BFG FAQ 2010 General Rules Questions

[RayB HA]

Hi MKG,

There have been numerous versions of turret suppression kicking around in the bag of possibilities. As it is an addition to the ruleset it can't be too strong otherwise it would make carriers potentially too cheap.
In my personal opinion you have to work bombers really hard to make them worth it, either by combining them with torp attacks, having a massive(over 4) wave or attacking only 0 or 1 turret ships.

Good point on premeasurement, it's not really clear. But yeah, its allowed by default.

Cheers,

RayB

[RayB HA]

Here's a pic of the 'new' GW blast template in between a NC Blast Template and a Bearing Compass.



Note: This is a pretty close in shot and because the blast template is quite thick it looks a little larger than it should for comparison.

Cheers,

RayB

[lordgoober]

Ray,  with respect to the "sunward edge" question.  It's pretty much with respect to the solar flare effect I think, could be the radiation burst which places a blast marker on a ship's base on the side of the sunward edge.

That being said,  there is a chart at the beginning of the Eldar section which lets you determine the sunward edge.

Essentially it's 1-2 long, 3-4 other long, 5 short, 6 other short I think.  

Planetary template question. 

With respect to the torpedos and the planetary template edge ruling,  does this mean that ships that are on a planet template can shoot at other ships that are on the planet template?

[horizon]

Ah yeah, planets and the error they made during design and playtesting of the game (3d models vs templates).

We use a scatter dice to determine sunward edge. Both systems work I guess.

[Caine-HoA]

@ RayB

The MASSING TURRETS was an addition to the rules as well and it does have a big impact on the ordnance system. SURPRESSING FIRE in comparison doesnt do a lot.
The +1 per fighter makes only sense vs turret amount where bombers do almost no dmg, and even then u get a 1/3 chance to have 1dmg done vs a +5armor. In fact its relativlly easy to defend your own ships vs big bomber waves by thinning them out with your own fighters. And 3 Bombers dont do a lot of dmg even vs a turret 2 target. Agains turret value of 1 bombers are very good against 2 they are ok from turret value 3 on they are almost wasted points.

So having both rules is worse than having none of them, at least for Tau (and othes who use Bombers). I understand that massing turrets is necessary for escorts versus assault boats but it gives Bombers a reduction in efficency.

In the end the problem with bombers is about the same as with nova cannons. If you roll well they can do massive dmg but in avarage they are overestimated.

[BlueDagger]

Ah yeah, planets and the error they made during design and playtesting of the game (3d models vs templates).

We use a scatter dice to determine sunward edge. Both systems work I guess.

Lol, big difference only a 66% chance it will be one of the long board edges vs 50% wit ha scatter.

[Don Gusto]

Sunward Shooting
My question about 'Sunward targets' was related to weapons battery fire. If the target is sunward then shifts for range are doubled. but how do you determine if the target is standing sunward from the attacker?
Horizon suggested to draw a line from the attacker through the target and beyond. And if that line reaches the sunward edge then the firing is considered to be 'sunward'. If you do it this way a ship standing close to the sunward edge will have a much larger 'arc' in which its shooting is considered sunward (could be almost 180°) than a ship standing further away.
The problem is similar to how eldar ships determine their sunward arc. The sunward table edge doesn't mark the position of the sun but its direction.

Imho there are only two practical ways to resolve this:
1) find the attackers sunward arc in the same way as for eldar ships and consider all targets in that arc to be 'sunward'
or
2) place the firing template over the attacker with one of its arcs centered on the shortest line to the sunward edge and consider all targets in THAT arc to be 'sunward'

The rules are not very specific on this.

Blast Markers
RayB I see you want to remove the 'even if moving away' part of the blast marker rules.
Imho the general abstraction of the blast marker rules is a good thing. If you have a blast marker in contact, you have a blast marker in contact - deal with it.
Eliminating the importance of the exact position of blast markers goes a long way to streamlining gameplay and preventing heated discussions.
Moreover removig the 'moving away' part mostly benefits the eldar fleets and I don't think they need a break here (note: my favourite fleet are corsair eldar and I play them alot).

Drifting/Blazing Hulks
The other problem with hulks is that they have no shields. Therefore they could take damage on a roll of 6, which would force another roll on the catastrophic table. But I don't think that was intended by the rules.

[RayB HA]

Lordgoober,

Good point on the planetary template, at current you can shoot at any ship ‘on’ the template but not behind it.


Roy,

Scatter dice!? What if it rolls into a corner?


Caine-HoA,

Actually the massed turret thing came in to being to counter the minimal bonus turret suppression gives. Just before my time in the HA.

The problem with bombers ‘is’ that they are so random, but you could use these ER’s:
Instead of deducting the turret value from the attack runs, roll all your attack runs together, any that beat the turret value then roll against the weakest armour value.
This means that Fighta Bommas D3 attack runs can get by without special rules.


Don Gusto,

Option 2 is the one you want to go with, however I might term it differently.

BM’s: the rule is not being removed just the answer as it is already answered in another point about BM’s.

Blazing/drifting hulks: It’s not the intention but it does make sense. Hmm...   
 
Cheers,

RayB HA

[russ_c]

Hey Ray,

This is probably completely out of scope, but...

What are the chances of ever seeing rules for a universally sized torpedo marker?

Russ

[RayB HA]

Russ,

Maybe

RayB HA

[russ_c]

Russ,

Maybe

RayB HA

Hey, thats more then I expected!  Cool.

Russ

[horizon]

Ray,

right on the point? heh...re-roll...

[russ_c]

Calculating Boarding Results:  The FAQ needs a clear example of calculating boarding results.  It's very common for people to think that Boarding Value is a part of the Boarding Modifiers.  This comes up so much with newer players and it's understandable considering how inprecise the example in the BBB is. The example completely skips calculating Bording Value and looking up the modifiers.

Example Thread: http://www.portmaw.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?38055.post

Russ

[RayB HA]

Thanks Russ, mixing value with modifier does come up quite alot.

Cheers,

RayB

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

Will be reading through what has been posted later. I got a connection somehow. chances are I won't be able to connect later again. In any case, change the definition of Turns into something like this:

Instead of Game Turns, call it Game Rounds. A Round is composed of the Turns of each player. A game lasting 8 Rounds would mean a total of 16 turns between both players.

If I remember correctly, there was an issue before re Ork Fleet Commanders being taken in 1 every 500 points. I just don't recall what exactly it was. Horizon, can you help remember?

Also clarify that a fleet with only 1 escort in it is legal.

I'll try to add some more questions and thoughts when I read through the proposed FAQs.