Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 6 of 7
  [ 103 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

thoughts on jetbikes
Markconz
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 3:39 am 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand
I don't know that I agree with that, Markconz. ?Skimmers in 40k are just as hard for melee critters to deal with, and Eldar skimmers are particularly vulnerable. ?In 40k, a fully pimped out CC Carnifex can charge a Falcon and only average .139 kills. ?It needs 7.2 turns to statistically guarantee a kill! ?


Well if you want duplication of this in epic - then you need to give the falcon holofields in epic! It takes heaps of ANY types of attacks to kill an upgraded falcon in 40k, shooting or close combat - hence their reputation for being unkillable! ?

This is not at all a problem with my argument about skimmers, it is problem related to how tough upgraded falcons are in 40k (a deserved reputation for being almost unkillable) and how tough they are in epic (paper thin armour). ?Another major inconsistency between epic and 40k which Sotec is just ignoring with his random pick and choose approach.

For the sake of interest lets also take a vyper as an example - (something which can't have all the upgrade goodies a falcon can). A vyper charged by a weak carni (eg just 2x scythes and tusks - and not even specialised at hitting skimmers), will take an average of one hit. This one hit has 50% chance of destroying the vyper outright, 17% chance of destroying the main gun (which would probably class it as OOA in epic), and the remaining 33% results stun it (unable to fire next round).

Remember also that an engage action in epic represents an entire 40k battle. Also consider that some hand to hand attacks (like tyranid bioplasma) hits skimmers on 4+ rather than 6+.

One last thing to note is that you also don't have to 'kill' a vehicle to render it ineffective in 40k, destroying its weapons, immobilising it, and even stunning it for round after round, can take you most of the way.


All Eldar skimmers being Fast, it's also extremely unlikely that that Carnifex will get a chance to charge. ?That's something else that doesn't translate well into Epic - it's not at all difficult to avoid lumbering 6" moving behemoths with 12" moving skimmers.

Exactly, so if the carnifex can't catch a fast grav tank or vyper (which can move up to 24"), then how do you expect it to catch a jetbike (which can also move up to 24")?! This is just another argument in favour of keeping jetbikes as skimmers.




_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Gotchaye
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 3:52 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 1:25 am
Posts: 59
Hmm?  Oh, I'm not arguing with you; I'm in full agreement that Jetbikes ought to be skimmers.  I was partially just disagreeing with your claim that a Carnifex could wreck a skimmer in CC and partially trying to justify the CC-avoidance ability of skimmers in Epic - they just can't be caught in 40k.

I suppose it should also be pointed out that Crisis Suits, who have the same assault phase move as Jetbikes in 40k, have significant ability in Epic to avoid CC through their jump back ability.  Jetbikes not only have that, they also have the same 12" movement of vehicles that makes them so hard to catch in CC.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Markconz
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 5:30 am 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand

(Gotchaye @ Aug. 19 2006,02:52)
QUOTE
Hmm? ?Oh, I'm not arguing with you; I'm in full agreement that Jetbikes ought to be skimmers. ?I was partially just disagreeing with your claim that a Carnifex could wreck a skimmer in CC and partially trying to justify the CC-avoidance ability of skimmers in Epic - they just can't be caught in 40k.

Ah my apologies I see where you were coming from now :)

I should really check out this Tau list too...

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tactica
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 4:56 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
Marconz,

OK, I misspoke about 'when' the skimmer became a 6+ to be hit in close combat.

We are into tedious argument stages at this point and miscommunication is happening.

Its true, when regular vehicles in 40K are idle, they are auto hit, when they move up to 6", they are hit on a 4+, and when the move over 6", they are hit on a 6+.

Skimmers are harder to hit in close combat than regular vehicles, also true.

Jetbikes on the other hand are always hit as infantry - which is not like a vehicle or a skimming vehicle, and that is the point.

Don't assume you know anything more about 40K than the rest of us Sir, your continual banter on this topic is no more valid than the rest of us. After all, its a fictional game.

My point is simple and remains constant.

I do not feel E:A jetbikes should be able to 1) force a Firefight and 2) should not be able to pop-up and fire like skimming vehicles can.

Reasoning: skimming jetbikes are _infantry_ and skimming vehicles are just that - _vehicles_. They have different benefits and weaknesses.

You can read through this thread and find that we've both made our share of mistakes, but your supporting arguments have been incorrect more than accurate.

Fact: jetbike infantry are not skimming vehicles.

I think the cases have been made, now its time to see where the cards lie with Sotec.

