AnomanderRake wrote:
Why would you ever want one BS4 Pathfinder with Precision Shot when you could get two regular Pathfinders for the same price?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Naaris wrote:

Sniper drone team - remove from codex

...Why?

 crazyK wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Why would you ever want one BS4 Pathfinder with Precision Shot when you could get two regular Pathfinders for the same price?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Naaris wrote:

Sniper drone team - remove from codex

...Why?

Yeah, why remove the sniper team?

If the next codex follows the current trend they will remove a ton of standard options that you will only get back in new formations.

I'm fine with a plan that removes the necessity of markerlights. I would love an alien auxiliary though that can actually hold out in cc. Either boost Kroot (dodge save in cc?) or CC battlesuits.

Bharring wrote:
The ideas were very rough.

Is Lance really better choice for Rail than Ordinance?

Lance portrays a weapon ignoring the heaviest parts of armor for whatever reason, tearing apart AV14 like it were AV12. But has no benefit against medium or light vehicles.

Ordinance represents a more forcefully directed weapon that destroys everything in its path. Not only is it more likely to hurt heavy armor, but also light/medium armor are even more likely to get penned.

It seems, to me, Ordinance is more in line with Rail than Lance.

Also, I could see Broadsides keeping their 2+ or being t5, but not both. Broadsides are the same tech as Crisis Suits, but built in a much more sturdy manner. The same weapons will be able to damage it, but the Broadside is beefier, so it takes more to drop it. That says Toughness more than Armor Save to me. Works either way, it was just an idea.

Rail Rifles would be a great option for StealthSuits, I think. Fitting, but costed appropriately, not broken.

Also, a drone controller on vehicles could be interesting. Would only affect the embarked drones, but could be fun.

The 'Marksmen' was so you could give Precision - and potentially BS4 - to the Pathfinder special weapons. Haven't really iterated on it, though. Might not be a good idea even. But 10ppm would be far too much.

Crisis Suits and double weapons - having 2x the same weapon is almost always a no-brainer. By costing base price +5, you might need to review taking a different weapon instead of 2x the same.

For experimental gear, I feel like some may have become standard issue, but only a few. Just moving all doesn't feel right.

For Pulse Carbines, yeah, not my finest idea. I was thinking allowing a Blind test with them might actually give Carbine FW a role.

Sniper drones - please don't nuke them!

crazyK wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Why would you ever want one BS4 Pathfinder with Precision Shot when you could get two regular Pathfinders for the same price?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Naaris wrote:

Sniper drone team - remove from codex

...Why?

Yeah, why remove the sniper team?

If the next codex follows the current trend they will remove a ton of standard options that you will only get back in new formations.

I'm fine with a plan that removes the necessity of markerlights. I would love an alien auxiliary though that can actually hold out in cc. Either boost Kroot (dodge save in cc?) or CC battlesuits.

Naaris wrote:

Bharring wrote:
The ideas were very rough.

Is Lance really better choice for Rail than Ordinance?

Lance portrays a weapon ignoring the heaviest parts of armor for whatever reason, tearing apart AV14 like it were AV12. But has no benefit against medium or light vehicles.

Ordinance represents a more forcefully directed weapon that destroys everything in its path. Not only is it more likely to hurt heavy armor, but also light/medium armor are even more likely to get penned.

It seems, to me, Ordinance is more in line with Rail than Lance.

Also, I could see Broadsides keeping their 2+ or being t5, but not both. Broadsides are the same tech as Crisis Suits, but built in a much more sturdy manner. The same weapons will be able to damage it, but the Broadside is beefier, so it takes more to drop it. That says Toughness more than Armor Save to me. Works either way, it was just an idea.

Rail Rifles would be a great option for StealthSuits, I think. Fitting, but costed appropriately, not broken.

Also, a drone controller on vehicles could be interesting. Would only affect the embarked drones, but could be fun.

The 'Marksmen' was so you could give Precision - and potentially BS4 - to the Pathfinder special weapons. Haven't really iterated on it, though. Might not be a good idea even. But 10ppm would be far too much.

Crisis Suits and double weapons - having 2x the same weapon is almost always a no-brainer. By costing base price +5, you might need to review taking a different weapon instead of 2x the same.

For experimental gear, I feel like some may have become standard issue, but only a few. Just moving all doesn't feel right.

For Pulse Carbines, yeah, not my finest idea. I was thinking allowing a Blind test with them might actually give Carbine FW a role.

Sniper drones - please don't nuke them!

I think of rail weapons as powerful weapons that punch through any armor, and keep going, through the vehicle, through the squad of troops behind that vehicle, through the building behind them etc... until the projectile inertia drops off and it crashes.
So i see them a a leveler of all armor.

Bharring wrote:
Its not some quasi-magical 'ignore your armor' weapon, its a gakton of energy in a small area. Like a smaller weapon, but better.

Lance seems to be a bit more than that.

Even with the amounts of energy we're talking about, with Lance, it'll probably pen a Predator, and it'll probably pen a Chimera (head on). With Ordinance, it'll probably+ pen a Pred, and almost certainly pen a Chimera.

Ordinance needn't be a radial explosion. I think it really think it fits the Railgun perfectly.

As for Primary Weapon vs Ordinance, (1), Primary Weapon in multiples actually rolls slower than Ordinance (one at a time vs. Reroll the fails), and (2) no mobility on foot/snapfire others on vehicles, I think is appropriate.

A Broadside that wants to reposition won't be bringing their Heavy Rail Rifles to bear (plasma guns are there for that!). Rail Pathfinders shouldn't be able to snapshot those things - you can't fire-from-thr-hip a weapon twice as long as you are tall! And a Hammerhead, focusing on landing its Railgun, won't have great accuracy from its other weapons as the Railgun fires.

Primary Weapon, IMO, is a bad idea for Rail.

Martel732 wrote:
"I've never understood why advanced AI drones would have poorer aim than the manned guns of a vehicle. "

Because Grimdark. Or something. The same reason they were questioning a computer hitting a TWO METER immobile target in Star Wars IV.

Bharring wrote:
Fleshbane typically reflects an effect that isn't tied to the strength of a weapon. Witchblades don't hit hard, but use psykic shenanigans to hurt anyone it touches. Black Mace is cursed. Things like that. They aren't simply 'super strong'.

A Railgun is more akin to an SM Orbital Bombardment than a witchblade, obviously. Only the Bombardment is a capital ship directing a substantial naval-scale battery upon the location, whereas the Railgun is a single shot of a weapon that would equal the combined hit of all those naval weapons at any given point. So, mostly the same profile. Except that the Bombardment is over a much, much larger area, so its large blast, whereas a Railgun is a single shot with a precisely aimed weapon. Therefore, S10 Ordinance AP1 is "right".

Adding some sort of Rail or Plasma to Stealth Suits could be cool. But why does it need to be some new special snowflake? Why not just allow more weapon options (at 1 per 3 still, probably), with a possible addition of Rail Rifle? (Does Relentless affect Ordinance?)

As for Precision, there is already a wargear option for that (although it might be interesting to consider adding a Precision option to Marker light uses).

Also, Primary Weapon seems... artificial on an infantry model, even one in a battlesuit.