|
|
Post by Blargaliscious on Sept 6, 2017 0:46:01 GMT
Based upon the September 5th Insider there was mention of a Man-O-War Bombardier Officer CA to be proposed. Assuming that it will be modeled after the Man-O-War Shocktrooper Officer CA it might look like this: SPD: 4 STR: 9 MAT: 8 RAT: 6 (Was 7, edited after learning Pagani sucks at simple math) DEF: 10 ARM: 16 CMD: 9 Hit Points: 8 Combined Range Attack Officer 40mm Base Grenade Cannon (as per Man-O-War Bombardiers) Chain Blade (as per Man-O-War Bombardiers) Point Cost: 4 points (  ) Attachment (Man-O-War Bombardiers)- This attachment can be added to a Man-O-War Bombardier unit. OfficerGranted: Clear Cut - While this model is in formation, models in its unit gain Pathfinder when the unit is performing a full advance. Repairable – This model can be targeted with Repair special actions as if it were a construct model. Support Fire – This model can use Support Fire once per game at any time during the unit’s activation. This activation, models in this unit gain Dual Shot. (If a model with Dual Shot uses it Normal Movement to aim, it can make one additional ranged attack this activation.) Tactics: Quick Work – Models in this unit gain Quick Work. (If a model with Quick Work destroys one or more enemies with a melee attack during its Combat Action, immediately afterwards it can make a free basic ranged attack.) Grenade Cannon – Arcing Fire Chain blade – Critical Shred Questions: Is this a good CA for the MOW Bombardiers? Is 4 points too much or too little for what it does? (Ignore that you can get it for free.) Should anything change? Was the French Revolution neither French, nor revolutionary? Discuss! |
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Sept 6, 2017 0:50:14 GMT
My only problem is clear cut really. Its a weird mechanic Means you can move into a thicket, but not charge out of there. I feel like the ability to move in Difficult terrain, but not able to run or charge kinda cancels itself out. Really Granted: Pathfinder wouldn't be too crazy.
|
|
|
|
Post by mcdermott on Sept 6, 2017 1:03:14 GMT
Yeah but they're really a ranged unit, the number of times you should need them charging in should be kind of small.
|
|
|
|
Post by elricaltovilla on Sept 6, 2017 1:07:27 GMT
Yeah but they're really a ranged unit, the number of times you should need them charging in should be kind of small. Except that by granting quick work, the CA also encourages them to get into melee so that they can get Quick Work shots off. If they're a ranged unit, they need more pure ranged support. If they're a mixed attacking unit, then they need the mobility necessary to support that playstyle. |
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Sept 6, 2017 1:08:31 GMT
Yeah but they're really a ranged unit, the number of times you should need them charging in should be kind of small. They do want us Charging if they're Giving us Quick Work. Which is a fine ability....Does it work in melee? I man that is a nice way of giving extended threat range in a way that's, not Assault. You kill a target in melee, then Fire off a 12 Inch arcing shot probably at some support. |
|
|
|
Post by mcdermott on Sept 6, 2017 1:09:30 GMT
12 inch range pow 14, cra and a mini feat for double shot. Having a backup plan for melee isn't the same as encouraging them to get into melee.
Edit to add: They're still only arm 16, so squishy for MOW, their weapons have a shorter melee range than the other two MoW as well. If you try to plan around them charging in to get their quick work shots off I get the feeling you're going to be regularly disappointed compared to if you treat it as a way to clear units that run to jam them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Sept 6, 2017 1:14:46 GMT
Having a backup plan for melee isn't the same as encouraging them to get into melee. No, it really is. They hit Hard enough (Pow 13) and they get increased Range if they successfully kill a guy (So a threat range of 19 with Arcing fire on a charge). |
|
|
|
Post by smoothcriminal on Sept 6, 2017 1:18:29 GMT
Clear cut does not synergize well with Quick work. One wants them to sit in terrain and shoot while the other wants them to charge into melee.
