Tactical Command | View topic - Tigershark AX-0-1

Page 3 of 5

[ 62 posts ]

Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

View unanswered posts | View active topics View unread posts | View new posts | View your posts

Tigershark AX-0-1

CyberShadow

Post subject: Tigershark AX-0-1

Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2006 6:28 pm

Swarm Tyrant

Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:22 pm
Posts: 9350
Location: Singapore

It is at that point already. As Air Caste, the player is limited to a third of the points values. So, for every 1000 points, you cant have more than 333 points of TS. At 175 each you can almost get two for every 1000 points (and only one by the strict letter of the rules).

_________________
https://www.cybershadow.ninja - A brief look into my twisted world, including wargames and beyond.
https://www.net-armageddon.org - The official NetEA (Epic Armageddon) site and resource.

Top

clausewitz

Post subject: Tigershark AX-0-1

Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2006 6:50 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

My suggestion did not limit the number of formations that could be taken, other than making it a 400 point choice. Thus the limiting factor is points and the 33% aircraft allocation.

Although putting back to 2 planes per formation makes the formation more durable, its increased cost and vulnerability to non-use due to BMs affecting activation should balance that somewhat. (Its a lot worse when 400 points of aircraft dont activate than 175 points worth)

As a comparison I used the Phoenix Bomber (400 points), Vampire Hunter (500) and Marauder Destroyer (450). All "heavily armed" type aircraft, somewhat similar to the AX-1-0. IMO, the ability to lay a swath of BMs through many bombers is worse than having a more survivable bomber formation.

Top

Steele

Post subject: Tigershark AX-0-1

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 12:22 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 6:40 am
Posts: 423
Location: Duisburg , Germany

Quote (CyberShadow @ 26 Jan. 2006 (18:28))

No, I meant , that You can only take 1 Plane per 1000 Points played , regardless of the 33%. This would lead to a maximum of 3 in a 3000 Points game.

Cheers!
Steele

_________________
Quid pro Quo

Top

Dobbsy

Post subject: Tigershark AX-0-1

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 2:34 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:24 am
Posts: 4499
Location: Melbourne, Australia

- Railcannons range cut to 30 cm (I've seen the same this has been done in the saim-hann list for the vampire hunter).

I'm against this too - I'd prefer the price hike or/and restriction on formation numbers, as to take too many would really cut my ground force activations.

It seems odd that ppl mention that the 45cm rail gun is longer than AA fire range of opponents when all but the Orks get at least 45cm AA ranges (SM and Eldar get 60 and 45-75cm respectively!)

Is there something I'm missing in this theory of dropping the range?

Top

Honda

Post subject: Tigershark AX-0-1

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 3:39 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:44 pm
Posts: 1891
Location: Katy, Republic of Texas

I'm against this too - I'd prefer the price hike or/and restriction on formation numbers, as to take too many would really cut my ground force activations.

In strong agreement with Dobbsy

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

Top

CyberShadow

Post subject: Tigershark AX-0-1

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 11:52 am

Swarm Tyrant

Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:22 pm
Posts: 9350
Location: Singapore

This is all well and good, and a points hike may be on the cards... but has anyone actually played with the TS as of v4.3.3?

Top

Steele

Post subject: Tigershark AX-0-1

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 1:38 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 6:40 am
Posts: 423
Location: Duisburg , Germany

Quote (CyberShadow @ 27 Jan. 2006 (11:52))

This is all well and good, and a points hike may be on the cards... but has anyone actually played with the TS as of v4.3.3?

With a little bit of luck - tommorrow.

Steele

_________________
Quid pro Quo

Top

clausewitz

Post subject: Tigershark AX-0-1

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 3:33 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

Quote (CyberShadow @ 27 Jan. 2006 (10:52))

This is all well and good, and a points hike may be on the cards... but has anyone actually played with the TS as of v4.3.3?

Yup, as reported earlier in this thread. That's what I based my idea on. Sorry I couldn't do a full batrep, but I can probably answer questions based on what notes I was able to take.

The change from 3+ to 4+ on the cannons did slightly reduce the damage done (probably rolled 1 or 2 4's in the course of the game), but that wasn't the problem. The problem was 5 formations that could lay BM's wherever they wanted, allowing me to break multiple key formations.

Top

nealhunt

Post subject: Tigershark AX-0-1

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 3:50 pm

Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA

It seems odd that ppl mention that the 45cm rail gun is longer than AA fire range of opponents when all but the Orks get at least 45cm AA ranges (SM and Eldar get 60 and 45-75cm respectively!)

