Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 10 of 12
  [ 177 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next

Tigershark
The_Real_Chris
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Fri Jan 13, 2006 6:46 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
Well I shall play my eldar games before commenting on the TS further but one last parting shot. For me the big problem is the range. The other bombers to date have to close, this doesn't. Sure they have a 45cm option (Marauder 4+ AT and Phoenix 4+ AT Pulse) but I'd rgue their stength is at the shorter ranges with their barrages (and the fact the Phoenix is actually a fighter). For me 45cm is air superiority stuff in Epic, which is why I don't mind that the eldar have all these 45cm pluse weapons on the vampire and phonex. They can strike with impunity and being eldar you really expect it.

At 30cm and either 2x4+TK or 1x3+TK D3 I think its a plane which is no longer a doddel to use.

Oh, and why does it have forward firing AA missiles? Wouldn't there be a better weapon system to defend it?

_________________
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
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Lion in the Stars
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Fri Jan 13, 2006 6:51 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 11:01 pm
Posts: 1455
As an aside, the FW Manta stats also had one TK shot from the Railguns, not the 2 we use.

Did we really start with twinlinked railguns?  I did not remember that.  *shrug*

At any rate, I still think that an AX10 should not be a Tank Company killer, on par with an A10 Warthog.  I see it as more of a B25H/J Mitchell gunship, with a special weapon load for specific point targets, like small cargo ships and/or escorting Destroyers.  A standard TS flight can chew up a Russ company pretty quickly (2 passes?).

Tell y'all what.  I'll type in the fluff description of the AX10's combat debut from IA3 tuesday (can't post over the 3day weekend), tell me what you think then.

_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tactica
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Fri Jan 13, 2006 7:20 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
Quote (The_Real_Chris @ 13 Jan. 2006 (11:46))

TRC,

Believe it or not, in fluff the AX-1-0 is not a bomber. We made it one in E:A to tone them down. Its actually a SHT fighter-bomber by E:A standards. Do not assume its a slow or lumbering type plane.

Regards to the Eldar justification, the tau justification for the range has a precident as well. See 40K fluff in IA3. It has the same role of the Eldar Vampire Hunter - fighter bomber titan hunting via Twin-linked massive cannons of titan killing power at extremely long ranges delivered from a highly technical flying machine of unmached performance in the Imperium.

I fully agree that such weapons don't fit into E:A well and thats why we have to tone the things down, the question is how much. In the case of E:A fliers, Eldar shouldn't have anything on tau when it comes to speed, accuracy, range, and power. Its just that Tau haven't figured the Pulse/Lance and holofield tech out - yet. :p Heh - tau also haven't really mastered the art of RA yet either.

Regards to 30cm range - if 45cm is justified for the vampire hunter, its more than justified here. 1) E:A Tau list isn't based upon special rule after special rule, 2) we have fluff backing up our ranges, too


Oh, and why does it have forward firing AA missiles? Wouldn't there be a better weapon system to defend it?

All around burst cannons and FF AA missles or missle pods, that's it. But again, it was not designed as a bomber. More wasn't really necessary in its traditionally faster/agile mode in IA3.

======

Lion,

Yes, the 'whiteshark' was twin-linked at one time and didn't do enough in that format... even though it had 90cm range weapons - PER JG long time ago:


- Whiteshark changed to WE 2DC, 5+ save (crit = destroyed)

- TL light railcannon (MW3+, TK(1))

- Both Whiteshark and Tigershark get Heavy Interceptor Missiles that have AT5+/AA5+

_________________
Rob


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tactica
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Fri Jan 13, 2006 7:46 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
Quote (Lion in the Stars @ 13 Jan. 2006 (11:51))
As an aside, the FW Manta stats also had one TK shot from the Railguns, not the 2 we use.

Did we really start with twinlinked railguns? ?I did not remember that. ?*shrug*

Yep,

We contemplated the same for the Manta. Unfortunately, it made it too useless with a twin-linked main gun system for the points.

There's all kinds of abstractions when you get to the manta. It doesn't have 16 or so burst cannons either. Nor does it have the networked marker and missle load out if I recall. It also doesn't have the same DC.

When it comes to the larger than life vehicles or aircraft, abstractions are commonly made for balance and desired impact to the E:A game.

Matching E:A units to 40K - just for the sake of doing so is not justification alone. It's a starting point. We've been down that path and it does not make sense in E:A to match the Manta to 40K stats point for point.

I don't think we want to reinvent the wheel on the manta front - or any unit, just for the sake of matching 40K at this point - especially not after the amount of playtest that has went into the units to get us this far.

If you are curious how we got here with the Manta, I'd refer you to the 9-10 pages of history here in this forum. (you'll have to select to look at 'the beginning' instead of the past 30 days) The older manta and moray threads should bring you up to speed with why we've done what we did.

Also, remember, 40K is what happens over ~30 second turns and 6-9 turns a game.

Epic is what happens over 10 minute turns and 3-4 turns per game.

