Let's fix Battlefleet Bakka

[NateMg]

The specific ships aside, Nate has said that he wants a list that gets a lot of turrets to counter its lack of LBs and go BB heavy.

There is already have a good selection of CLs in the list and if the Siluria goes to 4HP @ 80 that will be more so. What if the BB limits were relaxed a little for this fleet? What if escorts in squadrons of 3 or 4 or even 5 counted as one of the three cruisers to get BBs?

I'm of the opinion that giving the AdMech refit to the whole feet is not a good way to go. I would propose that turrets get to fire against both AC and Torps in each phase as a start and then some combination of the following:

  Turrets hit on 3+ (perhaps just on the 1st turret die)
  Extra turrets as a refit.
  WBs get a left shift against ordnance.
  Limited ships and/or escorts with access to the AdMech refit.

Just some thoughts.

  

[Plaxor]

Guys; Nate is looking for simpler. +1 turret is easier for gameplay/rules than any modification of the turret rules.

The simple explanation is that this fleet is in more 'readied' condition because of Gryphonne IV (Hah.) and Bakka, due to the fact that it is a Segmentum Strike force.

[Zhukov]

Re-posting this question:

The point of Bakka is to create a carrier-light Imp fleet list. Thus, it should be heavy on turrets and cheap BB's, which tend to be more ordnance-resistant.

@Nate (or anybody else willing to weigh in till he get's back): Is this supposed to be a fleet with: 1. Low amount of carrier hulls, 2. Low amount of attack craft total numbers or, 3. Low, to none, attacking attack craft (having fighter only carriers)?

-Zhukov

[BaronIveagh]

The problem with just giving it more turrets is that this fleet would quickly fold under pressure from even an IN carrier fleet at that point, let alone a 'nid aboat swarm or carrier based Tau.  

What we need is the ability to give turrets some range.  At least 30cm because most AC have a speed of 20cm or greater.  If it's 15cm, you'll rarely get a shot off.

So, I say we make it a fairly cheap upgrade, +5 or +10, and basically, in addtion to how they work now, they also function as 30cm lance that can only be used on ord and hits on a +4.

It's simple, elegant, and gets around the problem without being OP like making all the weapons hit ord on +4 or giving everything the +x number of turrets they would need to survive (since I doubt +1 will be as powerful as some people think)

As far as 'lots of BBs' goes: invert the selection process like with Tau or Nids.  Just be sure to put limits on HOW MANY battleships are allowed.  We've all seen the 'all battleships' list from Tau in the past, and it might win, but it's not  lot of fun to play against. 

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

I can understand the carrier light, heavy on cheap battleship feel.

Ok cheap battleships would go to Retribution and Oberon. I would say that just swap the Emperor class for the Oberon in the fluff to make things simpler instead of having a list having a ship which is not in the list but has the option to be included. Then just add either the Victory and/or the Vanquisher for heavy battleship feel. I have no beef with both ships although the Vanquisher rules feel too limiting since its only one ship in the class can be taken in the fleet.

So no Grand Cruisers. As far as battlecruisers go, just stay with the Armageddon and Overlord for cheap heavy then add the Invincible instead of the Mercury. It's basically the same concept though different cost if I remember correctly.

Cruisers, stick with Lunar, Gothic and Tyrant with seeding of Dictators. Endurance, Endeavor and Siluria are fine but I think the Dauntless can also be included here.

The new escorts look ok.

Now to replace the FDT, just allow ships to be able to purchase 1 turret at +5 points (Vanquisher turret should go down to 4 in this regard) as well as either:

1. hit better with direct fire weapons at 5+ instead of 6+ or
2. get a left column shift with WBs.

I prefer option #1 myself.

I'm also tinkering with the thought of turrets hitting on a 3+ instead in lieu of Direct Fire improvement. But 3+ might be too good.

To add to having battleship heavy feel, go for 1 battleship:2 cruisers instead of 3.

Ought to make an interesting fleet list.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

The problem with just giving it more turrets is that this fleet would quickly fold under pressure from even an IN carrier fleet at that point, let alone a 'nid aboat swarm or carrier based Tau.  

Again, how do you figure that? With battleships being assisted by 2-3 escorts, it would now have 6-7 turrets to help in shooting down ordnance. Nids now only have at most 2x the LB capacity if I am not mistaken. If Nids decide to send in their ABs singly, chances are good it would die to turret fire. If the Nids send it in waves, then use improved direct fire which I am proposing.

What we need is the ability to give turrets some range.  At least 30cm because most AC have a speed of 20cm or greater.  If it's 15cm, you'll rarely get a shot off.

Nope, bad idea. This is basically FDT enhanced.

[BaronIveagh]

Again, how do you figure that? With battleships being assisted by 2-3 escorts, it would now have 6-7 turrets to help in shooting down ordnance. Nids now only have at most 2x the LB capacity if I am not mistaken. If Nids decide to send in their ABs singly, chances are good it would die to turret fire. If the Nids send it in waves, then use improved direct fire which I am proposing.

