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

[horizon]

But then the raider fleet is no longer possible, like the fluff says.

Taros Campaign was all about Castellans & Protectors harassing the Imperial Navy.

[Harrypotter]

I think I was more thinking out loud about how to reconcile the fact that we'd like no fleet restriction with the HA's determination to impose one.

You could pretty much argue a mild Emissary restriction fluff wise if you needed to, but then you'd be straying away from 'established' canon.

I think what's most important is that whatever gets pushed through isn't left feeling broken, useless and unworkable because then we'd have a fleet that nobody would play in a game system that will not be seeing any new 'legal' races (for the foreseeable future - fingers crossed and all). But again this is me thinking (allegedly) out aloud again

[KivArn]

Arg! too much to reply too!

I'm pretty happy with the defender going to 45cm batteries, it gives it a single purpose then and is a bit different from other escorts too

With the protector i'm in the same boat as Horizon, it's a step in the right direction, but 90* turns would really add to the ship. It is pretty much a upgunned dauntless afterall.

As for the Warden, a 2-IC ship with nothing else sounds and looks cool but would be complete junk against Eldar. What’s wrong with making the Warden a faster Orca, or maybe even a Tau Cobra?

Does it have to be good against every other fleet? The Gothic class cruiser is pretty rubbish against eldar.. do we need to change that too? [/devil's advocate]
It's a bit unique and powerful, but not overly so due to restrictions

If you do take 5, then you must also take neutered emissary to be allowed to take them. Yes you are getting 10 lances for 150. But you are also getting a 2Wb 1 LB 3Torp Cruiser for 130 (using horizon's example)

Which gives us... 10 lances 2 Wb, 1 Lb, 3 Torps for 280. I can get 7 Lances 14 weapons batteries for the same price in an IN fleet (which is approx 10 lances 5 WB.. not that far off really!). Still don't see it being a massive problem, however play testing is the way to find out (as i'm aware that you could just spam emissaries and wardens... see later about restricting emissaries...) What about if they had 4+ armour??

Restricting the protectors to 2/500 (1/250) is fine by me... That's pretty much not a restriction anyway. My 750 fleet is 2-3 protectors and custodians to make up (usually 2 Protectors 8 Castellans), And one of My 1500 is similarly built, 1Custodian, 2 Protectors, 1 Emissary, 5 Wardens, Castellans for the rest. (I play very fluffily)

From your background/fluff point of view however the ships that should be restricted are the diplomacy vessels. I don't see a vast number of those being used in fleet engagements, nor would there be much point in having more than 1 or 2 in a fleet. I've already commented on the hunting pairs of protectors. I completely agree with you that you shouldn't have fleets of only protectors... but similarly, you shouldn't have fleets of only cruisers and battleships for the IN,.. Chaos... etc. Escorts should be a must in every fleet, and more common than cruisers to boot!



Just a side note... The 4 cruiser class scenario would be 2 Protectors, 2 Emissaries with a limit on protectors. Is this compatible with your fluff/gameplay/fairness measuring? Would 1 Protector per 250 or part there of be a better answer? Would allow for 3 Protectors, 1 Emissary in the Cruiser Clash.. Bit more fluffy etc

[fracas]

45 cm ion cannons on the castellan seem a bit much and would really define tau with their tracking system as the anti eldar fleet

[horizon]

45cm railgun batteries, not Ion Cannon.

With the overall speed mediocre, and absolutely pathethic broadside they are still easy pie with Eldar.
The Armada fleet is better vs Eldar with all the individual bombers zipping around.

[tinfish]

There is still the "You most take an Explorer if the fleet is over 750 pts" problem - can't build a pure FW fleet. As I asked before, can it be changed to 'You must take a Battleship' with the other restrictions for them.

Protector looks fine.

Castellan looks a lot better. It would be nice if it was fast enough to catch other escorts.

Emissary - How about going the build your own route, like a lot of Eldar ships?

Like this:

Emissary
points ?
hits 4
turrets 2
shields 1
armour 6+/5+
speed 25cm
turns 90*
prow deflector, integrated tracking systems.

Prow Railguns - 45cm - str.4 - F (is L/F/R too powerful?)

May take 2 of the following:

2 Grav Hooks

(One option)
Port Ion Cannon - 45cm - st.1 - L/F
Starboard Ion Cannon - 45cm - st.1 - R/F

dorsal launch bay - barracuda 25cm - str.2 - n/a

Prow torpedoes - 20-40cm - str.3. - F

Mix and match works for other fleets - variable costs stop you having to design a 130 pt ship.

[fracas]

45cm railgun batteries, not Ion Cannon.

With the overall speed mediocre, and absolutely pathethic broadside they are still easy pie with Eldar.
The Armada fleet is better vs Eldar with all the individual bombers zipping around.

