Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 177 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12

Tigershark

 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Sun Jan 22, 2006 11:27 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
Ginger,

We are developing a flying unit in a very new and non-standard list with many abstractions from its 40K cousin. We have to develop the list and its units to the tournament level player standard as guided by Jervis Johnson for games played inbetween 2,000 - 5,000 point levels.

Although I appreciate and recognize your conclusions on the AX-1-0, the fact that you admit to being new to the game and you've stated that you thought all TK in Epic:A is d6 hits vs the varied parenthesis value - is telling of your perspective. Frankly, your current experience level is not what we are developing too. I hope you can appreciate that not - by ANY measure - intended to be an insult, but as a fact of design mentality. No game is designed assuming players won't know the rules or will underplay their list's potential to the point that it becomes suseptable to the enemy army's potential. No car is designed assuming the driver will not be safe. No pill is created assuming the doctor will not follow the recommended prescription levels... etc.

Your and TRC's playtest is valuable because it shows what can happen to the novice of the game when an experienced player tries to apply a bias to a situation. On the other hand, it does not tell us of the Tiger is balanced.

There are many local players that have encountered the IG list and think its over the top. Its broken. The tank co is impossible to beat. The vultures ranges are too long. The roughriders and ogryn are underpriced... etc. We know this isn't true. The IG list is working great and is a list by which many others are measured. The locals continue to grown and have seen what Eldar and chaos can do since anyway!

I can also remember many of them saying it was impossible for Orcs to win. Well, I won't go there - but experienced players will easily state that the perspective is rediculously far from the truth.

Battle reports from equally and experienced veterens utilizing solid tactics while trying to exploit the list's units will tell us if a unit is balanced in the list or not. Asking a novice of the base rules to defend againt the latest developed gauntlet is far from measuring the challenge or threat IMHO.

Cheers,

_________________
Rob


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 12:14 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
Quote (Ginger @ 21 Jan. 2006 (15:36))
OK -

Having now skimmed through the thread to some extent, I gather that the TS stats are based on some "fluff" to the effect that a single ?pilot succeeded in destroying an Imperial Warhound in a single pass!! (presumably being decorated for the feat).



Ginger

Ginger,

I must beg to differ. I realize you are new to E:A and Tau as well, but please realize that we are not basing design of this vehicle off of fluff and one off heroic achievement. Far from it actually.

We've got Forgeworld as a direct guidance of the model and its stats.

From Imperial Armor Volue 3, page 198, TIGER SHARK:


The Tiger Sharlk is the Barracuda's larger cousin. It is a large aircraft deployed in the figher-bomber role. Often encountered flying in support of Tau Hunter Cadres during major operations, it is faster and more manoeuvrable than the Imperium's direct equivalent - the Maurader bomber - but the Tiger Shark lacks the large bomb payload.

Tiger Sharks are never as numerous as the Barracuads, but have many features and systems in common with it. All crew come from the Air Caste, giving them the natural advantage of superior three-dimensional awareness and tolerance for higher acceleration speeds, and more Gs in the turn, than a human pilot. Like the Barracuda, different Air Caste Septs operate slightly different versions. Other Tiger Shark variants have been identified armed multiple burst cannons and seeker missles.

The Tiger Shark's main role seems to be the deployment of drones. Its drone racks can deploy a shower of remote weapons platforms anywhere over the battlefield, as well as strafing with its ion cannons and wing-mounted missile pods. It is armed with ion-cannons and missile pods for ground attacks, and drone-controlled burst cannons for defence against enemy fighters, although a flight of Tiger Sharks will usually also be accompanied by Barracudas as fighter cover.

The aircraft has two crew, a pilot and a navigator/weapons operator. Their cockpit is also an escape pod, which can detach from the aircraft's fuselage and has limited gravitic mobility to bring the crew safely back to the ground.

On taros, Tiger Sharks supported Tau operations as a rapid response force. Flying from well-hidden bases on the Iracunda Isthmus, Tiger Sharks were often the first Tau forces to respond to the Imperial Guard's advances, quickly seeding an area with Drone squadrons, whilst other Tau ground forces were moved into place. Tiger Sharks were the first Tau forces to reach hydro-processing plant 23-30 after the Elysian Drop Troops' surprise attack, quickly reinforcing the garrison with Drone squadrons.

On Taros, the Tau also deployed a new variant of the Tiger Shark. Codified as the AX-1-0, this heavily armed Tiger Shark replaced its drone racks and ion cannons with two heavy railguns and seeker missile array. These massive weapons, usually mounted on the far larger Manta, turn the Tiger Shark into a formidable ground attack weapon, capable of engaging and destroying super heavy tanks and Titans. It is believed that the AX-1-0 was developed as a direct response to the Imperium's largest Titans. Until the Taros Campaign the Tau had few weapons capable of stopping the Imperium's greatest war machines, but the Air Caste and Earth Caste had secretly developed the AX-1-0, and first fielded it on Taros.

