ASC 2.0 Imperial Navy

[Gothmog Lord of Balrogs]

Considering the Mercury from Bakka is going to look a whole bunch like the Overlord (SHHHH *spoiler alert*), I think the Tyrant option is better. Mercury will have a nova and 60cm WBs, this should have torps and 45cm batteries. It would have a better niche that way.

Isn't the Mercury already in BFG:R IN fleets? Is it getting changed specifically for Bakka?

So proposed finalization of Chalice:
Chalice Class Fast Battlecruiser- 200 215
Hits: 8
Speed: 25cm
Turns: 45*
Shields: 2
Armour: 5+/6+ Front
Turrets: 2
Weapons:
Port WB- R: 45cm S: 10 12 Arc: L
Stbd B- R: 45cm S: 10 12 Arc: R
Dorsal Lances- R: 60cm S: 2 Arc: L/F/R
Prow Torpedoes- Speed: 30cm S: 6 Arc- F
Special Rules: +1D6 AAF. When checking for critical hits against the Chalice class, critical hits are inflicted on a 5+. When a critical hit is received, roll an additional d6, on a 5+, the Chalice suffers a fire Critical Damage result in addition to the results of the critical hit. Roll +1D6 for Plasma Drive Overlord Catasrophic Damage results.

If everyone is good with that, I will move onto the Diemos CA and Imperial Dreadnought Super BB tommorrow. Escorts will be after those two. I am holding out on the high conveyor, hoping to hear back from FW on releasing, or allowing in the public domain the Maelstrom Zone fleet lists.

[AndrewChristlieb]

It takes criticals easier and has a chance of double crits... Thats not nice. Why not go for a more traditional rule like crits on a 4+ (and no extra fire)? Or if you really want something different but fitting make the engine criticals (6 and 8 ) cause +d3 instead of +1 damage. Drop the plasma drive overload line, with 8 hits it rolls 4 for PDO already. 45cm batteries sounds good, being a battlecruiser I would push for 12wbs tho. If they can boost a Lunars entire broadside to 45cm in a battlecruiser surely they can do a Dominators???

As is this is a Tyrant+ boosted batteries+ bc lances+ 5cm and 1d6aaf. I would put that at ~230 (its faster than an Armageddon but has significantly less punch at range) 235 with 12wbs. The critical effect is hard to pin down a price on but 30ish points seems steep, maybe price it at ~215?

[afterimagedan]

In the BFG:R IN fleet, the 2010 Bakka stuff is there with the small amount of BFG:R Bakka changes incorporated. There is a Bakka committee working on stuff and is pretty much done.

Anyways, I think the profile and cost is about right. It has less firepower than the Armageddon, much more fragile in the two critical special rules, and the one increase it has is the +5 speed.

One Andrew's stats: I could go for that. 10wbs might make it a bit weaker than a BC should be. 12wb at 45cm would put it at full BC firepower. I would put it at 215 if we have it at that profile.

Also, how limited will this be? Will the ASC even talk about how available it is or what restrictions it has on taking it?

[Armiger84]

@Afterimagedan

That's a good question and I'm probably stepping on Gothmog's toes, but my suggestion would be that we get a list together and see what we have in terms of escorts, cruisers, etc. and then decide.  My gut reaction would be "everything in ASC counts as a reserve for purposes of fleet comp unless the ship's rules say otherwise, or it is included in a fleet list, in which case that fleet list's restrictions apply."  That pretty much defaults everything to a 3:1 ratio (3 normal ships in that fleet of a class for every one ASC vessel), but acknowledges that people write up variant fleet lists for their own campaigns, and we might expand the available fleet lists at some point too (I for one have my sights set on hopefully having a Segmentum Ultima drafted up eventually, something to flesh out the old Warp Rift article a bit).

Of course, the immediate problem I could see there would be ASC escorts, in which case there probably should be an exception (but whether to put that on the "Welcome to the ASC, here's how we've sought to balance introducing these ships into fleet lists" section or in individual entries... not sure).

[AndrewChristlieb]

Well the reserve rules as is are pretty meh, they strongly favor cruisers, CH, CB, and CG but compleatly screw over battleships and escorts. Thats not even getting into how theyre really only applicable to imperial fleets as just about all of the other races have some way built in to take all their ships.

No what we need to do is work on some rules for BFG-R to fix the reserve rules so the limits make better sense and the allies system is better laid out. Hell the last part GW has already done for us in the 40k rulebook .

Some ships should still have special restrictions of their own. Those are called "characters" and should have specifice requirements to field them (like the Planet Killer).

[horizon]

Why do the reserve rules screw escorts?

On 40k and allies: I read a lot of complaints on that part in the new 40k. Gamewise and fluffwise.

[Gothmog Lord of Balrogs]

I'll change it to +1d6 Plasma Overload. I feel that is fluffy and is niether an advantage/disadvantage.

I am warry to make the crit system too different from the Invincible/Blasphemer. The only reason it is also easier to crit (over the Inv/Blas) is because it is 8 hits, as are the Fast Battleships. It is suppossed to be a "glass jaw". As for the points, I felt since the Inv is pretty much 60 points cheaper than Retribution, this being 20-30 points cheaper than other BC was spot on. Bumping it up to 12 though makes sense I guess, but for 215? An overlord is only 220. How about 210.

AS for the rules regarding ship limitations, I would prefer that be discussed in detail in the main ASC 2.0 post and this post just be IN ship development
http://www.forum.specialist-arms.com/index.php?topic=5479.0
BUT I will briefly address what I had intended to do about ship limitations.

I planned on leading off the ASC 2.0 with a foreword explaining that these ships are "unofficial" ship's, developed by the community for compatibility specifically with BFG:R. ASC 2.0 contains ships based off multiple sources, both official and unofficial themselves. As such, using these ships requires your opponents permission. It is recommended that these ship's be incorporated into fleets using reserve rules. How ever since certain classes may be impractical to include using reserves (such as BBs in smaller games) combined with the fact they are unofficial and already require opponents permission to use, players can feel free to use however many as they want in a fleet, though a rough 1 unofficial ship for every 3 official ships is still a good guideline to follow. However, players are encouraged to completely ignore any restrictions for special scenarios, campaigns or just plain fun (Unique character ships are still 0-1 though!) ASC 2.0 will also include some fun and fluffy but unofficial fleet lists. These lists WILL have built in restrictions and it is recommended that these be adhered to and other unofficial ships only be included using the reserve rules. Any special/rehashed scenarios included in ASC 2.0 should be followed as listed, but players are encouraged to modify and change up scenarios to meet their own desires and needs.
Bottom line: Everything is unofficial and meant for fun! There are some good guides lines that are recommended to follow for fair play, but if you and your opponent are up for it, anything is possible! ENJOY!

As for using the 40k allies, I think players can decide on their own whether to do things like that or not for campaigns/scenarios, and it would prevent specific things in BFG like using Chaos ships as SM venerable BBs.

I am double posting this in the link above for the main ASC 2.0 thread, so if you want to follow up on ship restrictions, you can easily move discussion over there.

[Gothmog Lord of Balrogs]

Sodue to the lack of further comments (in either thread) it seems like people are okay with both the Chalice now (top of this page) and how I planned to handle ship limitations in ASC 2.0.

As well, on a sidenote, I hope to put together a working pdf next week.

