3 shots isn't automatically "too powerful" mate, it depends on the rest of the stat line. Clearly 15cm 3x AA6+ wouldn't get people too worked up.

I agree AA4+ is pretty good though and there is a precedent not to got there on an interceptor.

I still think the stats I proposed in the poll post are in the ballpark, justified by either Epic Armageddon precedence or a weak translation of 40k stats and not too OTT:


Yes you will have 3 shots on the intercept, but the average will be only 1.3 hits, and they have no specials. I'm thinking a starting price of around 250pts with these stats.

In comparison a nightwing formation is 3 for 300pts, has better armour, equivalent weapons stats (minus the missiles but added "lance" special rule) and worse initiative.

of course, my mistake, I clearly should have added the qualifier "3 shots with the proposed stats"....

if we're talking about precedents being set, someone asked the question earlier if there are any other interceptors with 3x AA shots already.... I don't think there are.... maybe that's another precedent we don't want to be pushing? I don't know, my approach would be start it off weaker, then buff if playtesting shows a need... just my opinion ofc

_________________
Just some guy

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator

I have not chipped in before, because I agree with the concerns expressed above.
AFAIK there are no fighters with 3x AA shots, but 3x AA6+ might still be a bit OTT on a Fighter or Fighter Bomber (because the rules have been amended to add +1 to fighters on CAP or intercept).

To be fair, the formation size is key here. If used as a single fighter formation at 225, having stats with 3x shots (AA, AP or AT) might be acceptable, while spreading the same shots across 3x a/c for 225 is much less acceptable because the increased unit numbers renders the formation much less 'brittle'. Equally care must be taken to avoid the dreaded 'spam'. The same formations at 175 are likely to be OTT because a player can get too many and swamp the enemy defences . . .

The point being made by all the above people is that the "Air game" in E:A can very quickly over-power the standard game on the ground. For this reason it is better to start off with *much* weaker stats at slightly too high costs, rather than the other way around as this approach makes it far easier to correct.

Please don't take my comment as intent to be rude, I could have worded that better.

Anyhow, yes I think you're right with respect to no other 3x AA shot fighters/FBs in the game. The only ones I can think of are bombers.

What stats would you or Ginger suggest? I like the idea of all weapons being represented, but the +1 to hit on interceptions does make this difficult to achieve without making a kick arse interceptor. I mean the fluff says it should be good, no doubt, but to go from no AC in the list to potentially one of the best interceptors in the game... well I understand why people are struggling with it inclusion....

If you were to drop AA from a weapon, then which one, to me the missiles have to stay AA - thats their primary role. The lascannons and heavy bolters though both make sense to me as something the pilot would find useful in a dogfight - and are clearly done so by other pilots in other AC types.

Maybe, and I say maybe, Nephilim's weapons become a grouped weapon, something like:
"the nephilim has a range of weapons on board, allowing the pilot to easily deal with a range of targets but not all types simultaneously"

"Panoply of the Nephilim" 30cm, 2x AP4/AT4/AA5

That way it only gets 2x AA shots, but on a ground attack it can target AP or AT effectively, but it can only target one type?

Kinda like the hellblade

I have to say I'm not familiar with the actual weapon loadout.... I just massively prefer the model to the storm talon

If all weapons were to be represented, and GW's policy of "if that bit doesn't have a skull on it, stick a gun there" tends to make that a difficult thing! I'd either drop the AA attack from the lascannons for the "too close for missiles, switching to guns" feel

Alternatively we could give the player the choice, missiles are a given and EITHER lascannon or HB?

_________________
Just some guy

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator

And that is the balance that you need to achieve LoL

For starters I agree with Kyuss about using two or even three stat lines on the "panoply of Nephilim" weapon for the AP/AT and the AA shots. This gives you a little more flexibility to juggle things to match the intended requirements. It also allows you to specify different numbers of shots and ranges.

