Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

SU-152 wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:



I understand marine player's frustrations with ogryns and veletari, I think this is more an issue of how clunky combat is and how critical they've made rules like rend.

Yet Marine Missile Launchers and Dreadnoughts are way more broken than Veletari and Ogryns. It seems they forget models cost points.

Ogryns will wipe a unit of dreads in close combat. trust me i know from experence. dreads only hope is to over watch with hand bolters and kill the Ogryns before they get there. the marine missile launchers are the same as the aux walker. but the aux walker is better and can spam it. good bye airplane.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:
That's his point. Too easy to just fish on 6's.

But seeing how strong airplanes are already not sure is buffing them right idea. Having them even harder to kill is not what i would want to see

we have stopped taking planes because its to easy to shoot them down. aux and marine players alike.

 ashlevrier wrote:
we have stopped taking planes because its to easy to shoot them down. aux and marine players alike.

Yeah my problem is the volume of fire of some units activations sorta negates the need for 6's, you're likely to get some if you're throwing like 12 shots.

tneva82 wrote:

 Sherrypie wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
That's his point. Too easy to just fish on 6's.

But seeing how strong airplanes are already not sure is buffing them right idea. Having them even harder to kill is not what i would want to see

Point being made was that LI would let you fish and AT wouldn't, which is incorrect. Both games have sixes always hitting, AT just has additional bits you cannot opt for if the penalties would take you to that point.

A working example would be something like 40k 8th, where you would indeed be unable to hit things if you reached a 7+ to hit from modifiers.

And unhittable is not good. You can't have unhittable things in game and expect game still to work.

So 6's hit is good.


The planes are silly good already so unkillable would be bad and unkillable units are always source of npe.

I do not agree. 6s always hit is lazy design, and makes lots of weapons, some covers, and negative modifiers useless and worthless.

The best approach is (again) Epic Armageddon: 7+, 8+, 9+ (that's rolling a 6 and then rolling again to get 4+, 5+, 6+).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ashlevrier wrote:

SU-152 wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:



I understand marine player's frustrations with ogryns and veletari, I think this is more an issue of how clunky combat is and how critical they've made rules like rend.

Yet Marine Missile Launchers and Dreadnoughts are way more broken than Veletari and Ogryns. It seems they forget models cost points.

Ogryns will wipe a unit of dreads in close combat. trust me i know from experence. dreads only hope is to over watch with hand bolters and kill the Ogryns before they get there. the marine missile launchers are the same as the aux walker. but the aux walker is better and can spam it. good bye airplane.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:
That's his point. Too easy to just fish on 6's.

But seeing how strong airplanes are already not sure is buffing them right idea. Having them even harder to kill is not what i would want to see

we have stopped taking planes because its to easy to shoot them down. aux and marine players alike.

Ogryns won't get to HtH, they will die in droves with the 6+ save (or maybe 1 or 2 stands reach base contact?). They will also die to the Dreads Light weapons (PD on top).

Again, you are missing the Armoured trait on Dreads, which makes them extremely survivable against point defense weapons.

Again, the aux walker is worse than SM missile launchers (it cost more points, which you insist in ignoring), and do not benefit from structure cover or the Armoured trait. Oh and it is actually worse vs planes than the Dread (accurate las-cannon), which you also forgot to mention.

the Heavy sentinal is not bad, that multi laser and missile launchers with a 4+ save is fairly solid, being able to move up before the game starts is also good.

SU-152 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Sherrypie wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
That's his point. Too easy to just fish on 6's.

But seeing how strong airplanes are already not sure is buffing them right idea. Having them even harder to kill is not what i would want to see

Point being made was that LI would let you fish and AT wouldn't, which is incorrect. Both games have sixes always hitting, AT just has additional bits you cannot opt for if the penalties would take you to that point.

A working example would be something like 40k 8th, where you would indeed be unable to hit things if you reached a 7+ to hit from modifiers.

