Marine Armoured variant list v0.1 |
|
Antipodean Ork
|
Post subject: Marine Armoured variant list v0.1  Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 11:29 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
 |
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 12:59 am
Posts: 15
Location: Brisbane
|
|
Out of interest, why have the 'fluff' as to no thunderhawk transports, then specifically add a thunderhawk transport formation with the war engine ruling, as well as landing craft, to me this makes a mockery of the concept!
The idea of a (slightly cheaper) armoured column, supported by teleporting terminators for use on the 'hard targets', and bomber but not airlanding support, is very WW2.
I like the way the armoured formations have been balanced at 3 - 6 "armour" vehicles.
A layout question - should the term not be "armour" (which is the same term for some tanks or many, as in this case) instead of "armours" ? And you should update the PDF with the note about the tacticals - otherwise you will continue to get questions over it.
I am not in a position to playtest, as I have no predators (two formations of land raiders and one of vindicators lurk in my transporter trays), but if there are mad keen marine players in Brisbane, I am happy to play against them!
Andrew
_________________
Epic gaming in Brisbane, Australia? Email me!
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
Evil and Chaos
|
Post subject: Marine Armoured variant list v0.1 Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:48 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
 |
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
|
|
It seems to me than an armour-themed marine army is the best (and possibly the only) place to put the variant marine armoured vehicles. It seems daft to leave them out.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Evil and Chaos
|
Post subject: Marine Armoured variant list v0.1 Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 2:20 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
|
|
The Helios at least has a fully-gw conversion that takes about 40 seconds to make.
I'm sure most of the others could be done simply with GW parts too.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Antipodean Ork
|
Post subject: Marine Armoured variant list v0.1 Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 9:43 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 12:59 am
Posts: 15
Location: Brisbane
|
|
to quote the quote... "
(Antipodean Ork @ Feb. 07 2007,12:29)
QUOTE
Out of interest, why have the 'fluff' as to no thunderhawk transports, then specifically add a thunderhawk transport formation with the war engine ruling, as well as landing craft, to me this makes a mockery of the concept!
I don't understand this bit."
Second page... special rules... "No thunderhawk with transport" and "Thunderhawk is only used as bombers" which appears in the paragraph immediately below the rule about the thunderhawk transporters. It seems contradictory.
If want to replicate a ground force column, why have the aircav at all?
Alternatively, put the spacecraft, thunderhawks (of all types) and landing craft into the 1/3 points category in the same fashion as aircraft and titans. It will limit Titan support, but is that a bad thing in a list of this nature?
Andrew
_________________
Epic gaming in Brisbane, Australia? Email me!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Evil and Chaos
|
Post subject: Marine Armoured variant list v0.1 Posted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:21 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
|
|
I recomend you pick the Iron Hands as the chapter for this list (They're famed for using a lot of armour).
They also use plenty of Dreadnoughts and normal Thunderhawks however.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Antipodean Ork
|
Post subject: Marine Armoured variant list v0.1 Posted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:48 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 12:59 am
Posts: 15
Location: Brisbane
|
|
The Land Raider Helios - I see players have tried it with a whirlwind launcher (1BP, 45cm indirect fire) replacing the twin linked heavy bolters.
Should there be an increase in cost for a Helios? Say, 25 points each, to cover the range boost compared to the heavy bolters, and the huge increase in artillery survivability and general purpose flexibility compared to whirlwinds?
I mean, they retain their TL- lascannons, and gain another AT weapon (even if the AP firepower, when range is not considered, appears to remain roughly the same).
Just early morning thoughts, before I go for caffeine jolt #2
Andrew
_________________
Epic gaming in Brisbane, Australia? Email me!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
