Demiurg Bastion

[Lex]

The Mods have been pointed to this post, and after reviewing the thread I would like to ask everyone involved to take a step back, let this issue rest for a couple of days (and preferably review your own post(s) and edit out the inappropriate parts!)

As always, ANY discussion is a good thing, but people stepping into one should be aware that people in discussion will have (and are entitiled to) their own opinion, be it based on actual play, reading the rules or even based on "fluff". Accept that fact and let people in their value, discuss the rule/game mechanisms, and when nescecary: Agree to disagree.

[Sigoroth]

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. 

Ah, this kind of a fucktard. A points system is all about balance. If you want to explore asymmetrical odds that's fine. Play different points values. I have no qualms about doing so either. In fact, some of the scenarios have one player with half the points of another player. Why should a Demiurg player have to have less than this? Why shouldn't he have the option of a fair game? Asymmetrical scenarios shouldn't have to take into account that some ships are overcosted and adjust accordingly.

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???

Nonsense. It's not the only reason, but it is a good reason. Hell, even at 240 pts it's still overcosted slightly. As for the Stronghold, I have seen nothing to suggest that it's underpriced. It compares ok to a fixed Retribution, but is not clearly at an advantage. In fact, the Ret enjoys better focus and range, greater resilience, is more likely to get into a broadside position and is more reliable. The Stronghold has greater total firepower and a couple of gimmicks (all round torps, cutting beam).

@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!

Bah. People need to harden the fuck up. Besides, your analysis is wrong. It is not inappropriate to swear when someone's being a dipshit and it's not just about "fun". It's about passion. Watch a game of footy and tell me that games are just about "fun".

As always, ANY discussion is a good thing, but people stepping into one should be aware that people in discussion will have (and are entitiled to) their own opinion, be it based on actual play, reading the rules or even based on "fluff". Accept that fact and let people in their value, discuss the rule/game mechanisms, and when nescecary: Agree to disagree.

Well then, I'm entitled to my opinions about the type of person that would deliberately overcost an integral ship in a fleet based upon his own preference for an inherent disadvantage for Demiurg players. And I'll agree to disagree with your assertion that we should let people have such opinions with impunity.

[Lex]

As always, ANY discussion is a good thing, but people stepping into one should be aware that people in discussion will have (and are entitiled to) their own opinion, be it based on actual play, reading the rules or even based on "fluff". Accept that fact and let people in their value, discuss the rule/game mechanisms, and when nescecary: Agree to disagree.

Well then, I'm entitled to my opinions about the type of person that would deliberately overcost an integral ship in a fleet based upon his own preference for an inherent disadvantage for Demiurg players. And I'll agree to disagree with your assertion that we should let people have such opinions with impunity.

THIS REACTION IS NOT JUST ON Sig's POSTS IN THIS THREAD!

ANYONE that posts here feels that kind of passion or we all would have stepped away from these great, but unsupported games a long time ago.

But we are not a bunch of football hoolligans, that in the heat of the moment use inappropriate language. We TYPE out our thoughts and opinions, and are capable of (re)reading (and adjusting) those words BEFORE hitting the Post-button....  and if need be, to go back and use the "edit" facilities.

IMHO there is no need for what (as a non-englisch speaker) I would consider bad and inappropriate language in a discussion where your arguments are enough to make your case.

[Sigoroth]

IMHO there is no need for what (as a non-englisch speaker) I would consider bad and inappropriate language in a discussion where your arguments are enough to make your case.

What you term "bad and inappropriate" language is as far as I'm concerned a part of normal vernacular and also clearly and honestly communicates one's opinion/derision/feelings efficiently. In my experience people overreact and get either snide and/or passive aggressive. You are also wrong in your assertion that arguments should be enough. They clearly are not. People are entitled to their opinions, even if they're wrong. But they should be called out as being wrong. Indeed, fucking wrong. Just because we happen to be talking on a board instead of face to face is no reason to become a pussy and give in to trite blandishments like "well you're entitled to your opinion".

You could disagree with the above of course, but then, according to your philosophy, this would simply mean you'd say that I'm "entitled to my opinion", right?

[Sigoroth]

Anyway, what I'm really after here is a timeline on when the Bastion can officially come up for review. I myself had thought it so obvious that the Bastion was overpriced that I didn't even think it needed justification. It's certainly not worth a shield/range upgraded Repulsive and is pretty much on a par with an Armageddon (which is already at the upper acceptable limit of its price range).

So if Ray, Nate or Bob are reading this, any idea when/if it will be eligible for review?

[horizon]

I can agree with Sigoroth that in real life you can call a good friend 'diptwat' without problems.

On a forum the general consesus is that people don't say 'diptwat'.


I have no issues with things like that to be honest.

I can call sig dipsilly because I do not understand his pm.... lol

[RayB HA]

Hi Guys,

I'll chime in now,

There really is no <EXPUNGED> reason to swear on a public forum, beyond angering people. For those where swearing is part of their common tongue it will mean nothing more than acceptable language, so there is no harm in not using unacceptable language. 

The annoying thing is that I agree with a few of Sigs points, I'm not sold on the 'rarity pointing' either, but I do respect that a lot of players enjoy this part of the games that have 'fluffed' points.