Except enhanced direct fire can be used to force your opponent to RO every turn in order to keep fighters on CAP out to 60cm, which gives you a hefty advantage in how many SO you can take compared to your opponent.  

Sorry, D'Art, but that's just broken, if they have to SO to put fighters on CAP, and you don't to eliminate them.

Nope, bad idea. This is basically FDT enhanced.

Not really.  In fact, doesn't even really resemble the FAQ's version of FDT.

FDT basically moved a turret from one ship to another, effectively massing at range.  Thus directly effects bomber attacks, etc.  

Instead, for any additional effect at all, they have to be shot down at range.  This can either be really effective, or... not, depending on how far the ord has to travel.  Basically it offers your opponent a choice.  Close into gun range, or continue to experience reduced ord effectiveness.  

Basically, turret becomes a 1 die per pt str 30cm lance that can only be used on ord and hits it on +4.  

Please go back to page 1, actually READ what I wrote there and THEN come back and invent relevant objections. 

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

Except enhanced direct fire can be used to force your opponent to RO every turn in order to keep fighters on CAP out to 60cm, which gives you a hefty advantage in how many SO you can take compared to your opponent. 

Sorry, D'Art, but that's just broken, if they have to SO to put fighters on CAP, and you don't to eliminate them.

Carriers ARE supposed to RO almost every turn. Carriers will have a disadvantage in the SOs they can take. So what's the problem? Because battleships can now shoot at ships with CAP on them? Is that really a problem? If you're shooting the CAP on a ship, you're really missing the more important target. Shoot the SHIP not the CAP on the ship.

Not really.  In fact, doesn't even really resemble the FAQ's version of FDT.

FDT basically moved a turret from one ship to another, effectively massing at range.  Thus directly effects bomber attacks, etc. 

Instead, for any additional effect at all, they have to be shot down at range.  This can either be really effective, or... not, depending on how far the ord has to travel.  Basically it offers your opponent a choice.  Close into gun range, or continue to experience reduced ord effectiveness. 

Basically, turret becomes a 1 die per pt str 30cm lance that can only be used on ord and hits it on +4. 

Which is why I said it is FDT ENHANCED. This is actually a better form of FDT. You can now shoot farther (FDT is 15 cm), you don't have to take another ship to use since youcan take it on your ship for a measly 5-10 points and get a better effect and hit ordnance on the standard 4+ only this time against all the other race's ordnance. Kinda broken isn't it?

[flybywire-E2C]

Hey Nate. I don't know if you saw this, but I was trying to keep track of everyones opinion on what they wanted to see in this list.


Vote Count.... (basically) Black means yes, orange means apathetic/other option, red means no. Tried to keep as good of track as I could, sorry if I screwed something up. Teal means 'with vengeance'.

Delete FDTs [Vaaish, Plaxor, Sigoroth, RCgothic valhallan
Vanquisher 300 (or less) pts [RCgothic, Plaxor, Sigoroth, Eldanesh
Victory 330 pts: [RCgothic, Plaxor, Vaaish, Eldanesh Valhallan
Delete Jovian: [Admiral D, Horizon, Valhallan, Zelnik, lastspartacus, Plaxor, Sigoroth, BaronI]
Add Dominion: [Plaxor, Horizon, Valhallan, RCgothic, Sigoroth, Zelnik]
Vanquisher 20cm speed: [Valhallan, Plaxor, RCgothic]
+1 Turrets (possible increased cost): [Sigoroth, Plaxor, Rcgothic, Valhallan, Zelnik]

Delete Victory: [Plaxor, Zelnik]
Vanquisher somewhere else: [Zelnik... Plaxor]
Delete Mercury: [Zelnik,

Hi everyone! There’s a LOT to respond to here so I will make my first fast-pass post in reply to this one. Everyone else does deserve replies as well, but some of these posts are actually conflicting (some say keep a ship because it’s great, others say get rid of it). That doesn’t make the arguments bad, but I will see how the discussion plays out and make adjustments accordingly. PS: “with a vengeance” means nothing to me. You either like it or you don’t. If your argument is rational, let’s talk about it.

-   FDT’s seem to be causing the most hate so they are gone. They are NOT being replaced with a different odd, used-nowhere-else mechanic such as turrets that hit on 3+. However, something far simpler is acceptable, such as all Bakka ships (incl escorts) can buy +1 turret for +10 points. Thoughts?

-   The 1.1 Bakka list (not yet posted) already has the Vanquisher for 300 points. This is as low as its going so arguments to drop the price further are moot. No, it’s not getting a speed boost.

