List of flawed ships

[Plaxor]

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

Good God, I don't know whether to be pleased or unhappy.

[Phthisis]

@Sig
Agreed that it should be 390 when used with torpedos as an attack carrier.  Agreed that the Despoiler should be more expensive.  Agreed that the lances are batter than WBs.  See, we can agree on some things, Sig!

Disagree on the difference in damage output being worth a 35pt cost increase when all else is equal.  There are benefits to the lances, for sure, especially at long range.  But there are some things that the Emperor's loadout is much better for.  Eldar and closing enemy ships come to mind.  Its not so cut and dry as a 56% increase in damage or firepower.  And you prefer WBs for the chance of a spectacular success a lot of the time, don't you?

@Plaxor
Ruling on using Firedagger or any other IN ships for Chaos' IN renegades that aren't from the original fleet list?

[Plaxor]

@Pthisis

Renegade Imperial forces as they are in FAQ 2010 aren't present in these rules, as it gives too large of an option. Players for fluff reasons may agree to use allies/reserves following those rules, and this replaced that method of taking ships.

However, depending on how the RT allies list looks you may have some small 'gray area' for taking ships from other fleet lists.

[Sigoroth]

@Sig
Agreed that it should be 390 when used with torpedos as an attack carrier.  Agreed that the Despoiler should be more expensive.  Agreed that the lances are batter than WBs.  See, we can agree on some things, Sig!

Disagree on the difference in damage output being worth a 35pt cost increase when all else is equal.  There are benefits to the lances, for sure, especially at long range.  But there are some things that the Emperor's loadout is much better for.  Eldar and closing enemy ships come to mind.  Its not so cut and dry as a 56% increase in damage or firepower.  And you prefer WBs for the chance of a spectacular success a lot of the time, don't you?

A closing capital ship with 6+ armour at long range will see the Emp with an average 1.33 hits vs the 2.33 of the Despoiler. This is a 75% increase in firepower in the most typical circumstance. Yes, the WBs aren't always this bad. Sometimes you're not at long range. Sometimes you're not shooting at 6+ armour. However, sometimes you're shooting through blast markers, or against abeam targets. The thing about WBs is that they're positional weapons. Great when you manoeuvre them well. Not so great when stuck on a slow barge that can't turn. As well as dedicated WB gunboats I also like lance boats, such as the Gothic. As a support weapon lances are greater than WBs and as a carrier both the Emperor and the Despoiler are support ships.

As for shooting at Eldar, I assume you mean MSM, in which case you're not going to get a shot off anyway, so it's a moot point. In fact, being faster, the Despoiler is more likely to get a shot off with direct fire weaponry.

[Phthisis]

The Despoiler has stronger firepower than the Emperor.  But 3 lances arent worth 35pts more than 6WBs.  Its worth 12 more by Smotherman.  Its worth 25 more by RC.  Looking at the fleet lists, its definately less than 30pts.  For what it does, it should probably be worth 10pt less than it is.

[horizon]

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.

Why on earth did you leave out the fact lances hit on a 4+? Regardless of 6+ prow armour.

Carnage is offensive if needed and great at long range.
You do not go prow on. You keep an abeam closing route. That means the str6 prow is not going to fire by itself. Attack does not mean blind head on.

The 20cm on the Despoiler is a great deal, aka turning with blastmarker in contact is possible. Emperor cannot do that. Thus that only sounds as 5cm but makes a great deal in gameplay as well.

[Phthisis]

I hope everyone knows lances hit 6+ prows on    a 4+.  AC also bypass armored prows.  As WBs are far more common and torpedos roll against whatever armor they hit, and lances come at a rather significant premium and are relatively rare even in a chaos list, 6+ prows can be leveraged.  The majority of dice rolled while closing need 6 to hit and to even drop a shield.  Its significant.  Just saying I don't think its overrated.  It literally makes the IN fleet useable.  Id like to play against that 145pt Lunar fleet.  It would be an easy victory.

Attacking at an oblique isnt closing.  Abeam closing is an oxymoron.  If you can fire side weaponry youre abeam.  The attack carrier needs to get in close to provide close AC support.  If youre firing side weaponry, then you must be moving further away from your target.  They may be closing, but the Dev is working to increase the distance.  The Dev is a poor attack carrier.  Its a defensive ship, much like the Carnage.  This isnt really an issue anymore because of the Hellbringer.

Yeah, the bump from 15 to 20cm is significant.  But its not worth 25pts.  Will you make a Despoiler with 15cm movement 365pts?  I dont think you would.

