August 06, 2024, 01:17:37 AM

Author Topic: BFG FAQ 2010 Fleet Specific Questions  (Read 176016 times)

Offline RayB HA

  • Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 424
Re: BFG FAQ 2010 Fleet Specific Questions
« Reply #315 on: August 30, 2010, 04:03:31 AM »
If the Ramilies lost all of its shields as appossed to just a quadrant's I can't really see much extra damage being caused. Only the odd pot shot from the other side, unless you're crazy and are putting all your ships in LOS of each quadrant!

The fact that escorts are in base contact is that they would otherwise die against Assault boats or are launching torps. To limit this weakness try mixing in 2 ship squadrons to break up the BM cascade, or place the closest escort away from the massed group to take the first couple of shots on his own.

Cheers,

RayB HA
+++++++++++

When I joined the Corp we didn't have any fancy smancy tanks! We had sticks! Two sticks and a rock for an entire platoon, and we had to share the rock!

Offline Vaaish

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 986
    • Digital Equinox
Re: BFG FAQ 2010 Fleet Specific Questions
« Reply #316 on: August 30, 2010, 04:24:01 AM »
Regardless of damage potential, if you only want it to have 4 shields total then make it that and adjust things, but don't say it has 4 shields per quadrant but make 4 bm drop the shields on all quadrants.
-Vaaish

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 4197
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: BFG FAQ 2010 Fleet Specific Questions
« Reply #317 on: August 30, 2010, 06:27:23 AM »
Then, indeed, an entry with the Ramilies has 4 shields in total. Not per quadrant.

Offline Zelnik

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 775
Re: BFG FAQ 2010 Fleet Specific Questions
« Reply #318 on: September 11, 2010, 07:48:35 PM »
hey folks, it's been a while

Just read through the PDF... So far it's pretty great with a few exceptions

The profile and rules for the Phantom Lance concerning Craftworld Eldar escorts remain unchanged but replace their special rules with the following: Shadowhunters are so nimble that they can even pursue attack craft with ease, harrying the smaller vessels with an agility impossible for other escorts. When attacked by any ordnance (both torpedoes and attack craft, even if in the same ordnance phase), they count as if having one turret. Make this roll before making the normal holofield save. Enemy fighters are still attacked first as they would against turrets normally, but bombers do not get any bonus for this.


Drop this garbage (thats right, this rule is garbage.).  No one likes the idea, and it's good enough that they get a 4+ to shoot them down. GET OVER IT.  

Flame of Asuryan‟s weapons: The port and starboard pulsar lances should be labelled Keel. They share a single weapon entry and so will be affected when weapons strength is halved for whatever reason. The launch bays carry Vampire Raiders at no extra cost. The port and starboard pulsar lance fire arcs are left/front and right/front respectively
[/b]

So good until the very end... how do you justify this final rule of FLR? why not just make it all 45 cm and call it "Craftworldy Void Stalker"?   Everything is FINE but keep it front only. the Flame is good enough without this absurd rule.


Ork fleets have access to the Grunt escort. By definition, this escort has the same profile as the Ork Brute with the following changes: 35 points, Armor 6+/5+, 2 turrets. Special rule: The Ork Grunt is constructed primarily to act as a huge armored assault ship. It counts as having 4HP when attempting to board or being boarded. Otherwise this vessel has no special ramming abilities different from any other Ork
escorts. Grunts may be easily represented by mounting Brute models on a large (battleship) base. Only by basing these models on a large base may they use the Grunt profile and point cost


Who the heck came up with this absurd idea??! This is a FAQ, not a new book. It's not our place to add new ships to the game.

Multiple Tyranid Refits: A hiveship can have three „different‟ refits and may therefore have four reinforced carapaces, two extra spore cysts and one other refit. A cruiser could have the three reinforced carapaces (as four would make it a Hiveship!) and two extra spore cysts. Keep in mind that if the fleet does not desire or by restrictions cannot have another hiveship, then the fourth reinforced carapace refit cannot be taken by a Tyranid cruiser.


I thought we were not letting nids use refits in one shot games?




« Last Edit: September 11, 2010, 07:50:32 PM by Zelnik »

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 4197
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: BFG FAQ 2010 Fleet Specific Questions
« Reply #319 on: September 11, 2010, 08:04:32 PM »
Hi Zelnik,
well you are fashionably late. ;)

The Flame: aside of the wrong wording in the end I have no issues with the swinging arcs that much. It won't be adapted in MMS 2.0 if one may ask. ;)

On the Nids. I dunno.

