New Unit Ideas Thread, Second Edition

[Sebenko]

It's been a while since we've had one of these, and I bet we have some great new ideas for the Covenant, especially since so much has changed since the last thread.

 

I'll start us off with a couple of ideas. I'll be focusing on land or land capable units, since Spartan's rumoured land push is ongoing/barely started:

 

XX-Class Drone-Tank Command Unit

 

Medium Armoured Capital Surface Skimming Model

 

90 Points

Squadron Size: 1

 

DR 4 CR 6 MV 7" HP 5

AP 3 AA 3 CC 2 IR 2

 

RB                                    1  2  3  4

Heavy Energy Turret (S)  6  6  6  6

 

Minimum Move 0"

Turning Template 360-degree

Turn Limit 0"

 

Model Assigned Rules: Inventive Scientists

 

Options: This Model is fitted with an Internal Shield (2) Generator for no additional cost

 

Weapon Arcs: The Heavy Energy Turret (S) has a 360 degree arc of fire

 

X-Class Drone-Tank

 

Medium Armoured Multi-Purpose Robot

 

30 Points

Squadron Size: Attachment Only

 

DR 4 CR 6 MV 8" HP 3

AP 1 AA 2 CC 1 IR 2

 

RB                                    1  2  3  4

Fore Energy Guns (S)      7  7  -   -

 

Minimum Move 0"

Turning Template 360-degree

Turn Limit 0"

 

Model Assigned Rules: Attachment(XX-Class Drone-Tank Command Unit, 4), Rear Echelon

 

Options: This Model is fitted with an Internal Shield (1) Generator for no additional cost

 

Weapon Arcs: The Fore Energy Guns (S) have a Fore Fixed Channel Fire Arc

 

The idea here is that the X-Class (working title) is quite powerful for its points, but can only be fielded with the XX-Class (also working title) controller- and if the XX is lost, then the squadron cannot activate in a turn, due to having no models without the Rear Echelon MAR in the squadron, representing the Drone Tanks being without orders from the mothership.

 

The XX-Class is a mostly circular skimmer, with a large E-turret on top, an engine in the middle (somewhat like the engines on the Capek, or maybe multiple in a wing configuration), and all sorts of communication related greebles around it, extruding from the usual CoA smooth hull.

 

X-Class Drone tanks would be based on some sort of anti-grav looking mechanism, with a visible receiver dish on the back and a large fixed energy gun on the front.

[Hubcap]

Second one is still too cheap even with all the setbacks

[Thamoz]

I would disagree with you there Hubcap, since the entire squadron (and all those 30 point models) can be rendered useless just be killing the command tank. As soon as it is gone then all those powerful little 30 point tanks are just terrain features.

Combine that with the fact their guns are short ranged, and the opponent would have a fair chance at neutralising the entire squadron in the first turn, when they wont be able to do anything but trundle forward. Plus their relatively cheap points cost is made up for by the whopping 90 point cost of the command tank.

 

I like the idea

It is a nice use of existing mechanics to create a unique and very covenanty unit.

[Hubcap]

I still think it is as you can hide the command tank and the offensive stats are real good especially for a land game for the attachment tanks (4 might be too much). As well as having a shield on it for some defense. I like the idea just it can be easily abused, especially in a land game with a lot of terrain.

Keeping the idea only things I would change

COMMAND TANK

Pts- 80

Add hit and run

Turret 7/7/7/7

DRONE TANK

Pts- 35

No shield

Attachment (3)

CREW- Conscripted

Command tank can use the other tanks as mobile cover and still shoot with hit and run (some CoA models have this mar so makes some sense with it)

reduced attachment for less firepower in RB2 and RB1 (made up slightly from increased damage from command tank)

Conscripted crew because it's a drone? Idk if that makes sense to anyone else but seems right if it has no actual crew

[Sebenko]

Hiding the command tank should be difficult due to size class and the fact it has to move with the squadron.

 

As for Crew Type, Elite fits the CoA theme and since they're robots, their lack of AP means that they're going to be fairly ineffective in boarding.

 

Viewing them in comparison to the Atticus, they're worse in every way apart from having a shield. They have weak support stats. Their main strength is the gun they bring, which is good for the cost.

As for why I think 30 points is a fair price, the Atticus is 40 points (and is kinda sucky for that price, too)- And compared to it, the drone tanks can't fire at RB3, lose the broadsides, are worthless in boarding, have worse AA and can't take an attachment group. As for advantages, they have a larger squadron size, can move over water and are more resilient- but have the glaring weakness of being able to be rendered useless by killing a single model. Yes, a smart player can hide the controller, but it still has to stay close to them, and isn't massively tough. It's a weakness that a smart player on either side can exploit.