Is there something I'm missing in this theory of dropping the range?

Equal range on flak v aircraft means the aircraft is still in complete control of the encounter. With that equal range, the aircraft can engage the edge of the target formation and as long as the flak unit is not the closest, the attack run will be completed before the flak can fire.

If you put the flak unit on the edge of the formation, the aircraft has the choice of either braving the flak to try to pick off the flak unit or simply approaching from another direction.

Even 30cm flak range will usually hit a 45cm range bomber on the disengage because the bomber will enter the flak unit's range before it can turn away. So, to that extent, 45cm range flak means little over 30cm against a 45cm range aircraft.

As far as SM longer range, the Hunter is typically surrounded by 45cm range units, so if the aircraft engage the formation in the 45-60cm range from the Hunter, the Hunter is always the farthest unit with range and is therefore suppressed first.

For the Eldar, the Fire Prisms are cool and all, but the formation is extraordinarily fragile and must be kept well towards the rear of the army or risk being suppressed, if not just killed outright. Still, it is probably the only flak that I would consider to effectively outdistance a 45cm range aircraft.

_________________
Neal

Top

Steele

Post subject: Tigershark AX-0-1

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 6:35 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 6:40 am
Posts: 423
Location: Duisburg , Germany

Quote (nealhunt @ 27 Jan. 2006 (15:50))

Equal range on flak v aircraft means the aircraft is still in complete control of the encounter. ?With that equal range, the aircraft can engage the edge of the target formation and as long as the flak unit is not the closest, the attack run will be completed before the flak can fire.

If you put the flak unit on the edge of the formation, the aircraft has the choice of either braving the flak to try to pick off the flak unit or simply approaching from another direction.

Even 30cm flak range will usually hit a 45cm range bomber on the disengage because the bomber will enter the flak unit's range before it can turn away. ?So, to that extent, 45cm range flak means little over 30cm against a 45cm range aircraft.

As far as SM longer range, the Hunter is typically surrounded by 45cm range units, so if the aircraft engage the formation in the 45-60cm range from the Hunter, the Hunter is always the farthest unit with range and is therefore suppressed first.

For the Eldar, the Fire Prisms are cool and all, but the formation is extraordinarily fragile and must be kept well towards the rear of the army or risk being suppressed, if not just killed outright. ?Still, it is probably the only flak that I would consider to effectively outdistance a 45cm range aircraft.

In my games , the Hunter stays pretty much in the middle as soon as my opponent realizes that he will face air threats. And , like I said , I tend to go as near as 15 cm or closer to deliver full payload.

So , it depends on playing style and not the bare ranges , which do me thinking though....

Cheers!
Steele

_________________
Quid pro Quo

Top

Honda

Post subject: Tigershark AX-0-1

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 7:33 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:44 pm
Posts: 1891
Location: Katy, Republic of Texas

@Neal

Equal range on flak v aircraft means the aircraft is still in complete control of the encounter. With that equal range, the aircraft can engage the edge of the target formation and as long as the flak unit is not the closest, the attack run will be completed before the flak can fire.

If you put the flak unit on the edge of the formation, the aircraft has the choice of either braving the flak to try to pick off the flak unit or simply approaching from another direction.

I know you are only trying to make a point, but your statement is posted as if this is a bad thing.

In reality, if all aircraft had to enter the flak engagement zone to do their business, then nobody would commit to air-to-ground missions. There just wouldn't be any justification to risking the pilots lives or the tens of millions of dollars/yen/rubles/pounds for each aircraft. The reality is that each time a AAA system becomes more effective, some technological improvement in aircraft forces the engagement envelope to shrink so that aircraft can resume expected level of effectiveness.

The fact that the Tau have an aircraft that has the 45 cm weapon range is only to be expected of an advance air force. So again, keep the capabilities the same and find another way to restrict the usage.

I still have yet to hear why limiting the use of the aircraft to one formation with two aircraft is such a bad idea. Everyone agrees that five is too many, but nobody has made that claim for two.

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

Top

blackhorizon

Post subject: Tigershark AX-0-1

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 7:45 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 9:40 pm
Posts: 2842
Location: Netherlands

I'm a complete Epic noob, I know nothing about the game except from what I read on Epicooms.

But the Tigershark discussion has been intrigiung (spl?) me.

