November 05, 2024, 06:26:28 AM

Author Topic: BFG:R Book I The Core Rules: Updates, Feedback & Comments Thread  (Read 66683 times)

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 4201
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: BFG:R Book I The Core Rules: Updates, Feedback & Comments Thread
« Reply #135 on: January 04, 2012, 07:09:27 AM »
For what it's worth, I just finished whipping up that spreadsheet that shows the rough effectiveness of each weapon type against typical CE, DE, and IN cruisers for various rule set/fleet list combinations.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Apqs5-oxdPArdF9mclBNTmYzVGptLXJRa01MMDN5blE

I present it without initial editorial.

?
I cannot make cheese of it.

Left most column: classic bfg eldar
lance <15cm needs 10 lances to do 1 hit = that what you mean?

Isn't that 'off'?

Did you factor in the blastmarker effect? Save = blastmarker = 6 is damage.

Did you factor in vs the Lunar that Eldar batteries have a left shift?

And if I am honest I am quite pleased with the battery values in BFG:R 1.6 vs the Lunar.


Offline TheDaR

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 21
Re: BFG:R Book I The Core Rules: Updates, Feedback & Comments Thread
« Reply #136 on: January 04, 2012, 07:13:39 AM »
About the DE list selection, I do think I mentioned something about having to make sample lists before I was sure. I think that maybe a 2 Escort per Capital Ship may do the trick. Max 12 was always a funny limit, and doesn't make sense for a pirate fleet, instead a split seemed sensible, besides most fleets would have to spend 2000 points on just cruisers to get to 12 so it isn't a real limit. With 6 you are given a true limitation, and one could spend 2000 points just getting Cruisers and the neccessary escorts/characters before they hit their limit.

Hrm.  At 2:1, you can run 3 Succubi and 7 Subjugation into a 750 point list.  Or 2 Tortures and 4 Corsairs.   That seems pretty reasonable.   In fact, if you go impalers on the capitals, you can exactly squeeze a Torture, 2 Succubi, and 6 Subjugation.  That seems like a well balanced list.

Though I still like the idea of running a 5 Succubi list at 750, or 10 strong at 1500. :)  I don't know that it'd be very good, but I like it.   I also still maintain that putting a heavy identity on Light Cruisers for Dark Eldar is both very fluffy, and helps differentiate them from a lot of other fleets.   A CL is just self-sufficient enough to be a perfect Pirate/raiding vessel.  The only other fleet that even really comes close to being able to run the same degree of CL-heavy lists is the IN.

As far as DE vs SM goes, yeah, it's been pretty clear that DE have to get things to go just right for them to make it work.  Even in the games I've "won", it's typically been pretty hard to actually make damage stick to the SM ships, and there's often been a fair few crippled Strike Cruisers with 1 hit left that I just can't quite finish off.   Having giant honking front-facing weapon batteries as a primary weapon that have to sneak within bombardment battery range, backed up by torpedo escorts just leaves you shaking your head and praying for 6s.  For my next game, I'll probably be going back to primarily lance armed C/CL with Impaler Corsairs.

Offline TheDaR

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 21
Re: BFG:R Book I The Core Rules: Updates, Feedback & Comments Thread
« Reply #137 on: January 04, 2012, 07:19:55 AM »
?
I cannot make cheese of it.

Left most column: classic bfg eldar
lance <15cm needs 10 lances to do 1 hit = that what you mean?

Isn't that 'off'?

Did you factor in the blastmarker effect? Save = blastmarker = 6 is damage.

Did you factor in vs the Lunar that Eldar batteries have a left shift?

And if I am honest I am quite pleased with the battery values in BFG:R 1.6 vs the Lunar.

Yes.  10 Lances to do 1 hit on average.   Yes, it factors in the save = blastmarker = 6 damage (otherwise it would take 12 lances;  12 shots, times 1/2 hits (4+) = 6 hits, times 1/6 unsaved = 1 actual damage, 10 lances = 5 hits, which works out to 5/6ths of a hit and 4 1/6th saves on average and a blastmarker, which in the next movement phase causes the remaining 1/6th of a hit to get up to 1 average hit).

