List of flawed ships

[Taggerung]

Other than Nova Cannons the ONLY weapons at a range of 60cm + are battlecruisers or battleships. Both of which you rarely ever see more than 1 ship in any Imperial fleet, and most of them its usually just a dorsal str 2 lance.  It's still a rare and precious commodity in the Imperial Fleet, so it's not like they are all over. Also, technically the Firedagger is only in one Imperial Fleet, battlefleet bakka which overall isn't very good (I don't think), and we won't be using it very often (Jon tried it out as a tester really)

I would be fine the Imperial ships being taken at the -1 ld, seems to be reasonable and fluffy. It would however need to be a common ship, and not a very specific ship such as a Firedagger since as I said, is only in Bakka.

[Phthisis]

The Firedagger is included in one of Plaxor's Imperial fleet lists.  I'm not jumping outside of his available fleet lists for it.  Its there, its available.

Nova Cannons with Lock On are one significant encroachment on the Chaos fleet's ground of being the fleet with long range fire.   AAF torp shotguns have an average range of 64cm and bypass shields.  In terms of weaponry, the Dominator and Tyrant can boost to 45 and there is some massive firepower available in the Battlecruiser and up range.  In fact, an IN battlecruiser usually has more firepower than any of the Chaos heavies anymore.  In the Chaos range, only the Carnage and Murder has any firepower over 45cm.  Its more even than you think.

Besides, if I have a method or tool that mitigates your torp shotguns then you might actually have to develop a strategy that requires some brainpower.   Anybody can roll dice. Our games were predictable and boring.  You used torps until I learned to dodge.  Now you use a fleet with a 7cm longer AAF torp range and Nova Cannons.  Wohoo.. So much fun I have.

[Taggerung]

Go read Plaxor's files before being an ass. The ONLY fleet list that gives you the Firedagger is battlefleet Bakka, a specific fleet list in plaxors flawed lists.

AAF Imperial shotgunning is a bad tactic, and I have never used it. I don't even do it anymore with the orks, since taking torps on killkroozers/terrorships costs extra now, and since it's possible with the changes to orks, I run a gunboat heavy fleet. We haven't even played 1 v 1 in months.

Even without Lock on working for Nova Cannons I would still run with 2 dominator's because I love the ship, I even use it against Eldar, it's an awesome all comers cruiser. Also, The nova cannons force me to go straight at you, just AAF to get out of my forward arc, and force them to turn then they aren't locked on, and pretty much useless.

I am so sorry that your fleet has a weakness, and you fight the two fleets that make the most of the disadvantage you have, but you don't see ANY other chaos players complaining about their fleets. Even though you suggested it, we can just go back to using actual fleet lists so no one will ever take the Firedagger again (Which is the least of your concerns, every ship in Bakka has fast tracking turrets for free anyways)....even though I don't even think they did anything in that 3k game we took.

[Phthisis]

What's so special about Bakka that its untouchable?  Why is everything esle on the table except for this one ship that helps mitigate the effect of your favorite tactic?  If the torp shotgun is not a good tactic, then why is it such a big deal that a chaos player has access to a ship that mitigates it?  From what youre saying, it shouldn't matter if I have a couple of Firedaggers or not.

Youve been playing a brand new Eldar player a lot lately with your Orks.  Torpedos would be a waste, heavy guns much better.

Stop trying to run interferance.  If you have any legitimate reasons why you think that the Firedagger should be off limits or why the Hellbringer would break the fleet, then lets hear them and debate them on their merits.  So far the only arguments you have given against anything that Ive said is that I don't win any games, that I'm just complaining because I don't know how to play my fleet and that youre more qualified than I am because you win all the time.  None of that is true and none of them are arguments against the proposed change, just attempts to assassinate my character.  Of course I'm going to be hostile when you insult me constantly.

