List of flawed ships

[RCgothic]

The Retribution only has FP 18, at 45cm. That's a 6 FP increase for a 15cm drop. I actually really like this ship, and even though I magnetized my Retribution model, it has already seen it's place as my flagship as the Lord Nelson.

FP12 total, and it will use its off-side more than any other battleship thanks to its speed and line-breaking focus.

But torpedoes are meant to be worth it as long range weapons. They were already struggling in this role, and reducing the base size is a direct nerf to their long-range capability. They did not need nerfing at range, and I don't understand why so many people think they did.

[Taggerung]

I find it a lot easier to fire my torpedoes now since I usually run in a tight formation, less chance i will hit my own ships.


Also...The retribution has Firepower 18 on each side at 45cm as of Imperial Fleet 1.3 (For Plaxors stuff, which is the thread we are in) so I what are you talking about with FP 12?

I guess I just never really had an issue with firing my torps at long range as I am good at guessing long ranges.

[RCgothic]

It's not a matter of aim, it's a matter of ease of avoidance. Whereas before an abeam enemy would have had to avoid 12cm of board for 18 torpedoes, they now have to avoid just 6.

The Retribution now has FP36, 3 dorsal lances and 9 torpedoes. Previously it had FP24, 3 dorsal lances and 9 torpedoes. That's an increase of FP12, and it's the most likely of any imperial BB to use all of that additional firepower. Worth way more than 15cm range.

[Taggerung]

It was over cost before though. Hence the increase in guns and no point cost.

[RCgothic]

IMO, the additional firepower is worth about 36pts, whilst the range decrease is worth 15, Nett 21pt increase in value.

It was about 10pts overcost to begin with, hence 10pt price hike.

[Taggerung]

I disagree.

A range decrease is a pretty huge disadvantage especially for the IN where range comes at a premium. I thought it was 10 points over cost before, and the overall firepower increase at the cost of range was worth at best 10 points.

10 points isn't that big of a deal, but at 355 the ship isn't worth it, I would rather take a Victory.

[Plaxor]

@Tag,

You can split them up if you like. I think I wrote that into the rules.

A 45cm ret fits into an imperial fleet better than a 60cm one.

[Taggerung]

Plaxor,

I agree that it fits better for sure. I was just saying that for IN range comes at a premium, and cool then I think the rules are fine. I personally just like having the smaller markers.

[Phthisis]

Jon used the new Retribution against me in the last game we played.  I'd say it worked fine as it destroyed one of my Devestations that had 5 damage remaining and full shields in one go on LO. He wasn't ecpecting it do die to the Retribution's fire.  If anything, I'd say the boost to the WBs made it much better despite the range deduction.  It likely couldn't have done as much damage as it dod with 12 at 60cm.  Its a battleship with an armored prow and a massive torp salvo.  Its not a fleet support ship like the Emperor.

Why not make them variants of the Retribution?  Im still not happy with the new Despoiler.  We could make the old stats a variant as well.

Any chance we can revisit the Chaos fleet again?  There is still a lot of work to do there IMO but its largely overlooked for the popularity of the IN.   It has been largely untouched with the exception of some general nerfing, marks and leadership costs.

[Plaxor]

@Pthisis,

Chaos had quite a few changes, and not just to marks. Tell me what you think is wrong with chaos?

We reduced the cost of the escorts/made them better, we changed the grand cruisers around and the despoiler.

To compile the list of random, late-game complaints:

Tag: Retribution 10 points too expensive
Pthisis: Chaos wasn't changed enough
RC: Hatred of small torpedoes
Bryantoy: Doesn't like long ranged Oberon


I'm a little disappointed, as I thought we were 'relatively' happy with where things were. We spent a lot of time voting on changes, and a lot of time since then working through things. Game changes are difficult to deal with, sometimes they suck. Sometimes people don't agree with you.

Tag, we voted to increase the cost of the Retribution, and although you wouldn't take it for its price, there are people who would. 10 points is hard to feel on such an expensive ship. The Victory isn't available in the same list as the Retribution so the comparison is irrelevant.

RC, the torpedo thing is something people are very polarized about. We agreed to move away from 'official' rules in a mutually agreeable fashion.  As there is no clear majority here, the rules go to official ones. However there is some feeling for a compromise, which I already outlaid for you, as created by Vaaish.

