Public repository for completed new rules from BFG HA's

[flybywire-E2C]

Hi guys! I created a Google account with a public folder so we could have a single place for everyone to download what we give the green light to, available here:

https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0Bw_dULEfC3rbYzUyNjQzZTAtMDZiMS00ZjRlLWJjNzMtYTE5YmNjZjdjODQ1&hl=en

They are visible directly from the site, but they show up in a low-resolution form that pretty much trashes all the graphics. You can download it directly from the site in their original form with teh graphics pretty much intact. We have listened to your inputs and did all we can to make these as fair as possible while both sticking to the design intent AND satisfying the fans, goals that are sometimes mutually exclusive!

The uploaded files have a few changes, based mainly on feedback we have received from the SG and BFG-List fan sites. Here's what we have on the street so far:

Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet
Eldar Domains and Refits

There is more to come. We should have the finalized FAQ/Errata and Rogue Traders rules on the street by the end of next week at the latest. There are a few more projects we will be working on after that, and when it is all complete, we will be pushing it all to GW so they can get it all posted at once.  Please feel free to copy the above link and re-post it anywhere you see fit. Thanks!

- Nate

[Commx]

Concerning the Tau Document:

Deimurg Cutting Beam
The Demiurg cutting beam is a short ranged but devastating ionisation beam. In addition to the rules described for this weapon on p.109 of Armada, the ship may extend the range of its cutting beam to 30cm by expending two collected blast markers per weapon strength instead of one, rounding down. For example, a Demiurg Bastion that gathers up five blast markers in the course of its immediately previous movement may in the shooting phase fire a str-5, range-15cm cutting beam or a str-2, range-30cm cutting beam.

This example is still wrong as the Cutting Beam begins at Str-1, not 0. Also, you misspelled Demiurg in the header.

A Kroot Warsphere may add up to +8HP, for +20 points per 2HP added. For every +2HP added, it adds +2 firepower to its weapons battery. Warspheres may also add +1 shield and/or turret strength for +10 points each (no more than one each). A Kroot Warsphere can extend the range of its weapons battery by +15cm for +25 points. Warspheres so improved are otherwise unchanged from their rules described on p.108 of Armada.

Looks like someone is going to be very happy upon reading this. (Not me though, I'll just be grumpy that the Tyranids lose such versatility only to have the Tau gain it...)


I'm also curious why every Tau capital ship suddenly comes with Tracking Systems of its own, further increasing the power difference between the Protector (which even became cheaper!) and the Hero when compared to other similarly priced ships (ie. every Imperial Cruiser).

[horizon]

The Tracking Systems is good (haven't read the thing yet).

Is it still open for changes.

* sharpens scalpel *

[horizon]

Tau Evolution List

The original fluff from the HA with O 'Mesme. Cool.

Custodian, as said, it is now a massive strong ship:
+20pts for better shields, better batteries (tracking system), better Ion Cannon and more missiles then the FW counterpart.

A beast of ship someone will always take.
I think it is too cheap.
I really liked the HA original approach with 2/2 launch bays and 8 missiles. Much more fun. Would take it at 330.

Warden, good variant. Like it. (the 2 IC version is abusable and will fall badly among non-Tau players I feel).

Protector vior'la, is the FW variant ( a capable ship!) at -5 pts, with better Ion Cannon (arcs) and better batteries (tracking systems.
Protecot Tol'ku, hm, it adds 6 batteries for the loss of range on Ion Cannon and 2 missiles. hmmsels. Guess the tracking systems on 12 batteries are worth to take this variant. Under 30cm the vessel is a beast... 12 batteries and 2 ion cannon, that can be compared 18 batteries. There is no cruiser that can do that! In any fleet if I go quick on it. Perhaps the 260pts CWE Dragonship but... jeez. It can even do Imperial broadsides!  4 batteries and 1 ion cannon port starboard same time... no more weakness...

The vessel is heavily underpriced at 185 pts. I advice upping to 190 (frick the cruiser clash scenario no one plays ). Drop a launch bay on the Tol'ku and arcs on the batteries on the Tol'ku! Drop Ion cannon range on the vior'la.

