Good point.
Dunno how this would be, but you could always say ork turrets are massively focuse on the rear of the ship, for some orky reason or another.
So bombers use side armor when rolling against.
javascript:void(0);
Another clunky rule-mechanic. From what I understand HA's are trying to avoid these as much as possible.
Nate, I know you think of the Onslaught having a lot of firepower, (or at least a chance for it), this is balanced out in squadrons. It is likely to roll consistent totals when rolling three dice.
For example with three dice the total rolled (and percentage chance)
3=.5%
4=1.4%
5= 2.8%
6=4.6%
7=7%
8=9.7%
9=11.6%
10=12.5%
11=12.5%
12=11.6%
13=9.7%
14=7%
15=4.6%
16=2.8%
17=1.4%
18=.5%
You see that the ships have a 70% chance of rolling between an 8 and 13, fairly consistent over 6 numbers. 50% of the time the ships firepower is worse than swords, 12.5% it is the same, and 38% of the time it is better. This is bad considering. It is more expressed in larger squadrons with more consistently less firepower.
With this we can determine how a squadron of 3 onslaughts compare to 3 swords. Now with this we note that 38/50% as a determinate for firepower comparison. Actually dividing the 'equal' percentage in half is a bit of a better representation so 45/55% Making it only have 81% the firepower capacity of the swords, close to the individual at 87%, but it appears as less in squadrons. I imagine this number will drop further with larger squads. With survivability, comparing them both in closing and abeam options we note that an onslaught has 2x survivability if both are facing forwards, and 2/3 from abeam. Comparing the two aspects, noting the general playstyle of each, then the sword will always face abeam when able, and the onslaught will always face forward.
This means that the Onslaught has only a 66% survivability compared to the sword overall in first strike scenarios. The sword closes with it's enemy, then turns abeam and fires, next turn it will turn again to face the enemy and fly between it's ranks to fire again, maintaining it's abeam status. Whereas the onslaught will perform no turns, and keep it's high-armor facing to the opponent.
Not to mention the fact that it is much less survivable against ordinance. Particularly bombers.
With a smaller turn the Onslaught is not likely to be able to turn and catch an enemy after they pass, as well as the fact that it doesn't have LFR batteries. This is fine and orky. It is slower as well.
This is the case for the Onslaught having +1 firepower, as I analyzed (technically my analysis said +2 at 35 points, but I'll take what I can get).
To make the fleet a more escort-heavy fleet you have to make the escorts at least nearly as appealing as they are in IN. With a weaker escort gunship, it will be looked over. I know its hard to compare two different fleets, but the mechanics are close.
The ravager is fine, torpedo boats always are well represented. The savage... at 30 points is close, I think I said that it would cost 27 points as compared to other ships, so close enough.