Pthisis, I have no idea why you wouldn't like the chaos fleet as it is.... most people consider chaos to be better than IN. Their ships were overall very appropriately priced save for the devestation and the styx. However the Styx was reduced in cost by the HA, and the devestation we did our own fix to. The escorts were hard to take in comparison to a slaughter, so they became cheaper and/or better. The Retaliator saw some fixes too, but other than that, the entire fleet is well represented and internally balanced quite well.

Bryan, I think I already explained our oberon thinking. It is a refitted emperor and would have the same weaponry, and it was underappealing due to mixed range.

[afterimagedan]

Plaxor and all who contributed,
You have made me very happy.
Love, Dan

P.S. Where did the Supernova go? 
P.P.S Are there plans to work on Tyranids? Sorry for showing up late in the conversation.

[Phthisis]

Yes, and mostly good changes were made for Chaos across the board.  Marks and Leaders were too expensive.  Escorts were complete rubbish because they were overcosted.  Still, it has recieved nowhere near the attention lavished across the IN fleet.  Chaos has 24 vessels to choose from, excluding special ships like the Planet Killer and an activated Blackstone.  Imperial Navy has 33 ships.  The original book as 13 ships for each.  The new fleet lists for the varius Imperial sectors have a dizzying array of battleships, battlecruisers, crusiers and escorts to choose from compared to what's available in the Chaos lists.  In addition, they have the capability of taking Space Marine allies and some Chaos ships are available to them.  The Chaos fleet should be a worthy counterpart for the Imperial Navy. In addition, many of the changes made to the IN fleets were intended to make them work better, while some of the changes made to Chaos reduced their capabilities. 

I'm tired of hearing from IN players that Chaos is far superior.  Chaos has longer ranged weaponry and a slight speed advantage over IN ships, but IN has 6+ prow armor which pulls double duty as superb protection and ram, and they come standard with torpedos.  I guess that the traditional way to play with Chaos is to run abeam and try to stay at long range while firing long range weaponry.  As a chaos player, you can't hide behind your abeam aspect.  Although we do have some weaponry at 60cm, the bulk of our firepower is at 45cm or closer.  That range is easy picking for an AAF torp shotgun.  A few centimeters closer and you're in ramming range.  These tactics ignore aspect and shields and are highly effective against Chaos ships and available to IN and Orks equally.  Eldar don't care about aspect, so abeam is no defense there either. 
The other strategic option that Chaos has, Head-On, has been significantly nerfed by the changes made to the fleet list.  Although the Hades and Murder were untouched (which is fine by me), the two carriers that could lend support to this strategy have been changed.  The 60cm lances on the Devestation put them too close to truly be a fleet support carrier as they were originally, but they can't function as an attack carrier either.  The removal of the front lances on the Despoiler have stripped it of it's Head-On attack carrier utility as well and made it only usable as a fleet support ship.

The result is that Chaos is now largely a one trick pony, and it's not the best trick either.  If you want to do a solid Head-On fleet, youre going to have to do it largely without in-formation carrier support, which means no CAP.  You can have plenty of carriers if you decide to traverse, but your abeam aspect will generally mean nothing and you will be in torp shotgun range, if not ramming at the very least.  Also, since you added LO on Nova Cannons, traversing is even more difficult to pull off.

My point is that the IN got all kinds of new ships, new toys and boosts, while Chaos got more of the same.  Chaos got a decrease to it's escorts, but IN got a decrease in points cost to one and 3 new escorts to choose from.  Chaos got 3 new Light Crusiers, IN got 5.  Chaos gets 4 new Battlecruisers, IN gets 7.  Now IN has 6 battleships, but Chaos has 4.  IN gets all kinds of new ships to add versatility to its fleet list, and Chaos gets more 45cm broadsidess.   


One thing I'd like to see is an escort like the Firedagger for Chaos.  IN has always been able to outpace Chaos in terms of ordnance because of torpedos standard on almost every ship and cheaper carriers, espeically now with the Tempest escort carrier and Enforcer light cruiser carrier.  A chaos firedagger type escort would help screen against torpedo storms and keep us from being overwhelmed by Imperial AC, whiche we now don't have much of a defense for.
I'd also like to see a light cruiser carrier.  Chaos fleets are piratical by necessity and if they couldn't steal a light carrier it would probably be necessary for them to convert one.

I've been playing Devestations with the 45cm lances for a while now and one thin I've noticed different from before is that they die very quickly.  Getting inside 45cm puts them in easy reach.  They don't have high armor and their abeam aspect doesn't make one bit of difference when being rammed, torpedoed, bombed or shot by Eldar.  The 60cm lance allowed them to keep a reasonable distance away.  They are definately not an attack carrier.  I'd like to see them regain their 60cm lances for a points increase or make their lances Str 2 45cm Left/Front/Right with WBs to the side.  This would give it an attack carrier role and it would fare much better.

