Why?

Right now the Predator Destructor is slightly worse than a Vindicator (Yet costs more).

Strikes me as this is an invalid objection to the idea of FF3+ Pred D's. There's no need to upgrade Vindicators in any manner, they're now fine. Saying they're tied together in any manner makes no sense.


I disagree. You'll still be left with a tank that's worse than a Vindicator under most circumstances (Not the least being it can't take cover in woods/ruins). In other words, Pred D's would remain as they are now: Never taken.

I mean, just think about it: 4x Pred D's for 250pts, or 4x Pred A's for 275pts... noone who didn't want to actively try and lose their game wouldn't find the extra 25pts for a Pred A formation.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

And just to count opinions, currently:

- 5 for testing the Pred D. with FF3+ (E&C, Simulated Knave, Morgan Vening, Angel of Caliban, Athmospheric)
- 2 proposing other ideas to do with formation composition (TRC & Ginger), since they think FF3+ isn't good enough.
- 1 wants a 25pt points cost reduction for Pred D's, leaving Pred A's as they are (Hena).

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

In their defence Devs are both a mixed INF/AV target and the AV's have armour 5+ in a 275 point formation.





Haha! At least, after years of waiting I get to triumpth on a point of GW lore!

Does no one remember the first predators with their transport capacity of a fire team?!

Indeed I have an early/pre heresy list that features just such a beast (and whirlwinds could to) that I occasionally play with and tinker.

And for that matter this was even mentioned in the ForgeWorld space marine vehicle catalogue (IA book).



Sorry I was suggesting mixing the two in a formation which I realised whilst writing would mean the 'optimised' choice of 3 vindicators and 1 predator.


Its a change, both the NETEA and EPICUK lists allow predators and land raiders to take hunters - in practice its added the annihilator/hunter formation to lists.


I'd noticed that devs in thawks seemed to have died a quiet death. They now feature mainly in pods, as motorised support/AA or as an alternative BTS in high activations low cost armies.



Varient mech/AV marine lists do use this mechanism, though normally with a non ideal vehicle (so say sallies can get 2 incinerators added to a destructor formation).

And yes, if we had the split armour save (did 1st ed have that or just for CAF?) we would have a lot more fun. (Hell reduced save Russ would mean reduced point russ and maybe a viable formation!)

E&C, I understand what you are proposing. You are trying to make the Pred D more attractive as an AP choice over the Pred A as an AT choice. Fair enough, but going from FF5+ to FF3+ is a big jump, and probably a bit too far. So I can understand what Hena is saying, and given a comparison with Leman Russ and LR, FF4+ is probably about as much as you can reasonably justify.

However, this debate is somewhat moot if the formation is not picked at all or if it is combat ineffective due to casulaties. So, I still maintain that we need either a larger formation, or some other means of improving the formation resilience.

My primary concern is in pitching the cost of the entire formation at the right point in the list (so with and without upgrades). Here I also agree with Hena that it is likely to be difficult to get this right. The point about including the 'upgrade' within the base cost is purely a means to help balance the cost process. Doing this means you can pitch the formation cost independantly of it's content. Either way, IMHO 275pts - 325 pts for the total formation cost is the point to aim at. Whether that is a single cost, or a base formation + upgrade is then an easier debate.

That would be a big jump, if we hadn't already been testing it at FF4+ for years (Which we have)... and seeing it under-perform with FF4+.

The logical next step is to try FF3+, IMO.


Nothing would be stopping you adding a Hunter, or a Vindicator (Which matches the AP bias of the Pred D's nicely), to the formation.

Pred A. formation with 1x Vindicator would be 325pts at current costs, or 350pts with a Hunter (Though the Hunter matches much better with the Annihilators).

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Would you say the Pred D and Vindy were on par as a 50 point upgrade? I would certainly prefer adding D's to my units than Vindies though.

At current stats, I'd rather have a Vindicator as an upgrade to infantry formations as it can use its Walker ability to take cover in woods/ruins alongside the infantry.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Ginger:



I'm not sure Variable armor would be necessary. The anomalies have a lot less to do with RA and a lot more to do with the fact that armor for vehicles appears to have stopped at 4+RA - I can't find an Imperial vehicle with 3+ or 3+RA, even though both make sense in several situations (the Russ would be good as 3+ if the Raider is 4+RA, for example, or even with the Raider at 3+RA - a move I would support). If you took vehicle armors down to 3+ (thus opening up a larger range), things'd get a lot more rational very quickly.



I do wish you'd answer the original question sometime... Do you think FF3+ would make them as good as the Predator Annihilator, ignoring the question of whether Predators generally are OK, and keeping in mind they're currently FF4+?



Bad idea. Making them more expensive won't make them more attractive, as I've elaborated on earlier.



Doesn't feel right to me, IMO. The other formations are all one type.



This could work decently (though 75 might be a better charge. Or 125 for two).

I will not be out-contentioused.

* * *

Hena:



OK. Please explain to me why this is so.

Because from where I'm sitting, the Predator Destructor has a completely different weapons fit to the Vindicator, and thus no change would be compelled.

The Vindicator remains with an Ignore Cover AP/AT weapon and Walker. That's not a particularly awesome niche, but it is one. Especially if the Predator is kept as a separate formation and the Vindicator remains as an upgrade.



Sure there is. Basic formation is 4 Destructors for 225. Replace two Destructors with Predator Annihilators for +25 each time.

Boomshakalalaka.

* * *

TRC:



You sneaky devil. Well done.

The Predator Reallyoldinator.

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread

I would want the pred outside with the rhinos taking the first shot on the better armour. In cover it can be ignored if the firing formation targets units not in cover.

(Which ia trick some people fall down to in regards to ME fire - the infantry touch the vehicle opening up the transports to be toasted.)

I tend to regard Rhinos as likely dead after their first move. I don't think having a single ablative Predator would save them.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

With a pred and a razorback (and then even a hunter) to take the hits I can keep those rhinos alive!

If say a guard company was firing at me on sustain its 5's for the infantry and 5's for the vehicles - 7/3 hits, which will probably not spill over onto a rhino with a pred and razorback in the formation with a fair chance one of those two vehicles will survive.

A Guard company isn't the kind of thing you shoot at vehicles. Tanks kill your Rhinos, or AT infantry, or aircraft.
It's a very rare game where my Rhinos survive the game.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

I'm not so sure about FF3+.

Given that infantry are often in cover, which reduced ranged to-hit but not FF, a 33% increase in FF hits is a big change in its likely battlefield role. It's already edging into all the dynamics of assault formations (like the never-ending air assault considerations) and this pushes it deeper.

Consider 4 Destructors at FF3+ versus 4 Devastators + Razorback (275 points each). There aren't very many situations in which I'd rather have the Devs - some, but not many.

The Destructors will die faster (No way to hide in cover from incoming shots), and break faster (Due to having only 4 units instead of 7). Once broken, they're easier to get hackdown kills on (Again, because they can't hide inside cover).


Earlier in the thread TRC seemed to think that Devastators were still the better tool for most jobs:
viewtopic.php?p=373184#p373184


Overall I'd say it's a wash, and because of that FF3+ is definitely worth testing, because clearly FF4+ hasn't worked.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter