Orks... Flawed Ships

[Plaxor]

Smotherman is made using the way ships were. These obviously were bad.

a heavy gun shouldn't cost 3 points... It should cost at best 1 point, probably closer to .5 on capitals and 1 on escorts, as they are almost twice as good at using them. Although 45cm guns aren't worth 2x the amount of 30cm guns. Who in their right mind would think that 10Wbs@45=20@30?

The value of these are closer to 1 30cm gun=.75 45cm guns. Which is true for the complex between 12wbs@30 for ten less points than 10wbs at 45cm.


Anyways, here is the modified smotherman value of escorts;
Hull; 5pts
Hits: 5pts
Shields: 5pts
Turrets: 5pts

Onslaught:
+4 speed, 4.5 for d6 guns, 1.5 for 1 gun Total=30pts.

Ravager:
+4 speed, 3 for wbs, 10.5 for torps, 5 for extra turret= total 42.5, although 40 is justifiable as they can't combine salvoes, and are usually the last thing to reload out of the whole fleet.

Savage:
+5 speed, ~4 for heavy guns =29pts. Although this still didn't seem good enough to make this escort a great one, so the soopa engines were added, which aren't that valuable overall.

Brute:
+5 speed, +3 guns =28 points. (doesn't count extra ram capacity)


Overall: The best escorts are the ones that cost less than the smotherman's estimations. As escorts aren't always used, the goal of 'Flawed Ships' was to make all the escorts more valuable in every fleet. So we balanced them against the best escorts, making them much more viable if used.

Discrepancies, not that big.

[Plaxor]

Continued thoughts on escorts:

It is shown that the best escorts are 3-5 points undercosted by smotherman, and these aren't even auto-include.

From the Ork study, these were both the brute and ravager, which both appeared in at least 50% of lists, whereas the savage was in 30% and the Onslaught at 7%

So the idea was to make all escorts more appealing, even without ABs killing them easily they still have comparative disadvantages to cruisers. They lose firepower with every hit, and are less armored overall. They have less firepower, but more focusable firepower.

[RCgothic]

The Ravager is downright fantastic for its points. It has an excellent 3.5 torps average, plus have the firepower of a Sword on top of that! I'd even go as far as to say the Ravager is undercosted.

The Savage and Onslaught are effectively identical to each other, but the Savage is faster (as it needs to be), and has greater firepower in exchange for shorter range.

Neither is even nearly worth the 40pts of the Ravager.

I'd say a price drop to 30pts for the Onslaught (It's slower that a sword, with fewer turrets, less manouevrable and less average firepower, but more damage potential)
35 for the Savage. It needs slightly less help than the Onslaught.

[Plaxor]

The Ravager is downright fantastic for its points. It has an excellent 3.5 torps average, plus have the firepower of a Sword on top of that! I'd even go as far as to say the Ravager is undercosted.

Firepower of a sword? it has 2. It's not undercosted as it is less defensible, and maneuverable, it's a lot bigger of a deal for escorts than one would think. 

The Savage and Onslaught are effectively identical to each other, but the Savage is faster (as it needs to be), and has greater firepower in exchange for shorter range.

Neither is even nearly worth the 40pts of the Ravager.

Good god yes.

I'd say a price drop to 30pts for the Onslaught (It's slower that a sword, with fewer turrets, less manouevrable and less average firepower, but more damage potential)
35 for the Savage. It needs slightly less help than the Onslaught.

The Onslaught is still not good at 30 points by itself. It still has 45' turns, -5cm speed, 1 turret (making it more than twice as susecptible to ordinance) and .5 less firepower. A bit much for 5 points. So with an addition of 1 firepower at 30points it should be fine.

One thing forgotten is that these escorts can't turn like anyone elses can, and they can only fire forward. Another disadvantage is that they usually have to CTNH to keep fireing after the first pass, this decreases their firepower and usually isn't even enough to get enemies in their prow arc.