Cheers,

_________________
Rob
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tactica
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 5:02 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241

(Gotchaye @ Aug. 18 2006,21:52)
QUOTE
Hmm? ?Oh, I'm not arguing with you; I'm in full agreement that Jetbikes ought to be skimmers. ?I was partially just disagreeing with your claim that a Carnifex could wreck a skimmer in CC and partially trying to justify the CC-avoidance ability of skimmers in Epic - they just can't be caught in 40k.

I suppose it should also be pointed out that Crisis Suits, who have the same assault phase move as Jetbikes in 40k, have significant ability in Epic to avoid CC through their jump back ability. ?Jetbikes not only have that, they also have the same 12" movement of vehicles that makes them so hard to catch in CC.

I would add to that... crisis suits cannot force a FF in E:A.

Crisis suits also fight horribly in E:A whether it be a CC or a FF.

Crisis suits are also infantry, just like Jetbikes should be in both systems.

I should also note that crisis suits are not skimming armoured vehicles, just like Eldar Jetbikes are not skimming armored vehicels.

I agree, I think this is very helpful information.

A jump away moving in the assault phase in 40K does not equal being able to force a firefight in E:A - very good analogy Gotchaye.

Cheers,

_________________
Rob
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
nealhunt
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 6:22 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
The dividing lines between types of units in each game do not have to be the same.  The general concepts are the same but the mechanics of each system has different tools for dealing with them that result in slightly different divisions.  The end result is that there is no formula of "40K X = Epic Y."  Things that push the boundaries of the categories in either system can and should be moved as necessary to fulfill mechanical needs in the respective system and background material.

"It's infantry here, so it should be infantry there" and similar arguments are of very little value in that respect.  Even identical mechanics can be translated differently.  The determining factor should be how the unit would behave at the respective scale.

_________________
Neal
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
jfrazell
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 7:24 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 1:21 pm
Posts: 144
As an aside,  jet bikes cannot do a pop up attack currently.

_________________
"Advance to the Rear!"
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tactica
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:50 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
NH,

I agree with you. The dividing lines do not have to be the same between systems.

In that same vien of thinking though, they do not have to be different - just for the sake of being different.

I think you agree.

My stance is, make them the same as a basis and only modifiy where it needs to be done for either balance, abuse, or some value that can be obtained which benefits the development of the unit/formation or list in question.

Here, in the case of jetbikes, I have yet to see a reason of value to blur the demarkation.

Why allow them to force FF in close combat when they clearly can engage in CC and they clearly can be charged in core design?

Does something bad happen to the Eldar if we allow them to be - what they are? Infantry on jetbikes?

What problems are caused by actually allowing them to be charged, just like marine bikes in both E:A and 40K?

Why would we not want to align with core design in this case - just for Eldar?

Remember, they can still charge in and only FF, then still withdraw 15cm (3x that of normal units in E:A)... they are still quite powerful in that regard.

Interested in your thoughts.




_________________
Rob
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tactica
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 9:01 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241

(jfrazell @ Aug. 21 2006,13:24)
QUOTE
As an aside, ?jet bikes cannot do a pop up attack currently.

Perhaps and ELDAR jetbike has no guns, but I believe he currently has the mounted and skimmer special rule.

So with FF weaponry, he might be able to pop-up and place a BM with FF weaponry, though he would do no damage otherwise.

Alternatively, this rule debate goes beyond the scope of Eldar, as I'm talking in general, not just about Eldar.

I believe Necron Destroyers and Necron Heavy Destroyers are also _Infantry_ with the _Skimmer_ and mounted abilities. I believe they are also can perform pop-up attacks and place BM, but they also have actual weapons that can do damage. Furthermore, like Eldar Jetbikes, they too can force a FF in combat situations.

In all cases, this seems very wrong to me when I consider how a Jetbike should perform in E:A.

_________________
Rob
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
jfrazell
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 9:41 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 1:21 pm
Posts: 144
You're throwing me here Tactica.  The only way jetbikes can attack is via FF.  You have to directly be engaged or (if supporting) have an LOS.  If supporting they are subject to a BM if they lose just as any other supporting formation.

Barring some type of tactic not hear of down here (potentially the case) He can't just place a BM-he has to engage in the FF either directly or support-with its inherent opportunity to get blasted off the board.

_________________
"Advance to the Rear!"
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
nealhunt
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 10:46 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
Tactica:  The answer to all your questions is flavor and feel.  I think it's just right according to the background material that Eldar bikes have the full Skimmer ability.  For every version of Epic they have been able to avoid CC.  For every version of 40K, including 4th ed, if not immune they have been significantly better than any comparable units at avoiding CC.  All the fiction and flavor text portrays them as being able to "fly high."

