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 - v1.2 (20110809)
PostPosted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 7:17 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 6:12 am
Posts: 1331
Location: Australia
ok, i did a little more thinking on the spooky.
basically its a marauderisation of the AC130U, and the A10 warthog.
Volcano cannon, on an off-centre line running the length of the marauder, replacing both its foreward lascannons, (thats where the gun comes out) and the bomb bays (thats where the coils go)
i kinda like the idea that they work in pairs, or that they work in tandem with a spotter plane of some sort. (a mixed bomber/figherr formation would be neat, i've been considering the option for my harbinger to buy an escort that activates along with it)

anyway, the loadout would be something like this: WE/AC Bomber, 5+ N/A N/A 1x Volcano Cannon, 45cm AT2+ TK(d3) FxF 2x twin heavy bolters 15cm AA5+
(i actually like the idea of it being a fixed left arc weapon, but thats perhaps a little weird. the range is because it should have some degree of stand-off to avoid having to fly head on into flak before completing its mission, and the AT score is because unlike the shadowsword, its distance and targetting can only lock onto larger signatures)

overall, i think it'd probably be worth 200 points, compared to a shadowsword, it has: greater ability to 'find' its target. less range, inability to sustain, less targetting potential for its main gun, greatly increased vulnerability (DC2 and a 5+save instead of a 4+ save) and less useful secondary armaments. plus it's operating in a high value section of the list. honestly, i'd consider it is probably only worth 175, but baby steps eh?
overall, its not as good a choice as two deathstrikes (because it will take 4 turns of successful activations to do the equivalent of damage, not to mention that deathstrikes will drop a high value target immediately in turn 1, not take till turn 4 to do so, the deathstrikes unlimited indirect fire makes it both more accurate and more able to 'find' its target (where as the spooky would have to get into flak zones from time to time)
so it fits in a niche similar to a shadowsword, with a greater freedom of movement, but much increased vulnerability. i like it.

also, for 'proper' names, i propose either Ares (greek god of war and weapons of war and razing cities and other such nastiness) or either Thor Or Odin (pretty much every norse god was also a war god, but those two are the big ones. and it fits with valkyries too, i reckon "Marauder Ares" is the best one though)

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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.2 (20110809)
PostPosted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 9:03 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 1:01 pm
Posts: 2518
Location: California
Hi..... There lots of things about the list I like that others have covered but here are some questions/thoughts for the rest of the list.

Strike Company and Upgrades

1) Do the Warhawks in the Strike Company have Gravchutes? Because I don't see them anywhere.
2) Why Free Stormtroopers in the Core fortion? Why not just a cheaper 4 unit add?
3) Artillery Officer. Maybe just have it a Battery instead of a Company and have BP3, then you could have it at 50 or 75 pts with no 0-1 2000 restriction?
4) Fire Support Teams. Maybe give them Missile Launchers or something more mobile or different that the standard Autocannons?

Support Formations

1) Sentinels. Why are the Sentinnels formation numbers so odd? Why not 4+4 or 6+4 or 6+2? I mean 6+3 is odd.
2) Support Sentinels. If they stay Rocket Pod ones then I would suggest them matching stats to the Elysian list. But making a different Support Sentinels with Plasma or something could be fun. I'm planning on doing it when I make my Ice World Plasma IG Regiment list.

Allies

1) Emperor Battleship. Why no Slow and Steady? Did the ship change when support other lists? Odd.
2) Should rename the Lighting Squad to Fighter Squad since there T-Bolts in it now. By the way I do like seeing a mix formation. However are the Lighting Status unified yet?
3) Why not use another Marauder variant form FW AI line for both the Drop Plane and for the Onero?
4) LineBreaker. Why Conquerors and not Demolishers?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.2 (20110809)
PostPosted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 8:21 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 7:26 am
Posts: 311
Thanks AoC, this is a good sort of list to address (I'll get to you in a bit, Jagged)

Strike Company and Upgrades
1) GravChutes are a formation-level status, not a unit-level one. If you choose the Valkyries as your mandatory upgrade, then the company does not have Gravchutes. The other two options, however, grant the ability to deploy from the Onero. If you check the Skyborne special rule, it says "all Infantry and Light Vehicles in a formation with GravChutes gain Planetfall." :)
2) I'd like to find a good threshold to delineate the difference between core formations with Warhawks, and those with the Veteran Stormtroopers. (I call them DropStrike and StormStrike companies in my head :P ) A greater number of Warhawks gives you more bodies and more AP firepower, whereas the Veterans give you Plasma Guns and a nasty Firefight value. The quantity of each and the points totals are still a bit fluid, but that should help clarify the three core roles of the Strike Company: Numerous Drop/Glider Warhawks for serious AP fire; Valkyrie-borne Air Cavalry; and elite tank-busting/Firefighting Veterans.
3) It might be beneficial to drop it down to a Battery. My worry with the ANGLICO liaison is that he should provide a nice barrage punch when needed, but he shouldn't be present in many companies, and he shouldn't invalidate the Support Sentinels as the primary source of BP. Desiring to keep him rare is the reason for the high points cost and the restriction, and the 6BP was to make him still worth taking despite those restrictions. :) The usage I saw for him is primarily during the initial drop: Support Sentinels are likely not in a position to provide good Indirect Fire to soften enemy hard points, and so the ANGLICO liaison can call in fire on the target that the rest of the team is engaging. Slow-firing means that Turn 2 would see an absence of those barrage assets, but they'd become available again just in time for the last-turn push. I'd actually be somewhat tempted, if they became cheaper, to make them have access to only a One-Shot barrage. It'd be easier to track than Slow-Firing, and would allow the strike to still mean something.
4) Definitely a good thought, but with the profiles being the same I just left them as they were, since it saved me a line of text :P I'll go ahead and throw it in, since it does add to the feel of the list.