The Savage I could see at 35 points with Soopa Engines. However it is very, very difficult to use weapons that are 15cm range. Usually when I play with them they only fire once or twice. As well 1heavy gun=~2/3 regular gun, however the ship does get a boost in speed, so this is closer to equal as it is more likely to get in range.

But not that much more likely. This ship should cost just as much as a Onslaught just the way that it is.

[Plaxor]

Sorry RC? You said Onslaught has more damage potential? The current FAQ 2010 has it as d6 firepower, which is 3.5, .5 less than the sword.  So were you thinking of my version which has d6+1?

But turning around is a really big deal for escorts, especially when you have F only weapons. Makes them very unappealing.

Like I said the Ravager is fine how it is, always was a perfect escort. Basically played like a shotgun that you never reloaded. I think in all my games I've maybe successfully reloaded a squadron of Ravagers like 4-5 times. They play perfectly by fluff, putting one of them in a squadron of Onslaughts and using it for extra damage at the last second.

And the fact is that we're trying to make escorts as appealing as possible. It was one of the goals of this project, as escorts are notoriously underpowered. Ravagers are the most taken escort ever in any fleet (so yes, they could be underpriced), and that is out of any.....

The Savage.... you have to play with them to really understand, after their first pass they are worse off than onslaughts, as by the time they turn they won't even be able to fire at half strength usually, as the enemy will be long gone.

Remember that it takes two turns before they can shoot anything at their opponents, which when compared to a cruiser, this is bad, as the cruiser could still fire something. Which is why most tacticas say don't take escorts.

[Sigoroth]

If you're firing with the range shift bonus for being within 15cm then you can't hit anything beyond 15cm.

[Plaxor]

 

If you're firing with the range shift bonus for being within 15cm then you can't hit anything beyond 15cm.

True... Hmmm.... never really played with that....

[RCgothic]

The Ravager is downright fantastic for its points. It has an excellent 3.5 torps average, plus HALF the firepower of a Sword on top of that! I'd even go as far as to say the Ravager is undercosted.

Firepower of a sword? it has 2. It's not undercosted as it is less defensible, and maneuverable, it's a lot bigger of a deal for escorts than one would think. 

Sorry, Typo. Meant half.

The Savage and Onslaught are effectively identical to each other, but the Savage is faster (as it needs to be), and has greater firepower in exchange for shorter range.

Neither is even nearly worth the 40pts of the Ravager.

Good god yes.

I'd say a price drop to 30pts for the Onslaught (It's slower that a sword, with fewer turrets, less manouevrable and less average firepower, but more damage potential)
35 for the Savage. It needs slightly less help than the Onslaught.

The Onslaught is still not good at 30 points by itself. It still has 45' turns, -5cm speed, 1 turret (making it more than twice as susecptible to ordinance) and .5 less firepower. A bit much for 5 points. So with an addition of 1 firepower at 30points it should be fine.

One thing forgotten is that these escorts can't turn like anyone elses can, and they can only fire forward. Another disadvantage is that they usually have to CTNH to keep fireing after the first pass, this decreases their firepower and usually isn't even enough to get enemies in their prow arc.

Whilst I agree lack of 90' is a big deal, surely it's possible to fall in with the enemy fleet rather than power past it, in order to keep the prow weapons to bear?

The Savage I could see at 35 points with Soopa Engines. However it is very, very difficult to use weapons that are 15cm range. Usually when I play with them they only fire once or twice. As well 1heavy gun=~2/3 regular gun, however the ship does get a boost in speed, so this is closer to equal as it is more likely to get in range.

But not that much more likely. This ship should cost just as much as a Onslaught just the way that it is.

Sorry RC? You said Onslaught has more damage potential? The current FAQ 2010 has it as d6 firepower, which is 3.5, .5 less than the sword.  So were you thinking of my version which has d6+1?

I did say it had less average firepower, but it does too have more damage potential. Six Onslaughts have a potential firepower 36, compared to a Sword's 24. I'm not saying it happens often, but much like the NC the potential is there.

But turning around is a really big deal for escorts, especially when you have F only weapons. Makes them very unappealing.

