Demiurg Bastion

[Sigoroth]

Can we get this cruiser up for review or something? It is waaay overcosted. It should be no more than 240 pts at the very outside (275 VPs in Demiurg fleet or against Orks). When you've got 8 of them it turns into a 120 pts wasted (or half a Bastion) and really, you should be able to make a 2k fleet, including re-rolls, with 8 Bastions. If they were pointed correctly you could. The Stronghold seems fine and the Citadel also seems about right, apart from the fact that there's no model for it (no, the Bastion is not a 6 hit model!!). Just need the Bastion fixed. Oh, and the Citadel should be 210 VPs in a Demiurg list or against Orks (+1/7 of actual cost).

[fracas]

Base on what factors should it be 240pts?

[Sigoroth]

Based on the factor that it's way overpriced. No, really, based on what factors did they cost it at 255 pts? You are simply paying too much for what you get. Demiurg special rules are a slight downside. Superior torpedo fire arcs and the option to launch AC is worth possibly a little more than the extra torpedoes that a Lunar would have. Call it even so far. Mandatory range upgrade on only the lances (still short ranged WBs): +20 pts at the outside. So prow WBs and cutting beam for 55 pts? Nuh uh.

Seems to me that the Armageddon has better focusable fire at longer range, more punch with its ordnance, greater longevity and is cheaper. The Bastion has greater direct firepower when it can get targets in all 3 arcs and within 30cm and a few novel but generally useless abilities (firing torps backwards and the cutting beam). Mind you, the Armageddon still has greater total firepower when the torps are taken into account unless you can actually get to use the cutting beam. All this while being 20 pts cheaper. Even knocking 15 pts off the Bastion it's still 5 pts more expensive than the Armageddon and really trades novelties for reliability.

Also, from what I gather, most people think that the Stronghold is worthwhile and that the Bastion is not.  The Stronghold is 5cm slower, has a BB turning circle and costs 95 pts more than the Bastion. In return it gets +2 hits, +2 shields, +2 turrets, +6 prow/port/strbrd WBs, +1 port/strbrd lance and +12WBe of ordnance. The Stronghold compares well to a fixed Retribution too, suggesting balance.

In comparing the Citadel's rules to the Bastion we see a 70 pt price difference, but the Citadel has +1 turret, so call it 80 pts. Let's say the 2 hits are worth 10 pts each (most consider them worth less than that), this brings the difference back down to 60 pts. Call the broadside lances 40 pts worth. Soooo 20 pts for the option to use AC instead of torps? Nuh uh. 5 pts tops. Mind you, there's nothing to suggest that the Citadel is balanced apart from this comparison, but if the Bastion is balanced then the Citadel isn't. Therefore one at least is unbalanced and given the other evidence I suggest that it's the Bastion.

[Caine-HoA]

To be honest i always found 255 points for this ship pretty expensive as well.
I compared what i get to my Tau cruisers and never felt the bastion was worth getting into my Tau lists.

This is not based on a perfect analysis or experience from play but simply what i thought when looking at the ship and my list. I only one time player with a Stronghold that was somewhat fun to use but still pretty expensive.

[Zhukov]

I'll chime in since I have a Demiurg fleet (2 Strongholds and 4 Bastion/Citadel).

I think the pricing for some fleets (like this one) is a multitude of factors involved (as stated by the Rules Commitee). It's part weapons layout, part fleet cohesiveness/composition, and part fluff. In this case, I think Sig is only looking at the weapons layout part, in which case he is completely right, it's much overpriced to the human fleets. However, when factoring in they are extremely rare ships according to the fluff, they should, in my mind, have an extra bit of points cost to them (and even more when fighting Orks or operating as a fleet, as is presently the case). Then when looking at cohesiveness and composition, the Bastion fits in really well. It's a pretty powerful ship in most games you will play. The fact is, the Demiurg will be putting out torps, and attack craft when available, every single turn of the game till the shooting begins. And with the armored prow, it will typically be going straight at you, meaning the cutting beam will be in arc, and the broadside WB's will be in range. Also, the long range lances mean you can support other vessels in the firing line if you want to pick on a weakling in the opposing fleet. When looking at the fluff, it seems to me the main opponent they will face, is the Ork. I've seen a good 5 battles between the two, and the Demiurg win handily every time (and not because of poor Ork commanding). Are they designed to fight the other fleets, typically no, and the fluff supports that view by saying they typically flee anybody but Orks when confronted in large numbers. So the high cost of the Bastion is a non-issue to me. But it's also why they created the Citadel variant, to give players the added option (one I don't think I will ever take but hey, that's just me).