Support Formations
1) Sentinels operate in squadrons of three vehicles. Since a 3-strong formation is a terrible, terrible thing for any units expecting to see front-line combat, I had the base formation be two squadrons working in concert, with the option to assign a third. (I also had Command Sentinels in the 0.x incarnation of the list, but I pulled them off as probably unnecessary. It would have allowed you to deploy a 10-strong Sentinel group. (Technically they should be deployed in 3-vehicle "troops," with the full 10 being a squadron, but in the fluff the 3-vehicles are always referred to as a squadron, so...) Since there are limited cheap ground formations in this list, the Sentinel pack was supposed to play the role of one.) Once we settle on a statline for Plasma Cannons, I'll be looking at including them in the Reconnaissance Company, probably only as a portion of the total though, not 9-10 walkers with Plasma Cannons.
2) As far as I know, the Elysian list hasn't settled on stats, has it? I see this list as needing some BP from somewhere, and I snagged the Support Sentinels for that purpose. If the Elysians go to the 2xAP5+/AT6+ Indirect (is that what they're looking at?) I'll probably drop the Support Sentinels (rather than having a conflict) and go to my original thought, which was a reskin of the Krieg Heavy Mortar as a 75mm Pack Howitzer, of the type used by the 1st Airlanding Light Regiment at Arnhem. Of course, the WW2 paratroop regiments didn't have light scout walkers, and I figured having the more mobile Sentinels would be better than the largely immobile Heavy Mortars. Not opposed to going back, it just means that your artillery would have to be dropped exactly where you need it.

Allies
1) (Keep in mind that it is being bumped back halfway, so it can't be used on turn 1) In my experience the Emperor Battleship basically never gets used, because of Slow and Steady. The price increase and the loss of the Pinpoint attack already covers the increased bombardments. As well, due to the nature of the Warhawks and their status as a Drop/Shock Regiment, they'd be far more likely to extensively coordinate their attacks with Naval support. Essentially the Battleship still has Slow and Steady, but it gets a 1-turn head start, because the Harakon troopers give it advance warning and then time their attack with its approach.
2) You're absolutely right, I forgot to change the name to represent the full extent of its integration. What do you mean by "are the Lightning Status unified yet?" Are you referring to the Lightning from the Adeptus Ministorum list clashing with the Elysian one?
3) Well, partially because there aren't any ;) The only two Aircraft not represented in this list are the Marauder Colossus with its huge FAE, and the Marauder Vigilant, which seems to be a mix between AWACS and a dedicated command aircraft. (I guess the Arvus and Aquila shuttles aren't represented either, but there's not a great role for them)
4) Because Conquerors don't get a whole lot of love in general, and they're able to keep up with the Chimeras. The Linebreaker is supposed to represent armored assets from an allied contingent that has risked being cut off from the main front in an attempt to strengthen the foothold offered by the Harakoni drop. Demolishers are short-ranged siege tanks, and although they (and Thunderers) were almost assuredly instrumental in facilitating the mechanized company's advance towards the drop zone, they would have remained behind in order to consolidate their gains, while the fast-moving Conquerors drew escort duty for the infantry.


Jaggedtoothgrin;
I was actually thinking something more along the lines of the Boeing YAL-1 as the model, as the AC130 variants tend more towards a Close-Air Support role than the Volcano Cannon. The 105mm cannon is really either an AT4+/1 BP weapon, ala the Earthshaker. As far as naming goes, Ares/Thor and the like actually follow the naming conventions of Land Raider variants (see: LR Achilles) more than the Marauders, which are Destroyer/Vigilant/Colossus. I'd be more like to favor something like the "Marauder Aggressor" or even hop back to the AC130H inspiration and go with the "Marauder Spectre." Regardless, however, I think we need to hold off on introducing such a potentially game-changing craft for a bit, until we can balance out the rest of the list. Once that's done, we can see what a TitanKiller Marauder can do to unbalance things. (actually feels somewhat like the Tau AX-1-0 Tiger Shark a bit)