More can happen over an Epic Turn, although not all weapons and ranges have the same impact in Epic that they do in 40K. Although not a norm, additional shots per unit are justified in some cases and lowered in others to make them have the desired impact on the E:A game.

Man... I feel ill, I sound like Asaura and NH... OK, I'm back. :)

cheers,

_________________
Rob
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Lion in the Stars
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Fri Jan 13, 2006 11:37 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 11:01 pm
Posts: 1455
Quote (Tactica @ 13 Jan. 2006 (18:20))
In the case of E:A fliers, Eldar shouldn't have anything on tau when it comes to speed, accuracy, range, and power. Its just that Tau haven't figured the Pulse/Lance and holofield tech out - yet. :p Heh - tau also haven't really mastered the art of RA yet either.

I disagree with speed, but maneuverability and firepower at range is the Tau hallmark. ?Per FW fluff, the Eldar aircraft are about a third to half again faster than anything else.

Regards to 30cm range - if 45cm is justified for the vampire hunter, its more than justified here. 1) E:A Tau list isn't based upon special rule after special rule, 2) we have fluff backing up our ranges, too.
?I actually can argue this one both ways. ?Aircraft weapons should be shorter ranged, because of the speed of the aircraft. ?I still feel that 45cm is more than warranted here. ?Yes, I know it's hard to balance, but it's no worse than the Phoenix or Vampire.


Lion,

Yes, the 'whiteshark' was twin-linked at one time and didn't do enough in that format... even though it had 90cm range weapons - PER JG long time ago:


- Whiteshark changed to WE 2DC, 5+ save (crit = destroyed)

- TL light railcannon (MW3+, TK(1))

- Both Whiteshark and Tigershark get Heavy Interceptor Missiles that have AT5+/AA5+

Ah, there's the problem. ?Why did we go to two shots, instead of TK(d3)? ?Was it to not step on the toes of the Moray? ?

I think that going to 45cm, MW3+ TK(d3) would go a long way to minimize the complaints about power.

_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tactica
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Fri Jan 13, 2006 11:53 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
Quote (Lion in the Stars @ 13 Jan. 2006 (16:37))
Quote (Tactica @ 13 Jan. 2006 (18:20))
In the case of E:A fliers, Eldar shouldn't have anything on tau when it comes to speed, accuracy, range, and power. Its just that Tau haven't figured the Pulse/Lance and holofield tech out - yet. :p Heh - tau also haven't really mastered the art of RA yet either.

I disagree with speed, but maneuverability and firepower at range is the Tau hallmark. ?Per FW fluff, the Eldar aircraft are about a third to half again faster than anything else.

That's interesting. Hmm... just curious, are you referencing text written before IA3?

Cheers,

_________________
Rob
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tactica
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2006 12:08 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
Quote (Lion in the Stars @ 13 Jan. 2006 (16:37))

- Whiteshark changed to WE 2DC, 5+ save (crit = destroyed)

- TL light railcannon (MW3+, TK(1))

- Both Whiteshark and Tigershark get Heavy Interceptor Missiles that have AT5+/AA5+
[/quote]

Ah, there's the problem. ?Why did we go to two shots, instead of TK(d3)? ?Was it to not step on the toes of the Moray? ?

I think that going to 45cm, MW3+ TK(d3) would go a long way to minimize the complaints about power.

Answer: At the time, the general feeling was (paraphrasing and doing this from memory - so bare with me here):

1) The White Shark was not doing enough damage to warrant its points and the Tiger Shark was a better choice for the same points.

2) We had no basis to give it TK(D3) as the AX-1-0 was not published yet. Remember, we thought of the White Shark before Forgworld came up with Alternate Tiger Shark

3) There was a proposition to give it TK (D6) and make it exactly what it is - the manta's weapon system. (at the time, also one shot) however, TK(D3) was deemed too powerful by the masses at the time. Therefore, it was shot down for fears that the "White Shark" would be too powerful - ironically - against Titans.  :p  (Again, remember, at the time the AX-1-0 was not yet released)

4) Twin-linking + a 'light version' of the weapon system made it 3+ (instead of the 2+ like the Manta), but a single shot at 3+ when many enemy's are in cover means that it may be 4+. That's a pretty ugly investment for a 50/50 shot when other 'bombers' have a better effectiveness at targets. Keep in mind, even titans can get a cover modifier for standing in ruins and other things.


So, for better or worse, those reasons are - to the best of my ability - why we went down the path we did... at the time. I should also note that towards the end of the development of the White Shark, Forgeworld released a descriptive blurb about what the new AX-1-0 was going to look like... JG petitioned FW to disclose the direction they were going to go with it and whether they would adopt our White Shark name  - we heard nothing and had nothing to work with so made our own decisions at the time to fix our problematic White Shark.

It does sound like people are more open to the Twin-linked and D3 idea. However, I still think 3+ is going to put us back where we were with point 4 above and may make it too risky to use with only a single make or break shot... if history can tell us anything anyway.

