Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 86 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Harakoni Warhawks - v1.5 (20131016)

 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.1 (20110809)
PostPosted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 11:58 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 3:22 pm
Posts: 5678
Location: Australia
ok

I came to catch up on stuff, but you guys write too much.... :-X

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Chaos Squats


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.1 (20110809)
PostPosted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 3:17 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 36685
Location: Ohio - USA
Harakonians ? I've heard that name before ... Star Trek, Star Gate ... or ??

_________________
Legion 4 "Cry Havoc, and let slip the Dogs of War !" ... "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.1 (20110809)
PostPosted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 3:20 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 11:25 pm
Posts: 8843
Location: Worcester, MA
Dune.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2018-05-15


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.1 (20110809)
PostPosted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 3:30 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 6:12 am
Posts: 1331
Location: Australia
that'd be Harkonnen, but yes
not a huge fan of the name, but since they'll be representing my 40k aircav force anyway, i wont have to call them that to myself XD

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.1 (20110809)
PostPosted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 4:29 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 36685
Location: Ohio - USA
Ah ! Knew I heard of them before ! ;)

_________________
Legion 4 "Cry Havoc, and let slip the Dogs of War !" ... "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.1 (20110809)
PostPosted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 6:07 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 7:26 am
Posts: 311
Quote:
how did the salamanders get there?

Primarily they'd have been already on the ground, and actually likely wouldn't be part of the Harakoni regiment. We also know that Salamanders can be carried on Aquila shuttles in a pinch, meaning they're very likely to be transportable by light aircraft, probably Arvus Shuttles and the like. Regardless, I'm not going to be including the Salamanders unless they feel like they're missing from the list.

Quote:
lightly armoured scout force

They're most definitely out there, but I think in general they're beyond the scale of an Epic game. The light infiltrators are probably 2-4 man teams, which makes them unnecessary to model. Basically, the same abstraction that applies to spotters for Indirect Fire would apply here, I think. (This doesn't mean I'm necessarily opposed to a lightly armored scout force, I just feel they'd be pretty extraneous, and wouldn't really fulfill a role at this scale.)

Quote:
1) thats a bit disappointing. i do think the squadrons with MW would work well. they'd basically be slower but drop-able landspeeder squadrons with walker instead of skimmer. they'd take on a dedicated AT role (which is otherwise limited to vultures with oneshot weapons, or strike fighters.
i agree that as a normal sentinels role goes, multimeltas arent the right tool for the job, but in an airborn army, i think they really are. it also rather solidly goes towards finding a useful niche for a formation whose inclusion will otherise pretty much entirely be taken to allow access to the support sentinels added firepower

MM Drop Sentinels are one of the hallmarks of the Elysian list, which I don't want to crowd in on too much. If anything, I'd be more likely to give them Plasma Cannons (plasma being the Warhawks thematic weapon) using the Demolisher template (AP4+/AT4+, Slow Firing)

Quote:
2) Spacecraft crowding

The loss of the GravChute deployment is a pretty significant hit to the list, as it requires you to mount all of your core formations either in Valkyries or in Gliders. The first is expensive, and the second is very vulnerable to heavy anti-air fire. Once a good source of antitank firepower arises, it should take some of the pressure off the spacecraft. I'm also thinking that the Battleship might be best if it couldn't come in on Turn 1, simply due to the devastation it can wreak in the enemy's deployment zone. If I was to pull an entirely new unit out of nowhere, here's where I would do it: some sort of aircraft with a spinal-mounted Volcano Cannon or Neutron Laser Projector. Seems unnecessarily drastic, though.

Quote:
6) Lance attack or Deathstrikes

The Basilisk company works because they're the sort of thing that can be moved into position and fire relatively continuously. Deathstrikes are essentially tactical nuclear shaped charges, and can't really be expected to provide the sort of on-call fire support that an artillery Regiment can. What might work is a "focused barrage" option, where instead of a 6BP basilisk barrage, it becomes a 2BP MW barrage. I do think Lance could be a useful ability to look into, but I'm not entirely certain what would be an appropriate weapon to put it on. It would actually be appropriate for a Plasma Cannon (since larger plasma weapons inevitably hit MW status) but the Demolisher sponsons don't have it.