During the breatkthrough to the Iracunda Isthmus the Tau unleashed their latest weapon with alarming results. The sudden loss of the Warhound Advensor Primaris to a Tiger Shark attack caused the remaining Titans to be withdrawn from the front line.


Furthermore, from the same book, but page 199:

ORDO XENOS
Max Recorded Speed: 2,100 KPH
Summary: Frontline combat aircraft. Also carries payload of 14 gun drones. Re-Armed variant replaces ion cannons and payload with heavy railguns


For the record, the Imperial Max Recorded Speed is the same for Tau Orca and Tau Barracuda Air Superiority Fighter.

You'll notice we did not make the Tiger Shark a fighter-bomber like the description from Forgeworld details nor did we factor in the air castes ability to drive the plane much faster and better than the Maurader bomber. In fact we made it just as slow and just as hindered by the Epic Armageddon rules of 'bomber' classification.

You'll also notice the vehicle was specifically meant to destroy both War Engines and Titans as a joint effort by the Air caste and Earth caste.

In addition: Same book, 40K rules for the Tiger Shark - page 201:


Ballistic Skill = 4
...
Targetting Array
Decoy launcher
Network Marker Light
Escape Pod
...
Two (not twin-linked) burst cannons
Twin-linked missile pods
6x Seeker Missiles
Twin-Linked Heavy Railguns 108" range, Str 10, AP 1, Ordnance1/Titan-killer
-- sub-munisions shot, 108" range, Str 7, AP3, Ordnance 1/Blast


In 40K, it means it hits on a 3+ with all guns and the twin-linked main gun means you get to reroll any misses with the gun - so yes, it usually hits pretty reliably at ranges greater than a leman russ tank or even LONG BARRELLED HYDRA FLAK TANKS - ironically.

The networked marker light also means that it can mark targets for its own seeker missiles, not having to depend upon other units in the army. In 40K, you have to roll to hit with the networked marker then you roll 2+ to hit a marked target with a missle. Furthermore, in 40K, missles have table-top range.

You'll notice the epic version of the plane does not have near the range nor does it have near the accuracy in Epic. On the other hand, it does have the abstraction of having one more shot with the main gun than the 40K version.

The Ordinance Titan Killer in 40K does mean (d3) hits per hit that the main weapon system has. This is also based upon a game system that has 6-9 turns where a turn is far shorter than what we have in Epic.

As you can see, we've toned down the vehicle significantly to make it fit within E:A... our guidance is not simply from a fluff battle of a heroic event.

Cheers,





_________________
Rob


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 12:59 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 5483
Location: London, UK
Tactica

Thanks for your indulgence, but notwithstanding my ignorance of the TK dice rolling, I believe the rest of my comments are based on statistcs in which my experience, or lack of it, are irrelevant. In essence, TRC's tactic is to place the A/c at 45cms range from a single AA unit, in such a way that AA from any other unit is minimised on the way in or out. (note I mean unit, not formation)

In this way, he won't be hit at all by 30cm AA, and with most other AA, he may suffer a single hit allowing tha A/c to fire with 3x dice which on average will score over 1 hit, resulting in 2x BM, and usually suppressing or destroying the unit. With five "lone" Sharks he will strip the defending AA with 2 or at most 3 A/c - - and the rest, as they say, is history.

Neal H, TRC and others in the thread consider this excessive, so I was trying to suggest ways that you could satisfy them while retaining the "fluff" in your design. In essence you appear to desire some form of futuristic equivalent of the A-10 "Warthog" - a sort of "flying tank" that can take reasonable punishment while seeking out worthwhile targets of opportunity eg Warhounds.

If so, why not consider the suggestion of letting the beast run the gauntlet of AA fire by reducing the TK range, but raising its leathality against Titans (which is the apparent aim) and keep to flying in pairs not singletons - From what I understand the issue being debated is the combination of a "relatively" cheap flyer that has excessive firepower, at long range, and is relatively indestructable. They seem to be asking you to take any two of the qualities, but not all of them.

In anticipation

Ginger

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 1:11 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Tacitca, I think this might be where the problem comes from.  IA3 has represented the AX-0-1 as an uber-aircraft!

I think we need to take a step back and ask if we should be trying to represent the AX-0-1 by going by IA3 40k stats?  I would say no we shouldn't, as it clearly leads to an overly powerful plane.

