Nova Cannon limitations

[BaronIveagh]

You're concerned because you lost 9 Iconoclasts? Given their cost, I'd be happy the NCs were shooting at them instead of my cruisers and would have been driving my cruisers forward so that I can destroy the enemy ships.

They were all that was in range.  He split his NCs between squadrons 1 and 2 during his first shooting, and on his second on squadron three and the Murder/Hades squadron that had just edged into range.  By the time the cruisers got across the killing zone, most of them had lost two or three hits.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

So, now it's your turn. Brutalize the NC ships via Lock On.

[BaronIveagh]

Yeah, I tried that, and managed to kill a Gothic (damn you admech) and damage two others before his next shooting phase, which lead to me loosing everything but my Hades which beat a hasty retreat, and the Styx which had never closed to begin with.

[Sigoroth]

I know some people have dismissed NC as more having a psychological impact, but last week I lost 9 iconoclasts to massed NC fire trying to cross the 120cm to the safe zone going AAF, so he's not entirely blowing smoke.

OK, you either grouped them too close, didn't brace or both. If you had them spread out and lost 9 NC then either that was all you lost (ie, he wasted a massive amount of NC firepower killing a few escorts) or he was tremendously accurate and managed to hit and kill an escort with every single shot (which is still a waste of NC firepower).

The most simple and number 1 rule when flying against a NC fleet is spread out. No NC shot should hit more than 1 ship. No NC shot should scatter to hit a ship other than its original target (which at extreme ranges it won't do anyway).

[horizon]

The AdMech is so expensive (Gothic with NC = 235pts) they will hardly get the 7 NC per fleet plus the AdMech has more NC access anyway.


As the admiral says: killing 9 escorts is kinda good with an NC. The NC hole does D6 damage. The template 1 hit.
So you could've braced if more NC's would've been bearing down.

More details on the battle please.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

Your opponent never braced? And why didn't the Styx join in with its bomber wings and it's dorsal weaponry? That many lances should have provoked a lot of BFIs on the NC ships.

[BaronIveagh]

*sigh*

As best as I recall, since I didn't take notes:
3 Dominators, 2 Lunars, a Gothic, a Mars and an Apoc. IIRC the mars had a left shift and had fighters CAP on the Apoc.

Mine was 3 Murders (squadroned) and a hades, 3 Devastations (TB, squadroned) and a Styx, and 9 icos in 3 squadrons (not my normal load out, but my desolator was being stripped)

We spent a few turns approaching each other (me toward the planet, him toward me) going AAF but my Icos kept pulling ahead.  

Now, against non-NC fleets, or even fleets with two or three, I sit back, launch boatloads of AC and lance the dog snot out of anything that tries to get near, with the icos either providing turret boosts or extra firepower against targets that get close.  


However, with them out ranging me, I figured it would be better to turn and AAF toward him and cross my fingers, since to sit in the NC range meant that I was going to be having him focus fire NC at one target at a time.  

So I went AAF and as before, the Icos pulled too far ahead, and entered range before the rest of my ships.  The Styx failed it's roll, so I left it to hang back rather then have it primaried until the rest closed. I headed for the middle and then for the flank with the Gothic, which seemed to be the only lances on that flank. The Icos got hosed right off the bat, for the reasons described above: failed BFI and too close together.  Between blast markers slowing me, NC hits, and lance fire from the apoc and mars as I closed, the ships took on average about 3hp, some a little more, some less.  the hades on the flank was actually fairly undamaged IIRC.  I turned my fighters and bombers toward the Mars, hoping to maybe take it out on the pass, but without much luck.  (Styx reloads ord here) The Gothic and two dominators plastered the Devistations, leaving one with a single HP and the other two damaged.  I locked on and killed the gothic (failed BFI), which became a burning hulk, and damaged a dominator (BFI but was hit anyway) but started to get bunched up due to blast markers.  At this point (his movement phase) the burning gothic unleashed my most hated BFG foe, the plasma drive explosion, killing a devastation, which, not to be outdone, I then rolled a 12 on the table, for a full on warp drive implosion.  This was the end of both remaining devastations and the damaged dominator, as well one murder and damaging the other two.