I'd kept Vendettas out of the Strike Companies because they seemed like an unnecessary complication to an already difficult-to-balance formation. I actually came to the same conclusion as you last night, about needing a dedicated tank-hunter formation. Vendettas really seem like the optimal choice, but I'm thinking Missile Launchers are better on the Support Squads in general, since they're currently used to extend the threat range of the drop companies beyond the 30cm Heavy Bolters. I'm going to go hog wild here, and throw in the Baran Sappers to represent the dedicated tank hunters of the Warhawks. Essentially going to grab the nasty and common 40k unit, Veterans in Vendettas with Demolitions (and Carapace Armor, since this is a Warhawks list) and an included Tech Priest unit as the leader of the formation. This squads going to replace the Stormtrooper Platoon, as it's pretty extraneous in the current list. They probably should replace their Heavy Flamer with Meltaguns, but unless it seems entirely necessary, I'll let their Meltabombs suffice for now. (Although it'd be interesting to have their Firefight value be "Ignore Cover OR Macroweapon," but that's probably a bit too much.)


EDIT: v1.3 is up


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.3 (20110810)
PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2011 1:49 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 7:26 am
Posts: 311
Okay, so right now there's a couple issues on the table that need to be addressed:

1) Strike Company: Between Warhawks and Stormtroopers, which should be the "Free" option, and which should be the bulkier option? Right now you can get +4 Warhawks and +2 Stormtroopers for 325 points either way. You could alternately have +4 Stormtroopers for 300 points or +8 Warhawks for 350 points. Does that seem right?
2) ANGLICO/Forward Observer: Slow Firing or One Shot for his bombardment? Keeping in mind that the Support Sentinels should be providing the regular preparatory bombardments.
3) Demo Specialists: Do these fulfill the needed antitank requirement?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.3 (20110810)
PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2011 12:19 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 6:12 am
Posts: 1331
Location: Australia
well i got a game in like i had hoped
of sorts.

my opponent was minervans, and to save the suspense, i got absolutely curbstomped. a small part of this was terrible activation rolls (in turn 1, my supcom didnt show up, one of my marauders full of engineers didnt show up, and neither did one of my lightning strike formations) a part of it was poor decisions on my activation order (i should have assaulted before i dropped my valks, so the valks could drop their disrupt shots on the hopefully broken tank company, not in order to prep the assault, of course, then my engineers didnt activate anyway, so yeah)
part of it was poor matchup with my deployment (my main drop zone, with a combined drop of 2 strike companies with storm troopers, 1 engineers regiment, and my BTS strike company with valks and vultures, happened to be a few CMs away from where he then placed his reaver titan and baneblade company)
part of it was poor rolling (when i finally got an engineer squad into the titan (i took 3, first dropped with the army and scattered out of range, the other took the other flank to try to kill the tank company and failed to activate) i rolled terribly)

but most of it came down to two things.

Demo Specialists do not have sufficient might to take on a serious quantity of heavy armour. if i'd rolled better, i would have taken out that titan, but only after a very concerted effort to do so (vultures, engineers, strikes, strikes, marauder, engineers all activated, or tried to, to bring me into a positon to be able to kill it)
both myself and my opponent agreed that engineers wont cut it against any serious number. now, my opponents army was a very RA heavy army (2 russ companies, 1 baneblade company, 2 shadowswords and a reaver all chewing up the pavement, thunderbolts that quickly decided not to show themselves, deathstrikes, salamanders, and 2 artillery battalions)
i had 3 engineer squads, 2 in marauders, one in the main drop. like all the vehicle-less infantry, they scattered to the four winds and turned intoa a complete cluster$%#$, and the marauder ones rely on an unreliable retain due to being unable to air assault from the marauder

now, had i rolled better, i could have killed the titan, and maybe even the baneblades (but vultures arent a very good AT against 4+RA until it's broken) but then my engineers would have been stuck footslogging it to the other side of the table (which meansmore vendetta instead) and those two tank companies would have still rolled me. i was able to put the pressure on very hard all game (or all 2 turns worth, i gave up on turn 3 when i had about a third of my army left, most of it in aircraft, and i'd killed a total of 9 things, 3 of which when my onerohit his two basalisk formations at the start of turn 1)

the other thing was that rolling to scatter formations of 8 infantry was a massive pain (cause you have to scatter the units individually) i shudder to think what would happen if i'd taken infantry upgrades.
doing it with multiple formations into the one main drop zone was such an experience that i intend to never do it again. i will be buying valkyries (which means without a dedicated stormtrooper formation anymore i wont be taking them ever) so i have half as many scatters to contend with, and a reformation potential to actually do something once i'm there

aside from the truly horrific failure (which is representative of an air assault gone wrong, yes, but not a gameplay experience we want to replicate) the army performed much as i'd hoped. it put a great deal of pressure on the player, even while failing miserably to kill anything, self-planetfalling valks and vultures (btw, vendettas are lacking it, is that intentional? i assumed no, but it didnt matter, as i'd left them at home this time) where very cool, even if vultures are pretty terrible once they've blown their wad over the enemy tanks and not killed a damn one...

