probably be closer.

Not really the intent of the thread, but I was thinking, it would be cool if there was a shredder version of the Spider Bite--either three shredder DFMs, or mount a GGC in place of the central missiles. That could also factor into the anti-soft model balancing I mentioned above.

 

I haven't ever played against them, so I wouldn't take this into too much account--but it seems to me that the Trebuchet is a bit overpowered, especially against soft targets. This could be a general result of how models with both DF and IF attacks are priced--for example, the Despot, which I (and most others, I think) find vastly overpriced due to the fact that you can only use one of its weapons per turn. A similar example is the Sultan mk2. I don't know how that part of a model's value is calculated, but maybe there should be a discount for "incompatible" weapons. That would probably fix the Trebuchet issue as well, as other FS models would make more sense next to it.

 

Finally--I do question the pricing/balance on a few of the higher-powered unique models--Deadeye and Vandal in particular--it just seems like they're way too good for their cost, even considering that you can only get one--to the point where it almost feels necessary to have a unique in your force to counter it, which to me indicates that they're not quite balanced. So maybe some of those need to see a small cost increase?

 

 

Wow that got long...sorry about that ::P:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On models that have both Indirect and Direct fire systems, since you can only use one at a time there needs to be a synergy discount. Being a Ritterlich player, I love the Mastadon, but for the most part I stopped using him a long time ago since it got so expensive for only a single shot. I figure its cause it is getting charged full price for both the direct fire and the indirect fire stuff.

 

I could be wrong, but that is the impression I get from looking at the prices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My experience has always been that dedicated models are more cost-effective: I would rather take a Bishop (or a Trebuchet, for a more extreme example) and a Mantis than two Sultans. From the Mantis, I'm getting the same number of DA as I would from both Sultans, and it's faster and better armored. And, I'm still getting my IA from the Bishop. There are tradeoffs, but I find the benefits almost always outweigh them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll cover the Rach since that's my favorite faction.

 

The ones I use most are the Jackal, Dictator, Bear, and of course, Rach Infantry. I also use the Barracuda a good bit, but don't consider a must have.

 

Anything I don't mention I like as is.

 

60 Dictator - The only reason I use the IFM is when I don't have any other shot and I'm hoping for a miracle. I consider using the IFM to be along the lines of using an MG to shoot at a hard target at extreme range. You can always get lucky and roll a 10......... actually, I have to change that........the MG is better because at least I can use it with my other direct fire stuff. I would be thrilled to lose the IFM or replace it with another DFM. That wouldn't fit the model though. Upgrading the IFM enough to make it worthwhile would probably increase the cost more than I would like. I don't see any options. Maybe we could just say that the IFM system is actually an LED spotlight and drop the cost of the IFM? :rolleyes:

 

70 Dictator - As above, although it is a better IFM system.

 

Barracuda - If the Longbow gets repair, I want it for my Barracuda too! I'd be happier if it stays just like it is though.

 

Kraken - I have only used this model once or twice. That is mainly because 'get in fast before the enemy has a chance to blow you out of the sky' is not my play style. To me the Kraken is too risky to use. Having said that, I'm not sure what should change my opinion of it. It's affordable and packs a punch for the short time it's in the air.

 

Warden - This is another model I rarely play, but I can't say why. I guess it's because I normally think of a Kahn or Jackal for recon. I've picked up some Wardens, but they still don't see much play. Nothing about it makes it seem worh 154 points. Maybe how it's supposed to be used just doens't fit my play style.

 

Despot - I love the model. I have 8 of them and I am going crazy waiting for the true scale version. When it comes to playing though, I will choose the Malfactor because it's so much cheaper. If it had a good DFM instead of IFM I would probably reconsider. Forcing it to decide between assault and fire support makes the Despot unappealing.

 

Tyrant - Why anybody would choose a Tyrant instead of paying a few more points for a 60's Tater is beyond me. Linked doesn't make up for the poor main guns and the better AoE on the IFM isn't worthwhile since it's attack value is poor. I want to say that it needs the main guns to be converted into soft killers, but then it would be in the same category as the Vanquisher. How about converting the main guns into two flamers? That would make it unique and fun to play with. (although probably not fun to play against!)

 

Vanquisher - AA makes the Vanquisher worth taking. It needs the IFM upgraded to make it worth using.

 

Light Mortars - The AoE/1 of light mortars keeps me from using them. I'll pay the difference for AoE/2 on the heavy mortars with a better chance against armor. If light mortars had a better AoE I would reconsider using them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree with Sethoman that the faction Rhino needs to have range 16" on the guns. If the Emporer has 20" it needs to be 16" as well.

 

I never use the Sovereign III because it really sucks. I don't know what else to say. I've never seen it fielded in CAV2.

 

Tyrant needs +1 armor.

 

I also think some of the Heavy AA figs need an armor boost.

 

It would be cool to have a few small fast models that had one killer Piercing attack. Kinda like the stilleto but a flyer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Outlaw needs a MG on it, or perhaps a flamer. Most tanks have some type of anti-infantry protetion for when things get in too close to use their main guns.

 

The Sovereign III needs, well it needs to be what it was in 1.5. With all those missle pods it just lacks any type of real punch against any targets. No counter battery, a single IFM, weak RAV, heck for 50 points more the Spectre doubles the AOE, doubles the RAV, and gives you counter battery. There are just so many better choices to take than it. It needs to get a boost to bring it in line with a the other dedicated fire support units or it needs to swap out everything for DFMs so that it can take a battlefield role again.

 

The Rhino needs to have the range backed down to 16 again. The short range was part of what the Rhino was, an up close in your face fighter. Its low movement made that tough to do sometimes but with the mov boost that has made the big guy able to use that assult and get in there shooting. Right now with its high rav and piercing value the rhino is deadly to most targets even in its third range band which used to end at 48" but is now out to 60" and it has really lost that in close feel.

 

The Wolverine just looks like it should have more than just a main cannon and a flamer. With that second turret it gives the feel of a secondary weapon system and then the flamer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a comment on the IFM thing in the Original version of CAV when buying a unit the first thing I would do is remove the IFM system and save some points on the unit. I would take a few dedicated IFM units if I felt the need. One of the things that has caused me to have no interest in CAV 2.0 is the inability to customize units.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Sov III DFM packs are no worse than a few other vehicles - RAV 1, Piercing/3, actually make it better than some CAVs, especially at a range (better than a Cougar all the time). It is the extremelly weak IFM that has me puzzled. I have used it a few times, but always as an Attack CAV using the DFMs w/ EST support. It can pack a decent punch out to a respectable range that way - I think it is the only dual smart missile with piercing.

 

No machine gun on the Outlaw, please (nor Trebuchet, or any other dedicated Fire Support). They are good enough as is, and low enough to hide. The only real effective counter to them is usually quick aircraft that can get to their firing position. Put an MG on them, and you just increased their survivability ten-fold (IMO). If you are worried about that, put a Poltergeist or 2 with them for defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...