List of flawed ships

[Taggerung]

You don't play Chaos, you don't know my fleet and youve never played against them in their original form.

yes I did, 3 times, back with the standard rules ork fleet (Which is considered terrible) and I still whooped you guys with them.

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.  

I obviously have more experience in the topic as you do, because (and you went the route of getting personal) I am winning my games, and you are not. Not because your fleet sucks or anything like that, but because you aren't playing your fleet right.

How do I know this? You keep the same tactics and I adapt to yours.

I just played a game of BFG against an Eldar fleet I had beaten 6 games in a row, and this time I wanted to swap fleets...he chose my orks (Which the last game before that I played orks and didn't lose a cruiser) and this time the Eldar won because I could play them better than he could, and I destroyed that ork fleet without losing an eldar cruiser, lost only 2 escorts too.

Next time we will swap fleets, you can play either my orks or IN and then we will see how that plays out. If you whoop my ass then we will talk if something needs to be fixed, but as it is, I see no issues with the fleet.

[horizon]

hi-haa! Settle it on the battlefield.

The way I see it...

Chaos has a viable fleet with really enough options and choices. I see fleets based on MMH, others on DDCCAA, other on this or that. Zelnik's Slaughter gallore's or grand cruiser fun.
Admiral d'Artagnan uses a head on fleet (MMH + DDSt) with success.

Compared to FAQ2010 not a lot needs te be changed. I really don't care a lot about marks so whatever floats the majorities boat.

Only the Despoiler needed a change. It was a weak link. The wysiwyg approach to the Despoiler MUST be done. I veto on that one.

Nah, Chaos is fine, that's why less changes are needed imo.

[Phthisis]

@Tag
God youre a cocky bastard.  I wasn't being personal at all, but now I am.

The first game we played, it was with the original list.  I pounded you and Jim into the dust.  If it wasn't for all the ships Jon lost it wouldn't have been a tie.  Jon didn't know how to play yet.

Our second game I used Devs with 45cm and you used your torp fleet.  
You rules lawyered me into letting you AAF your Ravagers through my Assault Boat screen and then torping me to death before I made my H&R rolls because you said the FAQ, which I hadn't seen, said it had to be done in the end phase.  You were wrong, your Ravagers should have been dead and my ships unhurt.  A very dubious but narrow victory.  Plus you were far over our agreed upon points limit.

Our 3rd game.  I took the Terminus Est for fun as an experiment against your torpedo fleet.  You blew it up.  Go figure.  You also launched torpedos and fightabommas simultaneously and threw torps one at a time at my ships to.make me turret them, and then hit me with the bombers using 2007 FAQ rules while I used the new FAQ changes to my fleet.  Whats worse is that you just declared that you launched torps in the shooting plase but didn't bother to put them down and then worked out their facing one at a time in the ordnance phase to your liking.  Of course thats way against the rules. Another dubious but narrow victory.

Our 4th game.  You used the Ork Clans list.  Claimed you had 6 fleet wide rerolls and +2 to LD on every ship in the fleet due to a single looted widowmaker in your ravager squadron.  I slipped around your flank, I killed a Kill Kroozer and crippled a Terror ship and wiped out your ravagers and you torped my BB.  You put your Ravagers in B2B to get turret bonuses vs my assault boats but I shot them instead.  You argued that their shields didn't go down when I knocked down the shields of an adjacent ship.  I knew you were wrong but gave it to you anyway and still finished them off in the following turn instead of targeting another ship.  Also, you had way too many ships with upgrades and your fleet list violated the rules for fleet organization. You were in a bad position and you ran away.  I won despite your shenanigans.

Who knows what you pull against other players, but they don't know how to play and you don't bother to teach them.  You almost got Jim to quit until I showed him how to make his fleet work.  I taught Jon too.  

I don't know if youre any good because you keep making 'mistakes' that benefit you and hurt me.  That game with the Nova Cannons may have been the first straight game I've played with you, but I didn't pay enough attention to find out.  I was busy trying to show Jim and Justin how to play their fleets while you were trying to grind me into dust.

I do fine in my games.  I usually eek out a small lead but there is no glory in crushing people who are learning to play.  Heck, I'm learning too and always will be.

We may not play any more games together Tag.  I'm playing to have a good time, not stroke my ego.  I don't care if you pull crap as long as the game was fun.  But if youre going to behave like this then Ive got other people to play against.