-Zhukov

[Zelnik]

Speaking as a proud owner of both bastion and stronghold vessels...

I think they are acceptibly priced. Each ship is effectively a battlecruiser in strength, and the cutting beam is rather remarkable if used properly.  Let's look at the benefits playing demiurg gives you.

1. Guaranteed leadership.  You are not starting at anything worse then ld 9.
2. Ignoring of blast marker effects.  Movement is not impeded.
3. 6+ prow armor universal
4.  All around torpedo launchers
5. Strong weapons combined with ordnance
6. Established rules forcing a disengagement
7. Cutting beam
8. Excellent ally options.

So far it seems the premium you spend on them is well worth it.

[Sigoroth]

@Zelnik

No, the premium you pay is not worth it. All the things you mention have been accounted for and the Bastion still falls short. The Ld may start high, but falls away due to attrition. So it gets worse the more it's needed. This is pretty much self regulating, being neither better nor worse than normal leadership, just different. Yes, being able to ignore BMs for movement is a bonus, but being forced to disengage when crippled is a negative. Again, this stuff balances itself out for the most part. I think taken all together that the Demiurg rules come out slightly down. That is, they serve to reduce the cost of the ship they're applied to. Apart from these rules they have multi-arc torpedoes, including backwards, as well as a bit of in-game ordnance versatility (from the Bastion). The most flavourful item though is the cutting beam. Typically this weapon does not-much. Sometimes it's really pretty good. I have no qualms about it being unreliable, it's just that it should be noted as such and not overestimated.

However, the biggest issue I see with your contention that the "premium" you pay is "worth it" is that this premium differs according to the ship. I think that I've shown that the differences in the value between the Citadel and Bastion and the Bastion and Stronghold are inconsistent with their price differences. So if you purchase a Citadel or a Stronghold for your fleet you're paying less of a "premium" than if you purchase a Bastion.

@Zhukov

Changing the point value when in a dedicated fleet or against Orks is untenable. It would make taking Demiurg to tournaments as allies would be impossible. Instead the ships give up considerably more VPs in those situations. This is fine, particularly as the extra resilience is only fair to middling (1 hit leeway on the Citadel, 2 on the Bastion, 3 on the Stronghold).

Rarity by fluff should have no effect on the price either.

As for compositional advantages I think I disagree here. While a lot of races can use them the most likely to is the Tau. The Tau typically want to take ships that allow their better ships to be taken. The Demiurg vessels will not allow a Kor'vattra player to take more Heroes nor would it count towards the minimums allowed for a Kor'or'vesh player to take Custodians. So a sacrifice is made here to take Demiurg vessels (particularly as the Hero is very strong competition for a Bastion). Similarly, in other fleets Demiurg ships don't count towards heavy cruisers, grand cruisers or battleships. So the ability for other fleets to take the Demiurg is pretty much balanced by the compositional restrictions.

In a pure Demiurg fleet again compositional restrictions work against the Demiurg. They have 3 ships and 2 models. If you're like me and don't accept the use of the Bastion model for the Citadel (meaning a scratchbuild) then this makes for a very restrictive fleet list. The Demiurg should really get a points break for this harsh compositional restriction. Particularly as you'd need 2 Bastions to field a Stronghold, which makes for a strange '1 Stronghold per 860 pts' limit. It is really quite hard to make a 1k Demiurg fleet too.

Now a note as to battlefield usage. It has to be fairly obvious that the Demiurg ship designs are quite conflicted. This isn't really a bad thing, since they have a lot of firepower and they're really just mining ships, but the fact remains that they're not efficient.