-   As I demonstrated using the Smotherman Rules everyone is so fond of, the Victory for its firepower is about equivalent to a Retribution, with a stronger prow compensated by weaker dorsals. Making this ship cheaper than a Retribution guarantees the Ret will never be used. As was pointed out recently, the Victory has several advantages over the Apocalypse, which is only 10 points cheaper. Speaking of which, I know everyone wants this ship to be 15cm because they want the Nova Cannon to be used as a stand-off weapon, but 20cm isn’t a handicap when used on cruisers. Again, the intent is to make this ship a Ret analogue. If the ship is still too confused or misguided for your tastes, don’t use it.

-   There seems to be some massive, vitriolic, almost prepubescent hate for the Jovian. Only one ship can ever be used in an entire fleet, it can only be used by Bakka, and yet people still absolutely HATE it. Okay, it’s gone, but what gives? Really?

-   The Dominion- has anybody actually playtested this against Eldar? I have- I own one but NEVER thought of making this official! It’s advertised as a pirate hunter, but its 260 points worth of strawberry jam against Eldar. We can put this in the Jovian’s place since so many people want it, but in my opinion it really is rubbish. By the way, strawberry jam goes great in ham sandwiches (sorry, couldn’t help it )

-   Allowing all Bakka ships to have Nova Cannons is insane. Period. It’s bad enough the fleet list already makes them pretty common. Were it up to me, Dominators would NOT be part of the fleet list, but only an idiot would suggest that Dominators (which originate from relatively nearby Kar Durniash) would not be a primary ship in a Bakka fleet list when the farther-away Gothic fleet list counts them as primary ships.

-   I don't mind giving the Mercury a torps option, but I will have to pass this by Bob. On that note, the Mercury is like the Overlord in that it is not an ideal gunship BC. Imperials don’t get an ideal gunship BC. Play Chaos if that’s what you want. Period.

-   Since this fleet is supposed to be AC-light, Defiants are absolutely, positively OUT. I know some people reading this have either min-maxed fleets at least once or played against people who have. Admiral Rath, three Defiants and an Emperor is NOT what I call a Bakka fleet. Period.

-   Endeavor and variants are NOT getting 90deg turns AND 6+ armor. One OR the other. Argument ends.

-   This is not a “Segmentum” fleet list, it is a Bakka Sector fleet list just like the Gothic Sector or Armageddon Sector fleet lists. It just so happens that Bakka is the Segmentum Fortress for Segmentum Tempestus. I imagine that as Voss is pretty close to Armageddon but rather far from Terra (not to mention Terra’s immediate proximity to Mars), a Battlefleet Solar fleet list has only a passing resemblance to that of Battlefleet Armageddon, though both are within Segmentum Solar. This is only an observation and not anything that actually needs to be disputed or debated over.

-   Due to the proximity to the Bakka Forge World, it has been suggested that the fleet gets one Adeptus Mechanicus ship as part of the primary fleet list (the rest still count as reserves). Thoughts?

-   It has been suggested that the fleet gets one Space Marine strike cruiser as part of the primary fleet list due to its strong affinity toward Maccrage and the Ultramarines (the rest still count as reserves). Thoughts?

-   I do NOT believe battleships should be 1:2, as battleships are still rare and precious assets throughout the Imperium. However, 1:1 for battlecruisers isn’t entirely unacceptable, again thanks to Bakka’s proximity. Thoughts?

-   The Mars BC will NOT be deleted for exactly the same reason why the Defiant SHOULD be so. AC are supposed to be rare for this fleet, NOT absent. The Mars is the most expensive 4LB carrier in the whole game if you don’t count the one-off Ork battleships. Nobody will be using these to fluff out a fleet. Even if battlecruisers are made 1:1, the best cruiser ratio you can get is 4 launch bays per 360 points, assuming a fleet made up entirely of Dominion BC’s and Siluria CL’s.

-   For reasons not worth ruminating over here, we will NOT be adding anything from Forgeworld’s Badab war fleet list to this project unless Bob or Ray specifically want to address the issue, nor will we as HA’s be addressing anything published in IA10. As far as we are concerned, it’s all official as-is if GW says it is. If Forgeworld actually comes out with any models to support these new rules, I will be quite happy and might even buy some.

[BaronIveagh]

-   FDT’s seem to be causing the most hate so they are gone. They are NOT being replaced with a different odd, used-nowhere-else mechanic such as turrets that hit on 3+. However, something far simpler is acceptable, such as all Bakka ships (incl escorts) can buy +1 turret for +10 points. Thoughts?

Fleet = DOA vs Tau/Chaos/'nids.  Without some way to counter large amounts of ord before impact, even at +1 per 5, we're talking naked here.  And that nerfs bombers too far. 

-   There seems to be some massive, vitriolic, almost prepubescent hate for the Jovian. Only one ship can ever be used in an entire fleet, it can only be used by Bakka, and yet people still absolutely HATE it. Okay, it’s gone, but what gives? Really?

