Tactical Command :: View topic - Marine Armoured variant list v0.4

(The_Real_Chris @ Apr. 08 2007,03:04)

One question - so why no LR Crusader? Stats are fairly simple and every chapters got it.

Land Raider Crusader
Armoured Vehicle, move 25cm, save 4+, CC 6+ (E&C suggests 5+), FF 5+
Twin assault cannon, 30cm, AP4+/AT4+
Multi-melta, 15cm, MW5+ AND Small Arms, Macro-weapon
2x Hurricane Bolters, (15cm), Small Arms, Extra Attack (+1)
Notes: Reinforced Armour, Thick Rear Armour, Transport (may carry two Terminator units OR three of the following units: Space Marine Tactical, Devastator & Scout units). The Multi-melta can shoot and be used to confer the macro-weapon ability to the unit?s base firefight attack, not the additional hurricane bolter attacks.

(The_Real_Chris @ Apr. 08 2007,04:21)

I dissagree. FF4+ gives it the same fire fight as a baneblade.
6 twin bolters, 1 twin assault cannon, multimelta and hull mounted frag launchers(?)
vs
'Mega' Battle Cannon, Demolisher Cannon, 2 lascannon, autocannon, 3 twin heavy bolters

The baneblade seems to have an edge

FF5+ (3 attacks) gives the crusader roughly 2/3's of a baneblades firepower (FF4+, 3 attacks), which seems about right, though of course most consider the baneblade undergunned.

(Hena @ Apr. 08 2007,06:29)

(The_Real_Chris @ Apr. 08 2007,06:04)

QUOTE

One question - so why no LR Crusader? Stats are fairly simple and every chapters got it.

I've left LR Crusader for the Black Templar list so far. But now there is two persons wanting it. You and E&C

Author:	Pulsar [ Wed Mar 28, 2007 9:00 pm ]
Post subject:	Marine Armoured variant list v0.4
looks good, needs a play test (hint hint Battle report )

Author:	nealhunt [ Mon Apr 02, 2007 3:43 pm ]
Post subject:	Marine Armoured variant list v0.4
I haven't been following this closely, so forgive me if some of this has been discussed. The point values all look pretty good, but I think the organization of the list could be better. Rather than having a mandatory "+ an upgrade" in the upgrades section, any mandatory choices should be included in the basic units. Also, instead of tacking on an "infantry" upgrade, I would have a basic "Tactical" formation that includes armor. That would give you 2 distinct formations that were either armor or mixed armor/infantry and cut out a lot of "if/then" kinds of function in the army list. To illustrate: Tactical formation 4 Tacticals, 2 Preds Armor, Hunter, Land Raider, Razorback 325 That gives you a combined armor/infantry formation. Then for an armor-only formation, you can just make your basic formation 4 units for 275, and the Armor upgrade 1-2 @ 75 each (or 2/150, or whatever). That gives you almost all the same formation options without all the questions that the "must take an upgrade" and the "either-or" formatting leaves. You lose only a small amount of flexibility - basically a formation of just infantry and LRs wouldn't be possible - for much more clarity in how the list works. You could either add a Transport rule like the White Scars list, requiring that all SM Tacs have transport, or you could include "+2 Rhinos" in the Tac formation. The former uses existing force org rules. The latter is more explicit and avoids all the Rhino/Razorback/LR/Transport weirdness. Of the two, I would suggest the "+2 Rhinos." ==== Edit: With the Tac+Pred formation I suppose you would also be unable to do 2 Tacs/1Rhino as an add-on. What is the purpose of that? Just to give armor formations more resistance to assaults? It doesn't seem that it would be much of a loss as far as list flexibility.

Author:	The_Real_Chris [ Sun Apr 08, 2007 4:04 am ]
Post subject:	Marine Armoured variant list v0.4
One question - so why no LR Crusader? Stats are fairly simple and every chapters got it. Land Raider Crusader Armoured Vehicle, move 25cm, save 4+, CC 6+ (E&C suggests 5+), FF 5+ Twin assault cannon, 30cm, AP4+/AT4+ Multi-melta, 15cm, MW5+ AND Small Arms, Macro-weapon 2x Hurricane Bolters, (15cm), Small Arms, Extra Attack (+1) Notes: Reinforced Armour, Thick Rear Armour, Transport (may carry two Terminator units OR three of the following units: Space Marine Tactical, Devastator & Scout units). The Multi-melta can shoot and be used to confer the macro-weapon ability to the unit?s base firefight attack, not the additional hurricane bolter attacks. Copied from batrep I haven't looked at/tried the bomber but a point of comparison would be marauders. It is tougher, slightly less firepower, better initative, slighty less AA defence. That suggets maybe 275 points assuming the marauders go to 250. The Helios I have tried as an 50 point upgrade and it was okay (I can see one being added to every LR formation however! ).