Meant 45 cm battery rather than 45 cm ion cannon lances

[Caine-HoA]

Emissary:
I think as being an advanced new technology fleet, the emissary indeed could get 2 shields (still having, 4 hull) i think thats about the only thing that would make this ship interesting for me. Having 130 points in 4 hull and 1 shield is just like thowing it away. Its only 3 dmg and the ship is crippled, there is almost no way to protect it...
Find a weapon combination that works with 2 shields and 90* turn (and or 25cm) thats what i think the emissary should be... you were working on the weapons but the fail for the emissary is beeing a capital ship with very low defensive abilities.

Castellan:
2wb (45cm) and 2 torp, seems ok for 50p?

Protector:
The "problem" for me with the 500 per 2 protectors is as horizon pointed out you must have escorts then, and most of the other fleets are allowed cruiser only fleets.
But after all it seems ok nevertheless. In addition i would support horizons opinion that all fleets should have to take escorts, as it simply adds to the gameplay when playing with escorts. But many fleets out there are just better without escorts as escorts are easy to destroy in comparison to the spent points. (i think assault boats instantly destroying escorts is one of the main problems).

[Harrypotter]

Giving the Emissary 2 shields would work well, and make it different and interesting.

Weapons wise I'd make it an escort hunter - Maybe 2 or 3 30cm IC's (or 1 L/F and 1 R/F IC) and a 30cm LFR Str4 WB (sort of Dauntlessesque).

I'd also give it a fighter capacity of 2 squadrons and no missiles and keep 2 turrets, this should allow it to survive against a moderate ordnance attack.

Basically (with 25cm speed and 90* turns) it should (with exceptions) be able to outrun anything it can't outgun if it needs to.

Is that about right for 130pts?

I'd certainly play them in my fleet like that, even if they cost a little more than 130 pts.

[Don Gusto]

... Incidentally, the FW capital ships tracking system mechanic was not designed to be used by anything but the host vessel. ...

I'm well aware of that. The point I was trying to get across is that this is not much of a limitation when it is mounted on every capital ship.

[horizon]

I like tracking systems = improvement,

HarryPotter,
an Emissary with 2 shields, 2 turrets, 2 ion cannon 4 weapon batteries, 2 fighters with that speed and turns is overpowered for 130pts. It'll blast all equivalents out of the sky.
I am no fan of 2 shields to be honest.

The Emissary should not have Ion Cannons. These are not modelled on the ship.

I still like my proposal to the vessel.

[KivArn]

I like tracking systems = improvement,
The Emissary should not have Ion Cannons. These are not modelled on the ship.

I still like my proposal to the vessel.

Agreed

[Caine-HoA]

@horizon

why not 2 shield? (as i said the weapons should be made fair for a certain price than)
I dont see many variants of this ship that would make it worth its points with only 4hull and 1shield. As pointed out before, it is a capital ship and will get dmg rather easy. Even 6hull ships are pretty easy to destroy but with 4 it simply has no survivability. Who wants to sent points in something that if lucky will be on the field for 2 rounds... (in avarage) as any enemy will know it is an easy target.

[Harrypotter]

I like horizons stats, what I scribbled (on reflection) is waaaaaaay too powerful, but I really
 think it needs the 2 shields just to give it any measure of survivability.

[horizon]

Hi Caine

2 shields plus 4 hits
can be more survivable then
1 shield plus 6 hits

If I score 4 hits boths ships are crippled!

If I score 3 hits Emissary has 3 hits left, Dauntless 4.
sub: If I score 2 hits Emissary has shields down, 3 hits left, Dauntless loses hitpoint -> crippled

So the Emissary will only suffer more under very heavy barrage, eg lots of dice.
With pod shots the Emissary will last a lot longer.



Hi Nate,

back on restricting the Protector, the core warship. I am not denouncing the imposed restriction 1 per 250 but you should consider the following:

in the Imperial Navy it is possible to create a fleet of only Lunars. Or only Gothics. Or only Dictators. You said fluff/background was important to you in this Tau list. Not wanting all out Protector fleets. However an all out Lunar fleet is just as offensive against the background.

The Imperial Navy is a widely spread machine. Small border patrols (eg Lunar with some escorts) or deep space exploration (eg lone Oberon). Battlegroups are hastily formed. Thus almost impossible to get a 1500pts fleet with 8 Lunars. However the fleet list still makes this possible.

Same applies to Chaos of course. Being Chaos I'd say same types of ships are rather restricted. eg 2 times the same per 1500.

And Orks, you know Deadshane won Adepticon twice in a row with an Ork fleet. How? By taking a core of 4 Terror Kroozers and NO escorts. unfluffy but effective (ordnance is Ork key to victory). Our Ork opponent goes by same 3 Terror core but adds escorts just because.
So for Orks also a stretch to get 3 times the same ship in a fleet.

So what I am saying is that this restriction you propose is more desperately needed in other fleets!!! As background dictates.

A sole Protector fleet is actually better possible then a sole Lunar fleet.