Personally, I like the Jovian, just not in this fleet.  As a suggestion: make it official but don't add it to a fleet list so anyone can take it as a reserve.  That should give those of us that want it the ability to have it, and the people that don't like it can go *content deleted due to inflammatory, heretical, and obscene nature.  Moral Threat: Extremis* in the palace of *name of ruinous power redacted by order of the Inquisition* and *content deleted due to inflammatory, heretical, and obscene nature.  Moral Threat: Extremis* themselves. 

-   The Dominion- has anybody actually playtested this against Eldar? I have- I own one but NEVER thought of making this official! It’s advertised as a pirate hunter, but its 260 points worth of strawberry jam against Eldar. We can put this in the Jovian’s place since so many people want it, but in my opinion it really is rubbish. By the way, strawberry jam goes great in ham sandwiches (sorry, couldn’t help it )

Notice that I didn't suggest it.  And, I have, and, you're right. 

-   I don't mind giving the Mercury a torps option, but I will have to pass this by Bob. On that note, the Mercury is like the Overlord in that it is not an ideal gunship BC. Imperials don’t get an ideal gunship BC. Play Chaos if that’s what you want. Period.

Torps for everyone!

-   Since this fleet is supposed to be AC-light, Defiants are absolutely, positively OUT. I know some people reading this have either min-maxed fleets at least once or played against people who have. Admiral Rath, three Defiants and an Emperor is NOT what I call a Bakka fleet. Period.

-   Endeavor and variants are NOT getting 90deg turns AND 6+ armor. One OR the other. Argument ends.

-   This is not a “Segmentum” fleet list, it is a Bakka Sector fleet list just like the Gothic Sector or Armageddon Sector fleet lists. It just so happens that Bakka is the Segmentum Fortress for Segmentum Tempestus. I imagine that as Voss is pretty close to Armageddon but rather far from Terra (not to mention Terra’s immediate proximity to Mars), a Battlefleet Solar fleet list has only a passing resemblance to that of Battlefleet Armageddon, though both are within Segmentum Solar. This is only an observation and not anything that actually needs to be disputed or debated over.

For that exact reason please remove all Voss variants.  It's stated bluntly in the Armageddon fleet fluff that they're rare in the sector they're built in, let alone half way across the galaxy in Bakka.

-   Due to the proximity to the Bakka Forge World, it has been suggested that the fleet gets one Adeptus Mechanicus ship as part of the primary fleet list (the rest still count as reserves). Thoughts?

-   It has been suggested that the fleet gets one Space Marine strike cruiser as part of the primary fleet list due to its strong affinity toward Maccrage and the Ultramarines (the rest still count as reserves). Thoughts?

Other then it breaks the 'all big guns' theme, sure.  It might help offset the lack of carriers.

-   The Mars BC will NOT be deleted for exactly the same reason why the Defiant SHOULD be so. AC are supposed to be rare for this fleet, NOT absent. The Mars is the most expensive 4LB carrier in the whole game if you don’t count the one-off Ork battleships. Nobody will be using these to fluff out a fleet. Even if battlecruisers are made 1:1, the best cruiser ratio you can get is 4 launch bays per 360 points, assuming a fleet made up entirely of Dominion BC’s and Siluria CL’s.

Incorrect: Admech list allows Dictator.  If you allow the admech ship, most people will take Dictator.  (If they're really lucky it will come with FDT) 

-   For reasons not worth ruminating over here, we will NOT be adding anything from Forgeworld’s Badab war fleet list to this project unless Bob or Ray specifically want to address the issue, nor will we as HA’s be addressing anything published in IA10. As far as we are concerned, it’s all official as-is if GW says it is. If Forgeworld actually comes out with any models to support these new rules, I will be quite happy and might even buy some.

So taking the Nicor will be perfectly acceptable in Bakka, as a reserve ship, if SM are allowed as reserves.  Nate, while I love to see big, indestructible hunks of metal blast my foes to ash, that seems... a bit OP. 

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

-   FDT’s seem to be causing the most hate so they are gone. They are NOT being replaced with a different odd, used-nowhere-else mechanic such as turrets that hit on 3+. However, something far simpler is acceptable, such as all Bakka ships (incl escorts) can buy +1 turret for +10 points. Thoughts?

+5 should be enough.

-   The 1.1 Bakka list (not yet posted) already has the Vanquisher for 300 points. This is as low as its going so arguments to drop the price further are moot. No, it’s not getting a speed boost.

-   As I demonstrated using the Smotherman Rules everyone is so fond of, the Victory for its firepower is about equivalent to a Retribution, with a stronger prow compensated by weaker dorsals. Making this ship cheaper than a Retribution guarantees the Ret will never be used. As was pointed out recently, the Victory has several advantages over the Apocalypse, which is only 10 points cheaper. Speaking of which, I know everyone wants this ship to be 15cm because they want the Nova Cannon to be used as a stand-off weapon, but 20cm isn’t a handicap when used on cruisers. Again, the intent is to make this ship a Ret analogue. If the ship is still too confused or misguided for your tastes, don’t use it.