And unhittable is not good. You can't have unhittable things in game and expect game still to work.

So 6's hit is good.


The planes are silly good already so unkillable would be bad and unkillable units are always source of npe.

I do not agree. 6s always hit is lazy design, and makes lots of weapons, some covers, and negative modifiers useless and worthless.

The best approach is (again) Epic Armageddon: 7+, 8+, 9+ (that's rolling a 6 and then rolling again to get 4+, 5+, 6+).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ashlevrier wrote:

SU-152 wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:



I understand marine player's frustrations with ogryns and veletari, I think this is more an issue of how clunky combat is and how critical they've made rules like rend.

Yet Marine Missile Launchers and Dreadnoughts are way more broken than Veletari and Ogryns. It seems they forget models cost points.

Ogryns will wipe a unit of dreads in close combat. trust me i know from experence. dreads only hope is to over watch with hand bolters and kill the Ogryns before they get there. the marine missile launchers are the same as the aux walker. but the aux walker is better and can spam it. good bye airplane.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:
That's his point. Too easy to just fish on 6's.

But seeing how strong airplanes are already not sure is buffing them right idea. Having them even harder to kill is not what i would want to see

we have stopped taking planes because its to easy to shoot them down. aux and marine players alike.

Ogryns won't get to HtH, they will die in droves with the 6+ save (or maybe 1 or 2 stands reach base contact?). They will also die to the Dreads Light weapons (PD on top).

Again, you are missing the Armoured trait on Dreads, which makes them extremely survivable against point defense weapons.

Again, the aux walker is worse than SM missile launchers (it cost more points, which you insist in ignoring), and do not benefit from structure cover or the Armoured trait. Oh and it is actually worse vs planes than the Dread (accurate las-cannon), which you also forgot to mention.

your ignoring my point from experence. armoured is good. but then vanquisher pops dread. the aux walkers are better at shooting down aircraft because more dakka. they also have a free move at start of game. frag missile to clear out buildings. half my dreads have las. the other half has assult cannon. all aux walkers have the same load out.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Formosa wrote:
the Heavy sentinal is not bad, that multi laser and missile launchers with a 4+ save is fairly solid, being able to move up before the game starts is also good.

yep. they are a good option for the aux. lots of dakka for the points.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
https://youtu.be/xRsivs31swc?si=DBESxff2NCZPeHeZ

had another game, 1,500 again, this time rolling in the secondary objectives - which in the end didn't matter much.

one slight change we have made is that objectives within 3" of a building are moved, or the building is moved, such that infantry within a building cannot control it - may revert this when games get larger but at present removal of such is awkward.

defeat for my XIV & Auxilia, moving forward to grab ground and hold it didn't work this time, such is dice.

Aircraft did essentially nothing, I had a pair of Xiphon, that killed a Vanquisher and plinked a wound on a Malcador, opponent had one, that did nothing - but both flights being kept back to avoid massed overwatch - to be honest points would have been better used elsewhere

Think I need to change how my SA infantry are organised, I currently have two formations, which is fine, one for each side of the board with a commander in each, good on one side, naff on the other.

so far they get broken before they get to charge, managed one charge this time which was bounced by overwatch with a failed morale check.

think whats needed is an assault detachment and a stand off detachment such that its hard to break the formation before the assault one gets where it needs to be. likely needs (another) box or two so the stand off lot can basically be cheaper bodies and the Ogyrn can be in the lead.

may be looking for some suitable STL files as I need more plain bodies but don't really need a lot of the rest (though another box for more axe murdering lunatics would be good)

also seriously need to adjust the marine infantry, the rocket launcher is just too good not to be bringing more of, "ignores cover" as expected is worth its weight in gold - and is also why the Auxilia didn't live long enough

Marine infantry the last units to die though, and put out some damage.

still close at the end, scenario with three central objectives, neither of which got taken until the third turn such was the slaughter around them

leopard wrote:
had another game, 1,500 again, this time rolling in the secondary objectives - which in the end didn't matter much.

one slight change we have made is that objectives within 3" of a building are moved, or the building is moved, such that infantry within a building cannot control it - may revert this when games get larger but at present removal of such is awkward.

defeat for my XIV & Auxilia, moving forward to grab ground and hold it didn't work this time, such is dice.