The apoc and lunars managed come to bare at this point, and all cruisers focus fired on the remaining murders, (which, despite BFI) enough damage got through to kill them.  At this point I conceded.

[Sigoroth]

lol 

[horizon]

Hi,

the Apocalypse takes a critical from firing lances over 30cm. So you should've used that (per FAQ2010 the Apocalypse no longer takes a hitpoint).

I guess the Gothic was AdMech allied? Because the AdMech does not have Dominators, Apocalypse & Mars.

Your Iconoclasts where positioned awkwardly then by moving to far away (you should've calculated the 5cm extra speed).

The Plasma Explosion is just an unlucky event. I had the same once vs Orks: I blew up a Kill Kroozer resulting in more vps to him then to me haha).

[silashand]

Not trying to be negative to the OP's original post, but does anyone have any other real evidence that the NC is overpowered other than anecdotal evidence that neglects to include the rest of the relevant scenario? IN was my first fleet and I've used NC a lot, but I've never seen the kind of results that Nate experienced in his batrep, nor have NC been all that great for me since the scattering rules were introduced. You basically have a 1/3 chance of a hit at any given range and a miss almost guarantees the template will scatter off the base. If you are actually scattering onto something then realistically that's generally a lucky thing if your opponent isn't just clustering their ships together. In the case of that batrep I'd say it is so off base as to be pretty much useless in determining anything. Also, given his son's tactics in that game it seems quite clear that they were suboptimal at best. Some other factors to consider:

1. some fleets could care less about NC (Eldar, Necrons and most Tau fleets). A weapon that is generally effective vs a few fleets would IMO hardly be a reason to change the rules for them.

2. celestial phenomena: there is very little discussion of how it is used in this batrep except the planet being used as a slingshot mechanism. NC are LoS weapons and asteroids, etc. block this. I have seen many games where effective use of decent terrain essentially negated any NC a fleet brought.

3. The IN fleet was obviously min-maxed, yet the Chaos fleet was not. Simple cruiser vs cruiser comparisons are not always effective at determining balance since that's only one scenario, and not usually a good one for most fleets. I can envision a number of alternative Chaos fleet lists that would have made a mess of the IN fleet, e.g. escort heavy, ordnance heavy, etc.

4. the scenario itself: Cruiser Clash is only one of the scenarios present and just because one fleet does well in it does not mean said fleet is overpowered or needs to be changed. Scenarios are one form of balance that the game enforces. Using only one of them is not an effective means of balancing an entire fleet, or determining if a single weapon system is overpowered.

5. the table: I know Nate has to play with what he has (as do we all), but a larger table may have given more options for manouver and/or staying out of range longer if desired.

Frankly it just seems some people hate Nova Cannons. However, without actual evidence provided that includes all the info as in Nate's batrep, i.e. fleet composition, scenario, die rolls, etc., any supposition that NC are broken is just that.

JMO...

Cheers, Gary

[horizon]

3. The IN fleet was obviously min-maxed, yet the Chaos fleet was not. Simple cruiser vs cruiser comparisons are not always effective at determining balance since that's only one scenario, and not usually a good one for most fleets. I can envision a number of alternative Chaos fleet lists that would have made a mess of the IN fleet, e.g. escort heavy, ordnance heavy, etc.

Actually for playtesting this the fleet situation like this is best. A maxed NC fleet vs a regular fleet. The regular fleet should have a chance to beat the NC list. I say it can.

[silashand]

Actually for playtesting this the fleet situation like this is best. A maxed NC fleet vs a regular fleet. The regular fleet should have a chance to beat the NC list. I say it can.