Emissary, hmm. 110pts... but still not the much requested and and adviced 25cm and 90*.

dal'yth : never ever take it. Nice to have Wardens, but no missiles is really doh.
bor'kan: doh, missiles for launch bays = MUCH stronger!! So useable. But I advice to merge bor'kan and daly'th: 1 launch bay, 3 missiles.
sa'cea: gunship which has one mission: draw away fire from Protectors and die.

So much on the Emissaries : this is no envoy, diplomacy ship which can defend against or run away from pirates. It MUST get 25cm speed and 90* turns. Increase it to 125-130pts.
Please consider the Distant Darkness variant posted in the thread. It was received really well and is playable.

The 2nd shield is a wish from many but that's up to the rest: I do not warrant it I guess.

All in all I would not use this Emissary variant. The crux is still missed: speed & manoeuvrability.

Castellan: ooh. 45cm batteries. Nice. The LFR arc isn't needed I think (Distant Darkness is F only). Consider trading the arcs for +5cm speed.

Xenos: as other poster. Nicassar: modelling and/or alternative model options needed.

The fleet list.....  Merging... GW and FW hmm.
I rather see a dedicated RAIDER / Fast strike fleet from the FW models, but alas.
I REALLY dislike the fact a Kor'O must lead the fleet if a Protector is present. Doesn't fit background. Having Kor'O's doing hunting and border patrols. tsk.

The Protector limit is odd. You know, this restriction doesn't matter. 2 per 500 means 4 per 750, right? But let alone of that: it just doesn't matter. Just make it unrestricted it won't change the local fleet setup.

Recap:
Custodian = overpowered
Protector = overpowered
Emissary = remains junk
Castellan = balanced thus good
Warden =  balanced thus good

On the variants: fluff wise no fan of it as this fleet isn't developed by septs. So I would just drop the sept names on them and give them suitable other names.
Overall this fleet is stronger then the FW list.

1500:
Custodian 330
Warden*3 90
Protector*2 Vior'la 370
Protector*2 Tol'ku 370
Castellan*5 250
Kor'O 80

1490

or
Custodian 330
Warden*3 90
Protector*2 Vior'la 370
Protector*2 Tol'ku 370
Castellan*4 200
Kor'O + aun'el 105
1475

The second list would give me:
52 batteries @ 45cm (all with Tracking System!)
+ 6 batteries @ 30cm
= total 58
6 ion cannon @ 45cm
+ 7 ion cannon @ 30cm
= total 13
16 launch bays
34 missiles

Lets see the FW equivalent:
Custodian 310
Warden*3 90
Protector*4 760
Castellan*5 250
Kor'el + aun'el 75
1485

giving me:
32 batteries @ 45cm
+ 21 batteries @ 30cm
= total 53
8 ion cannon @ 45cm
+ 5 ion cannon @ 30com
= total 13
16 launch bays
38 missiles

So it might look almost even one most take in consideration that your new list means the Tau have much better batteries above 30cm (do the number times 1.25 to get a good value, thus having 64 bats instead of 52 really)). Better turrets (re-roll), better boarding. Better shields (Custodian). Less prow deflectors (Custodian/Emissary).

Main considerations:
variants
Custodian strength
Protector strength
Emissary junk
Fleet list

cheers!


ps, all is just in my own humble opinion.

[fracas]

1. if this is not official can we make it?
http://www.twolandscreative.com/wip/docs/BFG%20%5bCodex%5d%20Adeptus%20Mechanicus.pdf


2. any reason not to separate out the xenos fleet into its own pdf with stats for the bastion, commerce, and warsphere? along with the warsphere movement rule?

3. love the upgrade for the warsphere btw
any chance for a downgrade? say 4 - 6 hit points
with greater maneuverability? say 15 cm movement
and the option for an all kroot fleet thus? without the one per 750 pts limit

4. given how maneuverable the nicassar carravan+dhow is, why leave it as a Defense rather than a Cruiser?

