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

[flybywire-E2C]

Thanks Nate, as an HA your knowledge of TAU fluff is good. 200 years after 'better than orks' doesn't mean better than imperial.

Sure Tau have only been spacefaring for 1000 years so far, it took them 700 years to go from just the explorer to their first true warship (Hero class)

And yes the Tau have a lot of issues holding them back from competing with imperial tech in a lot of ways. Namely warp drives (I love the fluff about the tau reverse engineering an ork ships drives, its amusing and true to how life would go. Reminds me of a tv show where a person who time travels leaves behind his camera sparking a tech revolution). As well as the power issues, through the entirety of 40k fluff maintaining engines and shields are extremely power-costly endeavors. As well tau ships were forced to be of larger size than the imperial equivalents due to their poorly designed warp drives.

Tau are only supposed to invent tech about 2-3x as fast as humanity, I remember the fluff on how they went from a feral, tribal race to spacefaring in 5000? years. About twice as fast as humanity. Probably within the next 250-500 years they will surpass impie tech, if they don't die before then, those tyranids are problematic.

According to Zachary's Theorem of Adaptive Divergence (AdMech32/XEN583), the Tau are estimated to approach and possibly exceed Imperial tech in about 1,000 years, with their conflict against the Tyranids being the current "rapidly changing environmental conditions" precipitating their rapid advancement. For some inexplicable reason they are evolving at about 2.5 times the rate of humanity. A total of 6k years to exceed Imperial tech is not a lot of time considering it took the Imperium 30k years to get there!


- Nate

[Zelnik]

Let me be specific!  I agree with everything you have done in the fleet list! Great job!  I may confess that I will miss the full st2 lc or st 6 torps on the protector, but I am getting much needed firepower in response. 

I never wanted gc rules on the custodian!  I just wanted my first and favorite fleet to not get scrubbed out of usefulness because someone is screaming "weeaboo"

[lastspartacus]

Nate.  Any magic fleet accusations are ridiculous.  Even with the changes we have proposed, The Custodian comes NOWHERE CLOSE to an Eldar battleship in agility.  The changes proposed only bring the Custodian CLOSE to normal battleship levels, not there, but close.

You can talk all you want about fluff, but with hundreds of years of development and shaving 2 hits off your battleship, I in no way believe it would be unreasonable to up the forward firing flagship's manouverability.  Especially because the kororvatra is a complete upgrade and redesign.  Its a ship design issue, not technology, as stated before.  Its just a different model car, with better technology as well.  That ship is grand cruiser size, with wide drive dispersal.

You can state design intent if you want, but dont use fluff on this one.  The Protector needs greater manouverability to keep up with the fleet its supposed to support.  At this point, its the nimble Protectors adjusting to the advancing gunline, while the Custodian is left behind, its soft nose closing straight into the enemy.  Very bad, man.

Its a ship that doesn't gel with the fleet, and you are forcing houserules on me.  Its a big mistake on your part, I believe that more than any other ship model discussed.

I'm happy to hear a prow deflector is being considered.  Means I may only have to houserule one thing in the fleet, and possibly Protector costs, but only after playtesting.

Let me be clear.  I like a balanced fleet, with weaknesses.  Kororvesh Tau have those weaknesses.
I'll be very happy if they never gain the durability or long range of other fleets.  What I am proposing is simply quite rational, balanced, and fluffy character in the fleet.  Magic fleet my ass.  *mumbles crankily*

[BaronIveagh]

All it means to me is that I'll have to kill ridiculous numbers of Tau battleships, which really isn't any different from what I do now.

[Zelnik]

last, get over yourself.

I always determined battleship strength by firepower, and considering how much the custodian is throwing out it's prow (which is always the most efficient and effective arc to fire from), it lands in the battleship zone soundly. The huge ordnance it's launching only compounds it's battleship status.

And no, the Protector will never have a 90 degree turn, not with it's strength. It's no light cruiser.

[lastspartacus]

You get over me first

I have very strong feelings about this, with reason behind my thoughts.  We are talking about a game we both enjoy, thats all.
 
Man up and don't take it personal.

So, could you please explain why you see prow as the most efficient and effective arc?

[Vaaish]

perhaps because all of the weapons are capable of focusing in the forward arc?

[Zelnik]

That's not really hard to consider. allow me to make some supporting statements first.

1. since your not on an infinite table, you typically are always moving TOWARDS your opponent (this is a game about blowing things up, not dancing.)

