September 27, 2024, 06:21:27 PM

Author Topic: The deal with Battleships  (Read 9910 times)

Offline AndrewChristlieb

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1651
Re: The deal with Battleships
« Reply #30 on: September 28, 2012, 02:24:42 AM »
Well in a 1.5k that leaves you with 625, 440 will get your pair of Dictators and taking the cheapest admiral your looking at 135 points so maybe a reroll and some swords. Thats really not so bad considering you would only squeeze 6 full cruisers and change with even a cheap BB.
I don't make the rules, I just think them up and write them down.

Offline Talos

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 542
Re: The deal with Battleships
« Reply #31 on: September 28, 2012, 06:08:29 PM »
What about (gasp) multiple battleships? While not feasible at less than 2000pt+, is this ever worth it? Or it the cruiser spearhead more powerful and affordable? It anyone has ever fielded multiple BB, I would be curious to know what they used and what their experiences were.

Offline Sigoroth

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1386
Re: The deal with Battleships
« Reply #32 on: September 28, 2012, 08:26:27 PM »
What about (gasp) multiple battleships? While not feasible at less than 2000pt+, is this ever worth it? Or it the cruiser spearhead more powerful and affordable? It anyone has ever fielded multiple BB, I would be curious to know what they used and what their experiences were.

I once played a large game of all BBs (mixed IN/SM) against an equal points fleet consisting of all CAs and CBs (Chaos), just to see if BBs were worth their cost and the heavy restrictions placed on them. The BBs annihilated the cruisers, with only one ship being crippled in return, if I remember correctly. So this suggests that their cost and limitation are both justified and that they should be taken wherever possible.

However, to be fair. this was pretty much a straight up slug fest, with little to no manoeuvring taking place. The battlebarges performed supremely, as one would expect, and the BBs put out a serious amount of fire since they were almost always locked on and had targets in both broadsides at 30cm or less. Conversely I've had an Apocalypse taken out by a single large squadron of Swords. The price of leaving a BB unsupported and unbraced.

These two extreme examples I think exemplify both the strengths and weaknesses of BBs. If you are likely to play a straight up brawl with little terrain and many soft enemy targets (ie, a large battle), the battleship is the way to go. Otherwise, their lack of manoeuvrability and need for support could make more intricate operations difficult.

Offline Talos

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 542
Re: The deal with Battleships
« Reply #33 on: September 28, 2012, 08:38:37 PM »
Interesting...bad luck on the apocalypse, btw ;). Imperial BB in particular are kind of sluggish so I can see how terrain could really reduce their effectiveness. Were the BB squadroned or left to their own devices? Was there any real ordnance capabilities or all direct fire?

Offline AndrewChristlieb

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1651
Re: The deal with Battleships
« Reply #34 on: September 28, 2012, 10:51:40 PM »
Emperors squadroned are silly good... I havent had luck with gun battleships but then the only time I have taken multiples were Retributions and theyre only just better than a cruiser pair by themselves.

I imagine that Sig could probably give more accurate estimates but its something like 13 hits to cripple a BB when braced and 14 to destroy a cruiser.

When you look at a crippled Retribution compared to a Lunar theyre pretty close to the same, 2 shields 6vs8 hits (advantage Lunar) 6weapons batteries(ret gets the nod for range) 2 lances (toss up, Lunar has more but Ret has better arc and range) 5vs6 torpedoes (Lunar) 2 turrets Retribution is 5cm slower. They sound pretty close when taken like this, but you pay more points for 2 Lunars than a Ret (15) and the Lunars are easier to wear down over time (6 hits for example on a Retribution is only 2 damage while a Lunar would be crippled. So the real advantage is in the amount of damage they can take over time as theyre weapons are slightly weaker for about the same cost. An Emperor is even worse as it boils down to a longer ranged Dictator when crippled -2 hits and torps but +1 leadership still and its 75 points cheaper than the cruiser pair plus the initial durability difference. So ya they can be worth it but I have found that they tend to draw alot of fire with my group (usually all of the fire :P) and dont last very long where as with cruisers theres more of a tendancy to spread the love around for some reason.... Psycological I imagine, but it means I usually dont field a lot of BB's in 1.5k games.
I don't make the rules, I just think them up and write them down.

Offline Sigoroth

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1386
Re: The deal with Battleships
« Reply #35 on: September 28, 2012, 11:16:40 PM »
Interesting...bad luck on the apocalypse, btw ;). Imperial BB in particular are kind of sluggish so I can see how terrain could really reduce their effectiveness. Were the BB squadroned or left to their own devices? Was there any real ordnance capabilities or all direct fire?

Eh, my own fault. I didn't put enough resources into the Sword squadron and what I did direct their way did absolutely sod all (as per bloody usual). My Apocalypse had failed to lock on and found itself just out of range, so I was already disgusted with it and myself and decided not to brace it as I was determined for the bloody thing to get to fire on LO next turn. I figured it should be able to absorb the hits. I obviously had never seen any of my games. Ever.

I imagine that Sig could probably give more accurate estimates but its something like 13 hits to cripple a BB when braced and 14 to destroy a cruiser.

Sixteen hits to cripple a braced BB, 18 hits to destroy a braced cruiser. Unbraced is 10 for each.

Offline Talos

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 542
Re: The deal with Battleships
« Reply #36 on: September 30, 2012, 06:10:27 PM »
We seem to be of kindred spirits in the rolling department...my last few games have been decent, but generally I consistently beat the odds to fail at almost every task. Emperor with 10 leadership? Fail 2 reload ordnance that game. 2 Locked on dauntless? 1 hit, followed by another hit next round when not LO. Pretty typical of me to...That's why i'm trying to improve my technique and general playing skill. Hopefully I can get so boss that no amount of bad rolling can undo my masterful stratagems...hopefully. ::)

Offline ThaneAquilon

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 187
Re: The deal with Battleships
« Reply #37 on: October 01, 2012, 02:50:34 PM »
You do manage to make most of your bfi rolls...4 hits past shields, none stick...multiple times...

Offline Talos

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 542
Re: The deal with Battleships
« Reply #38 on: October 01, 2012, 05:36:42 PM »
I did mention my last few games were pretty good. BFI is my apparent new specialty... ;)

Offline AndrewChristlieb

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1651
Re: The deal with Battleships
« Reply #39 on: October 01, 2012, 10:22:38 PM »
Ya BFI can be poo sometimes too tho. I brace against 2 Orcas locked on, fail every save :/. Score 16 hits on an explorer, takes 2 hits :/ starts a fire that never goes out and bruns the explorer to the ground tho. It all balances out in the end but sometimes you just feel cheated :D.
I don't make the rules, I just think them up and write them down.

Offline Talos

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 542
Re: The deal with Battleships
« Reply #40 on: October 01, 2012, 11:08:12 PM »
Ain't that the truth.. ;)