5. kroot warsphere with the option for 3 shields, and having 4 shields on the Caravan, what should their base size be?

[tinfish]

Custodian - good for its price, but not overpowered. It has decent firepower to the front, but compared to an Emperor - 16 batteries to one broadside, it is not worth more points. The Custodian has to be closing to fire at full effect, so the return fire can quickly cripple it, where as the Emperor will spend most of the game abeam.

Protector - I thought the T'olku variant was going to cost 190 pts. I have no problem with the other one costing 185 for the cruiser clash scenario. It has even weaker broadsides than the one I just playtested (IC front only now), so unlike Imperial or Chaos cruisers it suffers from having to be closing to get the best use of its weapons.

Emissary - nice to see some variants, but it really needs 25cm move and 90 degree turns. It can't keep up with the Wardens, so can't protect them. It's only value to the fleet is to act like a Dauntless.
Do the grav hooks need fire arcs

Castellan - fine - price has dropped 5 pts from the draft due to the weapon changes. It would still be nice if it moved 25cm to separate it more from the Defender.

Warden - good little ship.

Tracking system is nice, but it will only come into play a few times in the game. Once closing with the opposing fleet and a few pot shots later on. Compared to other fleets special rules eg. Necrons counting everything as closing, it is not that powerful.

So - I like it, but please make the 2 changes to the Emissary - even if it means the points going back up.

[Vaaish]

My question is why we keep finding the need to create rules that ignore the main rulebook? Eldar shooting, Necron Shooting, Admech AWR, and now giving Tau ignore fleet wide rage shifts?

[tinfish]

To be fair it is already part of the GW rules, it is just that you had to buy a 50 pt ship to allow it.

In some ways it is flavour - others might see it as rules creep, but at least they follow 99% of the rules unlike Eldar or Necrons.

[flybywire-E2C]

Concerning the Tau Document:

Deimurg Cutting Beam
The Demiurg cutting beam is a short ranged but devastating ionisation beam. In addition to the rules described for this weapon on p.109 of Armada, the ship may extend the range of its cutting beam to 30cm by expending two collected blast markers per weapon strength instead of one, rounding down. For example, a Demiurg Bastion that gathers up five blast markers in the course of its immediately previous movement may in the shooting phase fire a str-5, range-15cm cutting beam or a str-2, range-30cm cutting beam.

This example is still wrong as the Cutting Beam begins at Str-1, not 0. Also, you misspelled Demiurg in the header.

A Kroot Warsphere may add up to +8HP, for +20 points per 2HP added. For every +2HP added, it adds +2 firepower to its weapons battery. Warspheres may also add +1 shield and/or turret strength for +10 points each (no more than one each). A Kroot Warsphere can extend the range of its weapons battery by +15cm for +25 points. Warspheres so improved are otherwise unchanged from their rules described on p.108 of Armada.

Looks like someone is going to be very happy upon reading this. (Not me though, I'll just be grumpy that the Tyranids lose such versatility only to have the Tau gain it...)

Demiurg are corrected! I will have a repaired version up on the website this evening. How did the Tyranids lose versatility?


- Nate

[Vaaish]

To be fair it is already part of the GW rules, it is just that you had to buy a 50 pt ship to allow it.

There is a bit of a difference between having to buy a ship that can be destroyed and that only grants the effect in a limited radius and giving a wholesale license to ignore gunnery mechanics that can't be blocked or eliminated in any way.

[flybywire-E2C]

1. if this is not official can we make it?
http://www.twolandscreative.com/wip/docs/BFG%20%5bCodex%5d%20Adeptus%20Mechanicus.pdf

 

The Ships of Mars PDF is already on the GW website. Your format is much nicer, but right now we are working on fixes for what’s missing from the GW website.

2. any reason not to separate out the xenos fleet into its own pdf with stats for the bastion, commerce, and warsphere? along with the warsphere movement rule?

We did not want to create a completely separate Xenos fleet list, even though it for all intents and purposes behaves as such. Because the Nicassar are also Xenos but the Nicassar cannot be used by a pure Demiurg/Kroot fleet, it became a matter of simplicity to combine it all together into a single document.   

