Vanquisher:
This is significantly different from the version going into Bakka. I'd say use Bakka's profile and cost 290pts.
IN V 1.1
Vanquisher
...strange....don't like. The option is..weird...
Will go to Bakka's profile at SPD 20 for 300.
Victory:
Needs including/fixing?
Yes. Remember, last update was before Nate released Bakka
Mars/Dictator:
Since when have these ships been Torpedo Bombers/Minelayers? I would keep these abilities to the fleet list. Torpedo Bombers are worth nowhere near 40pts, doing roughly comparable damage to regular bombers under FS (especially as they may not launch the turn they themselves are launched - that's a half ordnance rate) And minelayers aren't worth 20pts either. Mines are nowhere near as versatile as AC. I'd rather this was kept to the fleetlists, scenairos and campaigns, otherwise I think every carrier should have the options.
Technically any cruiser has the capacity to be a minelayer. Anything with launch bays can be torp bombers. It's always allowed, kinda like the special torpedoes. However those will only be allowed in Admech outside of a campaign.
The advantage to minelaying is that it isn't limited by launch bay capacity, and you can have more in play than launch bays. Although the disadvantage is that they don't hit what you want, and if you take criticals they could suck more. Might go to a free exchange?
Torpedo bombers are something I've never liked, but the rules allow them. I suppose that they aren't really any better than normal bombers in this system. Could be cheaper? Or both these things could be campaign only.
Jovian:
Still rearing its ugly head?
Sorry, like I said, I haven't updated it yet. This will be replaced by the Dominion.
Ignis:
Don't like the profile. Its broadsides are too strong for a cruiser, and its dorsals are too strong for a cruiser. It also has battlecruiser level firepower, though obviously range issues. I could just about see FP9@30cm for a cruiser compared to S2 Lances@60cm, but the broadsides should cap out at 12. That would be fine for 200pts.
Ignus
Love it....that means it is waaaaaay to cheap, even with the special rule 
Suggestion: Torps +2 (never liked S4 tubes), Broadside -2, dorsal -2. Price +10 Points. (So still an impressive S18 Broadside)
Option to increase broadsides @45cm for +20Points and/or dorsal to @60cm for +20P
Yes, this was built too strong. It shouldn't have more than fp 20 on a broadside. Although the example model I'm building does have 'dauntless' wbs, jam-packed in there. How do you guys feel about 12 sides and 8 dorsals? Maintaining points? It would make the thing basically the BC eq of a Dominator.
The reason for the 4 torps, is that the only list that it is available in, the Tartanus Sector fleet, makes less use of torpedoes. See fleet lists.
Dominator:
How about FP6@45cm for -25pts? It's just not an attractive option.
-25 is waaaay! too much decrease. I was thinking about how low it would have to be for me to be tempted, and getting 165 pt IN cruisers with 6@45cm wbs and torps seems like a solid deal. Although I could see -20. Note that the Dominator will soon be able to swap its NC for 4 torps in any fleet list. This was wanted desperately in the past, and I disagreed because it would make the Tyrant less useful. However in each scenario you lose something. Either 2 torps or 2 wbs (and the 45cm ones...).
Tyrant:
Perhaps it should take a leaf out of the Hydra's book? Swap the ranges of the batteries. FP6@45cm, with a FP4 bonus@30cm. That would make it an attractive option to keep at 180pts.
Hydra:
Just a Tartanus Tyrant? They're not so different that it makes sense to have 2 ships.
tyrant
Well, you decreased the price, which is a good think. But I think I had prefered the other way: 190 Points, but the 45cm Broadside with S6. (if you follow my idea and decrease the Lunar/Gothic the current Tyrant should be 175 Points and the “improved†with S6@45cm 180 Points)
Hydra
at the moment a better Tyrant (+1turret, weapon layout) for the same price...IMO to “close†to the tyrant and not needed or should be changed.
I did think that the Tyrant should be 175. However they aren't exactly the same, the Hydra has only 4 torps and no access to a NC. About equal of a trade off, as no one really cares about the extra 2 wbs@45cm. Hydra might lose a turret if it comes down to it, but I still feel that the Tyrant is just barely overcosted for what it is, and the Hydra is about right.
The only real reason for the inclusion of the Hydra over the Tyrant is just for a feel. It is slightly different, in fact it's the RT cruiser. I demanded that Nate give the RT cruiser some background and reason for being so common. This is simply a plot-hole fix, and has decent enough background/variation to make it viable.
The idea is to easily allow the Tartanus a 'Tyrant' type vessel, that can't upgrade its range. As Tartanus shouldn't have a lot of LR weaponry, except at extremely low wbs strengths, such as the Vanquisher with its low 45cm weapons output. Or the Exorcist with its low 45cm output, the Dominator etc.