[horizon]

Well.... take it to personal message both of you.

Discussing ships and being in disagreement is fine. But not some personal shizzle.

[Phthisis]

@Horizon

I do respect your opinion, but my main concern stems primarily from the changing of the combat roles of the two main fleet carriers.  Theyre a big deal to Chaos as they are our only defense vs torpedos and other AC.  With the addition of more and cheaper carriers to the IN fleet and dedicated anti-ordnance escorts, how do you see Chaos coping?  What kind of Chaos list can put up a good showing in the ordnance phase AND have the attack power necessary to take on IN carriers?

[horizon]

Well, the Despoiler was poo. The Devastation too strong eg devaluating the other carriers. With the Styx at lower costs and changed weaponry on the Devestation role & balance are clear in the cruiser department.
Chaos also has the Excorcist as an option.

i. I do not see the Imperial Navy as ordnance heavy. 1 fighter can still take out a wave of torpedoes. Or a counter torpedo (Infidel).
ii. The 6+ prow from the Imperial Navy is easily cracked in my opinion.
iii. you are coming from a point where the IN player will take the cheap carriers and anti-ordnance escorts. Cheap carriers are easily surpressed.
iv. long range torps are always less of a worry. Shot gun range is more destructive. But that's close. And Chaos has guns up close. Lots.

[RCgothic]

Let's keep this civil please.

On the Retribution, we were 5-1 in favour of 355pts when this was discussed. The last post on the matter was Admiral D'A on P9. There's still a clear majority for 355pts.

I also veto any change of the Despoiler from WYSIWYG. It even has an attack variant still. 3Lances, 9 Torps and 6AC is nothing to be sniffed at! It is also cheaper as well as rearranged.

The importance of the Attack Carrier Battleship was discussed, which is why we also added the Desecrator, which has FP9@60cm F/L/R and 9Torps F, 4AC, and is 5cm faster than the Despoiler for 25pts less.

In terms of a pure Attack Battleship, the Despoiler is pretty powerful prow on, and we added another one in the form of the Relictor, although this is actually the point where I'm left confounded. I don't remember where this ship came from, how it manages to get S3 Lances onto one hardpoint, why its weapons are so pitifully ranged, or why anyone would take one when you compare it to an IN Retribution. Can we have a discussion of this ship?

Regarding torp shotgun range being more destructive: This is why the ability of long range torps should not be reduced further. To clarify, I prefer the compromise one D6 per marker to the HA's rule, but I'd prefer D3 per marker even more.

[Sigoroth]

Well.... take it to personal message both of you.

Discussing ships and being in disagreement is fine. But not some personal shizzle.

ssshhh! Don't interrupt! I want to see how this plays out.

[RCgothic]

Regarding the Relictor, I think it needs a significant price break regardless of what else is done to it. Both the lack of range and attack craft significantly overcost it. It also needs to remain distinct from the Despoiler, which is typified by long range broadsides. So I'm thinking along the following lines:

P/SB Lances S2@30cm.
P/SB WBs FP8@45cm
P/SB WBs FP4@30cm.
Dorsal WBs FP9@60cm F/L/R
Prow Torpedoes S9

Prow Torpedoes may be exchanged for S4 Lances@30cm F for no cost.

My formula brings this out at 310pts, but I'd be happy with 320pts with a fudge factor. The Desolator is essentially identical except it trades firepower for range. There's no way it should be 60pts more.

[Phthisis]

I agree about the Relictor.  As is, I'd never take this ship.

The Desecrator is a fine ship.  Not so nearly as good as the Despoiler when closing but fine when abeam.  Too bad I can't take a CSM battlebarge for one of the traitor legions in a 13th Black Crusade list.  For some reason, renegades and pirates in the Maelstrom have them all.  I wonder how they got them from the traitor legions in the Eye and brought them all to their pirate bases half the galaxy away?  If I'm going to use the Tartanus list to take any of the new ships, I have to ow a bunch of points on escorts & light cruisers before I am allowed to take enough cruisers to fulfill the fleet organization requirements to take one.

For the Despoiler, I agree that the new bay locations are a good change.  What about the ship's model says it has to have 3 lances and 10wbs?  