I, noob, suggest following:

- First go WYSIWYG on the weaponry. If, its not clear what a weapon on the model should represent send an e-mail to the designer of the model (not the rules maker).
I did that with the Tau Protector, the answer by the designer was completely different as what most people taught. My current Protector weaponry can be found on Gothicomms under Tau fleet.
So WYSIWYG & ask the designer of you don't see

- As a suggestion, when people think its incarnation is too strong (bypassing my earlier statement) go with formations like this:

To field 1 Tigershark you must field 2 Barracudas.

_________________
Light at the Horizon.

Warp Rift
Project Distant Darkness
Eldar MMS

GothiComp Hall of Fame
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=19176

Top

nealhunt

Post subject: Tigershark AX-0-1

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 10:00 pm

Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA

I know you are only trying to make a point, but your statement is posted as if this is a bad thing.

My post was only meant to answer Dobbsy's specific question.

_________________
Neal

Top

The_Real_Chris

Post subject: Tigershark AX-0-1

Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2006 4:21 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London

Well, another day, another couple of battles, this time verses more flak than I can imagine (batreps will be done by me or gavin plus pics from new digital camera) and two more wins for the Tau (beating me first game, curse being on the wrong side!).

Where to start? You go away for a week and find 8 pages of discussion, no point replying to each in turn so heres a summery.

1) Tactica remains unconvinced
2) People say that any army could get similar results with their bombers if taken on mass.
3) That people wouldn't take the plane if it was 30cm.
4) Its the best armoured dedicated bomber (ignoring the vampire hunter which has only been used a handful of times so far).
5) Its got the longest ranged main strike.
6) With a TK point strike it can snipe better than any other plane.
7) It outranges most flak, at least on the way in.

You can use it to boost activations.
9) That its a warengine hunter.
10) Comments on modern air battles.

A few points of my own -
11) The army with five planes in should in my opinion never ever win. It was picked to try and emphasis their damage potential as this is hard to show when you take one (though Neal does a good job of pointing out consistently higher than average points returns). I was actually unsure if it could win being as you have to take objectives, but I guess as you get to kill so much stuff

12) The Tau list shouldn't make the game more air orientated than it already is. I think the game sufferes if it goes very air/flak heavy as it wasn't designed to be so, goes against the ethos of the 40k background (air is a very minor part) and look at things logically - if air was that good you be find yourself playing modern esk games, WWII naval or similar where air pretty much wins you the game.
13) The fluff is out of whack with the game.

1) Tactica remains unconvinced

Solution - play tactica. Ah the limits of the net

Saying that I did everything he had said in previous posts with the eldar and still just lost. Well, remeber the black legion and no-one thought the war engines and planes were unbalenced

Well, they may still be, I have no idea as I haven't had a chance to look at the list again yet! Perhaps tonight might get to try it out.

2) People say that any army could get similar results with their bombers if taken on mass.
Well no. Believe me I tried. The Eldar lack the wieght of firepower on the aircraft to be the mainstay, the Orks need lots of big ground activations to stay in the game and again lacks the firepower - and is very short ranged making loses inevitable (though a chap at the WPS tourney with 1000 points of fighter bombers did I think win 1 game in 5). Then the Imperium. The marauder is dire. Falls out of the sky when hit, desperately short ranged, big drop off in effectiveness after the first plane dies etc. Better choice 99% of the time is artillary. And all the above have to get to 15-30cm of the target to be most effective.

3) That people wouldn't take the plane if it was 30cm.
Well, sorta interferes with point 2 doesn't it. All the other airforces are stuck fighting at that range. Why should 15cm make any difference? Is it perhaps the difference between being shot and not being shot before you attack?
Are people honestly saying they want the plane to deliever a MW and 2 TK shots with next to no chance of enemy fire hitting them? How does one then point such a creature? Do you base it on what it can kill over 3 turns in good conditions or what?

4) Its the best armoured dedicated bomber (ignoring the vampire hunter which has only been used a handful of times so far).
I have no problem with this really. I reckon the marauder should be 2DC 5+ save too. It means you can take flak fire and keep going to target. Combined with the ability to miss most of the flak though......

5) Its got the longest ranged main strike.
7) It outranges most flak, at least on the way in.
Anyone dissagree? I feel this is a multiplier as far as the other issues go - it makes it more survivable, increases its flexibility, makes flying it easier, etc. The other bombers have to get to 15cm to be useful, I got good with air using them. With these chaps its all to easy.