 

Y-Class Heavy Drone Support Walker

 

Medium Armoured Capital Model

 

75 Points (?)

Squadron Size: 1-2

 

DR 4 CR 6 MV 7" HP 5

AP 4 AA 4 CC 2 IR 3

 

RB                                          1  2  3  4

Bombard Rocket Battery (T)  9  9  9  9

 

Minimum Move 0"

Turning Template 360-degree

Turn Limit 0"

 

Model Assigned Rules: Inventive Scientists, Drone Relay

This model may upgrade to have the Squadron Support (CoA SAS, 5) MAR for an additional 15 points.

 

Options: This Model is fitted with an Internal Shield (2) Generator for no additional cost

 

Weapon Arcs: The Bombard Rocket Battery (T) has a 360 degree arc of fire

 

A way of adding more drones to a list without taking many carriers. The drone launch mechanism would actually be the rocket launcher, the upgrade purchasing a limited supply of drones, and their returning to the network representing the additional control the walker gives to the network, while not having the internal capacity to launch more drones.

[varnos]

I changed some minor things in the ideas, but I really like em! See below, if you want to try them out in a game or whatnot:

 

[Sebenko]

Hmm, couple of things to note- no model in the game has 0AP, although the PLC small tank used to. I also think Elite AP is pretty much the default on CoA units, so the Drone tank should have 1 Elite AP simply for stylistic consistency- hell, it still leaves it worse than the Colossus, which has 2 Elite and costs only 20 points. The others should have Elite as well, especially being as costly as they are.

 

As for Drone Launcher instead of Squadron Support, the entire idea behind suggesting that model was to be able to bring more drones to buff the network, without bringing full drone launchers- Which in that case would just make the Drone Support Tank an armoured Kepler, which doesn't seem a particularly interesting concept. I fully believe that there are loads of really interesting ideas that can be done within the DW rules, so that's mainly what I'm suggesting.

[varnos]

Fair points!

 

Re: 0AP: There is some precedent for the 0 AP though, for example the Reaper drone subs that are launched by the Manticore. I took those as inspiration to change it, considering they really can't operate without the mothership, something I'd find strange if there were at least some crew aboard. Also, don't discount the deva

 

Re: Elite Crew: The Socrates has Defensive! I'd consider 1 Elite AP to mirror the Orpheus, but it's by no means a universal phenomenon. I'd definitely mirror the defensive on the Homerus though.

 

Re: Drone Launcher: You definitely have a point there! Maybe it's possible to do something with the limited munitions MAR? Though I still think a unit that can switch between a drone launcher and a rocket launcher is pretty cool, so the relaunching part did seem cool to me...

[Sebenko]

Actually, yes. And since they're both drone type units, I think that's fair. Though remember AP on robots isn't actually marines, it's robot punching stuff.

 

As for the Orwell, it's not gaining that much from Elite, as the squadron will only ever have a single one, so aggressive boarding isn't going to be a great option for it, with whatever small AP count it has- and on a 90 point model, where none of the other models in the squadon can do any boarding. Background wise, the CoA have Elite troops on all their units that are likely to be in front line combat- the only non-elite AP land units they have are the Orbs and the bombards, both units that shouldn't really be getting up close, while the Orwell will have to be close to keep up with the drone tanks. 3/4 Elite sounds reasonable.

[Gasbow]

I really like the use of existing rule mechanics for new effect in the drone robot.

 

Aesop-Class Mechanical Flyer

 

Small Flying Robot

 

20 Points (?)

Squadron Size: 5 (very much open to debate)

 

DR 3 CR 4 MV 12" HP 2

AP 2 AA 2 CC 1 IR 1

 

Minimum Move 0"

Turning Template 360-degree

Turn Limit 0"

 

Model Assigned Rules: Crushing Impact (Boarding Only), Directed Fire (AA), Elusive target, Difficult target.

 

The visual idea is something insect / praying mantis like. Think flying bugs from starship troopers.

Basically the evil psycho cousin of the drones.

Small enough to envision it being launched by done launchers.

 

The Aesop fulfils the interceptor role for smalls and adds a bit of scariness to our aerial fleets.

 

There is a lot of wiggle room in the points, squadron size, AP and AA to properly balance it.

Maybe even make it tiny.

 

Combine it with the option to exchange carrier(x) for squadron support (Aesop (y) ) for some of our drone launchers.

 

edit. corrected mar as per comment below.

[Veldrain]

Having both Small and Difficult Target is redundant since they both target Capitols.  Are you sure you didn't mean to switch Small with Elusive?

[Gasbow]

yes sir

[Sebenko]

I think they might be a bit cheap for what they do, but there is an opening for a non-bomber small air model in the CoA ORBAT.

[Captain Covenant]

Nautilus-class submersible

 

Points: 150

 

DR 6 CR 9 MV 8" HP 8

AP 6 AA 3 CC 6 IR 7

 

Torpedoes:           10 10 10 10

Surface Mines x3: 4    -    -    -

 

LARGE CAPITAL SUBMERSIBLE NAVAL VESSEL

 

MARs: Inventive Scientists, Faster Torpedoes, Deep Diving, Hull Breaker (Ramming, D3)

 

Options:

This model is equipped with Sturginium Rounds (torpedoes)

This model is equipped with an internal Shield (2) generator for no extra cost

This model may be equipped with an internal Kinetic generator for +15 points

 

Firing arcs:

2X torpedoes have a 90 degree fore firing arc

 

This is from a man who is very much wishing he didn't have to use the Death Bringer for his every submersible need. I was very much debating on whether to give it two or three torpedo shots. Thoughts?