So, let's say you head straight at the enemy in order to try to maximise your cutting beam efficacy. Now you're wasting the range on your lances, which is wasted points. If you go abeam (perpendicular to approaching ships) then you're wasting prow weaponry and armour and off-side weaponry and the short range of the WBs is unhelpful. Of course, this is not what you would do. You'd approach obliquely, getting a target in the prow and a side. This will allow you to make use of your long range lances, prow WBs and torps. So, at 60cm you get 2 lances and 4 torps (Armageddon = 2L + 6 torps). At 45cm the Bastion gets 2L+8WB+4T while an Armageddon gets 4L+6WB+6T. At 30cm the Bastion gets 2L+14WB+4T vs 4L+6WB+6T. So far the Armageddon has won every single range bracket while being used the same way. If you get a target in the third arc it will likely be at 0-45cm meaning they will both perform the same for the most part, with the Armageddon edging out in the rare 30-45cm offside engagement.

The Bastions advantage lies in the ordnance versatility, raising of fleet AC limit and those occasions where the cutting beam comes into play. It loses out in range and focus. These ships are pretty close in capability, with the Bastion harder to use to effect and a bit more gimmicky. I don't see why the Bastion costs 20 pts more. For neither composition reasons, special rule reasons or rarity reasons.

TL;DR - point for point the Bastion performs poorly compared to the Citadel and Stronghold (internal balance) as well as against its nearest analogue the Armageddon (external balance). It's compositional restrictions make it just as bad as a battlecruiser in allied fleets and its cost makes it a nightmare to construct a 1k fleet in a pure Demiurg list.

[horizon]

Pretty straightforward:

Would I want to add this ship to my Rogue Trader or Tau fleet:
fluffwise: yes
playwise: never
why: to expensive for what it does.
solution: 240pts seems reasonable enough to go with

[Zhukov]

Hey Sigoroth,

Do you own any Bastions? Have you ever faught one? More than one? Or are you strictly looking at this by the stat line. We have two Bastion users here that are perfectly fine with the way the ships cost is. That should tell you something.

Either way, I'll agree to disagree. I think being an ultra-rare ship/species according to fluff is a perfectly acceptable reason to add a few points onto a ship. The Bastion works really well in the Demiurg fleet, and I should know, I have four of them and have never lost a game (8-0). Speaking in terms of a Demiurg fleet, what will the adjusted points really gain you in any games 1500 points or less? One extra escort? Maybe? It's really a non-issue to me. It's supposed to be a gimmick vessel when used as an Ally already, so the comparison to other fleets ship costs is pointless to me.

-Zhukov

[Sigoroth]

Hey Sigoroth,

Do you own any Bastions? Have you ever faught one? More than one? Or are you strictly looking at this by the stat line. We have two Bastion users here that are perfectly fine with the way the ships cost is. That should tell you something.

I have 2 Bastions and 1 Stronghold, with 6 Bastions and 3 Strongholds on the way.

And the fact that there are 2 Bastion users here that are fine with the ship's cost as is does tell me something. That there are 2 silly people here. Seriously, is your argument that a whopping 2 people disagree with me? Well 3 people disagree with you, therefore you must be wrong, going by that logic. Disagreement without reason isn't much in itself. You tried to provide some reason, but then failed to respond with more after it had been countered.

I think being an ultra-rare ship/species according to fluff is a perfectly acceptable reason to add a few points onto a ship.

Well you are wrong. Even if you were right, which you aren't (particularly as they should be tenable as a fleet in their own right), then why would the Bastion have a 'few points added' when the Stronghold and Citadel do not?

The Bastion works really well in the Demiurg fleet, and I should know, I have four of them and have never lost a game (8-0). Speaking in terms of a Demiurg fleet, what will the adjusted points really gain you in any games 1500 points or less? One extra escort? Maybe? It's really a non-issue to me. It's supposed to be a gimmick vessel when used as an Ally already, so the comparison to other fleets ship costs is pointless to me.

