<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title><![CDATA[Latest posts for the thread "Why aren't Assault cannons....Assault?"]]></title>
		<link>http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/16.page</link>
		<description><![CDATA[Latest messages posted in the thread "Why aren't Assault cannons....Assault?"]]></description>
		<generator>JForum - http://www.jforum.net</generator>
			<item>
				<title>Why aren't Assault cannons....Assault?</title>
				<description><![CDATA[ So we all know how funny it is for Assault cannons to be Heavy and Heavy Flamers to be Assault, in name at least.<br /> But for 8E it really seems odd if you think about the platforms Assault cannons were on in prior editions.<br /> Namely Vehicles and Terminators exclusively, which in prior editions were Relentless, meaning they didn't take any penalty for moving and shooting.<br /> <br /> So it seems odd, to me, that when Assault cannons were update for 8E (and they were altered more than other weapons*) <span class="glossaryitem" onmouseover='gp(50);'>GW</span> could have made them Assault, but didn't.<br /> So that is what I am proposing: make Assault Cannons into Assault weapons, but also only 5 Shots to make is roughly the same as Heavy 6 (still better, but not by much)<br /> <br /> -<br /> <br /> *Assault cannons were previously Heavy 4, AP4, Rending.  8E made them Heavy 6, but only <span class="glossaryitem" onmouseover='gp(6);'>AP</span>-1.  Other weapons that had Rending in prior editions got an additional <span class="glossaryitem" onmouseover='gp(6);'>AP</span> and all other weapons that were AP4, translated to <span class="glossaryitem" onmouseover='gp(6);'>AP</span>-1.  So with Rending, Assault cannons <i>should</i> have been <span class="glossaryitem" onmouseover='gp(6);'>AP</span>-2, but thankfully <span class="glossaryitem" onmouseover='gp(50);'>GW</span> just gave them extra shots instead.<br /> But the fact that they never suffered the Heavy penalty due to all it's platforms having Relentless, I feel they should be Assault, ESPECIALLY given their name.<br /> <br /> Thoughts?<br /> <br /> -]]></description>
				<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/765775/10201725.page</guid>
				<link>http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/765775/10201725.page</link>
				<pubDate><![CDATA[Wed, 24 Oct 2018 13:37:37]]> GMT</pubDate>
				<author><![CDATA[ Galef]]></author>
			</item>
			<item>
				<title>Why aren't Assault cannons....Assault?</title>
				<description><![CDATA[ Assault 4, S6 , <span class="glossaryitem" onmouseover='gp(6);'>AP</span> -2, D 1 and no penalti for moving. Would be nice but, it is <span class="glossaryitem" onmouseover='gp(50);'>GW</span>. <br /> <br /> Probably somebody cames to work with the idea doing the assault cannon like it is and the rest said, Ok do what you want.<br /> <br /> There are so many thing wrong in the game and without sense....]]></description>
				<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/765775/10201735.page</guid>
				<link>http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/765775/10201735.page</link>
				<pubDate><![CDATA[Wed, 24 Oct 2018 13:48:20]]> GMT</pubDate>
				<author><![CDATA[ Alex_85]]></author>
			</item>
			<item>
				<title>Why aren't Assault cannons....Assault?</title>
				<description><![CDATA[ Well, I am actually happy with the way it change initially.  <span class="glossaryitem" onmouseover='gp(6);'>AP</span>-2 would have been too good and would have made it more of a heavy target weapon.  <span class="glossaryitem" onmouseover='gp(6);'>AP</span>-1 was a good call, as was upping the shots to 6.<br /> <br /> But with the non-existence of Relentless, which had been on every platform that could take <span class="glossaryitem" onmouseover='gp(5);'>ACs</span>, I think that should have been a consideration for its profile.<br /> Assault 5 seems to be a good "equivalent" to Heavy 6 as Assault 4 would be objectively worse.<br /> It would make mobile Razorbacks, Landspeeders and Terminators a bit more appealing overall.  Currently you only see "parking lot" Razorbacks, which just seem wrong.<br /> <br /> -]]></description>
				<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/765775/10201749.page</guid>
				<link>http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/765775/10201749.page</link>
				<pubDate><![CDATA[Wed, 24 Oct 2018 13:56:34]]> GMT</pubDate>
				<author><![CDATA[ Galef]]></author>
			</item>
			<item>
				<title>Re:Why aren't Assault cannons....Assault?</title>
				<description><![CDATA[ They seem like in-jokes to me. Its a quirk, doesn't affect super amounts of units or just one entire unit. They (as seen pre-<span class="glossaryitem" onmouseover='gp(18);'>CA</span> 1) Assault Cannons were to powerful (with certain buffs etc). It's just a joke continued. No drama, are fine (Maybe a little to expensive now for certain units, but meh).]]></description>
				<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/765775/10201757.page</guid>
				<link>http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/765775/10201757.page</link>
				<pubDate><![CDATA[Wed, 24 Oct 2018 14:04:17]]> GMT</pubDate>
				<author><![CDATA[ Spectral Ceramite]]></author>
			</item>
			<item>
				<title>Why aren't Assault cannons....Assault?</title>
				<description><![CDATA[ Well, to reduce the potential buffs, you could make them Assault 4 with a bit of a points reduction.  Makes them worthwhile without lending too much potential for buffage]]></description>
				<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/765775/10201763.page</guid>
				<link>http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/765775/10201763.page</link>
				<pubDate><![CDATA[Wed, 24 Oct 2018 14:06:39]]> GMT</pubDate>
				<author><![CDATA[ Galef]]></author>
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>