Page 3 of 3

Re: Juggernaut comments here

PostPosted: Fri May 15, 2009 4:08 pm
by mattbird
I would say if it is destroyed, the crew are killed with it as it topples over, just to keep it simple.

Re: Juggernaut comments here

PostPosted: Sat May 16, 2009 12:13 am
by BenTheRat
Guess I was using the same game mechanic as the Screaming Bell. When the unit breaks, the bell is destroyed, the unit flees as normal. As does the Grey Seer who was riding it.

Re: Juggernaut comments here

PostPosted: Sat May 16, 2009 1:22 pm
by mikkjel
Crew dying when its killed makes sense. Possibly taking away the extra combat resolution that provides, so its safe to join multiple combats with the beast. I havent tried the unit yet, but some how I dont think I can justify spending that many points on something that isnt good enough in combat to survive and doesnt do enough damage to take it over a hellcannon or earth shaker.

Re: Juggernaut comments here

PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2009 1:56 pm
by jchrisobrien
Having faced two of these in a game, along with two "chariots" I think it's too much.

For trying to give the list a facelift for 7th edition, I've seen too much extra stuff added.

The US is 5 + crew so 15? Excessive.
ONE Bull Centaur pushes this monstrosity at M7? Too fast. I would take away all the chariot type features (speed, impact hits), and keep it has a firing/magic platform (at lower cost).

I don't like the auto-hitting on the daemon spew, since GW is getting away from that with all other models.

Keep the randomization the same as all other units.

If you want to have it shoot AND fight, I'd drop the number of crew from 10 to 6, and have a character displace one crew.

Bottom line? I think the entire unit is too complex and beyond the scope of what you wanted to do.