As for the Lunar, there are no shifts involved other than those it provides itself (which are none, as I wasn't assuming it was Eldar shooting at it).   This isn't necessarily to show what happens on a 1v1, but just general overall how well various ships react to shots from hypothetical "typical" weapons.   That's why I didn't include eldar ordnance rerolls, or the 6 vs turrets from Eldar attack craft, the Ork Fighta-bomma combination suppression and attacks, etc.

Offline Plaxor

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1106
  • Tyrant of BFG:Revised
    • BFG files
Re: BFG:R Book I The Core Rules: Updates, Feedback & Comments Thread
« Reply #138 on: January 04, 2012, 07:31:14 AM »
DE do have Mimics to assist, and with a higher Attack Rating would likely have the first turn. So in a game with 15cm (90cm gap between fleets) deployment vs IN, I find my general strategy works something like this;

1st DE turn: AAF towards enemy, and are now ~50cm closer.
1st IN turn: Drift aimlessly forward minimum distance ~10cm closer.
2nd DE turn: Now about 30cm from the enemy, I  move forward, turn and do not fire as Mimics still work. Gap is now 0cm (so we're right next to each other).
2nd IN turn: A smart player would AAF or use Come to New Heading, but this probably won't help much. They can't attack you still.
3rd DE turn: Lock on if possible, turn at start of move and follow poor IN ships in rear arc!

Another funny method of doing this is that since DE ships have Nimble, I have often found myself ~30cm in front of an enemy, and much to their surprise used Come to New Heading to pass them then use both turns to make a 180 in their rear arc. Here you would use leech torpedoes and fire to prevent their turning ability. Damage isn't critical at this moment, just preventing retribution.

About the CL fleet concept. You see this with the Wardens IN fleet, and I suppose that a more CL heavy DE fleet is sensible, but still it would seem that a pirate fleet would still have some smaller ships. IN CL fleets in the fluff generally have a number of supporting Escorts, even moreso than Battlefleets or Cruisers. Most scenarios involving Cruisers of Chaos or IN races rarely are accompanied by Escorts, whereas IN CLs are always described as having a number of Escorts.

@Horizon,

The Eldar player doesn't support MMS unfortunately, however he still has convinced the rest of the group to support it.... through douchy MSM playing.

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 4201
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: BFG:R Book I The Core Rules: Updates, Feedback & Comments Thread
« Reply #139 on: January 04, 2012, 07:41:21 AM »
Funny Eldar player. haha.

Offline Plaxor

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1106
  • Tyrant of BFG:Revised
    • BFG files
Re: BFG:R Book I The Core Rules: Updates, Feedback & Comments Thread
« Reply #140 on: January 04, 2012, 08:52:34 AM »
@TheDaR

I think your 1.5BFG:R statistics for Bombers is incorrect. If I am not mistaken it would take on average 3.28 Bombers to cause the first hit on the Torture and 5.07 for the second and 7.85 for the third. This is because 2 Fast Tracking turrets would kill on average 1.5 bombers, and each bomber would do an average of 1.667 attack runs against it. So each would effectively cause .56 hits if they survived. I was wondering about your math there as it seemed out of place.

Here you see an increased overall resistance vs. Bombers from 1.5 to 1.6.

@Horizon

Why are Lances and WBs equalized by the within 15cm rule? There already is a range shift, and looking at TheDaR's table you can see that Weapons batteries are around 1.5x as effective as they should be vs Holofields overall. As from a 'Moving Away' standpoint at all ranges 22 WB firepower=11 Lances in efficacy when fired at Eldar ships? Shouldn't this be 33 to 11? I still am confused about the discrepancy.

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 4201
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: BFG:R Book I The Core Rules: Updates, Feedback & Comments Thread
« Reply #141 on: January 04, 2012, 09:13:51 AM »
Where is Sigoroth when you need your math done?

Because Eldar need punishment within 15cm. :)

Offline Plaxor

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1106
  • Tyrant of BFG:Revised
    • BFG files
Re: BFG:R Book I The Core Rules: Updates, Feedback & Comments Thread
« Reply #142 on: January 04, 2012, 09:38:51 AM »
Where is Sigoroth when you need your math done?

He is pretty useful for that, as well as when you need someone to verbally beat someone into submission. Unfortunately the Sigoroth doesn't always work as BaronIveagh had profound resistance.