But what about the fluff precedent set by IA3? I hear you ask... well IMO 40k stats and fluff are entirely optional for E:A stats.  No I haven't gone mad... look at the Space Marine (perhaps THE signature troop in 40k background) SM play completely different in 40k to E:A.  If the space marine can be adjusted to suit the appropriate E:A playstyle, then an obscure unit like the AX-0-1 can certainly be adjusted to appropriate E:A stats.

I have been running some comparisons between the AX-0-1 and the Vampire Hunter (from the SaimHann list).

Vampire Hunter
Type Speed Armour Close Combat Firefight
War Engine Bomber 5+ - -
Weapon Range Firepower Notes
Twin Vampire Hunter Pulsar 30cm MW2+ Pulse, Fixed Forward Arc
Twin Eldar Missile Launcher 45cm AP4+/AT5+/AA5+ -
Scatter Laser 30cm AP5+/AT5+/AA5+ Fixed Forward Arc
Notes: Damage Capacity 2. Reinforced Armour.
Critical Hit Effect: The Vampire Hunters control surfaces have been damaged and it is destroyed.

The Hunter is probably the most powerful ground attack aircraft other than the AX-0-1.  Though I do remember some concern that it too was overly powerful.  It comes in formations of 2 for 500 points.

Some stats..
Average Hits
AX-0-1: AT 0.333333333 AP 0.5 MW 0.166666667 TK 1 AA 0.5
Vampire Hunter: AT 0.666666667 AP 0.833333333 MW 2.106481481 TK 0 AA 0.666666667

Kills against AV with AR 4+
AX-0-1: 1.333333333
Vampire Hunter: 2.439814815

Kills against AV with AR 4+RA
AX-0-1: 1.166666667
Vampire Hunter: 1.219907407

Take into account the current cost difference and against 4+RA the AX-0-1 is more cost effective.

Its often mentioned that we want to avoid rules creep when in development.  But lets take a look at the aircraft  in various lists...

In the book: IG & SM: Marauders and Thunderbolts, Orks Fighta-bommers.  Can't see that any of these are game breaking in firepower.

Swordwind: Beil Tan Eldar: Nightwing, Phoenix and Vampire Raider.  All much more powerful than the previous aircraft.

In development: AMTL: Marauder Destroyer.  OGBM Big Bommer.  BL: Swiftdeath, Helltalon.  Saim Hann: Vampire Hunter  Tau: Barracuda, Tigershark, AX-0-1.  With the exception of the Big Bommer all generally more powerful than the original book aircraft.

We started with low-mid AT/AP values and basic BP.  Then the Eldar added pulse AT and disrupt BP attacks.

Then Saim Hann added MW pulse weapons and Chaos had ignore cover for a while (can't remember if that stayed).

And finally we have the Tau adding TK weapons.

Ok, final thought for this post.  Is it not unusual for an aircraft to mount heavier weapons than a tank?  Should the AX-0-1 not mount a similar calibre weapon to the HammerHead?

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 2:07 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
Ginger,

I respond to TRC's comments and findings from his previous bat reps in previous posts.

Your views appear to be more of the same and come from the same game. Dually noted.

TRC would not go unapposed had he played against a skilled player familiar in the arts of dealing with E:A Aircraft. Not only would said veteren have had more AA on the ground, they might take a compliment of aircraft with which to engage TRC's aircraft from the rear to send his bomber aircraft to the curb in short order instead of attacking ground hammerhead formations with Vampires as first turn activations (further clearing a path for the Tigers). At the same time, hammering his ground forces into the point of submission with assaults would have capitalized on his large investment of air power. Furthermore, the veteren in question would in theory not have as many self admitted mistakes in the game.

I would postulate that these various factors may have an alternate impact to your game results. I may also be completely wrong, that's why I previously said I'll have to put TRC's test to my own playtest.

Regards to the recomendation, I don't want to speak for CS, but the goal as I understand it is to make the AX-1-0 in the Tau list to fill one of a few different gaps. That is, cost effective long ranged quality MW/TK.

If you've read the thread, the goal here is to make minor changes to the plane until its right, but since there was just a change to v4.3.3 - I don't *think* additional changes will be in order for some time until we've received plenty of feedback.

The idea to make it single shot at 3+ and TK(d3) has been tried before, coupling that with reduced range has not yet been tried. However, that is also not in line with the design history of the plane.

I'm not yet convinced that it is *or* is not overpowered in its current (v4.3.3). I'll have to await more playtesting from many more than TRC to develop an oppinion. However, yours, TRCs, and NH opinions will all be taken into account when I formulate my own opinion.

