Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG

[Vaaish]

Even as a slighter build, it's a grand cruiser masquerading as a battleship. Grand cruisers shouldn't be spinning around with 90' turns.

[lastspartacus]

We aren't talking about Imperials here.  We are talking about an unprecedented new fleet, essentially.
There are perfectly valid flavor, fiction, and balance reasons to include it.

[fracas]

Not a fan of the idea.
Problems arise when fleet stray too far from standard conventions

[lastspartacus]

What problems? 

Every alien fleets strays from 'convention'  because convention is human fleets.

Tau don't have NEARLY the dramatic variations that other fleets do.

[Sigoroth]

I always saw the kororvesh design philosophy as very efficient ships.  Less tonnage than similar class vessels in other fleets, but packing alot of firepower and using the less tonnage and splayed hull design for tighter turns.

I don't see it as 'nothing over 6 can turn 90'  I see it more as 'kororvesh hull design, which means slighter builds, required to achieve turning ability'
So you sacrifice the hits for the turning ability.  Which the Custodian does as well. 
The other design philosophy of good shielding for its size is lost in the Custodian as well, and I hope the option for a 4th is included, if not an extra turret.

This idea is flawed. Firstly, the idea of being "more efficient" by having less tonnage is a false economy if it makes them less survivable (which it does). So this, by itself, cannot be the reason for the change. If we're talking a sacrifice of survivability for some upside, say increased speed or manoeuvrability, then it becomes a viable proposition.

Now, if the Custodian is able to achieve 90° turns with 10 hits then surely the Tau could've made the Protector larger, keeping it at 8 hits, while still maintaining 90° turns. In this case we're back to sacrificing survivability simply for the sake of it. Senseless.

[Trasvi]

Perhaps there are other factors. With engine size A used on Protectors/Emissary the thrust/mass ratio is enough to give the desired 20cm of speed and 90* turns. If the ship was heavier, they couldn't get the required speed out of it, and engine size B are too enormous to fit on even a size 8 hull. However then you move up a class to the Custodian; with its larger size it can fit the size B engines, which again gives the required thrust/mass ratio to allow for higher speed and turns. A paradox which means that size 8 ships can't fit the required engines for 90* turns.

Maybe its an economy of production thing; they can produce thousands of engine A but not nearly so many of engine B, leading them to fit engine B only onto the larger, more important ships.

I disagree with fracas that this is too big a change from the standard. Tau are probably the MOST conventional out of any xenos fleet, the only 'rule breaker' they have is turning torpedoes, and even those are analogous to standard rules.

I'm fairly sure that custodians turning 180* would be pretty damn rare, considering that on nearly every game turn they will be wanting to reload ordnance. I'm jusLa little concerned with its 12WB 2L 8Torp  front armament it would become far too mobile and get turned into some kind of super gunboat, rather than a agile carrier.

[lastspartacus]

By efficiency I meant they were able to get systems of a certain class on smaller vessels, thus the -2hp.

The hull designs that allow the 90* don't fill up the cubic tons that standard long ship hulls do.

There is no set tonnage that makes a good space ship.  Every race has different standards.

Tau Kororvesh design finds the best balance of durability and firepower in the sizes they build, that happen to be smaller than other race's equivelant ships.  The ship designs allow greater manouverability and firepower than other similar vessels.

Its not a matter of 'they could make it bigger' its 'this is what we consider to be a worthwhile balance for our cruisers' or whatever class we are talking about.  And the ships they have made, have the aforementioned advantages.

As an example, the Imperium is all about size and grandeur.  If they could make a bigger battleship work, they would.
The sizes they use are what is deemed balanced and efficient for their technology.

[lastspartacus]

And to clarify, the Custodian won't be 'spinning around'  as it  can't go on CTANH.

Besides fluff reasons, The Custodian needs it because it is not a support carrier, it is more of a front-line carrier, and should be designed to make the same course corrections as the rest of the fleet.  Its essentially a Protector with more bays, so it actually does a worse job as a gunship with all its weapons pointing front than the Protector does if left at 45*

As I said before, the Kororvesh remind me of a school of deadly and agile fish changing direction in the ocean all of a sudden.  Their speed is not increased by this at all.

As Sigoroth said, it also fits the flavor of the Tau as a mobile shooty force.  It would make the fleet feel very unique and complete.