Offline TheDaR

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 21
Re: BFG:R Book I The Core Rules: Updates, Feedback & Comments Thread
« Reply #143 on: January 04, 2012, 09:43:47 AM »
@TheDaR

I think your 1.5BFG:R statistics for Bombers is incorrect. If I am not mistaken it would take on average 3.28 Bombers to cause the first hit on the Torture and 5.07 for the second and 7.85 for the third. This is because 2 Fast Tracking turrets would kill on average 1.5 bombers, and each bomber would do an average of 1.667 attack runs against it. So each would effectively cause .56 hits if they survived. I was wondering about your math there as it seemed out of place.

Here you see an increased overall resistance vs. Bombers from 1.5 to 1.6.

The 1.4 and 1.5 DE documents show 3 turrets on the Torture, same as the Shadow, netting 2.25 dead bombers before the attack run and .5 average attacks (3.5 average rolled, less 3 turrets) per bomber.  To get 1 hit through on 5+ armor requires 3 hits.  That means 6 bombers after turrets, or 8.25 before.

And I think you mean that bombers got more effective in 1.6, at least against high turret ships.  If it takes 8.25 bombers to net one hit against a 3 fast tracking turret ship in 1.5, but only 4.25 in 1.6, that makes the 1.6 bombers almost twice as effective.  In 1.5, suppression basically neuters bombers against ships with 3 or more turrets, no matter how many you send, unless you also provide fighters to counter suppression. 1.6 means that unless there's enough turrets to actually wipe out every last bomber, there's at least some chance the one that gets through can do 1 or more hits. 

The flip side is that 1.6 also keeps low turret, low armor ships from getting ganked quite so bad.  In 1.5 a 1 turret ship could take up to 5 hits from a single bomber, while in 1.6, it can only take 2 at most.  6 bombers in 1.5 against 1 turret and 4+ armor nets somewhere around 6.9 hits (out of a possible 30), while in 1.6 it only gets around 4.5 (out of a possible 12).

Offline AndrewChristlieb

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1651
Re: BFG:R Book I The Core Rules: Updates, Feedback & Comments Thread
« Reply #144 on: January 04, 2012, 03:15:21 PM »
DE do have Mimics to assist, and with a higher Attack Rating would likely have the first turn. So in a game with 15cm (90cm gap between fleets) deployment vs IN, I find my general strategy works something like this;

1st DE turn: AAF towards enemy, and are now ~50cm closer.
1st IN turn: Drift aimlessly forward minimum distance ~10cm closer.
2nd DE turn: Now about 30cm from the enemy, I  move forward, turn and do not fire as Mimics still work. Gap is now 0cm (so we're right next to each other).
2nd IN turn: A smart player would AAF or use Come to New Heading, but this probably won't help much. They can't attack you still.
3rd DE turn: Lock on if possible, turn at start of move and follow poor IN ships in rear arc!

lol have your IN players not herd of torpedoes? Espically with the DE being untargetable for 2 turns now its vitally important to throw up a screen to protect your front. This is also a perfect example of why you should have some escorts to protect your rear, along with whatever attack craft you can muster.

Another funny method of doing this is that since DE ships have Nimble, I have often found myself ~30cm in front of an enemy, and much to their surprise used Come to New Heading to pass them then use both turns to make a 180 in their rear arc. Here you would use leech torpedoes and fire to prevent their turning ability. Damage isn't critical at this moment, just preventing retribution.

I agree this is a very good destroyer tactic I have use quite often with IN and Corsair



@Horizon

Why are Lances and WBs equalized by the within 15cm rule? There already is a range shift, and looking at TheDaR's table you can see that Weapons batteries are around 1.5x as effective as they should be vs Holofields overall. As from a 'Moving Away' standpoint at all ranges 22 WB firepower=11 Lances in efficacy when fired at Eldar ships? Shouldn't this be 33 to 11? I still am confused about the discrepancy.

Lances and weapons batteries received a significant boost to attacking Eldar within 15cm to offset the fact that they got an over 30cm nerf (weapons batteries anyway lances actually got a large boost across all ranges over msm) The point remains that you should now be using your superior speed and weaponry to set up a crippling close range attack instead of bouncing back and forth into and out of range pecking the enemy to death. against certain fleets this will be a problem yes, space marines obviously but also necrons and other eldar especially as they tend to fight the same way. This once again shows why these fleets should have objective based battles, defend this attack that etc, a fleet engagement between 2 Eldar for instance can take all day as they play cat and mouse trying to expose a weakness (which can be a lot of fun especially with lots of terrain)



I don't make the rules, I just think them up and write them down.