If this is an "air-superiority" fighter I would also consider starting at 6+ on the AP/AT stats and working up from there - if a "ground attack" aircraft, then reduce the AA to one AA6+ while increasing the AP/AT. Formation numbers are also key - suggest starting at 2x units, and possibly 225-250 (which can be reduced if needed).

So *perhaps* something like the following

• "Air superiority"
  EITHER 30 cm --- AT6+
  OR 15cm --------- 2x AP6+ / AA5+
• "Ground attack"
  EITHER 30 cm --- 2x AT5+ / AP5+
  OR 15cm ---------- AA6+

But the choice is yours mate as they say (whoever "they" are )

Hi there!

I had a honour to face a Dark Angel SM company with my IG. The match was quite fun, and I liked all these new (to me) stuff like deathwing and ravenwing, wing with wing, and wing, and lots of plasma. These spiced up the usual codex SM for some degree.
After the battle I dig into the list and found another DA special thing that wasn't come up at all, although it appeared in the way as DA characters giving fearless.

Intractable. I have no issue with this, and also not so familiar with DA fluff, but gameplay wise I can see very few circumstances when this special rule could make a difference, or just simply come to be used at all.
We even joked around as my IG with 2+ int and tailored toward being slow and shooty, would more likely to profit with this rule.
Whereas Marines with 1+ has far less risk to fail activation, and also when it happens, then they mostly choose move action. Especially with DA extras, since all those "wing stuff" seems to based on manouvre and engage.

Again I don't say it is an issue, or it is BAAAD. Just feels a bit strange, but there could be still some situation where the DA could profit from this rule. It just happens that I haven't seen it yet.

So my question is what's your opinion about Intractable special rule? Have you had some battle where this came into play?

_________________
Epic Commander of the Prassium Invasion Troops 214th Regiment
***Action is our prayer. Victory is our offering.***

Actually wasn't that rule designed to be a penalty to the DA?

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

Well, we played it by the current compendium where we (it seems now ) misunderstood the wording. Our thought was that intractable just simply gave fearless if you choose non-moving hold action...
[Have re-read the DA armylist from OP, yeah the wording was fine tuned to be exact, and clear... for us too .]

Thanks for the quick response Jimmy!


PS.: Our DA players won't be happy to hear these news.

_________________
Epic Commander of the Prassium Invasion Troops 214th Regiment
***Action is our prayer. Victory is our offering.***

_________________
My NetEA Lists:
Fir Iolarion Titan Clan List
Dark Angels List

Always looking to Trade!
Angel's Trade Thread

_________________
My NetEA Lists:
Fir Iolarion Titan Clan List
Dark Angels List

Always looking to Trade!
Angel's Trade Thread

The only aircraft with AA4+ Lascannons are Bombers. I strongly would encourage you to rethink that. Admitedly I'm totally seeing this as a Fighter vs Fighter Bomber as well but that intercept bonus makes that silly amaze balls on that fighter.

(Waits for Ginger to show up with AA4+ ire )

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

_________________
My NetEA Lists:
Fir Iolarion Titan Clan List
Dark Angels List

Always looking to Trade!
Angel's Trade Thread

Plenty of aircraft have different weapons from 40k in Epic. Hell, the poster child of that is the Thunderbolt with a multilaser instead of dual twin-autocannons.

Do a Nephilim Laser Cannon at AA5+ or swap it for multilaser is my suggestion.

i know, it sucks to do but the air rules being what they are [shrugs] =/

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

If it gets the possibility of AA4+ and 5+ AND 6+ then these things would need be cost so high they'd make a Thunderhawk-dropped Terminator Detachment seem like an activation padding unit.

While it's admirable that you'd want to stick with 'what the weapons already are' stat-wise, when you mount all these weapons on one fighter and slavishly stick to it you will end up with an endless arms race cycle just as 40k has, which is definitely something we can all agree would be a bad thing.

Two weapons at 5+ or just one weapon at 4+, but certainly not three weapons (unless one was a 5 and two 6s) or you end up with Dark Angels going from zero air power to all the very best air power in one stroke.