Photo Gallery
User login
Eldar Void Spinner
Wed, 11/05/2008 - 16:08
Flavor text shamelessly lifted from Epic Swordwind. :D
How do you think it compares to the 100-point-cheaper two twin-linked 5" Destroyer shots from the Scorpion? I think it is different and comprable.
Matt
Thu, 11/06/2008 - 13:51
#2
The Rending is left over from a previous version. I'll take it out on the next one.
There were two aspects of the weapon that I was concerned about: 1) Should it affect flyers and 2) What should it do to Void Shields.
Flyers: It is a slowly drifting cloud of absolutely deadly filaments. It is shot high into the air and then allowed to drift down onto the enemy. The first part makes it feel a lot like the AA flak clouds that have been a staple of AA guns since WWII. The second part makes it feel like it shouldn't necessarily lose the 12" for shooting at aircraft since shooting high in the air is the basic operation. A lot of options were considered, but simply making it AA mount fit the best and was pretty simple. We're going to play it that it will hit anything under the template, even if the models are aircraft.
Void Shields: There were three options I came up with:
1) Ignore shields. The filaments are slow moving and are a physical mass, albeit small. This would be similar to moving within 12" of the vehicle in the movement phase.
2) Bounce off of shields. Picture a titan as if it is surrounded by a bubble. When the slow fibers drift onto the bubble, the bubble deflects them harmlessly out of the way.
3) Each volley shorts out a shield. They are fast enough to be affected by the shield, but burn out when they come into contact. I am picturing the way flash paper burns up into nothing when it ignites.
I sent these thoughts to my friend Phil Kelly who knows a bit about the Eldar. Here's his response: "But it sounds like you're in the right place. I think Void Shields would indeed be shorted out by monofilament wire and I LOVE the idea of a fighta-bomma flying through some invisible 'flak' and coming apart, silently, into thousands of tiny pieces, a puff of flame all that marks its passing."
Quote:
This thing can strip all a Warlord's shields with one shot,
Well, so can a Gatling Blaster, and an Apocalypse Launcher can get pretty close. I was actually not planning on having the player roll 5+(3D6 pick highest two), which is why I specified it. If you use it that way, a Gatling Blaster is better at taking down shields.
Matt
Thu, 11/06/2008 - 19:19
#3
I don't know how to remove the old version or replace it with the new one. Moderators please do that if possible. Thanks!
I'm planning on getting another Type 1 Scorpion model and making a custom turret for it. It'll have three spinnerettes on it, so the ROF of 6 will be appropriate. Once I get that done, I'll replace the picture of the Epic model with my actual model.
Thanks again!
Matt
Fri, 11/07/2008 - 00:29
#4
Old sheet removed.
I like it, but I do think it might be a bit too effective at bringing down shields. You might want to make it the same as the apoc launcher for odds of shorting out a shield..
I like the single shield idea though, where it goes up like flypaper when it shorts it out (but it does so automatically).
Maybe just have it short out D3 shields no roll required.
Fri, 11/07/2008 - 13:40
#5
Arg! I wanted to see what BBCodes I could use, and lost my huge post! Aaarrrgh!
I don't have time to re-type everything, so I'll make it quick.
An Apoc Launcher has a 20/36 or 55% chance of taking down a shield with one volley. This Voidspinner Array has a 21/36 or 58% chance. That's about as close as I can get to the Apocalypse Launcher without using the exact same mechanism. A Gatling Blaster has a 75% chance.
I think a 58% chance is close enough to simulating the shields shorting out. If each volley shorted out a shield it would be too powerful. If one shot of the Apocalypse Barrage (6) took out one shield, it would not be powerful enough. As we stand, one barrage will take out an average of 3.5 shields in one turn.
The only things a Voidspinner Array does better than a Scorpion or a Cobra is take down shields and aircraft, and the Cobra ignores shields. Infantry still have to be wounded and will get cover saves. Against vehicles it is slightly worse than a standard S9 weapon and its ROF gives it an average of 1 penetrating and 0.66 glancing hits against AV14 in one turn.
