BFG:R Light Cruisers

[Sigoroth]

Revisiting a certain CG and dropping some launch bays is something I would agree on. 

Coming from the man that wanted the HA to remove AC from the game, that's not surprising.


My thoughts:

120pts

25cm
+5 armor
2 str 2 LBs.
+1 ldr (maybe swappable for a str 4 prow torp, but not sold on that.)
3 turrets
no +6 prow

1 per 500 pts or fraction thereof.

pros: heavy LB

Cons: No direct fire weapon is a serious liability.

You cannot possibly be considering a 4AC CL with a +1 to reload.

[horizon]

Revisiting a certain CG and dropping some launch bays is something I would agree on. 

Coming from the man that wanted the HA to remove AC from the game, that's not surprising.

Yes, really from someone who agreed on lowering the prize for the Dictator, make the Oberon better, lower the Styx some more, making the Defiant playable, etc. 

Only way I could accept 4lb is if it its fighters only.

[AndrewChristlieb]

Revisiting a certain CG and dropping some launch bays is something I would agree on. 

Coming from the man that wanted the HA to remove AC from the game, that's not surprising.

Yes, really from someone who agreed on lowering the prize for the Dictator, make the Oberon better, lower the Styx some more, making the Defiant playable, etc. 

Only way I could accept 4lb is if it its fighters only.

Fighters only would make it awefully hard for them to have destroyed any ork ships . 2 bays is plenty for the price. The extra built in turret will make them less than worthless and the prow weapons now complement the other cruisers theyre likely to be paired with. It fits the roll, it fits the fluff, its not overpriced, and its not a sure pick to take two of these over a Dictator. What else does it really need?

[horizon]

What else does it really need?

Some playtest reports in which it performs well.

[AndrewChristlieb]

Well maybe we should be working on that as opposed to stuffing two more launch bays in it .

[horizon]

Yep.

Also, it was Andy Chambers who said, afterwards, that they should have dropped Attack Craft from the game.
Tidbit from the past.

[BaronIveagh]

it fits the fluff

Minor detail: No it doesn't.  Defiants are actually noted as being unusual for having the same carrier capacity as a Dictator.  Though, also that some battlefleets 'do not know what to do with it'.

It's actually statted separate from the other Voss hulls in BFK.

You cannot possibly be considering a 4AC CL with a +1 to reload.

Yes, what was I thinking?  Imagine the precedent!  Next thing you know, we might have an 8 LB battleship that does that with barely any rules restrictions at all! [/sarcasm]

The reality is that with out any direct fire weapons, only +5 armor and CL HP, it's not nearly as overpowered as you think, but it is an excellent baby flat top.

[Vaaish]

Overpowerd? maybe not. Out of character? Most definitely.

[Casus belli]

Minor detail: No it doesn't.  Defiants are actually noted as being unusual for having the same carrier capacity as a Dictator.  Though, also that some battlefleets 'do not know what to do with it'.

It's actually statted separate from the other Voss hulls in BFK.

In which document are Defiants said to have the carrier capacity of a Dictator? And is that document available online? I'm not trying to challenge it, I'm just ignorant of this particular factoid.

Regardless, it got me thinking: The number of launch bays a ship has represents not really the maximum attack craft capacity (something which can never really show up in the game) but more the speed with which those craft can be deployed - how many of its X number of squadrons the ship can deploy in the 30-60 minute time window represented by one game turn.
If the Defiant had 2 launch bays, and the special rule which doubled its attack craft control cap to 4, that could reasonably represent something with as high a capacity as a Dictator, but still not enough attack craft punch in one turn to upset anyone.

On second thoughts, the control cap still doesn't represent theoretical maximum 'capacity' well, only the number of squadrons the air traffic controllers on the ship can handle simultaneously, which is likely much less than the capacity. Maybe the maximum launch bay capacity is something which needs no real representation in the game, like the capacity of a Leman Russ tank to carry spare battle cannon shells.

Anyway, just my thoughts, for what they're worth...

[BaronIveagh]

Unfortunately, linking to a pdf of Battlefleet Koronus from FFG would probably be a banning offense since it is still in print and not very old yet either.  I can say that you can read up on the more recent fluff and crunch there.  Though, when they changed it, a lot of people's reactions was 'is this a misprint' but no, it was actually what they deliberately decided to do, with Andy Chambers as one of the writers on the book.

Overpowerd? maybe not. Out of character? Most definitely.

*shrug* Why should that bother anyone at this point?  Very very few of these changes that have been made were 'needed'.  Almost all of them were to change the game to more closely fit a given playstyle. 

[afterimagedan]

Unfortunately, linking to a pdf of Battlefleet Koronus from FFG would probably be a banning offense since it is still in print and not very old yet either.  I can say that you can read up on the more recent fluff and crunch there.  Though, when they changed it, a lot of people's reactions was 'is this a misprint' but no, it was actually what they deliberately decided to do, with Andy Chambers as one of the writers on the book.

Could you post page numbers? All I can see is that the Dictator and Defiant have the same number of launch modules.

[AndrewChristlieb]

BFK does also state that the Defiants are usually understrength.

[horizon]

On BFK, the stats of the Defiant are printed seperate to the Endurance/Endevour. But the Exorcist is also printed seperate and the Avenger as the base for the gunnnery variants.

[BaronIveagh]

On BFK, the stats of the Defiant are printed seperate to the Endurance/Endevour. But the Exorcist is also printed seperate and the Avenger as the base for the gunnnery variants.

I've never really understood what they were doing with GCs and BCs in BFK.  The Defiant gets the Jovian landing bay, which it normally could not take as a light cruiser, at a slightly reduced cost so that it fits, but why the Exorcist gets it I do not know

Could you post page numbers? All I can see is that the Dictator and Defiant have the same number of launch modules.

Not off the top of my head (IIRC it's something Victoria Horne says in one of her notes, but I could be wrong).  However, I might point out they not only have the same number of modules, they have the same launch bay strength, two Jovian pattern landing bays (str 2 each).  (LCs are normally limited to the jovian pattern escort bay [str 1].)

BFK does also state that the Defiants are usually understrength.

I don't remember that being in there.  I do remember that Hawk, a Defiant, is currently attached to Battlefleet Koronus because Battlefleet Calixis has no idea what to do with it or how to deploy a carrier.

(I have to wonder how it is that IN manages to never, ever act on the fact that Gothics do badly outside mass fleet actions, and carriers do extremely well all over.  It's astonishingly stupid that they will even comment on the fact in the fluff, but never ever act on it.)

[horizon]

Because the Gothic does perform on its own?

The comment from Horne on the Defiant is what I think a gimmick remark from Andy Chambers based upon what the community made of the Defiant. Because it is exactly what it is: no one (IN) knows what to do with vessel (since it was crap ).

I shall look into the BFK book.