i think the marauder transport thing worked well (aside from the need to then activate the engineers) and felt fairly balanced (i wouldhave quite liked the bombs when i was dropping infantry, so going without for the turn seemed like a good trade) and the strikes and interceptors handled themselves quite well. the oneros strike was good, and overall the list worked largely as it should. i think with a few tweaks, we may well have a winner here.


so my advice is this. Give Gravechutes the space marine drop pod rule. Basic infantry scattering takes AGES and is invariably a complete $$#!@storm once you're done (my dropped infantry where wiped out down to 1 commissar who hid in a cathedral)
these guys are supposed to be pretty good at this sort of thing, and without it, i'll not see myself ever taking an oneros over one of the other spaceships. dropping in valks was fine (infact, i tended to roll better on the valkscatter actually) but the basic trooper drop is a nightmare.

let the marauder transport drop be an air assault (but with an addendum that the marauder itself does not participate in it)so as to let engineers actually assault things without forcing a retain

and give us a serious run on the marauder spectre. it would probably not have turned the tide on this battle, but it would have given me the options to hold back some engineers to see how the army developed. i could have sent them against the superheavies, or titan, and while those tank companies would have been a serious problem, i'd have had engineers i could have taken a swing at them with

i'd like a pure stormtrooper formation to remain in, because i really like stormtroopers, and wont be taking them as upgrades anymore otherwise

i'd like to see the vulture squadrons be given the option tobe embiggened further, and to mix and match between punishers and regulars, or maybe even vendetta gun-squadrons without needing them to have engineers (so 4 vultures or vendetta for 300, +2 for +100, and +25 to replace 2 with punishers, +50 to replace all of them?)
the alternative is to give them slow firing, i have trouble getting behind so many 1 shot weapons, and atleast the valks have transport going for them. i see myself wanting vendetta for the continued use options

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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.3 (20110810)
PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2011 2:55 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 6:12 am
Posts: 1331
Location: Australia
also, in regards to the YAL vs Spectre, i really think that all aircraft in epic lean towards Close-Air-Support or aircraft interdiction. the YAL was intended to shoot down missiles, and its weaponry would theoretically be able to shoot down planes too, but not ground targets, because it didnt actually inflict serious damage itself, it just warped the skin of the missile (or control surfaces of the plane) and made it come apart in mid air due to the stresses of high speed flight. it would be virtually useless against a tank, and what we need is a high end tank hunter. yes, the volcano cannon is quite a ridiculous weapon to mount on an aircraft, but lets face it, 40k is chock full of ridiculous weaponry, and with scaled up armour (ie: superheavies and titans) one would expect that the type of weapons used in such a role would also increase. the only serious long range roles currently undertaken in epic would be that of spaceships (and in this case, the onero)

the GAU-12 is a ridiculous weapon, and yes, it is a gatling gun, which evokes images of arnie in T2, but it shoots 25mm high explosive rounds, its primary role is to hunt down armour and bunkers (and suppression of course) which in the 40k universe, would be exactly the sort of role undertaken by a volcano cannon.

plus, you can bet the imperial navy would absolutely love that kind of a weapon, they are bang up for freaky heavy weaponry.


oh, and i'd suggest that fire support for a formation with such heavy access to AP (but no AT) weaponry, should atleast be better at AT than AP focused. Multi Meltas, or failing that, Lascannons would be the go (although lascannons dont seem particularly droptroopery. its what i did for my bloody hand fire supports, because i wanted some more AT punch. i reckon those crazy buggers would love some multimeltas, but that didnt seem like the right fit to me, plus they already have the gore mages for that. here, however, i could totally see it, even if plasma is more in 'theme' i think usefullness might be a higher priority XD)

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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.3 (20110810)
PostPosted: Thu Aug 11, 2011 9:24 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 7:26 am
Posts: 311
Good to see you got a game in! Allow me to comment on what I see. :)

Jaggedtoothgrin wrote:
my opponent was minervans,

That is a terrible, terrible thing :P Minervans are probably the foe that this list is least capable of dealing with at the moment, potentially even worse than a Titan Legion!

I know what you mean about bad rolls, bad luck, and bad decisions. That always makes it tough to gauge list effectiveness, but we can do our best.