Weapon | S | ROF | Avg Shields per Turn
Gatling Blaster | 8 | 6 | 4.5
Apocalypse Launcher | 7 | 5 | 2.77
Las Blaster | D | 3 | 3
Voidspinner Array | 5 | 6 | 3.5
Vulcan Mega-Bolter | 6 | 15 | 3.06 (4.58 if all hit)
Wow, that looks terrible. The new forum software is auto-correcting my whitespace even in a code block. Annoying.
Anyway, this is about the power level I am shooting for. If my math is incorrect, let me know and I'll tweak it some more.
Thanks!
Matt
PS: Do you think it would be possible to give us permission to delete our own uploads in the Datasheet gallery? Sounds like a pretty specific setting, I admit.
Fri, 11/07/2008 - 16:52
#6
Permission is added (thought it already had been).
An apoc launcher has a 10/18 (20/36) chance (needs a 5+ on one dice rolling two for each) for each of 5 shots.
The voidspinner has a 7/12 (21/36) chance (needs a 7+ on two dice) for each of 6 shots.
I think your chart is off on the avg shields per turn.
Gatling blaster should be 4.5 (assumes none scatter off, reasonable on a large target)
Apoc launcher should be 2.77
las blaster should be 2 (I think it has to roll to hit)
voidspinner should be 3.5
and vulcan would be 1.66 (has to roll to hit on a 3+ and isn't ordnance)
pulsar 2 (assumes none scatter off)
Cobra 1.5
So here it looks fine. BUT compare against the armor 14 titan itself.
Gatling blaster - would cause 1.8 glancing hit on average
Apoc - Impossible
las blaster - 2 penetrating hits on average (at +1 damage)
void spinner - would cause 1 penetrating hit and 0.75 glancing hits on average
vulcan - Impossible.
pulsar - 2 penetrating hits on average (at +1 damage)
Cobra - 1.5 automatic structure damage.
Thus the void spinner would be more consistant than either of the "anti-titan" weapons, being worse than the gatling blaster at shield takedown but better at damage, and better than the lasblaster/pulsar/cobra at shield take down but worse at damage.
Overall, this would probably make it the most effective stand alone anti-titan weapon other than the lasblaster (which we all know is overpowered).
e.g. against an undamaged warhound (assuming you can position the apoc template to always hit with the "holes"),
void spinner - should take down both shields and basically a 80% chance of a hit (about half of which are penetrating)
pulsar/cobra - should take down both shields
lasblaster - should take down both shields
gatling blaster - should take down both shields and has about a 90% chance of a glancing hit (no chance of penetrating)
Add to this the AA capability which none of these weapons have and that it has the highest AP (effectively) of everything but the lasblaster/pulsar and the cobra (which is much better but has no range). I think the concern should be clear. The rules make it probably the best at titan take down (fairly distant second to the lasblaster if the lasblaster does use a template), second to the cobra at infantry takedown, and makes it the best AA platform available.
Fri, 11/07/2008 - 19:22
#7
Quote:
I think your chart is off on the avg shields per turn.
Actually, I think we're exactly the same, with the following three rules clarifications:
1) Every blast marker scatters now, so Las Blasters do not roll to hit. I think it's pretty safe to assume that every template weapon, especially the D-strength ones, still hit every single time.
2) Vulcan Mega Bolters are Primary Weapons, which make them roll 2D6 pick highest like Ordinance.
3) There are no holes in an Apocalypse Template, therefore no half-strength shots.
Plus, I thought the Cobra's Distortion Cannon ignored shields, but I could be wrong about that one. Wish I still had all of my Apoc books here at work...
On that note, I agree with your assessment about 90%.
In my opinion, any D-strength weapon clearly wins in infantry take down. In every game I've played, all of the infantry tries to stick to cover as much as possible, so the ability to ignore cover is paramount.
Part of me wants to decrease the AP to 6. I mean, after all, the Night Spinner and Warp Spiders have it. Although the description makes it clear that this weapon differs from those in that it eats through metal. I don't know. I think I'm up in the air with this bit.
Quote:
Overall, this would probably make it the most effective stand alone anti-titan weapon other than the lasblaster (which we all know is overpowered).