Personally - I echo my previous montra, more playtest with recent changes in v4.3.3... see if we can make history work for us as there's lots of development and thought into what we have already.

Cheers,

_________________
Rob


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
The_Real_Chris
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2006 2:11 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
[quote="Tactica,13 Jan. 2006 (18:20)"][/quote]
Okay, 1 more comment :)

In the case of E:A fliers, Eldar shouldn't have anything on tau when it comes to speed, accuracy, range, and power.


I disagree with speed, but maneuverability and firepower at range is the Tau hallmark.  Per FW fluff, the Eldar aircraft are about a third to half again faster than anything else.


? It is clearly stated everywhere eldar are the best airforce. Speed, esp manouvrability (why do you think their fighters have 4+ saves they jink on the way in as well), range (reflecting the speed, they close, fire and go before most pilots can react, Epic abstracts that with a long range on some weapon systems) and power (lance, pulse etc).

Reguardless of the relative worth of Tau air assets vs Imperials as defined by IA3 (and remeber air in both Epic and 40k is all a bit vague) Eldar should still be the bees knees.

Regards to 30cm range - if 45cm is justified for the vampire hunter, its more than justified here. 1) E:A Tau list isn't based upon special rule after special rule, 2) we have fluff backing up our ranges, too

The 45cm range on the Eldar bomber/transport is 'merely' AT. Even if all 3 shots hit it is less likely to kill a RA target. Sure its a sod - but eldar are supposed to be sods when it comes to retaliation to their attacks.

 I actually can argue this one both ways.  Aircraft weapons should be shorter ranged, because of the speed of the aircraft.  I still feel that 45cm is more than warranted here.  Yes, I know it's hard to balance, but it's no worse than the Phoenix or Vampire.

Well, I do feel extreme speed should be abonus to aircraft range as it can't be represented by much else. 45cm still puts you outside most flak ranges and it is harder to balance as I'd much rather have my tough targets shot at by the Eldar currently (and they can't get my tough infantry like terminators) as I have a greater chance of surviving.

4) Twin-linking + a 'light version' of the weapon system made it 3+ (instead of the 2+ like the Manta), but a single shot at 3+ when many enemy's are in cover means that it may be 4+. That's a pretty ugly investment for a 50/50 shot when other 'bombers' have a better effectiveness at targets. Keep in mind, even titans can get a cover modifier for standing in ruins and other things.

I have to admit I would love it if enemy tanks started running into ruins to avoid me. The decrease in chances to hit is a fair trade off to the -1 they will have for firing through those ruins and the 1 in 6 chance of crashing :)

Heres a related question to the whole 50/50 thing. How many turns should it take to 'make its points back' as it were. generally when assessing air for my armies I hope to do that over two turns (as many games last 3 turns and I invariable fail to activate one with them it seems due to flak, board edges etc).

Also I should add theres nothing wrong with a unit that has a lessened impact on the game when its favoured target fails to show. Many a time at a tourney have I seen shadowsword companies shooting Ork infantry and wishing they were baneblades or leman russ (as an extreme example).

If it take the enemy to field WE to make back its points does that not fit your fluff better and make an overloaded army a foolish choice?

Oh and I'd have less problem and more fun testing a a 2+ TKD3 damage 30cm gun than the previous 2x3+ TK guns :)

_________________
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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tactica
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 5:49 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
Quote (The_Real_Chris @ 13 Jan. 2006 (19:11))



? It is clearly stated everywhere eldar are the best airforce.

and just about all tau literature has been printed after the eldar. It will be interesting to see the eldar redone (which is appreantly on the horizon for 40K) so we can see what the up to date eldar really look like.



Reguardless of the relative worth of Tau air assets vs Imperials as defined by IA3 (and remeber air in both Epic and 40k is all a bit vague) Eldar should still be the bees knees.

OK, not sure what the bees knees are, but whatever - tau have superior fighters to imperial, thier's no question to that. I don't think they are that far apart from the Eldar in Epic terms, as I've pointed out in the previous post. Tau air caste is pretty darn good - as the text indicates. They devote their lives to flight and evolved at the tau typical explosive rate. They have the superiority fighter - which in the tau's hands is just that.

In epic, I just don't think that significant differences are there TRC, we can agree to disagree. IMHO - tau have the biggest and baddest guns in the 41st millenium just this side of IG... they just happen to put the biggest and baddest S10 guns on a flier. Eldar have a similiar tool they use for hunting titans. They work different but similiarly in both armies. Tau's AX-1-0 has been significantly dumbed down in its present form compared to what its capable of in E:A - even with the relative 'aircraft' reduction.

Tuning and playtesting remain, but as far as being sold on eldar airpower outclassing the Tau to the point of being 'the bees knees' - I'm just not sure that I can agree.

I'll also admit that I don't have current literature in hand to compare against and I don't know what the designers post Tau creation in 2006 vs. what the next gen Eldar will look like.