Quote:
Demo Specialists do not have sufficient might to take on a serious quantity of heavy armour. if i'd rolled better, i would have taken out that titan, but only after a very concerted effort to do so (vultures, engineers, strikes, strikes, marauder, engineers all activated, or tried to, to bring me into a positon to be able to kill it)
both myself and my opponent agreed that engineers wont cut it against any serious number. now, my opponents army was a very RA heavy army (2 russ companies, 1 baneblade company, 2 shadowswords and a reaver all chewing up the pavement, thunderbolts that quickly decided not to show themselves, deathstrikes, salamanders, and 2 artillery battalions)
i had 3 engineer squads, 2 in marauders, one in the main drop. like all the vehicle-less infantry, they scattered to the four winds and turned intoa a complete cluster$%#$, and the marauder ones rely on an unreliable retain due to being unable to air assault from the marauder

Here's the problem I see here: You took the Engineers in Marauders. When dealing with large numbers of armored vehicles, that's what the Vendetta's are for. They're the real bulk killer part of that formation, with the Engineers being designed so that if stand-off shooting is a bad idea, they can close into close combat while the Vendettas provide fire support. Marauder drops are primarily for Sentinels. Keep in mind that 4.2.5 in the rulebook points out that when you drop ground units, the unit can't activate later on in the turn. I'd be tempted to give them access to grav-gliders, but the Vendettas are really the focus of that anti-tank formation.

Quote:
now, had i rolled better, i could have killed the titan, and maybe even the baneblades (but vultures arent a very good AT against 4+RA until it's broken) but then my engineers would have been stuck footslogging it to the other side of the table (which meansmore vendetta instead) and those two tank companies would have still rolled me. i was able to put the pressure on very hard all game (or all 2 turns worth, i gave up on turn 3 when i had about a third of my army left, most of it in aircraft, and i'd killed a total of 9 things, 3 of which when my onerohit his two basalisk formations at the start of turn 1)

The pinpoint strikes from the Onero actually can only target War Engines, so you couldn't have fired them into the Basilisks. :) They're intended to let you drop the shields on those titans, which would have made it a good bit easier to take out that reaver ;)

Quote:
the other thing was that rolling to scatter formations of 8 infantry was a massive pain (cause you have to scatter the units individually) i shudder to think what would happen if i'd taken infantry upgrades.
doing it with multiple formations into the one main drop zone was such an experience that i intend to never do it again. i will be buying valkyries (which means without a dedicated stormtrooper formation anymore i wont be taking them ever) so i have half as many scatters to contend with, and a reformation potential to actually do something once i'm there

I am concerned about the effort required to scatter each unit individually, but in a way that's one of the iconic elements of a drop list. Something I will definitely be paying attention to during my game tomorrow as well.

Quote:
even if vultures are pretty terrible once they've blown their wad over the enemy tanks and not killed a damn one...

yeah, I kinda hate the stock vultures. They're supposed to be carrying 6 Hunter-killer missiles, and it'd be much better if instead of 2 x 120cm AT2+ One Shot, they were 2 x 60cm AT4+. I'd make a new variant, but it seems like it would clutter things up a bit too much.

Quote:
i think the marauder transport thing worked well (aside from the need to then activate the engineers) and felt fairly balanced (i wouldhave quite liked the bombs when i was dropping infantry, so going without for the turn seemed like a good trade) and the strikes and interceptors handled themselves quite well. the oneros strike was good, and overall the list worked largely as it should. i think with a few tweaks, we may well have a winner here.

Good to know the general impression was positive! Hopefully we should be able to adjust things around so it works smoothly.

Quote:
so my advice is this. Give Gravechutes the space marine drop pod rule. Basic infantry scattering takes AGES and is invariably a complete $$#!@storm once you're done (my dropped infantry where wiped out down to 1 commissar who hid in a cathedral) these guys are supposed to be pretty good at this sort of thing, and without it, i'll not see myself ever taking an oneros over one of the other spaceships. dropping in valks was fine (infact, i tended to roll better on the valkscatter actually) but the basic trooper drop is a nightmare.
I am definitely interested in the potential difficulties involved in the actual GravChute insertion, but Drop Pods don't really feel quite right. Something vaguely similar might work, but it also reduces some of the "parachute" feel, which can result in a catastrophic misdrop :P

Quote:
let the marauder transport drop be an air assault (but with an addendum that the marauder itself does not participate in it)so as to let engineers actually assault things without forcing a retain

Marauders aren't going to be Air-Assault capable. That just doesn't work with what is supposed to be a low-altitude drop. Having the Engineers be able to assault directly into an enemy might be a bit too potent, which is why I didn't give them glider access. It might be worth reconsidering, but their primary use should be as a force multiplier for the Vendettas.

Quote:
and give us a serious run on the marauder spectre. it would probably not have turned the tide on this battle, but it would have given me the options to hold back some engineers to see how the army developed. i could have sent them against the superheavies, or titan, and while those tank companies would have been a serious problem, i'd have had engineers i could have taken a swing at them with

I'm not sure the spectre would have helped too much, but it's definitely worth a try. I'll go ahead and add it in, but it's going to be probably 225-250 to begin with. (probably will be reduced, but it needs to not overshadow Lightning Strike Fighters.)

Quote:
i'd like a pure stormtrooper formation to remain in, because i really like stormtroopers, and wont be taking them as upgrades anymore otherwise

What about having the core formation be mixed somewhat? Instead of Commander + 5 Warhawks, it could be Commander, 3 Warhawks, and 2 Stormtroopers. Warhawks are supposed to be tightly integrated with Stormtroopers, so I'd rather not have them completely separate.