[RCgothic]

The Despoiler has stronger firepower than the Emperor.  But 3 lances arent worth 35pts more than 6WBs.  Its worth 12 more by Smotherman.  Its worth 25 more by RC.  Looking at the fleet lists, its definately less than 30pts.  For what it does, it should probably be worth 10pt less than it is.

My formula puts the Emperor at 362.5pts, and the Despoiler at 392, or (384.5 with torps), a diference of 29.5pts.

Smotherman puts the Emperor on 365.5 and the Despoiler at 399 (396.5 with torps).

The reason smotherman comes out so high is because it massively over-values assault boats, charging the despoiler 28pts for them. I on the other hand, would charge more for 60cm lances firing in 3 arcs, which recoups some of the value.

As such, I think 390pts is a good price for the sum of the parts. There is a reasonable argument that as a support ship, the Despoiler should get a slight price break for its substantial off-side firepower, though not for its 'attack' variant.

Thinking about it, I'd make the Despoiler 380pts, with the torp option +5pts. This isn't because the torps are worth more (they're worth slightly less), but because the off-side firepower is worth more on this variant so it shouldn't get the 10pt price break afforded to the regular ship.

@Phthisis: I use an abeam-closing profile with my IN ships and it works wonders. I get to fire both prow and broadside at targets. The closing speed is about 75% of what it would normally be, but it makes up for that by allowing my battleships, battlecruisers and Tyrants to return fire on the way in. It also makes turning into the enemy fleet easier when I arrive. An Acheron on lock-on makes a mockery of 6+ prows, and a pair of them will easily cripple any 6+ ship that doesn't brace, even at long range.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

Attacking at an oblique isnt closing.  Abeam closing is an oxymoron.  If you can fire side weaponry youre abeam.  The attack carrier needs to get in close to provide close AC support.  If youre firing side weaponry, then you must be moving further away from your target.  They may be closing, but the Dev is working to increase the distance.  The Dev is a poor attack carrier.  Its a defensive ship, much like the Carnage.  This isnt really an issue anymore because of the Hellbringer.

You probably need re reconsider what an attack carrier really means. In the old days an attack carrier just means a carrier with a lot of attack craft on board. They use the attack craft to search out the enemy and deal damage. Even then, one does not expect the attack carrier to crash into the enemy lines and shoot up targets.

Now the carriers in BFG are a hybrid type. They're essentially battleship carriers. However, I still wouldn't be expecting them to head into the middle of the enemy formation and perform as well on the offense as well as expect to survive the onslaught of return fire much better than a true gunship.

I agree with people when they point out that the Despoiler is a support ship. A support ship is neither offense oriented or defense oriented. It can do both but just not very well. The Despoiler on Lock On still won't be expected to do as much damage as a true gunship on Lock On. Do that with any carrier in BFG and you lose at least half of its weaponry. There is really no such thing as a true attack carrier in the game that marries both a gunship's offense and resilience as well as AC, especially with the revised stats.

[Phthisis]

The Despoiler at 380 with an increase for torpedos is reasonable.

The Dictator is a good attack carrier.  It can move with the formation and contribute its torpedos and ram as good as any other IN ship.  No sense in trying to go abeam with it.  It can get in close and launch at close range.

The Terror Ship is a good attack carrier.  Same armament fore as the Kill Kroozer.  No reason to run it abeam.  It gets in close and launches AC at close range.

That Eldar carrier is good too.  Prow mounted pulsar lance and 4 squadrons.  Dive in, lance & launch, run away.  Just like the rest of the Eldar fleet.

I'd say the Dev is unique as its the only carrier below heavy cruiser that is defensive and long range. Strange, isnt it?

Its a moot point when the revised traitor list comes out.

[Sigoroth]

Attacking at an oblique isnt closing.  Abeam closing is an oxymoron.  If you can fire side weaponry youre abeam.  The attack carrier needs to get in close to provide close AC support.  If youre firing side weaponry, then you must be moving further away from your target.  They may be closing, but the Dev is working to increase the distance.  The Dev is a poor attack carrier.  Its a defensive ship, much like the Carnage.  This isnt really an issue anymore because of the Hellbringer.

