If you want, I can just copy and paste my earlier post: "You are arguing against it's usability in the fleet and because of that, say it should be removed. Some people think it is more usable and would prefer more than you would. I have said this many times: you don't just argue for a ship being removed because you think it's crappy. I would also make the case for the Tyrant and the Gothic because I don't think the IN NEED any of those ships when they have Lunars but they add options to the game for people to use them if they prefer. It's the same with the Cardinal. It should be priced where it is competitive and not just throw out because some people don't like it."
Actually, you completely miss the point. The ship hasn't been added to begin with. What I'm saying is that just because someone mentioned they like a ship shouldn't be grounds for immediately assuming it must be added. If you want a ship,then the burden of proof is on you to explain why it should be added, not on me to prove why it shouldn't.
So far you've just been trying to argue that I have to prove it doesn't need to be added. I want it thrown out because it doesn't have a place. You keep refusing to actually work through reasons why this ship would be taken and why it is someone would use it over an Acheron pulled in under the FAQ2010 reserve rules. Unlike the ships you try to mention in your example that all actually have roles and differing play styles, the cardinal is an inferior duplicate of an official ship which is an entirely different situation than what you are presenting. I'm challenging you again, prove why this ship needs to be added. Simply liking something should NEVER be the the only grounds for adding elements. For example, I personally like the Armageddon gun on the PK, but that doesn't mean I have valid grounds to include a PK in the IN fleet lists. I can guarantee that will end with power creep, and I hope that isn't what you intend with BFGR.
Sounds like an attempt to bully people out of this. The fact is, BFG:R IS for friendly games and won't be accepted by people who do tournaments or anything official. That's just not what BFG:R is for. BFG:R is already used on a "with permission" basis. If this is power creep that should be reigned it, that doesn't mean that you throw something out. It can be reworked and repriced to make it non-powercreep.
I would argue that yes, it does mean it should be thrown out. You cannot increase the AC since its already at the max for a CL, you decrease the lances and you basically have a fast FAQ2010 defiant. Swap them out for WB and we end up with what's basically being proposed as a BFGR defiant. Swap the lances for torpedoes and have the same problem with the torpedo dauntless. At this point you can't really change anything else without taking out the bays or messing with the speed or armor which again brings you into conflict with the endeavor series or the dauntless.
That leaves you with increasing the price considerably which doesn't really solve anything except hoping that people need the points more somewhere else.
Let me reiterate once again, I'm becoming sorely disappointed in the entire process here. People simply say they like a ship and suddenly it's up for inclusion with little discussion or reason outside of they like ship x or y. Once we hit that point any dissent is immediately met with extreme resistance. The only thing you want to "discuss" is how to include the ship with zero proof provided by the people who want a change as to why that change should happen in the first place. Start making people prove why their suggestion should be included instead of making everyone else prove why it shouldn't.
Poll