Quote:
i'd like to see the vulture squadrons be given the option to be embiggened further, and to mix and match between punishers and regulars, or maybe even vendetta gun-squadrons without needing them to have engineers (so 4 vultures or vendetta for 300, +2 for +100, and +25 to replace 2 with punishers, +50 to replace all of them?)
the alternative is to give them slow firing, i have trouble getting behind so many 1 shot weapons, and atleast the valks have transport going for them. i see myself wanting vendetta for the continued use options

That's not a bad idea. Having the mixed formation would allow for a certain amount of versatility.


The AC130's are really closer to being equipped with Turbolaser Destructors than a Volcano cannon :p The YAL at least is built around a single weapons system.

I really don't want Multimeltas on the Fire Support teams, as it fails to actually extend the threat range of the formation any. Lascannons aren't a bad idea though. Keep in mind that the Harakoni aren't really like WW2 Paratroopers (which are Elysians) due to their heavy-infantry status. Lascannons would actually be fairly in character for that sort of regiment.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.3 (20110810)
PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2011 1:14 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 6:12 am
Posts: 1331
Location: Australia
Signal wrote:
That is a terrible, terrible thing :P Minervans are probably the foe that this list is least capable of dealing with at the moment, potentially even worse than a Titan Legion!


yup, i told him before the game that i was expecting it to go very badly, but if i couldnt take him on with the new units, it would still provide some useful playtest data.

Quote:
Here's the problem I see here: You took the Engineers in Marauders. When dealing with large numbers of armored vehicles, that's what the Vendetta's are for. They're the real bulk killer part of that formation, with the Engineers being designed so that if stand-off shooting is a bad idea, they can close into close combat while the Vendettas provide fire support. Marauder drops are primarily for Sentinels. Keep in mind that 4.2.5 in the rulebook points out that when you drop ground units, the unit can't activate later on in the turn. I'd be tempted to give them access to grav-gliders, but the Vendettas are really the focus of that anti-tank formation.


i really viewed the engineers as 'terminators light' basically an assault macroweapon unit. vendettas, i'd considered, but i decided to leave them behind because they would get in the way of an assault, and split the focus into an assault and shooting list (and my experience with engineer style units is that you get 1 assault out of them before they're wiped out, so attaching vendettas was a good way to lose them)
i totally missed the 4.2.5 (i've only ever air assaulted out of planes before, and infact had to check the list to see if it was allowed at all, as i said to my opponent, 'we're trying something here that is not only not present in the rules, we also only made it up 2 days ago') but i gotta say, without the ability to activate the unit, i dont see any sort of reason to ever use marauders as transports. dropping sentinels is not much use when they have grav chutes already. still, i'll be putting engineers into vendettas anyway from now on, to give them tighter drop control. does mean that marauder transports are pretty much useless though.

Quote:
The pinpoint strikes from the Onero actually can only target War Engines, so you couldn't have fired them into the Basilisks. :) They're intended to let you drop the shields on those titans, which would have made it a good bit easier to take out that reaver ;)


oops, i'll admit that this was the first time i'd ever actually taken a pinpoint spacecraft. i guess it would have been better to use the onero against the titan and the strikes against the basalisks, but i was really pleased with the idea that the overflight cleared artillery off (cause if i'd not killed them before the drop i would have been even more boned than normal)

Quote:
I am concerned about the effort required to scatter each unit individually, but in a way that's one of the iconic elements of a drop list. Something I will definitely be paying attention to during my game tomorrow as well.


yeah, i certainly got the feel of the iconic 'failed air operation' from all that scatter, but, like i said, thats not an experience i think we want to promote with this list. if only for simplicity, it was a huge pain, and thoroughly intermingled the formations. which made remembering which was which to extricate them very tricky aswell. tactics wise, this seems like a very 'things need to go well' army so all that extra scatter may make things very hard to handle.

Quote:
yeah, I kinda hate the stock vultures. They're supposed to be carrying 6 Hunter-killer missiles, and it'd be much better if instead of 2 x 120cm AT2+ One Shot, they were 2 x 60cm AT4+. I'd make a new variant, but it seems like it would clutter things up a bit too much.


i think i'd rather take a vendetta with its 3x45cm than a 2x60cm vulture variant. vulture missiles as is are very cool, and give a neat feel to the list, but i just dont see the formation as worth 300 points. if they had 'slow firing' then yes, i'd believe that, but as is, they're not. and watching them flutter about for a turn without any missiles left, they really did suck, they couldnt kill a single damn salamander!

