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

[Zhukov]

Nate,

When you say the Defiant works well in a fleet support role, how was the play testing done? How did you all use it? The only thing I have ever seen this do is pair up in base-to-base with a Dictator or have a pair base-to-base to lend only fighter coverage!

DON'T FORGET ABOUT THE ADEPTUS MECHANICUS!!!! They are the fleet I see benefiting to any change in the Defiant's profile as they are the only one to get models for it and have an unlimited number in their fleet. As it stands now, for 1500 pts, they get 10 Defiants. Not bad considering the gifts they get.

-Zhukov

[RCgothic]

Any chance the Endurance could go to 1Lance F/L/R instead of 2WB? Even at a cost increase. I like coherent armaments, me. Then again, when you have a squadron of three, it does become a sensible 6 WBs.

I think the defiant is so broken as to warrant a substantial re-write though. It simply has no offensive power, either from its launch bays or its lances.

And again, why can't Defiants and Endurances be 1 per X points, rather than tied to Endeavours?

But again, good job on the Endeavour. [Borat] I like! [/Borat]

[Vaaish]

Any chance the Endurance could go to 1Lance F/L/R instead of 2WB? Even at a cost increase. I like coherent armaments, me. Smiley Then again, when you have a squadron of three, it does become a sensible 6 WBs.

The problem being, to get a squadron of three you have to take three endeavours and I'd wager that the endeavour is just a better option all around. I'd like to see the lance as well, but I don't think it will happen. Would make the endurance more attractive

[horizon]

Defiant... flawed by intention? The problem is that Endeavour/Endurance match out weapons evenly and can be a great team (with 90* and 6+ prow ).
In terms of balance of firepower the Defiant should get 4 launch bays with fighters and bombers.
Same prow weapons.

I mean, that's balanced. But the intention is not such a strong launch force. Agreed. But that's the way the modular options work.

So best would be str2 launch bays and then str3 batteries port.starboard. Yet modelling is the problem...

Lets see:
hits 6
speed 20cm
turrets 2
armour 6+/5+
turn 90*
shields 1

port/starboard launch bay str 1 (fighters and bombers)
prow weapons battery str.2 l/r
dorsal weapons battery str.2 lfr
prow torps str4(?)

That at a cost of ~same as others...

[RCgothic]

I'm perfectly happy with S4 torps and the option of 45'/6+ for the Endeavour/Endurance.

You're pretty much spot on with the Defiant. It has less than half the broadside power it should, (2AC != 6WB or 1/2 4AC), and the S2 Lances are not equal to S4 Torps and 2WB either.

It needs a boost of the equivalent of 3WB to each broadside, and the equivalent of 2WB to its prow armament (2L = 4T). It also needs to dissociate itself from the Endeavour to eliminate the additional opportunity cost.

[lastspartacus]

Hell, just give the Defiant a points boost and limited availability and its great for str4 bays, I think.  150-160 points sounds right.

But if you go the route Horizon posted, with torps and a str4 l/r/f, thatd be pretty sweet too.  Actually, I love that idea.  Torps give it more support role.  But I don't see a problem with 4 bays in fluff either, those damn escort carriers can crowd the same amount the Defiant currently has into their hulls.  Still, Pick Horizon's idea, Nate .  Would this constitute it going back to 130?

Heres another question. Would the doubling of the torpedo armament have any effect on admech options?

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

No. It's a Light Cruiser. It should not have more than 1 LB to a side.

[flybywire-E2C]

Hi everyone! Okay, here's what's going on with the Defiant.

Everyone here makes good points. However, this is not going to be a pure support ship (fighters only) because that is against Imperial fleet doctrine in that every cruiser hull should have some offensive capability regardless of how effective it may or may not be. Since it's going to have full-up launch bays, we can't raise the launch bays to 4 because that would make the ship too expensive, which again goes against Imperial fleet doctrine: CL's are SUPPOSED to be cheap.

The best argument so far is the one RCGothic and some others made, and this one is the most difficult to address: Why not simply make the Defiant prow suite the same as its cousins? The best thing I can say is that it's complicated. When we were first play-testing profiles for these models, it was simple logic to make the three variants a mini-Tyrant, mini-Gothic and mini-Dictator, respectively. Heck- I loved it! At the time, we were told by the designers that while the Endeavor was perfect and the Endurance was a natural fit, the Dictator was by design the only Imperial cruiser in the game that would have both torpedoes and attack craft (notice the Mars doesn't have a torps variant?). In fact, it was intended to be the only dual-ordnance cruiser in the entire game until the Tau came out. Except for the Tau, it still is.

