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

[Valhallan]

what is the outline for the stats of the majestic (same as nemesis?)

the least convoluted counter to FDT's i could come up with is a special rule: stealing plax's name fleet defense something or other: 'in friendly ordy phases, the imperial ship's turrets may fire at nearby (15cm) enemy ord markers. these attacks roll 1 dice per turret and hit a wave/salvo on a 4+'

this would cause bakka to defend against ordy with confidance, and without relyance on carriers. though they'd have to be ballsy as all hell. fitting.

still like FDT's better (add the clause NO reserves may be taken from this fleet. explicitly mentioning that this includes Ad Mec.).

[BaronIveagh]

DING!DING!DING!DING!DING!DING!DING!DING!DING! Give the man a lollipop.  Yes, Emperor is not a pure carrier, not the way the unofficial Nemesis or the official Styx would be. So sorry you've still struck out. Still no proof of a pure carrier for me.

D'Art, if the Defiant isn't a pure carrier, then the Styx isn't either.  Nor is the Jovian.  All three of them have lances.  In fact, the Styx has MORE non carrier based firepower then the Defiant and the Jovian combined.  

In fact, having glanced around a bit, not one race in this game has a 'pure' carrier by that measure.  (This includes Tau, who make AC look easy) Even escort carriers have a str 2 weapon battery.  Hell, even the Nemesis has a str 3 60cm lance battery.  

So, quite possibly, with the Majestic and Tempest, IN may actually have the ONLY 'pure carriers'.  


Valhallen, why would admech reserve in Bakka ships?  Admech already gets FDT's.  They've had them for years.

Horizon , I'll take some time later and read this MMS thing in greater detail.  Though I think from what I'm reading I see why he said it, my IN would be on him like the white on rice without the ability to move shoot move.  I'd propose we adopt it at the next meeting, but I don't want to lose another player, since, reading through these stats, he's die horribly.

I do suppose, though that there must be some advantage to this on a 6x6 though.  

Edit: 6x4.  6x4... I'll remember that yet.  You guys and your tiny assed tables.  How the hell does anyone maneuver in such a small space?  It's not even a whole starsystem to move around in.  Everyone just jumps in a little box and fights like two cats tied by their tails.

[Plaxor]

Gotta fight somewhere, little boxes are the best. Can't maneuver? Baron, I'm afraid you've been tainted by the dark ones.

Even battleships can turn eight times in 120cm.

[BaronIveagh]

Gotta fight somewhere, little boxes are the best. Can't maneuver? Baron, I'm afraid you've been tainted by the dark ones.

Even battleships can turn eight times in 120cm.

I'm not sure how many times you can turn on the 20x40.  I'll go with 'a lot'  but we also have a lot of terrain.  

There's a reason I'm a big fan of the 'Mercury' and the Invincible.

[horizon]

TO avoid further derailing:
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/sg/forum/index.php?topic=208.0
to talk about Eldar MMS.

General:
180cm x 120xm (BFG = centimetres   yay !!!)
Is standard size.
Is Perfect for battles up to 2000pts.
Has lots and lots of room to manoeuvre.

[Plaxor]

Horizon says yay to cm.... Do you know how hard it is to get a cm tape measure in the us? It's like hunting for diamonds.

[BaronIveagh]

General:
180cm x 120xm (BFG = centimetres  yay !!!)
Is standard size.
Is Perfect for battles up to 2000pts.
Has lots and lots of room to manoeuvre.

Horizon says yay to cm.... Do you know how hard it is to get a cm tape measure in the us? It's like hunting for diamonds.

I just use my meter stick.  And with six to twelve meters between deployment zones, there's none of that NC first turn crap.  (Or, in 40k, any of that Basilisk or Warlord titan first turn crap.)

And it makes a healthy truncheon for necron players.

[horizon]

@ Plaxor, blame it on the US trying to create something new. They should have stuck with the good old cm.


@ BaronI, six to twelve metres is sick. With 1200cm between... :/ what's the point of the first turns.
To keep in mind some scenarios are aimed at 8 turns.

[Zelnik]

Plaxor... Go to a hardware store or your local GW.  problem solved.

[BaronIveagh]

@ BaronI, six to twelve metres is sick. With 1200cm between... :/ what's the point of the first turns.
To keep in mind some scenarios are aimed at 8 turns.

There's suppose to be a point to the first turn?  I always figured it was the turn after I put the minis on the table, and 45 turns till we brake for lunch.  There will probably be scout elements of either fleet probing throughout the afternoon, possibly with some AC contact.  Usually a third person serves as ref so neither side knows the other's objectives.  It's hard to figure out what another player's real goal is at times.  I know last time we played I managed to draw Tau off after a larger force when the smaller force was the one that actually was carrying out my objective.  (Planetary assault)

Zelnik, not one hardware store in my area carries cm rulers.  I've looked.   (the nearest GW is over 200 miles from here)


BTW: John, our Tau guy, would like to tank D'Art et al for getting me to buy some Strike cruisers, possibly with blunt instruments.

[Plaxor]

What baron said. Had to order a tape measure from gw. But people in my group tell me that ace sells one, albeit huge. It's a half and half.