Actually, I'd like to see a few ships rebalanced with dorsal or prow weaponry at L/F/R.  For example, a Carnage with 6wb @ 45cm, 2wb@ 60cm and 8WB LFR at 60cm.   I'd also like to see the Despoiler rebalanced to perform its original roll as an attack carrier.  You guys really nerfed the Head-On strategy when you removed its prow lances and made at a broadside ship.  Torpedos aren't a substitute.

[Taggerung]

@Plaxor,


What are you talking about?? We had come to the agreement that the Retribution would be lowered to 345, as it is in your latest version (1.3) of the Imperial Navy. There was no reason for it to be increased in cost, as it already had a fair price as it was. I don't even know why this is up for debate anyways! As for the fleet list thing...well we just don't use the set fleet lists around here. The game is more fun without having weird ship restrictions.


@James

You make it sound like Plaxor made up a bunch new ships for IN and left Chaos high and dry...With the Original 13, and the new Armageddon fleets the standard IN (Non Flawed) has 24 ships. Where chaos only has 15 after the extra fleets were added. So with that math Chaos actually got 8 more ships with Plaxors stuff, and Imperial Navy only got 9 (And some of these are just variations of the same ship)

So Chaos got the same love that Imperial Navy did.

If any fleet has to complain about lack of them it's orks! lol (Not that I am unhappy with the fleet Plaxor, I think it works great)

In addition, many of the changes made to the IN fleets were intended to make them work better, while some of the changes made to Chaos reduced their capabilities.

Some of the changes were made because the chaos fleet was too good for too cheap. Your fleet got/deserved a slight nerf, and really it was only 2 ships. The devastation which was SUPER under-cost (which dude where do you get off saying this line?

cheaper carriers

IN pays 20 points more than you for a worse ship), and the Despoiler, which I know you love, but being able to bring 7 lances to bear on one target and launching 8 AC a turn, with str6 batteries at 60cm on each side on top of all that, is just broken. You can't justify that ship for that price.

The last thing your fleet needs is a buff, especially not the devastations or the Despoiler! They are good now, and if anything could use a slight price increase. You seem to also forget that your fleet has more versatility in terms of Space Marines and your marks. Which can be quite useful.

Your examples are a little skewed because of one game we played where you stayed at extreme range and I just peppered you with locked on nova cannon rounds...so of course your devastations died quickly because I targeted the crap out of them. They are your bread and butter, and I knew they needed to die.

Now with that being said. Some new escorts for Chaos wouldn't hurt, but giving them the same as IN would be a poor decision simply because if you make all the fleets have similar ships, why have separate fleets.

[Plaxor]

IN has more fleet lists. The number of ships available in each fleet list is comparable to the chaos fleet lists.

The major reason for more IN ships being included was the BFB being done by the HA after we had already written and developed BFT.

Sorry Pthisis, but we already talked about the Despoiler, and the answer is we like it better wysiwyg. Sure it goes against fluff a little, but overall we find it more effective in a chaos fleet. Jeez, I wish Sig were still around.

The core ships of IN weren't changed, just the sucky ones. IN lost quite a bit when their torpedoes got smaller, and it has always been a thought process that Chaos>IN. You can see it if you look on the Yahoo group from even as far back as 2001. We didn't make them that much better, sure they have a few more options, but most people will only play one fleet list, and these are limited accordingly.

Chaos is a bit of a one-trick pony, but your meta is a bit different from other players. I understand that you play ordnance heavy.

There are three main fleet ideas however, one built around Murders, one around Carnages and the final around slaughters.

I'm sorry about your troubles, but balancing out things between races is VERY difficult. Here we were looking for internal balance more than anything else, just to let people play with more ships available to them. The only two fleets considered too underpowered to reasonably play were Orks and Admech.


If you want one-trick ponies look at how people play nids... super-hiveships abounding.


@Tag

Oh, Oops.... apparently I've been taking a bit too much of a break from this lately.

Yes, the Ret should be 345, I do remember talking about this at some point, and sig pushing it.

Where did it come from that it would be increased?


@Pthisis again

Still want that analysis of NCs.....

Also, how would you feel if I put in a closing carrier CL into chaos? It would give you something to take that would fit a CAP role. Something along the lines of the Hellbringer from BFK?