2. Since your opponent tends to close on you, you will have the advantage of 'closing' arc more often.

3. Concentration of fire is MUCH easier when you do not have to worry about turning to fire on a ship. Also, with this strength, you have the capacity to break up enemy phalanxes (sometimes violently)

4. Simplicity. You don't forget to fire your other arc

If you want to see this perfected, look at an eldar fleet.. everything goes to the
front arc.

Lets be honest, how often do you use BOTH arcs of an imperial cruiser and greater? not frequently.

[lastspartacus]

I'll reply to this more in depth after I sleep, but I will say 2 things.

Eldar have rockin' front fire, yes.  Imagine Eldar with only one 45cm turn after 15cm.

Do you not get a double-broadside oppurtunity every game?  Its not the majority, but I'd say about 20% of the time im using both broadsides.

[BaronIveagh]

That's not really hard to consider. allow me to make some supporting statements first.

1. since your not on an infinite table, you typically are always moving TOWARDS your opponent (this is a game about blowing things up, not dancing.)

2. Since your opponent tends to close on you, you will have the advantage of 'closing' arc more often.

3. Concentration of fire is MUCH easier when you do not have to worry about turning to fire on a ship. Also, with this strength, you have the capacity to break up enemy phalanxes (sometimes violently)

4. Simplicity. You don't forget to fire your other arc

If you want to see this perfected, look at an eldar fleet.. everything goes to the
front arc.

Lets be honest, how often do you use BOTH arcs of an imperial cruiser and greater? not frequently.

Um.... *points to self*  But then, that's why Horizon calls it a BaronI sized table.

[Zelnik]

the table i built is tournament standard 6x4... it's the maximum size that could fit

[lastspartacus]

Heh, just occured to me:  Even if we go on the ridiulous assumption that Tau are still anywhere close to Orkish level drive tech, Orks have 10 hit ships that have cruiser status, and Tau can't manage it with turn encouraging hulls?  Thats hilarious.

That's not really hard to consider. allow me to make some supporting statements first.

1. since your not on an infinite table, you typically are always moving TOWARDS your opponent (this is a game about blowing things up, not dancing.)

2. Since your opponent tends to close on you, you will have the advantage of 'closing' arc more often.

3. Concentration of fire is MUCH easier when you do not have to worry about turning to fire on a ship. Also, with this strength, you have the capacity to break up enemy phalanxes (sometimes violently)

4. Simplicity. You don't forget to fire your other arc

If you want to see this perfected, look at an eldar fleet.. everything goes to the
front arc.

Lets be honest, how often do you use BOTH arcs of an imperial cruiser and greater? not frequently.

Right.  Initially.  But once you reach weapons range its sometimes best to stay at distance and abeam.

2. Same thing.

3.  Prow weapons has nothing to do with phalanxs.  It matters not from what arc the firepower comes from, only that it comes   And broadsides are muc more devastating at that.
Also you can get closer to the enemy fleet without directly closing.  Or do all of your opponents advance nose-towards and then pull a tun to fire weapons?  Prow has nothing to do with concentration of fire, though it does ensure, on the first shot, that you are less likely to have to turn, but positioning helps alot either way.

4.  Oh you just wanted a point #4 didnt you?

And otherwise, first two questions still stand.

[Vaaish]

with tau I don't see any conceivable way you could decide that their broadsides are more devastating than their forward arcs.

Custodian, side arc, 1 lance and 6 WB... less firepower than the Lunar.
Protector, side arc,  1 lance and 2 WB... about as much as a firestorm.
Sa'Cea, side arc, 1 lance and 3 WB.... see previous.
All other emissary configs, side arc, 4wb... same firepower as a dauntless.

[lastspartacus]

Hmm, I definitly didnt mean to ever imply that thought, don't know where you got it.


Oh, forgot about character Custodian.  How should that look I wonder?  4 bays and killer guns?  More torps?   Hmmm.

If its ok with you Nate, I'd like to see how the normal Custodian ends up before I give input on that

[Vaaish]

Then you typed what you mean rather poorly.

It matters not from what arc the firepower comes from, only that it comes Smiley  And broadsides are muc more devastating at that.

We are in the Tau thread talking about the Tau list and you make the statement that broadsides are more devastating. Without qualifying that in any way and in reference to Zelniks post that the prow was the most efficient arc in relation to the custodian followed by his attempt to clarify why he believed that way, it stands to reason that your comment was related to the tau broadsides firepower.