Thus, we had to go with an alternate weapons fit for the prow. Rather than go with the 2x30cm WB's, we went with 2x30cm lances, which gives it considerably more punch and counterbalances the launch bays not being as hard-hitting as 4 bays would be. If you use a Defiant by itself it is not going to work very well, but points for points I think you would be hard-pressed to find any one ship that works really well all by itself. It's not impossible to think of one or two, but they are by no means common.

Zukov made a good point about the AdMech CL's being pretty good for what they bring to the table. This also was intentional: AdMech ships are supposed to be the very best the Imperium can put in space, and they are appropriately more expensive to boot. There is another, more subtle reason why AdMech CL's lean a bit to the right. If we made these models significantly less potent (for the points) than comparable full AdMech cruisers, nobody would ever buy them.

The Defiant may be difficult to use by itself, which is why it is attached to an Endeavor, with which it works brilliantly, especially now with the -10 point drop and the Endeavor’s +2 prow torps. If you think of the Defiant and Endeavor not as two separate vessels but a single one worth 240 points, you are getting a heck of a lot more hitting and defensive power for +20 points over a Dictator.

Sigoroth and Horizon have made another subtle point about the Defiant – the designers are no longer in charge, the HA’s are so we can fix this any way we want. I’ll be honest with you all. It took a leap of faith on their part to simply hand the three of us this game. It is something I take seriously, and while I don’t mind incorporating tweaks or making changes they were interested in seeing happen anyway, I would feel disingenuous if the HA’s started ripping up profiles in ways we know they wouldn’t approve of simply because we can. In the end, the HA’s would be doing ALL the fans a dis-service if we started behaving that way, even if in the end we instead make or don’t make all the changes the fans would like. I would rather err on the side of caution than make more drastic changes like completely re-writing profiles and such, even if it’s something a number of people are clamoring for or against. Even when you all are pissed at me, at least know that the three of us really are trying to be as good custodians of the game as we can.

-   Nate

[lastspartacus]

Nate, the Despoiler is a very powerful non-imperial, non-tau ship that can bring lots of torpedos and AC.

The HA sounds alot like the Imperium rulers, preserving rather than improving
Being a custodian is fine, but if you are just a custodian, there is nothing new and living really happening to the game, is there?
Custodian makes me think of someone guarding an old trophy, one that brings fond memories, but no new excitement.

The designers don't do anything for this game, and the calls they made were of course by no means perfect, not so with even the best game system.
The inability to change things sounds like a real hindrance to you, and I for one would feel like you were doing us no disservice in improving things.

Here's a question.  What is the purpose of not allowing mixed ordnance in an Imperial fleet besides the Dictator?
Or was it a 'just because' kind of thing?  4 torps on a limited ship shouldn't do much to dramatically alter the battle line, I would think.

Horizon's suggestion would both bring more integration in the different variants, and make the Defiant worth using.
It bring it just to the point of being competative with the other 2, I feel.  Enough to make you forget that they converted half the broadside weapons into, apparently, luxury quarters

On the overpowered nature of 6+ armor and 90* turns, I don't follow you there either.
A 45* turn already allows you to bring your broadsides to bear on an enemy dead ahead.  In a light cruiser built to fill a battleline like a small cruiser, with 20cm speed, how would a 90* change its tactics at all? 

[horizon]

The only playtest experience I have with the Defiant is as an AdMech ship. Well, I lost all my AdMech games, the Defiant always being first target.,.. then I changed it to an Endeavour (first time ever I rebuild a ship! So bad was the Defiant!) and, heck, since the Endeavour is in it I start winning games with the AdMech and have yet to lose...

[lastspartacus]

Forgot to add, Nate: With the doubling of torps, its far less tempting to go with the admech changes.  Any plans on switching out the 4 torps for 2 lances, or making custom torpedos cost 15 points?  Those are the only two changes that I can see happening with the switch.

[Sigoroth]

Sigoroth and Horizon have made another subtle point about the Defiant – the designers are no longer in charge ...

Horizon's point may have been subtle, but mine was about as subtle as a half-brick to the head. I hope they felt it too.