[jupjupy]

Nautilus-class submersible

Points: 150

DR 6 CR 10 MV 8" HP 8

AP 6 AA 3 CC 6 IR 7

Torpedoes: 10 10 10 10

Surface Mines x3: 4 - - -

LARGE CAPITAL SUBMERSIBLE NAVAL VESSEL

MARs: Inventive Scientists, Faster Torpedoes, Deep Diving, Hull Breaker (Ramming, D3)

Options:

This model is equipped with Sturginium Rounds (torpedoes)

This model is equipped with an internal Shield (2) generator for no extra cost

This model may be equipped with an internal Kinetic generator for +15 points

Firing arcs:

3X torpedoes have a 90 degree fore firing arc

This is from a man who is very much wishing he didn't have to use the Death Bringer for his every submersible need. I was very much debating on whether to give it two or three torpedo shots. Thoughts?

This thing is INSANE! For 150 points, 3 faster torpedo shots, mines, a shield, and the toughness of a battleship without even being submerged? I want one, but this is a little too powerful.

I'd either drop the dice on the torps to 6 or 7 but give them your current amount of shots, or give it a single 12 or 13 dice shot. You could even make it flavorful and give it pinpoint. It needs to drop in CR by 1 or 2, and in HP by 1. The shield will keep it safe underwater.

It also really does not need hull breaker on the ram. Perhaps magnetic mines?

[Captain Covenant]

I'll just reduce it by one torpedo shot. I felt that three might be too powerful, I kept on mulling it over.

 

I thought it would be more flavourful to make the torps have sturginium rounds.

 

I suppose it could do with one less CR taking into account the shield. I just thought that a lower DR but higher CR was a good idea. Easier to chip away at, y'know?

[jupjupy]

Remember that non-sub hunter weapons have to halve their AD when firing at submerged. With the long range, high power torpedoes on this thing, itll be incredibly difficult to deal much damage to it. I love the idea of the sub, though. Maybe a points increase would be justified?

[Captain Covenant]

Well, also keep in mind that that's only a 15 dice attack against bigger things. This thing is more designed to deliver a killing blow against weakened ships. Maybe a points increase would be justified, but let's see what the others think.

[Thamoz]

Since shield dice cannot explode vs torps anyway, sturginium rounds does not actually do anything for the torpedoes.

I would drop the mines entirely though, but maybe with a kinetic gen they have value? But then, with our torp spread, why does it want a kinetic?

Sorry, that was rambly. I mean, mines on a large (and most medium) vessels are almost useless. When was the last time you uses diophantus mines? Or even zeno mines? The best (and only really useful) minelayers are easy to manoeuvre and very fast. Ptolemy. Korsor. The kinetic gen solves one problem (speed) but magnifies the other (turning).

Mines aside, I like the idea. Two faster Torp shots of ten seems right for the points, did you consider giving it Hunter submerged? Since sturg rounds does nothing for it (and we lack a dedicated sub killer) it could be an option. I agree with lowering the cr by one.

[halosss]

Hmmm, I don't really like how it doesn't need to surface to do its job. Every other sub needs to do this to meet its full potential. Give it a PA of Maybe the Aristotle or a little stronger and it will have a reason to pop up. Or even give it strong broad sides. Having a sub the for no reason needs to come up is kind of OP. Hence the drone launching nerd from wave lurking no longer working.

[Captain Covenant]

A very good point, Thamoz. I forgot about the torpedoes automatically cancelling exploding shield dice. What else should the torpedoes have? Maybe pinpoint? Also, you're right about the hunter. Should it be Hunter (submerged, 2+) or Hunter (submerged and deep diving 1+)?

[jupjupy]

I would like to think Covenant torpedoes on submarines would have been tailored to hit other submarines, so Hunter (Diving, +1) would fit. And halosss has a point. Perhaps a PA would be fitting instead of the mines? It could even be used to shoot other subs.

[halosss]

I also just like to think about a big ole laser being fired under water melting a ship and evaporating the water to the target and then watching the ocean fill in the hole again.

[Nazduruk_Bugzappa]

The only reason for giving mines to a (slow) large or massive is for the bonus minefield that some campaigns generate.

[varnos]

Hmmm, I don't really like how it doesn't need to surface to do its job. Every other sub needs to do this to meet its full potential. Give it a PA of Maybe the Aristotle or a little stronger and it will have a reason to pop up. Or even give it strong broad sides. Having a sub the for no reason needs to come up is kind of OP. Hence the drone launching nerd from wave lurking no longer working.

 

well, no, the vengeance submarine only has a torp array and ramming potential.