Tactical Command
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

Vindicator
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=73&t=7708		 Page 1 of 10
Author:  Lion in the Stars [ Sun Oct 15, 2006 6:04 am ]
Post subject:  Vindicator
As long as I'm dreaming, I'd like a MW firefight attack, FF4+ (MW).  A Vindicator is the ultimate short-ranged infantry removal tool, even Termies are unlikely to survive.  It's also highly capable of smashing AV14 vehicles.  Roll 2 dice, pick the highest, and I need a 4+ to affect you?  No problem.

Barring that, Thunderer cannon, Extra Attack +1.
Author:  Warmaster Nice [ Sun Oct 15, 2006 10:53 am ]
Post subject:  Vindicator
I'd be even more extreme and say that the Vindicator might qualify as a very short range TK weapon (something like 15-30 cm max range). It'll give it a very distinct role in the army and help the marines with some extra anti WE capability.

Apart from that it of course still need the speed upgrade discussed elsewhere.
Author:  Hojyn [ Sun Oct 15, 2006 11:07 am ]
Post subject:  Vindicator

(Warmaster Nice @ Oct. 15 2006,10:53)
QUOTE
I'd be even more extreme and say that the Vindicator might qualify as a very short range TK weapon (something like 15-30 cm max range). It'll give it a very distinct role in the army and help the marines with some extra anti WE capability.

Apart from that it of course still need the speed upgrade discussed elsewhere.

Yes, I'd love to see the Vindicator with TK, short range, and a speed upgrade.

This is an excellent idea and would be an appropriate fix to the Marines' lack of TK weapons.
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Sun Oct 15, 2006 2:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Vindicator
The vindicator is armed with the same Demolisher cannon as a Leman Russ Demolisher / BaneBlade's secondary weapon?

So if you give the Vindicator a MW FF attack, you have to give the two IG tanks MW FF attacks too.

Personally I'd up the FF to 3+, and drop the price of the upgrade to 50 points.
Author:  Warmaster Nice [ Sun Oct 15, 2006 2:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Vindicator
The gun itself may well be the same but perhaps the ammunition used is different? Since the Marines are supposed to be he very elite of the Imperial army it is not unreasonable think that they may have access to exotic ammunitions like special armour piercing rounds, melta warheads etc. which may be so difficult to manufacture that it wouldn't be available to the IG.

In the SM2 system the Vindicator had an awsome save modifier of -3 which makes it almost as powerfull as a Volcano canon or a Plasma Blastgun although the range was shorter. Now of course that was before the introduction of the Leman Russ Demolisher. At that time the Baneblade wasn't armed with a Demolisher Cannon either.

In Epic40k The Vindicator had a firepower value of 3 (the highest of any marine tank) compared to the Demolsher's 4 firepower. Of course you then have to take into account that this reflects the added Plasma sponsons and Hull Mounted Lascannon on the Demolisher.


I thik that an important note to bear i mind is that GW fluff is never consistant. It reflects whatever is needed to make a unit interesting and "sell" it.
Most notable is the story about the Hellbore. Although it was never intended to bear any weapons it was decided that the unit stats should have some guns added because the marketing guys didn't believe they would sell enough of a unit which wasn't able to shoot.
Anyway I digress; If the Vindicator doesn't work the way it is now I think it is not unreasonable to consider modifying the fluff slightly to make it a more interesting and characterfull unit in the army.
Sometimes I believe it is necessary to disregard (or at least bend) the 40k fluff. That fluff was written for a smal scale skirmish game and thus doesn't always make sense if you upscale the battle to involve large engagements between actual armies - Heck: The Dreadnought makes no sense at all from a military perspective but it is a realy cool idea for a skirmish game. However most people here agree that the unit doesn't work very well in an Epic scale battle. ..And let's not even get started on how much sense it makes to have an army of just 1000 superwarriors and half a dozen tanks make any difference in a real war... :p :D :;):
Author:  Lion in the Stars [ Mon Oct 16, 2006 12:47 am ]
Post subject:  Vindicator
Note that we explicitly do NOT have to give the IG tanks the MW FF attack if we rename the gun that Vindicators are armed with.  Also, look at FW's bits packs:  There's different ammo for Demolishers and Vindicators (there's our fluff justification), just like there's different ammo for Vanquisher cannons and Battle Cannons.

It's easy to make that change to the fluff (actually, it's just an addition to the fluff) and say that Marines use special/different ammo than the IG does.
********************
One thousand 'superwarriors' and 4 tanks have changed many battles, just by showing up offshore.  A thousand Marines (US variety) and 4 M1A1 tanks is a Marine Expeditionary Unit.  The locals tend to stop squabbling when a MEU comes over the horizon.
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Mon Oct 16, 2006 1:00 am ]
Post subject:  Vindicator
Specialised ammunition is good enough a justification for a MW FF attack on the vindicator in my opinion.
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Mon Oct 16, 2006 4:36 am ]
Post subject:  Vindicator
No, TK is not justified.

MW could be though, I believe.
Author:  Dwarf Supreme [ Mon Oct 16, 2006 2:57 pm ]
Post subject:  Vindicator
I agree, MW is justifiable. As Warmater mentioned, it did have a -3 TSM in SM2, and it also ignored cover.
Author:  Bombot [ Mon Oct 16, 2006 5:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Vindicator
TK is too good.  I thought the Marine list needs a tweak, not a shot in the arm.
Author:  jfrazell [ Mon Oct 16, 2006 8:44 pm ]
Post subject:  Vindicator
TK would be two steps above the IG version. ?Thats substantially out of wack and you'll get some severe pushback from guard players because of that.  I think the Thunderer option would be more palatable.
Author:  Lord Inquisitor [ Mon Oct 16, 2006 9:47 pm ]
Post subject:  Vindicator
+1 EA doesn't make a lot of sense (it doesn't hit a bigger area)

FF3+ is out of whack - the Demolisher has FF3+ and it has all those other weapons.

TK is too much.

MW, on the other hand, is good. Personally, I've always felt the Demolisher cannon is kind of pants in Epic, I think that MW4+ would be fine for both Vindicator and Demolisher.

Sure, that'll require repointing Demolishers, but if you have to up the cost of Tank Squadrons, why not?

The Demolisher will have a reason to get inside that 30cm range (as it is, the Demolisher is not much better than the sponson weapons!), and Vindicators will have a purpose in the SM list AND give the SMs some MW attacks they've been wanting.

Lord =I=
Author:  Lion in the Stars [ Tue Oct 17, 2006 5:26 am ]
Post subject:  Vindicator
Why would our change to the cannon on the Vindicator have to change the cannon on the Demolisher?  Just change the weapon name on the Vindicator, and leave the Guard list alone.  

If we don't rename the Vindie's weapon, we'd end up giving the Baneblade 3x Macroweapon FF attacks!  I really don't think that the Baneblade needs that much of a boost, even if the Demolishers could use a boost.
Page 1 of 10 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/