Since I have been on this forum, Ive been lobbying for a single change to the Chaos list.  It doesn't need longer range lances on the Dev or the old Despoiler profile back.  It only needs an attack carrier.  It needs one ship profile that can move forward along with the line ships, provide close AC support and lend some firepower to the gunships.  Its fluffy for a Chaos fleet to have such a ship, its necessary now to counter the plethora of AC and ordnance that other fleets are now capable of taking, cheif amongst them the IN.  And, as it is, the Tartanus fleet list has no carrier below cruiser size and a requirement for an escort squadron or light cruiser for each cruiser taken.  The Wardens list has opportunities for ordnance below cruiser level in terms of torpedos, an escort carrier (assault boats!) And a very good option for a light carrier.  The Hellbringer satisfies the attack carrier role and fills in the gap in Tartanus.  Add an attack carrier, fleet has its character back, issue closed.  

[horizon]

Phthisis, you are still coming from the point of view Chaos is to weak or something. Which they are not. Chaos has clear rounded fleet. A fleet that can do anything and everywhere. You make is seem as it has lots of weakness. This simply is not true.
I really hope you take Admiral d'Artagnan's & mine advice to Chaos with you.

Have you ever responded to the question if you use celestial phenomena?

Make me a list of what you think are the weakness of a Chaos & Imperial Navy fleet.

What do you consider an attack carrier? A light cruiser ain't suited for attacks.

No one forces you to play Tartanus if you cannot/will not/do not like with few carriers. Play the Gothic or Armada list.

[Taggerung]

What's so special about Bakka that its untouchable?  Why is everything esle on the table except for this one ship that helps mitigate the effect of your favorite tactic?  If the torp shotgun is not a good tactic, then why is it such a big deal that a chaos player has access to a ship that mitigates it?  From what youre saying, it shouldn't matter if I have a couple of Firedaggers or not.

It's not my favorite tactic, far from it. Effective? Yes for sure, but boring as shit. Why do you think I was lobbying for an Ork gunship platform? Because the ONLY ork tactic was AAF shotgun, and ram/board if possible....fucking yawn...why do you think I started a new fleet?

Youve been playing a brand new Eldar player a lot lately with your Orks.  Torpedos would be a waste, heavy guns much better.

Yes that's quite true I have been mostly playing them. However I have also played my Imperial Fleet 7 out of the 8 games we have played. Which if you want to call Ethan and ask him what fleets I have taken, you will realize they have a healthy mix of everything as I am trying to make a neat/fluffy all comers list, go for it, since you seem to think all I do is lie.

Stop trying to run interferance.  If you have any legitimate reasons why you think that the Firedagger should be off limits or why the Hellbringer would break the fleet, then lets hear them and debate them on their merits.  So far the only arguments you have given against anything that Ive said is that I don't win any games, that I'm just complaining because I don't know how to play my fleet and that youre more qualified than I am because you win all the time.  None of that is true and none of them are arguments against the proposed change, just attempts to assassinate my character.  Of course I'm going to be hostile when you insult me constantly.


Calm the fuck down, you are getting far too upset over a forum man. Sit back, pop a beer and relax. This is only about a game that's supposed to be fun.

Except for that one post I have done no such assassination attempts (Which I apologized for, and you started anyways), and have backed you getting that Hellbringer since it was proposed, I was only suggesting that specific fleet ships 1: really have no place in the Chaos fleet, and 2: We need to play test the hellbringer before giving you more new ships into the fleet. Trial and error is the best way to make sure things don't get too out of whack. Add in one ship at a time and see how it works out. Going through and making vast (Not saying this is) changes to anything will result in some errors and it will be to hard to figure out what is

Since I have been on this forum, Ive been lobbying for a single change to the Chaos list.  It doesn't need longer range lances on the Dev or the old Despoiler profile back.  It only needs an attack carrier.  It needs one ship profile that can move forward along with the line ships, provide close AC support and lend some firepower to the gunships.  Its fluffy for a Chaos fleet to have such a ship, its necessary now to counter the plethora of AC and ordnance that other fleets are now capable of taking, cheif amongst them the IN.  And, as it is, the Tartanus fleet list has no carrier below cruiser size and a requirement for an escort squadron or light cruiser for each cruiser taken.  The Wardens list has opportunities for ordnance below cruiser level in terms of torpedos, an escort carrier (assault boats!) And a very good option for a light carrier.  The Hellbringer satisfies the attack carrier role and fills in the gap in Tartanus.  Add an attack carrier, fleet has its character back, issue closed.  

