Public repository for completed new rules from BFG HA's

[horizon]

Good catch, that's like really bad wording. If it is intentional it is bad as well.

[flybywire-E2C]

Hi all! The DRAFT rules for Space Marines Dominion and Crusade fleets as well as Rogue Traders & Pirates can be seen here:
https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0Bw_dULEfC3rbYzUyNjQzZTAtMDZiMS00ZjRlLWJjNzMtYTE5YmNjZjdjODQ1&hl=en
To be perfectly clear that these are only drafts, they are stamped as such on every page of the downloadable version of the documents. These remain a work in progress and should in no way be considered a final product until the name has a date stamp and has “DRAFT” pulled out of the name.

As far as the finalized documents go, the Eldar Domains and Refits file has been re-named but is otherwise completely unchanged. I’ve changed the naming convention for the finalized files to show the date in (YYYYMMDD) format. This way if for some reason the finalized rule sets have some unforeseen error or otherwise needs to be repaired, it will be replaced with a new file with an updated date. This way you will know at a glance whether or not you have the most current copy of the rules. Keep in mind that NONE of these are official canon until we finalize all  the projects we are working on and get them turned in to GW. What we will be turning in however is pretty much what you see in the finalized documents, at which time I will be pulling the site down.

Have fun, game on and enjoy!

-   Nate

[flybywire-E2C]

I had a proper read of the pdf last night and noticed something.
In the fleet list it under Cruisers it says 'It may contain up to two Protectors for every 500 pts of Tau vessels in the fleet'

Literally this means I can only take 2 Protectors in a 1500 pt fleet - I need to buy 1000 pts of ships to be allowed 4, but I can only afford 2. In this same fleet I can take 2 Explorers and 2 Custodians.

Should it not read 'You may include 2 Protectors per 500 points of value of the fleet' or something like that. The Custodian could be read similarly.

Fixed: Every 500 points of Tau vessels in the fleet may include up to two Protectors. The updated file is being uploaded tonight.

[horizon]

You still kept the nonsense that a Kor'O and Aun are needed when a Protector is taken.

You still did not adress every and all remarks about the Emissary.

I am still not convinced this Tau fleet is in any way balanced.

:/

[flybywire-E2C]

You still kept the nonsense that a Kor'O and Aun are needed when a Protector is taken.

Oops, that should have been fixed as well, an oversight on my part.

You still did not adress every and all remarks about the Emissary.

I am still not convinced this Tau fleet is in any way balanced.

:/

We are not going to agree on everything, and please feel free to disagree that this fleet isn't balanced. The Emissary is not nor will be a "Tau Dauntless". The Dauntless is an "escort but bigger," light, fast and maneuverable. The Emissary is a "cruiser but smaller,"  Tau-style, something like an Imp Endeavor but not as good, which is what all the Tau ships are supposed to represent: Like Imps but not as good.
Tau seem like they hit harder than Imperials, but Imps fight best abeam, whereas Tau fight best only prow-on, an inherent weakness in and of itself.

[horizon]

Dauntless is escort but bigger? = ship with 6 hits.
Emissary is cruiser but smaller? = ship with 4 hits.
Someone forgot to send me a memo?

But then why is the background for the Emissary that it is a diplomatic vessel that can withstand small pirate attacks and is manoeuvrable enough to evade them.
Manouevrable = 25cm / 90* turns.

Like an Imperial Endeavour but not as good? Well, the voss prow light cruisers are so weak and useless.... they NEED a 6+ prow at no point increase to be viable. I never ever compare a vessel to an Endeavour/Endurance/Defiant.

I still stand by this for the Emissary:
points 130
hits 4
speed 25cm
turns 90
armour 5+ / 6+ prow deflector
shields 1
turrets 2

prow battery str.2 - 30cm F
port battery str.2 - 30cm F
starboard battert str.2. 30cm F
prow missiles str.3 F
dorsal launch bay str.1 (fighter only)

Balanced & fluffy.

Representing Imperial ships but not as good?
As it stands the Hero from Armada is better then any Imperial equivalent.
Your Tau Protectors are better then any Imperial equivalent.
Your Custodian is better then or certainly a match for any Imperial equivalent.
Better turrets, better gunnery, better focusable firepower, better torpedoes, better bombers.

Please...

Fighting prow on like Tau is a lot easier. The Imperials have to choose: prow on for armour 6+ plus torps or abeam for guns. The Tau style is no weakness, their ordnance cover a lot of areas. Plus your Tau have better broadsides then the original FW fleet.


edit: the fleet list still tells me to embark an Aun on the Protector or Custodian.