Quote:
which lunar it is, the normal one or the admech one

AdMech uses the Gothic cruiser, the Lunar is the 3BP/1 Pinpoint one. I forgot to add them in to the summary, but I'll do that promptly.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.1 (20110809)
PostPosted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 10:11 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2005 8:16 pm
Posts: 4681
Location: Wheaton, IL
Here's a list after closer inspection.

Stormtrooper Upgrade - recost to +100? 8 Troopers are 200 in the Steel Legion list.

Fire Support - adding 5+ armor increases their worth significantly from the SL. Perhaps +125?

FAO - great concept, but would it be worthwhile to make it a Character instead of a unit in itself?

Grav Glider - I really like this concept as well, but you have it being used as a throwaway and a reusable in the same list. I would either use it like a WWII paratrooper glider (a metal box to get where you're going and lose) or a helicopter transport (more expensive, but good for infil and exfil). I'd personally like the first, but without free planetfall. That way it's prone to AA fire on the way in, which should keep the cost down. Or you could use the High Altitude Drop as a tow, and allow it to give some number of gliders the GravChutes special rule.

More later.

_________________
SG

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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.1 (20110809)
PostPosted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 10:50 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 7:26 am
Posts: 311
Are you sure you grabbed the newest version? v1.1 actually included a fair number of the changes ;) I've just posted v1.2 up as well.

Core formation has been jiggled around a bit, as have the upgrades.

Fire Support: you're probably right about them needing to cost more points, I'm just a bit uncertain about whether 125 might be too much for an upgrade, when 150 buys you a Sentinel Recon Squadron.

FAO: Character is probably a great idea, and I've incorporated it :)

grav-glider: independent one has been removed, leaving the list with no exfiltration option for the moment. Gliders are for Strike companies only, and Sentinels/Stormtroopers have either GravChutes or the Marauder drop. Self-Planetfall has been shifted to the Valkyries, which gives them an option for deployment that doesn't involve the Onero.

Rug: The Tiger Shark/Gun Drone thing is pretty close, but seems to cater more to a multi-craft transport role. Definitely going to swipe some of the language, though.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.2 (20110809)
PostPosted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 11:43 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2005 8:16 pm
Posts: 4681
Location: Wheaton, IL
No, I was working off v1.0, which was what was available when I had the look last night. Will print v1.2 and look again.

_________________
SG

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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.1 (20110809)
PostPosted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 12:25 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 6:12 am
Posts: 1331
Location: Australia
Signal wrote:
MM Drop Sentinels are one of the hallmarks of the Elysian list, which I don't want to crowd in on too much. If anything, I'd be more likely to give them Plasma Cannons (plasma being the Warhawks thematic weapon) using the Demolisher template (AP4+/AT4+, Slow Firing)


well, i'll admit that i thought that the MM was a "drop sentinel" thing rather than an elysian thing. however, forgeworld do have their "Elysian Drop Sentinel" model which, upon reading, suggests that the ability to fit in valkyries, and have grav chutes, are infact what the elysian pattern does, MMs dont actually seem to be on that list.
however, i do feel that other drop regiments will have access to the same style of sentinel, as they will have need for the same role to be filled, and the same mechanics as to how to do it.

while i very much like plasma cannon armed sentinels (they're my favourite loadout of the new 40k kit) i dont think i'd ever want to bother with such a weapon loadout in epic. a small unit of slow firing LV dudes doesnt really seem like it'll survive long enough to take a second shot. the demolisher has several advantages of it (most notably, survivability, but also 2 shots each) which the sentinels do not have. with stormtroopers to provide scout, i do see myself not bothering with any sentinel configurations. its not worth a 150pt formation that doesnt do much good, to be able to take a vulnerable 200pt formation. and thats a pity. cause i like sentinels for this army.