Aircraft did essentially nothing, I had a pair of Xiphon, that killed a Vanquisher and plinked a wound on a Malcador, opponent had one, that did nothing - but both flights being kept back to avoid massed overwatch - to be honest points would have been better used elsewhere

Think I need to change how my SA infantry are organised, I currently have two formations, which is fine, one for each side of the board with a commander in each, good on one side, naff on the other.

so far they get broken before they get to charge, managed one charge this time which was bounced by overwatch with a failed morale check.

think whats needed is an assault detachment and a stand off detachment such that its hard to break the formation before the assault one gets where it needs to be. likely needs (another) box or two so the stand off lot can basically be cheaper bodies and the Ogyrn can be in the lead.

may be looking for some suitable STL files as I need more plain bodies but don't really need a lot of the rest (though another box for more axe murdering lunatics would be good)

also seriously need to adjust the marine infantry, the rocket launcher is just too good not to be bringing more of, "ignores cover" as expected is worth its weight in gold - and is also why the Auxilia didn't live long enough

Marine infantry the last units to die though, and put out some damage.

still close at the end, scenario with three central objectives, neither of which got taken until the third turn such was the slaughter around them

If you search milky way on yeggi I think there's some decent bodies.


Planes I'm finding a bit frustrating, we both ran a couple yesterday and it still feels like they're too easy to destroy. I really don't want the only way for them to feel viable being a unit of like 3-4, because the sheer firepower gets insane.

Marine missile launchers are great, wish solar aux had something with a decent range for infantry that could go in units, even if it was just like a multi laser or something. I need some rapiers.

yes aircraft being fragile is tempered by how they can hit quite hard, they need care, I've swapped to the sort of tactics I use with Flames mid war Panzers, think of them as glass hammers and position to limit return fire - making them your last movement activations if possible.

you limit potential targets but also limit the chance you don't get to fire at all - avoiding stuff on First Fire seems to be a good idea too

cheers for the hint, will go have a look have seen various guardsmen type models, hoping to get stuff I can use as plain bodies that don't look too out of place (even if they end up in dedicated units)

and yes the lack of organic heavy weapons for the SA is a problem

I have Tarantula, I want a decent Rapier solution, push comes I can model the carrier, the crewman may take a bit more but could just go old school, a tracked carrier and a pair of crew standing near it

I've got about 8 tarantula painted, have you ran yours yet?

not yet, not finished painting, have 4 of each flavour in base & wash

have held off as agreed with regular opponent not to use stuff he doesn't have access to (will be printing him some in the new year)

they look interesting tactically

deploy too far forward and they will be easily killed, too far back and they are less useful - I think they are more a bit of a speed bump than serious threat

reasonable range on their guns, accuracy nothing special on the las-cannon one and not too hard to shove something cheaper they will lock on to in place of something heavier - their saving grace being when they fire

I'm hoping they slow down an enemy who feels obliged to kill them before coming closer, while distracting some fire from my infantry

the air defence one is likewise interesting, this has to be thrown forwards or enemy aircraft will just stay out of range while picking off your units that advance beyond them (this also makes mixed batteries harder)

I think for the points though I'm very tempted to run a few units, and make them large enough they are awkward to kill, or small enough they are a waste of decent firepower

leopard wrote:
not yet, not finished painting, have 4 of each flavour in base & wash

have held off as agreed with regular opponent not to use stuff he doesn't have access to (will be printing him some in the new year)

they look interesting tactically

deploy too far forward and they will be easily killed, too far back and they are less useful - I think they are more a bit of a speed bump than serious threat

reasonable range on their guns, accuracy nothing special on the las-cannon one and not too hard to shove something cheaper they will lock on to in place of something heavier - their saving grace being when they fire

