I dunno. Looking at Real Life you can go either way, from point defense interceptors to area interceptors, and each nation has some examples where the generic term 'interceptor' has some limited capacity to support ground forces. The question shouldn't be what the autocannon is capable of, it should be what we want it capable of. The balance at this point is the most important the we can justify either position fluff-wise.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

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

Thanks Moscovian, that's exactly what I was trying to say. Game balance is the most important element here.

I don't think there's anything inherently unbalancing with giving it AP/AT shots. Something that basic can be dealt with by point adjustments alone. What I'm proposing are stats that give the Lightnings assigned roles but still keeping them balanced with regards to the TBolt. If we make them too good in comparison no one's going to want to take the TBolt because it's not specialized enough (kind of like Baneblades).







The Tbolt the middle of the road, decent at attacking infantry and tanks on the ground and intercepting other aircraft.

The Lighting Attack is the best interceptor. It has comparable AA shots to the TBolt but at longer range (where it can't be shot back at as much). It's trade off is reduced ground attacks, it looses an AP4 shot.

The Lightning Strike is the best anti-armor. It get's very good AT firepower in comparison to the TBolt at the expense of its AP and AA attacks.

All of them have the same armor, an AT4+/AA5+ at 30cm. It's the second weapon option that's giving them their roles.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

My vote is for giving the autocannon the AP/AT attacks too. If there was a lightning with all three I could well imagine that the pilot would be swamped if he tried to aim all three weapons (they're all different, one set of guided missiles, one point attack weapon and one spray-and-pray, while the thunderbolt only has the missiles and two sets multishot weapons).

But on a plane with just lascannons and an autocannon I don't think it's unreasonable to fire both. It's still worse than a T-bolt at ground attack.

There's been much hoo-hah about the 45cm AA range, but to me it looks like two attacks at 30cm is the real killer. Almost all defensive fire from bombers is at 15cm range, so the lightning (like the nightwing) never needs to decided between firing at full effect or staying outside defensive fire range.

Are we really going with only one rocket attack? I'd much prefer two, even if it costs more.

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.

3 AT4+ attacks per aircraft...?

edit: That is the firepower of 3 fighta-bommaz for 150 points, so maybe not unreasonable for a ground attack specialist costing 100 points or more.

They're armor hunters. They really aren't good at anything else. And the few lists that use them (I'm looking at you, Elysians) Need all the help they can get in that department, since their Gound-based AT is minimal.

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.

Vultures+Vendettas are pretty good AT

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion

Vendettas are good, but the one shot nature of Vultures means their effectiveness is largely psychological. Again, though, Vendettas are 3x 4+AT that transport troops at 35cm move, have 5+ armor, and cost 36.25pt over Teleport, so call it 50pt. They have far more use than Strikes, which can only do one thing well, and one thing (AA) poorly. Also Armor tends to be well protected by AA due to it's cost, and thus the 6+/- Save is even more of a handicap.

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.

Vultures are pretty poor choices overall. The Harakoni also don't even have the access to Vendettas in Core formations that the Elysians do, which puts even more pressure on the Strike Variant. I'm okay with Dave's posted Lightning Attack variant above with the AP/AT/AA5+ Autocannon, but the Strike variant needs more than just swapping the Autocannon for a single rocket shot in order to be a worthwhile choice.


Totally agreed. I don't think the extended range would justify a decrease to AA6+, especially as it would make the Lightning Attack variant less effective at interception than the Thunderbolt, although theoretically it could stay outside of an occasional ground attack shot. Definitely not worth the loss of the multirole capability the thunderbolts bring.





Dave's statistics, but with the extra Rocket shot for the Lightning.
Pricing is a list-dependent thing, but this puts the Strike Fighter as a superior ground attack option, enough to justify the loss of one of the primary aircraft roles, Interception/CAP. This will definitely push the cost of the Strike variant up to about 100 each, but allows for tactical air support that actually means something, in the lists that have a desperate need for airborne AT fire.

I think that Strike variant with 2 rockets is worth more than 100 each. It currently has 2 x AT4+ and 1 x AT6+ and they are priced at 200 for two. In the Elysian list they are probably the most chosen air formation which tells me they are at the top of their price point. With the proposed stats you are going to get effectively 3 x AT4+ each and IMO that would warrant 225 or even 250 for two Strike variants.

It used to be the case that the Elysians had a lack of AT available to them, but since the Vendettas came out they really don't have that problem anymore. My last game with the Elysians had me laying blast markers ONLY with all my aircraft because there were no armored vehicles or light vehicles to shoot at - I was playing against an infantry heavy army. Lightning Strikes, Marauder Destroyers, Vendettas, all are armor eating machines. Plenty to work with.

To put things back on track, adding another rocket attack warrants a price bump and I'm not convinced it needs it anyway. The difference now is it has lost a single AT6+ attack which -as anyone who plays this game knows- hits a heck of a lot less than 1/6 of the time.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

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

Im not convinced the attack variant is worth 200/pair. 175 maybe, perhaps as low as 150.

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.

with Dave's stats I can't see much point in taking the Strike variant - they'd be pants at intercepts and too focused on AV/LV hunting. Perhaps if they were 150pts vs. 200pts for the Attack variant, which is a far better all rounder.

speaking of the Attack variant, compared to the Nightwing it has a pip less AP but 15cm extra range, worse armour but the same intercept values and can be taken in smaller formations, therefore increasing air cover and activation count. I think 200pts should be the minimum to start with.

Pricing is a list dependent thing, but the Page 1, Post 1 point of this thread has been to design a Lightning Attack Fighter that is on par with the Thunderbolt for cost, meaning 150 points. In its current incarnation, I think the Attack is suitable to price at 150.


In my experience, you are vastly more likely to run into a list without aircraft (using ground-based AA and artillery) than you are to run into a list without vehicles. Additionally, there is no justification for the Attack variant costing 200 when the Thunderbolt costs only 150 for a pair.


Are you proposing the Strike variant be only 150, then? Pushing for parity amongst all three fighters seems a difficult thing to do, although it might be useful. The MArauder Destroyer currently has 4 AT4+ attacks at 45cm, 3 AT5+ attacks at 30cm, and it's only 175 points each. Additionally, they can soak a hit without losing any combat capability, something the Strike fighters cannot do. Dropping them to only a single rocket seems as if it would make the Strike variant significantly worse than the Destroyer.

If people want more attacks for with 2x AT5+ for the rockets on the strike. The SM/TL and E40k TBolt both carry six rockets on the model, as does the FW Strike. I don't think they should have twice as many shots at the same AT because of that. "Un-twin" them to AT5+.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17