So for now, I'm happy to agree to disagree  - and we can look at this again after at least the new Tau codex comes out... and possibly after the Eldar 40K codex comes out. We both should get new ammo on this front for this discussion to take place further.


4) Twin-linking + a 'light version' of the weapon system made it 3+ (instead of the 2+ like the Manta), but a single shot at 3+ when many enemy's are in cover means that it may be 4+. That's a pretty ugly investment for a 50/50 shot when other 'bombers' have a better effectiveness at targets. Keep in mind, even titans can get a cover modifier for standing in ruins and other things.

I have to admit I would love it if enemy tanks started running into ruins to avoid me. The decrease in chances to hit is a fair trade off to the -1 they will have for firing through those ruins and the 1 in 6 chance of crashing :)

LOL - OK, first, enemy tanks go into cover all the time around here. I'm sure you've seen the double "cautiously move" with the first move to get out of the terrain and them "full move" with the second to get into position... or vice versa... or single move and fire to cautiously enter the terrain and then open up on the enemy. Heh - this is just way too common around here I guess... heck, its expected every game! Second, my understanding is that they don't take a minus for the terrain their firing out of (like 40K), only intervening terrain beyond that or terrain that the enemy is in, so in the end - yeah, if your opponent isn't making good use of terrain, I can appreciate your perspective much more.

My opponents make VERY good use of terrain - darn near constantly on every turn!

Regards to making my opponents tanks run to cover... that may be a bit of spin on your part. That's not what I said at all. See above, its the norm - enemy tanks as well as infantry are regularly in cover if there's an advantage to doing so - and regularly there is! It has nothing to do with planes of any sort on the field or not.

Heres a related question to the whole 50/50 thing. How many turns should it take to 'make its points back' as it were. generally when assessing air for my armies I hope to do that over two turns (as many games last 3 turns and I invariable fail to activate one with them it seems due to flak, board edges etc).

I don't assess value in points spent vs. returned. There are many intangible returns in a game that are not necessarily points earned. Example: by having an airforce that's not yet entered play, my opponent may cautiously move and thus not take aggressive actions on the table to maintain covarge from his AA umbrella. That may afford me an opportunity to take a flank or a particular front with ground forces easier than I originally anticipated/hoped for thus freeing up forces on that front for a tertiary engagement plan. Therefore, indirectly my planes generated points as my opponent changed his battle tactics accordingly that turn.

Also, in my last batrep, my TS only killed two models before it blew up. It just so happened they were expensive models otherwise, it would not have gotten its points back. There's been many times I've sacrificed a TS to break a formation. Example - I've flown in with a TS to kill a single manticore tank, then break the 3 model formation as a result, on the way out, I opted to take the backfield exit to avoid the damage I would have to encur by flying through a bunch of flak. On turn 2, it didn't come on, but ground forces were able to silence the manticores or they don't rally in some cases. On turn 3, I've activated the TS again only to have it shot down before it could impact the game. However, that one manticore dieing and formation breaking on turn 1 offered me an opportunity cluster all the rest of my formations as they moved as no manticore battery would be firing down on them. Even if they rallied, there was no commissar on that formation so at best I would have to deal with a single 2BP shot on turn 2. Definitely an intangible benefit of planes. (or TS in this case)

Perhaps we play differently, but I don't expect point for point equivilencies and nor do I think that's a gauge for balance. There are many things one can kill which will add up to greater than 175 points, and whether I kill it or not will not mean I win the game or that what I killed will even greatly impact the game at hand.

Also I should add theres nothing wrong with a unit that has a lessened impact on the game when its favoured target fails to show. Many a time at a tourney have I seen shadowsword companies shooting Ork infantry and wishing they were baneblades or leman russ (as an extreme example).

There's a difference between a shadowsword's favored target not showing up... and making a formation relatively ineffective due to cost vs. yield.

Planes may show up and may not, a shadowsword that fails to activate can still hold for a 90cm shot.

On turn 2, a tau plane may have significant blast markers. Its very probable that a tau plane can get 1 turn of fire and 2 at most due to tau 2+ activation, armor, and 2-3 blast markers gained in one turn.

If it take the enemy to field WE to make back its points does that not fit your fluff better and make an overloaded army a foolish choice?

I would have to say that it fits the fluff well enough, and an overloaded army is a foolish choice now. On the other hand, I question your adversaries skillset in dealing with the force. I need to put this to the test myself and see if I generate the same test results you did. I fully agree that *if* your results remain true with the latest v4.3.3 version of the TS, then we have a problem. However, I don't feel that will be the case. My feeling is that the reduced amount of FP potential on average per turn will detur effectively and generate the desired army compositions as the kill potential that you once experienced is no longer there.


Oh and I'd have less problem and more fun testing a a 2+ TKD3 damage 30cm gun than the previous 2x3+ TK guns :)

Interesting, we can speculate on even more future combinations if we like...