The first thing it would accomplish is to make a 4 Bastion 1k fleet possible. This alone should be enough to warrant the change, since the only way to construct a 1k fleet of pure Demiurg vessels at the moment without giving up a massive amount of points is to use Citadels (either 5 or 2 + 1 Bastion + 1 Stronghold). Since Citadels would require a scratchbuild that's not a very good situation.

If the comparison to other fleets costs is pointless then let's make the Bastion cost 40 pts then. After all, inter-fleet cost comparisons are pointless right? So no value is better than any other and we can make it cost anything we want. 40 pts seems right to me.

Oh, and if it is a non-issue to you then you should not be opposed to a cost decrease. You should only oppose if it is an issue.

[Caine-HoA]

@Sigoroth

the worst thing you can contribute to a forum discussion is an insult...

Anyone can have his own opinion. If it is your opinion that it is silly what he said in this discussion, you nevertheless shouldnt call him silly as a person.

[Zhukov]

@Sigoroth

the worst thing you can contribute to a forum discussion is an insult...

Anyone can have his own opinion. If it is your opinion that it is silly what he said in this discussion, you nevertheless shouldnt call him silly as a person.

Don't worry about it Caine. He does this pretty consistently around here. We kinda ignore those part of the posts and move on.




@Sig:

I see a 2-1 argument saying the Bastion is fine in terms of actual users of the vessel. I assume, unless they say specifically, people are talking theory-Gothic, and therefore its harder for them to see the advantages of the Demiurg. Not to mention, most people think of Demiurg in terms of using them strictly as allies. I have never used them as such and don't plan on it (partly because the best fleet they mesh with is the Imperials, and I don't own any of them).

In terms of which of the three vessels of Demiurg origin is wrongly priced, I think you have a stronger argument for the Stronghold being undercosted than the Bastion being overcosted.

On the fluff being a reason to add value to a ship, well I think your wrong! See I can do that too, and it gets us no where. So lets just agree to disagree.

In terms of the 1000 point fleets, you do know of the Demiurg list at the end of the new Tau list in the 2010 FAQ right? You don't HAVE to make a fleet entirely of Demiurg vessels if you don't want to (which, to be honest, is only a problem because you don't want to use the Citadel the way the Rules Commitee suggests). Not to mention, adjusting the points of the ship because you feel the Demiurg should be able to field 4 Bastions in a 1000 point fleet or 8 in a 2000 point fleet.... why? Why do you think so? What would be the difference between that and me saying "I think we should adjust the Murder to 165 points to get 6 in a 1000 point fleet or 12 in 2000 point fleet because I think thats right"?

-Zhukov

[Sigoroth]

the worst thing you can contribute to a forum discussion is an insult...

Hey, he started it.

Anyone can have his own opinion. If it is your opinion that it is silly what he said in this discussion, you nevertheless shouldnt call him silly as a person.

You have this arse backwards. If you don't want to be called silly then don't say silly things.

I see a 2-1 argument saying the Bastion is fine in terms of actual users of the vessel. I assume, unless they say specifically, people are talking theory-Gothic, and therefore its harder for them to see the advantages of the Demiurg. Not to mention, most people think of Demiurg in terms of using them strictly as allies. I have never used them as such and don't plan on it (partly because the best fleet they mesh with is the Imperials, and I don't own any of them).

Really? I see a 3-2 argument saying that the Bastion is so bad that it's not even worth taking.

In terms of which of the three vessels of Demiurg origin is wrongly priced, I think you have a stronger argument for the Stronghold being undercosted than the Bastion being overcosted.

Really? Care to justify that position? I've provided a good deal of evidence to the contrary. You've yet to provide any. Also, if the Bastion is correct then both the Citadel and Stronghold are incorrect. So, what, you want to adjust those 2 profiles rather than the Bastion's?

On the fluff being a reason to add value to a ship, well I think your wrong! See I can do that too, and it gets us no where. So lets just agree to disagree.

The difference being that you are wrong. What kind of fucktard would think that the Demiurg should be boned because they're rare? Void Stalkers are rare. The Flame of Asuryan is rare. Space Marines are rare. Aren't too many Slaughters or Acherons around either. Damn, throw 20 pts onto all those ships.