Even in your home turf of the 40K mechanics they are better at avoiding CC than Tau Crisis and better than avoiding CC than other bikes or jetbikes because they have all the movement advantages of both.  In your strict "40k design" gold standard, that is strong evidence that Eldar Jetbike conceptual design is to be better than any "infantry" unit in the game at avoiding CC.

In any case, I don't care to argue about it any more.  I think this has gone about as far as it can go without engendering hard feelings.

_________________
Neal
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Markconz
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Tue Aug 22, 2006 8:55 am 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand

(Tactica @ Aug. 21 2006,15:56)
QUOTE
We are into tedious argument stages at this point and miscommunication is happening.

Don't assume you know anything more about 40K than the rest of us Sir, your continual banter on this topic is no more valid than the rest of us.

Actually we just got to the important bit of the argument - the bit where we realised that you were quoting fictitious rules and background as the major evidence for your case.

Therefore, please do not presume to lecture me on validity.

As I said on the SG forum, I find your approach less than genuine here. I can only hope it not intended as such.

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Mohawk
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Tue Aug 22, 2006 11:57 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:04 am
Posts: 81
@Tactica:

Reasoning: skimming jetbikes are _infantry_ and skimming vehicles are just that - _vehicles_. They have different benefits and weaknesses


The core rules regarding skimmer does not separate unit types in any order - why do you?
You describe both of them as "skimming"...

The only fact that you can use to support your cause is that in the current edition of wh40k jetbikes can?t leave actual CC. (That is another game at another scale.)
In all else the rules and fiction support jetbikes as skimmers.
In wh40k Jetbikes can avoid getting into CC with all ordinary foot troops in absurdum thanks to thier special move. The designers apparently saw that the blunt rules of the current ed. didnt reflect eldar jetbikes and had to implement a special rule to keep them away from CC - why do you choose to ignore that?

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Ilushia
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Tue Aug 22, 2006 12:09 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 1189
Do please remember that close-combat in Epic also includes very short-range fire fighting, in the 6" or less range basically, in 40K. Sure you can move 12" towards me then fall back 6" to avoid me charging you, but functionally I can still close to within 6-12 inches then I'm in 'close combat' range for Epic. This is also why Space Marine Bikes have such high close-combat value, as I understand it, since they put out horrendous amounts of very short-range fire power thanks to their twin-linked bolters.

I won't bother repeating my opinion, since I've posted it several times already. But it's worth thinking about, do Jet Bikes really have the capacity to pull up outside of short-range fire fight and grenade use range in less then the time it takes a unit to make a single move? Once the enemy is on top of them I have a tough time picturing them being able to pull out of combat very quickly, as any enemy fighting them is likely to grab hold of the vehicle with as many of their number as possible to hold it down (There's a few pieces of fluff involving this kind of thing happening. Space Marine Assault Troops jumping in ontop  of a group of flying bikes. Or Tyranid Hormagaunts leaping up into the air and grabbing hold of them to force them to ground).

Just adding a little more confusion to the arguments for and against skimmer. Can't say I have that strong an opinion at present though, as I've never played against them and for my own army I'd usually much rather have enemies FF me then melee me.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Mohawk
 Post subject: thoughts on jetbikes
PostPosted: Tue Aug 22, 2006 12:35 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:04 am
Posts: 81
@Ilushia:

I think youre wrong in your first paragraph - SM bikes are considered "good CC troops" equipped with CC weapons - that thier role, thats why they get a good CC-value.
In Epic as well as in wh40k CC is only close combat, FF represents short range firefights - as stated in the core rules. Using your argumentation noise marines, especially NM havocs and would have a horrific CC, luckely enough they are "just" good in FF.
(Just for the sake of it: Pistols are listed as FF weapons not CC, i.e. 12" range in wh40k does not translate into epic CC. )
Weapon box on page 25 clearly states close combat weapons as chainswords etc and bolters etc are FF weapons.

Second para:
Jetbikes cant pull out of FF-range (there is only short range firefights in epic, se core rules p. 10), but they can sure keep out of CC range. The special "jetbike move" can keep them eternally outside CC with regular CC opponents and, considering an entire wh40k game is an epic engament and one turn in wh40k to gain distance ("only" using the shuriken cannons - but still shooting!) is but a fraction of that they should be considered immune to CC during a regular epic engament. Hence "skimmer" is a justified ability imo.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 6 of 7
  [ 103 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 38 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