Extra ship pointing questions/concepts

[Talos]

In the same vein as my other post...

1) How much would a battlecruiser dictator cost? i.e mars with torpedoes?

2) Chalice class from BFG:R/Rogue Trader is cool idea but crappy execution. How much would you price a overlord battlecruiser if the batteries were 45cm FP 12 and the dorsal was a strength 6 battery? How much of a point reduction would adding the fire critical in addition to other criticals ability be? And how much are improved thrusters? I think this setup would well represent a fast close-mid range brawler with the plasma glass jaw.

3) Is the Enforcer Light cruiser from BFG:R a well balanced ship? The torpedo variant seems much better than an equal cost dauntless: 6 str torp and 2 str bay on one target vs. 6 str torp and wimpy 4fp batteries on 2 different targets. Should it be costed higher?

4) Is there serious balance issues with slapping a NC on to a light cruiser? In terms of damage, it is similar to the strength 6 torps or fp 3 lances that can be grafted on, so would it be an issue of game balance or just a fluff contradiction? Would it be viable if the broadsides were reduced in power?

It amuses me without end that the more senior members of this forum must be like "STOP ASKING FREAKIN' TWENTY GAZILLION QUESTIONS AT ONCE!!!!!1111". If this is really a bad issue, I will stop doing it.

[horizon]

Hi,

1) Dictator cb = add 2 dorsal lances @ 60cm = +30pts (Murder-Hades) / add range increase weapon batteries = ~20pts.

2) I think the Chalice fills a role as given per Rogue Trader/Battlefleet Koronus
20 wb is nice in one shot.
Compare it to BFG:R Avenger.
Same max broadside power, Avenger better when in the middle.
Chalice has +4 torpedoes
Avenger +1 shield
Avenger +2 hits
Chalice prow armour
+ special rule

3) More or less: a carrier which is easy to shut down. Within a squadron with bigger ships it suffers the 5+ prow as 5+ on a dice will be applied to this vessel and not be wasted on 6+ prows.
Going in an abeam squadron would gain little to it as it would waste its speed.
Point technically balanced, playwise niche ship.

4) fluff contradiction. Adeptus Mechanicus will brand you heretic. Ship has not enough mass to hold a NC.

There are no stupid questions, only stupid answers.

 

[AndrewChristlieb]

In the same vein as my other post...

1) How much would a battlecruiser dictator cost? i.e mars with torpedos

IN battle cruisers are all over the board: Lunar-Armageddon (pure crossover) +55pts Dictator-Mars (Nova only option discount) +50pts Dictator-Dominion (someone was discount) +40 pts  Overlord kinda stands alone but its +30 on a Dominator and +25on a Tyrant w/range upgrade. It should be 260 based off the Mars but the Dominion kind of throws that off for me (the 45cm lances are a bit better then the 45cm WB)

2) Chalice class from BFG:R/Rogue Trader is cool idea but crappy execution. How much would you price a overlord battlecruiser if the batteries were 45cm FP 12 and the dorsal was a strength 6 battery? How much of a point reduction would adding the fire critical in addition to other criticals ability be? And how much are improved thrusters? I think this setup would well represent a fast close-mid range brawler with the plasma glass jaw.

Weapons loadout? 230-235, its an Armageddon with WB instead of lances, +1d6 AAF not much 5pts? imo, are you saying that it would have to place a Bm and take a fire critical if it locks on?!? I would say that would be worth a significant discount at least 25 points maybe more, that fire crit doesnt sound bad until you dont roll a 6 4 turns in a row...

3) Is the Enforcer Light cruiser from BFG:R a well balanced ship? The torpedo variant seems much better than an equal cost dauntless: 6 str torp and 2 str bay on one target vs. 6 str torp and wimpy 4fp batteries on 2 different targets. Should it be costed higher?

It shouldnt have the option to replace its lances, where is it putting the torpedoes and spares for AC?

4) Is there serious balance issues with slapping a NC on to a light cruiser? In terms of damage, it is similar to the strength 6 torps or fp 3 lances that can be grafted on, so would it be an issue of game balance or just a fluff contradiction? Would it be viable if the broadsides were reduced in power?

Well even more nova options on cheaper ships is a bit of a problem for game play.

It amuses me without end that the more senior members of this forum must be like "STOP ASKING FREAKIN' TWENTY GAZILLION QUESTIONS AT ONCE!!!!!1111". If this is really a bad issue, I will stop doing it.

I dont see it as a problem, its kinda the point of the forum

[Talos]

So the dictator would cost...270? Same as mars? It's basically a dominion with batteries, which are weaker at 45cm then lances, and the dominion is only 260. So presumably it would be roughly the same, maybe lower like 255pt?