However, I prefer to stay focused on the present since a new version was just released. I should hope you'll join us in taking an equal amount of pleasure in testing the current version:

2x4+ 45cm TK(1)...

...which, for the record, is my preferred loadout vs your hypothetical 30cm single shot version - until I have more playtesting under my belt to develop an opinion further on this matter.

Cheers,

_________________
Rob


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
The_Real_Chris
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 8:06 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
Quote (Tactica @ 16 Jan. 2006 (16:49))

I'm sure you've seen the double "cautiously move" with the first move to get out of the terrain and them "full move" with the second to get into position... or vice versa... or single move and fire to cautiously enter the terrain and then open up on the enemy.
Second, my understanding is that they don't take a minus for the terrain their firing out of (like 40K), only intervening terrain beyond that or terrain that the enemy is in, so in the end - yeah, if your opponent isn't making good use of terrain, I can appreciate your perspective much more.


Ah, I feel we may have two differences here.
The first being the size of cover. Our ruined areas/woods/similar cover that vehicles can enter are quite large. You can't cross them with one turn of cautious movement.
You only avoid the -1 for firing out of it if you are on the edge of it as far as were understand otherwise it is interveening. A tank in the middle of a ruin has -1 firing out as well as -1 to enemy units firing in.

I don't assess value in points spent vs. returned. There are many intangible returns in a game that are not necessarily points earned. Example: by having an airforce that's not yet entered play, my opponent may cautiously move and thus not take aggressive actions on the table to maintain covarge from his AA umbrella. That may afford me an opportunity to take a flank or a particular front with ground forces easier than I originally anticipated/hoped for thus freeing up forces on that front for a tertiary engagement plan. Therefore, indirectly my planes generated points as my opponent changed his battle tactics accordingly that turn.


With me planes are all about destroying the enemy. Normally their best assets as well as opposed to general chaff (unless they are thunderbolts who only ever go chaff hunting). If I have a plane which will stop the enmy from emerging from cover I'd be thrilled as I'm going to win. Indeed the only plane that could stop me doing that is one who can kill at least half its value in one go and with its mates break the attack. Kinda like 5 TS vs a Leman Russ company. Hell, I can wipe it out if I'm slightly lucky.

I've always taken the view that wiped out broken units or units that fail to activate as they have been broken before they activate give me a certain advantage. My style of play is generally to brea the enemy before they activate and then wipe out broken units. Air can do this fairly well, better is artillary, even better is air that can strike from outside AA range.

Manticore example
You a SC re-roll 1 blast marker isn't much of a deterant. I actually leave units like that alone if they are covered and shoot something else. Being spaced out for fear of a manticore atack doesn't worry me much (especially when 4 of my formations are two APC tanks and manticores are a bit wasted on them), I'd rather have attack after attack from the TK plane as its very demoralising. Indeed in the first batrep I ignored the artillary entirely. I realised by just flying again and again I'd do far more damage ofsetting any damage from the 6 manticores. But this is all playstyles I guess.

Incidentally how did the Imperials managed to shoot it down? get lucky with a crit from a moved up battery or shot at it lots or what?

On turn 2, a tau plane may have significant blast markers. Its very probable that a tau plane can get 1 turn of fire and 2 at most due to tau 2+ activation, armor, and 2-3 blast markers gained in one turn.

Play with lots of activates and the issue doesn't arise, you have to deal with one, maybe two if some clever manovering has gone on, blast markers. And in that first turn you would have done a lot of damage. Well, thats the idea, hopefully get to demonstrate it vs eldar tomorrow after doing marines and Guard :)

I need to put this to the test myself and see if I generate the same test results you did. I fully agree that *if* your results remain true with the latest v4.3.3 version of the TS, then we have a problem. However, I don't feel that will be the case. My feeling is that the reduced amount of FP potential on average per turn will detur effectively and generate the desired army compositions as the kill potential that you once experienced is no longer there.

Okay, will you try my 2700 point army list? And will this be on a player who knows they will be attacked by 5 WE bombers with TK weapons or someone who is taking their regular force? :)

And if I slaughter the Elder tomorrow do I get a cracker? :)

Incidentally you should get Tiny Tim to try this out, hes a better player than eye and would mostly be able to get even more milage out of it.

_________________
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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tactica
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 8:19 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
Quote (The_Real_Chris @ 16 Jan. 2006 (13:06))


Quote (Tactica @ 16 Jan. 2006 (16:49))

I'm sure you've seen the double "cautiously move" with the first move to get out of the terrain and them "full move" with the second to get into position... or vice versa... or single move and fire to cautiously enter the terrain and then open up on the enemy.
Second, my understanding is that they don't take a minus for the terrain their firing out of (like 40K), only intervening terrain beyond that or terrain that the enemy is in, so in the end - yeah, if your opponent isn't making good use of terrain, I can appreciate your perspective much more.


