List of flawed ships

[RCgothic]

I'm nearly done with the editorial pass of the main rules. I'm on page 42/45. Should be done either this evening or tomorrow some time.

[Plaxor]

@RC

Thank you, you're a godsend. Especially for defending the tempest.

@Pthisis

You'll get your Hellbringer. However I feel that it isn't unique enough from the enforcer, and isn't quite worth the cost that it needs to be (150). So I think that it should have either 45cm lances (and I like the idea of a prow-only weapon, to force the hellbringer to close) Or potentially str6 45cm wbs.

So the argument on 'fixing chaos' should be moot. I understand your concern. Tartanus/maelstrom are supposed to be 'comparable' fleets. And tartanus has a much easier access to ordnance than the rather ordnance light Maelstrom.

@Admiral

AC spam is difficult in IN lists, as the Defiant is restricted. The enforcer is spammable, however you wouldn't gain anything over just taking 2xDictators anyways. The only real solid ac spam is taking tons of tempests, and those aren't that great, and you only improve your ratio by a little. The only fleet allowing these loses some strength on their torpedoes.

Don't worry, I have worked very very hard to ensure that AC does not become more accessible to any fleet for less points than they currently have (with a small margin of error). Most people don't like CLs/Escorts anyways when they are carriers, so there is no unbalance here.

The Hellbringer, would allow the same number of ac as a devestation, for 40 less points. Although significantly weaker.


@Nova Cannon,

Sorry I've been quite a bit busy this week and intend to look into nova cannons as soon as possible. I know Pthisis sent me an analysis of them.

@Retribution/Desolator

The desolator saw a small boost with its dorsal weapons batteries. The ret will be 355 rather than digging up something new.

@Changes, everyone

At the end of next week, with the finalization of the Hellbringer's rules, I intend to put a hold on rules changes. Save for those regarding Tau, Tyranids and RT/Demiurg fleets (as I haven't updated their documents fully)

RT fleets will be seeing some significant changes relative to background in the tartanus sector. As the war here will be a RT driven one. So the 2 fleet lists for RTs currently, which have a multitude of unorganized options will be divided into three, representing the three main families involved in the war.

The Alexander family will have access to Demiurg, Kroot and Eldar allies.

The Damote family will be the 'Wolf-Pack fleet' slightly modified

The Injarl family will have access to thexians, as well as Imperial reserves.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

I'm looking for a carrier that can attack aggressively.  Just because the Devestation's lances are shorter, it doesn't mean they are suited to be played forward.  I even tried just that as an experiment in my last game.  It was bloody terrible and when I mentioned it here you told me it was obviously bad positioning and never to do it again back on page 84.  

Doesn't mean they can't fit the role of attack carrier. You just can't put them in front. They're not sluggers. What would you expect from a 5+, 8hp ship which needs to LO to be effective? Even the original Despoiler cannot be considered an effective attack carrier.

Why was the Devestation so undercosted?  You don't think its priced low deliberately to counter torpedos?  

Simple answer, they made a mistake. they didn't realize how effective it was.

GW has already published light carriers for the IN, so we are stuck with them.  The problem is they were made cheaper in the revisions without providing Chaos with a comparable option.  And then it went even further with the Tempest.

Yes, but doesn't mean we can't get rid of them or make it hard to take them.
  

Rather than scrap all that work, the easy way out is to offer Chaos a good way to add AC with ships below cruiser size as well.  I see this as an opportunity to introduce new tactics and flavor to the Chaos fleet without torching what was previously done.
I am really really quite happy with the Hellbringer as proposed.

If the work makes the IN become what they are not supposed to be, then scrap it no matter the time and effort put in. I am still wary about giving Chaos access to cheap LCs which in turn can give them more AC and which is still an effective gunship. They already have the Slaughter and the Devastation for that.

@Plaxor, you miss the point. IN was never supposed to be an AC fleet. We're not talking about effectiveness of the ship, rather the access to AC, even if restricted. What's happening is people can bring quite a lot (including torps) at the expense of Chaos which IS supposed to be the AC fleet. I can bet that someone can make an effective IN AC list even using Defiants. That's what troubles me. The line is being blurred between the two and the solution now is to give Chaos access to LC carriers. I'd rather just return to the original roots of BFG and keep the delineation bet Chaos (mainly AC fleet) and IN (mainly Torp fleet).

I can actually understand Pthisis' problem with the IN getting a whole slew of stuff, esp the latest project of Nate and the other HA. I thought IN should not get anymore. Chaos should be getting a couple, and they did get some but I think, not enough. Eldar, D. Eldar, SM, Orks, Necron, Nids and Tau  should also have gotten more than is norm. Really the addition of the new ships just doesn't bring anything to the table and makes people wonder why IN keeps getting stuff.

[RCgothic]

I actually think access to CVLs and ECVs will make IN LESS of an AC fleet, because the ability to take a cheap and almost totally defensive  carrier will free up the obligation to take an offensive carrier, freeing up points for gunships.