Why not just swap the speed of the Vanquisher and Victory? Granted the later is a Ret analogue and I have no problems really with it but seems more logical and I most likely will take it with the torp version anyway.

-   I don't mind giving the Mercury a torps option, but I will have to pass this by Bob. On that note, the Mercury is like the Overlord in that it is not an ideal gunship BC. Imperials don’t get an ideal gunship BC. Play Chaos if that’s what you want. Period.

Chaos doesn't have an ideal gunship BC.

-   I do NOT believe battleships should be 1:2, as battleships are still rare and precious assets throughout the Imperium. However, 1:1 for battlecruisers isn’t entirely unacceptable, again thanks to Bakka’s proximity. Thoughts?

1BC:1 Regular cruiser is fine.

-   The Mars BC will NOT be deleted for exactly the same reason why the Defiant SHOULD be so. AC are supposed to be rare for this fleet, NOT absent. The Mars is the most expensive 4LB carrier in the whole game if you don’t count the one-off Ork battleships. Nobody will be using these to fluff out a fleet. Even if battlecruisers are made 1:1, the best cruiser ratio you can get is 4 launch bays per 360 points, assuming a fleet made up entirely of Dominion BC’s and Siluria CL’s.

Dictator's would be better then.

[Valhallan]

-   FDT’s seem to be causing the most hate so they are gone. They are NOT being replaced with a different odd, used-nowhere-else mechanic such as turrets that hit on 3+. However, something far simpler is acceptable, such as all Bakka ships (incl escorts) can buy +1 turret for +10 points. Thoughts?

+5 would be better. +5 for escorts min. imo. writing up some sample bakka lists (2k) i'd spend abou 50 on FDT's, though they'd have about 10 cap ships. 5pnts happens to be the smotherman value.

-   The 1.1 Bakka list (not yet posted) already has the Vanquisher for 300 points. This is as low as its going so arguments to drop the price further are moot. No, it’s not getting a speed boost.

Rockin'!

-   The Dominion- has anybody actually playtested this against Eldar? I have- I own one but NEVER thought of making this official! It’s advertised as a pirate hunter, but its 260 points worth of strawberry jam against Eldar.

horizon brought it up. I seconded. our groups each use MMS.... its pure gold.

-   I do NOT believe battleships should be 1:2, as battleships are still rare and precious assets throughout the Imperium. However, 1:1 for battlecruisers isn’t entirely unacceptable, again thanks to Bakka’s proximity. Thoughts?

really? you want AC lite, but now half of the CB's are carriers, and your talking about making 1:1 CR/BC? that's practically as bad as the defiant you really don't want in the list.

-   It has been suggested that the fleet gets one Space Marine strike cruiser as part of the primary fleet list due to its strong affinity toward Maccrage and the Ultramarines (the rest still count as reserves). Thoughts?

cute. leave it for when someone makes a kar duniash or IN ultramar sector fleet. too much AC in marines... or so i hear. Never played em. but thats my two cents. (pence? wtf is a pence?)

-   Due to the proximity to the Bakka Forge World, it has been suggested that the fleet gets one Adeptus Mechanicus ship as part of the primary fleet list (the rest still count as reserves). Thoughts?

sounds cool. extra turrets, extra lance. nifty refits. is it ANY ship or any ship within fleet restrictions (ie no mech. arc when you already got a BB). dictator though?

-   As I demonstrated using the Smotherman Rules everyone is so fond of, the Victory for its firepower is about equivalent to a Retribution, with a stronger prow compensated by weaker dorsals. Making this ship cheaper than a Retribution guarantees the Ret will never be used. As was pointed out recently, the Victory has several advantages over the Apocalypse, which is only 10 points cheaper. Speaking of which, I know everyone wants this ship to be 15cm because they want the Nova Cannon to be used as a stand-off weapon, but 20cm isn’t a handicap when used on cruisers. Again, the intent is to make this ship a Ret analogue. If the ship is still too confused or misguided for your tastes, don’t use it.

its still a sweet ship as is. 345 or 335 is fine with me. 20cm is rad. lets me turn that NC around when under fire.

other notes:
jovian. meh. no prow weapons. for its hardpoints it shoulda had 8lb. i'd never of used it.
I'm still behind the enforcer with only fighters. though its probably the same argument as the defiant. oh well.
the 'geddon is an excellent gunship. (esp here if i can buy it an extra turret).
okay. keep the Mercury as is. just put in some dauntless' to fly around with it. otherwise it's only got escorts that can keep up with it... oh and sularias (redundant as both are WB). torps are cool, i dig.

[Zhukov]

-All Bakka ships (incl escorts) can buy +1 turret for +10 points.

