GlynG wrote:
Gatling Kannon seems considerably underpowered. 45cm and 6 x AP/AT5+ isn’t much good compared to the other options. Particularly on a slow unit that will often be doubling. I agree with the worse to hit rolls than Imperial titan weapons but could it not be boosted to 7 or 8 shots? What’s more Orky that rolling bucket loads of dice with terrible to hit rolls?
I’d stongly suggest making the missiles 0-1 per Gargant.
I’d prefer to limit the Supa-Stompa to a more limited choice of weapons than the Gargant. Giving it the same free choice of 3 Gargant weapons seems too good for it and to devalue the much more expensive Gargant.
.
About the first one I am the responsible: the previous Gatling Cannon had about the same average damage as the Supa-Zzap, while doing a lot more to unarmored and the Supa-Zzap better against RA, so more or less balanced in damage with less range, so i told Mordoten to downpower it, which he did, a bit. So now, if the weapons are all in the same category and there is no plans to limit them, we need to put it back like how it were and make it more powerful to counter the reduced range.
I do not think we need limits to the Missiles: while for fluff makes sense to limit them, no one will fill a Gargant with missiles and i f they do it will under-perform latter and be mostly useless later. As long as they are One-Shot they will not pose any issue. Another issue would be with Supa-Stompas as they would become a better Deathstrike battery and very Un-Ork, so i think that limiting them for Great Gargants only is a way better option in my opinion
I also thought that it would be better than the Gargant with all of that firepower, but truth is that on OGBM Gargants were a better option always because of WE rules. Still i think they will need a point increase, as there are way better weapons out there than three Soopagunz.
jimmyzimms wrote:
So... double un-fun?
Just curious but there's no requirement for 1/3rd allies in the EA system. Would 1/4 be better or some combination of reduced/increased upper formation size sit better with some?
I prefer if we are to limit air to go with a minimum of four Fightas than to add an artificial limit of 1/4. But i do not think that we need either, as Kyusschains said, they are needed and on the other side this list loses a lot more than others if going heavy on air, and as proof of that, almost no one has tried that with OGBM
Tiny-Tim wrote:
Couple of quick comments on the above discussion.
In previous versions of this list I found that the fortress mobz were the main winning element of the list. The gargants and Supa-Stompas would pound the enemy with the fortress mobz claiming objectives. This was ok, but the gargants were not IMO the focus of the list.
This is also why I have kept indirect fire out of the list. However I am listening to what is said above and we might bring something back in.
True that different groups find different solutions. I am interested to see the battles were you tested that, as per my opinion the strategy of Fortress get destroyed first and the Gargants isolated seems obvious and very effective, same as what happens when mixing Supa-Stompas with the other Gargants, but easier as Fortress get destroyed a lot easier.
Please keep restricting Indirect Fire, save for very limited weapons like the One-Shot Missiles.