BFG:R Vote 54: Finalizing Battlefleet Bakka

[afterimagedan]

Bakka. Also, if you think there still needs to be changes that haven't already been voted down, please voice that here!

[Vaaish]

What are the list of changes before voting? Did we drop changing the victory and vanquisher and just add the carrier reserve penalty and rath changes?

[afterimagedan]

Rath point revision, IN commander point revisions, reserve penalty, Victory merge option.

[afterimagedan]

I'm going with a no because I think the Mercury and Vanquisher need help

[AndrewChristlieb]

I think we still have some work to do here.

There has been a lot of concern about making this more like the original version for one but also I think we should look at updating the list of ships available. Adding the Vengeance and Avenger back in and maybe the Dauntless type CL's seem like natural choices as these are already pretty limited and would make fluffy picks. Theres also the Dominator seeing how Tempestus is adjacent to Ultima I can see them receiving some support/ reinforcements from the fleet yards at Kar Duniash. Given the state of the fleet post "Circe incident" maybe allowing them to take Chaos reserves like Bastion also.

[Vaaish]

I voted no because I don't think we need the victory change. I sure as heck don't think there needs to be half of what you just rattled off as needed changes to the list.

[afterimagedan]

If you guys want to work on more stuff, start talking! The people who wanted to scratch and start over were outvoted 2:1. There are a million ideas floating around here for Bakka changes but more discussion needs to be had.

The only changes I can see that need addressing:
-discuss and possibly modify Mercury (if people want to consider even using that... thing)
-discuss and possibly modify Vanquisher (though hardly anyone seems to have ideas about this)
-add Enforcer and Defender?

[AndrewChristlieb]

I voted no because I don't think we need the victory change. I sure as heck don't think there needs to be half of what you just rattled off as needed changes to the list.

Really? Whats the half you liked then because having a fleet that is supposed to be primarily focused on raider control and big guns with limited access to big guns and speedy choices is just dumb. 

[Vaaish]

Perhaps the CG, but that's about it. I'm not convinced about those either. The list already has the Siluria and endeavor series so it doesn't really need another cl, you already have chaos ships available via the reserve rules from FAQ2010, and I believe the dominator was already tested in the list but dropped as a result of having too many high turret ships with cheap nc access.

[BaronIveagh]

-discuss and possibly modify Mercury (if people want to consider even using that... thing)

*SPLUTTER* *GASP* You really do have NO IDEA...



She was worth every dime of the three kits I had to buy to make her.

She was one of the Stars of my old Fast IN fleet, back when such a thing could be done with Bakka.  (When she still exploded as a 12 HP battleship.)

Really? Whats the half you liked then because having a fleet that is supposed to be primarily focused on raider control and big guns with limited access to big guns and speedy choices is just dumb.

Again, as the only poster here (AFAIK) to ever use this fleet in a tournament, or any other capacity beyond screwing around with proxies...

The strength of this fleet has always been FDT, and fast light cruisers, supported by equally fast heavy cruiser/Battlecruiser options, with the original FDT rules.  I can say that I rarely took any of the battleships (other than the Invincible).

My suggestion:

Ditch Jovian

Add Defiant (replacing Enforcer and stuck with both it's 2 per 500 and Enforcer's 3 total limits)

Add Dauntless

All 20cm light cruisers can take +5cm speed for +10pts

Original FDT rules for fleet restored.

[afterimagedan]

-discuss and possibly modify Mercury (if people want to consider even using that... thing)

*SPLUTTER* *GASP* You really do have NO IDEA...

No idea about what? I am well aware that you love that long serpent of yours. You are basically using an overlord with +5 speed (which is less necessary with its range and actually works against having a nova cannon) and +2 weapon batteries, some at smaller range. Also, the explosion thing is a negative. I don't see why this would be preferred to an Armageddon or Overlord. If people think its fine, let's keep it in. I don't see why it's an option worth taking, especially with the explosion thing.

[BaronIveagh]

No idea about what? I am well aware that you love that long serpent of yours. You are basically using an overlord with +5 speed (which is less necessary with its range and actually works against having a nova cannon) and +2 weapon batteries, some at smaller range. Also, the explosion thing is a negative. I don't see why this would be preferred to an Armageddon or Overlord. If people think its fine, let's keep it in. I don't see why it's an option worth taking, especially with the explosion thing.

Let me guess, you never sacrifice your queen either. 

Ever run into a fleet that had a really solid formation and wanted to break it up in a hurry?  Or wanted to make a battleship change course?

This flying bomb is perfect for it.  AAF into the center of the formation or make a ramming run at the battleship.  You'll see ships scattering to try and get away from what may or may not be the 'big kaboom'.  Factor in a hefty torp spread from everything else, and either they take big hits or scatter to be picked off by the small hoard of LCs and escorts following it.

[Talos]

The mercury is exactly like the RSV for SM: people have them, so we are keeping them IMO.

As for the enforcer: IIRC you can swap out the lances for torpdoes, right? That should not be allowed, as you will quickly see how useless the torpedo dauntless it by comparison, especially at the same cost.

The lance variant has a niche, and a real unique flavour, but the torpedo one is just an ordnance monstrosity.

[afterimagedan]

The mercury is exactly like the RSV for SM: people have them, so we are keeping them IMO.
I don't want to drop it.
As for the enforcer: IIRC you can swap out the lances for torpdoes, right? That should not be allowed, as you will quickly see how useless the torpedo dauntless it by comparison, especially at the same cost.
I think that's a worthy discussion.
The lance variant has a niche, and a real unique flavour, but the torpedo one is just an ordnance monstrosity.

[afterimagedan]

Here's exactly what I would like to see changed in BFB (I don't think we need to scrap BFB as it is in BFG:R now, but I would like to see added some more options from the original BFB):
1. Bring back the Enforcer (just as it is in BFGM 2, although should be 120pts)
2. Bring back the Defender (replacing its fleet defense turrets with the current upgrade from the Admech fleetn should be 115pts). 
3. I am fine with keeping the Mercury/Long Serpent as it. I'll budge on that one.
4. I think the Vanquisher would be much more fluffy and usable if it was at 20cm movement at 310pts.