Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 4 of 10
  [ 148 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 10  Next

Vindicator
Nothing new 10%  10%  [ 3 ]
Upgrade FF by 1 to 3+ 19%  19%  [ 6 ]
Change weapon to Thunderer Cannon and give +1 EA 19%  19%  [ 6 ]
Something else, see below 52%  52%  [ 16 ]
Total votes : 31

Vindicator
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Vindicator
PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:09 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
Fluffwise you can possibly begin to justify ignore cover, but the weapon itself doesn't have ignore cover in 40k, while Flamers etc still do.

I think it should be playtested at MW4+, and if it's found to be not good enough, then it can be tested further with ignore cover added back in.

*We need a Marine Champion* :)

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Blarg D Impaler
 Post subject: Vindicator
PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:35 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 9:08 pm
Posts: 356
Location: Beavercreek, Ohio, USA
I went through some of the Baneblade posts from over a year ago on the old SG Forums, and it appears that the idea of giving the Demolisher cannon a seconf FF attack died out, with the possible replacement idea being to give the Demolisher cannon the ability to make all FF attacks the Ignore Cover ability.

One of the interesting things I noticed was that there were a couple of posts that said "Hey, look what they are doing over on this army forum..."  If there were an army champion for the Adeptus Astartes that could coordinate with other army champions...

_________________
I shot a Deathstrike Missile and destroyed an enemy titan in my pajamas last night. ?How it got into my pajamas I still don't know...
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Vindicator
PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:43 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
Personally I think the ForgeWorld version of the Baneblade is a good place to start, and then perhaps modify the Demolisher cannon to MW4+ from there.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
consectari
 Post subject: Vindicator
PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:43 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 7:36 pm
Posts: 946
Location: On the Ohio river, USA

(Evil and Chaos @ Oct. 19 2006,11:09)
QUOTE
Fluffwise you can possibly begin to justify ignore cover, but the weapon itself doesn't have ignore cover in 40k, while Flamers etc still do.

I think it should be playtested at MW4+, and if it's found to be not good enough, then it can be tested further with ignore cover added back in.

I know you can't completely throw 40k out the window when dealing with Epic, but it isn't a rulebook you MUST go by.

I think what's being overlooked when trying to justify it having ignore cover when it doesn't in 40k is that the Epic Vindi ALREADY HAS ignore cover.

You aren't trying to justify giving it something it doesn't have, just justify keeping it when you've given it another tweak.

*We need a Marine Champion* :)


Any experienced marine player/epic rules lawyers care to volunteer?

_________________
Understand this: that skag and his floozy...they're gonna die
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Vindicator
PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:50 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
Any experienced marine player/epic rules lawyers care to volunteer?


I'd volunteer, but only if I was allowed to petition the ERC for the inclusion of the MM dreadnought! :D


I know you can't completely throw 40k out the window when dealing with Epic, but it isn't a rulebook you MUST go by.

I think what's being overlooked when trying to justify it having ignore cover when it doesn't in 40k is that the Epic Vindi ALREADY HAS ignore cover.

I agreed this is a salient point, one which might leave a reworked Demolisher with MW5+ ignore cover, but then that doesn't seem all that powerful now does it?

Remember that MW does replicate the biggest effect of ignore cover (That being denying cover saves to low-armour infantry)[/i]. All you're getting above that is ignoring the -1 to hit, which could possibly be too powerful. Anyways as I was saying, MW status has siegebreaker abilities built-in.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
consectari
 Post subject: Vindicator
PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 5:39 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 7:36 pm
Posts: 946
Location: On the Ohio river, USA
My biggest problem is that once you get the Vindi within range, it HAS to kill it's target, or it's gone.  It's now so close that if it misses, it will be assaulted and wiped out.  

When you consider that it's going to double to get there, it can't afford an additional -1 to hit mod from cover.

MW only helps if you actually hit your target.

We're trying to make it an effective choice for the marines.  

How much more effective would the Vindi be if it had MW 4+ ignore cover than a standard Leman Russ which is cheaper?

_________________
Understand this: that skag and his floozy...they're gonna die
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Vindicator
PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 5:52 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
I was also considering how a 4+ MW ignore cover would behave on a LR Demolisher / Baneblade, not just the Vindi.

On a Demolisher chasis especially, it would be too powerful IMHO.




_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
consectari
 Post subject: Vindicator
PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 6:33 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 7:36 pm
Posts: 946
Location: On the Ohio river, USA
I still think that a way can be found to avoid making changes to the IG list if we change the SM Vindi.  

How else can it be made into a viable option without unbalancing another list entirely?

_________________
Understand this: that skag and his floozy...they're gonna die
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Lord Inquisitor
 Post subject: Vindicator
PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 7:56 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 1216
Location: Norfolk VA USA
Personally I think the Demolisher cannon should have appropriate stats for every army, and the IG list can withstand a little tinkering. What we really want to know is if the IG people think it could work.

As for Marine Champion, all you need is someone to compile the changes and make some decisions, right? Well, I don't mind doing it if noone else wants to, but I'd suggest Neal for that - he's been compiling the changes so far, he's ERC and very experienced.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
consectari
 Post subject: Vindicator
PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 8:29 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 7:36 pm
Posts: 946
Location: On the Ohio river, USA
Changes to a list with little complaints could be stirring up trouble.  Of course, I don't play with the guard, only against them, so meh.


I checked the SG forum & it appears there have been no posts from the IG champion since 6/19/06 (his only post).  This may not be a bad thing, but it could mean a new IG Champion would be needed to make changes to that list.

I say, fix the Vindi and consequences be damned.  :D

So with new stats, should the Vindi stay 300pts for a formation or try it at the new 275 level?

_________________
Understand this: that skag and his floozy...they're gonna die
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Vindicator
PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 9:55 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
As for Marine Champion, all you need is someone to compile the changes and make some decisions, right? Well, I don't mind doing it if noone else wants to, but I'd suggest Neal for that - he's been compiling the changes so far, he's ERC and very experienced.


That depends on what we want the Marine Champion to accomplish.

If his task is just 'make every unit useful in air assault' (because that's all the current SM list is focused at) then we probably need only an 'unofficial' champion to compile the list of changes.

If the Champion's task was to modify the Marine list so that it works with other themes than air-assault (Infantry-based, Armour-heavy, etc), then that would require a Champion, because the current list is obviously unsuited to being modified towards this purpose.


I'd prefer the latter, because the current air-assault optimised bias doesn't truly reflect Marine's multi-role aptitude (And the rulebook list is meant to be a multi-role list after all, heh).




_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
The_Real_Chris
 Post subject: Vindicator
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 8:01 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
Vindicator
To make equal to pred it needs
+5cm (so 25cm speed)
add small arms, ignore cover to the Demolisher (that is not an extra attack mind)
Thick rear armour (for urban ops)
Walker (from the big dozer blade)

Then pred - medium tank
Vindicator - urban assault

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
The_Real_Chris
 Post subject: Vindicator
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 8:30 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
Isn't there something in 40k (perhaps an old cityfight book) about up armouring the vehicles for urban combat.

I think if I were an assault tank expected to operate int he massive urban areas of the imperium (think Stalingrad) I would be up armouring myself pronto.

CC5+ would be nice, but I can't think how, and would be nice probably ain't enough. Having it as a monster when attacking in FF should be fine. this way its damage from shooting and FF is roughly equal, which I feel appropiate for this assault vehicle.

As a siege guard commander four of the above pouring shells into the trenches and supporting their marine friends would be bad news. Hell one of my regular guard infantry companies in cover wouldn't want them nearby.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 4 of 10
  [ 148 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 10  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 33 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net