I was hoping to playtest two games this past weekend, but my counterpart had something come up at work at the last minute and caused us to lose the opportunity for saturday gaming at the last minute Friday afternoon. So - perhaps next weekend I'll be able to throw some new playtest data into the mix.

Perhaps yours and TRC's game will prove examplatory, perhaps it will pove to be an abstract of our results. We'll see. :)

Cheers,

_________________
Rob


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 9:59 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 6:40 am
Posts: 423
Location: Duisburg , Germany
Hi,
so yesterday I got a replay match with the Tau and SM list which TRC used. Couple of things to note:
The Marines had no SC or even another  Character in their BTS formation. Same formation is noted as having 1 Razorback ( at least payed for only 1), therefore no legal list as 1 Stand of Infantry would have to walk. Terminators overpriced. In the end they had 100 Points surplus to spend, which would have accounted for another Hunter and the missing Razorback.
For the Game itself :
@TRC - did you use the "New Planned Garrison Rule"?

So we went to game with another Razorback to fulfill Transport Rules - at this time I hadn?t realized that no SC is present. Marines won the Initiative every Turn bud did not help them, as well the Terminator causing severe losses under the Human Aux , the second Termis failed to activate due to second activation and 2 BM. The TS DOMINATED. The first attack run I did against the Whirlwinds , taking 2 Hits - 1 Wound , no critical , destroying the first Hunter and 1 Whirly. The second attack run took care of the second Hunter and 2 Rhinos. The tunderbolts wanted to CAP once but failed and therefore they went on attack runs. The two T-Hawks were utterly destroyed by TS attacks after deploy their Cargo. The only mentionable feat the Marines achieved was breaking my BTS Goal twice. The rest was slaughter. In the End I won 5-0 ( If you count my broken BTS then 5-1 ).

Aftermath: My Buddy definitely said that the TS is strong and should at least go to 4+ ( as in CS?s 4.3.3 ) and the Marine List wasn?t optimal , knowing or not what to face , and he is as experienced as I am. For me it is also Very Strong and I highly recommend to restrict them in a way or another AND keep the 4+ . If not they WILL be abused unless you invest a lot of Points in AA - and this kind of game isn?t much fun.

But , the game against the Guard is pending eventually next weekend. As they have larger formations and more Arty I expect them to do more damage before eventually succumbing to Air Attacks.....

Cheers!
Steele

_________________
Quid pro Quo


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 1:49 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:24 am
Posts: 4499
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Holy crap! how long is this thread?! Can anyone tell me roughly where we are on this so far? Cheers.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 2:50 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 6:40 am
Posts: 423
Location: Duisburg , Germany
Quote (Dobbsy @ 23 Jan. 2006 (13:49))
Holy crap! how long is this thread?! Can anyone tell me roughly where we are on this so far? Cheers.

I would say : Still gathering info and discussing the thing to death.... :/  :p

Cheers!
Steele

_________________
Quid pro Quo


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 5:02 pm 
Swarm Tyrant
Swarm Tyrant
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:22 pm
Posts: 9348
Location: Singapore
And still it continues!  :o0

Anyway, although this thread is very interesting, it has limited value at this point (although there are points which are acknowledged). With the changes made to the Tiger Shark, I do feel that any issues about the revised stat-line should be aired in a new thread, to stop confusion errupting.

_________________
https://www.cybershadow.ninja - A brief look into my twisted world, including wargames and beyond.
https://www.net-armageddon.org - The official NetEA (Epic Armageddon) site and resource.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 5:13 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
Its often mentioned that we want to avoid rules creep when in development.  But lets take a look at the aircraft  in various lists...


Hear, hear!

Although not as extreme as "wizard-hammer" from earlier editions of Warhammer, I see Epic following down that same path.  Just like it was impossible to field a Warhammer army without a Lvl 4 Wizard and expect to win, it's becoming increasingly difficult to field a viable force without massive AA/air cover.

_________________
Neal


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Sun Jan 29, 2006 1:14 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
So should I reply to stuff in this thread or move tot he next with responses to stuff in here? Or just let it drop and see where things are?

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Sun Jan 29, 2006 11:13 am 
Swarm Tyrant
Swarm Tyrant
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:22 pm
Posts: 9348
Location: Singapore
If it contiinues discussion raised in this thread, relevant to the TS before v4.3.3, continue discussion here. If it pertains to TS post-v4.3.3 then you could summarise the points in the new thread.

Thanks.

_________________
https://www.cybershadow.ninja - A brief look into my twisted world, including wargames and beyond.
https://www.net-armageddon.org - The official NetEA (Epic Armageddon) site and resource.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 177 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net