Yes last time i posted the stats uhm...4 pages ago

This is what we are discussing now:

Space Marine Storm Talon Gunship
Type Speed Armour CloseCombat Firefight
Aircraft Fighter 5+ n/a n/a
Weapon Range Firepower Notes
Twin Assault Cannon 15cm AP4+/AT4+/AA4+ Forward Arc
Twin Heavy Bolter 30cm AP4+/AA5+ Fixed Forward Arc

Formation of 2 for 200pts.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Stats look fine to me. I'ma gonna go build myself one. :-)

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Inclusion in DA or BT will need extensive testing as it negates a major list weakness.

Also 3+ intercepting tends to produce complaints

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

It's not allowed to be taken by either of those armies in 40k at this time.

The only army allowed it in 40k so far are Codex Astartes Space Marines*.



*Note that includes a lot of fairly codex-adherent armies like White Scars and Salamanders. But it certainly excludes Dark Angels, Black Tempalars, Blood Angels, and Space Wolves.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

I could include the Storm Talon in the Salamanders list for testing.
Perhabs Storm Eagle too. After all FW painted it in Salamanders colours

The 3+ on intercepts come sonly inplay if the Storm Talon approaches to 15cm. A range which transport aircraft usually have some kind of defensive* AA (exepction is the Vampire Raider) while at 30cm no aircraft has defensive* AA.

*that's AA that doesn't shoot only in the Fixed Forward Arc.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

I don't want this to come across as having a dig, it's not intended to, but I get a feeling you don't play a lot of games of Epic.

Fighters don't just "CAP" and intercept transports they also go after all other flyers too, some have good AA cover a lot don't.

Some players already fly fighters into the 15cm range of transports especially if like the T/Hawk they can be kept to just 1x5+ attack.

3+ on CAP and Intercept has already caused concern on other Aircraft in the game, lets learn from that and not waste 6 to 12 months testing it on this aircraft.

For me, if the BL proposed stats are adopted but with AA5+ on the twin assault cannons and 2+ initiative I'd say we are ready to go with testing.

AA5+ would require a re-naming of the weapon - not heinous, I suppose.

Mind you I think AA4+ is much more a psychological threat than a real one - A pair of Thunderbolts vs a pair of Stormtalons you're talking about 2 hits versus 2.3 hits at 15cm range, or both the same at 1 hit at 30cm range.

It's hardly a game changer... not like it has lance or 45cm range or something (both of those being on lots of commonly accepted aircraft - Razorwings, Lightnings, etc.).


Dark Eldar fighters have 2 AA5+ shots, one of which has Lance, both at 30cm range... more dangerous IMO due to range and power to nobble Marines, and I've never heard a word against them.


The pilots are Marines so initiative 1+ is a must IMO.



As we well know, that was also tied with a range of 45cm. And that was the real kicker - that Hell Talons could stand off at comparatively long range, outside of AA bubbles, and generate hits.

I maintain that where you're forcing the aircraft to get within 15cm to shoot, 2.3 hits versus 2 hits is going to be good at what it's intended to be (It's called the "Stormtalon Interceptor" after all), but not the best aircraft in the game.

Especially so when the Stormtalon is worse at Mixed or AT ground attack than a Thunderbolt.

Ie: There's a trade-off going on for that extra 0.3 hits & a pip of armour - higher cost and lesser ground-attack utility.
Unlike the Chaos Helltalon, which is simply good at everything and probably priced a tad too cheaply to boot.

Still, despite all that, Helltalons are hardly ruling the gaming tables at tournaments, are they?




What I'm trying to say, is that "4+ is too good" is a way of looking at things that isn't really taking in the full picture.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Why ? as far as I know there isn't an official Assault Cannon with AA already, if anything giving it an AA attack of any kind even 4+ would need a name change.

There is an un official aircraft mounted Twin Assault Cannon on the Marauder Destroyer in the Elysian list. It has AA4+ (not Ap or At stat as it is purely defensive).

And no weapon needs a name change only because it has an AA value. Mounting it on an aircraft or ground AA-unit is enough to give it an AA value. After all Twin Heavy Bolters on Razorbacks and Thunderhawks doesn't have different names on the Razorback and Thunderhawk.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Both NetEA and EUK have planes with twin assault cannons having AA4+
Name changes not normally nessesary when adding AA when mounted on a plane - see Thunderhawk, Thunderbolt, Marauder etc.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

I am with dptdexys on this; while AA4+ on a bomber may be an appropriate defensive armament, it is not valid on Fighters or Fighter-bombers because of the +1 gained for CAP and Intercept. As I have said before, IMO the Hell talon stats are 'broken' in this respect.

We really need to stop the 'arms creep' right here, otherwise the presence of AA4+ on this A/c will be used as an argument for further A/c to use it.

Personally, I'd actually like to see the +1 intercept go. It was not in the rules originally and I think it would do us a lot of good to remove it. I think it puts too much emphasis on aircraft.

I'd go with AA5+ and have no objection personally to just keep it called a twin assault cannon despite the different stats.

Remember that aircraft profiles in epic are derpowered translations of their 40k versions and to maintain consistency and comparative balance between aircraft this should be the case for new aircraft profiles too. Take the example of the Thunderbolt - the Epic one only has a Storm Bolter and a Multilaser for guns, whereas the 40k one has quad autocannons and twin lascannons. Or the Epic Thunderhawk missing it's twin lascannons, say. The literal translation from 40k should be toned down in the epic way to remove the objectional 3+ intercept, though initiative 1, as for all other SM aircraft, is appropriate.

I concur with Dobbsy that we stat it as the interceptor it is described as and not concern ourselves with how it looks. SM have very advanced, powerful engines and strong alloys and materials and to them aerodynamics are unimportant compared to other priorities. It's different to contemporary real world military, just as painting your armour bright colours rather than camoflage is, but both are fine and make sense in context.

Init 1+, Fighter, Armour 5+, ATSKNF is a pretty big improvement over Thunderbolts, even without AA4+. They're slightly weaker on AT attacks (but that's not the main role).

How many points would a pair of these be? 250?

To be fair, this is untrue. The fact of the matter is that the core Thunderbolt is a "legacy pettern" based on stats from previous editions of Epic, and older models of said Aircraft. In the meantime the 40k version has been significantly upgunned.

Current aircraft are usually being inducted at stats appropriate to the 40k version. This does lead to a mismatch where just about every aircraft is accused of being "better than a Thunderbolt", largely because they are better than the TBolt included in the core rules.

But let's be honest, a modern TBolt is one of the more overgunned models in 40k. It would have :

2x Twin Autocannon (30cm AP4/AT5/AA4, FxF),
1x Twin Lascannon (30cm AT4/AA5, FxF) - however, the Lightning's Wingtip Lascannons were specifically downgraded to keep from competing with the TBolt so a higher AA could be justified (I used the correct AT and the AA from the Lightning),
1x Underwing Rockets (30cm AT4, FxF) - 45cm if the Marauder Destroyer's Hellstrikes are used.

I don't know the solution to this problem - we can modify the TBolt to match current fluff, or modify every new aircraft we add to keep from stepping on the TBolts toes. Neither is very palatable to me.

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.