BFG 2010 FAQ WIP pdf file

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

Generally speaking, weapons are limited to the arc they are located in unless otherwise noted. Left for port, right for starboard and front for prow. Torps however are ordnance and their main rule is that as long as they hit and opponent's base, it wouldn't matter if the ship was declared to be in the port or starboard arcs rather than the prow. 

The torps when attacking will also depend on which arc it hits the opponent. Some opponents have different armor values. Orks for example. 6+ prow and 4+ rear. So if the torp hits the prow, it will roll vs 6+ whereas if it rolls in the remaining arcs, it will roll 4+.

[lastspartacus]

After reading over it a few times, I think I understand what you are saying.  That, essentially, I cant say 'Those torps dont hit me because my ship isnt currently in your front arc'?

Also, are power rams now standard on imperium ships that dont have nova cannons?  I'd need to inform my group


Edit:  Save the Bommas! ^^
Or...or I wont buy the ork fleet im now considering!

[horizon]

Power Rams are a +5 pts upgrade. Not standard.

[Don Gusto]

After reading through all the pages of the v2.0 FAQ2010 here are my final notes:

page 3, Movement:
Good to see your clarification that stacking should not be abused. I can play with that.

page 4, Blast Markers:
The last sentence in the section concerning Eldar. "This leadership check ..." confuses me.
Eldar don't get a leadership check for blast markers. The way I've played it an Eldar ship would just roll once against a D6 if it encountered both a gas/dust cloud and a blast marker in its movement. Since the number of blast markers moved through doesn't matter, it doesn't matter in this case wether the Eldar can ignore one of them. Is this not correct?

page 5, Nova Cannon:
You dropped the idea of the blast template not being saveable by Holofields, but kept it for the Armageddon Gun? As a CE player I thought it was ok.

page 9, Massing Turrets and Turret Suppression:
There is still a wrong number in the example with the Emperor. "The four bombers now each roll ..." should be three instead.
The second last section (crippled Lunar) is no longer needed and should be dropped since turret suppression is now limited by attacking bombers.

page 10, Boarding Actions:
Does the upper limit of 10 apply in general or only to the example? Crazy circumstances could push this much further.

page 10, Hit and Run Attacks:
I have no doubt the proposed rules will work and are fair.
But (sorry for repeating myself in this case) here I can't follow the logic of the FAQ as a whole.
One rule weakens H&R (saveable by BFI) the other strengthens it (allowed on SO). Both are additions to the original rules. Why not drop both and keep the rules simpler? I'd prefer H&R destroy escorts on 5+ over 4+ combined with BFI save.

page 22, Eldar Ordnance:
The second section is outdated as it references the old turret suppresion rules.

page 28, Demiurg cutting beam:
The rules now work exactly as I was hoping for - Wonderful

[Vaaish]

There seem to be some rather significant changes in there. Why can the armageddon take a NC? Why did you revert to allowing the holofield save against the auto 1 hit from the NC? Why does the exorcist now get AB?

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

There's been an v.2 update? Where can I get it?

Re Vaaish points, Armageddon is a logical extension since the Lunar can get one. Not really that effective since one will have to choose bet the NC and the broadside weapons.

Holofield reversion is pretty much the suck. Eldar should not get any save from the blast effects. They're paper. Let them be paper.

Exorcist getting ABs is 50-50 with me since I rarely use the ABs. However, makes me wonder why they can introduce this change to the Exorcist and still be against swapping the TH and Shield value of the SC.

[Vaaish]

Admiral, I understand that, but I'm curious as to why the changes showed up. The armageddon doesn't need the NC upgrade with its lances and it gave the tyrant some use if you wanted NC in the armageddon fleet beyond reserving in a dominator. Same goes for the exorcist why give it AB and second, why charge 10 points for it when all other ships with access only pay 5.

[fracas]

" In a pure Demiurg fleet, up to one Stronghold commerce vessel may be taken for every two Bastion commerce vessels in the fleet, though there is no limit to the number of Bastions the fleet may contain."
What about citadel vessels ... these will not qualify to get a stronghold?

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

Admiral, I understand that, but I'm curious as to why the changes showed up. The armageddon doesn't need the NC upgrade with its lances and it gave the tyrant some use if you wanted NC in the armageddon fleet beyond reserving in a dominator. Same goes for the exorcist why give it AB and second, why charge 10 points for it when all other ships with access only pay 5.

Cheaper access to NC for BC class ships? Probably better to have gone onto the Overlord but hey, still cheaper than the Mars.

Having no access to the latest PDF, I don't know why they gave it the AB at such a steep price. Maybe the designers considered it as a ship large enough to take in the AB squadrons. Hey the Vengeance prows must be good for something. 

[fracas]

the overlord, being in essence a souped up tyrant, should also get the nova cannon option

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

It is not. It's a longer ranged Tyrant but in no way is it souped up.

[horizon]

Hi,

Even with the remark I dislike all and everything about overlapping.

A ship that starts or ends its movement in contact with a blast marker for any reason counts as being in contact with a blast marker all around it and in every arc for purposes of movement, shooting or ordnance attacks.

Does that mean that if I have a ship in contact with a blastmarker and move away it still has the effect of the blastmarker 20cm further away? Thus I suffer a shift to the right when shooting because the blastmarker counts as being all around. (Obnoxious rule that counts all around, blech bah boo). 20cm away. That is what you write here. It also means that 20cm away from the marker it still counts as being in contact thus that means every ordnance I envounter in my movement or that attacks me in my ordnance phase must roll a d6 to avoid collision with the blastmarker.

Noodles I call.

Eldar holofield: reason for change is the massive flak the FAQ got on it from the people at Yahoo. (Yes, yahoo BFG and Forum BFG is almost an entire different gaming kind of people ).   In all cases I don't mind since I don't play offiical Eldar but if I would then I liked the non-saveable holofield template hit.

torpedoes"str.3 marker vs 2cm2cm. If both use the same it has no effect. Works together at the same time as well.

Allies: Dark Eldar will be allies with Corsair & Craftworld Eldar if it both suits their needs (survival of race).

Flame of Asuryan: still no reason why the keel pulsar is swivelling.

Shadowhunters; this rule is still blechy. So Eldar do suicide runs.... fly into bomber marker... bomber makes d6 attacks, then against 4+ armour, then holofield... with re-roll. Naah, not so Eldar.

Fighter bomber explanation still confusing and in the end downgrades them by a large margin.

Tyranids: evolutions only if people agree. Good enough... I hope









 

[Vaaish]

Eldar holofield: reason for change is the massive flak the FAQ got on it from the people at Yahoo.

I remember that thread. In fact, I just pulled it up and reviewed it. I really didn't see anything in there that provided any solid reason why it should revert to getting a holofield save.

The discussion seemed to boil down to two parties, one saying the rules specifically say any other form of attack so Eldar get the holofield save plus it's instakill for escorts. The other saying, WB are area affect and thus the column shift rather than holofield since NC are area of effect weapons outside of the center hole, they should not grant the eldar a save.

Seeing that we've already rewritten other rules in the past, I see no reason that the current wording would prevent the change. Second, It's not instakill, Eldar just have to think a bit more about bracing their escorts like the rest of us. Third, most times you will only hit one escort and most corsair fleets like taking nearly all escorts. That means even if you do instakill the escort you won't be making any significant headway before eldar can ship the NC down.

I really think this is one that should be allowed. It's not kowtowing to IN players, it just makes IN slightly more viable against eldar.

[horizon]

I agree, you know.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

Yup. Only those biased towards Eldar would really like to maintain the status quo.