Jump to content

I'd change that card and why


Mad Pat
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've seen three Ogres. But they lost.

 

I've got three Ogres, but I've never fielded more than two of them. Costs too many points. Sometime, I would love to try 3 Ogres and two Recluses in a section.

 

I did field 3 Mastadons (in a Black Rose force) once. The blaster made a huge difference there. I got 2 or 3 crits with a 9 during the game, as I recall. Between blaster and Dueces Wild at least one of the mastadons was guaranteed to crit each turn.

 

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 95
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I've seen three Ogres. But they lost.

 

I've got three Ogres, but I've never fielded more than two of them. Costs too many points. Sometime, I would love to try 3 Ogres and two Recluses in a section.

 

I did field 3 Mastadons (in a Black Rose force) once. The blaster made a huge difference there. I got 2 or 3 crits with a 9 during the game, as I recall. Between blaster and Dueces Wild at least one of the mastadons was guaranteed to crit each turn.

 

Steve

 

Right, that was two that one time, not three. It was in a small game though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then the obvious answer is to kick the points up.

How many people field 3 Emperors or Thunderbirds at one time?

 

(I still think the T-bird should be faster and/or cheaper, but then I am a stubborn dude)

 

The Thunderbird is a horrible Super, IMO. Expensive, because you pay for both IA and Direct (and cannot use both at the same time). Coupled with very slow move (8 should be the minimum, I think - 7 sucks). And the tinfoil armor SyRam put on it. Once that first hit gets in, it crumbles.

 

I will never field one as is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then the obvious answer is to kick the points up.

How many people field 3 Emperors or Thunderbirds at one time?

 

(I still think the T-bird should be faster and/or cheaper, but then I am a stubborn dude)

 

The Thunderbird is a horrible Super, IMO. Expensive, because you pay for both IA and Direct (and cannot use both at the same time). Coupled with very slow move (8 should be the minimum, I think - 7 sucks). And the tinfoil armor SyRam put on it. Once that first hit gets in, it crumbles.

 

I will never field one as is.

 

That would be MV6, actually, lousy movement, as for the rest of your statement, Welcome to my NightMare.

I pay for Rugged, Shielding/3, CFP and Piercing/5, all of which are not necessary on the chassis. If I get LOS to a target, I am NOT using the missiles but the PBG's, so WHY HAVE CFP???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many people field 3 Emperors or Thunderbirds at one time?

 

(I still think the T-bird should be faster and/or cheaper, but then I am a stubborn dude)

Outek will field multipe T-Birds whenever the game is big enough for him to do so.

 

The dual role of the T-Bird would probably justify the argument for it being cheaper, but I don't want anything to happen that will allow Outek to field more T-Buckets than he already does!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many people field 3 Emperors or Thunderbirds at one time?

 

(I still think the T-bird should be faster and/or cheaper, but then I am a stubborn dude)

Outek will field multipe T-Birds whenever the game is big enough for him to do so.

 

The dual role of the T-Bird would probably justify the argument for it being cheaper, but I don't want anything to happen that will allow Outek to field more T-Buckets than he already does!

 

Actually I agree with you, sort of, either lower the points and drop a few SA's or increase the speed. IF the speed were upped on the T-bird I feel it should become a "true" Fire Support model, i.e. lower the Piercing value of the PBGs, Piercing/3 would be good, and LOSE CFP and lower the Shielding.

Right now it is an IFM boat that thinks it is an Assault Cav, It is NOWHERE near fast enough to fulfill that role, especially since the T-hawk has the role covered. If the T-bird is going to be a Fire Support model, make it that way, how many Fire Support Cavs have secondary guns like a T-bird? Forget that it is a SuperHeavy, either it is a Fire Support vehicle OR an Assault vehicle, it can't be both. If the T-hawk hadn't come along, I would be advocating just the speed change so it could do both jobs, but it is too expensive and not specialized enough for the point cost.

If the T-bird were changed to MV8, DV13, Piercing/3, Shielding/2, and lost CFP, I could see 750 as a good point cost, it would still have all the INDIRECT goodies, but be less inclined to try and Hang'n'Bang with an "assault" SuperHeavy.

Increased speed would make it more survivable on the tabletop, and allow it more flexibility while still keeping the intended nature of the vehicle.

 

I still prefer my idea of the Tyrant having two flamers, but I thought of another idea. What about giving it two worthwile main guns, slightly lower MOV, and a DV of 12 or so. It would give players an uparmored version of the Dictator 60.

 

I have to bow out of this one since the Tyrant wins my "ugliest Cav in the game" award. I don't even own one. :blush:

I am still a little surprised it is slower than most Rach designs, since they tend to favor MV over DV.

Never having used one, I have no constructive suggestions.

 

Oh, and one other thing, how come the Terror, Boxer and Slayer never got the RC08 treatment? Or did I miss the updated cards for them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, and one other thing, how come the Terror, Boxer and Slayer never got the RC08 treatment? Or did I miss the updated cards for them?

 

War for Sale. Usable only in a Core Worlds Coalition army - Independent.

 

That explains it, I never picked up WFS.

And now that the cyberattack on Register.com has left me unable to access Mil-Net, I probably never will.

 

:angry::ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do like papabees suggestion of making point blank only 8"--I've always found it a little odd that Rifle Teams can get point blank and a range penalty at the same time. Might need to rewrite how point blank and flamer interact (maybe just drop PB from flamer?), but otherwise I think it would work quite well.

Its actually in the rulebook under Point Blank Zone (pg 87) that Weapon Systems with Rng less than 12" still receive the bonus, regardless of its range band.

 

edit - what I mean to say is that was a planned part of the rules, not just a fluke that came up and we had to create a ruling to cover it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do like papabees suggestion of making point blank only 8"--I've always found it a little odd that Rifle Teams can get point blank and a range penalty at the same time. Might need to rewrite how point blank and flamer interact (maybe just drop PB from flamer?), but otherwise I think it would work quite well.

Its actually in the rulebook under Point Blank Zone (pg 87) that Weapon Systems with Rng less than 12" still receive the bonus, regardless of its range band.

 

edit - what I mean to say is that was a planned part of the rules, not just a fluke that came up and we had to create a ruling to cover it.

 

So a gun w/ range 8 would get a minus 2 plus 1 if they were at 12"? If that is the case I think it would make more sense to say that PB (although I still like 8") would be 12" or the short range band whichever is less. Just my 2 cents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While yes, the Tyrant is rather suckish, I'm not terribly upset by it either as by fluff it'd be the equivalent of trying to use a M60 instead of the M1A2. The Tyrant's production run was from 2249 through 2269. During GW1 the Tyrant was replaced by the Dictator 60 as the attack CAV of choice. By the time GW2 starts, it's OOP and the Dictator 60 is getting long in the tooth.

 

Something you might try with the horrible IFMs mounted on the Tyrant, Dictator 60, and Vanquisher is to use them with a CFP unit as part of a Salvo Fire. It has worked for me in the past.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much s it pains me The Warhawk needs its Chavel III's piercing SA lowered to a 1 instead of a 2 for consistity (I miss my spell check) with the 'hawk VI's as well as make the Lance MK1 look more use.

 

The Warlord and the Knight's C12 IFM need to have the same shredder SA value as well. Currently the knight has shredder/2 while the Knight has shredder/1.

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...