In terms of the 1000 point fleets, you do know of the Demiurg list at the end of the new Tau list in the 2010 FAQ right? You don't HAVE to make a fleet entirely of Demiurg vessels if you don't want to (which, to be honest, is only a problem because you don't want to use the Citadel the way the Rules Commitee suggests). Not to mention, adjusting the points of the ship because you feel the Demiurg should be aAble to field 4 Bastions in a 1000 point fleet or 8 in a 2000 point fleet.... why? Why do you think so? What would be the difference between that and me saying "I think we should adjust the Murder to 165 points to get 6 in a 1000 point fleet or 12 in 2000 point fleet because I think thats right"?

Wow. Just .... wow. Of course I know about the Tau fleet list. The Demiurg should be able to make a pure Demiurg list. This is self evident. As for not wanting to use the Citadel as the "rules committee' (ie, Nate) suggests well, no one should want to do that. Firstly, if I did, then there would be no Bastion, or it would have to be scratchbuilt. Using identical models to represent two different classes is terribad, the more so when those 2 ships are different displacements. Anyone that fields a Citadel and a Bastion in the same fleet without some massive conversion or a scratchbuild should be beaten about the head and shoulders with a stick. And secondly, the Bastion model is certainly worthy of an 8 hit statline.

If the only reason for reducing the price of the Bastion was that it made making pure Demiurg lists a lot easier then that would have to be considered, even if the ship were actually worth 255 pts. This is because the price of a races ships also takes into account options within that race. The amount reduced would depend upon how onerous the restriction was and how much would be achieved by points reductions. You could argue that the Demiurg have non-Demiurg options to fill out points costs and can also convert/build another Demiurg ship to expand the severely limited options. You can even argue that the points reduction is large and achieves a little (one more 1k fleet list option). So these would be arguments against a reduction due to fleet list restrictions. However, these arguments only apply if the ship is actually worth its price tag. Which it clearly is not.

• It is not unreasonable to want a pure Demiurg list
• It is not unreasonable to reject the Citadel/Bastion model equivalency
• It is unreasonable to expect players to field 2-5 converted ships to make a 1k list
• It is not unreasonable to expect some list variety at 750 - 1000 pts
• The Bastion is internally and externally overpriced

Reducing the cost of the Bastion seems a fairly reasonable solution to these problems. It's not all that should/could be done. An escort would also be nice. Something like a xenos vessel with a prow cutting beam (max 2) instead of the lance and no xenotech refit for 40 pts. Maybe give it leadership of 4 + squadron size (max 8 ) and force disengage when squadron crippled.

[Zhukov]

What kind of fucktard would think that the Demiurg should be boned because they're rare?

Good-bye. Hope you feel bullying people out of an argument is somehow winning that argument. I simply don't have time to write a book of a response to you showing every facet of the argument I want to make. The simple fact is, I think adding points onto ships for fluff reasons gives the game some needed character compared to the math-formula you want the game to be where everything is perfectly balanced with each other. I find your version of the game terribly lame and it seems you're not up for a tactical challenge because, you know, that just wouldn't be fair to be at some sort of disadvantage because your a certain kind of race in BFG. Calling me a f***tard for that is completely uncalled for and just not worth the limited time I have. 

-Zhukov

[fracas]

 The 255 pts is odd, but really the only reason to reduce this is to fit a 4th bastion into 1000pts, which is not a good enough reason. It may be overcosted but this is balanced out by the stronghold. This might need a minor downward adjustment given the current existence of the citadel and other cruisers available to take the stronghold. At 1.5k 4 bastions and one stronghold seem balanced.
I have more of a problem with the citadel. I have no problem with trimming down the bastion model to represent a citadel but why oh why must it be on a large base???


@sig
Your language and tone really is inappropriate and does more harm to your arguments than you realize. You forget that ultimately BFG is a game, thus at it's existential core must be fun. And as an extension discussion regarding the game should also be fun. Shame!