I'm hoping they slow down an enemy who feels obliged to kill them before coming closer, while distracting some fire from my infantry

the air defence one is likewise interesting, this has to be thrown forwards or enemy aircraft will just stay out of range while picking off your units that advance beyond them (this also makes mixed batteries harder)

I think for the points though I'm very tempted to run a few units, and make them large enough they are awkward to kill, or small enough they are a waste of decent firepower

Ya been holding off for same reason, wanted opponent to have time to paint theirs. The air defense seem great, but almost not needed yet as neither of us have a sizeable airforce just yet. I am excited about the las tarantulas, very cheap and lots of decent ranged shooting. Hoping it pairs well with smaller detachments holding objectives in the backfield.

leopard wrote:
had another game, 1,500 again, this time rolling in the secondary objectives - which in the end didn't matter much.

one slight change we have made is that objectives within 3" of a building are moved, or the building is moved, such that infantry within a building cannot control it - may revert this when games get larger but at present removal of such is awkward.

defeat for my XIV & Auxilia, moving forward to grab ground and hold it didn't work this time, such is dice.

Aircraft did essentially nothing, I had a pair of Xiphon, that killed a Vanquisher and plinked a wound on a Malcador, opponent had one, that did nothing - but both flights being kept back to avoid massed overwatch - to be honest points would have been better used elsewhere

Think I need to change how my SA infantry are organised, I currently have two formations, which is fine, one for each side of the board with a commander in each, good on one side, naff on the other.

so far they get broken before they get to charge, managed one charge this time which was bounced by overwatch with a failed morale check.

think whats needed is an assault detachment and a stand off detachment such that its hard to break the formation before the assault one gets where it needs to be. likely needs (another) box or two so the stand off lot can basically be cheaper bodies and the Ogyrn can be in the lead.

may be looking for some suitable STL files as I need more plain bodies but don't really need a lot of the rest (though another box for more axe murdering lunatics would be good)

also seriously need to adjust the marine infantry, the rocket launcher is just too good not to be bringing more of, "ignores cover" as expected is worth its weight in gold - and is also why the Auxilia didn't live long enough

Marine infantry the last units to die though, and put out some damage.

still close at the end, scenario with three central objectives, neither of which got taken until the third turn such was the slaughter around them

i played two 1650 games. i was 3rd legion the other side in both games was Aux. i lost the first and got a draw on the second.

i had 5 aircraft in my list. 3 fighters and 2 storms. the Xiphons in a group of 3 killed some tanks. the 2 storms didnt do so much. second game i used them as assult transports for the assult marines. they did good that time.

i ran two units of 12 stands of infrantry. one unit had rhinos the other didnt. but i did have just 4 rando rhinos for taking objectives and activations.

marine tanks are good for one thing i think. overwatch when the axe men come. first game i got swarmed with mass units of ogers and axe men.

second game had more tanks and less axe men and ogers.

the draw game was close. marines still have a 0 win rate in the local group. marine tanks just die unless its the heavy tank.

i may make smaller units instead of large infantry swarms. also rhinos are amazing at overwatch when the axe men come.

kind of a moment of pride is when the baneblade opened up on the rhinos and not the infantry.

leopard wrote:


Think I need to change how my SA infantry are organised, I currently have two formations, which is fine, one for each side of the board with a commander in each, good on one side, naff on the other.

so far they get broken before they get to charge, managed one charge this time which was bounced by overwatch with a failed morale check.

think whats needed is an assault detachment and a stand off detachment such that its hard to break the formation before the assault one gets where it needs to be. likely needs (another) box or two so the stand off lot can basically be cheaper bodies and the Ogyrn can be in the lead.

I think you should drop one infantry formation and boost it for durability. It is the tanks that are the work horses in solar, not the infantry. How big are your core units when you use two sub cohort formations??