[RCgothic]

It doesn't matter how accurate your targetting system is, any bomber worth its salt will pick up on an incoming flak volley from such long range and neatly jink out the way. (given that it has at least 2 minutes to get out of the target zone.) You'd either need to saturate the space with such a large amount of flak that we're talking blast markers and main weaponry, or have long-range guided missiles, which aren't common and wouldn't function as turrets in other respects.

Fleet Defence turrets were a bad idea in ad mech, and they are a WORSE idea in bakka because they're so unrestricted and available.

The fleet doesn't even need the extra defence, low AC is perfectly viable - it only takes a couple small volleys from escorts to clear the CAP from enough targets for the entire fleet (bakka should have the falchion, but cobras will do), so offensive power is no problem, whilst defensively you can either mass turrets normally, use escort carriers like the Defiant/Enforcer (perfect choice defensively), or take the hit on the nose like most fleets with only 1 or 2 carriers do at close range. Either way, the fleet will survive having a low AC count.

[Zelnik]

Wow... I am both shocked, horrified and amused in a cynical "this nation is going to the tubes" manner.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

D'Art, if the Defiant isn't a pure carrier, then the Styx isn't either.  Nor is the Jovian.  All three of them have lances.  In fact, the Styx has MORE non carrier based firepower then the Defiant and the Jovian combined.  

In fact, having glanced around a bit, not one race in this game has a 'pure' carrier by that measure.  (This includes Tau, who make AC look easy) Even escort carriers have a str 2 weapon battery.  Hell, even the Nemesis has a str 3 60cm lance battery.  

So, quite possibly, with the Majestic and Tempest, IN may actually have the ONLY 'pure carriers'.

Granted those ships aren't pure carriers. They're still closer to pure carriers ships in BFG will ever get by virtue of having launch bays in their broadsides. Let's say I agree with the Defiant. Still at best it's not a ship which can give IN a serious upgrade in AC. Which is the problem with the Jovian. It can give IN serious increase in it's AC number for a cost much more efficient than a Dictator. Which should not be the case. Hakka a fleet where IN should not have AC in serious numbers can get them via Jovian and Emperor even at higher than normal cost. In effect, it loses this disadvantage. I don't buy it.

Note also the IN has not gotten any launch bay heavy cruiser and up sized ship. The Mars and Dictator are the heaviest they have gotten. The Emperor and Oberon and Exorcist are all pre- or Heresy time ships. Only the Defiant can be said to be launch bay heavy as well as the escort carriers but again, they're not really frontline ships.


However, if the number of AC can really be capped while still allowing access to the Jovian then I can be amenable.

As to the SC comment, you're welcome. Now start playing them.

[Sigoroth]

2 x Defiant (4AC) - 260 pts
1 x Dictator (4AC+6T) - 220 pts
1 x Jovian (6AC) - 260 pts

14 AC + 6 torps at <750 pts if Jovian allowed as a reserve.

2 x Defiant (4AC) - 260 pts
1 x Defiant (6T) - 120 pts
1 x Emperor (8AC) - 365 pts

12 AC + 6 torps at < 750 pts and this is considered a cheesy list.

For Chaos who are supposed to be AC dominant compared to the IN you can get:

2 x Devastation (8AC) - 380 pts
1 x Styx (6AC) - 260 pts
2 x Infidel (4T) - 80 pts
1 x Iconoclast (0) - 30 pts

Giving 14 AC and 4 torps at <750. So the Jovian being available as a reserve gives more cheese than the cheesy IN list and more ordnance than Chaos. Wot?


As for what constitutes a 'pure' carrier, well I think that there are two metrics at play in peoples general estimation. The first is that all available broadside hardpoints should be launch bays. Ships like the Despoiler (model) could take this further by adding a prow launch bay on top. The second metric is that the total converted WBe of the launch bays should at least exceed the value of the ships direct fire weaponry.

In the example of the Defiant the first metric is satisfied, but the second is not. 2AC is 6WBe firepower, as is the 2 lances of the prow. So it is half gunship and half carrier. In the case of the Styx both metrics are satisfied (all launch bays, 18WBe AC vs 12WBe direct fire). In the case of the Jovian, again both metrics are satisfied, this time even moreso than the only known previous pure carrier. It has 18WBe in its AC vs 6WBe direct fire and it gets a bonus to reloading from its prow armament (so like the Emp/Obi/Desp its prow armament can contribute to its carrier status). On the other hand the Emperor doesn't qualify even though it has 24WBe in its AC vs a total of 22WBe direct fire (including off-side) and the prow sensors because it doesn't satisfy the first metric.

So why these 2 metrics? Well, the first one is a judgement of optimisation. If you could have put more launch bays on the ship but didn't then it's not a 'pure' carrier. This makes sense even if it's used purely in a carrier role because you could get a "more pure" carrier by refitting the ship, and if something can be made "more pure" then it wasn't pure to begin with. The second metric is a judgement of role. It is hard to argue that a ship counts as a "pure carrier" when half or more of its strength lies in its guns. So I think that both these metrics are reasonable in judging what constitutes a "pure carrier".

While it hasn't really been much of an issue so far there is also a third metric that comes into play regarding whether a given "pure carrier" is objectionable. That is the "fleet carrier" metric. In other words, does the ship have at least 4AC? CVLs and CVEs really aren't all that objectionable given that AC increases in strength supra-linearly the more that a given ship can launch. You could say that another metric would be the overall points/AC a ship can give, but this is the main objection to pure carriers in the first place, so hardly needs to be stated.