List of flawed ships

[horizon]

Necrons AAF rules are neat imo.

@ Plaxor --> Void Dragon is less expensive then it should be because it either needs a Hero/Admiral or 1 per 1000 or 0-1 per fleet. Either way: very limited & restricted.

No harm done.

[Plaxor]

I know Horizon... I'm doing 1 per full 1000 points, but the only thought is that with this any CWE player would always buy a Void Dragon before buying a Dragonship at this level....

It just seems that if it had to purchase the two upgrades rather than just having them would make sense. Like in MMS, you wrote that the VD doesn't auto-include aspect warriors. No other ship comes with either automatically.

And the relative cost of the vessel is reduced because of a hero being unnecessary to purchase the vessel. Not having these two things doesn't really hurt the vessel, and people that still want them can purchase them.

However, Wraithship 150? Does this make sense?

[horizon]

Wraithship @ 160 is fine. (mms its higher). 150 is too low!

[Plaxor]

Um... You're really conservative when it comes to these things. It's just that if we assume that an Aurora is correctly priced @ 140, then 5+ armor is worth more than 20 points (considering it loses 5cm bands as well). I really don't think so....

The Dragonship for 10 points gains 5+ armor and 1 pulsar in comparison to the eclipse. However it is a restricted BC, so this is more justifiable.

[horizon]

Wraithship vs Aurora=
+20pts
5+ armour vs 4+ armour
6 hits vs 4 hits

Same fp strength but also options for fleet balance.

Both are costed well.

[Plaxor]

Oops... sorry Horizon.... thought the Wraithship had four hits for some reason.

Stop being right! Or else!

[lastspartacus]

As in my ideas are neat, or neat as they are? : )

The idea that they can turn while on AAF is just strange to me.

[Plaxor]

As in my ideas are neat, or neat as they are? : )

The idea that they can turn while on AAF is just strange to me.

Necron AAF rules are neat. No need to change them, however they do rape in exterminatus and planetstrike scenarios. We'll have to do something about that later, when we go over scenarios.

[Plaxor]

I actually think that there should be a different style of limitation on the VD than how the void stalker is done in Corsairs. The Corsairs only have 1 restricted ship and therefore the 1000 point style works fine for them

However craftworlds have 2 restricted ships, and the dragonship is shown to have limitations similar to that of IN/Chaos. I think that it would make sense to just say 1 GC per 3 Cruisers. This would mean the mimimum points value to use it would be 875 points anyways.

It would hurt the 1000 point list; I.E. 1 Void Dragon, 1 Dragonship, 2 Wraithships, Eldar Hero, but that list really doesn't make sense anyways, and I guess couldn't be done before FAQ 2010.

So at 1500 a list should have a core like:

1 VD with admiral 395
1 Dragonship 260
3 wraithships 480

with either 8 shadowhunters, another wraithship and 5 shadowhunters, or 2 wraithships and upgrades on commanders.


This actually looks to be quite accurate according to what 'should' be around when larger ships are. This mechanic prevents someone from getting 2 VDs at 1500, and would need at least 1675 to receive 2. If they wanted to do that.

At 2000 you would have a core list similar to this:

2 VDs 1 with admiral 715
2 Dragonships  520
6 Wraithships 640

In every case people would be buying up. Not taking Dragonships in favor of Void Dragons, so that's my reasoning as to why both upgrades should be removed. Just to make it slightly less appealing.

Yes, It should be a little better for its points than a Dragonship, but not significantly.

Back to 1000 point games, without the 'admiral gets a dragonship outside of restrictions rule', I think Bluedagger might stab me.

Like I said, old list; 1 VD, 1 Dragonship, 2 wraithships Eldar hero. Without FAQ 2010 it was 2 Dragonships, 2 Wraithships, Supreme Admiral re-roll and a farseer. Not that far off.

However the admiral dragonship rule was only useful at 1000 points, or if someone didn't want to use a hero.

Now a player is forced to run 4 wraithships and 1 dragonship at this points value if they wanted to max out on cruisers. More sensible for fluff reasons....


My only hope is that Shadowhunters are appealing enough with our changes that it is much more appealing, as from what I understood about the escort was that it was downright terrible.

[lastspartacus]

Another random idea.  Would it be a fair trade if necrons lost the ability to make all those turns while on AAF, and gained the ability to ignore ordnance while moving on AAF?

[Plaxor]

Sorry LS, Horizon and I agree that necrons are cool.

DE 'super-torture' can't take two of the same weapons system, as I fear that an 8 launch bay eldar ship would be an abomination that would destroy the whole world!

[Plaxor]

My Eldar/DE document is now visible in my signature link.

I was thinking about two additional upgrades for DE capital ships; (maybe just the flagship)

Wych coven; any capital ship can upgrade this for +15 points, and it doubles its' boarding value

Incubi Bodyguard: the fleet commanders ship can purchase this for +15 points. +1 to boarding modifier, and 2d6 on teleport attacks and choose which counts.

[lastspartacus]

Pretty cool on the bodyguard.

For necrons, are the current special VP rules acceptable?  Necron ships are already dramatically overcosted for what they do, and then you factor in 300 percent victory points and the like, and you wonder why things are the way they are.

[Plaxor]

it is a little steep. I could live with 150% for destroyed and 200% for hulked.

[Plaxor]

Ray, are you sure that a Hemlock should be 50 pts? It seems like 45 is more appropriate.