if you're worried about stepping on the elysian list's Unique Selling Points, well surely "drop infantry" and "will lose pretty much all the time" have that covered. I'd rather trade "will lose" with "multimeltas" and go from there :P

Quote:
The loss of the GravChute deployment is a pretty significant hit to the list, as it requires you to mount all of your core formations either in Valkyries or in Gliders. The first is expensive, and the second is very vulnerable to heavy anti-air fire. Once a good source of antitank firepower arises, it should take some of the pressure off the spacecraft. I'm also thinking that the Battleship might be best if it couldn't come in on Turn 1, simply due to the devastation it can wreak in the enemy's deployment zone. If I was to pull an entirely new unit out of nowhere, here's where I would do it: some sort of aircraft with a spinal-mounted Volcano Cannon or Neutron Laser Projector. Seems unnecessarily drastic, though.


that was my thought on the emperor. as it stands, it's the best option to take specifically because it will unleash so much devestation on the enemy deployment, nicely prepping it for a turn1 air assault via marauder-drop and grav gliders. and i'm not sure that losing planetfall is quite the blow you may think. i hardly ever use it myself, because i like to respond to my enemies plans, not what i think my enemies plans will be in X turns. between the choice of a lack of Anti Engine Firepower and a lack of Planetfall. i see myself losing the planetfall pretty much every time.

Quote:
The Basilisk company works because they're the sort of thing that can be moved into position and fire relatively continuously. Deathstrikes are essentially tactical nuclear shaped charges, and can't really be expected to provide the sort of on-call fire support that an artillery Regiment can. What might work is a "focused barrage" option, where instead of a 6BP basilisk barrage, it becomes a 2BP MW barrage. I do think Lance could be a useful ability to look into, but I'm not entirely certain what would be an appropriate weapon to put it on. It would actually be appropriate for a Plasma Cannon (since larger plasma weapons inevitably hit MW status) but the Demolisher sponsons don't have it.


well, my counterarguement to that, is that a deathstrike can theoretically be fired from anywhere on (or infact, orbitting) the planet, so while a basalisk company can move into position, it also needs to move into position, something that the deathstrikes dont. a 2BP MW barrage is an ok idea. i've done a bunch of numbers on such for my slaughtersword. i would suggest you go for a 1BP barrage instead if thats the route you go, because the difference between 1 and 2 is that 2 is better at killing infantry, but no better at killing tanks. considering the guy is going to want to sustain to be even remotely capable of killing anything, that becomes a 5+ to hit. if you hit a baneblade, you'll get 2 shots at it, which means thanks to armour saves, you've a 33% chance of actually doing a point of damage to it. those are not odds i'd bother with for the points and loss of mobility.

Quote:
AdMech uses the Gothic cruiser, the Lunar is the 3BP/1 Pinpoint one. I forgot to add them in to the summary, but I'll do that promptly.


ah, the army compendium still lists it as a lunar class.
i do still think the spacecraft are un-good for the list (which is, that their weapons are quite useful, but that overflight is what the list 'should' be about, so giving people such good reasons not to take it is a dangerous move)

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.1 (20110809)
PostPosted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 12:54 am 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 10:14 am
Posts: 3416
Location: Western Australia
Signal wrote:
Quote:
1) thats a bit disappointing. i do think the squadrons with MW would work well. they'd basically be slower but drop-able landspeeder squadrons with walker instead of skimmer. they'd take on a dedicated AT role (which is otherwise limited to vultures with oneshot weapons, or strike fighters.
i agree that as a normal sentinels role goes, multimeltas arent the right tool for the job, but in an airborn army, i think they really are. it also rather solidly goes towards finding a useful niche for a formation whose inclusion will otherise pretty much entirely be taken to allow access to the support sentinels added firepower

MM Drop Sentinels are one of the hallmarks of the Elysian list, which I don't want to crowd in on too much. If anything, I'd be more likely to give them Plasma Cannons (plasma being the Warhawks thematic weapon) using the Demolisher template (AP4+/AT4+, Slow Firing)
It should be noted that the Minervan Plasma Cannons are AP5+/AT5+ (with NO Slow Firing).
This is a MUCH easier way to play Plasma Cannons. It gets very annoying having to keep track of multiple, Slow Firing units.

