|
Cross posted on the sg forum.
So time to resurrect an old thread?
The Marauder Bomber is without doubt (to me) the worst aircraft in the game. Ok so a formations has the firepower to shoot one or maybe two Fighta Bomberz out of the sky, but against longer range defences or other fighters its pretty much toast.
This relates to several factors.
1 - It is short ranged, which means it will normally take flak. The consequences of this are outlined in point 2. Yes I know you could clear all the flak away, but the attack isn?t that stunning, leading to point 3. One hydra battery will on average kill one marauder a turn if they come near them, that is 150 points of multi-purpose ground vehicles killing 150 points of aircraft.
2 ? If you take any hits you have a 50/50 chance of losing a plane per hit. So what? But if you do you loose more than just half your firepower. A two plane formation has 2 barrage templates hitting on AP4+/AT5+ and two twin lascannon shots. Kill a plane and now its one lascannon shot and one template but only AP5+/AT6+.
3 ? The attacks themselves, compare them to a ground battery. Whirlwinds get two templates, but hit on AP3+/AT4+. This leads onto the whole air/ground advantages/disadvantages.
Ground and air (artillery/bomber) units have different advantages and disadvantages.
Ground units can still do something when they fail an activation, can use sustained fire and can take objectives. But they can also be targeted by most weapons, be assaulted etc.
Air units can strike anywhere and only be targeted by flak. Indeed against a flak less enemy you can have a field day. But they have high chances of failing to activate if facing a properly equipped enemy.
In essence the Marauder is being compared with Imperial artillery and Whirlwinds.
Against the whirlwind the Marauder exchanges the ability for slightly more firepower until a plane dies and more importantly range, for a 1+ initiative, toughness, warhound allowance etc.
Against Imperial artillery the marauder offers more firepower than the basilisk and a better chance of firing every turn against the manticore and bombard. Otherwise it costs more, disallows some titan options etc.
In both cases they aren?t worth it in comparison. For marines taking whirlwinds and/or Warhounds gives reliability and options air doesn?t ? something important in a low activation army. Switching that for the chance to brave flak in the enemy deployment zone isn?t worth it. For Imperials paying more for quite often less simply seems a bit mad ? you can kill more effectively with regular artillery than risking all on planes.
Finally of course it is compared to thunderbolts. For the same price thunderbolts are double the activations, can suffer more flak as a result, but as the bomber is so vulnerable to flak its safe to assume both planes avoid it, has the ability to act as a fighter and has more firepower ? 300 points of bombers give 15cm 4bp and 2 A45cm AT4+ shots against 4 15cm AP4+, 4 30cm AT4+ and 4 30cm AP5+/AT6+ for the fighters.
So how to correct this?
The Bomber needs to offer something to both Imperial air arms ? I believe increased firepower and range vs increased risk. In essence a combined arms plan to be more effective than a load of artillery firing till the barrels glow.
Several options exist.
Option 1
Make the points equal to the plane. A simple drop to 250 points for 2 bombers provides the above gamble to both marines and Imperials.
Option 2
Make the stats equal to the cost. Here an equally simple change of 2bp to 3 bp means the bombers firepower degrades more evenly as well as providing a very slight firepower boost.
Option 3
Make the plane tougher, i.e. reduce the gamble. The big problem is the ease at which the expensive bomber gets blown away. Changing it to a warengine affects squadron survivability greatly. The following vaguely correct maths tries to illustrate this.
All hits from the same attack ? being a WE means you can play hit allocation to both your advantage and disadvantage when receiving damage from different formations.
2dc 5+
1 hit - 1/9 dead
2 hits - 5/9 dead (the effect of criticals when two hits sustained somewhat overdone, but don't matter too much)
3 hits - 5/81 chance of knocking both out (5/9 for first and 1/9 for second)
2dc 6+
1 hit - 5/36 dead
2 hits - 5/6 dead (5/36 of critical, 25/36 of two failed saves)
3 hits - 25/216 (about 10%) chance of knocking both out (5/6 for first and 5/36 for second)
And of course currently
4+
1 hit ? 1/2 dead
2 hits ? 1 dead
3 hits ? 1/2 chance of knocking both out
I would change the damage to 2dc 6+ with all other stats being equal if the price point remained at 300.
Option 4
A mix of the above, make it equal to the models.
a) Specialist games plane
Its tiny. I would suggest
Type - Fighter bomber
Save - 5+
Heavy bolter, 15cm, AA6+, Rear Arc
Assault Cannon, 30cm, AP5+/AT5+/AA5+, Fixed Forward Arc
Twin Missiles, 45cm, AT5+, Fixed Forward Arc
Bombs, 15cm, 1BP, Fixed Forward Arc
Past experience with a similar plane suggests 225-250 points for 2
b) Forge World plane
This looks like a proper bomber.
Type ? Warengine bomber
Save ? 6+
Twin Lascannon, 45cm, AT4+/AA4+, Fixed Forward Arc
Twin Heavy Bolter, 30cm, AA5+, Fixed Rear Arc
Twin Heavy Bolter, 15cm, AA5+, 360 degree Arc
Bomb bay, 15cm, 3BP, Fixed Forward Arc
2DC. Critical hit effect, the bombers control surfaces are
damaged causing the craft to crash and be destroyed.
Points around 300, maybe 325 for 2
Note if you wanted it to be a 'meaty' medium bomber and have 2dc 5+ as well as 3bp a points rise would be in order. I would think 350-400 points. It is delivering twice the firepower of a basilisk battery, though admitably will if facing threats only fly twice during a 3 turn game - I doubt the squadron will be downed however.
_________________ 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
|