Also to make it less NC-centric, although you could still just spam dominators.....
Siluria:
Does it get Dorsal WBs and +10pts as per Bakka? Should definitely be 4HPs.
Silura
I don't like IN ships with 4 HP. Leave this to Eldar or Tau.
Also such a cheap cruiser can be abused to spam BCs or BBs.
Yes to RC. Eldanesh, this makes it unique, and people don't spam dauntlesses to get more BBs or BCs, in fact people who want BCs usually just play Solar. People usually don't like to take 4hp ships just to get another Emperor/Ignus (although that would be a decent fleet...) etc.
This is also a compromise as in Tartanus, Cls are mandatory to take cruisers, so a cheap one is good.
Endeavour/Endurance:
Thought we were keeping these at 120pts? I may be forgetting the whole discussion, but with 6+ Prows and 90' turns they're probably worth 120pts.
I think that the HA might've decreased their cost after. I know the discussion basically said 6+ and 90' for no change. But was that no change after HA decided it was 110 pts? I imagine so.... I'll ask sig/horizon, one of them will remember.
Defiant:
Thought we were going with a 90/100pt Endeavour/Endurance Prow?
Nope. Remember that discussion? It kept its lances, so it stays at 120.
Enforcer:
Is worth more than a Dauntless - Defiant gives up its main broadside for its LBs, whereas on the Dauntless those are just secondary weapons. 120pts.
Fair enough... I would love to hear someone elses thoughts on this. As we did have a discussion on how crappy 2lb carriers are. I do think that it is a better option than the defiant, even without the 6+ armor... so 120 it is!
Viper:
Can we include please? I like it. 35pts.
Will be included in Bakka, not in Tartanus.
Retribution
Should perhaps have an Option that brings Batteries to 60cm ~ 10-20 Points
Sorry, but no. At the very least it will allow us to release a BB with that sometime later. Although this is somewhat unlikely as none will compare to an Emperor, which has 15@60 focusable already.
Oberon
compared to the Emperor still unattractive, due to the "conflicted design". But as this layout is essential for the ship I suggest point decrease ~ -20 Points.
We had a long discussion about this one, and that was the 'voted' result. This will not change unless there is a mass uproar to do so.
Overlord
Very underperforming. Perhaps it would be a good idea if the targeting array and/or the 3rd turret is included without any additional costs
Our original idea was somewhat complicated. Although I think it is decent for 235 with the targetting array. How do people feel about 3 turrets? I could see that easy. Or even another -10 points.
Gothic/Lunar
maybe I'm breaking a dogma, but do you really think hatthese ships are priced right? I always had the impression that both are ~10P points overpriced especially if compared to the Dominator or chaos ships. So probably 170P would be better,IMO
The Dominator has the disadvantage of having a mandatory NC. In 'fs' it doesn't but it will swap for a sub-par torp salvo. They're fine where they are. They might be overpriced, but they don't break any internal balance in the IN fleet.
Dauntless.
Hate to say this, but the easiest way that other CLs become more attractive is to make the daunt more expensive. Should be at least 120P, perhaps even more.
Sorry... this is a no. The Dauntless is good for it's points, but not great enough to justify an increase. The other CLs are good now because they have 6+ armor, and are the same cost. (at least I think...)
Enforcer/Tempest
Should only be allowed in a very limited way/very special fleet lists … otheriwse the IN can easily become a “carrier fleetâ€. Especially the Tempest could be a problem: 20 Hangars for 900 Points could be a bit much...
Enforcer isn't a big deal, as Tartanus doesn't include Dictators.... So you can get 4lbs for 240 points (now after the increase) which is correct.
The Tempest is priced correctly, and Tartanus is a bit more AC-oriented than normal IN fleets, it trades off torpedoes for this. Normal IN fleets can get 20 for 995 points (3 dictators+Emperor). So this isn't a big deal. Plus Escort carriers have their own flaws, and people I don't think would like running a fleet full of them.
List section
Admirals and rerolls are overpriced (Has anyone ever used a Solar Admiral with 3 rerolls? I've already played games with 5000 points and 4 Battleships and never used such a guy ^^) This is not a IN specific thing, but more or less all races are involved. But I have no real idea how to solve this as cheap commanders are somewhat of a race advantage (e.g. having a cheap LD10 Admiral is one of the few advantages that SM have...)
[/quote]
Yeah, they probably are. This is one thing that is accentuated by the Emperor, which I feel is undercosted, as you get the +50 point bonus to your admirals cost (as the emperor is almost always the flagship).
Most characters became more consistent through working this out. Notice that SM masters of the fleet became 75, the arch magos for Admech became 75.
I'll probably change the LD ups to +25 points each due to this fact. As one leadership is usually considered worth about 20 pts. Any disagreements?
Chaos will follow suite as closely as possible.
