List of flawed ships

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

And your disagreement with the LCV is the same disagreement I have with the Necron auto brace. I dont like it there for they shouldnt have it.

So change it. If one has to, remove it. I have the same answer for it.

The IN still pays a premium for their AC regardless of the platform it is deliverd on. And if you are taking the small guys you are concentrating on gunboats as has been pointed out almost a dozen times already. No one, and I do mean No One is going to spam LCV's and hope to win. If they were they would take nothing but Dictator's instead because they are far more survivable and flexible. The LCV is a points trap if you dont come with a very good plan on how to use and protect it from the get go.

No one has tried yet. You can't say they can't hope to win because as with any list, it's the player which will make or break the list.

It is not an undercut to the flavor of the fleet. And it never will be. It is nothing but another play in a giant playbook. Should Choas get some kind of access to torps? They have it in their BB's their GC Repulsive and their Escorts. If they want it they have 4 avenues from which to approach it. And their hulk as well. So its not a lack of options that you can complain about, they have lots. Including several Character ships. Throw on top of it that they get boarding Torps for free while the IN dont have access to it at all.

Character ships are unique. They won't give Chaos access to torps the way AC LCs can provide cheap access of AC to IN. You want something similar, then Chaos gets access to torp LCs like the Dauntless.

But as I said in my first sentance ill say again, just because you dont like something doesnt mean it must change. There is no undercut to the flavor of any of the lists/fleets/races/sectors/whatever by the IN having LCV's. Hell they have had access to escort carrier's for a long time now and im sure you wont argue that those break their flavor. And while I only own 6 of them I love using them mixed in with other escorts to sacrifice first so I can keep cranking out CAP and letting those Big Guns, affordable because I didnt have to purchase full cruisers, do their jobs.

I'd argue the escort carriers DO break their flavor. Your last sentence is precisely my problem with AC LCs and Escort carriers in IN. Thank you for further supporting my point.

And lastly, the Dev IS way undercosted for what it can do whether you use Smotherman or RCGs math. Everyone has known it for the longest time. It had to raise in cost or get nerfed. Proof is in the pudding already in that the new stats cut down the lance range from 60cm to 45cm, meaning the game designers agreed with those clamoring for a change as well. And it's still around 10 points under.

[Phthisis]

@Plaxor

Its not going to avoid the controversy.  Everyone was on board with the Hellbringer except Admiral.  His argument wasnt against a chaos light carrier but rather that all light carriers should be stripped from the game.  Besides, he's using two bad arguments.  The slippery slope argument is unfounded.  Adding a Hellbringer does not mean anyone will ask for another ship type or that you will have to allow it, nor does it mean you have to add torpedos to Chaos or make every fleet identical.  This is a way to make the Chaos fleet the AC fleet again, remember?  This is reinstating the uniqueness of the Chaos fleet.  Also, comparing the Slaughter to a light cruiser is a false comparison.  The Slaughter has a cruiser profile and so is much more resistant to damage and less manouverable.  They have nothing in common.  Might as well say you shouldn't have a Dictator because they have a Mars and the Mars is much better.  
And 150pts   is well deserved for the Hellbringer because in addition to the weaponry and bays, I'm going to use it to board like a mofo.  Unbraceable damage past shields.  Thats why I havent argued it needs to be cheaper.  

If youre not eliminating the IN light cruiser profiles, Admiral isn't happy.  If you keep the light carriers in the game but don't introduce one for chaos in the tartanus list, there is a big imbalance against the chaos list and a burden to spam Devestations in the precious cruiser slots.   Yes, I get an attack carrier and am grateful for that, but for a full size carrier you are putting it in the wrong list.  This new solution seems to fix less and satisfy no-one.

[afterimagedan]

I liked the first version of the Hellbringer. It was a nice addition and will allow for a good, head-on carrier.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

@Plaxor

Its not going to avoid the controversy.  Everyone was on board with the Hellbringer except Admiral.  His argument wasnt against a chaos light carrier but rather that all light carriers should be stripped from the game.  Besides, he's using two bad arguments.  The slippery slope argument is unfounded.  Adding a Hellbringer does not mean anyone will ask for another ship type or that you will have to allow it, nor does it mean you have to add torpedos to Chaos or make every fleet identical.  This is a way to make the Chaos fleet the AC fleet again, remember?  This is reinstating the uniqueness of the Chaos fleet.  

The problem is there was never any need to restore the uniqueness of the Chaos fleet before the AC LCs came out.

Also, comparing the Slaughter to a light cruiser is a false comparison.  The Slaughter has a cruiser profile and so is much more resistant to damage and less manouverable.  They have nothing in common.  Might as well say you shouldn't have a Dictator because they have a Mars and the Mars is much better.

You're mistaken. They do have something in common. Speed as well as weapon ranges as well as speed bonus during AAF. The Slaughter is effectively the Light Cruiser writ Large. It is virtually the Chaos equivalent in all but name being a faster, short ranged and highly maneuverable regular cruiser compared to its siblings.
 

If youre not eliminating the IN light cruiser profiles, Admiral isn't happy.  

To be more precise, IN light cruiser carrier profiles and maybe even access to the Escort carriers. The funny thing is the Defiant profile, given more speed (25 cm) and 45 cm range Str 2 lances would actually be a good fit sat wise for Chaos rather than IN. While I have been against Chaos getting LCs, I might be persuaded to actually relent and give Chaos that.

