Tactical Command | View topic

Page 1 of 4

[ 57 posts ]

Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

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

Demolisher part2

Evil and Chaos

Post subject: Demolisher part2

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 2:46 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire

*shrug*

If you think it's so broken, go and test it and report back. Personally, I think MW-status is the best solution.

EDIT: I voted option 3, IIRC.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Top

Markconz

Post subject: Demolisher part2

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 2:59 pm

Purestrain

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

Yeah well no surprise you want to continue arguing about it Hena. Good luck in coming up an alternative that has anything close to the support that last poll had, I know I've done my best. And yes I closed it and yes I decide. Who else is going to given the current situation - you?

To set the record straight it was as I said it was:

13 for MW (in some form)
6 for your extra attack idea... (hmm interesting).
8 for something else including yet more people specifying different MW proposals (I watched the voting and comments carefully).

Trying to misrepresent it as you have is just stupid.

Here's the thread (that you should have linked to):
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/cgi-bin....=10073;

Here is my full final post I made saying why I ended it:

Problems Neal.

First off - vindis will get a speed increase, that isn't even a matter of debate as far as I can see. Walker also perhaps.

Now for the actual demolisher which is why I started this thread.

1. FF3+ on vindis has been debated and shot down before. Vindi has much less Firepower than a LR Demolisher and the only gun it does have is one that is also on a LR Demolisher - and yet you want to give it the same FF? A little problematic. Yes you might say a marine demolisher is better somehow... but that idea has also been shot down numerous times previously...

2. Constant ongoing criticisms exist that the Demolisher stats are simply not appropriate. Ogryn clubs are MW but the most powerful gun in 40k is not? Come on. People want this gun to bust things ? it hits it should be very bad news for the target. Not some minor weird abstraction that is little different to what ended up going into the EA rules first time around and causing problems. Epic 40k was criticised for not having the feel of individual weapons correct, and this certainly feels like a case of that again to me.

3. This poll and all the many prior debate and polls on this subject. About half of people polled so far support the MW proposal. Even more voting for option 3 support MW in some form if not exactly the one above (ie they want it MW but more or less powerful in various ways). In short MW ideas have a high level of acceptance, other ideas have much more marginal and isolated support.

4. This debate is a VERY old one. Here we have yet another 100 post long thread on the subject, but at least it seems to have found (as E&C said) a "nonconservative consensus" which is far better than anything I've seen before on the subject. People have had plenty long enough to make up their mind by now - literally years. At some point this ridiculous neverending process has to stop and a decision has to be made.

I've recorded at least half and really more like 2/3 in favour of MW in some form, equal, or more or less powerful than proposal number 1 above. I have first playtest reports from people who have got sick of waiting and are saying they like MW on their vindis and baneblades. I'm seeing a remaining 1/3 of people who all seem to have their own highly individual pet desires in one direction or another.

Why would I want to continue with the endless circular debate on this after all these years when I have that? Why would I want to continue annoying the majority of epic players on this issue? As far as I'm concerned I'm ready to bank it. People can start another debate on this if they want but I am done for now. Any new debate I will point people to this.

Good enough for now. If it doesn't work out it, it can be changed at a later date and good luck to anyone else who wants to try and debate this all over again. Enough of a mandate for me to stick it in the handbook, and happy to switch at some future point if that is proven necessary.

Post 99 = topic closed and all demolishers become MW4+ Ignore Cover. Thanks for the votes and feedback.

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/

Top

Markconz

Post subject: Demolisher part2

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:09 pm

Purestrain

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

One other point Hena - it is pretty obvious looking at the list of changes you use in your own tournaments, that a very large number are simply your own personal preference rather than any international standard. That is fine if your own group is happy to play along with it, and in fact I have included many of your personal proposals in the handbook simply because they have come to have wider international acceptance.

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/

Top

nealhunt

Post subject: Demolisher part2

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:25 pm

Purestrain

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

You guys might recall that I was in favor of upgrading the Demolisher cannon a long time ago. I thought it would be a way to fix both the Vindicator and the Baneblade and probably require only a minor tweak to the Demolisher.

