I disagree with this statement. Had epic shipped without any ground units mounting weapons with a 2+ to hit we'd be having the same conversation about that if we needed to add a weapon that logically should have a 2+ to hit. If the ground game can be balanced with 2+ to hit weapons then there's no gameplay mechanic reason that the same cannot be true for air units.

Don't blame correctly statted weapons for OP units. If the weapon is correct and the formation is OP, then we look at other options either using alternative load outs, different formation sizes, price increases, etc.

I'm perfectly fine with having an Avenger that has crap AA if it means it's good at strafing ground targets. In the case of the Nephilim, I hate to say it, but the ABC isn't the primary load out. It's an option that can be swapped out and perhaps the solution there is to just not include the ABC version or price it appropriately to upgrade the unit.

_________________
-Vaaish

Now you're cooking with gas!

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

_________________
My NetEA Lists:
Fir Iolarion Titan Clan List
Dark Angels List

Always looking to Trade!
Angel's Trade Thread

Bruno
I am not against a limited use of 45cm ground attack weaponry - it is the 45cm AA that is problematic IMO (especially where that is AA4+.) Your views on the Helltalon are news to me and very interesting. However, it is the Hellblade that has the Autocannon. Dropping the AA4+ shot completely from the twin Lascannon on the Helltalon would remove all AA capability from the Helltalon, which is probably unacceptable.

I would far rather use split stats which allows greater flexibility when modelling the weaponry, and stats possibly looking like this:-

I would also recommend the use 'split' stats for the 'Long-barrelled' Autocannon on the Lightning like this:-

And I would even suggest more imaginative use of arcs of fire to represent agility eg

Wingtip Lascannons 30cm AT5+ / AA5+, FxF
. . . . . .OR . . . . . . . 15cm AA6+, RF
. . . . . .OR . . . . . . . 15cm AA6+, LF

This retains the firepower in the front arc, but also simulates the aircraft turning left or right and getting a fleeting AA shot on enemy attacking them. However, I also realize this approach bulks out the list in a way that may not be acceptable

I certainly agree that ERC should be driving this, so I share your frustrations and your concerns whether there will be an 'official' revamp.

I also share your pain about the Nephilim, especially since you apparently did not want it in the first place. It seems that virtually every list designer gets to go through the same pain over aircraft (eg the Tau AX-1-0 tiger shark). Unfortunately, since there are no 'principles' or 'guidelines' written down, it is up to nuisances like me to point out the issues and desiderata.

Note I am a 'fluffy-phobe', so do not know the 40 details. However, from the comments in this forum, the AMB seems to be a titan weapon that has been modified to be carried by aircraft. As such it is still a large and heavy weapon designed to attack ground targets, so it belongs on a Fighter-Bomber at best and quite possibly ought to be restricted to bombers only. Fighters need to be armed primarily with AA weaponry (which may have a ground component) rather than weapons that are primarily designed for attacking ground targets. This, coupled with the manoeuverability, power and range, and the formation size all combine to make it OTT (as others have commented elsewhere).

Finally, revamping the entire aircraft stats to reflect the current 40K stats would be a 'labour of love' that would need to review all the aircraft and ground AA units and weaponry, and potentially many other ground weapon stats as well - potentially re-writing a core part of the game. This is not really practical

_________________
My NetEA Lists:
Fir Iolarion Titan Clan List
Dark Angels List

Always looking to Trade!
Angel's Trade Thread

Might even of been quicker in retrospect!

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

It's my lot in life. Strong opinions and thick skin do that to ya.



Nothing except that it seems currently to be severely OP in the DA though not necessarily because of the AMB stats. I'm not really up on the state of the DA list myself though.

Technically, the ABC and the AMB on the Nephilim aren't the same weapon. They source the same fluff but have slightly different names and the AMB is inexplicably weaker with different ranges than the ABC. Most probably they were supposed to be the same weapon but instead of making the AMB a paid upgrade for the Nephilim, GW changed the FW stats. I say that since it doesn't really make sense otherwise to have two weapons that are described the same but giving them different stats.



This is true. For all intents and purposes its a Vulcan Mega-bolter that's been chopped in half and mounted on an airframe. However, it's pretty clear that the airframes it goes on are fighter sized since the Avenger is about the size of the Lightning. That means Fighter-Bomber is appropriate though larger craft (at least I think it's larger hard to tell) like the Fire Raptor might need bomber classification since they mount the somewhat awkward Twin Linked Avenger Bolt Cannon (really FW, wouldn't that just be a regular VMB?)

_________________
-Vaaish

As the 'human' member of the ERC I have zero interest in rebooting all the aircraft to match their ever changing 40k stats, as long as a unit works in game and is at least representative of the fluff then fine.

Regarding this debate as a whole I don't see what edict from on high you want, the debate here is civil with pertinent points on both sides. There is no proposal with widespread support to look at. The thread is serving it's purpose by having discussion about and highlighting ideas and issues about aircraft stat design and creep. Furthermore the list design process is working,at least in this area, with testers flagging up concerning stats to their ACs

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion

Indeed, and it looks as if we are building towards a consensus that the avenger can keep the AMB, as a fighter bomber, and the nephilim can swap for the lascannon for an AA craft, with limited stats to keep it from being mega powerful.

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list

The unit being disproportionately powerful relative to how it should be compared to existing aircraft (which are often toned down, sometimes significantly) is a problem, though you seem not to want to recognise it as such. Don't be so pedantic about the 40k rules similarity between the Vulcan Mega Bolter and the Avenger Cannon, the existing epic norms and balance are much more important and it should be toned down in translation.

Playtesting isn't the be all and end all - getting the unit stats right in the first place is very important. A list designer could invent a Warhound variant with weapons overall as powerful as the main weapons on an Imperator and cost, playtest and balance it from there. Such a unit could be balanced to perfection while still being wildly inappropriate.

Didn't I recently read a batrep that was utterly dominated by ground attacking Nephilim?

_________________
- Ulrik

Yeah I wrote one of them....

Also guys if Glyn is telling you to calm down about matching 40k stats accurately that is a pretty good barometer that you're maybe being a teensy bit anal about it....

_________________
Just some guy

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator

Saying it's a problem enough times doesn't make the argument any more valid. Show how it is and I'll recognize it as a problem. Right now there's been a distinct lack of showing despite the Avenger basically trading Tbolt AA for AG capability. Obviously the situation is a bit more fluid since the Avenger gets the most dice when going against AT or mixed formations. (3.3 hits if split AP/AT, 2.64 against AP, and 1.98 against AT. compare to the Thunderbolt: 2.66 hits if split AP/AT, 1.66 vs AP, 1.32 vs AT. Both aircraft squadrons throw 4-6 dice)

Since we're going in circles with all this, I'll just say it straight up. The Avenger Bolt Cannon stats aren't changing, they are appropriate for the weapon they represent evidenced by epic standards (shells the size of a VMB should have AP3+/AT5+ defined by core rulebook titans), fluff defininitions (the weapon is one half of a VMB), and 40k stats further bear evidence that this is correct though they aren't used to directly stat the weapon. If that makes the Avenger too good, we'll further reduce it's AA capability (currently 1/2 of the Thunderbolt), but as of right now there is ZERO indication of any verifiable issues with the unit especially since it pays a 50 point premium for effectively dropping an AA hit for an AG hit.

_________________
-Vaaish

I'm sorry but that is a ludicrous stance

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion