Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 4 of 10
  [ 140 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 10  Next

Baneblade
The stats below (with whatever concensus) 62%  62%  [ 18 ]
Other stats (suggest below) 38%  38%  [ 11 ]
Total votes : 29

Baneblade
Markconz
 Post subject: Baneblade
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 11:03 am 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

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

(Evil and Chaos @ May 06 2007,10:00)
QUOTE
The baneblade's main gun is less powerful than a Demolisher Cannon (Less S, Worse AP).

Thus if you have a MW Baneblade Battlecannon, you have to have a MW Demolisher Cannon too.

As we should  :)

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Markconz
 Post subject: Baneblade
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 11:07 am 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand
Someone remind me again why Multimeltas get MW status but Demolisher cannons do not?

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Baneblade
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 11:20 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
It's more that the Multimelta has superior AP (AP1), and has at least the potential to penetrate armour values of up to 20!


The demolisher on the other hand... well personally I'd have made it MW status a long time ago. :D

The MM is concretely more powerful than the demolisher vs armoured targets anyway, and Demolisher is pretty much where the MW/AP line is drawn.

If Demolishers gained MW status, I might actually use Vindicators occasionally, instead of seeing the IG use the vastly superior Hellhound in the same damn role all the time, for considerably less points, but largely increased capability.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Markconz
 Post subject: Baneblade
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 1:32 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand
"Believe it or not..."  :alien:  

Actually Demolishers are just as lethal to strong armour in 40k as meltas (and probably more lethal given their range)...  

To focus on the 40k values, AV's don't go higher than 14 so a potential penetration of 20 (or 18 from an assault cannon, or 16 or 22 from S10 weapons!) is an abstraction that is meaningless in game terms - it doesn't actually do any more damage! You need to compare actual damage rates between the two - ie what is your chance of actually blowing stuff up if your packing a melta vs a demolisher?  :)

Surprisingly, if you number crunch the respective capabilities of meltas and demolishers there is no real difference in damage dealing capability even at close range (remember an on target ordnance shot gets to roll two dice for penetration and choose the highest (as well as starting at S10)). Eg:  


Melta at long range vs strongest armour
0.83 No effect.
0.00 Glancing Hit
0.17 Penetrating hit.

Melta at close range vs strongest armour:
0.28 No effect.
0.00 Glancing hit.
0.72 Penetrating hit

Demolisher at any range vs strongest armour:
0.25 No effect.
0.19 Glancing hit
0.56 Penetrating hit.

A glancing hit has about half the chance of seriously damaging/destroying a vehicle as a penetrating hit, and the other glancing results will still effectively knock the enemy vehicle out of action for a turn (which often turns out to be a pretty lethal result in game terms). Ie the difference in power is around 3-6%  depending on how you want to measure it.

In other words there really is no significant difference between Meltas and Demolishers in actual armour defeating capability at short range (and Demolishers are far superior at longer range). Demolishers also use the Ordnance damage table against vehicles meaning they have a greater chance of blowing vehicles to pieces rather than just knocking them out. Demolishers also do twice as much damage to open topped vehicles (most LV's in epic terms).

All of which is a long winded way of saying that there simply is not justification from 40k for one being MW and the other not in Epic.  ???


More importantly in terms of actual balance and gameplay in Epic... demolisher cannons are just sad lame ducks at present. I actually thought the tide had swung on this issue some time ago in favour of making them MW as myself,  E&C and others would like.  Hopefully people will see the light and change their minds...   :)

If Demolisher cannons on Vindis, Baneblades and Demolishers are MW IC, then AT3/AP3 for the main gun on the baneblade might be ok....

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Baneblade
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 1:43 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
Yep, to be fully accurate, Multi-Meltas should probably be:

15cm - AP5+ / AT5+
Range (5cm) MW5+, EA+1

Yep, a 5cm Firefight EA.

Which'd represent how much more lethal they are at closer ranges, and how as Markconz notes, they're quite unimpressive at longer range.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Markconz
 Post subject: Baneblade
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 2:19 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

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

(Hena @ May 06 2007,10:09)
QUOTE
Demolisher cannons idea is urban combat. Multimelta is to destroy heavily armoured targets.

This means that demolisher can clear buildings and structures better (ignore cover) and multimelta can engage heavy targets (MW) better. It's the idea behind the weapon instead of 40k stats. That's to me anyway, but I wasn't playing E:A when it originally developed, can't say much more than that.

According to the background Vindicators are mainly used for blasting holes in the thickest armoured fortifications and pillboxes so marines can pour through. So yes to the use in urban war because it should be good at clearing buildings and pillboxes. BUT, importantly it does this by smashing them and anyone in them to pieces, rather than clearing them like a flamethrower which is the wimpy effect it has now. Multimeltas and Demolishers are both good against armour - the first by vaporising it, the second simply by virtue of a massive shell with huge kinetic energy.