How about +5 for escorts, +10 for cruisers, battlecruisers, and battleships instead?

-There seems to be some massive, vitriolic, almost prepubescent hate for the Jovian. Only one ship can ever be used in an entire fleet, it can only be used by Bakka, and yet people still absolutely HATE it. Okay, it’s gone, but what gives? Really?

Because that one vessel will ALWAYS be taken. Between having the incredibly rare Emperor, a more expensive Mars (which has less LB's anyway), and no Dictator or Defiant means the only good way to get LB's will be the Jovian. And for a fleet who is supposed to be intentionally lacking in attack craft, 6 LB's on a Jovian really picks up the slack for the average player who wants an average of 8 in his fleet.

- The Dominion

Can someone send me the stats to this ship please?

-Allowing all Bakka ships to have Nova Cannons is insane. Period. It’s bad enough the fleet list already makes them pretty common. Were it up to me, Dominators would NOT be part of the fleet list, but only an idiot would suggest that Dominators (which originate from relatively nearby Kar Durniash) would not be a primary ship in a Bakka fleet list when the farther-away Gothic fleet list counts them as primary ships.

Why not create an "alternate" profile for the Dominator that has torps instead of NC's for 170 pts?

-I don't mind giving the Mercury a torps option. On that note, the Mercury is like the Overlord in that it is not an ideal gunship BC. Imperials don’t get an ideal gunship BC.

Actually I think the Armageddon is friggin awesome and most certainly fits the definition of an ideal BC. I just noticed the fleet list reduced the cost of the Armageddon. So why exactly would someone spend 20 (or 35!?) extra points for a ship that explodes violently and has comparable firepower? Not to mention, the BB engines fluff wise doesn't make any sense. I thought the Imperium had lost the tech to build new BB's? So why would they waste BB engines on a cruiser hull?

-Since this fleet is supposed to be AC-light, Defiants are absolutely, positively OUT. I know some people reading this have either min-maxed fleets at least once or played against people who have. Admiral Rath, three Defiants and an Emperor is NOT what I call a Bakka fleet. Period.

Actually, Defiants absolutely positively DO fit the definition of having AC-light fleets! There are ways of restricting the use of Defiants so the above example does not happen. Like, taking them 1:2 with other cruisers and battlecruisers in the Bakka fleet. If you want AC-light fleets, then you have to have ships with little (2!) LB's. And if the player wants a lot of Defiants, then he has a lot of vulnerable ships on the table!

-Due to the proximity to the Bakka Forge World, it has been suggested that the fleet gets one Adeptus Mechanicus ship as part of the primary fleet list (the rest still count as reserves). Thoughts?

Emperor, Dictator, and Defiant could be a problem. Otherwise, I think it's totally reasonable!

-It has been suggested that the fleet gets one Space Marine strike cruiser as part of the primary fleet list due to its strong affinity toward Maccrage and the Ultramarines (the rest still count as reserves). Thoughts?

Agreed! Like this idea! Though I potentially see the problem of having Bakka fleets with it's one cruiser just sending it out as bait (to soak up fire) and looking for someone to board. If you force Bakka to take the Strike Cruiser with the additional Bombardment Cannons instead of the T'Hawks that may keep the theme of the fleet going.

-I do NOT believe battleships should be 1:2, as battleships are still rare and precious assets throughout the Imperium. However, 1:1 for battlecruisers isn’t entirely unacceptable, again thanks to Bakka’s proximity. Thoughts?

I think it's necessary to give more credence to a firepower fleet. A lot of Armageddon's and Lunar's running around would be scary me thinks....

-The Mars BC will NOT be deleted for exactly the same reason why the Defiant SHOULD be so. AC are supposed to be rare for this fleet, NOT absent. The Mars is the most expensive 4LB carrier in the whole game if you don’t count the one-off Ork battleships. Nobody will be using these to fluff out a fleet. Even if battlecruisers are made 1:1, the best cruiser ratio you can get is 4 launch bays per 360 points, assuming a fleet made up entirely of Dominion BC’s and Siluria CL’s.

Which equals to a total of 16 LB's in a 1500 pt fleet (360x4+50 pt fleet commander=1490)! That could be a problem...

-Nor will we as HA’s be addressing anything published in IA10. As far as we are concerned, it’s all official as-is if GW says it is.

       

-Zhukov

[Vaaish]

-   FDT’s seem to be causing the most hate so they are gone. They are NOT being replaced with a different odd, used-nowhere-else mechanic such as turrets that hit on 3+. However, something far simpler is acceptable, such as all Bakka ships (incl escorts) can buy +1 turret for +10 points. Thoughts?

Well, the FDT was a different off, used-one-place-else mechanic, so I don't see why it would be problematic to do that here unless your hands are tied by GW but since you won't entertain the thought I guess the turret increase would do.

I think it should be an automatic +1 turret for all ships in the list with a +5 point cost increase already added to the ships and the option to take a second turret for +10 points.