[Phthisis]

@Tag

I merely pointed out the discrepancies in numbers of ship types netween the two fleets.  I know some of them were added by others.  Diversity can be a marked advantage however.  More ship types mean more viable combinations and strategies.  The new fleet lists for IN makes ready use of all kinds of new ships while most of Chaos' new ships are Tartanus only and Chaos is forced to take one escort squadron or light cruiser per cruiser.  Even the new Chaos ships are more of the same.  IN gets more diversity and more access to ships (even chaos cruisers).  Im just saying I'd like to see some more diversity and access to the Chaos lists.

IN does get cheaper carriers.  The Emperor is cheaper than the Despoiler.  The Dictator is more than the Devestation, but it also has torpedos and a 6+ prow.  Now IN has the Enforcer and the Tempest which are cheaper than any carrier in the Chaos fleet.  Look at smotherman. chaos pays a premium because of assault boats.  On top of that, every cruiser gets torps unless it has an NC.  IN has always had an edge on ordnance superiority... Which is why its weird that IN gets a firedagger but Chaos doesn't.

You don't know from personal experience if they needed or deserved a nerf.  You don't play Chaos, you don't know my fleet and youve never played against them in their original form.   Devs were a good carrier because it could stay out of harms way and contribute supporting fireand its squadrons. Now it has to get close and becomes an easy target.  Nerfing the lances wasn't a suitable fix, IMO. Ive come to this conclusion after several games of playtesting. I'm fine with a 45cm range but it should become an attack carrier.  LFR lances at 45 does that.   Or go back to 60cm and raise points.
The Despoiler with 7 forward lances was justifiable and it still exists as such in the main rules.  Thats no more damage than a Desolator can do at 60cm, but a Despoiler has to do it at 30.  The reason for the profile change was only to make it fit the model better.  Horizon, who created the new profile, said he didn't consider points value or usage, only model appearance.  The Despoiler isn't the ship.it used to be.

Marks are useful, but we pay for them.  CSMs are an expensive LD buff as chaos ships have a hard time boarding without being rammed and torpedoed to death first.  

Yes, the one game we played you destroyed my fleet over 3 turns with 3 LO Nova Cannons, before I got in range to cause any damage.  Youve made my point on LO NCs for me.  3 of them can wreck a 1500pt fleet.  Obvioisly traversing is not a viable strategy for Chaos in this rule set.  Unfortunately thats what it has been given.

Tag, if chaos is so powerful, why don't I just wipe the gameboard with your pathetic fleet?   Its because Chaos isn't as powerful as you claim it is.  It has very little in the way of weaponry that bypasses shields and is the most vulnerable fleet in the game.  Its unforgiving if you position your ships poorly and heavily dependent on attacking in concert.  Its a fleet that wins on finesse, skill and functional strategy.  It has no superweapons and lacks the ability to spam ordnance as effectively as other fleets. I play it because it demands perfection like no other fleet in the game. You have absolutely zero experience on this topic.  

@Plaxor

Im still working on it.  I have numbers for LO vs no LO, but coming up with a comprimise is proving a bit difficult.  I think you'll be surprised with what I have so far.  Once I'm done I will PM them to you.

Chaos>IN has quite a lot to do with player ability I think. A lot of new IN players just get outclassed by veteran Chaos players and they think it is the fleet, not the player. Its just like Space Marines in 40k.  They attract new players because they look cool and have cool fluff.  They play badly and give the list a bad name.  But a veteran player with Space Marines is a tough nut to crack.  If you look at what the ships ate capable of and their strengths and weaknesses, you'll find what I say is true.  Chaos is a finesse fleet, IN is very forgiving and powerful.  We have a friend who tried to plat IN as a broadside fleet for a while and he got crushed.  Once I taught him to bully people with his prow armor and torpedos... Well, Tag plays IN now too.

Chaos is a one trick pony now, but with the original fleet list there were 3 viable options.  Two of them made heavy use of the Despoiler and Devestation in different combat roles.  Its too bad you can't see the Despoiler through my eyes.  I'd lime to redevelop rules that stay true to the model but keep its original combat role.  WYSIWYG has some flexability.  It doesn't have to be its current form.  I don't care what Sig thinks about it.  He has some seriously bad ideas.

A closing carrier would be great, but on a light cruiser chassis I don't know how it could provide enough CAP for itself and its fellow ships.  A true attack carrier needs to be able to take a few hits and contribute some support fire.  Thats why I like 45cm LFR lances on the Dev.  What do you have in mind?