Author:	Markconz [ Sun Apr 08, 2007 4:23 am ]
Post subject:	Marine Armoured variant list v0.4
(The_Real_Chris @ Apr. 08 2007,03:04) QUOTE One question - so why no LR Crusader? Stats are fairly simple and every chapters got it. Land Raider Crusader Armoured Vehicle, move 25cm, save 4+, CC 6+ (E&C suggests 5+), FF 5+ Twin assault cannon, 30cm, AP4+/AT4+ Multi-melta, 15cm, MW5+ AND Small Arms, Macro-weapon 2x Hurricane Bolters, (15cm), Small Arms, Extra Attack (+1) Notes: Reinforced Armour, Thick Rear Armour, Transport (may carry two Terminator units OR three of the following units: Space Marine Tactical, Devastator & Scout units). The Multi-melta can shoot and be used to confer the macro-weapon ability to the unit?s base firefight attack, not the additional hurricane bolter attacks. Good, but FF4+ surely (especially seeing as standard LR are likely going to 4+)? Crusaders are made for FF: At close range, 12 twin linked bolter shots, 4 twin linked assault cannon shots, multimelta (with machine spirit for reroll), plus hull mounted frag launchers (have a somewhat abstract assault function for transported troops in 40k). CC 5+ probably makes sense too.

Author:	The_Real_Chris [ Sun Apr 08, 2007 5:21 am ]
Post subject:	Marine Armoured variant list v0.4
I dissagree. FF4+ gives it the same fire fight as a baneblade. 6 twin bolters, 1 twin assault cannon, multimelta and hull mounted frag launchers(?) vs 'Mega' Battle Cannon, Demolisher Cannon, 2 lascannon, autocannon, 3 twin heavy bolters The baneblade seems to have an edge FF5+ (3 attacks) gives the crusader roughly 2/3's of a baneblades firepower (FF4+, 3 attacks), which seems about right, though of course most consider the baneblade undergunned.

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

Marine Armoured variant list v0.4 http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=73&t=9046	Page 1 of 2

Author:	Markconz [ Sun Apr 08, 2007 5:39 am ]
Post subject:	Marine Armoured variant list v0.4
(The_Real_Chris @ Apr. 08 2007,04:21) QUOTE I dissagree. FF4+ gives it the same fire fight as a baneblade. 6 twin bolters, 1 twin assault cannon, multimelta and hull mounted frag launchers(?) vs 'Mega' Battle Cannon, Demolisher Cannon, 2 lascannon, autocannon, 3 twin heavy bolters The baneblade seems to have an edge FF5+ (3 attacks) gives the crusader roughly 2/3's of a baneblades firepower (FF4+, 3 attacks), which seems about right, though of course most consider the baneblade undergunned. Yes you may be right in this comparison, but I thought the Baneblade was being considerably upgunned? FF3+ (for baneblade and demolisher)? +1 EA FF ignore cover? http://www.specialist-games.com/forum/t ... IC_ID=9630 Not sure where those proposals are all at though.

Author:	Markconz [ Sun Apr 08, 2007 7:33 am ]
Post subject:	Marine Armoured variant list v0.4
(Hena @ Apr. 08 2007,06:29) QUOTE (The_Real_Chris @ Apr. 08 2007,06:04) QUOTE One question - so why no LR Crusader? Stats are fairly simple and every chapters got it. I've left LR Crusader for the Black Templar list so far. But now there is two persons wanting it. You and E&C . Well for what it is worth I also think it should be in there.

Page 1 of 2	All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	The_Real_Chris [ Sun Apr 08, 2007 5:57 am ]
Post subject:	Marine Armoured variant list v0.4
I think it is, but not to that extent. Currently the weapons fit is poorer than the above, most think going to that, plus I think giving the demolisher small arms ignore cover, is enough. A quick comparision before and after would be Current tank. Battle Cannon, Autocannon, Demolisher Cannon, Heavy Bolter, 2 Lascannon. Proposed tank. 'Mega' battle cannon (awful name, stats undecided, prob MW4+ or hopefully instead AT3+/AP3+), Autocannon, Demolisher Cannon (with small arms ignore cover, big boost for assaults vs infantry), 3 twin Heavy Bolter, 2 Lascannon.