 
|
Page 4 of 6 |
[ 85 posts ] | Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next |
Elysian Air Units |
|||||
| The_Real_Chris |
|
||||
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm Posts: 8139 Location: London |
|
||||
| Top |   |
||||
 |
|||||
| jfrazell |
|
|||||
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 1:21 pm Posts: 144 |
|
|||||
| Top | |
|||||
|
||||||
| Tactica |
|
||||||
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am Posts: 2241 |
|
||||||
| Top | |
||||||
|
|||||||
| Honda |
|
||||
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:44 pm Posts: 1891 Location: Katy, Republic of Texas |
|
||||
| Top | |
||||
|
|||||
| The_Real_Chris |
|
||||
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm Posts: 8139 Location: London |
|
||||
| Top | |
||||
|
|||||
| Tactica |
|
||||||
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am Posts: 2241 |
Keep in mind, this can be addressed in point efficiency and availability. Also please keep in mind, Imperium is known to have more weapons than Eldar Imperium is known to be slightly less accurate than Eldar I still say - design the units first by vision and established weapons. IA3 gives us a guidance I've already refined. Next, assign points. I fully expect these planes to cost more than the Cypra Mundi patterns. I think you look at weapon systems for stat derivatives. Looking at who has what AA is not the direction I would start with. Cheers, _________________ Rob |
| Honda |
|
||||
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:44 pm Posts: 1891 Location: Katy, Republic of Texas |
Tac, I'm not disagreeing with anything that you are saying. I'm asking my questions for a reason and the reason isn't because I'm wishy-washy. Points we need to keep in mind as we are developing the aircraft: 1. Whether we like it or not, there is a perception by a fair number of people in the community on how the aircraft for each race "should" behave. I say "should" because of the guidelines that are in effect for some of the earlier lists and those who don't want an escalation in the air realm. There were strong opinions about that in the Tau Tigershark discussion as we are both aware. So, I asked my previous question because I wanted to get an understanding for what the basic perception is. That does not mean that we are going to serve up neutered aircraft in this list. It does mean though, that if we offer up something that runs contrary to expectations, then we have to justify why we did that. As a contrast, there is a fair amount of discussion going on about the Eldar and some of their special abilities. When Eldar players and list developers are challenged as to why things are the way they are, their arguments aren't necessarily convincing those that challenge. This list will need to present convincing arguments as to why we take the approach we take. I'm Ok with the fact that some people may not like the approach we take. I'm not trying to run a popularity contest or run for Student Body President. I have a list that needs to get out. So, we just have to ensure that what we are doing is for the right reasons (i.e. add cool things that don't break the list) and that our results stand in the face of valid testing. So, if we are going to propose aircraft values that seem to break from the expected norm, then there has to be a "compelling" reason why you would do that. Our current list of reasons goes like this: a) No ground based AA b) No Super Heavy Tanks c) No Armored Vehicles except the Vultures/Valkyries d) Only artillery is one shot, except for the mortars which are 2 BP (and you only get one of those units) e) No Titan/War Engine support So those reasons, at least in my mind, are fairly strong reasons why we might be able to justify aircraft that deviate from the expected norm. We might also add that the core army formation is nearly pathetic except in the areas of mobility and a reasonable CC/FF value. No armor means that if they don't: a) Strike first to deflate an impending attack b) Take advantage of terrain c) Coordinate their assault with other units d) All of the above ...then they are in serious trouble. This will be a finesse list, you will have to give up a lot (see above list), to get the goodies it brings. ANY aircraft that we propose, may not unbalance the list, that is a given, but we won't really know that until we add aircraft, get past the initial pre-game willies, then find out how they behave over a series of games. 2. This is a new list. I expect it to be challenged and it should be. That is how the community can keep the environment "safe and clean" for general play. The approach we take has to be solid, hence the continual referral back to IA3 whenever there is a question or a need for a guideline. I think how the Support Sentinel questions were resolved is an excellent process model for how we address our isses. 3. IA3's author states in the beginning of the Epic Air appendix that the aircraft values are gross and that he didn't point them for that exact reason. So grabbing those stats, knowing as we do that they are unbalanced and just plugging them in "as is" isn't acceptable. So, how much do we want to "tweak" them to make them acceptable, yet still fun and different to use? That will be determined in testing. 4. I am still ruminating on the "suite" of aircraft, but things that I am now comfortable with: a) Lighting formations will be either 2 or 3 aircraft b) The Marauder Destroyer will be the heavy attack weapons system that allows us to engage heavier weapon systems. At least initially, I will put these in formations of 1 and they won't be cheap c) I am Ok with putting "Hellstrike-like" missiles on aircraft that can be used each turn (per Tac and TRC's points, i.e. rearming) d) I am still not of a mind to add a different "pattern" of Thunderbolt to the list at this point So a bit long winded, but an update none the less. My goal is to give this thought for another day or so, then put something down, have us beat on it for a little bit, then commit to the 2.1.x version so we can test. I would like to be able to have that all done by Friday of next week so that we could line up games for next Saturday and start testing. _________________ Honda "Remember Taros? We do" - 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment |
| The_Real_Chris |
|
||||
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm Posts: 8139 Location: London |
|
||||
| Top | |
||||
|
|||||
| Legion 4 |
|
|||||
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 5:13 pm Posts: 36949 Location: Ohio - USA |
|
|||||
| Top | |
|||||
|
||||||
| Honda |
|
|||
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:44 pm Posts: 1891 Location: Katy, Republic of Texas |
I don't think anything I posted in my previous note contradicted or goes against what you are stating. It is not my intent to develop super aircraft. That is why I want to have an understanding of the general frame of reference for how each airforce is expected to behave. However, that also doesn't mean that we're going to serve up cookie cutter airplanes. The easist way to boost interceptor power incidentally is to boost the squadron size as it reduces incoming fire and bumps the value of CAPs. 4 interceptors at 300 points are strangely enough better than 300 points of 2 squadrons of two interceptors. I think this is the only part of the game where this is so. |
Fair point and something I will keep in mind.
_________________
Honda
"Remember Taros? We do"
- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment
| Tactica |
|
||||||
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am Posts: 2241 |
|
||||||
| Top | |
||||||
|
|||||||
| Honda |
|
||||
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:44 pm Posts: 1891 Location: Katy, Republic of Texas |
You didn't imply anything, but I also wanted to state why I was doing what I was doing. It's going to be extremely critical that we nail down the aircraft so that: a) The Elysians can be somewhat competitive against all lists b) The Elysians don't become some grossly unbalanced list It would be easy to end at B, somewhat easier to not be competitive at all, and will require effort to get to the magical A. But we can do it. We have enough sharp minds participating that we can get to that first cut where all the units are included and we have something quite playable. My preference is if we are going to "guess", then to start out with a "weakened" list vs. a over-strength list. It's a lot easier to ratchet up vs. down. 
_________________ Honda "Remember Taros? We do" - 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment |
| Honda |
|
||||
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:44 pm Posts: 1891 Location: Katy, Republic of Texas |
|
||||
| Top | |
||||
|
|||||
| Tactica |
|
||||||
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am Posts: 2241 |
|
||||||
| Top | |
||||||
|
|||||||
| Print view | Previous topic | Next topic |
|
|
Page 4 of 6 |
[ 85 posts ] | Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next |
Who is online |
|
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 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 |