SO moving on to the next classes

Deimos Class Torpedo Cruiser- 230 (220) 225
Hits: 8
Speed: 20cm
Turns: 45*
Shields: 2
Armour: 5+/6+ Front
Turrets: 2
Weapons:
Port Meteor TDS- Speed: 30cm 45cm S: 4 Arc- L/F
Stbd Meteor TDS-Speed: 30cm 45cm S: 4 Arc- R/F
Prow Torpedoes- Speed: 30cm S: 6 Arc- F
Special Rules: The Meteor Torpedo Deployment System (TDS) launches a modified version of the standard torpedo. These torpedoes are smaller and fired from turret mounted box launchers, and as such are more limited. Meteor TDS torpedoes are short burn torpedoes and dissapear after the ordnance phase in which they were fired, nor can they leave the arc they were fired in. Meteors are also smaller in size and are only hit by Turrets on a 5+, rather than 4+.  They cannot be combined in a salvo with normal torpedoes or Meteors from another Deimos, however the Port and Stbd luanchers on a single Deimos can combine their salvoes when fired in the FWD arc.
Auto loaders: You do not have to RO for the Meteor TDS. It is still required for the Prow Torpedoes.
MODELLING SUGGESTION- Use lance battery hard points and plasticard to make a launcher similar to a NATO Sea Sparrow Launcher http://www.murdoconline.net/2007/sea_sparrow-thumb.jpg
Design Note- The original Deim os was in Warp Rift 9 and had a very complicated Meteor TDS. I think this streamlines it a little bit and overall makes more sense. Wasn't sure of the points cost, but 220 didn't seem enough in my gut with the revised rules, especially the autoloaders.

Abyss Class Imperial Dreadnought

Abyss Class Dreadnought- 1000points
Hits: 18
Speed: 15cm
Turns: 45*
Shields: 6
Armour: 5+
Turrets: 7 6
Weapons:
Prow Lances- R: 30cm S: 4 Arc: L/F/R
Prow Torpedoes- Speed: 30cm S: 6 Arc- F
Prow WB- R: 30cm S: 2 Arc: L/F/R
Port WB- R: 45cm S: 18 Arc: L
Port WB- R: 60cm S: 10 Arc: L
Port Lances- R: 45 S: 4 Arc: L
Port Lances- R: 60 S: 2 Arc: L
Port Launch Bays- Fighters 30cm, Bombers 20cm, ABs 30cm, S: 3 Arc: -
Stbd WB- R: 45cm S: 18 Arc: R
Stbd WB- R: 60cm S: 10 Arc: R
Stbd Lances- R: 45 S: 4 Arc: R
Stbd Lances- R: 60 S: 2 Arc: R
Stbd Launch Bays- Fighters 30cm, Bombers 20cm, ABs 30cm, S: 3 Arc: -
Dorsal WB- R: 45cm S:4 Arc: L/F/R
Dorsal Lances- R:45cm S: 2 Arc L/F/R
Dorsal Bombardment Cannons- R:30cm S:6 Arc:L/R
Special Rules: May not use come to new heading. +1d6 to any form of Catastrophic Explison (plasma or warpdrive). -1d6 AAF.
Design Notes: I went off the picture. Kinda had the ship "Furious Abyss" in mind. Will likely use a very similar profile for the Character ship when we get to Chaos.

Virtus Imperator Class Dreadnought (Developed by Tyberious)

Virtus Imperator Class Dreadnought - 850
Hits: 16
Speed: 15cm
Turns: 45*
Shields: 5 (4)
Armour: 5+/6+ Front
Turrets: 6 (5)
Weapons:
Prow Torpedoes: Speed: 30cm S:12 Arc: F
Prow WB: R:60cm S:5 Arc: L/F/R
Dorsal Lances: R: 60cm S: 4 Arc: L/F/R
Port WB: R:45cm S:24 Arc:L
Port Lances: R:60cm S:6 Arc:L
Port LB: Furies:30cm Starhawks: 20cm S:2 squadrons Arc:-
Stbd : R:45cm S:24 Arc:R
Stbd Lances: R:60cm S:6 Arc:R
Stbd LB: Furies:30cm Starhawks: 20cm S:2 squadrons Arc:-
Special Rule: Cannot use come to new heading. +1d6 to any form of Catastrophic Explison (plasma or warpdrive). -1d6 AAF.
Design Notes: lost the Nova Cannon, tried to go off BFG:R IN BBs and match stats to the picture.

[AndrewChristlieb]

Why do the reserve rules screw escorts?

On 40k and allies: I read a lot of complaints on that part in the new 40k. Gamewise and fluffwise.

