Alan Brain <aebrain_at_...> writes:
> Mark A Shieh wrote:
>
> > As far as I can tell, Tyranid Titans are not much more fragile
> > than their Imperial counterparts. They have the same number of Damage
> > Capacity as their Imperial equivalent has in Shields+Damage Capacity.
> > They have one less weapon. They go 33% faster and ignore any terrain
> > modifiers. They have the same assault.
>
> And the weapon they have is very close range. No Death Rays here.
> Frankly, their weaponry is less effective by a long way.
True, but isn't a CC weapon a CC weapon no matter which race
has it? They sound like CC monsters, not stand+shoot units.
> Also, let's take an example of a Bug Titan and a Reaver.
> Both get hit by 2 Death Rays.
> Reaver takes 2 void shield hits. Bummer, but manageable.
> Bug Titan takes 2 criticals, an average of 9 hits out of 18.
>
> I agree that Bug Titans are more useful than it first appears. But they
> are quite a bit more fragile too.
True, but apart from the immediately banned Deathstrike (The
*_at_#% thing doesn't even have the decency to say "one-shot" in the stat
line, only the description
Player 1: "Flavor text, it doesn't affect the rules, Ha!"
Player 2: <smack>
), how many Death Rays do you know that are mounted on
Infantry and Vehicles? I suspect that in most situations, the
artillery, tanks or something up front can strip void shields before
the War Engines go. If you're gunning for a Titan, you're going to be
shooting it a *lot*, so IMHO it's reasonable that both the Reaver and
the Bug Titan would have taken 4 hits by the time Vehicles + Infantry
are done shooting.
I missed the slightly worse Critical Damage tables. Sorry
about that part.
I'd also like to point out that I don't think they're
incredible units, just that they're good enough to be worth fielding.
Mark
Received on Mon Apr 14 1997 - 16:44:09 UTC