If you could make a Chaos ship legal, which one(s) would it be?

[BaronIveagh]

I want to take the Mark of Malal if we're going down this route.

[horizon]

Sig, you may be right in concept about the Chaos Gods but GW always (since '80's) Khorne vs Slaanesh, Tzeentch vs Nurgle was added later as a rivalry.

Not in fantasy.

In Fantasty : Slaves to Darkness, 80's  Khorne vs Slaanesh.

[flybywire-E2C]

Hi Horizon!!

Hi,

City of Light
I am no such fan of 9 batteries (bfi/crippled), make them 8. Otherwise cool.

9 was a flavor-add that does two things. One, it’s Tzeentch’s favorite number. Two, it gives it's batteries the Styx launch-bay trick when crippled, where half of nine is five in BFG math.   For Tzeentch being the Lord of Change, the thought was that the oddness of it would be very themeful.

Wage of Sin
A Desolator with:
+ 6 launch bays
-15cm on the lances.

Surely this ship either: Drops speed or Drops AC to 4. I favour the latter. Fast Battleship Carrier.

Agreed, but like I said, reducing the launch bays makes this too expensive, and dropping the price drops it below flagship rank and NO we are NOT changing the flagship (most expensive ship) rules.

Vengeful Spirit
I understand Sigoroth, the vessel is based upon the skewed Despoiler design. Check the thread in the discussion area were we are discussing ships. No one likes the Despoiler design in relation to the model design.

Now the Vengeful Spirit, being different then the Despoiler could be made like you propose. BUT ONLY if the standard Despoiler profile is adjusted.

I hate it too! BOTH of my Despoilers are built with one gun deck and two lance decks to match the profile, and the whole POINT of the Vengeful Spirit is to provide an easy out so player can use the “right” Despoiler profile- you notice there is no limit as to how many Vengeful Spirit-type Chaos battlebarges are allowed in a fleet? Why do all this? We’re not changing the Despoiler profile (or any other core profiles) at this time. We can only justify changing profiles for ships GW acknowledges are broken if we want any of work we’ve done to pass muster at all.

Now there is something I would like to discuss with you off-line about a possible avenue to explore, but you have to e-mail me off-line about it…  

Hecate
May be balanced (compared to Styx it trades 2 AC for 8wb) but I don't want another carrier in the Chaos fleet.

I’ll be honest with you. I really like the Hecate, and I REALLY liked the original Hecate profile PRECISELY because it behaved significantly different to a Styx in the Chaos fleet. The only reason why I acquiesced to making it a gun-Styx is because there wasn’t any neat way to fix the Inferno without borrowing the Murder prow, and the HA’s DEFINITELY did not want to create a cruiser/battlecruiser pair when BOTH ships are new-adds.  

The Hecate has been around a very long time and is well-tested, especially using its original profile. I will find out the feeling with adding the Hecate using its original profile and dumping the Inferno entirely.

Cerberus
Since this is a Slaugher Battlecruiser it must have 30cm speed and 5d6 on AAF. All weapon ranges at 30cm. I mean, we have been very clear about that.

The Slaughter is already an odd duck. In game terms, it was created to give Chaos a short-range, hard-hitting bruiser as a counterpoint to the Dauntless that the fleet otherwise did not have. The Scartix coil provided a neat foil to explain letting travel faster than all the other cruisers, but this ship is already juicing a lot of firepower, even if it is close range. There is NO WAY we can justify creating an HC Slaughter AND give it the +5cm/+1AAF benefit as well. Chaos-range firepower on a super-fast cruiser is a no-go. If there is a lot of grief about this, we can just dump the ship and people can make one for house rules. You and I both have plenty of house-rules models that will never see the light of day as official rules so it’s not like killing the Cerberus is going to hurt the Chaos fleet.

Inferno
Drop it, not needed. Even less nice then a Hecate.

Done.  

I notice you are pretty carrier-averse. I understand the sentiment, but as carriers are kind of the Chaos thing, it seems natural that they would have more kinds of these than other fleets. However, the Emasculator is old and well-tested. I never liked it because it seems more like a re-weaponed Carnage (kind of like the lance-Murder) than a cruiser class in its own right. If we get rid of the Inferno and Cerberus, what are your thoughts on slipping in the Emasculator? I have to get that by the HA’s, but I’m not going through the effort just to get my head hammered some more.

Fleet Lists
With the little differences isn't there a way to create this through a single page? Think about the enviroment when printing on paper.

It’s an electronic document, and most people I know only print what they will be using. Besides, the Plaguefleet already exists, and when I tried conglomerating all four flavors as options in a single fleet list, the result saved one page and was so clunky to read, it was worth the extra page to keep them separate.

Major point A
Daemonships
I would rather have updated rules on them then a Hecate or Inferno.