I say a regular fleet can as well. However, I disagree entirely with your other statement. It's no different than tailoring armies based on knowing who your opponent is. If you want to determine actual balance you need to put both sides on equal footing. The only time this scenario will prove anything is if the NC fleet can reliably beat one that is tailored to defeat it. Then and only then could the NC be considered unbalanced. If a fleet has options that can defeat another fleet on a relatively even basis, then there are no grounds to say it or any element of it is broken because the factors average out. That's how playtesting should be done if you want actual results that can be measured.

Cheers, Gary

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

Actually for playtesting this the fleet situation like this is best. A maxed NC fleet vs a regular fleet. The regular fleet should have a chance to beat the NC list. I say it can.

I say a regular fleet can as well. However, I disagree entirely with your other statement. It's no different than tailoring armies based on knowing who your opponent is. If you want to determine actual balance you need to put both sides on equal footing. The only time this scenario will prove anything is if the NC fleet can reliably beat one that is tailored to defeat it. Then and only then could the NC be considered unbalanced. If a fleet has options that can defeat another fleet on a relatively even basis, then there are no grounds to say it or any element of it is broken because the factors average out. That's how playtesting should be done if you want actual results that can be measured.

Cheers, Gary

You've got it all the way around. If an NC fleet can beat an anti-NC tailored fleet, it just proves that the NC fleet can handle the situation and thus there is no need to improve on it as well as a need to limit it if the NC fleet wins overwhelmingly.

Horizon has it right that a non-tailored fleet should be able to beat an NC fleet so that we can show the NC does not need neutering.

See the difference? In this case, we do not need any further neutering to the NC.

Edit: added the underlined portion.

[silashand]

You've got it all the way around. If an NC fleet can beat an anti-NC tailored fleet, it just proves that the NC fleet can handle the situation and thus there is no need to improve on it.

Horizon has it right that a non-tailored fleet should be able to beat an NC fleet so that we can show the NC does not need neutering.

See the difference? In this case, we do not need any further neutering to the NC.

That's absolutely false. That is not how playtesting is done to determine balance. I did computer games design for a while and what you describe is absolutely not the way it's done. There are multiple ways to achieve balance in a game:

1. you balance at the system level, i.e. all options are identical for opposing forces or they are relatively equivalent.

2. you balance at the force level where elements may not be equivalent, but you add in counters to any opposing advantages/disadvantages, etc.

3. you balance at the unit level where each unit is a self-contained entity and either has equivalent abilities and/or counters as in #2 above.

BFG, and in fact all of GW's games, are generally balanced at the force level. In Nate's example he is attempting to adjudicate a scenario whereby one side is allowed to take its advantages and the other is not. All you do is prove that one side is more powerful when allowed to use certain elements while denying the opposition the ability to use its counters. This is what happened in Nate's game and should be expected (except for his ridiculously good die rolling). If you continue to play this scenario the NC fleet should be able to defeat a non-min/max force on a regular basis. This uses the following assumptions:

a. the NC is better than normal weaponry in most situations
b. the players are relatively equal in skill and ability
c. both players use the best possible tactics given their fleet composition to win the game
d. the scenario is not skewed to favor one side or another

The only time the results of playing this scenario should result in the balanced fleet winning on an equal or greater basis are if any of the above assumptions are incorrect.

Sorry, not to be rude or anything, but if you don't believe me you need to take Systems Engineering and Design 101.

Cheers, Gary

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

Again, we're trying to prove that the NC does not need any more neutering by showing that a non-tailored list can beat an NC list. We already know the NC IS balanced (though I myself feel it has been hammered more than norm).

The problem at the moment is Nate's almost unbelievable good fortune in rolling hits or wonderful scatters rolls which is showing NC list overwhelming the non-tailored list which would then prove his point that the NC does need limitations.

Now while I don't have the time to study Systems Engineering 101, I think my english and understanding of logic here doesn't require me to take the subject you mentioned. Maybe you just need to go back to English 101. Not to be rude or anything, of course.