The French can be quite shooty: anyone know how many Pulsar Phantoms get used over there?

_________________
MoK's Painting Blog
Now Showing:
Mok's Modular Modern Messy Guard Army

Since they aren't being used frequently, we can recommend that people play them more as-is? A lack of information is just that: not enough information.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

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

My thinking is that you need units at the end of the game to claim the objectives, and that units that die can't help you do that. Going for mutual annihilation only leads to draws.

I'm no epic genius though, so take my opinion with a grain of salt. Also, saying how many points a unit killed and if it survived or not doesn't really say that much about how it performed. If the ranged phantom just hid in a corner, ignored by the enemy, and never threatened any objectives it would be a waste. If the fist armed one first nuked that 600 pts detachment and then absorbed the full attention of the rest of the enemy army before going down it would not only have destroyed a valuable detachment but also saved the rest of the eldar army from significant damage. But saying "it killed 600 pts!" just doesn't say that much imo...

The fact that they’re very rarely used is indicative that they are a poor choice (particularly in comparison with the Warlock) and I think there’s enough agreement and argument in this thread and from Chroma that change(s) should be trialed, whether they end up being a weapon tweak or point reduction.

up the warlock. That would have the same effect, wouldn't it ?

Can't it also indicate that it just seems like a bad choice? Might behave differently in game.

Maybe the problem is that the favored targets (russes, land raiders) aren't taken that often?

No, it wouldn't.

It might produce a superficially similar result, but I don't see a more expensive assault-monster Warlork causing people to use Pulsar armed Phantoms in any way.


This is another rarely considered variable in the equation; a Phantom might be a viable choice at higher point levels because there's more "room" in the 1/3 section *and* opponents may be more likely to take those more expensive formations/units that are prime targets for the shooty Phantom.

Again, this is just fine-tuning of a list that's been quite stable for some time and it may not even go anywhere. Currently, such a change will not be making it into the NetEA docs, but is part of the "year in review" process.

I'd really appreciate if people tried taking Phantoms "as-is" and testing them and/or testing them as "more shooty" and reporting back.

Thanks for your efforts!

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

Here's why I think the P-fist is better than the pulsar:

[In general] Assaults are much more important in E:A than shooting: assaults result in more casualties, automatically break the losing formation, and (except in the case of fearless units) are the only way that you can force an opponent to move away from a particular area of the board.

In fact, shooting is often just another way to prepare for assaulting - in many cases the application of a single blast marker is the desired effect because that can lead to a +2 difference during the assault resolution.

Add to that the fact that the Eldar are allowed to make a full move after a successful assault and the ‘meta’ bias toward engaging increases.

Also, consider the fact that a 30cm 6xAP4+/AT4+ shooting weapon is actually a good alternative to the pulsar when facing hoard armies, even without the extra abilities in assault. That fact that you can get both, maintain the ability to take long-ranged pot-shots with the one pulsar, and factoring in the info from the top of this post means that the [fist+pulsar] > [pulsar+pulsar].

Plus, when you think about the comparison being [fist+pulsar] vs. [pulsar+pulsar] instead of [1 x fist] vs. [1 x pulsar], you can see that changing the pulsar might not have the desired effect, since you will be improving both phantom builds. That is why a lot of people suggest nerfing the fist (at least as part of the solution).

GlynG, anyone reading this entire thread would not find agreement on here at all. In addition to my analysis on the crushing effects of Pulsar weapons, I'll point out that the Warlock and the accompanying powerfist are a better choice than a Phantom with twin pulsars... for a 3000 point game played the short way across the table under the tournament scenario. Change any of those factors and I believe you are in entirely different territory.

A sustained fire reducing a full Leman Russ formation to 10% effectiveness is vastly superior to an assault because the assault allows the enemy to fire back. The assault of a Warlock can severely damage the titan, especially against a tough opponent. Both scenarios (a sustained fire from a Phantom or a CC assault from a Warlock) are equally likely. In fact the sustain fire might actually be more likely but I'll settle for even odds for argument's sake.

I'm willing to take the Phantom for several spins as-is. Anyone willing to join me?

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

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

I'll see about asking some Eldar opponents.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

My experience and thoughts are somewhat similar to this.

At 700 points you could then also include nightwings at 3K rather than just a vampire, which would be nice to have as an option. 1K in just two activations at 3K is still a lot of course.

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

I often use the Twin pulsar Phantom and rather enjoy the lurking menace that it create for the enemy, now weather its worth 750pts is another matter as markconz points out it limits your choices, i would be in favor of the 50pt reduction over the weapon stat increases myself.


Tim NZ

I can test one on Vassal if anyone fancies a game some time, I've now redownloaded the module to my new computer. Note though that I am GMT + 8 at the mo and weekends are best so I can't suddenly offer 5 reports next week or anything. If people are testing, from reading the above is the best to look at:

1 - as is with 2 pulsar
2 - as is with pulsar and fist
3 - 2 pulsar minus 50 points i.e. 700 pts?

Is the discussion just moving towards a fist being worth + 50 points to either titan?

I'd like to see the dual Pulsars tried out, both with the current stats and with the 3 x attacks.

So far, there's no movement in any direction; it's all been theoretical discussions for the most part.

Any testing done, with any of the options above, would be appreciated.