Jump to content
CoreHunter

Initial Terran unit review

Recommended Posts

Leviathan can upgrade its grenade launcher that it does not have... but seems ok.

Loki ok. Hodor ok. Uncertain why this helix is an assault and not an AA helix also not clear on why it went up in points on the hodor by 20 each but seems usable now.

Slepnir is 70pts more for the gun setup really? 50 extra just by itself?

Tyr so i'm guessing it is not meant to fight at PB range but is unable move far enough to escape PB range once in it? Vidar just makes me a little sad and wonder why the main wiffle gun still causes terror and where its cqb weaponry went Also 4AD at extreme range would have been better off left at short range.

Heimdal well it is better but this obsession with corrosive is pissing me off as nuclear corroding things is insane and obviously radiation is not acid but a terrifying slow painful death to organic life but yeah lets melt metal.

Balder up 10pts now I know your (*&% with me.

Sinir ok. Uller MK1 10pts cheaper and a gun nearly useless outside 12". Uller MK2 may be cheaper but is also slower than our heimdals and only helps against kenetics so yeah.

yay Freyas went up and that's it...Valkyrie causing terror was one of my only joys out of terran lights, but hey they didn't go up for no reason nd are still one of the crapiest lights.

Huscarl well... I know no words to describe my disgust and after looking at the aerial units almost turned my computer off and started getting a garbage bag.

just my initial thoughts and a suggestion. Never post new rules on monday do it like thursday or friday as most people pretty much working till the weekend and can do little more than just theory craft for like 5 days. The fact that corrosive seems to be the only weapon mar other than kenetic that affects main combat units is limited as even our qcb weapons are corrosive mostly just like directorate and Terrans where already smiler to them as it was just slower and trading a DR for a SH.

Well will be a week before I can test any of it out but every unit i tended to use is either weaker or went up in cost. Some oddly enough both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose the Corrosive is to represent thing like depleted uranium munitions as oppose to actual nuclear warhead. That works in my head. 

Also slightly disappointed that the assault helix hasn't had any real change. It feels like the model designers tried to make some difference between different races in the helixs but the rules guys just got out their cookie cutters. 

Glad the Odin shield gen and the slepnirs have been aligned as well as the Ullr

Why does Terran need so much AA? Are our Aerials so poor at flying? 

Going to do a proper full comparison later tonight. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah all theory crafting at the moment, ill try to get a game soon to provide some feed back.  Some nice improvements and some things that seam hard to understand. I'm sure they will get ironed out going forward. 

 

Improved Shield Harmonics now equals trash unless there is a typo and it really still adds shield dice. Why you would ever pay 80 points for the support tank or neuter the fire power of the command barge to help with kinetics doesn't really fit with the beefy Terran shield approach.

Core helix got smacked hard, Vidar lost alot of its close range teeth.

Why are the Uller mk2 slower than most of the tanks they can attach to? doesn't make sense. 

Uller mk1 6" mv and 12" range to try to catch planes that move minimum 16"+ makes me glad the Loki and Hodor got good at shooting planes because i see no reason for either of the support tanks in their current state. 

For a ground attach gun ship the Hermoor has some poor PB fire power even with its increase in pts and loss of CQB dice.

Going to be darn hard to line up a  Rindr shot with 24" min move and 15" gun range. From a quick glance it looks like most race's interceptors have longer range guns than there min move.  Same problem on the hawker Guardsman... fly so fast they cant shoot. 

Like most of the new Hawker..  Seneschal gun looks under powered with its high cost compared to other heavies.

 

My 2 cents. will run some battles to evaluate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps a leftover not like the leviathen grenade launchers or our tank hunters going up in points.

Or the silly way they buff most heavy fliers and use needs and point increases in the smaller fliers to balance them. I do mean most as excluding our medium infantry transport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't looked at the fliers yet apart from the helix update. 

Was really hoping they would be 1 heavy flyer and 0-2 mediums

That would allow nicer flexibility in an area that is already spoling for choice. Going full interceptor is a big gamble imo and especially for Terrans as they can get AA everywhere else. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The command helix in general for all have went up a lot due to generating command points I guess. The assault helix seems usable at least but not for assaulting. It should do well to replace our Uller AA as the range on them seems rather stunted for the cost. Not sure how I feel about hawker losing its own special rule and taking the mediocre at best Terran rule for shields. The whole kenetic thing for our unit shield specials seem meh unless like how they have thrown pinpoint on everything others besides din and relth have gotten kinetic shoved on half of their weapons. Din with kinetic and pin seem way good, basically anti anyone but cloak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok so RSN and sirylians keep their awsome heavy infantry but terrans get a nerfed expensive one.

also do Terrans seriously need all these designators. We will probably be spending 6 orbital tokens on a single drop leaving us with a bunch of useless designators.

