BFG:R Vote 5: Sigoroth Tyrant NC Option

[afterimagedan]

180pts, 12wb L&R 30cm, +10pts for 10wb at 45cm. (Sigoroth option)

[Sigoroth]

To be honest, and to clarify, I don't personally care whether this goes through or not. I just think that if you're going to remove the option from the Tyrant then you should remove it from the Lunar and Armageddon too, for consistency's sake.

Also, some people, for some unknown reason, play the current Tyrant with range and NC upgrades. Not something that I'd do, but hey, that's their look out. Removing the option would unnecessarily penalise these people.

[Talos]

Fair point Sigoroth, I suppose leaving an option that hardly anyone uses has merit, since it will never be really used anyway. It seems so messy though...

[AndrewChristlieb]

Well you could always just drop the Tyrant, give the Dominator torps for -10 and an option to boost range to 45 @str 10 for 10 points. Alternativly for the original price you could modify the weapons to be dual purpose: The Tyrant is equiped with weapons batteries that make use of superfired plasma technology allowing them to be fired at a greater distance while allowing it to maintain the same weight of fire as comparable cruisers. 12 30cm weapons batteries standard. May fire upto 45cm but at a reduced strength of 8. The Tyrant may replace its standard weapons batteries with str 10 45cm weapons batteries for +5 points.

[Talos]

Well that is certainly the simplest and most effective way to do this...except the tyrant is a fairly well established (if loathed) ship and people would certainly be unhappy if it was replaced in by a quote unquote rarer ship...you people know who you are.

[shephammer]

For the record, I don't like the idea that the tyrant has a nova cannon option.  But I voted yes.

You'd need a pretty ironclad reason to remove a non-abusive game rule.  20 points and -6 torpedoes for a nova cannon is not "overpowered" and so the only real reason to remove the rule would be if the fluff was contradictory.  It doesn't seem like it is.

I love the short range fp12 with torpedoes.  That will make the tyrant an instant favorite of mine.  Two lunars in a squadron works for some people, but I prefer the freedom of solo cruisers, a tyrant and a gothic will deliver that for me with no loss of firepower due to intervening blast markers.

Is there going to be a discussion on changing the fp and range of the dominator weapons to make it more "unique"?  I would love to see him with fp10 45cm batteries.

[Talos]

Don't worry shephammer old pal; no one in their right mind finds the nova cannon overpowered; in all actuality its  generally weaker than an equivalent (6 strength) volley of torpedoes. Some people are just terrified of nova spam, because like any spam it is annoying and takes away from the game. The only reason I personally don't like it having a Nova is that it then resembles the dominator quite a bit, not that it is overpowered.

Consider average target with 2 turret, 2 shield and 5+armor:
On it's own it it will deal 1.5-2 hits (1.65 or something but you get the drift)
Against same target Nova will average 0.33 hits (since it only hits one time in three and deals 3 damage, 1 past shields)
The torpedoes synergy with AC, and if combined are obviously uber-destructive.
The Nova combines pretty well with the long range dorsal lances on most IN battlecruisers; fire off your NC and if you hit blast at it with lances.

As far as I can tell in my time playing it, the only real advantage it has is increased range, and although it limits your movement it does not actually consume a SO, which can be a boon to most ships.

In short, Nova Cannon is the long range IN players best bet, or for those who love gambling (includes me). But even then it takes quite a few to be abusive. People point out that 6 NC 1500pts fleets are likely to deal a lot of damage to a cruiser. True, but pumping 36 torpedoes into that target will do a hell of a lot more damage.

Not to mention, unlike 40k pieplates the NC's is so small that although it can scatter and hit other targets it cannot do like in the novels and other fluff and wipe out a squadron of escorts unless they are base hugging in a carebear countdown circle of oh-sweet-god-please-end-my-misery.

All that considered, I don't even know why it costs +20pts. I suspect it's to reinforce the fact that it is considered much rarer in most battlefleets.

[shephammer]

I've still got a little bit of a lingering concern that the tyrant and the dominator are getting a little homogenized.  I am absolutely on board for making this tyrant change.  But I would like to appeal for another look at the dominator.

For people who don't focus on IN, if this change goes through, the tyrant is probably going to almost always be fielded at 180 points.  It would be the perfect shotgun-then-broadside compliment to the naked lunar and gothic.

If you aren't playing against MSM eldar, then you can use actual normal IN tactics to beat them, and not have to build in wacky sources of long range WB.  Meaning, in a BFGR world, the range upgrade to the tyrant is nice and fluffy, but wouldn't be particularly powerful.

So my implication is that, flavorful upgrade options aside, we are about to have two ships that look like this...

tyrant       fp12 30cm l/r        6 torp front

dominator fp12 30cm l/r        nova cannon front

Now the "fluff" of each ship could serve as a guiding hand to create some uniqueness.

The dominator was "designed as a fleet support vessel" whose purpose was to "hang back".

The tyrant makes mention of powerful plasma batteries which added to range, but that its long range firepower was barely enough to take out an escort.