3. love the upgrade for the warsphere btw
any chance for a downgrade? say 4 - 6 hit points
with greater maneuverability? say 15 cm movement
and the option for an all kroot fleet thus? without the one per 750 pts limit

 I cannot tell you how much grief exists that the Kroot even have their own ship. Without getting too deep into it, giving the Kroot their own ship faced extinction more than once, and the powers that be are NEVER going to buy off on a stand-alone Kroot list. Also, we didn’t want to give the Kroot anything that changes their basic “behaves like a Rok” mechanic because it would create yet ANOTHER movement rule-set, and between the Eldar, Roks and Space Hulks, the game has enough exceptions to the movement rules.

4. given how maneuverable the nicassar carravan+dhow is, why leave it as a Defense rather than a Cruiser?

No. This thing under no circumstances should be a cruiser.
 

5. kroot warsphere with the option for 3 shields, and having 4 shields on the Caravan, what should their base size be?

Good question!. The 2010 FAQ states “anything greater than two shields OR 10HP gets a large base.” Both of these would fall under that ruling. The Warsphere under the current rules does not, but good luck getting that monstrosity to stay up on a small base!

[fracas]

1. i think an all Kroot list would be amusing:
a super warsphere or two
a few standard warsphere
and half a dozen or so light warsphere

all bouncing around in the movement phase

but given the rules as is, i may just build a demiurge-kroot fleet


2. given renewed options for the Nicassaar, any thoughts to re-releasing their models?

3. the Admech pdf is not my creation, though i do love the format


thanks for your considerations nate!

[horizon]

Tinfish:

Custodian - good for its price, but not overpowered. It has decent firepower to the front, but compared to an Emperor - 16 batteries to one broadside, it is not worth more points. The Custodian has to be closing to fire at full effect, so the return fire can quickly cripple it, where as the Emperor will spend most of the game abeam.

Emperor is +35 pts for:
+1 leadership
+2 hits
+1 turret (negated by tracking systems)
+8 batteries (focusable in one arc from Emperor = 6 + 10) at higher range
has weaker ordnance (no resilience)
No missiles (6 of them) thus Custodian can do a synergy strike which the Emperor cannot.
No Ion Cannon (2 pieces). Lets say that 1 ic = 3 batteries (at 30cm to be honest) the Custodian has 6 extra batteries through them. So the earlier +8 bats is downed to +2. Down this post I'll show how it even gets better for the Custodian.

In a 1 on 1 duel the Custodian won't close. But use its faster speed to go around to the rear of the Emperor. Though it'll be tricky for both.

Tinfish

Protector - I thought the T'olku variant was going to cost 190 pts. I have no problem with the other one costing 185 for the cruiser clash scenario. It has even weaker broadsides than the one I just playtested (IC front only now), so unlike Imperial or Chaos cruisers it suffers from having to be closing to get the best use of its weapons.

Lets see, compared to Lunar the Vior'la has:
+5pts
-2 hits
+1 turret (plus tracking system)
+ 15cm range on batteries (+ ts)
+ 15cm range on ion cannon (lances)
+ 2 launch bays!
6 missiles which are better then 6 torpedoes (turns and speed).

In a 1:1 duel the Lunar will die die die. The Tyrant (185) and Dominator (190) as well.

The Tol'ku has just as much batteries then the Dominator without ts and has Ion Cannons and has launch bays and has missiles.

Both Protector variants need toning down! Preferring Ion Cannon range and ordnance.

Vaaish,
tracking systems

I understand your sentiments but on another level. The normal Tau fleet from Armada is an ordnance fleet pur sang. It can get some nice gunnery with the Messenger but still won't excel at it. Though the Hero is a problem with its massive weaponry.
Now this new HA Tau list creates a Tau fleet that has massive ordnance available but is also turned into a heavy gunnery fleet! 45cm Protectors (one with 45cm Ion+ 45cm bats), the other with 12wb at 45cm with TS), 45cm Custodians (Ion & batteries).