My problems with the chalice are three fold:
1) It has 4 strength torpedoes is front. Fits with fleet feel that plaxor was going for, but I would rather see the stats at 6 strength with option to reduce, like other ships in that fleet list.
2) Already it is the only IN battlecruiser to field dorsal batteries; but then its strength is 8. Should it not be 6 strength dorsal at 60cm, or is it bigger because of range degradation vs. lances?
3) It's special rule is, in my honest opinion kind of stupid. Quote, "...it cannot maintain speed without sacrificing firepower." But its rule does no such thing; instead it reduces its speed when gaining additional firepower. I believe its ruling should either reflects its glass jaw with plasma leaks or weaken its guns when if moves faster, such as quartering fp on AAF. Or maybe just have that phrase re-written to it has to limit its survivability when it maximises its firepower or something along those lines. Because it does lose a shield, which is HUGE.

As for the enforcer, I have not used light cruisers too much, but I always field them in separate squadrons of two or three, more like mega-escorts than mini-line ships.

Fair enough on heretical knowledge, but according to fluff light cruiser is only about 10% shorter and only weighs about 25-30% less. And a full cruiser can fire a nova along with both broadsides simultaneously, which is not fluff possible. I am just suggesting a light cruiser, maybe AdMech/Reserve only, that packs a Nova only (if Admech than small dorsal lance too). If a full cruiser is able to take the crushing recoil along with two components a side, why could a marginally smaller ship not fire it as its only weapon?

[Talos]

Haha no I mean't fire critical instead of lock on thing...jeez what a crippled ship that would be...Enginseer Prime would be bitch slapping the hell out of the shipwright, that's for sure.

[AndrewChristlieb]

So the dictator would cost...270? Same as mars? It's basically a dominion with batteries, which are weaker at 45cm then lances, and the dominion is only 260. So presumably it would be roughly the same, maybe lower like 255pt?

Dominion is  Its easily my go to now for a CB, thats a problem IMO and it should be costed up to reflect its abilities. Should be more like Mars 270 Dominion 265 Dictator CB 260 Admech Dictator 255

My problems with the chalice are three fold:
1) It has 4 strength torpedoes is front. Fits with fleet feel that plaxor was going for, but I would rather see the stats at 6 strength with option to reduce, like other ships in that fleet list.
2) Already it is the only IN battlecruiser to field dorsal batteries; but then its strength is 8. Should it not be 6 strength dorsal at 60cm, or is it bigger because of range degradation vs. lances?
3) It's special rule is, in my honest opinion kind of stupid. Quote, "...it cannot maintain speed without sacrificing firepower." But its rule does no such thing; instead it reduces its speed when gaining additional firepower. I believe its ruling should either reflects its glass jaw with plasma leaks or weaken its guns when if moves faster, such as quartering fp on AAF. Or maybe just have that phrase re-written to it has to limit its survivability when it maximises its firepower or something along those lines. Because it does lose a shield, which is HUGE.

1: all mention of str 4 Torps should be dropped :/.

2: Intersting, Str 8 30cm, If your boosting the broadsides to 12@ 45cm then 8@ 45 sounds right although 10 and 6 would be more in keeping with the current values for those weapons. Even a BB only gets 5@60cm on its dorsal.

3: The Bm is a carbon copy for the Apoc, but the Apoc gets a larger benifit. Maybe that could be used to explain the range? str 12 and 8 30cm or upto 45cm but if they fire over 30cm place a BM, that would help soften the impact of the BM too.

As for the enforcer, I have not used light cruisers too much, but I always field them in separate squadrons of two or three, more like mega-escorts than mini-line ships.

Thats how I run mine usually, although a Lunar or Dictator and a Dauntless can make good pairs

Fair enough on heretical knowledge, but according to fluff light cruiser is only about 10% shorter and only weighs about 25-30% less. And a full cruiser can fire a nova along with both broadsides simultaneously, which is not fluff possible. I am just suggesting a light cruiser, maybe AdMech/Reserve only, that packs a Nova only (if Admech than small dorsal lance too). If a full cruiser is able to take the crushing recoil along with two components a side, why could a marginally smaller ship not fire it as its only weapon?

It really just not needed. I wouldnt be opposed to it from a backgroung pov but from a 140-160 pt nova cannon pov!

[Talos]

That would be a good compromise, 12 fp a side with 6 strength dorsal, all at 45cm, with blast marker effect if it fires over 30cm. Along with str 6 prow. Would it still have the same cost?

[AndrewChristlieb]

Well the Dorsal 6 wb @45 is well below standard for a CB and it has a penalty for firing over 30cm, even with the extra turret and +5D6 AAF I would put this pretty low 200-210, in the same neighborhood as the current version.

Cruiser/8 20cm 45* 2 shields 6+F/5+ 3 turrets
P/S Weapons batteries Strength 12 45cm L/R
D    Weapons Batteries Strength 6 45cm L/F/R
P     Torpedoes            Strength 6 45cm F

This ship rolls 5D6 when determining AAF speed. This vessel is subject to plasma overloads, anytime the vessel fires its weapons batteries over 30cm place a blast marker in contact with its base directly behind it.