Like I said the Ravager is fine how it is, always was a perfect escort. Basically played like a shotgun that you never reloaded. I think in all my games I've maybe successfully reloaded a squadron of Ravagers like 4-5 times. They play perfectly by fluff, putting one of them in a squadron of Onslaughts and using it for extra damage at the last second.

And the fact is that we're trying to make escorts as appealing as possible. It was one of the goals of this project, as escorts are notoriously underpowered. Ravagers are the most taken escort ever in any fleet (so yes, they could be underpriced), and that is out of any.....

The Savage.... you have to play with them to really understand, after their first pass they are worse off than onslaughts, as by the time they turn they won't even be able to fire at half strength usually, as the enemy will be long gone.

Remember that it takes two turns before they can shoot anything at their opponents, which when compared to a cruiser, this is bad, as the cruiser could still fire something. Which is why most tacticas say don't take escorts.

[Plaxor]

3 onslaughts will have a firepower between 8 and 13 75% of the time. Although they could roll 18, it is very unlikely, and it is just as probable that they roll 3.

The fact is that multiple models in a squadron stabilize the randomness, and the vessel should be balanced as though it had 3.5fp for every D6. The percentage represented above becomes larger with more vessels, meaning they become much more consistent.

I know the 45' turns doesn't feel so bad, but it's that coupled with F only weaponry, and yes you can pull it off where you always have enemies in the prow, but it's tough.

[lastspartacus]

Not a ship, but I'm thinking strategy rating 3 for the orks of the cyclops cluster list, and 1 for the waaagh fleet.  They are as subtle as a brick in space.

[Plaxor]

RC, I know the Savage seems really great.... but look at it in comparison to a sword;

A sword is half as likely to die to ordinance, Also has better armor on it's off sides, i.e. the sides that it doesn't want facing towards it's enemies (front and rear) compared to the savages off sides (side and rear). Whereas they are both equal on the prow.

Basically a savage is far more likely to die than a sword. Not only that but heavy guns, due to the lack of range column shift only equal about 1.35wbs at 15cm range. Putting the Savage at total 5.4? firepower eq. at 15 cm, and zero at ranges above 15. Not only that but it doesn't have LFR weaponry.

As one of the goals of this was to make every escort balanced on the two best (ravager, and sword)

In fact the only advantage a Savage has on a sword is that it has 1.4 wbs on it at close range....

X	Advantages	disadvantages
Savage	1.4fp at close range	less turns, F only weapons, less than half resistance to ordinance, Ork LD, Worse armor on off sides, Less range/no weapons strength at similar ranges to Sword

Honestly it is absurd to make the vessel cost the same amount... also the -2AAF dice make it a lot harder to use it's short range weapons.

Heavy guns suck compared to regular wbs, I know double damage seems like a lot, but the HGs basically are getting a right column shift compared to normal wbs, which accounts for more than you think. Ultimately it was calculated 1HG=4/3Gun at ranges under 15cm due to the range shift and double damage.

[Plaxor]

All right to get absolutely how valuable heavy guns are compared to regular wbs I will do the work that I didn't need to. Analyzing the whole FP table. This is a representation of how much firepower you would need to get each number of dice to roll.

Number of Dice	Closing	Moving Away	Abeam	Average
Guns Vs Cap (1)	1	1	1
Guns Vs Escort (1)	1	1	2
HGuns Vs Cap (1)	1	1	2
HGuns Vs Escort (1)	1	2	3
Guns Vs Cap (2)	2	3	3
Guns Vs Escort (2)	3	3	5
HGuns vs Cap (2)	3	3	5
HGuns vs Escort (2)	3	5	8
Guns vs Cap (3)	3	4	5
Guns vs Escort (3)	4	5	8
Hguns vs Cap (3)	4	5	8
Hguns vs Escort (3)	5	8	13
Guns vs Cap (4)	4	5	7
Guns vs Escort (4)	5	7	10
HGuns vs Cap (4)	5	7	10
HGuns vs Escort (4)	7	10	18
Guns vs Cap (5)	5	7	9
Guns vs Escort (5)	7	9	13
Hguns vs Cap (5)	7	9	13
Hguns vs Escort (5)	9	13	23
Guns vs Cap (6)	7	8	11
Guns vs Escort (6)	8	11	16
HGuns vs Cap (6)	8	11	16
HGuns vs Escort (6)	11	16	28
Guns vs Cap (7)	8	10	13
Guns vs Escort (7)	10	13	19
Hguns vs Cap (7)	10	13	19
Hguns vs Escort (7)	13	19	33

Stopped there as it started to be beyond the scope of things.

