Cw,
For the record, Its AX-1-0 (per forgeworld) not ...0-1.
Sorry.
| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| Tigershark AX-0-1 Poll http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=5531 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | clausewitz [ Mon Jan 23, 2006 7:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Tigershark AX-0-1 Poll |
Since the Tigershark thread has become very long and difficult to follow I thought I would start a couple of new threads to discuss it. The purpose of this poll is to gather an idea of whether people are currently happy with the stats. ?Some may wonder why there is no "I dont know" or "Subject to playtesting" option in the poll, the reason is that those options dilute the results of a poll with a small number of people too much. ?So please pick which option represents your opinion best. ?Further polls could be made to make further delineation if required. Please save comments and discussion for the Tigershark discussion thread. So the poll is Are the current stats for the Tigershark AX-1-0 balanced? So thats with the Railcannons as 2x 45cm 4+ TK(1). Cost 175 points for a formation of 1 AX-1-0. |
|
| Author: | Tactica [ Mon Jan 23, 2006 7:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Tigershark AX-0-1 Poll |
Cw, For the record, Its AX-1-0 (per forgeworld) not ...0-1. Sorry.
|
|
| Author: | Steele [ Mon Jan 23, 2006 7:29 pm ] | ||
| Post subject: | Tigershark AX-0-1 Poll | ||
I can?t tell for sure if its balanced , one thing I recommend is to restrict it a way or the other at first and playtest this again before changing it?s stats again , which seems better after CS?s changes. So far I would tend to say that it is balanced , for a WE Hunting Monster. Cheers! Steele |
|||
| Author: | clausewitz [ Mon Jan 23, 2006 7:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Tigershark AX-0-1 Poll |
Doh, I will edit the poll. Thanks Tactica. |
|
| Author: | Tactica [ Mon Jan 23, 2006 7:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Tigershark AX-0-1 Poll |
Cw, No problem.  Regards to the poll, I'll refrain from answering until I've developed an opinion on the v4.3.3 version. I don't think we have enough 'current' v4.3.3 data to make a decision, and I've personally not played any games with v4.3.3 TS AX-1-0 yet. So not ignoring, just waiting until I can intelligently respond. Cheers for the poll, |
|
| Author: | clausewitz [ Mon Jan 23, 2006 7:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Tigershark AX-0-1 Poll |
No problem Tactica, just wanted to get the ball rolling as the other thread had become bogged down. |
|
| Author: | The_Real_Chris [ Sun Jan 29, 2006 12:59 am ] |
| Post subject: | Tigershark AX-0-1 Poll |
Just point out it ain't a WE hunting monster, that would have one shot with d3 damage.  I guess my biggest and really only beef when you get right down is the range. If it was 30cm tk shot then i reckon you could point it accurately, 45cm means I can dodge flak to my hearts content. |
|
| Author: | Steele [ Sun Jan 29, 2006 2:39 pm ] | ||
| Post subject: | Tigershark AX-0-1 Poll | ||
Hi, clarify please. Just with a random damage is it a WE hunting Monster? Cheers! Steele 
|
|||
| Author: | The_Real_Chris [ Sun Jan 29, 2006 5:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Tigershark AX-0-1 Poll |
Yes. If the shadowsword was 90cm 2+ TK it would be a long range anti RA sniper. If it had D3 damage (as it does) it becomes a WE killer as they have multiple points of damage. Generally multiple TK/MW hits slice up heavy infantry and vehicles, whereas multiple damage weapons are good against point WE targets. |
|
| Author: | Steele [ Sun Jan 29, 2006 8:46 pm ] | ||
| Post subject: | Tigershark AX-0-1 Poll | ||
Ok, now I got it. Single shots with multiple Damage are only real dangerous to multiple DC Units - in contrary to multiple single damage shots which kill/damage with the amount of shots taken. Cheers! Steele |
|||
| Author: | The_Real_Chris [ Mon Jan 30, 2006 2:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | Tigershark AX-0-1 Poll |
Yes You are better shooting TK shots against say Leman Russ in an Imperial army - there ever kill is a degrading of firepower, conversly a unit with one big hit would go after the big targets as here 1-2 hits isn't enough to knoc the WE out. Generally I get whatever has a chance to kill something in one turn to try and kill that target. In the case of Tigersharks I'd need 2-3 planes to kill a SHadowsword whereas if I only had say 2 availible I'd be tempted to go after Leman russ and other high value point targets as here ever kill reduces the enemies firepower and ability to return the favour. |
|
| Author: | Tactica [ Mon Jan 30, 2006 7:26 pm ] | ||
| Post subject: | Tigershark AX-0-1 Poll | ||
Completely disagree with this sentiment. See latest batrep. For the record, I've still not decided whether the plane is balanced or not, but am collecting data and developing an opinion. |
|||
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|