List of flawed ships

[RCgothic]

I think we could afford to knock another 15pts off the Styx. I get it at about 245pts.

[horizon]

NO friggin way.
Veto against Styx at 245pts.



Attack carrier,
do you think such a Devestation would change the Dictator examples we have. ?

[Phthisis]

How did you get veto power?

Yeah, it changes it a bit.  Makes an AAF shotgun a lot riskier because the attack carrier is facing straight towards you.  They can potentially engage in a multiple ship boarding action.   Unbracable damage and a bunch of chances at a crit.  Finally gives Marines an opportunity for boarding in a fleet that conventionally tries to keep its distance.   A pair of cruisers boarding a Dictator with CSMs on it averages 3 hits, but can potentially do a lot more. 
It evens the score a bit for the Dictator's torpedo/AC combo, but even then the Dictator still has an advantage.

[horizon]

I just say so. I have no veto.
But it is habbit I used in this thread. Just, ya know, fun.


I don't get your assessment. What is the difference in a ship pointing at you firing 2 lances. Or a ship turning broadside and firing 2 lances?

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

I think we could afford to knock another 15pts off the Styx. I get it at about 245pts.

No, 260 is the lowest it should be.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

I just say so. I have no veto.
But it is habbit I used in this thread. Just, ya know, fun.


I don't get your assessment. What is the difference in a ship pointing at you firing 2 lances. Or a ship turning broadside and firing 2 lances?

I don't get it either. Directly pointing a ship at a another is a surefire way of getting it shot with WBs more effectively. I do this with the MMMH and accept the risk because I get a chance to shoot my lances forward on LO to get a better return. One can't do this even with Pthisis proposal or my carrier proposal (all LBs, Str 2 lance firing forward) because the ship will be reliant on RO and thus cannot maximize the full potential of the lances.

[Phthisis]

@Admiral
If the Styx is 260 then the Mars is undercosted. 


@Horizon & Admiral
Context guys.  I'd rather take 12 WBs to the prow than 6 torpedos to any side. 

I already explained that facing would give me the option to board.  Coming head on gives a ship a lot more options than running abeam.  I'm thinking a turn ahead.

Why doesn't anyone understand that you don't have to RO untill the turn AFTER you launch?  That means I can be LO the turn I launch ordnance.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

@Admiral
If the Styx is 260 then the Mars is undercosted. 

And you think this because...?

@Horizon & Admiral
Context guys.  I'd rather take 12 WBs to the prow than 6 torpedos to any side. 

Why not take 12WBs on an abeam profile then? It's not like only one weapon is firing at you. That attack vector you prefer might just mean you'll be eating 12 WBs as well as 6 torps in front.

I already explained that facing would give me the option to board.  Coming head on gives a ship a lot more options than running abeam.  I'm thinking a turn ahead.

What is it about boarding that makes it important to you? Boarding with cruiser is tricky at best. Boarding with a battleship is a much better option.

Why doesn't anyone understand that you don't have to RO untill the turn AFTER you launch?  That means I can be LO the turn I launch ordnance.

What is it about not launching ordnance to clear away bombers and torps that you do not understand? It's not like your opponent will not be launching his AC and torps at you. I do get that you can do that. What I don't get is why you would do that.

[Phthisis]

The Mars is undercosted because 2 bays is nor worth an armored prow, 6 WBs and a Nova Cannon.

They probably wont be taking many WBs because of thd geometry.  And of they do, it may wipe out incoming torpedos for me.

Boarding with a closing cruiser is tricky vs an abeam cruiser.  Its easier vs a closing cruiser.  Its impossible by an abeam ship.  Boarding is a good tactic as it passes shields and is unbraceable and potentially devestating

Place on CAP, then RO.  Then you have protection against long range ordnance while you close.  Up close it wont protect you.  In all likelihood I might not even LO.  Its not much of a boost on a ship with only 2 lances.  Keeping mobility for boarding is more important.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

The Mars is undercosted because 2 bays is nor worth an armored prow, 6 WBs and a Nova Cannon.

?

What? You're comparing across factions again? It won't work because each faction has its own characteristics. You compare within faction. From the Dictator, the Mars adds an NC and 2 Dorsal Lances, increases the range of the WBs and loses a turret. All for 55 points. Say 20 points for the NC. Leaves 55 points for the lances, range increase and loss of a turret.

They probably wont be taking many WBs because of thd geometry.  And of they do, it may wipe out incoming torpedos for me.

Who won't be taking WBs?

