BFG:R Vote 50: Endeavor and Endurance

[afterimagedan]

ENDEAVOR
6 hits, 20cm speed, 90* turns, 1 shield, 6+/5+, 2 turrets
P/S wbs 30cm 6
Prow torpedoes 2
Prow WBs F/L/R 2

110pts for IN, 115pts for Battlefleet Bakka (which will have an additional built in turret), 130pts for Adeptus Mechanicus (with the additional Admech bonuses)

ENDURANCE
6 hits, 20cm speed, 90* turns, 1 shield, 6+/5+, 2 turrets
P/S lances 30cm 2
Prow torpedoes 2
Prow WBs F/L/R 2

110pts for IN, 115pts for Battlefleet Bakka (which will have an additional built in turret), 130pts for Adeptus Mechanicus (with the additional Admech bonuses)

[Vaaish]

I thought it was +15  for the admech cl upgrades. At 110 for in that should place admech at 125

[afterimagedan]

Yup, admech bonus was 10 for light cruisers but that doesnt count the gift and 10 points is seriously under costing them. 125+20=145 here idk where 15 came from.

125- base
10- admech special rules
10- gift.

To be honest, 125 pts is way overpriced for the basic Endeavour. It has ~¹/₂ the firepower and ~²/₃ survivability of a Lunar, which should put it more in the 105 pt range. Add on another 5~10 pts for the 90° turns. So call it 115 pts base and then throw on your 20 pts for the upgrades and you'll come up with a much more reasonable number.

I the base price drops back to 110 i can see the Admech@130.

Seemed to be left at that so I thought +20 made sense.

[Vaaish]

I think they are going to be a touch overpriced at 130 but it probably won't matter in list building. If my calculations are right I can pull off this:

Oberon
Lunar, range
Gothic
Endeavor, range
Endeavor, range
5 swords
5 cobra
Magos, reroll
1500

Or

Retribution, nc
Dictator,nc
Lunar
Gothic
Endeavor, range
5 gladius
Magos, reroll
1500

[AndrewChristlieb]

This sounds... reasonable. They have definatly felt over priced at 125.

Where are we on the Defiant? 

[Khar]

All seems reasonable now. I still have a bit of doubt about Admech price, but if playtesting will show it's overpriced, we can always change it again.

Voting yes.

(Defiant keeps being problematic, though, it'll need some more discussing...)

[BaronIveagh]

I have to ask, but how will we keep people from using the reserves rule to keep them from simply taking them at a lower price?  With LCs it's kind of easy to get enough of them to do that.

[Vaaish]

Can you explain that more Baron? Taking them as reserves in what fleet and what lower price? What do you gain by doing this?

[AndrewChristlieb]

Is it any worse than taking 6 dauntless so you get two emperors?

[BaronIveagh]

Is it any worse than taking 6 dauntless so you get two emperors?

Eh.  Yes and no.  Bakka is the biggest problem for this if we're creating three separate stat lines for this.  As stands, the rules for Bakka state they can take all of them.  This would make a LC spam fleet very very confusing for an opposing player and increase book keeping dramatically.

That last one being something that, IIRC, was one of the things that BFG:R actually set out to reduce.

[Vaaish]

How is this different than it already is? You can have a mix of 1,2, and 3 turret cl using the base bakka rules from 2010 and you can have access to mixes of 1 and 2 turret cl just using armada.

For that matter, Bb, CG, cb, and CA all have different turret numbers should those all be standardized too?

[AndrewChristlieb]

How would this affect book keeping or opposing player confusion?

Book keeping= write down the number of turrets your ship has.

Player confusion= be ready to explain your fleet and provide your opponet with a copy of your fleet list...

Am i missing something?