Ah, I feel we may have two differences here.
The first being the size of cover. Our ruined areas/woods/similar cover that vehicles can enter are quite large. You can't cross them with one turn of cautious movement.
You only avoid the -1 for firing out of it if you are on the edge of it as far as were understand otherwise it is interveening. A tank in the middle of a ruin has -1 firing out as well as -1 to enemy units firing in.

Hmm, my understanding is you can only see...

1) into, or
2) out of, or
3) through...

...10cm of forest/terrain, etc.

So if you are outside of said forest and firing at somebody in terrain within the 10cm of the edge, you could fire at them, but they would be in cover.

On the other hand, if you were firing OUT of the terrain which you were within 10cm of, then you would not take a penalty at all - whether you were 1cm from the edge, or right at 10cm from the edge - you were firing out of YOUR piece of terrain that YOU occupied to somebody that wasn't in your piece of terrain - therefore, no penalty to your tank... unless of course there was another piece of intervening inbetween you and your target.

The only exception to your own peice of terrain NOT giving you a negative would be if the enemy target also occupied your piece of terrain. Now if they were in that piece of terrain with you and you were both within 10cm to have a LOF - then you would take the negative for firing at somebody incover.

That's our understanding anwyay.

So in our games, there's almost always... infact, I think there are indeed ALWAYS tanks in cover regularly in our games.

Perhaps your group is different due to terrain / playstyle / other?

_________________
Rob


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
The_Real_Chris
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 8:38 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
Quote (Tactica @ 16 Jan. 2006 (19:19))

Yes, tanks rarely go into cover as they get destroyed to dangerous terrain tests and they can't cross cautiously in one turn.
The rules state that you may see through 10cm of cover but nowhere do they see you may ignore it.

Indeed the text says
Units that are in terrain that is tall enough to at least
partially obscure them from an attacker?s view receive a
-1 to hit modifier when being shot at (see 1.9.5). The to
hit modifier also applies if intervening terrain obscures
the target partially from view.

If you can see through 10cm of ruins it is most certainly intervening. Just because you have line of sight doesn't mean shattered pillars and the like will move out of your way.

Further the design concept box states
Snip.... However, the -1 to hit modifier should be generously
applied, and if in any doubt it should be counted rather than ignored.

It is also pretty much common sense.
If you are in the middle of a wood you have hundreds of trees around you, so by all means have -1 to hit. But equally it is rather tough to line up shots on mobile units outside the wood as all these trees keep getting in the way. Sure you can wait for that one shot through the 20 trees ahead but methinks that gets you a lower rate of fire than most units in the 15 minute turn.

Perhaps this should be FAQed? Though the above reasoning is the way we have always played, everyone I've met at tourneys has played and how other games are played as well.

_________________
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
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tactica
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 9:05 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
[quote="The_Real_Chris,16 Jan. 2006 (13:06)"][/quote]
I don't assess value in points spent vs. returned. There are many intangible returns in a game that are not necessarily points earned. Example: by having an airforce that's not yet entered play, my opponent may cautiously move and thus not take aggressive actions on the table to maintain covarge from his AA umbrella. That may afford me an opportunity to take a flank or a particular front with ground forces easier than I originally anticipated/hoped for thus freeing up forces on that front for a tertiary engagement plan. Therefore, indirectly my planes generated points as my opponent changed his battle tactics accordingly that turn.


With me planes are all about destroying the enemy.

That's interesting, I didn't expect that to be your perspective.

Normally their best assets as well as opposed to general chaff (unless they are thunderbolts who only ever go chaff hunting). If I have a plane which will stop the enmy from emerging from cover I'd be thrilled as I'm going to win.

LOL, OK, however, I'll disagree. If my opponent has two sets of planes off board, and I've already activated my fighters, things could be such that my flak is not all ready to activate right now - so my flak umbrella may not as it should be, although I've done quite well in the game thus far. Being mindful of my opponent's remaining four activations and knowign that two of them are planes will definitely impact whether or not certain assets move now or later and when they leave cover. ?

Ignoring such facts and variables to minimize my own risks and maximize my threats is only logical to me. Therefore, if my opponent has fliers off table, they very well may impact how I proceed in a turn as well as impact the order of units I activate. Its absolutely part of my analytical process and approach to fire and movement disciplines I observe if not adhere too subconsciously.

I'll respect that you see it differently, I'll grin if you think these tactics are simply game losing.

Indeed the only plane that could stop me doing that is one who can kill at least half its value in one go and with its mates break the attack.

Noted - rather cavalier of you, bravo.

Kinda like 5 TS vs a Leman Russ company. Hell, I can wipe it out if I'm slightly lucky.
TRC, come on man... really... lets be honest here... the secondary weapons of the TS are basically moot unless you are flying right into the face of danger and assuming you'll get no flak hits blast markers and no unsaved hits... so we are really down to the main weapon systems if you are skirting the edge of fate and manage to get your bombers into no flak zones while firing...