Despite the added turrets, bakka is still going to have problems with ordnance unless they have a good cheap decently armored torpedo boat like the falchion to intercept torpedoes with small salvos. This will be a serious issue against Tau who can easily synergy alpha strike and negate most of the turret effect. The only way around this would be to let them shoot at any ordnance rather than being force to choose between AC and torpedoes but you don't seem to be willing to try that since it would make a new mechanic.

-   The 1.1 Bakka list (not yet posted) already has the Vanquisher for 300 points. This is as low as its going so arguments to drop the price further are moot. No, it’s not getting a speed boost.

Is there anything that you would be willing to change to give it some benefit over just taking a victory? The profiles are just too similar and there isn't a scenario reason to ever use this ship.

-   Allowing all Bakka ships to have Nova Cannons is insane. Period. It’s bad enough the fleet list already makes them pretty common. Were it up to me, Dominators would NOT be part of the fleet list, but only an idiot would suggest that Dominators (which originate from relatively nearby Kar Durniash) would not be a primary ship in a Bakka fleet list when the farther-away Gothic fleet list counts them as primary ships.

Ok, then if the dominator has to stay, remove the option for all other ships outside the mars to take a NC. Fluff reason is that all available NC went on the dominators.

-   I don't mind giving the Mercury a torps option, but I will have to pass this by Bob. On that note, the Mercury is like the Overlord in that it is not an ideal gunship BC. Imperials don’t get an ideal gunship BC. Play Chaos if that’s what you want. Period.

Torpedo option is needed for this ship. It's not so much that I'd like to see an ideal gunship as something to make the super explosiveness make sense. If you do a direct comparison to the Overlord they both have exactly the same 60cm WB capabilities for about the same points with the overlord's targeting array. There is no logical reason why the Mercury would NEED the battleship size powerplant to power the weapons when the overlord already has the ability to use weapons that powerful WITHOUT the powerplant.

25cm speed isn't enough of a reason to have a glorified fireship. Increase battery strength, an extra lance or two, anything to justify why this ship needs the powerplant and therefore the risk of exploding is sorely needed to make this ship work. Anything else and people will just reserve in an overlord.

-   Since this fleet is supposed to be AC-light, Defiants are absolutely, positively OUT. I know some people reading this have either min-maxed fleets at least once or played against people who have. Admiral Rath, three Defiants and an Emperor is NOT what I call a Bakka fleet. Period.

I highly doubt you'd ever see that taken. It's just a crap fleet. I suggested defiants because they are the crappiest carrier available to the IN and have the lowest LB numbers. People can try taking them but it's going to hurt them more in the long run. By way of example, how hard is it to force a 1 shield strike cruiser to brace and they have 6+ armor? Now ask the same question about the defiant. Once braced your AC evaporates and with it any offensive punch you might have had. Most people would rather reserve in a dictator than take one of the defiants. Not to mention they already have prescedent for being limited to at least 1 per 500 points or if you wanted 1 per 750 to so increased rarity. Much better than leaving the mars in.

-   Due to the proximity to the Bakka Forge World, it has been suggested that the fleet gets one Adeptus Mechanicus ship as part of the primary fleet list (the rest still count as reserves). Thoughts?

Very bad. A mechanicus dictator will always be taken for AC and turrets. You want AC light not easy access.

-   It has been suggested that the fleet gets one Space Marine strike cruiser as part of the primary fleet list due to its strong affinity toward Maccrage and the Ultramarines (the rest still count as reserves). Thoughts?

Also bad and unnecessary with the Marine Dominion list that better represents IN with a strong affinity to Marines.

-   I do NOT believe battleships should be 1:2, as battleships are still rare and precious assets throughout the Imperium. However, 1:1 for battlecruisers isn’t entirely unacceptable, again thanks to Bakka’s proximity. Thoughts?

1:1 will work alright if the Mars goes away. A siluria + mars done twice ends up leaving you plenty of space for more cruisers, escorts, and battleships.

[Plaxor]

Hi everyone! There’s a LOT to respond to here so I will make my first fast-pass post in reply to this one. Everyone else does deserve replies as well, but some of these posts are actually conflicting (some say keep a ship because it’s great, others say get rid of it). That doesn’t make the arguments bad, but I will see how the discussion plays out and make adjustments accordingly. PS: “with a vengeance” means nothing to me. You either like it or you don’t. If your argument is rational, let’s talk about it.

Oh sorry about that. Forgot to delete that statement. Note nothing was in teal.

-   FDT’s seem to be causing the most hate so they are gone. They are NOT being replaced with a different odd, used-nowhere-else mechanic such as turrets that hit on 3+. However, something far simpler is acceptable, such as all Bakka ships (incl escorts) can buy +1 turret for +10 points. Thoughts?