The Grunt was long in the pipeline ircc.

Offline Zelnik

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 775
Re: BFG FAQ 2010 Fleet Specific Questions
« Reply #320 on: September 12, 2010, 12:26:49 PM »
Classes do that to you, real life can be such a female dog.


It just seems odd to make them FLR, and totally throws off how the thing will be used, i don't see the need for the swinging pulsars.

And i stand by my statement where the shadowhunter rules are garbage.

The grunt? We don't have the right to add new stuff to an official document. We just DON'T.  This is not supposed to be a fan supplement, it's supposed to be the official rules update for the game. Not only that, i don't see the need for this ship in the Ork fleet.
« Last Edit: September 12, 2010, 12:32:03 PM by Zelnik »

Offline fracas

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 882
    • WarMancer
Re: BFG FAQ 2010 Fleet Specific Questions
« Reply #321 on: September 12, 2010, 03:08:24 PM »
Why not add new ships? This is as close as we get to a rules/game update as well as breath some new life into the game

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 4197
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: BFG FAQ 2010 Fleet Specific Questions
« Reply #322 on: September 12, 2010, 06:50:35 PM »
I agree with Fracas on the matter.

And unless the Orks fundamentally will change such an escort won't have an impact at all.

Offline Zelnik

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 775
Re: BFG FAQ 2010 Fleet Specific Questions
« Reply #323 on: September 13, 2010, 03:47:32 PM »
Because we are NOT gw.  Even if they have abandoned effectively the game, only GW has the right to add new content.  We do not have the same flexibility that blood bowl has with their LRB.  I play orks, I love my boyz, I have won with them before, but like the goblin blood bowl team, they are meant to be a challenge (or challen'j). 

If you want to breathe new life into an already healthy game, go join the BFG project and work with us in fan made content.

Offline fracas

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 882
    • WarMancer
Re: BFG FAQ 2010 Fleet Specific Questions
« Reply #324 on: September 13, 2010, 03:59:32 PM »
By GW do you mean the suits that manage the company and the product lines?
Or the game designers and rules arbitrators as represented by the HA and tasked and designated with maintaining the game system?

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 4197
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: BFG FAQ 2010 Fleet Specific Questions
« Reply #325 on: September 13, 2010, 07:15:50 PM »
Hey Zelnik,

the High Admirality is installed by Andy Hall who works for Games Workshop. While the HA is not GW employees they do give their material, ideas and FAQ's to them. So it is the HA that designs new fleets, ships and rules.

Also, with Armada being gone from the GW store the pdf's finally go into a real living rulebook status. We can start to alter the rules for Nids, Necrons and Marines. Update the pdf's and done. No conflicts with rules being sold.

So effectively same status as the Blood Bowl LRB.

Offline Zelnik

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 775
Re: BFG FAQ 2010 Fleet Specific Questions
« Reply #326 on: September 13, 2010, 07:34:16 PM »
Until I see it in writing, I won't believe it.  As in, an official statement.

I don't care if the rules are determined by suits or gamers, without authority from the owners of the game, we simply DO NOT have the capacity to do this. 

Being a devil's advocate is important, because if we dive in and screw with the rules, we risk ruining the delicate balance of this game.

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 4197
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: BFG FAQ 2010 Fleet Specific Questions
« Reply #327 on: September 13, 2010, 07:57:33 PM »
We not. The High Admirality has and had the authority! They made the Ship of Mars rules! The FAQ 2007. The FAQ2010 (within weeks on the GW site).

This time around they run down new rules with us before posting them on the GW site. That's great.

The HA are the owners of the game as they have always operated under the licence of Andy Hall who is GW.

Offline Zelnik

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 775
Re: BFG FAQ 2010 Fleet Specific Questions
« Reply #328 on: September 14, 2010, 12:45:50 AM »
...well NOW i know that :P

I was not aware they made the Ad Mech rules..

Alright alright you win Horizon.


Offline Temurill

  • Lurker
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: BFG FAQ 2010 Fleet Specific Questions
« Reply #329 on: September 14, 2010, 01:25:24 PM »
I have a question concerning the Armageddom Gun:
what happen when u fire against an asteroid field?
It stops the armageddom gun?
Can u hit something inside the asteroid field (eldar  ;D)?

Thank u for your attention.