Leman Russ co is 10 models strong. *If* you can manage to avoid all flak, you'll get 10 shots hitting on 4+. ?5 hits = 5 dead tanks. (this of course assumes there were no more tanks and no flak tank in the formation)

Threfore, 5 activations and 875 points to deal with 325 points of tanks. Well done, seems about right actually. Shame on your opponent for knowing that you had 5 TS off table that could hurt his Lemans... Shame that he let you activate all 5 of those over three different sets of tau activations and never protected his lemans as the most you were killing was two per activation opportunity. anyway - well done - Now you'll have to get off the field with all 5 and hope the enemy still has not put you in his flak umbrella. Else you'll not even get all of your models next turn. NOTE: if he had given one or two upgrades to the company, you'd not even have broken the formation. 1 flak tank could have solved that. And you'd have a host of fliers with blast markers on them - you should probably even lose 1 or 2 hits in total placing a couple blast markers on some of the formations!

Now, *If* Mr. Hypothetical opponent thought about things you had off table a bit more, the lemans should have absolutely been in cover when at least some of your 5 TS entered the table. you'd hit on 5's. 10 shots = 3 hits = 3 dead tanks. So in this mode, your 5 activations and 875 points only got you 195 out of the enemy's singular activation on that go.

Your 5 TS probably just got a host of blast markers too - shame really, not all of them are coming back next turn. Moreover, the flak should have done some damage that's on the field and you may have even lost one... hopefully Mr. Hypothetical continues to use cover, fire his 75cm weapons at your limited ground forces, and continue to keep his lemans in good flak coverage while you struggle to work out how to deal with the IG flak umbrella and clustered formations.

So, I have a hard time appreciating that unless faced by 5 TS or the equivilent of ~900 points of aircraft, you would ignore the enemy air power with your tanks and not worry about cover. Your point is quite clear, but I don't know that I agree with the modus operandi. :p

I've always taken the view that wiped out broken units or units that fail to activate as they have been broken before they activate give me a certain advantage. My style of play is generally to brea the enemy before they activate and then wipe out broken units.

Definitely a good Montra TRC. Break you if not kill you before you have the opportunity to do the same to me. Makes sense.

Air can do this fairly well, better is artillary, even better is air that can strike from outside AA range.

I find that large MW capable lance formations, MBT tank formations, some SHT formations, rapid strike assaults, drop assaults, space craft with pin-point attacks, teleport attacks by termy's and/or marines, many eldar vehicles, eldar gate with charge by jetbikes... and to a lessor extent artillery and planes - all tend to do an exceptional job at eliminating the enemy before he can have an opportunity activate.

2 AX-1-0 Tiger Sharks, you get the first turn, and your first two activations... against my LRMBT company - in cover (mine always will be unless the table just doesn't allow it) will also have a hydra flak tank in it at minimum and will have nearby flak - best you get is 2.x kills for your 2 activations and 350 points if you are lucky needing 5+ to hit with your v4.3.3 main weapons on the AX-1-0.

350 points of drop pod marines might do a far cry better against me after I've taken their battering of pod attacks plus assault with blast markers.

:cool:

Okay, will you try my 2700 point army list?

Sure - you build it (v4.3.3 0 or current if one comes out sooner) and I'll put it to the test. I'll play it against my best IG/bug player. (he'll probably play IG as he's more comfortable with them and the list is stable) I'll then also reverse roles with him (time permitting) and he'll run the Tau vs. his own IG that I'll then play. I'll get 2 batreps from it and post them both here. Sound good?

And will this be on a player who knows they will be attacked by 5 WE bombers with TK weapons or someone who is taking their regular force? :)

You pick. I'll do it however you like it.

Presumably, you don't want him to know that he'll be attacked by 5 SHT bombers. He should just build and all comers IG list. On the other hand, you may not like the result as our locals play a bit more air and flak that perhaps your group does.

And if I slaughter the Elder tomorrow do I get a cracker? :)

Incidentally you should get Tiny Tim to try this out, hes a better player than eye and would mostly be able to get even more milage out of it.

Cheers,

LOL - well, don't know about the cracker and tiny tim thing. We'll have to see how the batrep rolls out and see if the player even knows what he's doing. I presume you'll find a good player to run Chroma's Eldar.

Looking forward to that batrep. NOTE: I'm assuming you'll be playing v4.3.3 against him.

Cheers,

_________________
Rob


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tactica
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 9:13 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
Quote (The_Real_Chris @ 16 Jan. 2006 (13:38))

TRC,

All makes good sense, but not the way we play it locally. Thats for sure. Perhpas we define "intervening" a bit differently. Perhaps we are applying a bit of 40K technique/rules to the epic system in this regard. I'd have to research further on this to see if yours or our interpretation is clearly defined. I simply don't have the time to dig into it right now.

I thought it was stated that you could clearly draw LOF out 10cm of terrain somewhere. Perhaps I'm mistaken. I do realize you cannot draw it through it. I also realize the enemy in the terrain will benefit from it.

Logically though, I'll have to disagree with you. If I'm within 10cm of wood edge, I can clearly see throught the trees out to my target MUCH easier than the enemy can see me.

