BFG FAQ 2010 Fleet Specific Questions

[Valhallan]

I would say all in 1 rules pdf
all in 1 campaigns
then all in 1: Imperial navy (all ships, all lists, etc.)
all in 1: Chaos
": Tau
": nids
.... you get the Jist.


GW probably won't make a bfg 2.0. they'd have to hire on Horizon to redo eldar and ray might get pouty. (j/k!)


____
on another note. what about expanding the armada 'modifications' to include fighter bomber upgrades at a cost per LB?

[fracas]

any thoughts to change the kroot sphere from a defense to a ship for purpose of movement and as a target?

[fracas]

Any thoughts to make the Overlord a more appealing choice?

[Zhukov]

As far as the Kroot, I would increase it's speed to at least 15cm and increase the range of it's weapons to 45cm.

-Zhukov

[Dan_Lee]

Ramilies questions:

In the end phase do you a) remove 1d6 blast markers in total or b) remove d6 blast markers from each quadrant?

If the answer is b), maybe you should specify whether each quadrant get a separate roll or you use one roll and apply it to each quadrant separately.

The wording in the Armada rulebook is very ambiguous as the word "just" confuses the whole sentence. It reads like the writer was distracted mid-sentence and changed what they intended to write.

 "In the End phase D6 blast markers are removed from the whole of the Ramilies fort, not just D6 blast markers per quadrant."

Also, I was sure the Ramilies rotated 45 degrees each turn, but I can't find where I read that.

[RayB HA]

Hi Dan Lee,

You've just reminded me of something I really want to 'fix'.
Proposal: Any BM's on a Ramilies base will take down a shield from each quadrant! (which given that they are getting massed turrets is as is in the rules).

So if the station has 4 BM's in contact none of the quadrants will have shields, if any of the quadrants are crippled, only 2 BM's are required to drop those quadrants shields.

What do you think?

Cheers,

RayB HA   

[Zhukov]

I would argue no. First off, this seems like too much anyway and significantly weakens the Ramilies. But secondly, I always thought that when it said "each quadrant has it's own shields" that it means each quadrant has it's own shield generators, which means that blast markers on one quadrant will not affect the other's. At the same time though, ya'll make the argument that one blast marker takes down the shields of every vessel of an escort vessel that are in base-to-base contact (which I totally disagree with btw).

-Zhukov

[commander]

Defences are already weak. Weakening them further is a bit too much.
In the fluff it is said: 'a ship is a fool trying to fight a space station.'
But A mere cruiser blows it to little pieces without much trouble. A fix for the defences, even rethinking/designing them, would be welcom.

[horizon]

Reminds me of a forgotten wip article I have stored on my pc...

About how defences really should be.

[commander]

In my mind:
- they are more easily hit, being stationary.
- to compensate: more shields and heavy armour (6)
- always a BFI save of 4+ without reducing weapon strength; they are build to last.
But open to suggestions 

[commander]

Maybe not a BFI save but higher structural integrity = more hitpoints

[flybywire-E2C]

Hi Dan Lee,

You've just reminded me of something I really want to 'fix'.
Proposal: Any BM's on a Ramilies base will take down a shield from each quadrant! (which given that they are getting massed turrets is as is in the rules).

So if the station has 4 BM's in contact none of the quadrants will have shields, if any of the quadrants are crippled, only 2 BM's are required to drop those quadrants shields.

What do you think?

Cheers,

RayB HA   

I agree with Ray on this one. Zukov, I understand how you feel about this significantly impacting a Ramilies. Personally I love this model and use it every now and again, but the Ramiles is a MONSTER for the points, gets four shields per quadrant and removes D6 blast markers at the end of every player turn. Ray’s ruling addresses a significant oversight and brings the Ramilies in congruence with how BM’s affect all the other ships in BFG. Regardless of how you feel about BM’s affecting multiple ships, the ruling was made way back in 2002 to counterbalance massing turrets, and as a whole it has been well understood and accepted by a vast majority of the BFG community in all that time. Incidentally, this is NOT a ruling- the HA’s have to get together to discuss it, but I like it and think it makes sense.

[Vaaish]

What's the point of having 4 shields per quadrant if you effectively only have 4 shields total because of the BM rules?

[horizon]

Good point. None really when bm count on all quadrants.

[Zhukov]

Vaaish makes a great point. If you do this, make a Ramilies essentially 4 shields total not four per quadrant, then you should reduce the points cost accordingly.

(As an aside, EVERYONE sorta complains that escorts have zero survivability in this game and a lot of that has to do with the blast marker ruling. In the many games I have run and played in, not using this rule (but still saying when one escort dies the blast marker placed eliminates the escorts shields that were in base to base contact with it), escorts actually LIVE so generally accepted in the BFG community..... well sorta it is. )

-Zhukov