DE/Eldar/Tau Flawed Ships

[Sigoroth]

Two hit points for free and it's good as far as I'm concerned. However, upon thinking about the lance variant I think it should cost +10 pts. The whole "1 hook costs 5 pts and is worth 10 issue" is fine so long as the hook is a forced purchase with the ship and the escort is worth taking. This is true in the case of the Explorer. However, it isn't true with the Merchant because you have the option of ditching the hook in favour of more firepower. Since you have the option then it really costs 5 pts and is worth 5 pts, whereas the lance costs 5 pts and is worth 10 pts.

Example: You purchase an Explorer for 230 (215 ship + 15 hooks) and buy 3 Orca for 25 each. The actual total price of an Orca is 30 pts. If you buy a Merchant you could have a 6WB ship and then buy 2 Orca for 30 pts each, or you could decide not to buy the Orcas and take a 6WB & 2L ship.

Now obviously the Orca is worth (a little) more than its cost, but this is because you have to buy the escort since you've already sunk some points into when you bought the parent ship. If you don't have to waste points then you don't have to buy the Orca. So the option of the lance is unbalancing. It shouldn't get the same price break that the hook gets.

I would say +10 pts for the lance variant Merchant. I wouldn't increase the price for the lance Emissary though, since the hook on that ship is worthless anyway, there is no balancing the two options and it should not be penalised for this.

[Plaxor]

I agree with Sig,

105 points for 6 hits hook vers, 115 for lance vers.

The Merchant is viable because it is ridiculously cheap. The vessel wasn't meant to be in a combat fleet, and in comparison the lance variant does have good firepower compared to a hero, for a much cheaper cost. Still 100/110 could be warranted.

[horizon]

Good with me.

[Zelnik]

If you go the route of 1 lb 2 b 1 fighter for the hellbore, how do you justify the cost? much less the abandonment of wyswyg.

[Plaxor]

If you go the route of 1 lb 2 b 1 fighter for the hellbore, how do you justify the cost? much less the abandonment of wyswyg.

Honestly I think this is an 'everyone nods with horizon' thing. Which happens pretty often

I don't know Eldar well at all, I've never owned an eldar fleet (I currently own 1 cruiser and 6? escorts I was using for a Rogue Trader game). For BFG I kinda just ignored their existence, as I've rarely come into contact with an eldar BFG player, and only played against them twice.

[horizon]

What?
1 launch bay = 1 fighter bay on the Hellebore.
(2wb + 1pl)

thus compared to current: -2 torps, +1wb, +1 fighterbay, +5pts (unique role)

I agree I am stepping over the wyswyg issue here. This to fix the issue.

You read the latest faq...?
Unchanged profiles:
Hellebore 65pts
Aconite 55pts

Hemlock/Nightshades still at 40pts.

I am very concerned about these things and am horrified no one protests. Bringing Aconite down, unchanged Hellebore ah well okay. But 10pts less for the Aconite!! I can only agree if they brought up the Hemlock/Nightshade to 50pts. imo.

[fracas]

You can always take hooks without orcas or dhows
Don't see why taking lances should cost more for the merchant a ship that is already weak as it is
I would say that the lance merchant is weaker than the merchant + orcas

[lastspartacus]

I don't vote for an increase on the lance version of the Merchant, but thats just me.  I'd prefer +4 wb at 45cm than +2 lances at 30cm, personally.
But ya know,  I dont have a korvattra fleet right now, so decide as ye want.

[Zhukov]

I am very concerned about these things and am horrified no one protests.

That's because everybody plays the MMS rules you've maintained so they don't care what happens in the MSM world

In all honestly, I'm with you Horizon on the points issues. I've never gotten around to painting my Eldar since I think the rules aren't the fairest already and I think this is only going to make it worse.

-Zhukov

[Plaxor]

@lastspartacus & fracas

The vote wasn't for the increase of the cost of the lance version, it was for a decrease of the hook version. Which, happened.

To get the extra lances and wbs on the hook version you have to spend an additional +50 points.