What? Of course attacking at an oblique angle will close with the enemy. Hell, you can be travelling in perpendicular directions to the enemy and still close the distance. The Dev can be used as an attack carrier. In the line it has only -6WB offside firepower compared to a Lunar, with 4 bombers rather than 6 torps. On the way in you can run them straight in if you want, keeping them with Slaughters (though behind obviously), firing the fore batteries on the way, as well as the 4 AC. Hell, you can be pointed directly at the enemy and still get to fire your abeam weaponry against them. It just depends how close you are and how wide his line is. Obviously if you're going to bring the Dev in close enough to use its prow weaponry and/or shotgun its bombers then an oblique attack angle would likely be best, depending upon the other elements in your fleet.

A more normative use of the Dev might be purely as a support ship, providing AC cover and lance fire from 45cm at. By the way, the Carnage is not a defensive ship. It has a defensive aspect, but has the speed, reach and firepower to take the initiative and force the opponent to react.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

The Despoiler at 380 with an increase for torpedos is reasonable.

The Dictator is a good attack carrier.  It can move with the formation and contribute its torpedos and ram as good as any other IN ship.  No sense in trying to go abeam with it.  It can get in close and launch at close range.

Contribute torpedoes basically means supporting the others as you do not expect them to really kill something. Probably will have to BFI too. And part of your definition of an attack carrier is for the ship to be able to ram. So ram away with your Devastation. Nothing's stopping you. You'll probably take more damage but you can still do it.

The Terror Ship is a good attack carrier.  Same armament fore as the Kill Kroozer.  No reason to run it abeam.  It gets in close and launches AC at close range.

And then it probably gets crippled the next turn or at the very least loses its AC. Sure go ahead.

That Eldar carrier is good too.  Prow mounted pulsar lance and 4 squadrons.  Dive in, lance & launch, run away.  Just like the rest of the Eldar fleet.

Yeah because if it doesn't run away, it's basically toast as well.

I'd say the Dev is unique as its the only carrier below heavy cruiser that is defensive and long range. Strange, isnt it?

Its a moot point when the revised traitor list comes out.

It's the player and not the ship which makes for a ship being offensive or defensive. You can do all those things which the other ships can do with the Devastation. It's up to you if you want to. Now yes, you have tried it with your battle report a few pages back. However, you actually used them as bait, which I would never have done, at least not with only the Desolator as the main distraction. They are better off coming in with the MMMH group but not squadroned with them or as the second wave and shooting things up with opportunity fire.

Put Dictators with a Retribution and you'd also see the Dictators targeted first and killed rather than the Ret.

[Phthisis]

@Sig

True, that would be the way to do it.  Running oblique the whole way risks your Devs being out of range, so straigh in then oblique right before.  If youre oblique or perpendicular, technically they are closing and you are moving away even if the distance is shrinking.  They could always turn and leave the Devs out of range.

Still, I'm worried about their survivability in that role.  High priority target, low armor in a vulnerable facing without enough firepower to make the enemy flinch... I cant see them not being forced to brace or crippled quickly, unlike the other carriers I mentioned.

@Admiral

The attack carrier doesnt have to be able to ram specifically, just make the opponent flinch.  Making other ships brace is something that those other ships can do but I seriously doubt a Devestation can.  It means the carrier gets hit a lot harder the next turn.

Dictator with power ram.  Torpedo then bomb.  Ram if you can following turn.  Or ram & bomb.  Scary.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

Power Ram adds +1 and you're adding another 5 points to what is already an expensive and possibly overcosted ship. At best, you get the +1 additional damage. Great. But remember once that ship AAFs, no more ordnance for the next phase.

Sure you can have ordnance this turn if you didn't launch them and keeping them for the shotgun but then your Devs would be launching bombers at the enemy fleet since you're keeping stuff for the shotgun. And guess what? The bombers would be going after the Dictators. That's what i would do because once there is no AC, Chaos would be more in the advantage.

I'd say the Devastation, esp in 2s or 3s will make an opponent flinch. In my list, it was 2 Devs and a Styx. So 16 bombers vs 2 Dictators? Care not to flinch?

[Phthisis]

14AC from 2 Devestations and a Styx.

So, against a Dictator, that's average 14 attacks with bombers by 2 Devestations and a Styx. Not too shabby. 
Of course the 2 Dictators average 17 from torpedos and bombers.  And are much better protected by 6+ armor on the approach.   Also, not too shabby.  Especially since the two Dictators cost 220pts less.  And the Dictators have a slight advantage in getting their shots off first.

Compared to their counterparts in other fleets, the Devestation is fairly pathetic when used offensively.  Its a good defensive carrier, but I honestly wonder why it has such a reputation.