If you use my clarifications, it is behind the Pulsar and the Cobra's Distortion Cannon too. We should only really be comparing it to those two but because the Eldar don't really have anything *besides* those two we need to use the other titan-level weapons.
OK, there are two questions that we must ask ourselves: 1) What is appropriate from the weapon's description and 2) What power level do we want?
I liked the use of the Apocalypse Template because it satisfied the "floaty cloud" description, especially when we scatter the template itself over long distances, so I'd really like to keep it.
Here's a simple idea. Why don't we reduce the ROF to Apocalypse Barrage (3)? I'd like to put in a bit about automatically taking down D3 Power Fields per volley, but can be talked down. Everything else would remain the same.
Thoughts?
Matt
Sun, 11/09/2008 - 03:33
#8
I was at work and couldn't remember if the lasbalster had templates or not.
I hadn't seen the primary weapon is always ordnance rule. Looked it up and confirmed it. I'll have to remember that (although then why does it even GIVE the type in the rules since it's meaningless... GW could have done this so much clearer...). The void spinner should probably be a primary weapon (you have "main weapon" in the rules) or at least specify that you ignore the "primary weapon" method (making this a new rule - heck you could just say that a "main wepaon" has the 4+ special save only).
I would have to agree that the apoc template makes the most sense for the weapon (However, I'm not so certain a 10" template wouldn't work), I think the concern is that with ROF 6 and the fact that it's effectively strength 8.5 (because of the 2D6) with the AP 1 benefit of not glancing. its quite a bit better than anything else that isn't destroyer. The real limit on the gatling blaster is it being AP3 (compared to AP 2 of all the destroyer weapons) and its inability to penetrate armor 14 (making it hard to do damage to big war machines since it can't do structure damage).
I would suggest the following.
Two fire modes.
Mode 1 (concentrated cloud)) 7" blast template. ROF 1. Shorts out D3 shields or 1 hit at 5+2D6 armor penetration. AP 1 AA mount
Mode 2 (drifting cloud) apoc template ROF 6. AP 2. no ability to hurt vehicles.
Both modes use the roll against intitiaite at str 5 against infantry.
Mon, 11/10/2008 - 13:10
#9
I think I'm most comfortable with lowering the ROF to 3. I'll set the points down to 500 to be in line with the Scorpion. I think this is good enough to start testing. I'll hold any special anti-Power Field rules in case I feel that they are needed later.
By the way, I'm pretty sure that AP1 weapons no longer have the "never glance" rule. They just get +1 to the roll on the Vehicle Damage Table (while Glancing gets -2).
Thoughts?
Matt
Thu, 01/28/2010 - 23:29
#10
ok this tank i got to have
any idea where i can find those big nightspinner cannons? scorpion body from forgeworld is no prob.. but the cannons.. dont think the normal nightspinner guns are big enough
Fri, 01/29/2010 - 21:48
#11
Never noticed before, but I think you might want to consider re-writing this datasheet a little.
That Void Spinner Array will only hit on a d6 roll of a 6. (Apocalypse, page 96)
You probably wanted something more effective than that.
Maybe a second weapon mode that is a heavy 3, AA mount ?
Sat, 01/30/2010 - 16:11
#12
Yeah, there was an updated version that I forgot to post. I've updated it a bit and put it here
As for the model, I have a turret laid out for cutting on the laser but haven't got around to making it yet. I've got a few other projects in front of it at the moment. For a sense of scale, it looks just like a Doom Weaver but the end pods are plastic Easter eggs.
Matt
Sat, 01/30/2010 - 23:49
#13
could u send me a copy of the turret plz :-p.. willing to pay for transfer and expenses offcourse.. but i really dig this void spinner tank..