I think it should be +5, the relative low cost of the turret is reasonable considering that they would have low ordinance. Besides, 10 point turret upgrades are too much for most people to consider on a regular basis. Most players would go without if they were so expensive.

-   The 1.1 Bakka list (not yet posted) already has the Vanquisher for 300 points. This is as low as its going so arguments to drop the price further are moot. No, it’s not getting a speed boost.

Nice. Why not? It had it in BFGm?

-   There seems to be some massive, vitriolic, almost prepubescent hate for the Jovian. Only one ship can ever be used in an entire fleet, it can only be used by Bakka, and yet people still absolutely HATE it. Okay, it’s gone, but what gives? Really?

I think it's a combination of things. Its already a detested idea by a small group, and putting it in the fleet which has fluff contrary to using LB ships is just suicide on its part.

-   The Dominion- has anybody actually playtested this against Eldar? I have- I own one but NEVER thought of making this official! It’s advertised as a pirate hunter, but its 260 points worth of strawberry jam against Eldar. We can put this in the Jovian’s place since so many people want it, but in my opinion it really is rubbish. By the way, strawberry jam goes great in ham sandwiches (sorry, couldn’t help it )

Yeah, I don't get the pirate hunting idea. Then again most pirates aren't eldar? Having lances against Ork pirates is golden. I don't think it's rubbish. Sig went on a rant about it, saying that it should be 255. I think it's decent, and will build one for my IN fleet that I've just started (Go Tartanus!)

-   Allowing all Bakka ships to have Nova Cannons is insane. Period. It’s bad enough the fleet list already makes them pretty common. Were it up to me, Dominators would NOT be part of the fleet list, but only an idiot would suggest that Dominators (which originate from relatively nearby Kar Durniash) would not be a primary ship in a Bakka fleet list when the farther-away Gothic fleet list counts them as primary ships.

Nate.... The Gothic sector only had one Dominator in the fluff. The reason that it allows multiples is because the game designers didn't want to force fluff so hard on the fleet lists. The Gothic sector doesn't say 0-2 Emperors... 0-20 lunars, 0-6 Tyrants etc.

-   I don't mind giving the Mercury a torps option, but I will have to pass this by Bob. On that note, the Mercury is like the Overlord in that it is not an ideal gunship BC. Imperials don’t get an ideal gunship BC. Play Chaos if that’s what you want. Period.

I agree. Although most feel that a different ship build could suit a similar role and be more appealing to players. Look at the Ignus build, all you have to do to make it 'feel' like a fast BC is give it Improved Thrusters.

-   Since this fleet is supposed to be AC-light, Defiants are absolutely, positively OUT. I know some people reading this have either min-maxed fleets at least once or played against people who have. Admiral Rath, three Defiants and an Emperor is NOT what I call a Bakka fleet. Period.

Yes.

-   This is not a “Segmentum” fleet list, it is a Bakka Sector fleet list just like the Gothic Sector or Armageddon Sector fleet lists. It just so happens that Bakka is the Segmentum Fortress for Segmentum Tempestus. I imagine that as Voss is pretty close to Armageddon but rather far from Terra (not to mention Terra’s immediate proximity to Mars), a Battlefleet Solar fleet list has only a passing resemblance to that of Battlefleet Armageddon, though both are within Segmentum Solar. This is only an observation and not anything that actually needs to be disputed or debated over.

True.

-   Due to the proximity to the Bakka Forge World, it has been suggested that the fleet gets one Adeptus Mechanicus ship as part of the primary fleet list (the rest still count as reserves). Thoughts?

I really do love this idea. It makes the list much more interesting than it would be without.

-   It has been suggested that the fleet gets one Space Marine strike cruiser as part of the primary fleet list due to its strong affinity toward Maccrage and the Ultramarines (the rest still count as reserves). Thoughts?

No. That was one little war for the fleet. The Gothic sector doesn't get access to Eldar ships because they worked together once. Reserves works fine for this.

-   I do NOT believe battleships should be 1:2, as battleships are still rare and precious assets throughout the Imperium. However, 1:1 for battlecruisers isn’t entirely unacceptable, again thanks to Bakka’s proximity. Thoughts?

I agree. Battleships are a rare commodity. In most references in the fluff (that you partially writ battlecruisers are considered the real 'fighting' ship within the IN. If the IN wants to win a battle, they send in BCs, BBs are rare and valued, and hard to maintain so they wouldn't see combat like the BCs do.

-   The Mars BC will NOT be deleted for exactly the same reason why the Defiant SHOULD be so. AC are supposed to be rare for this fleet, NOT absent. The Mars is the most expensive 4LB carrier in the whole game if you don’t count the one-off Ork battleships. Nobody will be using these to fluff out a fleet. Even if battlecruisers are made 1:1, the best cruiser ratio you can get is 4 launch bays per 360 points, assuming a fleet made up entirely of Dominion BC’s and Siluria CL’s.

I agree.