In my 1500p force i am planning on using only 1 sub-cohort with 3 core units of 12 bases (8 las + 4 flame), 8 ogryns, 8 sentinels and 8 storms. That puts me at strenght 51, bp 26. Then i allso plan to add some russes with the defualt cannon instead of air support. bp of 26 using just the content of one infantry box may not sound too strong, but as a solar you are ment to sit back with the infantry until the armor element has done the heavy lifting.

Allso solar dont have ground transport models, dont have light armor and dont have artillery, when we get that survivability of the infantry should go up a little.

core units currently run eight strong, aware thats on the small side

the four lasrifle, a pair with flamers and a pair of Ogyrn

built that way as I had one box to start with, then gained a second, thinking of doubling them up to be honest.

while at 8 strong they die the interesting bit is more that they break before they die, to the point that I do double them up its going to be asymetric with one unit being basically just the las rifles who sit back - the job being to hold ground, survive and stop the formation breaking, while the other gets boosted with six Ogryn and six flamers

they have a pretty simple role currently, advance on the flanks, letting marines handle the centre, and distract enemy fire from the marines - they need to look scary while not being too many points.

not run their armour as yet, need to jiggle the list about a bit for a 2k game thats coming up


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Follow up: game coming up, someone I've not played yet, apparently the local club have a few who have fiddled with the points system and force design slightly

you have a point value, main and allies as usual, but cannot buy knights or titans with it, then there is either an extra total which can only be used for knights & titans or a set number of knights & titans get added.

the thinking is the point values are so out of whack as to neutralise them and remove the ability to forgo the titan and bring a lot of extra ants to swarm the board with - while still permitting the bigger toys to be used.

I actually think, not having tried it yet, this is perhaps not a bad way to go

If you look at the units and what they actually do, a tercio isn't much except a vehicle for more ogryn and veltaris, or a screen for valuable shooting units. They have very basic shooting and no melee flexibility unlike tacticals. And if the tercio isnt a great unit, the current selection of units means the sub cohort isn't either.

Until the next expansion when they hopefully release a light armour, more transports and artillery unit, the pioneer company is the best bet. It still gives you all the good infantry options, without the tercio tax, with access to bastion, with two slots for air, and giving all your infantry infiltrate (compensating for the lack of transports).

Ogryns and veltaris seem to be a bit of an issue for a lot of people. They have a lot of ease of use with the 15" march and able to melt through every terrain feature people commonly put on the table (obstructing and structures both allow full infantry move), while denying los to them. New people tend to not not read rend until it's time to melee and assume dreads or whatever can take them. Once more people get access to rapiers, I have a feeling the ogryns and veltaris will be easier to interact with; 120 for 18 30" 4+ -1barrage shots does wonders at picking off infantry.

have got twelve rapiers sitting waiting primer arriving this week currently, six thudd gun and six laser destroyer - and I agree the lasrifle bodies are more or less a tax (though useful for sitting on an objective once its taken as in cover they still take effort to shift)

will be moving to a Pioneer formation for the Auxilia shortly, basically avoiding the need for transports as they can largely deploy where they will need to be and can then stay there

likewise Marines likely going for a Garrison formation for infantry so similar reasons. in both cases getting the assault bodies somewhere useful

and with barrages more likely transports likely become even more important to shelter from them

okay so played a 1500 point game today. almost a mirror match against a marine player. my take away from this game. seams like its very easy to get a large lead on VPs if you can nab a objective. i just needed his home objective for one turn to get a win. at 1500 it still fells like a knife edge. i had his home objective for two turns. that would have been 18 VPs alone.

he had two aircraft i had one. i shot down one of his with a single tank. go 6s. the other got shot down by my plane. but mine was also shot down. aircraft are just to expensive to get hit with a lucky 6.

deap striking terminators are what gave me the win. landed on the home objective and just pulled a dwarf. come and take it.

i was more aggressive so i had more of the board early.

so my first marine win. but seeing as how it was a marine vs marine fight. its kind of a wash.

preads did okay this time. i kept them at 22 inches and just shot at other tanks. sics did meh. one got a shoot down a plane. my kratos all failed me. but that was more to do with rolls not the tanks them selves.