In a seperate issue, directed mostly at the HA's:  Is there any chance of getting a third WB on the Castellan?  I got some in today, and they sure are big, imposing escorts.

And finally, is there any reason why the Custodian does not have a 4th shield?  If it is a fluff issue, such as Tau do not have the technology for that shield strength the same as they don't have 60cm weapons ability, then so be it, just make that clear.
If its something else, an option for an extra shield primarily would be appreciated, and also an extra turret.
If its not a fluff thing, then theres no reason the Custodian should not follow the flavor of its smaller brethren of 'Less HP but equal shielding'

[horizon]

No third RG on the Castellan. As that would invalidate the Defender. 2 RG at longer range is cool & good enough. As the 45cm can be used for Tracking System, making 2RG effectively 3RG in the 31-45cm range.

LS, am I right in thinking you want to improve, upgun and make ships better over the whole line? (Not only Tau)

Custodian has +2 shields over Explorer. That's a lot. 4 turrets with tracking systems is fine enough.

[clintv42]

From my experience playing the FW tau fleet so far I gotta agree with everyone who is for the Custodian getting 90* turn.  It fits the feel of the fleet, the fluff, and I can't see how it is an imbalance to the ship, nor do I see the addition of its 90* turn giving the overall fleet an overwhelming edge. 

As far as fluff goes we can all argue until we're blue in the face why or why not the custodian can/can't have the 90*.  This argument, (while I feel that its fluffy) can be put aside for the time being.

 So lets go to the feel of the fleet.  Yeah, the fw fleet has made a good step into maneuverability but is still not a "fast" fleet.  These 90* turns which will most often be used to put you on a barrel run towards the enemy will also put you in the most disadvantageous firing WB table.  I tell you what, Space Marine SO gets ahold of any tau ship/unit of ships, BFI or not, all that's going to be left is debris.  This is a good balance.  The FW ships must put themselves in danger in order to make maximum use of their weaponry while having 2 less hits than other ships.  That's fair right?

The Custodian doesn't have an exorbitant amount of fire power.  Its a good ship, I enjoy using it but I personally have had a hard time making it count once my opponent and I close ground.  Every other battle ship is different.  They all have nasty broad sides.  They go past you, make their 45* turn and they're fine.  You're still in a side arc.  Tau ships are quite different as you all know.  Once your battle lines pass, if you don't have the extra maneuverability on a front arc only ship its over.  Yeah, it has a couple shots to the left or right but we're talking about a battleship equivalent here. 

As mentioned before its not a top, it's still only going to be able to make the 1 turn.  As far as why this is an impossibility, I just can't agree with the logic behind that statement.  I've been reading through all of the threads you guys have been doing on these balance issues (which I will note I really appreciate all the hard work you folks are doing) and there have been a couple times now where "this can't work" has been revisited and found to be a valid change.  I believe this is one of these cases.  It will most definitely give the fw fleet a unique feel, not over power the ship, and give the overall fleet more cohesion which is right up the Tau's ally in terms of tactics.

I'll be using it with 90* turns tomorrow and I'll let you know who it goes.

[horizon]

...another one pushing this...? heh

Then the Custodian MUST go down to 4 (2/2) launch bays.

[lastspartacus]

Definitly not for upgunning everything, Horizon, only making things worth playing and competative.
It IS my goal and belief that all fleets should be roughly equal in competative level.

I simply challenge a rebuttal for the questions and statements I put forth.

Why would the Custodian need to lose bay strength, the one weapon that would be uneffected by the proposed 90* turn?

Custodian, a battleship, of battleship cost.  No battleship weapon's range, no battleship powerful broadsides.
So as opposed to being able to keep abeam and at a distance, circling, The Custodian must reach firing range more directly, while closing on the gunnery chart.  While having 2 less hits than the standard battleship.
Not allowing said ship to have at least the option for comparable shielding to a normal battleship with previously mentioned advantages is madness.
Denying it the ability to come to grips with the enemy before getting blowed up after the first pass is icing on the cake of madness

After thinking it over, I will concede that the philosophy on the Castellan makes sense, but asthetically its just such a much more impressive looking escort than the Defender.  And it is 5 more points.  And in its current build it just doesnt seem to compare well in role with the Emissary.