[Sigoroth]

In the same vein as my other post...

1) How much would a battlecruiser dictator cost? i.e mars with torpedoes?

Dictator (210) + CB upgrade (30) + range (10) = 250 pts. A 3 turret Mars should cost 270 (at most) and this price keeps the 20 pt optional NC price tag. Mind you, there shouldn't ever be a CB Dictator, though maybe a torpedo variant Mars would be possible. I would prefer not.

Note, the Dominion is the same as a CB Dictator (250 pts) but it has 45cm lances instead of WBs (+5 pts). So the BFG:R cost is accurate, and the BFG:R Mars is costed at 260 pts (2 turrets) with the option to upgrade to 3 turrets, so that's a much better price (though you're still paying a premium for that NC).

2) Chalice class from BFG:R/Rogue Trader is cool idea but crappy execution. How much would you price a overlord battlecruiser if the batteries were 45cm FP 12 and the dorsal was a strength 6 battery? How much of a point reduction would adding the fire critical in addition to other criticals ability be? And how much are improved thrusters? I think this setup would well represent a fast close-mid range brawler with the plasma glass jaw.

Where have you seen the rules for this ship? I've found the RT entry, but not anything about it in BFG:R.

3) Is the Enforcer Light cruiser from BFG:R a well balanced ship? The torpedo variant seems much better than an equal cost dauntless: 6 str torp and 2 str bay on one target vs. 6 str torp and wimpy 4fp batteries on 2 different targets. Should it be costed higher?

It is 10 pts too cheap. I also think that it should not have a torpedo variant as even at 120 pts this is just too good.

4) Is there serious balance issues with slapping a NC on to a light cruiser? In terms of damage, it is similar to the strength 6 torps or fp 3 lances that can be grafted on, so would it be an issue of game balance or just a fluff contradiction? Would it be viable if the broadsides were reduced in power?

Eh. I don't think that it is all that bad in terms of damage. However, it does allow for a lot of NC spam. Consider that an Apocalypse costs 365 pts and only provides 1 NC. For that price you could buy 3 CLs and therefore get 3 NCs. Of course, the Apocalypse is the most extreme example, but the principle is the same. If we consider that NC spam is perfectly fine, this still adds a new dimension to the IN fleet. It is actually very similar to just increasing the number of NC a single ship can deploy, ie, a CB that could mount 2 NC instead of, say, the dorsal lances.

I don't think that IN needs the ability to increase their NC spam capabilities, nor do I think that an artillery CL makes a great deal of sense (as CLs are putatively faster). I don't think it's all that unbalanced (get within 30cm and the CL is practically useless) but not really a good idea either. And that's based off the assumption that NC spam is perfectly fine. As it stands a lot of people find it beardy as is, let alone with an increased ability.

It amuses me without end that the more senior members of this forum must be like "STOP ASKING FREAKIN' TWENTY GAZILLION QUESTIONS AT ONCE!!!!!1111". If this is really a bad issue, I will stop doing it. 

This generally happens with new members. I think the "annoying" bit isn't so much the questions, but the incessant proffering of new ships that inevitably results. It's understandable but I think that the axiom "less is more" applies somewhat to BFG. I myself have posited new ship classes and variations, and I also welcome a few extra classes beyond what is "official" but that this process of creation and acceptance should be somewhat reserved. I think that most people figure this out for themselves eventually. Basically we're looking to avoid a paint-by-numbers version of ship building, while maintaining precedents wherever possible. It's a fine line.

[horizon]

Hey,
the Chalice is in v1.6 BFG:R Plaxor put online. I overlooked it couple of times as well. It is listed with the other CB's.

[AndrewChristlieb]

As stated the BFG-R ship pricing is an improvement and going with that version the 250 255 260 Dictator BC Dominion Mars would be viable, Mars should have retained the third turret at that price imo but you cant have it all. I am also still of the opinion that the Dictator CB is not needed.

The Chalice is tucked inbetween the Dominion and Lunar iirc i know its the last CB listed and there are two on that page. I am not so much a fan of this vessel either due to its breaking of the mold as it were (bc range, fast imperial cruisers, 4 torps) much like the bakka Mercury it just doesnt fit.

[Sigoroth]

Hey,
the Chalice is in v1.6 BFG:R Plaxor put online. I overlooked it couple of times as well. It is listed with the other CB's.

Oh, I only have the 1.3 Imperial Fleets document. Is there still an online host for this document?

[horizon]

Go to www.battlefleetgothicrevised.com
link on the right side to google documents.

[Talos]

Hehe...when I mean twenty gazilion questions, I don't mean that I ask too many...I always wonder if the senior board members are annoyed by the fact that I ask so many per post/topic.