Interestingly Demolisher Cannons don't match the background in 40k because they don't have any ignore cover capacity! (for game balance reasons given the short ranges in that game I think). In epic they have the opposite flaw - it is just a glorified flamethrower rather than a bunker buster!

Demolisher Cannons are widely acknowledged as being lacklustre in epic, so lets just make them MW as they definitely deserve to be  :).

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
BlackLegion
 Post subject: Baneblade
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 2:57 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:13 am
Posts: 8711
Location: Leipzig, Germany, Europe, Sol III, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster, Universe

(Evil and Chaos @ May 06 2007,14:43)
QUOTE
Yep, to be fully accurate, Multi-Meltas should probably be:

15cm - AP5+ / AT5+
Range (5cm) MW5+, EA+1

Yep, a 5cm Firefight EA.

Which'd represent how much more lethal they are at closer ranges, and how as Markconz notes, they're quite unimpressive at longer range.

Hmm for some kind i like this :)

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Warmaster Nice
 Post subject: Baneblade
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 3:21 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2003 9:15 pm
Posts: 7948
Location: Denmark
I like the idea of making the BBC a MW. As to werther or not this should affect the Demolisher cannon also... well... Not sure. I've long been a fan of upgunning the Vindicator to MW (Or even extremely short range TK but that's a different story).

Giving the Baneblad thick rear armour isn't the way to go IMO is that goes against the standard set for the other SHTs.
That said, I still have no problem bending the fluff if it helps game balance.

_________________
Sofa General

Nobody expects the Inquisition!!!
http://theepiclounge.wordpress.com/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
The_Real_Chris
 Post subject: Baneblade
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 8:04 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
Currently hunting say a pred in an urban setting -
MM - 7+/6+/5+ to hit - no save - 15cm range
DC - 5+/4+/3+ to hit - 4+ save - 30cm range

Now range doesn't mean much here - its likely to be 10cm max if fighting in a city. But still, after save the DC is killing more armour. An advance from both weapons gives a 1/6 chance of a kill for a MM vs a 5/12 (6+ save)/ 1/3 (5+ save)/ 1/4 (4+ save) for a DC. Against reinforced armour (the typical 4+ RA) its a 1/12 chance for a MM vs 1/8 for a DC. Further the DC benifits from crossfire a lot more.

I know which weapon I would rather be armour hunting with!

_________________
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  
 
BlackLegion
 Post subject: Baneblade
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 8:12 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:13 am
Posts: 8711
Location: Leipzig, Germany, Europe, Sol III, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster, Universe
Is the 3+ to hit for Sustain? Because DemolisherCannon has AP3+/AT4+

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Markconz
 Post subject: Baneblade
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 11:48 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand
What about the far more likely circumstance that an armoured target is in the open Chris?

Pred:
MM = 0.17/0.33/0.50
DC = 0.17/0.25/0.33

Landraider:
MM = 0.08/0.17/0.25
DC = 0.08/0.13/0.17

This really is not justified. The DC should be better than a MM not worse. Come one it's not like we're saying it should be BP! :)

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
ortron
 Post subject: Baneblade
PostPosted: Sat Jun 02, 2007 1:27 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 1:48 pm
Posts: 681
Location: Australia
G'day

I've been using shadow swords a bit in my guard army since i have a ton of old storm hammers which "count as". Like most people i have found them terrible compared to the shadow sword.

If i had to choose, I would take the BBC as AT3+/AP3+, and the extra TL HB shots would be great.

As far as changing weapon stats.. I beg we leave them be. They are not broken and while they may not match someones idea of how a weapon works or is equivalent to its 40k affects, chaging them changes so many other parts it just starts more arguments.

I Also do not support the call for Thick Rear Armour for any current Guard super heavy. If anything i think the guard protect their urban assault tanks with more close in firepower than extra armour. Remember TRA implies equivalent armour all the way around, and i doubt this would be the case.

I will trial the current stats of the weapons/tank listed earlier in the post - TRA.

ORTRON
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
wargame_insomniac
 Post subject: Baneblade
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 7:20 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2004 6:42 pm
Posts: 3305
Location: West Yorkshire, UK

(ortron @ Jun. 02 2007,13:27)
QUOTE
I Also do not support the call for Thick Rear Armour for any current Guard super heavy. If anything i think the guard protect their urban assault tanks with more close in firepower than extra armour. Remember TRA implies equivalent armour all the way around, and i doubt this would be the case.

I thought that was exactly the point- IG SHT's do have thick armour all way round- the Stormhammer in particular.

I'm in the make Demolisher Cannon a MW camp. How many people now take Baneblades vs Shadowswords, Demolishers vs Leman Russ/Hellhounds, or Vindicators vs Predators.  Making it an MW makes 3 lesser used choices all much more viable.

Cheers

James

_________________
My TOEG- Blood Angels and Deathbolts
My Painting Blog- Evil Sunz, Goffs
My Epic trades list
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 4 of 10
  [ 140 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 10  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 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