@Horizon
Ive never played against an IN fleet that didn't have ordnance superiority.  I usually take 2-3 carriers, but if you add up their bays and torpedo salvoes they outnumber me.  1 fighter does counter 1 torpedo, but here they are AAF shotgunned only.  Enemy fighters sweep.CAP on their chosen target, then come the torpedos, then come the bombers.  Its effective.  I can always avoid weapons fire.  Its the 50-64cm torpedo shotgun that gets you.  Traversing in front of that with my long range weapons is an exchange thats generally not in my favor.  
I agree that 6+ armor can be easy to crack with Chaos' gunnery, but not without incurring more damage than you cause by torpedo shotguns and ramming.

Given that the Traversing broadside isn't terribly effective, I'd really like to see some more closing firepower available.
Everyone seems so dead set against changing the Chaos fleet and giving them more toys.  I'd like my questions answered, but as I'm not getting anywhere I guess I'll just learn to stop worrying and love the bomb.  I give up.
Just out of curiosity, who here plays chaos as their primary fleet?

[Taggerung]

@Tag
God youre a cocky bastard.  I wasn't being personal at all, but now I am.

The first game we played, it was with the original list.  I pounded you and Jim into the dust.  If it wasn't for all the ships Jon lost it wouldn't have been a tie.  Jon didn't know how to play yet.

This was everyones first game here, not just Jons, and yes it became a tie because we focused in on Jon's fleet as you moved around an asteroid field

Our second game I used Devs with 45cm and you used your torp fleet.  
You rules lawyered me into letting you AAF your Ravagers through my Assault Boat screen and then torping me to death before I made my H&R rolls because you said the FAQ, which I hadn't seen, said it had to be done in the end phase.  You were wrong, your Ravagers should have been dead and my ships unhurt.  A very dubious but narrow victory.  Plus you were far over our agreed upon points limit.

We were still playing the normal rules here, not your 45cm devs. We hadn't even heard of the Flawed Fleets at this point. Yes I was wrong about your assault boats, however that's because the rulebook said what sounded pretty straight forward, and me and Jon both thought it was the way we played until you found it in the FAQ later on. That was also not Ravagers, those were 2 ram ships that went in and did 2 points of damage. We also did a multi ram that did nothing, which we learned later we were both wrong about, and excuse me?! Over points? Bullshit I have only made a mistake once where I was over points, and that was because I forgot my codex one day.

Our 3rd game.  I took the Terminus Est for fun as an experiment against your torpedo fleet.  You blew it up.  Go figure.  You also launched torpedos and fightabommas simultaneously and threw torps one at a time at my ships to.make me turret them, and then hit me with the bombers using 2007 FAQ rules while I used the new FAQ changes to my fleet.  Whats worse is that you just declared that you launched torps in the shooting plase but didn't bother to put them down and then worked out their facing one at a time in the ordnance phase to your liking.  Of course thats way against the rules. Another dubious but narrow victory.

bullshit, you were not using the 2010 document because 1: you didn't have it with you, and 2: we were using the rules out of the book I had printed which only has the 2007 document. There is nothing about 2010 document that showed up in that game, from the torp markers, to the fact my escorts didn't get a save from your assault boats. As for the torpedo thing...yea I didn't place them, but I sure as shit declared my targets, and never changed them (Not that it even affects anything since you can place all ordnance at the end of the shooting, and then proceed to move them). You had the Terminus Est, why would I bother launching torps at anything else, which is exactly what happened. Except for the 2 cruisers that got hit by torps moving past the Terminus Est.


Our 4th game.  You used the Ork Clans list.  Claimed you had 6 fleet wide rerolls and +2 to LD on every ship in the fleet due to a single looted widowmaker in your ravager squadron.  I slipped around your flank, I killed a Kill Kroozer and crippled a Terror ship and wiped out your ravagers and you torped my BB.  You put your Ravagers in B2B to get turret bonuses vs my assault boats but I shot them instead.  You argued that their shields didn't go down when I knocked down the shields of an adjacent ship.  I knew you were wrong but gave it to you anyway and still finished them off in the following turn instead of targeting another ship.  Also, you had way too many ships with upgrades and your fleet list violated the rules for fleet organization. You were in a bad position and you ran away.  I won despite your shenanigans.

Ah yes this game. I never claimed I had 6 fleet wide rerolls (I still have the list), I had 6 re-rolls but they were per Squadron, and in that list I had 6 re-rolls which allowed for 6 upgrades, which is all I had. Quoted here from the clanz document

A vessel or escort skwadron led by a Warlord may be given up to one of the following upgrades per Command re-roll the Warlord has.