[KivArn]

FLEET LIST

Nice work sorting out the Kor/Aun issue

The wording on the limitations of the custodian are a little cluncky

Your fleet may only include one Custodian per FULL 750 points of Tau vessels. In other words, if your fleet is equal to or more than 750 points, it may then include one Custodian

Implies that
0 - 749 NO Custodians
750 - 1499 ONE Custodian
1500 - 2249 TWO Custodians
etc.

but it cannot include a second unless it already includes 1,500 points of Tau vessels, etc

but this implies the following

0-?? points NO Custodians
?? - 1829 ONE Custodian
1830 - 2579 TWO Custodians (as you must have 1500 points of Tau vessel (including up to one custodian) before you can take a second, and you can't get one in the first 329 points after the 1500 minimum)
2580 - 3330 Three Custodians
etc.

If the former was intended then could the latter half be re-worded

Your fleet may only include one Custodian per FULL 750 points of Tau vessels. In other words, if your fleet is equal to or more than 750 points, it may then include one Custodian. If the fleet totals 1500 points then it may include up to two Custodians, etc.

I still think the limitation on the protectors is worthless

2/500 so...

Points	|	max # of protectors taken 2/500	|	max # of protectors unlimited	|	# of protectors including one custodian
500	|	2 (370)	|	2 (370)	|	2P (370)
750	|	4 (740)	|	4 (740)	|	1C 2P (700)
1000	|	4 (740)	|	5 (925)	|	1C 3P (885)
1500	|	6 (1110)	|	7 (1295)*	|	1C 5P (1255)**
2000	|	8 (1480)	|	10 (1850)	|	1C 8P (1810) ***
3000	|	12 (2220)	|	15 (2775)****	|	1C 14P (2920) *****

* You could get 8 for 1480 but you need a Kor'el minimum at 50 points.
** You could get 1C 6P for 1440 but a Kor'O must be taken at 80 points.
*** Similarly you could get 1C 9P for 1995 but a Kor'O must be taken at 80 points.
**** You could get 16 for 2960 but you need a Kor'el minimum at 50 points.
***** However it is far more likely that at 3000 points you will have atleast 2 Custodians, and hence 2C 12P for 2880 points


As you can see from the table, the only sensiblish fleet that would break your 2P/500 is the 1000 point all protector fleet. And this is by one. Elsewise you will almost certainly be taking a custodian. They are, after all, too good not to take!

I ask you, is the limit really necessary? It seems like a rule for the sake of having a rule.

Other than this, the fleet list looks fine


TAU SHIPS
Custodian
May be a touch powerful, but only playtesting will tell

Protector
If we are having different configurations of protector i'll live with it, but i see no downside worth in taking the voir'la version. The Tolku gets +6 WB for -2 Torps, it might just be me, but on paper i doubt i'll ever take the voir'la class...

Emissary
Definitely has some worth in the different configurations, would look nicer perhaps if the ion cannon variant was dropped and replaced with either

The IL'PORRUI BORK'AN CONFIGURATION may exchange its grav hooks for 1 ion cannon

alternatively this would be done the other way around, keep the ion cannons and exchange them for grav hooks... would be easier this way with the attack arcs.

And to keep this ship in line with it's own fluff it needs to have 90* turns, otherwise it will be surrounded and eaten by all the pirates and other escorts it's meant to be able to out manoeuvre

Castellan
No Problems

Warden
No Problems

[horizon]

Hi,
the aun is still needed on a Protector. I guess oversight.

By the way:

Kor'o 80pts
aun'el 25pts
Custodian 330pts
3*Warden 90pts
Custodian 330pts
3*Warden 90pts
3* Protector 555pts

is 1500pts exact. If your guess one (0-749 = none, 750-1499 = one) is true, which I think it is.

This is quite noodles as Nate specifically stated he disliked the FW rules made it possible to easily take 2 Custodians.

The FW equivalent would cost:
1475 pts in total.

But the FW list would be weaker (no 45cm Ion on Custodian, 2 less missiles, only 2 shields, no swing arcs on Protector for ions, no option to take variant Protector (which I certainly would take in this new list) and no tracking systems on both custodian and protector, thus weaker railguns and turrets.