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 4201
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: BFG:R Book I The Core Rules: Updates, Feedback & Comments Thread
« Reply #145 on: January 04, 2012, 04:58:10 PM »
DE do have Mimics to assist, and with a higher Attack Rating would likely have the first turn. So in a game with 15cm (90cm gap between fleets) deployment vs IN, I find my general strategy works something like this;

1st DE turn: AAF towards enemy, and are now ~50cm closer.
1st IN turn: Drift aimlessly forward minimum distance ~10cm closer.
2nd DE turn: Now about 30cm from the enemy, I  move forward, turn and do not fire as Mimics still work. Gap is now 0cm (so we're right next to each other).
2nd IN turn: A smart player would AAF or use Come to New Heading, but this probably won't help much. They can't attack you still.
3rd DE turn: Lock on if possible, turn at start of move and follow poor IN ships in rear arc!

lol have your IN players not herd of torpedoes? Espically with the DE being untargetable for 2 turns now its vitally important to throw up a screen to protect your front. This is also a perfect example of why you should have some escorts to protect your rear, along with whatever attack craft you can muster.

Another funny method of doing this is that since DE ships have Nimble, I have often found myself ~30cm in front of an enemy, and much to their surprise used Come to New Heading to pass them then use both turns to make a 180 in their rear arc. Here you would use leech torpedoes and fire to prevent their turning ability. Damage isn't critical at this moment, just preventing retribution.

I agree this is a very good destroyer tactic I have use quite often with IN and Corsair



@Horizon

Why are Lances and WBs equalized by the within 15cm rule? There already is a range shift, and looking at TheDaR's table you can see that Weapons batteries are around 1.5x as effective as they should be vs Holofields overall. As from a 'Moving Away' standpoint at all ranges 22 WB firepower=11 Lances in efficacy when fired at Eldar ships? Shouldn't this be 33 to 11? I still am confused about the discrepancy.
Quote
This once again shows why these fleets should have objective based battles, defend this attack that etc, a fleet engagement between 2 Eldar for instance can take all day as they play cat and mouse trying to expose a weakness (which can be a lot of fun especially with lots of terrain)

Xisor, is that you?


Offline Plaxor

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1106
  • Tyrant of BFG:Revised
    • BFG files
Re: BFG:R Book I The Core Rules: Updates, Feedback & Comments Thread
« Reply #146 on: January 04, 2012, 09:42:59 PM »
I too got the Xisor vibe.....

Regardless I plan on making the game objective based, although that objective will usually be victory points.

Offline AndrewChristlieb

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1651
Re: BFG:R Book I The Core Rules: Updates, Feedback & Comments Thread
« Reply #147 on: January 05, 2012, 12:16:15 AM »
I'm not sure if being confused with xisor is a good thing or not, but sorry, no I'm not xisor, at least no ones confusing me with sig! I'm sorry that was uncalled for, I have a sense of humor  :P
I don't make the rules, I just think them up and write them down.

Offline Plaxor

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1106
  • Tyrant of BFG:Revised
    • BFG files
Re: BFG:R Book I The Core Rules: Updates, Feedback & Comments Thread
« Reply #148 on: January 05, 2012, 02:00:35 AM »
It's impossible for anyone to be confused with Sig, his writing is always in teal, clearly the most foolproof identification system.

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 4201
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: BFG:R Book I The Core Rules: Updates, Feedback & Comments Thread
« Reply #149 on: January 05, 2012, 04:35:29 AM »
Hi Andrew,
the only bad thing about Xisor is that he left the bfg community. He only jumps in once a year.

One of his last projects, pretty far in it as well, was hammering out a system like you described there. So, that's why I said it. :)


Dark Eldar fleet selection:
1 cruiser per 3 escorts
1 light cruiser per 2 escorts

following allowed as well: 1 cruiser, 1 light cruiser, 2 escorts.
next level would be: 2 cruiser, 2 light cruisers, 4 escorts