Horizon, this simply isn’t going to happen right now. If GW buys off on some game company like FFG taking over BFG, ideally just the rule-set while GW continues minting models, then of course we can revisit absolutely EVERYTHING!!! Profiles can be fixed, entire rule-sets can be changed, the works! I’d be more than happy to blow the dust off many of the ideas in the long-dead BFG 2.0 effort and pour it into this thing. At this time however that’s beyond the scope of what we’re doing here.

Major Point B
Tweaking
I am still preferring a change of all the ships in the blue book, armada and exisiting pdf's then adding new cruisers for Chaos. Adding the themed battleships to the Terminus Est is good. But instead of Hecate I rather see the Styx fixed as it should (260), instead of an unneeded Inferno I rather see a fixed Devestation (45cm lances). All about priorities. Instead of the Vengeful Spirit (less-needed battleship) I would rather see the correct Despoiler profile.

All in good will.

Horizon, I feel you!!    We just can’t do that right now. If we try it, everything we’re trying to accomplish here will be for nothing. Not only will all the effort be wasted, but in the end the game will not be improved one iota. I’m not interested in losing the war just to prove a point.

-   Nate

[RCgothic]

To begin with, we were asked which ships we would like to propose for inclusion. Naturally people much preferred fixes to existing ships, and as these discussions weren't curtailed, particularly in the case of the Endeavour variants, and bearing in mind the tweaks to the main rules already in the FAQ, we had hope that there were fixes coming.

Now we're told GW won't countenance any but the slightest change, that's led to a lot of frustration.

We've also been told that the inclusion of new ships is the main hold up of the FAQ in general. Whilst new stuff is "Nice", "Nice" is a distant third place behind "Essential" FAQ rulings and "Important" rebalances.

If the "Nice" extras and fluff are holding up the "Essential" FAQ, then it should be put off until afterward - there's no good reason why the FAQ should be held up for this.
If the "Important" fixes endanger the entire project, then again, we'd far rather just the "Essential" FAQ were published. Once that has passed, the rebalances can be worked on without endangering the whole thing.

[lastspartacus]

I for one am not asking for a long ranged, fast, heavier hitting Slaughter.  I want an HC Slaughter with nothing over 30cm range.  I think thats what Horizon and the others want too.

We are averse to carrier, at least I am, because unless they play differently its just more of an OP weapon.  Thats why I liked the idea of a frontline carrier.

Have I mentioned how excited I am about a Chaos space hulk?
It would be RIGHT after I start an ork fleet, of course.

[Zelnik]

Here is my idea of a Khornate Hulk (Since they are the only ones described taking them)


Defense/30, Speed 10, turns (standard orc movement), shields 4, armor 6+front/4+, turrets 4.

Armament
Prow Weapons battery, st16 30cm F
Prow lance battery: st6 30cm F
Dorsal Boarding Torpedo Launchers: St 12 FLR
Dorsal Launch Bays LC:4 Dreadclaws, bombers, fighters
Port weapons battery: st 12 30cm L
Port Lance battery St 3 30cm L
Starboard weapons battery St 12 30cm R
Starboard Lance battery st 3 30cm R
Aft Weapons battery: st10 30cm rear

Special Rules: don't even think of CTNH, Can NOT got AAF for free, Has an unmodified LD of 7, unless a lord is embarked.  Comes with the mark of Khorne, boarding modifier is not doubled, but has Chaos space marines included in point cost. Can Board Ramalies star fort.

Built to Bash: This hulk is so huge, and it's crew so intent on crushing their foes, that they will ignore risk and take paths that will lead them into the path of multiple ships.  If the hulk's base crosses up to two enemy vessels  (not escorts), it may select to do the following: Board BOTH vessels (It ends it's movement BtB with the second ship boarded), resolving the first ship in it's path first. OR Ram ONE vessel, and board another. OR ram two vessels in it's path, leaderships to ram two vessels are taken as normal.

This vessel follows all critical damage rules for an ork hulk.

Catastrophic damage: All rolls for catastrophic damage remain the same as a normal ork hulk aside for the roll of a 6, where the following happens.

Cataclysm: If a 6 is rolled on the catastrophic damage table, the owning player may make an unmodified leadership check for the hulk, if passed, the vessel's warmaster drives the gigantic plasma reactors of the hulk to critical in one final, cataclysmic explosion in dedication to the god of war and blood. Roll d6x10 cm, everything inside of that radius suffers 15 lance hits as the hulk explodes with incredible force.  Place 15 blast markers where the hulk once was (as there is not enough left to form a field!) 

If the leadership is failed, it counts as a 5 on the catastrophic damage table.

[Zelnik]

Fly.. if your going to have the Hecate, you need to have the inferno, without both there is no precedent for the design to be in existence.. I just don't see a need for more carriers

[lastspartacus]

Hmm, point there on the HC of a nonexistant cruiser.