[lastspartacus]

Not trying to upgun every ship for sure, I'm usually a big downplayer.  But the kororvesh as a fleet needs some help to make it competative, not just as a raider fleet.  Thats just a sad thought for me, as I'm now invested in them.

I realized the potential weakness of the fleet when I compared a 2k point chaos list I ran a couple weeks ago to my future 2k point kororvesh fleet.

Desolator
Max command
2 Murders
1 Hades
2 Carnages
2 Slaughters
5 Idolators
4 Iconoclasts

Custodian
Max command
4 protectors
3 Emissaries of the torp and Warden variety
9 Wardens
4 Castellans


I realized that the chaos capital ships seemed severely intimidating, having superior speed, firepower, range, 4 shields and 22 (!) hull points over the Tau counterparts, lacking only ordnance superiority.  A massacre waiting to happen, getting even worse after the initial pass.

5 Idolators and 4 Iconoclasts will also beat 9 Wardens every time.

That leaves 4 Castellans in the Tau's favor.  Far, far from enough to swing towards balance.
Assuming players of equal skill, the outcome is almost predetermined.

That, Horizon, is why I am fussing about the Kororvesh

I love the feel, and wouldnt change it.  The answer lies in some small buffs and more accurate points costs.

[horizon]

FW Tau was well balanced & competitive.

Custodian is good. I advocate lesser LB also on the Grand Cruiser level! I think you are underestimating it heavily.
Only time my Custodian blew up was because I wanted it to become fire magnet. Otherwise it survived all battles.... even a close brawl with a (good) Ork fleet! Marines couldn't kill it either. Only Chaos managed to do so.

The Defender is more impressive then the Castellan. The Defender is the size of an Emissary (almost) and would one of the escorts to deserve an unique 2 hitpoint status.
It is an escort: turn on a dime. Enough of a role. 2 missiles goodiness.

....your assessment...later

[horizon]

Not trying to upgun every ship for sure, I'm usually a big downplayer. But the kororvesh as a fleet needs some help to make it competative, not just as a raider fleet. Thats just a sad thought for me, as I'm now invested in them.

I do not agree completely. Same as Marines will never be for fleet engagments, like Dark Eldar the Tau Kor'or'Vesh pure fleets shouldn't be engagement elites either. It's their role: raiding, assisting the main battle line.

I realized the potential weakness of the fleet when I compared a 2k point chaos list I ran a couple weeks ago to my future 2k point kororvesh fleet.

Desolator
Max command
2 Murders
1 Hades
2 Carnages
2 Slaughters
5 Idolators
4 Iconoclasts

Custodian
Max command
4 protectors
3 Emissaries of the torp and Warden variety
9 Wardens
4 Castellans

Heavy fleet engagement level. Bring it down to 1500 for proper comparision.
Also: 2000pts should be 2nd Custodian imo.
Also: Chaos fleet should have carrier otherwise they die missile death.

I realized that the chaos capital ships seemed severely intimidating, having superior speed, firepower, range, 4 shields and 22 (!) hull points over the Tau counterparts, lacking only ordnance superiority. A massacre waiting to happen, getting even worse after the initial pass.

Did I tell you about that time my 1250 Tau fleet utterly crushed a 1500pts Chaos fleet? Well, now I did, the point difference was a mistake by opponent...lol. Fleet Engagement scenario. After four turns two death Chaos Cruisers, two crippled, escort squad destroyed, fleet braced &  disengaged. I had only 1 crippled Protector,,,!

5 Idolators and 4 Iconoclasts will also beat 9 Wardens every time.

You're sure? 345pts vs 270pts. 22 batteries + 5 lances (37) vs 18 batteries + 9 lances (45)
I think the Chaos escorts are in dire problems in a direct duel. Wardens level Iconoclast with batteries, lances for Idolators.

That leaves 4 Castellans in the Tau's favor. Far, far from enough to swing towards balance.
Assuming players of equal skill, the outcome is almost predetermined.

I don't agree.

That, Horizon, is why I am fussing about the Kororvesh

You are underestimating:

* Tau Alpha Strike
* Tau Missiles
* 90* turns (this is a real biggie when used well)
* Tau gunnery @ 45cm.

So, I do not agree on your fuzz.