September 17, 2024, 08:18:28 AM

Poll

Should the BFG:R Imperial Navy, as linked below, plus the presumable and pending new Nova Cannon rules, be official in BFG:R?

Yes, make it official.
4 (57.1%)
No, needs more work.
3 (42.9%)

Total Members Voted: 7

Voting closed: November 02, 2012, 06:55:04 PM

« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 9   Go Down

Author Topic: BFG:R Imperial Navy  (Read 25516 times)

Offline AndrewChristlieb

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1651
Re: BFG:R Imperial Navy
« Reply #15 on: October 30, 2012, 01:17:05 AM »
I knew the rsvs got voted out, didnt realise that ALL soace marines got voted out of Armageddon.
Logged
I don't make the rules, I just think them up and write them down.

Offline afterimagedan

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1902
    • Loc: Chicago IL, USA
Re: BFG:R Imperial Navy
« Reply #16 on: October 30, 2012, 01:38:20 AM »
They didn't Do you see something that's missing from the document?
Logged

Offline afterimagedan

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1902
    • Loc: Chicago IL, USA
Re: BFG:R Imperial Navy
« Reply #17 on: October 30, 2012, 02:05:09 AM »
Quote from: horizon on October 29, 2012, 07:37:44 PM

Armegeddon list
List mentions Space Marines escorts & Vessels. But these ships are not in the document. Iffy.

Hmm, do you guys have the right document? I am looking at them right now.
Logged

Offline afterimagedan

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1902
    • Loc: Chicago IL, USA
Re: BFG:R Imperial Navy
« Reply #18 on: October 30, 2012, 02:36:37 AM »
Ok, I made the changes. All torpedoes say 30cm instead of "Imperial Torpedoes" now. Tyrant has ITS NEW PROFILE!  ;D
Logged

Offline Bessemer

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 339
    • Loc: UK
Re: BFG:R Imperial Navy
« Reply #19 on: October 30, 2012, 02:48:43 AM »
Just noticed the Exorcist, Didn't it used to have an option for 30cm fpw10 batteries?
 
Logged
I refuse to be killed by something I've never heard of.

Offline afterimagedan

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1902
    • Loc: Chicago IL, USA
Re: BFG:R Imperial Navy
« Reply #20 on: October 30, 2012, 02:54:07 AM »
Quote from: Bessemer on October 30, 2012, 02:48:43 AM
Just noticed the Exorcist, Didn't it used to have an option for 30cm fpw10 batteries?
 
Good eye! I'll fix that right now.
Logged

Offline Talos

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 542
Re: BFG:R Imperial Navy
« Reply #21 on: October 30, 2012, 04:12:06 AM »
Last thing, since were closing up shop: why is the mars battlecruiser the only cruiser in the game without the extra turret? Can someone explain this?

And second, in BFG:R the dauntless CL has 2 turrets. Although there is no real justification for them, it was always odd that they are the only 1 turret vessel in IN, other than the cobra (which is, excepting unique vessels, apparently the smallest capable human warp vessel). It is designed for self-sufficient long-distance patrols, and having decent turrets would seem like a must have. Just me?
« Last Edit: October 30, 2012, 04:18:21 AM by Talos »
Logged

Offline afterimagedan

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1902
    • Loc: Chicago IL, USA
Re: BFG:R Imperial Navy
« Reply #22 on: October 30, 2012, 04:18:37 AM »
Both the Mars and the Overlord have it as an upgrade from 2 to 3. I'm confused.
Logged

Offline Talos

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 542
Re: BFG:R Imperial Navy
« Reply #23 on: October 30, 2012, 04:26:47 AM »
Yes yes but every other carrier has one more turret in its profile than other cruisers;dictator has 3 vs. 2 for IN cruisers, devastation has 3 vs. 2 for Chaos cruisers, hero and protector have 3 (in a vacuum) etc...

I just find it odd that the mars does not come with the turret stock, that's all. And that the dauntless has less as well.
Logged

Offline afterimagedan

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1902
    • Loc: Chicago IL, USA
Re: BFG:R Imperial Navy
« Reply #24 on: October 30, 2012, 04:51:11 AM »
Not sure why the Mars is like that.
Logged

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 4200
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: BFG:R Imperial Navy
« Reply #25 on: October 30, 2012, 06:38:17 PM »
It is because they could.
Logged

Offline ThaneAquilon

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 187
Re: BFG:R Imperial Navy
« Reply #26 on: October 30, 2012, 06:47:06 PM »
Could be a similar reasoning as for the repulsive's oddities. The other thing is the mars was the first battlecruiser, right? There have been advances since then.
Logged

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 4200
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: BFG:R Imperial Navy
« Reply #27 on: October 30, 2012, 06:51:41 PM »
No the Repulsive was meant to be 2 shields and to be shipped with a small base.
Then GW started shipping the model (after first batches) with a large base. So the 3shield rule was created.
Logged

Offline ThaneAquilon

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 187
Re: BFG:R Imperial Navy
« Reply #28 on: October 30, 2012, 06:59:16 PM »
Ahh, my understanding was that Grand cruisers having 3 shields was a standardisation that happpened after the creation of the repulsive (I didn't mean the base thing).
Logged

Offline Talos

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 542
Re: BFG:R Imperial Navy
« Reply #29 on: October 30, 2012, 07:01:24 PM »
That too.

I always though it was a mixup between the acheron and the mars...mars has two (but is a carrier) and acheron has three (one more than a standard cruiser, but is not a carrier). Strange little mix ups that don't really get justified.

Just me then that wants the acheron at 2 and the mars at 3? Neither ship is crippled/overpowered, but this would make a lot more sense.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 9   Go Up
« previous next »