Also, the reason the Despoiler is more expensive than the Emperor is because it has 30-40% more firepower, more speed, ability to turn under fire, and free assault boats, with the Emperor's only bonus the +1Ld. I personally think the assault boat upgrade is worth 10pts on an 8LB ship, and the Emperor gets them too cheaply.

If the Leadership is worth 25pts, that makes the despoiler 35pts more expensive than the Emperor for +30% firepower, +5cm speed, and ability to turn under fire. If the speed/ability to turn are worth just 15pts, that makes the Despoiler's additional firepower worth 20pts, which I think is fair. I could see a further 5pt reduction, but that's it.

================================================

We do need to talk about the Relictor though. The fluff talks about it being faster than a Desolator, which it's only barely, the weapons reduction is comical compared to the bare increase in speed, and S3 Lances feel weirder  than overpowered weapons batteries would be because they're more WYSIWYG. Rather than use the Scartix coil as justification for a pathetic increase in speed, or make it cheaper and thus impinge on the Desolator, I'd go with the following:

"The Relictor class battleship was first developed during the Great Crusade under the supervision of Arch Magos Eneatu who theorised he could gain even more performance from the Desolator's engines. Unfortunately due to the increased power demands of the improved engines, the Desolator's high power lances had to be exchanged for less power hungry weapons systems. Few were ever created following Eneatu's designs, and most were assigned to the various space marine legions that went traitor before the Istvaan incident.

The Relictor in its current form is believed to have been born when the heretic captain [insert fluff-appropriate name] encountered the dark-age space hulk [insert fluff appropriate name] in [insert fluff appropriate date]. It is unknown exactly what he discovered as the hulk disappeared back into the warp soon after, but since that date various Relictors have surprised Imperial vessels with implausibly powerful broadsides.
The most famous Relictor is the Harbinger, recorded as the head of...etc"

Relictor class Battleship, 360pts.
Prow S9 Torps
Dorsal FP9 WBs@60cm
L/R Lances S2@45cm
L/R WBs S18@30cm

The Relictor is Massive and has Improved Thrusters. The original designs used less powerful, longer-ranged weapon batteries. The Relictor may revert to this pattern by exchanging its FP18WBs for FP12 versions with 45cm range for -20pts.

This way it stands up pretty well to an Imperial Retribution.

[Phthisis]

@Plaxor
Glad to hear Chaos will get a Hellbringer.  Id favor the 45cm lances or 3 lances at 30cm over the 6 bays.  6 bays seems too many.  I agree about fixed forward lances.  No LFR.

@RC
The extra bays in CLs and escorts could also be used to eat CAP, freeing up the bays from larger ships to attack.  It makes IN very very good at being an ordnance fleet.  Chaos couldn't take enough bays for CAP.  Combine some smaller carriers with a pair of Dictators and everything from the Dictators becomes offensive.

I agree the speed of the Emperor is a big disadvantage, but the +1 LD is a 25pt freebie.  Lets call them even. In terms of AC, with the Sharks on the Emperor its still 20pts less.  So the difference is Emperor has +1 turret and 16WBs side while the Despoiler has 10WBs and 3 lances.  Are those 3 lances worth 20pts more than 6WBs and a fifth turret?

@Admiral
The pitiful forward armament on the Devestation means its not an effective attack carrier.  Its a defensive ship.  Its a high priority target and can't dish it out and get close.  Not an attack carrier.

The old Despoiler was a beast head on.  Not a perfect attack carrier, but at close range on LO its intimidating.

Glad to see someone gets my point on the balance between Chaos and IN!  IN had torps, Chaos had AC.  IN had resiliance, Chaos had more firepower.  IN had ramming, Chaos had boarding.  IN has manouverability, Chaos had speed.  Chaos largely had longer range at the cruiser level but the IN battlecruisers encroached on that territory and NCs crossed that line and do so with fervor now that they are 22% more accurate.  If IN has both AC and torpedo superiority, plus manouverability, resiliance and several ships with heavy long range firepower and NCs... What does Chaos do better than IN again?

[RCgothic]

What 5th turret? Are you thinking of the Oberon?

[Phthisis]

Emperor had 5 turrets unless somebody took one off.  Despoiler has 4.

Oh, and by your calculation above, if the +1 to leadership is worth 25pts, then the Despoiler is 45pts more for +5cm speed, -1 turret and 3 lances in place of 6WBs.

[RCgothic]

Well I'm officially astounded. I never knew the Emperor had 5 turrets! Well it still works out.

The emperor is 365
Assault Boats should be 5pts, so 375.
minus the leadership bonus of 25pts, so 350.
minus additional turret is 345.
Despoiler's speed/turning +15, 360.
The difference is therefore 30pts. What you get for this:

-FP10@60cm in 3 arcs (43pts)
-FP12@60cm in 1 arc (43pts)

+FP20@60cm in 1 arcs (72pts)
+S3 Lances in 3 arcs (51pts)

Difference: 37pts.

These are using my formula estimations for weapons. Alternatively, Smotherman, which I consider less accurate, gives a 34.5pt difference for weapons.

[Phthisis]

So, despite their fairly equal utility, the Despoiler is screwed 30pts for 4 extra off-side WBs that doesnt get used?