Love the idea of mark specific hulks!

But why -10 hits?

[Zelnik]

'cause it ain't orky!

[flybywire-E2C]

Fly.. if your going to have the Hecate, you need to have the inferno, without both there is no precedent for the design to be in existence.. I just don't see a need for more carriers

By no means do HC's need to have cruiser "forebears," with both the Styx and Acheron being cases in point. In fact, only the Hades of all of them has a counterpoint (Murder), and the Murder has a variant the Hades doesn't have access to so even that analogy is incomplete.

In particular, the original (2001) Hecate profile makes a much smoother transition between the Styx and Mars than its current profile. It's much easier to say the Hecate was developed as the Grareox Prerogative (and the Styx along with it) fell out of favor than to say the Hecate was an up-gunned cruiser of some unknown type.

- Nate

[flybywire-E2C]

To begin with, we were asked which ships we would like to propose for inclusion. Naturally people much preferred fixes to existing ships, and as these discussions weren't curtailed, particularly in the case of the Endeavour variants, and bearing in mind the tweaks to the main rules already in the FAQ, we had hope that there were fixes coming.

Now we're told GW won't countenance any but the slightest change, that's led to a lot of frustration.

We've also been told that the inclusion of new ships is the main hold up of the FAQ in general. Whilst new stuff is "Nice", "Nice" is a distant third place behind "Essential" FAQ rulings and "Important" rebalances.

If the "Nice" extras and fluff are holding up the "Essential" FAQ, then it should be put off until afterward - there's no good reason why the FAQ should be held up for this.
If the "Important" fixes endanger the entire project, then again, we'd far rather just the "Essential" FAQ were published. Once that has passed, the rebalances can be worked on without endangering the whole thing.

Hi everyone! I absolutely PROMISE the FAQ isn't being held up for inclusion of new ships. All the new ships under discussion are being added to their respective articles, NOT the FAQ. The FAQ is currently being held up because we are still (heatedly, I might add) discussing and playtesting blast markers, torpedoes,  attack craft and  Nova Cannon.

Like I said, we're listening.

- Nate

[flybywire-E2C]

Hmm, point there on the HC of a nonexistant cruiser.

Love the idea of mark specific hulks!

But why -10 hits?

Sorry folks, we're not doing Mark-specific Hulks. These things are just too vast for some specific Marks to take effect with any reasonable balance, and it becomes a fairness issue if we say some Marks work and others don't. For example, Slaanesh and Tzeench Marks are fine, but Nurgle would be pointless (NOBODY's trying to board a Space Hulk and what does +1 matter to 40HP) and Khorne (boarding value of 80? Really? Also, who would be stupid enough to let the thing even get close?).

OF course we can modify the rules, but then we're modifying existing mechanics to suit a particular model that in the end would create little additional utility and value to what is already an extremely powerful and interesting model.


By the way, any generic Chaos fleet can use a Space Hulk- there's no restriction besides only one being allowed. Khorne just happenes to be the only "flavored" fleet that allows one.

- Nate

[lastspartacus]

Flavored, eh?  Only the cherry flavored khornate drink can be on the roks?  Oh I kill me.

I did notice no Roks allowed, come to think of it.  I assume only Orks must make use of these, and that at least gives more diversity in favor of the Ork model.

Nate, I'd love to see a character VBB that didn't fit into one of the two battleship chassis.  Grand Cruiser or HC.

I just realized this, because this is the first time ive looked in depth at space hulks:
I feel non-repairable crits was a great idea at the whole 'big non-centralized hulk', but don't you think its kind of random?  Its much less devastating on average than crippling, and ya know, after working so hard to take out 20 hits, I'd think I'd rather see a normal crippling with half dice to repair?

Also, I always assumed turret strength wasnt amount of turrets but density and crossfire of turrets.
6 turret value is a HELL of alota turrets spread across the vast rock fields and hulls of a space hulk, isnt it?

I'm assuming the Blackstone's super weapon autokills ramilies and hulks and the like?

P.S. Chaos Space Hulk was like a Christmas present, and I'm already modeling around a foam egg.  Please don't take it as criticism and dislike of the idea

[Masque]

On page 17 it says the new cruisers can be used in "the Chaos fleet list."  I'd specifically mention the 12th and 13th Black Crusade lists.

On page 20 under Using Chaos Space Hulks it says "it counts as a battleship against a Chaos fleet list" and "there is no minimum point requirement or ship prerequisites".  Which is it?

Does the Tzeentch Warmaster intentionally give a max leadership of 10 while the others only give 9?