Also why would they follow a british doctrine? isn't the capitol like moscow or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think the revised pin point Mar is a big step down in its usefulness:

Pinpoint [Value] (Weapon MAR)
Prior to firing a weapon with the Pinpoint (Value) MAR, roll a number of [BLACK] D6 equal to the Value listed in the brackets. For each roll of a [BLACK] 6, the target suffers a -1 to their DR in the upcoming attack. Should multiple 6s be rolled, these are cumulative, as are any other modifiers to the DR that might be in play (Flanks, Rears and Debilitating Effects).

When rolling 6's with old pin point you had a 30.56% (pin 2), 51.7% (pin 4) of doing a entire point of damage (odds for rolling at least one 6. While a bit hit or miss this actually made pin point make since for hunting hard armored targets. With the new PP you would get -1 DR, whoopty dooo. Against a hard armored target, often with with DR 8 or more this means you still wont do any more damage when coupled with the fact that it doesn't look like the the AD of the pin point guns went up much  at all, this is a major reduction in the damage potential. If the number of pin point dice went up allot it could be useful but that would make it very random and often even overpowered or useless depending on the luck of the dice. 

IMHO: The Mar isn't random anymore its just mostly useless. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently, the boards decided to eat my first reply; they've been flaky all morning.

In any case, I hate the new Pinpoint.  I hated the old Pinpoint too, for basically the same reason.  The rule construction sticks out like a sore thumb in the system.  All other rules have defined effects and targets they work against.  Pinpoint has...random dice rolls.  The system is already far too prone to rewarding lucky rolls of 6, the last thing it needs is even more emphasis on that.  Reward proper positioning.  Reward proper target selection.  Reward thought in activation orders.  Don't reward the ability to get a handful of 6's at an opportune time.  That isn't a strategy, that's just dumb luck.  The new Pinpoint is, in some fashions, even worse than the original at this with the boosted values.  If you shoot a heavy tank squad from the side and get four 6's with your PP role, that squad is almost certainly gone...the whole squad, in one shot.  If you roll zero 6's, then you'll likely only hurt (not kill) one of them.  That's a horrifically swingy rule, with far worse variance than the original.  If you want to make a tactical game, you've got to fence these results in better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well when nearly every offensive mar is a variation of corrosive what do you expect? Cyber - super corrosive. pinpoint - **** corrosive. corrosive - well corrosive. that leaves 2 others, ignoring hard target or hindering shields.

forbid it provide some kind of counter to cloak or count (x) rolls of six as 3 hits without exploding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

huh that would be kinda neat pinpoint (2):

The first 2 rolls of a six count as 3 hits without exploding.

The first 2 rolls of a six ignore cloak.

or just make the unit able to bank pinpoint rolls at the start of the shot and spend them to bypass defenses. Successes could be spent to allow a six to bypass cloak or a single dice to bypass a hard target penalty.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Zebo said:

What about this option?

 

Pinpoint (x): If a weapon with Pinpoint MAR damages a vehicle, but don't kills it add (x) successes to the damage. 

But then what happens if it does kill it? 

Think its worth playing the current and see how it plays out before creating alternatives. 

I don't like the new or old PP but going to give it a go this weekend, even if my beloved Tyr is having turret issues. 

Edited by chrisbburn
Additional

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be honest, the new PP rule is growing on me. As an Aquan player, it's not that difficult to get a PP3 off, and with the Crystals the PP roll is 5+ instead of 6+. 2 successes isn't impossible, in which case you've reduced a 8/8 medium to 6/6, as the rule currently stands. Add in a Corrosive marker, and we're talking DR5... Which means that even a Aquan Medium squadron has decent odds of killing a target. 

I'd like it even more if it weren't random at all, or at least didn't introduce one more dice rolling step, but at least it is an improvement over the old one. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, chrisbburn said:

But then what happens if it does kill it? 

Think its worth playing the current and see how it plays out before creating alternatives. 

I don't like the new or old PP but going to give it a go this weekend, even if my beloved Tyr is having turret issues. 

The same that with the old version... Anything 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me, the only viable solution is to make the pinpoint MAR independant of any dice roll. Just as every single other MAR of this game. Without this, you can change the rule how many times you want (removing one DR point, lowering the DR, etc...), it will either be too powerful or too random/weak.

And please, tell me the broken turret of the Tyr is just a typo, because if not it's just plainly ridiculous... Especially considering that its turret doesn't make it overpowered at all.

Also, it is very surprising that the Vidars lost so much firepower without cost reduction. I never felt that they were overpowered.

Huscarls were a bit overpowered, but now after being hit so hard and so many times, they're kinda "meh", and even a bit weak to me. Cost raising, AD drop, loss of potential terror weapons, DR drop... don't you see that's a bit too much for a single unit? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.