Each warlord had 2 re-rolls. So the only thing I fucked up with in that fleet list was the widow maker rules, which and ask Jon about this, was exactly how HE played it against me. That was my own fault however that I never checked up on them myself. This was when we started using the 2010 FAQ, because we used turret suppression for the first time. Whoops...yes I did only have 1 cobra.

As for the shield thing, ya you were wrong, we played that right because I caught on to this rule, and I even showed it to you that game. Here it is again from the 2010FAQ regarding escorts and shields.

DESTROYED ESCORTS: When an escort is destroyed replace it with a blast marker placed as centrally as possible to where the escort was. As a blast marker is smaller than a small flying base, the only way it is possible to take down a ship‟s shield with this blast marker is if their bases actually overlapped.

It was not until after this game here at Luke's garage that we found the flawed lists so don't claim otherwise.

Who knows what you pull against other players, but they don't know how to play and you don't bother to teach them.  You almost got Jim to quit until I showed him how to make his fleet work.  I taught Jon too.  

I don't know if youre any good because you keep making 'mistakes' that benefit you and hurt me.  That game with the Nova Cannons may have been the first straight game I've played with you, but I didn't pay enough attention to find out.  I was busy trying to show Jim and Justin how to play their fleets while you were trying to grind me into dust.

Wow, what I pull huh? What about the mistakes that you make like claiming that brace works for your shields for the first 3 games we played? We make mistakes while learning any game, something I have never held against you or anyone else but the fact that the orks have changed fleet lists 3 times now for me has led to a few minor mistakes (All with that awful clanz list)

I do fine in my games.  I usually eek out a small lead but there is no glory in crushing people who are learning to play.  Heck, I'm learning too and always will be.

You make it sound like I am some Veteran destroying the noobs in this game...You were the only one prior to the start of the campaign who had ever played this before. Jon, myself and Jim's all first games were the same game. I don't take glory or pride in destroying people, I much prefer close games as they are more interesting. That's when rolls get exciting and you can yell or curse when your dice don't go how you want, if one side is dominating, then they usually aren't having fun and there is no excitement left in the game.

We may not play any more games together Tag.  I'm playing to have a good time, not stroke my ego.  I don't care if you pull crap as long as the game was fun.  But if youre going to behave like this then Ive got other people to play against.

Just want to clear up some things here. I don't wish to continue this argument over these forums, but dude that was some epic slander I needed to correct. Call me if you want to talk.

[Bryantroy2003]

Play tested the new Ret profile and even at 355 it performed admirably, a pair of them and 6 Dauntless half torp half lance cleaned house against a list of Orks loosing only two Dauntless for the majority of the Ork fleet. The Ret's were able to actually deliver their broadisdes with some force and against a 6+ Kill Kroozers prow still inflict 6 hits only 1 of which was saved by brace, and the lances then finished it off without note. But I continiously found my self torn between RO or LO. As they were stuck in with the enemy and trading shots close up, even got boarded at one point, I found LO the better choice overall. But occasionally a RO would have put me with 18+ torps on a single target.

I also found the new FB rules for the Orks entirely appropriate and they managed to take off 4 wounds and 5 wounds respectivly from my BB's before the end but not quite cripple them. The shields managed to absorb all of the lackluster firing my opponent managed to bring around. His dice just hated him in general. So I am no longer in disagreement to this point.

As for Choas, ive also been playing them as a suplementary fleet since I started the game with the starter box. I cant see too many changes to my Slaughter charge strat tbh. My Devestations are still going to hang back and churn out AC and my Slaughters/Incolasts are still going to rape face at cloase range. All in all im happy with the changes including the price reduction of the Deso.

[Taggerung]

On the Retribution, we were 5-1 in favour of 355pts when this was discussed. The last post on the matter was Admiral D'A on P9. There's still a clear majority for 355pts.

Umm no? Myself and Admiral were both for the 345 point cost, and I believe Plaxor was as well. It was for the most part a stalemate on page 71/72 between yourself RC and Sigiroth being for the 355 cost, and myself and Admiral for the 345 cost. No one else really chimed in on the matter, I do remember it being decided on a 3-2 being at 345, just can't remember who the 3rd was.

[horizon]

I called a Ret at 345pts iirc ?!?


Phtisis, weird. Chaos generally has several shots before the IN reaches you. Aren't you able to brace them?

[Taggerung]

I don't know what your call was Horizon on the matter.