Is it viable to 'switch' the range options?  Essentially giving the tyrant the 'poor' choice of 45cm fp6 (or , while the dominator gains the option to pay more and get a full compliment of 45cm fp12?  The dominator could also simply have a fp10 45cm range l/r WB.

The torpedo toting tyrant won't miss the range nearly as much as the "hanging back" fleet supporting dominator.  And this would add a little more "role clarity" to the two cruisers.  Tyrant does the drive-bys, domintor provides the firepower support to the mars/emperor play style.

[afterimagedan]

Role clarity is a good way to put it.  Personally, I don't have too many opinions about the Tyrant and/or Dominator changes except that I really like Sig's Tyrant stats.  I would not be against switching the ranged upgrade option from the tyrant to the dominator and keeping the tyrant with sig's stats and the option for the NC upgrade. That would help with the role clarity. Both can take NCs, but if you are using the fleet list that can take Dominators, you will be able to save points.  The one thing I am not a fan of is to have the Tyrant lose the upgrade option. Personally, I wouldn't feel comfortable with not having the non-battlecruiser upgraded range option that doesn't have torpedoes. Basically, I would miss the option to take that Tyrant.

[Talos]

If we want the Sig profile but want the dominator to stand out, what are the options then? I completely agree with role. As I envision it, the tyrant is a better brawler, the dominator a better long range fleet support. As it stands, although the tyrant is supposed to be mid-range the dominator would benefit from it more I think. As has been pointed out, NC one target and broadsiding another is one of the best uses for the NC. If we are not removing the Nova, perhaps we can work out a long range option for the dominator? It should be pretty strong, I think. Strong enough that the dominator is the defacto choice for ranged support and the tyrant the no-brainer for the lineship role.

[horizon]

Keep dominator as is (although variant is not needed imo).

Tyrant per Sig with NC upgrade and 10wb @ 45cm variant option.

Everyone served.

[Sigoroth]

Keep dominator as is (although variant is not needed imo).

Tyrant per Sig with NC upgrade and 10wb @ 45cm variant option.

Everyone served.

Agreed on all counts (particularly that the Dom variant is not needed, it's worthless).

I do like the directions that people's thoughts are going. They're constructive and problem oriented, rather than knee-jerk or inflammatory as I've seen in the past, so I'd like to compliment all on that. The reason I agree with Horizon though, and as such disagree with the good ideas put forward, is that we should be aiming at as conservative a change as possible. The Dominator isn't a broken ship. It doesn't need fixing.

Those that like the Dominator for what it does should still be able to take it as-is in those lists that allow it, rather than being forced to pay an extra 10 pts in the form of a NC Tyrant. Also I'd like to point out that the Dominator does have a complementary weapon load. At the point where the NC cuts out the WBs can take over. This allows the Dominator to go from artillery vessel to knife-fighter. The range/NC upgraded Tyrant works differently to this. So the Dominator does have a role and fulfils a niche. A NC Tyrant (no-range) could replicate this at a cost.

[RCgothic]

I voted no to the NC, because otherwise I see no point to a Dominator. I only ever took it for WB12, and I'd never take a NC over torpedoes given the option, let alone for a premium (let alone for a premium of 20pts).

There doesn't need to be a limit on NCs either. When we playtested a pure torp fleet vs a pure NC fleet, the NC fleet was annihilated every time. If the NCs are getting more than one shot off in a game, the other fleet is doing something wrong.

[AndrewChristlieb]

Did you maybe test them against other fleets? Nova cannon rape orks who cant move fast enough and have low shields, gw tau for the same reason, they really screw up most chaos fleets also forcing them to close takes away all their protection, msm Eldar get eaten alive by blasts (using the original rules). Sure the nova spam will be less effective against the fleet that is designed to close rapidly, but not all fleets are. Infact there are not many at all that are as focused on closing as the IN torp wall.

I have found Novas to be a bit underpowered when used by themselves but with four or five or even more in a fifteen hundred they can really hurt the enemy even with only one volley. The real kicker to the nova isnt when they do less than average its when they get the first turn kill because of good rolls, or heck even average rolls with 6 of them, and just obliterates something, typically a carrier. Its less so in lower games, although three dominators in a seven fifty is really hard to work around for a lot of fleets.

[Talos]

@ Sigoroth I suppose the whole point of this project is to make a better game together. *Sigh* With that in mind, I will step down on this one for the sake of getting this over and done with. It's not the end of the world anyway if tyrant is good; it spent so long sucking that it should really be given a chance

I will fight until my dying breath saying that the Nova Cannon is underpowered; I think it's mechanic just draws attention to its inherent randomness. You roll only one die, and that one die determines whether a random blast marker appears or a ship takes potentially heavy damage. With that same volley of torpedoes you have six dice and the laws of mathematical probability and average come into account more often. For every time my NC's have struck a direct hit for 6 points they have just as often dealt no damage at all, or been fired from long range and not gotten bast shields, turning into a very expensive turn 1 speed bump and that's it.

No one would ever agree with me or they would accuse me of being a closet Nova spammer, but in reality as I mentioned I will never understand why they cost +20pts. That is a lot of points for variable and usually worse effectiveness. You guys would kill my family if I suggested lowering though, despite the fact that you probably agree with me .