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.2 (20110809)
PostPosted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 1:15 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 1:01 pm
Posts: 2518
Location: California
The Plasma Cannon needs a recheck through the ERC. I remember in the thread to the NetERC they were proposed either AP3/AT6 or AP4/AT6 both with No Slow Fire IIRC. AP5/AT5 Doesn't seem to fit as well.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.2 (20110809)
PostPosted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 2:22 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 7:26 am
Posts: 311
Let's see what the Plasma Cannon discussion comes to (so go add to that conversation!) but keep in mind that I would like to give the Sentinels Plasma Cannons. Sorry Jagged, Multimeltas on the drop Sentinels are straight off the table for this list. I agree with Honda that they're very iconic to the Elysians, and they fit better in a list where they can be part of the core formations.

Lacking significant antitank capability beyond Stormtroopers/Vultures/Aircraft is currently the issue at hand, I'd say. Once that falls into line, the Spacecraft pressure should be relieved a fair bit (I'm going to add a note to the Emperor that it's unable to come in on Turn 1) Other than the Forward Observer (which I'd like to not have as an auto-include) and Multimelta Drop Sentinels (which will not be included :P ) what are some other fluffy means of acquiring Antitank firepower?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.2 (20110809)
PostPosted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 2:53 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 6:12 am
Posts: 1331
Location: Australia
this is my sad face btw. but oh well. i guess it was too much to hope for.

well, then best option in that case would probably be to change the fire support weapons to be multi meltas, and/or to include some fancy aircraft variant (i seem to recall there was talk about the collossus being a BP weapon that inflicted a MW hit on the central target, for bunker-busting)

the problem with things like commissars and demo charges, is they're not at all capable of dealing with something like a russ or superheavy company, and given that the core unit lacks AT firepower, there isnt really a unit with the sustained capabilities to deal with it (vultures, for instance, will kill 2 russ and then be out of shots forever, terrible waste of the formations cost. stormtropers will have not really any more success, although they might get to try again in a turn or two if they rally from the inevitable counterfire)

what is needed, is a dedicated tank hunting formation. in 40k, that would be vendetta squadrons (which we also dont have, why not?) masters of ordinance (not a great choice to be honest) or veterans with meltabombs and demo charges. given the way epic works, we need more a more dedicated unit formation than just "a few guys have CC MW attacks" and we cant really give them ALL it. so our choices become:

a dedicated formation of tank hunters. Vendettas would be the obvious fit, but you'd want something with MW aswell. small "fire support squads" could work here (so like the fire support upgrade, but as a support formation) if we're moving MM sentinels off the cards.

include it within upgrades. allowing attached vendettas (or vultures) or again, giving fire support squads MMs instead of autocannons. perhaps engineers with MW (or even TK) CCWs

Aircraft: we currently have lightning strikes, which can do ok against tanks, but are in a heavily contested area as it is. a marauder 'spooky' variant would do well. give it a (perhaps slow firing) TK weapon of some sort. given the list lacks deathstrike/silos or fire/warp strikes, a turn by turn tkD3 or a slow firing tkD6 mounted onto a marauder chassis would be a good fluff option (and slots nicely into my aircraft fetish XD)

i think a combination of the three would work best. give fire support upgrades MMs, but dont give them a seperate formation yet, include vendettas in the list, as both a valkyrie upgrade, and as a dedicated gunship formation (maybe as an option to the vulture squadrons) and i do really like the idea of a spooky.

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 86 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


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