Mon, 02/01/2010 - 14:25
#14
I'm not really sure what you are asking for. Send me a mail at matt at tralfazsolutions dot com
Matt
Tue, 02/02/2010 - 09:58
#15
hehe.. nevermind.. ordered a scorpion superheavy at forgeworld yesterday.. and ill figure something out to create a void spinner turret.
going to magnetize it so i can switch between scorpion and Void Spinner cannons. dont know how ill make the large spinerettes yet, but ill try to make something.
ok back to the topic..
last sunday we had a small apocalypse battle and I used my cobra as a void spinner. really wanted to test this baby out.
the problem with the `VS` is the large scatter difference. it is one of the few apoc barrages that do scatter.. and even in feet.
in the 4 turns i used it it only hit 2 times (shorter than 60` so autohit). but on the longer ranges it is useless.
also. the apoc barrage 3 is not all that to write home about... ok against void shields they are cool, but still.
anycase.. next saturday ill have another apoc battle, and ill try out the following stats
Apoc barrage 4(just as the stratagem) and scatters 4d6"
Flyers can only ever be hit once but wth a +1 to hit for every 2 actual hits. so on average you hit on a 2+ ( this due to flying through a lot of microfillament wire clouds so hitting the target is quite eazy)
example:
void spiner fires against thunderhawk. the thunderhawk is hit 4 times. only 1 hit counts, but it has a +2 to hit.
it hits on a 2+ and has str 5+2d6 ap.
against void shields:
it does not matter how much times a titan with void shields is hit. as with the flyers a titan with void shields can only ever be hit one time. but it counts as an auto penetrating.
a hit does d3 damage to void shields and you get a +1 on the dice roll for every 2 actual hits the barrage template did ( again same as the flyers.)
if the titan has less void shields remaining than u actually damage, treat each extra damage as a automatic glancing hit.
Example:
Void spinner hits a titan, with 2 void shields remaining, 4 times. scoring 1 hit and gaining a +2 on the dice roll to see how miuch shields go down
a 3 is rolled. 3+2 is 5 so 3 shields go down. The titan only has 2 shields left, so the remaining damage point counts as a glancing hit against the titan itself..
against titans/superheavies:
only 1 actual hit can be made ( see previous 2 examples) but gaining +1 strength per actual hit. so with an average of 4 hits, the fillament wire has str 9 andmore chance to actually penetrate the hull,
anycase.. this is how i see the void spinner barrage. a lot of microfillament wire, making it eazier to hit. Because of the "weak" overall power of the wire you only do 1 hit against superheavies but because of the shear amount of wir, it counts as extra strength.
smaller tanks and infantry typers etc are to small to be actually covered by large amounts, so against normal tanks the normal str 5+2d6 counts. usually these type of tanks are only hit one or 2 times so the mass of the wire is not increased.
dont know how to explain it in a few words so that it can actually be placed on a datasheet.. but this is y interpretation of the large clouds they fire, and how they could work on the battlefield..
Tue, 02/02/2010 - 15:34
#16
OK, to each his own I guess. Thanks for the feedback.
Over 60", the template should be where you placed it 1/3rd of the time due to the 'hit' on the scatter die. How good are the Scorpion and Cobra at ranges greater than 60"?
Your rules sound pretty complicated. Enjoy your game this weekend!
Matt
Tue, 02/02/2010 - 16:41
#17
hehe.. the rules sound complicated.. but are fairly eazy.. im just not that great in translating my idea in words
btw.. the apoc battles i play are on a much smaller scale than yours, so most of the time i do not need to fire more than 60"away.
basics for the cloud is. only one hit, but more damage.
if it is to hard to explain to my teammates ill just up the apoc barrage of your type to 4 or something.
question.. are all you guys professional titan builders or something? because i see lots and lots of titans, superheavies etc. and one other topic shows me the scratchbuilding of an army of titans.
add this with the datasheets and i wonder if im talking way out of my league here....
Tue, 02/02/2010 - 17:51
#18
Quote:
question.. are all you guys professional titan builders or something? because i see lots and lots of titans, superheavies etc. and one other topic shows me the scratchbuilding of an army of titans.
add this with the datasheets and i wonder if im talking way out of my league here....
Professionals .... no
Slightly unhinged ... yes.
Tue, 02/02/2010 - 18:11
#19
I consider myself semi-pro. :-)
You are not out of your league we just think about this stuff A LOT. Everyone's opinion is valuable.
