Jump to content

I'd change that card and why


Mad Pat
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Moderator

I guess my only gripe with the game so far is that all of the gunships I have yet tried seem to be very easy to hit and knock down. They are always the frist thing to get squashed and for something that moves in three dimensions, they get hit way too easily. Add a model with AA to the board and you might as well not even bother fielding the gunships.

 

TS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 95
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I guess my only gripe with the game so far is that all of the gunships I have yet tried seem to be very easy to hit and knock down. They are always the frist thing to get squashed and for something that moves in three dimensions, they get hit way too easily. Add a model with AA to the board and you might as well not even bother fielding the gunships.

 

TS

 

This is CAV. Our gunships move in 2 directions. My Tsuiseki flys lower to the ground than my Rhino pilot sits.

 

Tsuisekis are worth taking, IMO. And the Recon ones to move into position to call in strikes. Other than that, most of the gunship types are preety useless, IMO, also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*from the cheap seats* CFP is staying on the Dragonfly

 

Are we getting a gunship that has IFM attacks? Or modifying how CFP works?

 

I second the question. As it stands, that CFP is totally useless outside a specialist section, and very limited in use even then.

 

 

I think gunships overall work pretty well, actually. The faction specific ones, as a rule, are far more useful--the Overlord, Harpy, and the various upgraded forms from Shards, for example, are quite useful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*from the cheap seats* CFP is staying on the Dragonfly

 

Are we getting a gunship that has IFM attacks? Or modifying how CFP works?

 

I second the question. As it stands, that CFP is totally useless outside a specialist section, and very limited in use even then.

 

 

I think gunships overall work pretty well, actually. The faction specific ones, as a rule, are far more useful--the Overlord, Harpy, and the various upgraded forms from Shards, for example, are quite useful.

 

The reason they don't want to remove the CFP from the Dragonfly is that it'll make it too cheap. 88pts for a model that could do +5 vs. hard as fun as that sounds it would make it out of balance.

 

The Soveriegn III and IV needs AA added back to its DFMs to make it more useful and help fill the gap in the Templar's anti-aircraft units.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

Yes... that would be a good idea :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*from the cheap seats* CFP is staying on the Dragonfly

 

Are we getting a gunship that has IFM attacks? Or modifying how CFP works?

 

I second the question. As it stands, that CFP is totally useless outside a specialist section, and very limited in use even then.

 

 

I think gunships overall work pretty well, actually. The faction specific ones, as a rule, are far more useful--the Overlord, Harpy, and the various upgraded forms from Shards, for example, are quite useful.

 

The reason they don't want to remove the CFP from the Dragonfly is that it'll make it too cheap. 88pts for a model that could do +5 vs. hard as fun as that sounds it would make it out of balance.

 

The Soveriegn III and IV needs AA added back to its DFMs to make it more useful and help fill the gap in the Templar's anti-aircraft units.

 

If removing the CFP makes it too cheap, then I'd suggest that it's an issue with the points calculator, and should be dealt with from that end, instead of building useless abilities into the model. Further, it should be pretty cheap--it doesn't even have Assault, which just about every other gunship has, and it's the only gunship with two tracks. Its pricing should be more in line with the Barracuda IMO--I'm not advocating a huge drop, just ten points or so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something cool is being added to make the CFP on the Dragonfly make sence and be usable.

 

I will personally take a look at the Sov, she is one of the first mini's I ever painted up and is one of my sculpt favorites so I'll see what we can do.

 

As for the rest we'll take it up in committee

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few more comments:

 

Both the Courier and the Dragonfly have Cormorant 7 PBGs, but the one on the Dragonfly has +1 RAV and +1 Piercing. Might want to look into either changing the stats or name of one--I can see missiles having different attack values due to targeting equipment and such, but a 2-point different on a PBG just seems a little odd.

 

Maybe it's a factional differences thing, but it would be nice if Adon had at least one Fire Support model with a decent RAV. The Sultan is the closest, but +2 against everything is rather pitiful, honestly.

 

I think the Rudegern might be a little overpriced--not much, but especially without FiST, it'll require an electronics upgrade to be useful in most cases, and it ends up rather expensive for its abilities then.

 

Are the Jackal and Barracuda ECMs misprints? Neither makes a great deal of sense...not sure if that was addressed when the cards first came out or not.

 

Maybe take a look at the Spider's cost too--related to the direct/indirect inefficiency issue. It's paying full price for an expensive ability which only applies to its secondary weapons.

 

Think that's all...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As the rules stand now, I agree with Vil on the Dragonfly and CFP. I guess if you're improving CFP somehow, I'll wait and see.

 

I feel like the Wasps are too cheap. With the Adonese electronics doctrine, they can cover a lot of units with their electronics. OTOH, spiders are too expensive -- the pop-up is nearly useless. I think the same goes for the recluse, to use the pop up, I give up my electronics which was the point of having the unit to begin with.

 

I also think that the Infantry rocket upgrades may be a little too expensive, or not powerful enough. I'm paying 45 points to add a rocket to a fragile unit, that's not likely to survive. I can buy an air strike for 50 or an orbital pinpoint for 60 -- either one seems like a better deal.

 

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

I can agree with that. Then we need to remove all the direct fire weapons from all the other fire support units. My point on suggesting a MG on the Outlaw (and you're right the Treb needs one too) is to bring them in line with all the other units in the same basic catagory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see a MG on the Outlaw, it being a tank. But half the point of the Trebuchet is that it doesn't have a DA.

 

On the Wasp...compare it to, say, a Sabre. The Sabre is faster, tougher, has FiST, and has a roughly equivalent weapon. The Wasp gets EST and is twenty points cheaper. Seems pretty balanced to me. I usually give mine improved maintenance so they can keep up with Scarabs, which makes them cost the same as the Sabre and move the same speed, so the Sabre gets +1DV, +1DT, and FiST for my EST. If anything, more balanced.

 

On infantry rockets...I don't think they should get any more powerful, they've got a lot of punch as is. But I could see a slight points reduction--to 35-40, perhaps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the EST is adding +3 to effect DV to the Wasp and everything within 6" of it, that's the big difference. +3 to a whole section is worth more than _1DV, +1 DT and FIST for a unit. I'll add that if the Harm missiles become official I have less of a problem with the Wasp.

 

I don't particularly want rockets to be more powerful. I was thinking 10-12 points/DT instead of 15.

 

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can agree with that. Then we need to remove all the direct fire weapons from all the other fire support units. My point on suggesting a MG on the Outlaw (and you're right the Treb needs one too) is to bring them in line with all the other units in the same basic catagory.

 

I'll have to check my JoR, but I don't think the Outlaw ever had a MG. It was an ATV mining vehicle retro-fitted to have missile packs, I believe.

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...