The Orca is probably worth ~30 points, as compared to a firestorm, which has +5cm speed and 1 turret (probably about 5 pts value), To the merchant spends about 10 points towards those in its hook version. However if you don't buy them it's a waste, which is a disadvantage.

The Ion cannon version gets more firepower on the same hull, and not on easy to kill escorts, also it doesn't 'waste' the 10 points for hooks if it doesn't use them. According to smotherman, the lances would be worth ~20 points. Hence the reasons.

[lastspartacus]

I think ion cannons are way advanced for the merchant anyway.  I like the idea of 2 wb per side rather than a lance.

[Plaxor]

I think ion cannons are way advanced for the merchant anyway.  I like the idea of 2 wb per side rather than a lance.

Not Really, Ion cannons are a more common thing in tau than lances in IN. Tau can readily produce them, and have just as much power issues with railguns as they would Ion cannons.

Although you could make a railgun merchant option, with Str. 2 45cm wbs on each side instead of the lances. Would make for an interesting variant LR tau playstyle. With tons of merchants and an explorer and a few messengers.

I would reccomend a +5 point cost on this variant instead of +10

How do people feel about that?

Also as a note on the messenger; does anyone think that this ship is too doomed to die? I think that either the restriction on them should be deleted or they should get 'stealth systems' (I.e. when a player tries to shoot at them when they aren't the closest target they must make an ld check on 3d6 rather than 2. If they are, then they just have to make a standard ld as though they weren't the closest.)

Other thoughts.... I don't think that there should be a Kor'or'vesh/Kor'vattra fleet list, I think that they should be separate and the allying rules works just fine if someone wants to use an older vessel in their 'new fleet', or a newer one in their old fleet.

It makes sense to have heroes in Kor'or'vesh, but not really merchants or explorers, or even defenders, as these would be all 400-800 years outdated. Presumably the Kor'vattra list represents the Tau fleet just after the damocles gulf crusade ~750M41. The Kor'or'vesh would be ~988m41 about 250 years later. The way tau update their tech, this would mean that the 1000 year old Explorers (which in the fluff are no longer produced as of 750m41, would be dying out quickly) and the 800 year old merchants (which weren't designed to be a front line ship) wouldn't be included in the main active fleets of the tau. They would likely be reserve vessels, taken in times of desperation, similar to old IN vessels.

However the Messenger and hero work just fine in the 'newer fleets' as these are 2nd gen ships.

[lastspartacus]

Some necron thoughts.  Reactive hull being exactly as the Kraken defenses?

AAF makes them harder to hit of they roll a 4 or more?

[Oqlanth]

hey,
As a Dark Eldar player I wish to talk about them.

By the way, I talk this according to latest confirmation;

Dark Eldar:
Mimic engines for free
Torture can buy two impalers for 20 points, not 2 for 20 each.


And I read latest FAQ Draft (v.2.6).

I think DE has nearly everything they need (at least what I  . For Grand Cruiser, DE doesn't madly needs it but it helps in both Fleet building and options but I advocate Yriel's Flagship like ship instead of 'slower' ship.

What I mean with Yriel's Flagship like is;
*It has have same movement with regular DE cruiser like Yriel's Flagship has same movement with other CWE cruisers.
*It has 0-1 (max 1) restriction.

I advocate these because;
*A slower DE ship is not fluffwise and less effective even it has 8 hits...
*Having many Grandcruiser is not fluffwise(this is Dark Eldar and only strongest and richest kabals 'may' have a cruiser like this one) and also 'may' effect game balance

So 'if' there will be a DE Grandcruiser it will be 8 hits but has same movement with other cruiser (35cm) and maximum 1 restriction (and may also has limited to 500+ or 750+ points fleets). As you noticed a 'flagship' will be perfect decision, at least from my point of view

 It also solves main problem of dublication of same cruisers for larger battles (like 750+ points ones) and also will be fluffwise and balanced.

Thanks,

[Plaxor]

Perhaps there could be a simpler solution;

The Torture carrying the fleet commander can upgrade its hits to 8 and then purchase an additional weapons system. Probably the cost for this would be somewhat steep, maybe 35? points.