6) With a TK point strike it can snipe better than any other plane.
So its a rules abuse, but this plane can exploit it far more effectively than any other with its two instant kill attacks (and MW attack).

You can use it to boost activations.
Again a bit obvious. Lots of 175 point activations which can't be easily destroyed is going to be a boost for your activation count.

9) That its a warengine hunter.
And should be such in that case, or be something else in the fluff. A machine with an optimal target, not one with anything good as the target. Warengine hunters have multiple DC attacks - the chance to kill that baneblade in one turn. If you have a unit with multiple TK attacks, not damage, WE are no longer the best target. Now you want to kill something in one go making high value vehicles and infantry the priority (sniped as required). If its a WE hunter it should have 1 TK attack, D3 damage. This then gives it an optimal target. Currently it will be usefull against nearly every army selection in the game whether massed or taken singly.
10) Comments on modern air battles.
If you want to draw modern analogies, its a mistake. First off Epic does not have built into the army lists the prepondarance of flak that modern armies have. Hell, it has nowhere near the flak WWII armies had. Air force wise air rules the battlefield now. Whether its hunter drones, cruise missiles or traditional strikes, things are a bit rough for ground formations. Hence all the flak that is kept in reserve for fighting a modern army. As well as a fluff leaning towards ground combat Epic has space assets, changing radically what you can do air wise. The Ork air superiority didn't seem to do much to the armies of the Imperium - to see what happens now check out the 91 iraq war.
Epic isn't built to handle modern air ideas and strike practices. in my view this is a good thing - and similar to why I don't like playing naval games with carriers involved. BFG is about the only carrier game I do like and there bombers with the experimental rules aren't the be all and end all.

A few points of my own -
11) The army with five planes in should in my opinion never ever win. It was picked to try and emphasis their damage potential as this is hard to show when you take one (though Neal does a good job of pointing out consistently higher than average points returns). I was actually unsure if it could win being as you have to take objectives, but I guess as you get to kill so much stuff

Hmm, already put in commentry

Different air rules and the area of airplane design could be very different. These air rules and the area of airplane abuse increases. It also means the game is less exiciting

13) The fluff is out of whack with the game.
Look at this thing. A fighter bomber with excellent offensive power? Space wise ditch al the barracudas and titan things., replace with these. Excellent massed strike, able to provide fighter cover as well, less of a strain on logistics. Ground wise, get air superiority (how hard is that if the Imperiums naval assets aren't playing), then launch massed strikes with these. Throw a hundred or so into pre ground war bombardment, then pick up pieces with infantry and tanks.

Elite air power would have the same effect as it does now. Indeed there would be no reason to play 40k - unless it represented mopping up oporations. Indeed, why play epic? How have those Leman Russ companies survived this long? How many hardened bunkers does the Imperium have?

The game doesn't work with modern logic and the effects aren't thought through. uber infantry, tanks, commanders and the like in 40k are fine, there would be many ways to counter tactically with existing stuff. uber air assets cause a rethink of the whole game.

Overall if I had god like power to change the plane I would start with making the main weapon twin linked D3 damage 30cm (a warengine hunter) and go from there, pointing it to get its optimum target. That way if that formation of shadowswords shows up, wayhey, if it doesn't I shouldn't expect the plane to make much difference.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' Ã¢â‚¬â€œ Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

Top

Honda

Post subject: Tigershark AX-0-1

Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2006 6:54 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:44 pm
Posts: 1891
Location: Katy, Republic of Texas

A few points of my own -
11) The army with five planes in should in my opinion never ever win. It was picked to try and emphasis their damage potential as this is hard to show when you take one (though Neal does a good job of pointing out consistently higher than average points returns). I was actually unsure if it could win being as you have to take objectives, but I guess as you get to kill so much stuff

So, I may be a little dense, but if by taking five planes you lose more times than you win, then why is that an issue?

Do we also restrict someone from taking too many AT weapons against a horde/all infantry army? This is just an opinion, but if somebody wants to take a bunch of "all powerful, galaxy crusher" units and always loses the game, who cares?

I'm being a little cheeky here, but that isn't "unbalanced". An unbalanced unit causes people to win an inordinate amount of time through the use of the weapon.

This alone is not a reason to change the TS. I'm not saying that's what your point of contention is, but this isn't what I would consider an issue.

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

Top

Print view

Previous topic | Next topic

Page 3 of 5

[ 62 posts ]

Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 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

Jump to:

Tigershark AX-0-1

Who is online