Logically speaking, if you have a smaller gun in reference, this may cause you more of a challenge compared to the way I see the situation.

A tank cannon will be able to draw a target out of the woods, but into the woods will be much harder.

A pistol drawing a bead out of the woods is going to have it harder than the battle cannon, but it will still be easier to fire out than into the woods.

Several war games apply this philosophy actually. I thought Epic was the same. I'll have to reasearch - like I said above. Hmm..

Cheers,

_________________
Rob
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
The_Real_Chris
 Post subject: Tigershark
PostPosted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 10:46 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
[quote="Tactica,16 Jan. 2006 (20:05)"][/quote]
Leman Russ etc


Actually I've done it twice if you check the two games against Imperials. The massive actvation advantage was a help, as was the fact each attack does a blast marker.

Even assuming I'm not done my manovering correctly to have a go with my secondary weapons and only kill 1 thing with each plane the formation breaks long before all five have activated. After two attacks the formation is down 2 tanks and up 4 blastmarkers. 3 ?- 6 blast markers, 7 units left etc.

So my planes have completly crippled the best Imperial formation facing me. Sure it could sit there and not advance, luckily its short range and my objective placement means I am now 1 turn closer to victory.

If they have advanced into cover they haven't gone very far, or have had no chance to shoot me. Either way is good.

And is the entire Imperial army going to be doing this?

And to be frank if faced by 900 points of Marauders or even Eldar bombers I'd be a lot more chipper as my tanks actually have a chance of surviving unbroken, and due to their shorter ranges, a far greater chance of blowing them out of the sky. Not to mention they don't have as many activations as the TS, are easier to shoot down anyway etc.

2 AX-1-0 Tiger Sharks, you get the first turn, and your first two activations... against my LRMBT company - in cover (mine always will be unless the table just doesn't allow it) will also have a hydra flak tank in it at minimum and will have nearby flak - best you get is 2.x kills for your 2 activations and 350 points if you are lucky needing 5+ to hit with your v4.3.3 main weapons on the AX-1-0.


Well, I'd be using them last probably after the rest of my army had attempted to break the hydra batteries (fairly easy in my experience if you get a clear line of sight), in fact check out the Batrep here for pointers on what I would do :)

And if the tanks were creeping forward that fast its going to take them at least three turns to simply get to the half way line, never mind my objectives (make sure you place his as far forward as you can in the open, makes getting there easier and Guard have no nasty garisson formations).

General tips try to avoid pointing the plane at the target, at an angle of 45 degrees does fine.

I guess the only way I'll ever have to show you how I use aircraft is to do it in front of you, perhaps one day we shall meet :)

Sure - you build it (v4.3.3 0 or current if one comes out sooner) and I'll put it to the test. I'll play it against my best IG/bug player. (he'll probably play IG as he's more comfortable with them and the list is stable) I'll then also reverse roles with him (time permitting) and he'll run the Tau vs. his own IG that I'll then play. I'll get 2 batreps from it and post them both here. Sound good?
You pick. I'll do it however you like it.

I'm trying to do the same with an Elder/Nid player and he's using Eldar for the same reason :)

It should be a regular 'tournament force' so have as much flak as you normally have, but 2000 points of Hydra would be execessive :) So no special response to the Tau air armada.

5 Tigersharks
4 Pathfinders
Crisis and supreme commander
2 ion Hammerhead formations, 1 network upgrade
2700 points
Top tip is to hide a lot and let the planes deal with the big stuff, stick to shooting up infantry and the like (crisis and pathfinders seem to be quite good against garrissoning infantry). Markerlights on the LR and similar help as well with the MW tigershark shots.
Also let the guard player go first if possible, take the manticores and whatnot on the chin. Idea is to make him run out of activations and have free run with the planes. Also when being shot by manticores make sure the scouts are inside the apc's, not outside (baffles me why people do this).

Looking forward to that batrep. NOTE: I'm assuming you'll be playing v4.3.3 against him.

Definatively, as it boosts the Tanks and Crisis :)

LOS woods

Well sure, you have LOS but it says nothing about negating the cover save. Indeed to shoot you I have to have LOS, but then I get -1.

Makes a big difference I suspect to our respective games and tactics. Incidentally I agree about it being easier to see out rather than in, but thats a level of detail Epic doesn't go into, somethings obscured or it isn't. The degrees of cover of say woods vs ruins and similar are all a -1. If you wanted to get more detailed I'd claim a +1 every time my artillary shelled woods to get at infantry and similar modifications (as its now easier to get the little buggers).

think of it this way - your tank gets -1 as you have one shot only, I get -1 as I have to lay fire into a big area of the wood in an attempt to get you.

perhaps it should be -1 and -2 back but thats not something Epic goes into. instead it uses a black and white measure - you are either in or out of cover, shooting through or not shooting through an interveening obsticle.

_________________
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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 10 of 12
  [ 177 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 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

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net