Eventually, I gave up on the idea because every time it was discussed the objection that it would be too difficult because it crossed so many units was trotted out. And there is some validity to that view. However, now that the rules review process has essentially split into various independent efforts it seems the prevailing opinion is that more complex revisions are okay.

I probably should have dropped the conservative mindset on that sooner.

===

On thinking about it more, I'm okay with the MW4+. That's about 80% increase v AV units and about a break even against most infantry.

I'm iffy about the MW/IC combo. That's about a 50% increase in firepower against infantry and still 80-90% against vehicles. That seems a bit much, but I'm definitely willing to try it.

So... move me to the MW column as well.

More important, though, is the whole package for the different vehicles. Those will need to be evaluated individually.

_________________
Neal

Top

Markconz

Post subject: Demolisher part2

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:29 pm

Purestrain

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

(nealhunt @ Aug. 16 2007,14:25)

QUOTE

Markconz: What are you proposing overall?

25cm, 4+MW IC, possibly walker too.

Points uncertain. They were going down to 275, I'm not sure that is a good idea anymore.

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/

Top

Moscovian

Post subject: Demolisher part2

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:33 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA

Smile everyone! Have a little Epic-Zen moment. Realize that we're talking about fake guns for a toy tank in a fictional world. Go pet your cat, hug your mom/wife/daughter, smell a flower, eat some peanut butter and chocolate chips.

We are the world, we are the children. Okay, now you may return to your regularly scheduled mud-slinging.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Top

BlackLegion

Post subject: Demolisher part2

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:58 pm

Brood Brother

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

Mew has a better feel to the Demolisher gun than without it. If this makes the tanke quipped with it too powerful then up the price.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Top

Soren

Post subject: Demolisher part2

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 4:01 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 9:42 am
Posts: 694
Location: Austria

Just a Clarification:

FF value will stay the same and will not get MW, right?

Just a note:

I?m playing marines as my main army, and I am always hard on thinking when composing my army list to include any MW into the army. The reason: MW tend to force you getting shooty instead of FF?ng or CC?ng, which is not good with Marines, as I found out early (in a very hard way

).

The only regular unit which gives you MW on shooting are the speeders and you have to maneuver good to keep these little buggers alive. Now you can buy MW shots as upgrades to normal detachments with increased range and better value (4+) AND the protection of other AV. Makes me worry the whole thing will get the Marines more shooty....for my opinion the wrong way.....

But to make it clear, I will play with these rules, give 'em a try and then look at the results.... Just to wash away my bad feelings about this :blush:

my 0,002 cent :;):

Soren

_________________
Attrition is the proof of absence of Strategy

Top

Evil and Chaos

Post subject: Demolisher part2

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:01 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire

FF value will stay the same and will not get MW, right?

Yes, there would be no modification to the FF stats (The Demolisher doesn't have time for a sustained barrage during a firefight, and is only slightly more effective than a Battlecannon... that can be absorbed into the FF stats).

MW tend to force you getting shooty instead of FF?ng or CC?ng, which is not good with Marines, as I found out early (in a very hard way

).

It's worth noting that the Demolisher Cannon is still 30cm range, which is always going to be more useful to an Engagement-type army, rather than a stand-off shooty force (Which the Marines couldn't do well under any circumstances, due to their armour values).

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Top

Evil and Chaos

Post subject: Demolisher part2

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:06 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire

(nealhunt @ Aug. 16 2007,15:25)

QUOTE

So... move me to the MW column as well.

Cool.

More important, though, is the whole package for the different vehicles. Those will need to be evaluated individually.

Agreed, the Leman Russ Demolisher being the most important tweak (It may need a seperate squadron cost to the standard Leman Russ, if its power goes up too much).

I'll be adopting any pertinent changes into the Death Korps armylist as soon as I get the time.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Top

Morg

Post subject: Demolisher part2

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:27 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 4:33 pm
Posts: 193
Location: Ireland

Ah, finally the Vindicator gets useful. I welcome the added versatility and a little bit more Umph! for the Marines which is badly needed.

_________________
Generosity rules where 6mm soldiers are concerned.
--
Looking for players near Dublin - get in touch with me!

Top

Print view

Previous topic | Next topic

Page 1 of 4

[ 57 posts ]

Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 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:

Demolisher part2

Who is online