Anyways if you total up the amount of firepower needed for Guns Vs. Heavy guns in the same circumstances, then this becomes 271guns=431 heavy guns.

Which amounts to a Gun needing .62 the amount of 'strength' to get the same number of dice. However Hguns do double damage so this is actually 1.24 standard WBs equivalents. For simplicities sake we rounded up to 4/3 at close range or 1.33, but decided that since they are only useful half as often (half range) then this puts them at 2/3 overall.

Now WBs, Hguns really any weapon is more useful on an escort slightly, as not only are they faster (they have farther threat range, and a better turn) but comparing 1 escort directly to another, especially if they are the same speed prevents this from becoming an issue.


Note that we originally did the table above with just 'firepower required to get to 3 dice' in which case the value was .67 instead of .62, the far right column dilutes stuff a little, but still the principle is the same, and no matter where you take it from it will give you consistently a value between .57 and .75.

[Plaxor]

Also more thoughts on the Onslaught:

So if the FP remains at D6 for 30 points, then compared to the brute:

For the benefit of 1.5 firepower the Onslaught costs 5 more points. It loses 5cm speed, LFR weaponry (a big one), 90' turns, and the ramming capacity. Definitely not worth 1.5 firepower.

2.5 yes (d6+1), then the negatives are worth the 5 point hike.

[Plaxor]

I think a reasonable compromise on the Savage gunship would be to do my original thought, which was to cost it at 30 points but to make soopa engines a +5 point upgrade on it. This would work with current HA ruling which place the vessel at 30 points (see FAQ). Essentially this would give the ship an upgrade option.

Also note; soopa engine upgrades on capitals can now only replace guns, not heavy guns, and they are less detrimental overall. They only will reduce the FP to str2, not entirely. So for a Kill-Kroozer it's side weapons would go from D6+2 to just 2. This resembles the BBs better (who lose 2 fp on each side, in this case each ship loses 3.5), and makes it a worthwhile upgrade.

[Plaxor]

Final thoughts on Savage; think about it this way, if an escort was equipped with str 6 forward only wbs (we're rounding up from 5.33 for comparison's sake) that were 15cm, then how would it compare to other vessels?

Compared to an Iconoclast:

Iconoclast loses: worse primary armor (side). No automatic AAF, less firepower at close range
Iconoclast gains: +5cm, 90' turns, LFR weaponry, better leadership overall, 5 points cheaper, +2d6 on aaf, more firepower at a distance, thus making it more defensive.

That is a lot to lose. Note that Savages have to be within 15cm of their enemy to be effective, this means that they will likely be within 15 the next turn, and the opponent will get more dice against them with their wbs.

We already talked about Swords of course, but to reitterate:

Sword loses: Less firepower at close range, no automatic AAF, Standard boarding modifier (like this matters on escorts...)
Sword gains: +1 turret, better off side armor, 90' turns, Longer range (and thus more defensive), +2d6 on AAF, better leadership, LFR weaponry.

The gains that a Savage has is not worth them being equal in price.

Anyways, I won't rant about the Savage anymore. It is notorious for being a terrible option, and I might find old tacticas to point it out.

One thing that's difficult about Savages is that they are difficult to play by themselves, they really only work well with other escorts. It is rather interesting how the fluff on them is true (although written of course by how they were played). Usually Enemy ships will be able to shoot at them a turn or two before the savages can fire back, or they pass them and are able to kill them from the sides or behind.

Firing a weapon at an abeam cruiser within 15cm without a range shift is bad.... and the savages die... terribly.