I completely support this...never said I had an issue with it, at all. I think it makes perfect sense since Chaos is mostly a pirate fleet. Do I think it will fix your problem? No, nor do I think it will be that great of a ship personally, but I have had really poor performance from every light cruiser I have ever taken.

/sigh....

[Taggerung]

On a positive note, how goes Dark Eldar anyways? My buddy Jim built himself a grand cruiser, and is just awaiting rules on one

[RCgothic]

@Tyranids, I suggest we post in the Tyranid fleet thread about what to do with it. afterimagedan has some good ideas that are worth expanding on.

@Imperials, Firedaggers do mitigate hostile torp shotguns - 1 in 6 salvoes will blow up on contact with the flak field. Retribution should be 355pts (not going to let people forget!)

@Chaos, it has 2 battleship carriers that can fire forwards with nearly as much firepower as a retribution (more at close range) whilst pumping out 4, 6 or 8 AC, one of which having a speed of 25cm. The Relictor may also pump out as much firepower whilst closing as a Retribution. Chaos is very strong in this regard. Now I'm not against an AC focused LC, but it needs to be on the expensive end of the spectrum so as not to edge out the Devastation.

@Necrons, this fleet also needs some love. I really liked the idea of scarab swarms, though not so much introducing a carrier specifically for them. This is based on the ideas thrown around in the necron thread in the experimental rules section:

Scarab swarms are treated as resilient assault boats that may move 10cm in the movement phase and are only hit by turrets on the roll of a 6. When the scarab swarms complete their attacks against a ship, do not remove them, as they cling to the ship to make further attacks in subsequent ordnance phases until they are destroyed. The turrets of the target ship may fire at them again at the beginning of each ordnance phase, and the ship moving through blast markers will also affect them normally.
Scarabs are not replenished by reloading ordnance, but by a successful damage control roll in the end phase, as more scarabs are located and brought online. Each roll of a 6 replenishes 1 scarab base up to the original complement. If ship has also taken critical damage, you must share successful rolls between repair and scarab replenishment, so you will have to decide which is more important!

[Plaxor]

@Tag

Dark Eldar have a GC, read the options below the torture. Players may make their flagship torture a gc by adding hits and another weapons system.

@RC

You're right about the Retribution, in all honesty I did reduce its points due to complaints on Tag and... others part. Mostly to stop whining. However the point is that people would still take this incarnation of the Retribution for 355 without feeling handicapped. Which is all that I want.

On necrons: Scarabs are going to be featured in the necrons 'planetary defense' section. They will be much like a minefield but be assault boats. I would love to hear suggestions on how this would work, but unfortunately I think that this would be a detraction from my current primary goal; finishing the fleet lists/rules. Planetary defenses are fairly secondary to this.


@Pthisis

I honestly think that the Maelstrom fleet is quite playable as it is now. I don't understand the complaint exactly. With it you're merely forced to take 3 squadrons of escorts or 3 cls. However I do understand that the fleet is ordnance light, and I made the Hellbringer more for rogue trader fleets, who don't have many ordnance options.

@Tyranids

I made a few decisions about tyranids, and I'm not terribly interested in a complicated change. People weren't interested in tyranids before which is a peculiarity. So far I have 'scouting' vanguards and some changes to the upgrades. Mainly that they are always available, and that you can only take 4 upgrades, including taking the same one multiple times. Meaning that you could only create a 6shield 12 hit monstrosity (without any other good upgrades, which are now usually cheaper) instead of a 14 6 shield one with boosted speed and massive amounts of bio-plasma.

Also of note, escorts with more than 1 hit become light cruisers. Since these can be squadroned with escorts it is no problem, and allows for a certain niche. I am considering allowing light cruisers to purchase an additional weapons system from their respective lists (I.E. a light cruiser vanguard would be able to purchase double the pyro-acid batteries).

[Taggerung]

Oh fine, raise the cost of the Retribution. It seems we are out numbered again. I will still take it because it reminds me of an 18th Century Ship of the line (Which is why I started the Imperial fleet to be honest), and it is still way better than it was, I still won't change my opinion on the fact that it's fair at 345 lol.