Otherwise the CA and base range change fixes all the issues with this unit I had. It will work on the table.
|
|
|
|
Post by Celtkhan on Sept 6, 2017 1:19:49 GMT
Quick Work on non-Reach, non-Gunfighter models is always an odd decision. If you fail to kill your target, you don't get to shoot. If you kill your target, but his buddies are standing too close, you don't get to shoot. It's usually only corner cases where you're charging a ranged unit, a melee unit with shortblades, or a backline support unit that it ever impacts things. If Bombardiers manage to pull off any of those things, then you're either mopping the floor with your opponent or their beating you so badly that the loss of an entire unit is inconsequential.
|
|
|
|
Post by mcdermott on Sept 6, 2017 1:22:31 GMT
Having a backup plan for melee isn't the same as encouraging them to get into melee. No, it really is. They hit Hard enough (Pow 13) and they get increased Range if they successfully kill a guy (So a threat range of 19 with Arcing fire on a charge). They only equal the threat of their guns (in CID) with a single khadoran caster, and require the support of the kovnik AND Strakhov2 to do that. You're confusing a splash of versatility to clear away jammers efficiently with encouragement to turn them into a melee unit. |
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Sept 6, 2017 1:29:40 GMT
They only equal the threat of their guns (in CID) with a single khadoran caster, and require the support of the kovnik AND Strakhov2 to do that. You're confusing a splash of versatility to clear away jammers efficiently with encouragement to turn them into a melee unit. Then it's a confusing rule. You can't really fault me for that. |
|
|
|
Post by Blargaliscious on Sept 6, 2017 1:39:13 GMT
I think the basic idea behind this CA is to increase the amount of firing the Bombardiers do over the length of the game, based upon their movement.
If the Bombardiers need to cross rough terrain they would need to run if they wanted to make any distance. Assuming 4" or greater of rough terrain, with Clear Cut they can make the same distance that they would by running, but they can also fire since they would be walking. Now the only real reason why the Bombardiers would run (and not fire) would be to move up the board to close the distance.
Quick Work allows the Bombardiers to make a charge and, assuming that they kill what they charge, get a shot off.
Since the basic idea of Man-O-Wars is to advance towards the enemy to kill them (for the greater glory of the Motherland) they should rarely ever stand still. If they do happen to stand still for a second, they now have the mini-feat of dual shot.
See, this guy is all about making the Bombardiers fire more often over the length of the game.
|
|
|
|
Post by mcdermott on Sept 6, 2017 1:42:18 GMT
They only equal the threat of their guns (in CID) with a single khadoran caster, and require the support of the kovnik AND Strakhov2 to do that. You're confusing a splash of versatility to clear away jammers efficiently with encouragement to turn them into a melee unit. Then it's a confusing rule. You can't really fault me for that. IMO its definitely a trap that will get a lot of people to misuse them on the table, and there are even going to be times when charging in is the right call, but they're still relatively squishy, only hit as hard as IFP, and have a low charging threat. It makes sense though. With MOW you're not getting masses of models, so the individual models you have are going to need to be able to deal with a variety of situations. With a 10 man ranged unit you can write off the 1/3 of a unit or whatever that gets jammed and keep shooting, but that becomes a problem when you only have 6 models to the unit, and they're going to need a way to clear out people who run to engage or else any speed 6/7 unit or even speed 5 with spell support is just going to sprint up into them. |
|
|
|
Post by borderprince on Sept 6, 2017 5:39:26 GMT
I wonder whether the UA might only get a RAT increase, to highlight the ranged nature of the unit. It isn't like MAT7 is bad in any event.
I like it, but wonder whether it might be priced at 5 points. Extra attacks are probably seen as more valuable than many other benefits, and this model provides two different ways of having multiple attacks, and a form of pathfinder.
Surely the correct answer is that it is too soon to say?
|
|
|
|
Post by thebuoyancyofwater on Sept 6, 2017 6:30:42 GMT
I would expect RAT6, not 7. Otherwise looks good on first (untested) impressions!
Cheers,
Dave
|
|
)