Now Project Distant Darkness (sorry to bring this up every time but I gave thought about it) has a Tau fleet which has focus on gunnery. The Custodian has 4 launch bays, the Protector 1, the Emissary a fighter bay. Then the main gunnery, batteries at 45cm is Front Arc only in most cases, Ion Cannon @ 30cm can do left-front or right front. yes the fleet is nimble with higher turning rates but with fixed arcs not overpowered. Less ordnance also means less broadside/rear protection.

Also lets not forget tracking systems make turrets re-roll their dice. Meaning an ordnance heavy fleet is just untouchable by other ordnance.



Onto Tracking Systems and batteries:

6 batteries above 30cm with tracking systems equals 8 batteries above 30cm with no tracking systems (Take that Lunar!)
8 batteries above 30cm with tracking systems equals 12 batteries above 30cm with no tracking systems (whoa! Custodian thus has 12 batteries plus 2 ion = 12+6 = 18!)
12 batteries above 30cm with tracking systems equals 16 batteries above 30cm with no tracking systems (like oh yeah oh yeah tol'ku!)

Add all these batteries to the 45cm Ion Cannon availability added to all the launch bays added to all the missiles....

(I made one mistake in the earlier post, tol'ku has no swinging arcs on the Ion Cannon, still no issue with all these batteries....).

Nate, you really said the FW Tau fleet was overpowered?

On the Kroot and the powers that be. lol. Frick'em. Create a Kroot list and release it unofficially in Warp Rift.

[tinfish]

On the Custodian v Emperor issue - you have to take into account a few other things. To field a Custodian you must take a Kor'O, the +1 Ld for the Emperor allows you to take a Fleet Commander for Ld 9.

So the relative costs are Custodian - 410, Emperor - 415. Are the differences you listed worth 5 pts?

Protector -v Lunar. As you are well aware closing v abeam makes a huge difference. The Lunar should only face one round of shooting against its prow armour before swinging abeam - it will lock on. Then the Protector could try a point blank synergy strike - if it hasn't been forced to brace. If the Protector goes abeam (to fly round for another pass) it isn't likely to knock a shield down with its broadside. The Lunar will always have a friend - 2 v 2 will be different.
In my playtest games the Protector didn't feel too powerful. You are always wary of the 6 hp's. If a couple of escorts strip your shields you have to brace against the next shot. They do have a powerful first shot, but then you are in amongst the enemy with your pathetic broadsides trying your hardest to get them back into your front arc.

Compare it to an Acheron instead, it can sit abeam, has the same batteries at +15 cm then +2 lances (in all 3 aspects) at 45cm and is 5cm faster, all for +5pts. My money is on the Acheron. My money is on the Acheron v the Lunar as well.

I should point out that I'm not some Tau fanatic, they are my 5th fleet. I just don't want them to be as poor and one dimensional as Orks.

[horizon]

Ah well, on the Custodian I seem to be forgetting the Kor'O is needed in this list. I still think the vessel goes 1:1. In the larger scheme I'd still call it on the strong side.

Protector vs Lunar = Ion Cannon negate prow armour. Missiles & Manta's can do synergy strike (turrets have to choose).

2 vs 2 the Protector will even be more on the winning side with the added launch bays, missiles and added weaponry. Because now I can shoot (standard version) 12 batteries & 4 Ion Cannon at a single Lunar before it can shoot back.
The Lunar can only lock on if it is already abeam, it cannot turn doing the lock on when a turn is needed.

So even then, with a blastmarker on it, the Lunar moves 15cm forward (if the Protector shot from 45cm), makes a slight turn to shoot broadsides (6wb + 2l). The Protector still has the options then. Slow moving pace. Reload or Lock On, even AAF to make new distance for a new attack run.

The Acheron will also face difficulties because of the bomber/missile synergy, though 3 turrets is better. The 5+ prow won't help when closing. 6 batteries & 4 lances will harass the Protector, given.

(Cool to see you bring up th Acheron, underrated ship by many).

The Tau fleet indeed will have troubles in broadside duels but before they get there the enemy will be mauled.

I should point out that I am a Tau fanatic.