As for the Demiurg fleet list, I have an extreme idea: I want a joint fleet list that contains Demiurg, Kroot, Rogue Traders, Pirates and xenos. This fleet list could be used to make a Demiurg fleet (or Kroot etc), but as it is hard to make a useable fleet with so few choices you could bulk out your choice fleets with a few cheap choices from the other races.

Cheers,

RayB HA   

[Zhukov]

As for the Demiurg fleet list, I have an extreme idea: I want a joint fleet list that contains Demiurg, Kroot, Rogue Traders, Pirates and xenos. This fleet list could be used to make a Demiurg fleet (or Kroot etc), but as it is hard to make a useable fleet with so few choices you could bulk out your choice fleets with a few cheap choices from the other races.

Uh Ray, that already exists.

See 2010 FAQ, In the revised Tau list, at the very end of the document. What you just said was an 'extreme' idea, is already done. Did Nate do this part completely without you? Or did you just forget it was there?

Now, what Sig will say to this thought (of filling in points for Demiurg fleets with other allies ships) is that he wants a fleet that is purely Demiurg, at 1,000 or 1,500 points. Right now, in really both instances, a purely Demiurg fleet is left with... a number of points that are lost due to not having enough Demiurg options (this problem is exacerbated if you reject the Citadel without having a complete scrachbuilt to represent it).

Some of us believe the Bastion is correctly priced (based partly on the stats and inherent abilities of the Demiurg and partly on the difficulty of assembling more than one Demiurg vessel, let alone a Demiurg battlefleet for battle, in fluff) and the points lost represent the difficulties the Demiurg would have in any engagement (more so than any other BFG race). Some believe the costs based on this fluff reasoning is completely uncalled for (since no other ships, no matter how rare, have added points for fluff) and the stats and inherent abilities (some would say the latter balances out and gives no real advantages) of the ship is overcosted by enough points to make an all Demiurg fleet easier.

It's really a split issue.
 
-Zhukov

[horizon]

Uh Ray, that already exists.

See 2010 FAQ, In the revised Tau list, at the very end of the document. What you just said was an 'extreme' idea, is already done. Did Nate do this part completely without you? Or did you just forget it was there?

If I look at the way Ray approaches the 2nd shield on the Marine Strike Cruiser (he never noticed it!) and above comment I believe Ray has not read FAQ/Compendium 2010 completely.

[Zhukov]

If I look at the way Ray approaches the 2nd shield on the Marine Strike Cruiser (he never noticed it!) and above comment I believe Ray has not read FAQ/Compendium 2010 completely.

An option I had not considered! Maybe he was just skimming the parts that didn't involve the stuff he plays with, or against, all that much.

I wonder if he knows we re-introduced the Fra'al battleship at the end of the Rogue Trader document and created an option for an all Fra'al pirate fleet! Hahaha

-Zhukov

[horizon]

Or 90* turns on Tau Protectors <evil grin>. 

[fracas]

 A pure demiurge fleet would need demiurge escorts

[RayB HA]

Really funny!   

I bloody well wrote that damned FAQ! 

My 'extreme' idea is to actually have a fleet list containing all of these elements.

So a Demiurg fleet could have armed transports or xenos ships as escorts. Kroot could have support from a Demiurg Stronghold. The non racial specific fleets are full of possibilities.

A fleet could contain any or all of the following:
Demiurg Stronghold, Bastion, Citadel (demiurg need tweeking for campaign progression)
Kroot Warsphere, and variants
System ships and Defence monitors, with tranports in squadrons of 2.
Fire ships!
Rogue traders, Cruiser and light cruiser
Transports of numerous types, inc cruisers.
Common escorts, like iconoclast and imperial escorts.
Various xenos escorts.
 
Should Niccassar be included?

NO Orks or Eldar!

I love the idea of having such a varied fleet.

Cheers,

RayB HA

[Sigoroth]

You can already do that sort of list, but I'm interested in a pure Demiurg list. I know that Demiurg are mercenaries and it's plausible that they've made contacts and could call upon some favours to dragoon in some allies in some cases, but it wouldn't be so in all cases (or even most) and presumably the Demiurg would be able to field a fleet of their own. 

So any idea when we can get an official review of this? We've already seen some stuff from Armada altered, so is there any reason why this ship couldn't be changed also?

[Kelsik]

You can already do that sort of list, but I'm interested in a pure Demiurg list. I know that Demiurg are mercenaries and it's plausible that they've made contacts and could call upon some favours to dragoon in some allies in some cases, but it wouldn't be so in all cases (or even most) and presumably the Demiurg would be able to field a fleet of their own. 

So any idea when we can get an official review of this? We've already seen some stuff from Armada altered, so is there any reason why this ship couldn't be changed also?

I haven't posted on this forum much but i have 2 cents to throw in on this topic.
Review what you know about the social structure of the Demiurg to examine how and why they would gather in large numbers. 
Demiurg use a family or clan system called brotherhoods.  A single brotherhood would control a bastion cruiser. 
Up to four brotherhoods co exist on a stronghold.
Their tech is tailored to mining so their mind set may also be more on mining than fighting.
Now ask your self,  what makes  miners really mad and willing to fight?  Profit? Rare exotic ore? Haggis?  Do they have territory they will fight over? 

I know my comments are not helpful,  but sometimes I like to put a face and motives on the game pieces I field. ( I do have Demiurg and like the way they fight)