Boarding with a closing cruiser is tricky vs an abeam cruiser.  Its easier vs a closing cruiser.  Its impossible by an abeam ship.  Boarding is a good tactic as it passes shields and is unbraceable and potentially devestating

It is. For both parties. I wouldn't board unless I was on a battleship or the target is crippled or am tag teaming one.

Place on CAP, then RO.  Then you have protection against long range ordnance while you close.  Up close it wont protect you.  In all likelihood I might not even LO.  Its not much of a boost on a ship with only 2 lances.  Keeping mobility for boarding is more important.

Again, every turn, the enemy will be launching AC against your ships. So have one on CAP. And once I clear those out, then what? You won't launch again? Then guess what I send bombers or AB against you.

[Phthisis]

Comparing across factions is fair game.  If they can't compare rationally then its a symptom of imbalance.

I mean they wont be taking much WB fire.  Unless you turn broadsides in which case I welcome them over the torpedos.

I'm planning on double teaming one with CSMs.   Pretty low chance of failure.

Long range ordnance has a very low likelihood of connecting.  Its the close up stuff I'm concerned about.
Everything launches fighters for a screen and reloads.  My next launch is the turn before I board. See it now? 

[Plaxor]

Regarding interfleet balance.

Balance between fleets is a very difficult endeavor. So long as overall they are close this is unimportant. Ships such as the styx can only be 'loosely' compared to the Mars as each fleet has access to several different fleets. It is much better to balance within fleets, to ensure that no ship is obviously a poor choice compared to others in the list.

Regarding fleet lists.

I know someone brought this up, that IN/chaos don't make sense to have individual fleet lists. This is comparable to Space marines in 40k, who have several rule books for just space marines.

The reason why IN/Chaos fleets don't simply have access to everything like other races fleets, such as Eldar or Necrons is simply because they have FAR more ships, and in the interest of fairness these vessels are limited to accomidate races with smaller numbers of vessels.

If say Necrons had another 10 ships then there would be individual fleet lists for them as well.

Additionally, this is a way to provide character and to make players who use the 2 most-commonly played factions from looking too much alike. Think about it in 40k, what if every marine player just played with the generic codex, then things would be much more boring.

Regarding power of veto:

Horizon has power of veto on anything regarding Eldar. In fact, he is the only one with veto, as the eldar rules are his idea.'


Styx:

These quandaries are a little late in the game gentlemen. The Styx works for 260 points. I do not want to dig up old arguments. They are a substantial waste of time, and every person has an idea of what ships are useful and which ones aren't.

I believe the styx to be good at 260, Horizon does as well and Admiral D too. Not every vessel has to be in everyone's taste.

[Taggerung]

@Plaxor

No I agree that we don't want the same thing for every fleet, but if we break them up to be different types of fleets instead of being special lists, and break them up accordingly...Such as a patrol fleet probably wouldn't have access to most Battleships, but more likely to have light cruisers and escorts.

This is more a streamlining effort to make match ups easier.

[Sigoroth]

The Mars is undercosted because 2 bays is nor worth an armored prow, 6 WBs and a Nova Cannon.

Er, no, I have to completely disagree here. The armoured prow is countered by the fact that the Styx has absolutely no need whatsoever to close with the target and so can go abeam. I would not pay the 35 pts to put a 6+ prow on the Styx. It would be worthless. The Mars on the other hand needs to point its prow at the enemy to get off a NC shot, for which the 6+ prow is appropriate protection. Also, the Styx at > 45cm has +6WBs +2AC vs the NC of the Mars. At 45cm the Styx has +2AC vs the NC of the Mars (at a secondary target). The Mars has +6WB offside fire, the Styx has +5cm speed. The Styx has +1 turret.

Three Mars will give 12 AC, whereas 2 Styx will give 12 AC. This leaves 260 pts worth of ships to make up for whatever advantages you see the Mars having.

[horizon]

Mars is fine. Styx as well (260).

@Horizon & Admiral
Context guys.  I'd rather take 12 WBs to the prow than 6 torpedos to any side. 

I already explained that facing would give me the option to board.  Coming head on gives a ship a lot more options than running abeam.  I'm thinking a turn ahead.

Why doesn't anyone understand that you don't have to RO untill the turn AFTER you launch?  That means I can be LO the turn I launch ordnance.

First sentence: what? I do not understand.

If you face on a 45degree angle you get broadside fire, next turn you can turn again to go into boarding position if you like. Boarding is only funny with dedicated ships. Not sure if I would run a carrier into boarding...

Waiting with launch ordnance means your AC is not in play and that my ordnance can do whatever it wants.