[horizon]

I am against Chaos light cruisers as well. Not only the admiral.

[Sigoroth]

Also against Chaos CLs.

[Phthisis]

Sorry Horizon.  I didn't mean to forget you. Youre against all chaos light cruisers of any type because of fluff, but are ok with the IN's light cruisers of every type, even carriers.  Admiral is against all light carriers and escort carriers in either fleet, but seems ok for gunship light cruisers for both.  Youre both against the Hellbringer for completely different reasons and it seems that giving one of you what they want will make the other unhappy.

@Admiral
I still dislike the Slaughter/Light Cruiser comparison on the issues of manouverability and survivability.  I think those are the key differences and the Improved Thrusters and weapon range are incidental.  
Perhaps a comprimise on this issue is to eliminate the Slaughter from the maelstrom list.  There are plenty of light cruisers there you think will fill the same role.

I will let you and Plaxor hash it out whether to burn the Tartanus lists and remove light cruiser and escort carriers from the game or not.  Personally I'd like to keep them.

@Plaxor
Youve got a tough job!

I think there can be a solid case for chaos light cruisers in fluff becausd of the new RPG fluff, piracy  and the chaos escort background, a necessity for a good sub-cruiser carrier option in the tartanus list and a big hole in the fleet where an attack carrier should be.  I'm very willing to pay the agreed upon 150pts for the Hellbringer, and so is everyone else, despite its profile because of its utility.  

Or we can scratch the whole thing like Admiral, Horizon and Sigiroth want.  Gut the lists, start over and obsolete a bunch of existing models.

Or we can add a nearly identical ship to the Devestation that fills the attack carrier hole but still allows the tartanus list to suffer, especially at lower point values.

[Taggerung]

Hmmm seems we are at an impasse...

Plaxor, Tagg, Phthsis for the Hellbringer

Sig, RC, Horizon against the Hellbringer


So far the only compelling arguement against the Hellbringer I have really seen is that those against don't want chaos to have CL's on principle (I guess? Haven't really seen any logic behind it thus far), and they don't want Chaos to get an easier way to get a mass amount of AC in a fleet list which is designed to restrict it.

I personally am more on the fence, I don't really care, I think it's a neat ship idea and I know Phthsis would really like to see it in his fleet, and I really have no issue with it. However as sort of a compromise about CL's for Chaos (Since they already have them, and in fact a fleet list is designed around taking them) why not just restrict it's use.

In the Maelstrom incursion fleet list just have a 1 for every 500 points rule in there...It can't be spammed, but still be used, and if you take a Hellbringer it can't be used as the requirement for a Devestation.


or my personal preference is to just remove the specific fleet per sector (Which is dumb anyways) and have it more like the Eldar, or Orks...you have a couple of types of fleets you may make up, such as a Battlefleet, a Patrol Fleet, a (Whatever fleet)...This way players can choose which type of encounter they are having, and make fleets from there. My biggest problem is that with Chaos and Imperial fleets, you don't have similar mechanics of fleets to come up with a fair game, and that is something I think could be a good change, and would allow for things like the Hellbringer to see the light of day but yet only be in a Pirate fleet list, so players if they so choose can completely ignore them.

[Phthisis]

Not opposed to those limitations at all.

[horizon]

I still want to see what an attack carrier should be for Chaos.

And, welcome to list/rule design. Be a dictator and find your head on a plate. Be a wimp and be burned at the stakes.

[RCgothic]

Hang on a sec, I'm not opposed to the Hellbringer. I think it's a neat idea that would get butchered by any semi-competent gunfleet due to easily being suppressed and almost no defensive weapons.

As for list/rule design, Plaxor's tried to be as open and inclusive as possible, but I can sense a lot more dictation coming up on the topics people can't agree on.

[commander]

I am against Chaos light cruisers as well. Not only the admiral.

Same here.

[RCgothic]

Well the Chaos CL can of worms was opened by an official GW publication. They exist. End of.

Allowing them in one list will not be game-breaking, and they're a significant counterbalance to all the new ships IN are getting.  

[horizon]

Well the Chaos CL can of worms was opened by an official GW publication. They exist. End of.

That's sad since I have the original fluff line on the Pestilaan. And it would've solved the problem. (Meaning: no Chaos CL).

[Phthisis]

If fluff is the only issue here, then write new fluff!  The Maelstrom isn't the Eye of Terror and pirates aren't traitor legions.  There should be no expectation that renegades in the Maelstrom will adhere to the fleet list and ship types that Abbadon made use of half the galaxy away in a large scale coordinated invasion. So far there are already a couple of significant fluff glitches in the background written for Tartanus ships anyway.

Chaos doesn't have light cruisers because they used to not have them?  Well, these light cruisers are new pirate modifications of stolen IN light cruisers.  Some of them are even produced by renegades.  Ta da!
These ships arent even allowed in the BC list. 

@Horizon
Ive said this twice before:
An attack carrier is a carrier with an aggressive posture, ie:  significant forward weaponry.  A good example is if you switch the position of the weaponry on the Devestation.  2 lances 45cm FRL and WBs on the sides.  Or even fixed forward lances at 60cm.