MVPs again is the humble Rhino. little guys all over the map taking pot shots at infantry. or in the case of two of them hunting down tanks with multi meltas. they did get a tank kill this time

 ashlevrier wrote:
okay so played a 1500 point game today. almost a mirror match against a marine player. my take away from this game. seams like its very easy to get a large lead on VPs if you can nab a objective. i just needed his home objective for one turn to get a win. at 1500 it still fells like a knife edge. i had his home objective for two turns. that would have been 18 VPs alone.

he had two aircraft i had one. i shot down one of his with a single tank. go 6s. the other got shot down by my plane. but mine was also shot down. aircraft are just to expensive to get hit with a lucky 6.

deap striking terminators are what gave me the win. landed on the home objective and just pulled a dwarf. come and take it.

i was more aggressive so i had more of the board early.

so my first marine win. but seeing as how it was a marine vs marine fight. its kind of a wash.

preads did okay this time. i kept them at 22 inches and just shot at other tanks. sics did meh. one got a shoot down a plane. my kratos all failed me. but that was more to do with rolls not the tanks them selves.

MVPs again is the humble Rhino. little guys all over the map taking pot shots at infantry. or in the case of two of them hunting down tanks with multi meltas. they did get a tank kill this time

Yeah planes it just feels like the message is you must take like 3-4 to a unit and go full ham, it really sucks how expensive they are when you just want a one or two on their own. As you said the lucky 6's are too easy to come by. I think there are two possible solutions, one is allow jink like a feel no pain save, or weapons without skyfire can only shoot planes at half range, it'd cut way down on the bs overwatches.

The progressive scoring is not something I'm a particular fan of, have you considered trying a scenario but doing end game scoring for objectives? Could still do the secondary thing but it helps cut down on one side getting a big lead early on.

Deep striking terminators are very good, being able to reliably choose when they want to come in is very strong. I've yet to see them miss hap but I also don't really like that as a balance, would much rather they get delayed or placed by opponent that just wiped out.

Nice to hear about rhnos with meltas hunting down tanks, that sounds awesome

Has anyone tried running an Aerial Assault detachment yet? Is it viable?

I'm building one - 3 Thawks, 2 Fire Raptors, 3 Xiphons, 4 Storm Eagles (so far), but haven't played yet.

 ingtaer wrote:
Has anyone tried running an Aerial Assault detachment yet? Is it viable?

It's pretty much the most specialised, most money/resource intensive to print, so id imagine not many people have ran a full version of it.

Hard to imagine it's not viable though. You can dump full units of assault marines and terminators (and min units of dreads) out of hawks, which can also use their hellstrikes and turbo lasers to do the hangback and snipe out of Overwatch.

Needs proper play though. When you have so much choice for movement and what to target you can make more mistakes.

I think anyone who played AI likely has a leg up in terms of being able to run one. It's more difficult to gage how marine air force will do because of 2 factors, the first being they need, imo, a fix to their heavy bolters to bring them in line with solar aux, not being able to shoot down other flyers seems sorta silly. Second, most of the marine flyers have hover, this is actually a massive deal because they can switch from being in los to the whole world and vice versa, to actually being where they are physically and drawing los from their accordingly. So the concern in general with flyers seems to be flying on and maximizing long range weapons like 25-30 inch ranged missiles, it's sortof a middling threat with only a plane or two but if a huge portion of the opponents army are flyers it could be quite scary without aa.