On the vior'la vs tolku Protector.
The Tolku has Ion Cannons at 45cm. Having a combination of Tolku & Vior'la is ideal:
370pts for:
6 + 12 = 18 railguns at 45cm (with tracking systems = equivalent of 8 + 16 batteres above 30cm = 24)
2 ion cannon @ 45cm
2 ion cannon @ 30cm
2 + 2 = 4 launch bays
6 + 4 = 10 missiles

True killer combo.

Lets look at an Imperial equivalent: 2x Lunar
360pts for (focusable firepower):
6 + 6 = 12 batteries @ 30cm
2 + 2 = 4 lances @ 30cm
6 + 6 = 12 torpedoes
outshot, outordnanced, torps will be neutered by 3 re-rollable turrets or fighters (2 needed, leaves room for 2 bombers).
Even the 6+ prow will suffer vs 24 batteries + 2 lances @ 31-45cm when closing.

The only option for the Lunar is to go on All Ahead Full and try to get in between both Protectors to use both broadsides. But it'll be a hard long road.

[KivArn]

Hi,
the aun is still needed on a Protector. I guess oversight.

Saw the Kor'O had gone, and assumed that the aun had as well... hopeing that it's an oversight!!

By the way:

Kor'o 80pts
aun'el 25pts
Custodian 330pts
3*Warden 90pts
Custodian 330pts
3*Warden 90pts
3* Protector 555pts

is 1500pts exact. If your guess one (0-749 = none, 750-1499 = one) is true, which I think it is.

This is quite noodles as Nate specifically stated he disliked the FW rules made it possible to easily take 2 Custodians.

The FW equivalent would cost:
1475 pts in total.

But the FW list would be weaker (no 45cm Ion on Custodian, 2 less missiles, only 2 shields, no swing arcs on Protector for ions, no option to take variant Protector (which I certainly would take in this new list) and no tracking systems on both custodian and protector, thus weaker railguns and turrets.

And that's quite a nasty little fleet there!

A better limit for the custodian might be 1 per 1500 or part there of, would drastically limit the numbers, but allow them to exist in smaller games. The possibility of 4 in a 3000 point game is a little silly!

[Don Gusto]

Since about 10 days I cannot access the files any more. Previously it worked just fine but now I just get a blank page. Tried it with different browsers, both at work and at home. 

[horizon]

Heya,
I discovered that too, but when logged in on my gmail account I can download/see them again.

[KivArn]

had  the opposite problem... lost them in gmail and had to use the original links!

weird 

[russ_c]

I have a question about the Space Marine fleet list and venerable battle barge.  If I have a fleet worth 1000 points does that mean I can have both a Space Marine Battle Barge AND a venerable battle barge?  Or, does a venerable battle barge count as a "regular" battle barge for the purpose of fleet points/composition?

Also, How do annilators work with turret suppression?

The Dominion fleet appears broken to me ( without play testing ).  The cost for a strike cruiser is reduced by nearly 20%, but they still have the best SM benefits: armor, high LD, +1 Hit and run,  and boarding value.

The Venerable stuff is...interesting.  So for 435 points I can take a despoiler with 4 T-hawks?  That seems like a better choice then a standard Battle Barge if you're willing to give up the batteries for lances.

My first overall impression is that you're really messing with the flavor of SM.  It's starting to feel like an IN fleet.  I think that SM needed some work, but not like this (good work on the combined batteries ruling in FAQ though).  If you'd like to add options to SM but not sacrifice the flavor as much why not try a few things like...

- Variants of Strike Cruisers that are either Bombardment heavy or T-hawk heavy.  Basically re-distribute the load out on the vessel
- If you must add longer range +4 lances, how about "artillery" bombardment cannons instead?  Perhaps they have a longer range and can only every column shift a single direction once ( brainstorming on the fly here if it isn't obvious!), they still fullfill a role much like a lance, but aren't quite the same thing and serve to fill a longer range roll much like an NC vessel would for IN.

Russ

[flybywire-E2C]

Since about 10 days I cannot access the files any more. Previously it worked just fine but now I just get a blank page. Tried it with different browsers, both at work and at home. 

Here's the link. Let me know if this doesn't work:
https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0Bw_dULEfC3rbYzUyNjQzZTAtMDZiMS00ZjRlLWJjNzMtYTE5YmNjZjdjODQ1&hl=en

- Nate

[Don Gusto]

I only get a blank page.
The same link worked for me previously. I could view and download both the Tau and Eldar PDF's.
I don't have a gmail account or anything like it.

Lots of new stuff and I can't start a rant on it.