Quote:
I am definitely interested in the potential difficulties involved in the actual GravChute insertion, but Drop Pods don't really feel quite right. Something vaguely similar might work, but it also reduces some of the "parachute" feel, which can result in a catastrophic misdrop :P


i agree that 'can result in a catastrophic missdrop' is a good thing to have in the list, but right now it feels like 'will result' especially given that i was using the smallest unit sizes possible and it still failed. (also the 'we dropped two of our virtually all AP units right in front of a titan' goes a long way to representing 'catastrophic'
maybe if marauder bombers where adjusted so they had scatter, but could still assault, that would work better (i know it feels odd that the low ground stuff scatteres while the halo stuff doesnt, but the marauder needs to be avoiding flak, and the oneros would likely have much more precise sensors and whatnot)

Quote:
Marauders aren't going to be Air-Assault capable. That just doesn't work with what is supposed to be a low-altitude drop. Having the Engineers be able to assault directly into an enemy might be a bit too potent, which is why I didn't give them glider access. It might be worth reconsidering, but their primary use should be as a force multiplier for the Vendettas.


see above, but i'm just not seeing the engineers as a good choice if they cant assault before getting whacked. i really viewed it the other way, planetfall gets you into position, but its not as precise, and you need to preplot, marauder drops let you suicide assault into the scary formations without blowing up the marauder itself (as a note, if jump troops can assault out of a thunderhawk, how is it not 'representitive' of a low altitude drop?)

Quote:
I'm not sure the spectre would have helped too much, but it's definitely worth a try. I'll go ahead and add it in, but it's going to be probably 225-250 to begin with. (probably will be reduced, but it needs to not overshadow Lightning Strike Fighters.)


i like the strikes (and will definitely be taking them again, 3 AT ground attacks is better than 1 TK attack against regular tanks)
given my rolls, they mightnt have, but they'd have killed or broken his baneblades, which would have given the titan less support when i assaulted it, or they would have finished off the titan, leaving my engineers to deal with the tank companies of some description. i expect i would have still lost the game, but it would have been closer
as to price. i reckon they'd really only be worth 175, after examining the tigershark, which has slightly less AA, but better ground attack and better armour, and comes at two for 350, i reckon i was about right at 175, but i'll happily take them at higher costs (although 3 strikes is much better value at 225)

Quote:
What about having the core formation be mixed somewhat? Instead of Commander + 5 Warhawks, it could be Commander, 3 Warhawks, and 2 Stormtroopers. Warhawks are supposed to be tightly integrated with Stormtroopers, so I'd rather not have them completely separate.


my concern there i twofold, firstly, its making scouts become a mandatory option, which could be overbalanced, and secondly, mixed formations will be harder to tell apart (for myself, i'll be using these as my basic troops. i'd love to use actual GW stormtroopers, but at that price, i expect i'll be using the DRMs as stormtroopers aswell.
i quite like the 3 option setup at the moment (or i would if i wasnt going to be only taking valks from now on ;)) so i'd not really want to see that changed
how about to represent them being 'tight' with each other, you let the stormtroopers in valks formation back in, but make it a core formation? that'd be pretty rocking i'd think...

Quote:
The AC130's are really closer to being equipped with Turbolaser Destructors than a Volcano cannon :p The YAL at least is built around a single weapons system.


to be fair, thats why i was talking about the AC130U 'spooky2' rather than the spectre, which trades its two mini artillery weapons for a single ridiculous high explosive gattling gun, which is the closest thing we've got to a volcano cannon right now ^_^
plus, the marauders kinda look like the AC130, the YAL, looks like a boeing passanger jet with a funny nose (because it basically is, it was based on a civilian template, not a military one)

Quote:
I really don't want Multimeltas on the Fire Support teams, as it fails to actually extend the threat range of the formation any. Lascannons aren't a bad idea though. Keep in mind that the Harakoni aren't really like WW2 Paratroopers (which are Elysians) due to their heavy-infantry status. Lascannons would actually be fairly in character for that sort of regiment.


fair enough. i think extending the range may be overrated. the commander still has an autocannon, so can drop a BM on people from 45cm away if need be, giving them a nice juicy FF punch may be just what the doctor ordered, plus badass dudes lugging a multimelta around is pretty cool XD

anyway, good luck with your game (or perhaps, terrible luck so you can reach the same conclusions as me XD)

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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.3 (20110810)
PostPosted: Sat Aug 13, 2011 5:44 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 7:26 am
Posts: 311
Well, my game last night fell through. Hopefully I'll be able to get an opponent over here in the next few days.

Quote:
i really viewed the engineers as 'terminators light' basically an assault macroweapon unit. vendettas, i'd considered, but i decided to leave them behind because they would get in the way of an assault, and split the focus into an assault and shooting list (and my experience with engineer style units is that you get 1 assault out of them before they're wiped out, so attaching vendettas was a good way to lose them)

Terminators light implies a certain amount of resilience that they don't really have, but I get your point. Mostly I figured the Engineer+Vendetta's would be best using the TL Lascannons until there was an opportunity for a solid victorious assault. The Engineers give close combat punch, as well as numbers to help with breaking and assault resolution.

Quote:
i think i'd rather take a vendetta with its 3x45cm than a 2x60cm vulture variant. vulture missiles as is are very cool, and give a neat feel to the list, but i just dont see the formation as worth 300 points. if they had 'slow firing' then yes, i'd believe that, but as is, they're not. and watching them flutter about for a turn without any missiles left, they really did suck, they couldnt kill a single damn salamander!