The four power specific fleet lists have many poorly written sections.  By a strict reading the number of grand cruisers you can have is based solely off the number of cruisers and heavy cruisers from the 13th BC list but no grand cruisers are actually in these new lists and thus can only be taken as reserves.  There is also no limit to the number of heavy cruisers taken unless they are from the 13th BC list.  As such a fleet entirely of Hecates is possible.  There is no need to limit the number of cruisers from the 13th BC list to 12 when the total number of cruisers cannot exceed 12.

Except for the Tzeentch list allowing max leadership of 10 and having a single warp beast upgrade I see no reason for these fleet lists to exist.  You can't do anything with them you can't do with the 13th BC list with the new ships added.  By choosing these lists you limit which marks you can take, how many daemonships you can take, and prevent yourself from using the Planet Killer (except as a reserve).  Previously the Nurgle list allowed the Terminus Est which could only be taken in the 13th BC list through reserves.  But now that you are allowed to take all the VBBs in any Chaos list what is the point?

I would suggest making all the VBBs except the generic one only available in the god specific lists (except with reserves).  I'd also consider making some kind of special thing for each fleet.  The warp beasts are a good start.  Finally, I would actually list which cruisers, heavy cruisers, and grand cruisers are allowed in each fleet.  I would not simply give them access to all of them.  This could be used to help add flavor to the fleets by making them take ships that fit their theme.  I would probably also put any new cruisers and heavy cruisers that make the cut in the god specific fleet lists and not simply add them to the 12th and 13th BC lists.  They could still be taken as reserves in all the other lists that way.

As for the new cruisers...

The Hecate seems fine.

The Cerberus is obviously making nobody happy.  I'd suggest something like this.  Take a standard Slaughter.  Remove one lance from each side.  Put the two lances on top (keeping the 30cm range).  You end up with far more focusable firepower in front, a little more on a single broadside, and a little less on the offside.  The new ship can keep pace with other Slaughters and will do a bit more damage on the way in but doesn't have more total firepower than the basic Slaughter.  Charge 190 points and call it good.

The Inferno presents a serious design problem with the limitations that no Chaos carrier may cost less than 190 points and no Chaos cruiser may cost more than 190 points (the cost of the cheapest heavy cruiser).  Since it has to cost the same as the Devastation it needs to fill a significantly different role.  I would suggest up-gunning it and dropping all it's ranges down to 30cm, maybe 45cm on the prow.

I have another alternative in mind but I'd like a little more info on what would and wouldn't be allowed for a new ship.  Is the 190 point minimum for any carrier or only carriers with at least 4 launch bays?  Can a new cruiser require some conversion work if it only requires a single cruiser hull?

[lastspartacus]

Except for the Tzeentch list allowing max leadership of 10 and having a single warp beast upgrade I see no reason for these fleet lists to exist.

I would suggest making all the VBBs except the generic one only available in the god specific lists (except with reserves).  I'd also consider making some kind of special thing for each fleet.  The warp beasts are a good start.  Finally, I would actually list which cruisers, heavy cruisers, and grand cruisers are allowed in each fleet.  I would not simply give them access to all of them.  This could be used to help add flavor to the fleets by making them take ships that fit their theme.  I would probably also put any new cruisers and heavy cruisers that make the cut in the god specific fleet lists and not simply add them to the 12th and 13th BC lists.  They could still be taken as reserves in all the other lists that way.

The Cerberus is obviously making nobody happy.  I'd suggest something like this.  Take a standard Slaughter.  Remove one lance from each side.  Put the two lances on top (keeping the 30cm range).  You end up with far more focusable firepower in front, a little more on a single broadside, and a little less on the offside.  The new ship can keep pace with other Slaughters and will do a bit more damage on the way in but doesn't have more total firepower than the basic Slaughter.  Charge 190 points and call it good.

The Inferno presents a serious design problem with the limitations that no Chaos carrier may cost less than 190 points and no Chaos cruiser may cost more than 190 points (the cost of the cheapest heavy cruiser).  Since it has to cost the same as the Devastation it needs to fill a significantly different role.  I would suggest up-gunning it and dropping all it's ranges down to 30cm, maybe 45cm on the prow.

I have another alternative in mind but I'd like a little more info on what would and wouldn't be allowed for a new ship.  Is the 190 point minimum for any carrier or only carriers with at least 4 launch bays?  Can a new cruiser require some conversion work if it only requires a single cruiser hull?

I agree almost completely with this.  After reading the Tzeentch entry, I excitedly read ahead to see what special abilities the other marks got, but nothing!  Two, one at the least, fun little special abilities per list. 
Limit the amount of ships, just like the Imperial variant fleets.

Exactly what I said on the Slaughter, losing a broadside lance and gaining 2 dorsals is a great idea.  Maybe dorsals only can be 45cm., unless that would clash with another class.  I'd be completely happy if it was all at 30cm.

Agree exactly about a more frontline carrier.  Ding ding.  We have some winners here Nate, we have some real winners, hey, hey, listen!  (Navi voice)