Tue, 02/02/2010 - 19:06
#20
cool.. then ill think about things to.. i hope.. i guess.. ehh.. nevermind..
anycase.. do all of you guys belong to the same gaming group?
and i go offtopic again..
the voidspinner.. hope to get my scorpion next week, so that i can start building me a void spinner.
does anyone have an idea of how to make spinnerette cannons ?
Tue, 02/02/2010 - 20:23
#21
I am not in the Siegeworld group, as I live in North Carolina (a good 10+ hours away). I am not a professional titan builder, although I have been a semi-professional game designer in the past (GW has only ever compensated me with free stuff, and I've never earned enough to not need another job).
As I said before, I have a complete design for the spinnerette cannons. The first thing you need to get is some sort of egg, either wood or plastic. Then you need to attach it to your barrel. Then you attach the barrel to the stock. It would be weird to re-use the Scorpion's turret for the stock since the Voidspinner shoots up in the air like artillery. Pretty much any semi-organic shape will work, such as a larger wood egg cut down and made narrower.
The detail work, in order of priority, would be:
1) Fins on the end of the spinnerette. There are two on Death Spinners and three on the Shadow Weaver. I like the look of three.
2) Fin on the back of the stock. You've got so many Shadow Weavers, I'm sure you know what I'm talking about.
3) "Ribbing" on the barrel. I would do this either by cutting slices of a slightly-larger tube or using some other disk. You could also approximate this with your painting scheme.
My laser-cut design has a lot more details, including the top and bottom pieces to the egg.
Here are the pieces for the barrel and muzzle. (The color piece is not to scale):
My plan is to use 1/8" thick material and layer it to make the stock. Think of this next picture as a sandwich. Using half of the quantity listed, start at the top and then go to the bottom then go back up again. The very bottom piece is my basic plan at a mount for the turret. Once I have the whole sandwich I'd glue it nice and solid and then sand the heck out of it to make it as smooth as possible.
Good luck!
Matt
Tue, 02/02/2010 - 20:49
#22
Matt,
Have you built this yet? It looks like a great design thou it requires some pretty precise cutting. you and I think a lot alike I think.
And even thou you don't live in St. Louis Th still consider you part of out little group in as much as we are a group.
Wed, 02/03/2010 - 00:16
#23
No, I haven't built it yet. This was going to be the turret on the second Star Dragon super-super-heavy, but I was not able to make it before my last unlimited-point battle. It will take a long time to cut out and I've got a lot of other things in line before it. I think I've got the cut paths figured out pretty well, although this will be a very difficult pattern.
Thanks for the inclusion in your group. I appreciate it!
Matt
Wed, 02/03/2010 - 11:09
#24
holy... that is a lot more difficult than i tought.. oh well.. ill try it.. and i do not have a laser cutter machine here:-p.. so ill do it with another type of material. or less detail..
Wed, 02/03/2010 - 14:53
#25
Send me the file please. I want to see how this works. maybe I can get it cut when I do the Levithans, I think I have some space on that sheet.
Wed, 02/03/2010 - 16:53
#26
Quote:
I hadn't seen the primary weapon is always ordnance rule. Looked it up and confirmed it. I'll have to remember that (although then why does it even GIVE the type in the rules since it's meaningless... GW could have done this so much clearer...).
I don't remember reading this before either. Doesn't change those guns much, but does change them a little.
As to why it might have been done this way, there was a separate ordnance damage table when GW released Apocalypse.
It is actually much more brutal than a mere 2x 5" D templates.
This thing can strip all a Warlord's shields with one shot, 80% glance against AV12 each hit. The next will probably hurt. (Armour pen of 5 + (roll 3d6 pick highest 2) with AP1 damage... 16.7% glance, 35.6% pen against AV14)
I would also believe the rending would be unnecessary as well - I can think of nothing with I9+, which is the only time rending based on Initiative could possibly kick in. It's already AP1, so rending's ability to bypass armour grants no bonus in this case.
Apocalypse barrage AA - very fluffy. White .. drifting... cloud... fluffy...
Sounds good to me.