Sounds more like a problem with how points values are calculated for FLR weaponry.

If thats the way it is, what if the Despoiler had 6WB side, 5WB FLR and 3 lances FLR?  That makes it even stronger in all 3 fire arcs but by your system it should drop its cost from 122 pts of weaponry to 115pts.  Thats a 7pt decrease.  But its stronger all 3 sides...

Maybe youre undervaluing FLR WBs or overvaluing fixed WBs?  The firepower of both ships is more evenly matched than a 35pt or even a 30pt difference.
And what needs to be restated is that as it stands the Emperor is still 20pts less with Sharks, an extra turret and +1 LD and -5cm.

[RCgothic]

In that example, it's not stronger in every arc, just the first it fires into. It's 3WB worse off overall as well as 7pts. I value the 4WBs off-side as worth 14pts, so even ignoring the off-side the Despoiler would only be 6.4pts overcost, so I still think it's priced not far wrong. Smotherman completely disregards fire arc, so in the example you gave Smotherman would rate the L/F/R 14pts weaker.

The problem with formulae is that off-side firepower is more valuable for some ships than for others. Being able to focus fire is very valuable for a carrier, but would a Retribution be willing to sacrifice more than 20% of its firepower to focus?

The additional 4WBs may not be worth much to a standard Despoiler (and these 4WBs are by no means the only source of the points difference - lances are a lot more valuable at 60cm than WBs), but if it trades 2LBs for 9 torps, it's suddenly going to find itself in a position where pure firepower matters more. (not sure 2LBs for 9 torps is a very fair trade)

Perhaps the despoiler could come down in cost by 10pts more, with the torp version costing 10pts.

[Phthisis]

Ok, so Emperor at 365 but +10 for Sharks.  Despoiler at 380, but +10pts and -2 LBs for torpedos. 
Considering the rules for boarding torpedos and the value of the long range lances, this seems fair to me.

[horizon]

Glad to see someone gets my point on the balance between Chaos and IN!  IN had torps, Chaos had AC.  IN had resiliance, Chaos had more firepower.  IN had ramming, Chaos had boarding.  IN has manouverability, Chaos had speed.  Chaos largely had longer range at the cruiser level but the IN battlecruisers encroached on that territory and NCs crossed that line and do so with fervor now that they are 22% more accurate.  If IN has both AC and torpedo superiority, plus manouverability, resiliance and several ships with heavy long range firepower and NCs... What does Chaos do better than IN again?

IN has no AC superiority, even under BFG;R

As said: attack carrier is Devestation is broadside as Lunar. What is Lunar? Attack Cruiser.
You also keep forgetting the Grand Cruiser: Excorcist

Reslience? 6+ prows? Long range? Acheron, Hades, Desolator, Despoiler, Styx, and something I forgot: oh yeah: m.thaf... Planet Killer! At 45cm (outside usual IN operational field) more lances are added.

6+ prows are the most overrated items in the game to me.

[Phthisis]

Thats what Ive been hearing.  But as 6+ armor is slightly better than 5+ abeam, and torpedos and ramming are a heck of a lot better than any IN cruiser's (or even any Chaos cruiser's) side weaponry and 6+ armor makes that possible, I figure its pretty decent.   Armored prows can be leveraged lretty successfully.  If anyone wants to take a 35pt deduction and run their IN cruisers with 5+ armor its fine by me.  What do you say to a 145pt Lunar?

Even the IN having parity with Chaos on AC is too much. But yes, in most fleet lists as it stands now IN can easily have AC superiority as well as their usual torps. And they dont sacrifice much to do it.
Hellbringet fixes it and adds attack carrier.

A Devestation lacks two key features the Lunar has: forward armament and armored prow.  Chaos can't have an armored prow.  Devestations have 6WBs front at 30cm.  Carnage has the same thing forward.  Do you consider it an offensive or defensive ship?

Yes, both Chaos & IN has long range in ships above cruiser size.  Its not the sole territory of Chaos and so not something they leverage well.

What do you want for the Planet Killer?  A unique super battleship of your own?  That sounds fun, actually.  All the other fleets have something similar.  But maybe the Ramiles counts?

[RCgothic]

Hell yes I'd take a 145pt Lunar. I'd take ten of them in 1500pts.

Anyway, Plaxor you have a 21page 10,000 word e-mail.

[Sigoroth]

The Despoiler has significantly greater firepower than the Emperor. If you used the Despoiler in the exact same manner as an Emperor then you get roughly +56% direct focused firepower. This isn't even taking into account offside weaponry. You also get the comfort of not being easily manipulated by enemy fire. Even with a BM in contact you're able to execute a turn.

If you choose to you can replace AC for torps and use it as an "attack carrier". For this role the bonus offside weaponry is actually usable and the extra speed over the Emp is essential. All the while still having equivalent firepower from the dorsal lances on the way in, even before broadside firepower is calculated.

The advantages of the Emp are +1 leadership and +1 turret. Versatility, manoeuvrability and firepower vs an easier time reloading and slightly better ordnance protection. I think the price difference is justified.