My problem with flyers currently is they really do feel like paper for the most part. We've both only ran a few per game, but that's sorta the problem, detachments of one aren't exactly resilient and it's shame given their elevated point costs, often approaching the cost of a baneblade. That said, until the local game shifts to being more flyer heavy on both sides, I almost want to make jink an additional save that can always be taken. I'd probably regret that change once we're both rocking larger detachments of planes but for now it really sucks that garbage ground fire en masse actually stands a pretty good chance of shooting down a plane, which really isn't a fair model of how AA works even now, there is quality aspect seeking/guided missiles that are very expensive that excel at shooting down air craft, and then there are aa units firing hard shells/bullets and they waste a tonne of ammo and often can't hit fixed wing aircraft unless they're very low flying, they're much more of a threat to choppers. In real life you had whole iraqi villages and cities dumping ak fire into apache's doing very little. If modelled like LI every 10th ak would be downing a boron armoured combat chopper worth god knows how much, I don't doubt an autocannon could down an aircraft no problem, but it has to hit first, same with the insanity of tanks firing their turrets at planes, they could maybe hit a chopper if it was just hovering but a fixed wing air craft with a tank cannon? Seems next to impossible.

I could also see only allowing weapons without skyfire to shoot planes within half range or something. It's also fair to say that, it's not like AA is particularly expensive for marines or solar aux, its just that currently only people who already have appropriate models or printers have AA. The dedicated aa missiles on the acastus are very very good.

I think the reality for now without any alteration is flyers are sorta a bit cynical in that one is sorta forced to either be a little pedantic on the pre measuring side of things to get an idea of potential threat radius of enemy fire/overwatch fire. What messed me up first time running flyers was thinking for some reason HAD to move the full movement stat like with flyers in 30/40k, but it seems like with that not being the case the name of the game is come in short and dump long range fire to neutralize any threats first, or do some while coming in in hover mode to also now limit possible incoming fire because los matters now.

to be fair though, its not exactly hard to kill a baneblade either

when three predators stick out six AP -1 shots, three re-rolling to hit and a 4+ or a 6 v fliers they are reasonably likely to get enough to splat a baneblade or a flier. something like a sicaran detachment with higher rate of fire and 'tracking'

have been bringing one or two Xiphon in here, towards the flanks, and aiming to be in range (just) of the desired target, which itself is a more forwards located enemy armoured unit to minimise return fire

sometimes soaking overwatch from say a quartet of Kratos for a turn can be worth their loss

leopard wrote:
to be fair though, its not exactly hard to kill a baneblade either

when three predators stick out six AP -1 shots, three re-rolling to hit and a 4+ or a 6 v fliers they are reasonably likely to get enough to splat a baneblade or a flier. something like a sicaran detachment with higher rate of fire and 'tracking'

have been bringing one or two Xiphon in here, towards the flanks, and aiming to be in range (just) of the desired target, which itself is a more forwards located enemy armoured unit to minimise return fire

sometimes soaking overwatch from say a quartet of Kratos for a turn can be worth their loss

My issue is, some players are a bit more obsessive/contemplative than others and I fear every time a plane or detachment of them come in it will take them or me far too long to figure out where to place them given the unlimited ability to measure everything. This only gets worse in larger 2v2 games imo, I'm getting flashbacks of taking 20 minutes to decide where to put deep strikers only for them to get intercepted by broadsides no matter where you placed them

I think anyone who played AI likely has a leg up in terms of being able to run one.

Certainly true for me. I have a total of 12 Xiphons, 6 Storm Eagles, 2 Fire Raptors, and a Thunderhawk that I never got around to building for AI, which will now serve me well for LI instead (and also AI if I ever manage to get a game of it in in the future).

In terms of SA, I can legitimately feel squadrons of at least 8-12 aircraft of every plane in their arsenal easily, in some cases a good bit more as I double dipped to cover variant designs (i.e. Thunderbolt vs Thunderbolt Fury).