I was wondering something. Why does the Vanquisher have 5 turrets? Is it because it can become a carrier?

As for the Dark Eldar GC, oh, I was under the impression you were making a new ship, not just adding some hit points to one a cruiser.

About space marines and the specific chapter rules (Which are neat by the way), wouldn't it be more accurate/fluffy that Imperial Fists had the Stalwart rule, and Space Wolves were aggressive or something a bit more appropriate for a Chapter known for it's brutal assaults (Even in aggressive boarding actions in the fluff, Space Wolf Omnibus if you are interested). Maybe they get a bonus to the crit bonus, or do an auto crit...just tossing ideas out)

 

[Plaxor]

The Vanquisher has 5 turrets because it had little of anything else.


The reason Space Wolves are stalwart is because of counter charge in 40k. there is already an assaulty marine option.

[Taggerung]

Quite so, missed the relentless rule for Blood Angels.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

The sum of its parts were worth what was paid for, they just didn't work well together in concert. The new sum of parts is worth more than the old sum of parts, and work well together. The fact it can go toe to toe with more expensive battleships with reasonable chance of success indicates it should be more expensive than it is currently.

It doesn't change the fact that the original 365 point Retribution was an overcosted underperforming animal as Tag has pointed out. In an ideal world, it should have had FP18@60 cm broadsides for the same pointage if we go by the Emperor's FP6 broadside weaponry. I still think 345 is fine for the FP18@45cm Retribution but why not just meet at 350 just to satisfy both parties?

[Phthisis]

@Horizon

IN & Chaos were balanced before all the changes made.   Chaos got an overall nerf by shortening the lances on the Devestation and changing 4 forward lances to 4 side batteries.  IN got buffs. NCs got the ability to reroll misses. The new fleets have added more heavy weaponry on battlecruisers and above, and more access to AC with a pair of very good light carriers and even an escort carrier that can get AC into a fleet even cheaper than a Devestation.

Chaos was always the more AC heavy fleet, which was a counter to the fact that almost every IN ship has torpedos.  Now IN has more torpedos, more AC, and plenty of long range gunnery.  

We use terrain but not as much as the book suggests.  Most people here are still learning how to play.

@Plaxor
I dont like Tartanus because the lack of AC creates an exageration of the above imbalance.  AC to protect against torpedos and enemy AC is a necessity and Chaos has to use its precious cruiser slots to do that.  Even then Chaos still will be at a disadvantage.

@RC
The difference is that the Ret is more resiliant than any Chaos BB.  Chaos is supposed to have more firepower at longer range than the IN to make up for its vulnerability.  If the Ret is tougher and has more firepower, then what does the Chaos BB have over it?

@Tag
Glad youre not against the Hellbringer.  It would make the chaos fleet more interesting and even out the creeping imbalance between Chaos and IN.
You and I need to go to our seperate corners.  I need time to calm down.  I have that celtic temper where its exceedingly hard to make me angry but once that line is crossed it stays crossed for a good while.  Insulting my intelligence and integrity are the fastest way to cross that line, mostly because those are my best qualities.  I take pride in my intellect and my sincerity. Libeling me by telling everyone here that I'm a bad player and accusing me of lobbying for changes to help me win couldn't be further from the truth and you know that those claims are false.  You still havent retracted them. 
Keep the arguments to the issue at hand and over time I will calm down.  If youre right you should be able to speak against the argument and not the arguer, right?

@All
My argument is that the IN has a lot more AC and cheaper than before.  Chaos is weak against ordnance, so in the original fleet they had access to cheaper AC than the IN to make up for the INs penchant for torpedos and high armor.  Giving the IN so much cheap AC and keeping their torpedos has shifted the balance in favor of the IN.  More long range heavies in the IN list and weakened Chaos carriers contributed to the imbalance a bit too.  A light carrier like the Hellbringer fixes this by adding another less exoensive AC option.  Its fun, its fluffy. Even those who don't see the imbalance agree that it won't break the fleet list.  Add it and there is no more problem.

[horizon]

I gave up vs Phtisis, all arguments ditched etc. Ah well. Can't have it all.