GlynG wrote:
A Destroyer Tank Hunter’s 40k stats don’t at all justify titan killer – it’s nowhere near that powerful.
When the list was written the Laser Destroyer was identical to the Volcano Cannon 40k stats at the time (IA1) in all but range and the lack of the "Titan Killer" special rule (which caused d3 structure points with a hit). With EA's Volcano being a TK(d3) it was completely justified and made sense for the Destroyer to be straight TK.
While I agree that it could have been AT2+, TK, to avoid being an infantry hunter as well I think that road wasn't taken due to either the MW hit allocation wording (i.e. it needs MW in the firepower to be allocated as a MW hit) or people just not recognizing that flexibility was there. The first argument didn't really hold water for me then, and still doesn't.
Abetillo wrote:
Just thinking, does someone here remember why Minnerva hadn't been added no Griffon or Hellhound formations back in the day? To avoid kitchen sink lists maybe? I think we should work taking into account that first.
It was still young in Epic's lifetime, and people weren't pushing for more use for their models. I'm sure many figured the umpteem-dozen lists in development would get approved so there'd be a list you could use them in somewhere. Nearly 15 years later that's no longer the case. Two new formations isn't going to push this list into the kitchen sink category, for one the units are already in it, and two it's still going to be thematically the same, a "lots of armor, few infantry" list.