Well to the first part, most lists don't feature enough escorts to warrant any reserves. I like escorts but even in my lists I don't often field 12 escorts and if you want a squadron larger than 3 ships your going to need ridiculous numbers of escorts. If I want to bring a squadron of say 5 Cobras into an Armageddon list I would have to get 15 other escorts and pay at least 525 points before I could bring them in, that's silly.

As for the second part blah! Theres nothing wrong with the 6th ed allies system and the people complaining about it being against the fluff are either misinformed or lacking in imagination (probably both). Now BFG probably doesn't need to get as in depth as the 40k setup but I don't see any problem with allowing your X to ally with Y if you have a good back story and its not flat out against the fluff. Ive not heard anyone complain against the game play tho, thats the one thing Ive heard good things about . Of course its designed to be able to take advantage of so your going to get the normal "cheese" complaints but Ive learned to ignore stupidity (I see plenty of it where I live ).

I think reserves/allies would be better suited on a points based system. Something along the lines of you may take up to six escorts for every 500 points, one cruiser for every 750 points, or one battleship for every 1500 points in your fleet. You may not have more reserve or allied vessels than you have ships of that type from your main fleet. Well something like that anyway.



Deimos, price sounds a bit high, especially with the limited range and low strength on the broadsides.

[Gothmog Lord of Balrogs]

Maybe change reserves for escorts to 1 escort squadron for every 2 or 3 list squadrons. That way if you take say 2 squadrons of 3 swords, you could take a squadron of 6 cobras etc. etc.

As for the Deimos, I kinda felt that at first, but remember Torpedoes bypass shields AND these ones only get shot down 1/3rd of the time. And I felt the fact it doesn't have to LD check to RO was kinda a big deal.

What if the Speed of the Meteors was increased to 40 or 45cm and stayed the same. Basically they are smaller and faster, but short lived and it would give the ship a little reach

[afterimagedan]

The fact that the Deimos doesn't have to RO to fire them is fine but it is sort of cancelled out by the fact that you cannot lock them on either. It has no weapons to LO so it will just always RO anyways. I would make them 45cm torps. I think that's an awesome ship.

[Gothmog Lord of Balrogs]

The fact that the Deimos doesn't have to RO to fire them is fine but it is sort of cancelled out by the fact that you cannot lock them on either. It has no weapons to LO so it will just always RO anyways. I would make them 45cm torps. I think that's an awesome ship.

It could also BFI without worrying about having to pass a later check to RO.
45cm Meteors and 230 points or less?

Anyone have any inputs on the dreadnoughts, especially point costs? They really are more just for absurdity and fun, but I want to make sure they are priced right and the weapons seem appropriate.

[horizon]

6 & 7 turrets is a no for me. Because that means it cannot be attacked by bombers in anyway.

[Gothmog Lord of Balrogs]

6 & 7 turrets is a no for me. Because that means it cannot be attacked by bombers in anyway.

Good point. Though the Chaos Space Hulk has 6 turrets and 40 hits!

So if they are 5 turrets max, they match a normal carrier BB. Do you think they need something else to offset being 5 turrets max?
May +1ld each? Or an additional shield? Maybe better defense against boarding attacks (since they have such massive crews)

[Armiger84]

I'd leave out the Abyss-class Dreadnoughts for now.  We really don't have anywhere near a good enough depiction of their armaments in the novels (...yet; I'd trust A D-B to do his research and consultations and do a decent job of it), so I'd rather hold off on that.  At least until we're a little further in and see if ANY of the three survive the Heresy (Furious Abyss is definitely sunk, Trisagion and Blessed Lady... dunno yet).  Plus, super-mega-death cannons are hard to balance (and oddly enough, A D-B in "Betrayer" avoided any mention whatsoever of the ridiculous Yamato gun from "Battle for the Abyss" anyhow...).  I'll spill the beans and say I was planning on building one eventually... (a Word Bearers friend was remarking on how he'd like to have a battle barge-type ship in BFG for his 40K/Epic army) but I was planning on just using the Chaos Space Hulk rules to represent it since that made for a reasonable shortcut for designing an absurdly massive warship that's received the standard Black Library hyperbole treatment.