| Brood Brother |
 |
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
|
To get the opinions of all those who don't frequent the SG site, here is the current proposed chaos aircraft stats, and the feedback from a couple of friends in the UK.
SG discussion here.
PG's current suggestion/summary of concencous.
Here are some preliminary stats for the Hell Blade and Hell Talon. The idea is to move the Swiftdeath to an Archive section and make the two Forge World aircraft the official CSM aircraft.
Hell Talon
Type Fighter-Bomber
Armour 5+,
Weapons
Twin Lascannon 45cm AT4+ Fixed Forward
OR 30cm AA4+ Fixed Forward
Havoc Launcher 45cm AP4+ Fixed Forward,
Bombs 1BP Ignore Cover Fixed Forward
Price
200 points for 2
Hell Blade
Type Aircraft
Speed: Fighter
Armour -
Weapons
2x Twin-linked Autocannons 45cm AP4+/AT5+ Forward Arc
OR 30cm AA5+ Forward Arc
Price
225 points for 3
I have gone through all this stuff and chatted on messenger to a couple of friends, one in Eltham and one in Sittingbourne, who have been giving the list another occasional go since it was finalised. They look at the planes slightly differently to me, primarily seeing how it fits into the list before comparing to other races, though obviously limited to WYSIWYG model wise.
I really should include their game experience! They play Epic with their Ork and Marine armies (both have marines, one has Orks), the games are 2000 points with the aim being to play 2 in 3 hours or so. The BL have been part proxies, part stuff off ebay (hence why trying them out). Gaming experience apparently shows them the proposed Hell Blade is two good and a bit pricey to get into their points (and they theorise it would be at 3000 too) whilst the Hell talon is possibly okay, hard to be sure.
The conclusions were the following:
Chaos needs a fighter more than other races, having more problems getting flak.
Chaos needs 'cheap' formations'.
It should reflect the model.
The plane should be relative in power to other races.
The first two combined indicate there should be an artificial discount on the planes to make up for deficiencies elsewhere. In our combined opinion Chaos should view a formation of planes for AA nigh compulsory in a GT setting.
The comparison made for me to illustrate the plane relative to others was the following (I presume there is nothing else to do in Sittingbourne all day). It is not directly relevant but amused me so I include it here 
Orks - Mig 21
Eldar - F-22
Chaos - JSF
Thunderbolt - Tornado
Lightning - Eurofighter
Make of it what you will
Back to cost. Ideally it would be 200 points for the formation allowing a Banelord to be taken and some fighters. Factoring in the idea about a points break means the formation could 'really' cost in direct comparison to other races 225 points, putting it per plane closer to a thunderbolt than an Ork fighter (bear in mind squadron size three vs two). An alternative points level to aim for is 175 (effective 200) to allow a couple to be bought with a ravenger or 2 Ferals.
Reflecting the model means there are several possible weapon options.
1 x Quad Autocannon - 45cm AP3+/AT4+/AA?+ (note autocannon weapons are not yet set AA wise, just the Hydra
Long Barreled autocannon, giving an element of freedom).
2 x Twin Autocannon - 45cm AP4+/AT5+/AA?+
4 x Autocannon - 45cm AP5+/AT6+/AA?+
1 x Twin Reapers - 30cm AP3+/AT5+/AA?+
2 x Reaper - 30cm AP4+/AT6+/AA?+
An Imperial Thunderbolt (and smaller formation size)
15cm AP4+/AA5+ (AA4+ intercept) Fixed Forward Arc
30cm AP5+/AT6+/AA5+ (AA4+ intercept) Fixed Forward Arc
30cm AT4+ Fixed Forward Arc
As an air superiority fighter it is reasonable to assume better AA for the squadron and worse ground firepower.
The current suggestion (2x45cm AP4+/AT5+ 2x30cm AA5+ (AA4+ intercepts)) is both a lot better ground firepower (range and attack values) and better AA range, in both cases making up for the lighter armour on the attack run. Even with a 25 point discount at least 250 points for the squadron.
We all think that rules out autocannon due to their range advantage, leaving reaper autocannon.
Assuming 30cm AP4+/AT6+/AA6+ (fixed forward) for a reaper there are two options:
Twin Reaper - 30cm AP3+/AT5+/AA5+ (AA4+ intercept)
Similar ground firepower, better range but poorer attack averages for intercepts.
Would reckon this is a good candidate for 175 points for 3. Perhaps even 150 for 3. Misses the air superiority objective though.
Two Reapers - 2x 30cm AP4+/AT6+/AA6+ (AA5+ intercept)
Slightly better ground firepower, better intercept (same hits but longer range).
This would be the candidate for 200 points.
If either weapon fit too good at ground attacks for points change to fighter bomber status (which limits manoeuvrability on the ground attack run).
The same considerations apply for the Hell Talon (points wise) as outlined above for Chaos airpower, with the flak being an issue and with these chaps. So aiming at 200 points (real value 225).
They also thought that from what I told them the wrong comparisons had been made. The Marauder should never have come in, if you really wanted to compare it it should have been with another fighter bomber like the Thunderbolt.
But they argued me round to thinking it shouldn't be compared outside the list at all, just to the Hell Blade (assuming the stats for 200 points for three for them are correct), with better ground attack and worse AA.
Innately the Hell Blade has better ground attack manoeuvrability and a larger squadron size, making getting to the target easier and being able to go through flak better unless there was a big difference in armour, and is 5+ vs 0+ a big enough difference? 1/3 less casualties, compared to 2/3's numbers and higher value for each plane.
The comparison weapons wise then is
6 x Reapers 30cm AP4+/AT6+/AA6+ (AA5+ intercept)
vs
2 x Lascannon 45cm AT4+
2 x Lascannon 30cm AA4+ (3+ intercept)
2 x Havoc 45cm AP4+
1 x Bombs 15cm 2BP, Ignore Cover (AP5+/AT6+ unmodified)
Thats hits wise (assuming three units covered by template)
AP3/AT1
AA2
vs
AP2
AT1.33
AA1.33 (with better AT and worse AP range)
In addition Lee (more of a 40k fan than I) points out the Havoc Launcher is range 48, Strength 4, AP6 (is AP 6 good?) and at most should be Range 45 (maybe 30 add I?) AP6+.
This would make the above AP1.33, AT1.33, AA1.33.
They don't feel that it is currently worth taking the Hell Talons as performance is similar to the 'blades and with their armour saving rolls and more importantly shorter ranges less survivable. Only reason to take them is points, otherwise the 'blades are more of an all rounder and with limited air they feel that's important.
Saying that I reckon the Talons have far better ground attack values if they can close and attack a nice clump of targets.
They are more unsure what to do here. Currently they reckon the weapon fit is slightly better than a Thunderbolt, with the Havoc change it would be about par. Though with better survivability (45cm stand off range and higher armour). They do have three ideas though.
Leave as is, see if can compete with changed Hell Blade.
Change the Havoc launcher and re-point at 175 for two.
Option 2 b) Change the Havoc launcher, reduce the armour to 6+ and re-point at 150 for two.
Radical change, drop the lascannon AA value as it looks weird, change the Havoc to 30cm AP6+/AA6+ and re-point at 125 for two.
Regardless I would like to see what you think and they would like some advice at what to try.
_________________ If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913 "Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography." General Plumer, 191x
|
|
Since we don't play AI, we'll drop all the AA options ! 
Thanks TRC ! 