Yeah, that's true. It's kinda sad how solidly the Vendetta steps on the toes of the Vulture. I wish they hadn't made the Vendetta at all, honestly.

Quote:
as a note, if jump troops can assault out of a thunderhawk, how is it not 'representitive' of a low altitude drop?

Well, Thunderhawks actually land while they do so ;) The Marauder is still at the very least 500 feet up, and can easily be at over 10,000.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.3 (20110810)
PostPosted: Sun Aug 14, 2011 12:56 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 6:12 am
Posts: 1331
Location: Australia
Signal wrote:
Terminators light implies a certain amount of resilience that they don't really have, but I get your point. Mostly I figured the Engineer+Vendetta's would be best using the TL Lascannons until there was an opportunity for a solid victorious assault. The Engineers give close combat punch, as well as numbers to help with breaking and assault resolution.


well, the problem there, is that a vendetta squad can never safely engage in a shooting war with, say, a company of leman russ. or a titan with twin TLDs
i'll try them with vendettas next time, but i really think they need to be able to air assault in order to be a viable source of MW

Quote:
Yeah, that's true. It's kinda sad how solidly the Vendetta steps on the toes of the Vulture. I wish they hadn't made the Vendetta at all, honestly.


personally, i think the vendetta is a logical extension of the valkyrie, but i would much prefer it if the vulture was a viable alternative

Quote:
Well, Thunderhawks actually land while they do so ;) The Marauder is still at the very least 500 feet up, and can easily be at over 10,000.


the thunderhawk lands to let out devastators, but it doesnt for jump pack troops, thats why they get a wider disembark move.
the point is that if one unit can engage an assault while falling out of a flying aeroplane, so should our talented professional drop-troopers. aesthetically it makes some sense. game balance-wise, without it the marauder bomber is a functionally useless transport.

this list needs to be an alpha strike list in order to succeed, without air assaults and viable planetfall formations (ie: drop pod style rule for the infantry) it cannot achieve this.

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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.3 (20110810)
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2011 9:44 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 9:15 am
Posts: 1832
Location: Oslo, Norway
Hey, just a comment on the Marauder Drop. Like I said in the Elysian thread, I'd really like to see a rule representing a 'proper' paradrop, and here's my suggestion:

What I'd do would be to make a non-landing transport 1) not attack except flak, but the transported formation(s) attack as normal (shooting or engage) 2) only units with Jump Packs or Grav Chute can deploy, 15cm as per standard Jump Packs 3) the aircraft never lands, so can't be attacked by ground fire but can be intercepted as per normal.

I see you didn't want to allow air assaults, but I think that's an unneccesary limitation. I can't really see how it can be too good for any unit to perform an air assault when the game already has Aspect Hosts dropping in or multiple space marine formations attacking in one go?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.4 (20110831)
PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2011 8:36 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 7:26 am
Posts: 311
Sorry about not updating for a bit, but my regular opponent has had some trouble making it to any games, leaving me without any playtest data to work with.

The Marauders will not be allowed to Air Assault, just because it doesn't fit how I see them operating. They are not like Thunderhawks, and shouldn't behave the same way. Additionally, having it simply be "Marauders cannot perform Air Assaults" leaves the rules very simple and straightforward, without creating any possible difficulty in interpretation. Keep in mind that only the bomb-bays are invalidated while transporting troops, so the Bombers can make a Ground Attack, deploy their transported units, and fire their weapons as the transported troops engage. This also leaves the bomber overhead as an AA umbrella for the deployed formation.

On the other hand, I can see your point about air assault being potentially necessary for the demolition team, so they have been given access to the grav-gliders.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.4 (20110831)
PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2011 8:42 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 9:15 am
Posts: 1832
Location: Oslo, Norway
Signal wrote:
Keep in mind that only the bomb-bays are invalidated while transporting troops, so the Bombers can make a Ground Attack, deploy their transported units, and fire their weapons as the transported troops engage. This also leaves the bomber overhead as an AA umbrella for the deployed formation.


Transported troops still perform their action together with the aircraft on the turn they deploy, right?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.4 (20110831)
PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 11:16 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:24 am
Posts: 4499
Location: Melbourne, Australia
On first glance this list looks great Signal. :) I'm quite interested in it. I'm not sure when I'll get to play it but I'd definitely like to. :D
I'll probably use my catachans to proxy it if I ever get them finished and the red bandanas will proxy well for red berets - go the Paras! ;)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harakoni Warhawks - v1.4 (20110831)
PostPosted: Tue Sep 13, 2011 10:51 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 7:26 am
Posts: 311
Quote:
Transported troops still perform their action together with the aircraft on the turn they deploy, right?

Correct, a marauder conducting a ground attack that drops troops would dirt its guns, and the transported unit would likewise get to fire its weapons at the same target formation.


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