Agreed though, flyers seem way overpriced for what they bring to the table. The game (like most minis games that feature fliers) sets them up to be glass hammers, which is appropriate, but then makes it a relatively trivial affair to hit them rather than representing the challenge posed by their speed and maneuverability. They never seem to hit quite as hard as they would need to in order to truly be a "hammer", but they are definitely "glass", and an expensive one at that. Most flyers seem to be overpriced by about 10-20 pts IMO.

chaos0xomega wrote:

I think anyone who played AI likely has a leg up in terms of being able to run one.

Certainly true for me. I have a total of 12 Xiphons, 6 Storm Eagles, 2 Fire Raptors, and a Thunderhawk that I never got around to building for AI, which will now serve me well for LI instead (and also AI if I ever manage to get a game of it in in the future).

In terms of SA, I can legitimately feel squadrons of at least 8-12 aircraft of every plane in their arsenal easily, in some cases a good bit more as I double dipped to cover variant designs (i.e. Thunderbolt vs Thunderbolt Fury).

Agreed though, flyers seem way overpriced for what they bring to the table. The game (like most minis games that feature fliers) sets them up to be glass hammers, which is appropriate, but then makes it a relatively trivial affair to hit them rather than representing the challenge posed by their speed and maneuverability. They never seem to hit quite as hard as they would need to in order to truly be a "hammer", but they are definitely "glass", and an expensive one at that. Most flyers seem to be overpriced by about 10-20 pts IMO.

The one area I'd disagree is, once you get to a level of having a lot of bombers they can be insanely strong, because you can also outfit them with wing bombs for maximum insanity in the movement phase or all missiles for 30 inch sniping. Cost is sorta all over the map.

Glass hammer is more or less right idea for planes, but they just let too much hit/target them. Like right off the bat a solution could be if you're on advance order you just can't, you need to be on first fire, the idea too of a tank driving full speed while hitting a fixed wing air craft with 120mm cannon is just, it'd never happen unless it was chopper.

Side note, I also think it was a mistake to allow advance to overwatch, first fire outside of very long range/high quality shooting rarely ever seems useful unless the unit has no plans of going anywhere anyway like a detachment in a structure holding/guarding an objective.

cost is all over for the whole game, GW seem to have been doing that a lot recently, just phoning points in. have expect some suggestion about "power levels" to be the solution here

(when in practice the two turrets of the Leman Russ for example should just have been two different units in the "Battle Tank" slot, at different costs, with maybe the option to add one to a normal squadron for a set cost)

I think once the kit for the tarantula comes out air power will be less common

there is also a solution to people who take an age to decide anything, start packing up - make a few comments about opponents dropping dead of old age etc first, but when people are that slow its a problem for you, basically stop playing them

have one locally who seems to need to map through every single option, measuring, placing dice etc before deciding anything (this is in other games mostly)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
side note, do think grounded aircraft and an airbase will make for a quite interesting board, will have to adapt some of the STL I have with landing gear deployed and find something suitable for hangers/control towers etc

overwatch on advance.. personally I'd allow it, with the detachment determining how many dice it has for each weapon

then halving them


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Further thought

Legions is still a new game, its got one book with units in, its ripe to make a change before it gets too developed

move to a D12, rolls and is nicer to hold than a D10, easy to convert, but provides half increments to what we currently have

e.g. a las cannon goes from a 4+ to a 7+

then maybe run with a -1 when over half range, so the current "hits on a six" becomes "hits on 11+", and can take the modifier to be a 12

I would love it if GW would learn how to design games that predominantly use something other than a d6, but I'm not holding my breath for it.

chaos0xomega wrote:
I would love it if GW would learn how to design games that predominantly use something other than a d6, but I'm not holding my breath for it.

nor me, the HH boxed games, well Burning of Prospero, certainly used others

amazed they haven't done something with like a "D14" and a trademarked shape

 ingtaer wrote:
Has anyone tried running an Aerial Assault detachment yet? Is it viable?

I played against one (we already have the miniatures from previous Epic editions).

Extremelly flexible and powerful to grab objectives. THs delete armoured detachments in one run. It seemed OP even when making the mistake of treating it as 1 W only