[RCgothic]

Thus, we had to go with an alternate weapons fit for the prow. Rather than go with the 2x30cm WB's, we went with 2x30cm lances, which gives it considerably more punch and counterbalances the launch bays not being as hard-hitting as 4 bays would be.

That would have been true at the time, 2Torps and 2WB being (roughly) equivalent to 1.67 lances, 2L is a boost. It still lacked in its broadside, however.

Now the other variants have a weapons fit equivalent to 2.67 lances, and the defiant is still undergunned in its broadside as well.

Which brings me on to my next point:

The Defiant may be difficult to use by itself, which is why it is attached to an Endeavor, with which it works brilliantly, especially now with the -10 point drop and the Endeavor’s +2 prow torps. If you think of the Defiant and Endeavor not as two separate vessels but a single one worth 240 points, you are getting a heck of a lot more hitting and defensive power for +20 points over a Dictator.

And if the alternative was to take a second Endeavour, or an Endurance instead, why would anyone take a Defiant? The only way I can possibly see them half-working is squadroned with another Defiant (requiring another 2 Endeavours), or with a Dictator, (requiring a dictator and an endeavour.)

This is building your fleet around the light cruiser, and that is not the reason people take light cruisers (particularly cruisers but smaller) - to plug gaps in their fleet. And it would still be massively undergunned:

The Defiant does 1 attack per attack craft vs a T2 target. The dictator does 1.4attacks per attack craft. This makes the LBs on a Defiant roughly equivalent to just 2WB. It's undergunned by a factor of 4WB per broadside and 1WB on the prow - if you add up all that missing firepower you get more than half a Dauntless!

Sigoroth and Horizon have made another subtle point about the Defiant – the designers are no longer in charge, the HA’s are so we can fix this any way we want. I’ll be honest with you all. It took a leap of faith on their part to simply hand the three of us this game. It is something I take seriously, and while I don’t mind incorporating tweaks or making changes they were interested in seeing happen anyway, I would feel disingenuous if the HA’s started ripping up profiles in ways we know they wouldn’t approve of simply because we can.

OK, but this isn't the Lunar Class we're talking about here. This is the Defiant, the single most useless ship in the Imperial arsenal. The other Endeavour variants needed changes only 1/10th as much as the Defiant does. It needs far more than a points adjustment to make it useful.

[horizon]

With the 2 bays you'll be launching fighters only in 99% if the cases.

As I see it the only viable scenario for the Defiant is in a small convoy scenario (paired with an Endeavour) protecting transports. There its fighters can actually do something (eliminate torp clusters).

For the rest it is meh. Ofcourse the HA shouldn't just adapt all and everything but the Defiant is such a poo-piece a complete profile rewrite is needed and warranted.

[RCgothic]

For the rest it is meh. Ofcourse the HA shouldn't just adapt all and everything but the Defiant is such a poo-piece a complete profile rewrite is needed and warranted.

Hear hear!

It is simply not a combat effective ship. It will never be competitive with the Dictator/Mars, because its attack craft are so much less effective per AC, nor can it plug a gap left by the absence of a Dictator/mars, because of the additional cost of bringing along an Endeavour and the limited effect two fighters can have on fleet defence.

Another effect of having only two LBs is that because passnig a RO check is so low-gain, unlike the dictator which will mostly get first priority, reloading a Defiant will inevitably be the last thing you do, and so there is a far higher chance that it won't reload, due to earlier failed checks. This drops its LB effectiveness yet further.



This is a ship so sick that it needs a completely new MO. OK, so fighters only isn't an option, and neither is 4 full bays, but how about:



Defiant, 140pts (1 Defiant or Endurance per 500pts)

Cruiser6 Speed20 Turns90 Armour5+ Turrets2

Port/SB Launch Bays S1p/s Fighters/Bombers
Port/SB Launch Bays S1p/s Fighters
Prow Weapons Battery S4 30cm F/L/R
Prow Torps S4 30cm F

Optional: 6+ Prow in exchange for 45' Turns.



This way it would be a very effective escort carrier, without having offensive power of a Dictator. The Torps also give it additional incentive to reload. The WB aren't a straight swap for the lances, but are still a reasonably potent primary armament. It loses its tie to the Endeavour, but is still restricted, giving it the ability to plug a hole in a fleet without the expenditure of an entirely new ship, and again without being spammable. Even at 140pts, this would then be an attractive ship.