anyone have any luck using daemon ships?

[unseelied]

That whole having two BFG-R's is a bit confusing.  So what you are saying is that I could perhaps take bits of the BFG-R and introduce it slowly rather than taking the whole thing?  Certain fleets, Necron, Orks, and to some extent Tau and SM have issues as they stand now.  I honestly never saw the need for MMS.  I might be a thing to try to introduce an improved Ork fleet as they really need something to make them more competitive.  When the time comes I will look into it. 

[Khar]

I honestly never saw the need for MMS.

There's a simple two part excercise that helps to see this need:
1. Take Eldar Fleet. Set up table with no asteroids or planets. Try to win.
2. Have your opponent take Eldar fleet. Set up table with lots of asteroid fields. Try to win.

It is truly an enlightening experience.

In all seriousness, though, yep, even though BFG:R lists are intended to be balanced mostly against one another, introducing revision piece by piece could be viable. Especially starting with fleets that need it the most.

[unseelied]

Sure, with no terrain at all the eldar will be at a disadvantage.  However, in my experience having asteroids on the table is not an auto win for the eldar.  The fleet has a steep learning curve and mistakes will be severely punished at any level.  A beginning eldar player will be at a disadvantage against everyone but as time passes he will become very competitive.  However, I think that the average eldar player playing against an equally average other player with average terrain will have an average chance to win.

Now at an infinitely high level of play, where Yoda Eldar guy and Yoda IN player play maybe there is something to it but I'm not seeing that down here where I am.  I don't know any eldar Yodas. The local eldar players do well against most people.  The only real problem they have is they have difficulties with the Necrons. Other than that they win some and they lose some just like everybody else. 

I have an eldar fleet.  CWE as well.  I don't like the play style as much so I don't use them as much as my other fleets.  Its a strong fleet but not unstoppable, terrain or not.  That's been my experience. 

[afterimagedan]

That's a good experiment to try. MMS Eldar is the best. More accurate to lore and more balanced. Another experiment: try playing against Necrons with Eldar. Necronautowin.

[horizon]

Hi,
I won't comment on Eldar MMS.

But look at official Eldar rules:
1)it breaks the core mechanic of BFG: it lets ships move in the ordnance phase.
2) 4+ armour is not a good way te represent Wraithbone
3) Why would an advanced race be so easily hurt by the mosty common weapon mon-keighs can make? Weapon batteries: no save for Eldar. 1 weapon battery can kill thousands of Eldar. That's just wrong.
4) No protection versus space rocks
5) Play surprise attack:
Eldar move on table, destroy enemy ship, move away from table. Eldar win before opponents moved. Given : if someone plays like that he's an a$$. But the rules do allow it and it isn't illegal. So, bad rule writing.


Craftworld Eldar: alternatively I once said this:
Corsair Eldar use MSM
Dark Eldar MS (with mimics)
Craftworld Eldar use MMS

Three Eldar with different rulesets. So, just give your CWE a go with them.

//
ahem

On BFG:R
Yeah, talk with your friends about BFG:R. Pick the elements your group likes. I mean, Marines2010 are a really good improvement over the original Marine rules. BFG:R doesn't change it a lot but finetunes the Space Marine rules a bit more.

[unseelied]

Well, breaking the core mechanic does make the fleet unique.  Its kinda what they are about. 

I am not up on the lore behind wraithbone but I thought it was supposed to be some kind of organinc thing like bone.  If spaceships made of metal are 5+ why wouldn't super bone be less strong? 

I had always imagined weapons batteries were like shotguns, just filling space with tons of crap.  If you depended upon not being seen as your defence then the shotgun being your weakness would make sense.  Why they only rely on only that is a mystery but we play in a world where people punch tanks to death with giant fists so I can let it go.

Space rocks are the bane of the eldar.  The fall is just propaganda.  Space rocks are the real reason they are nearly extinct.  I don't know how many times I've lost a ship with high leadership popping thru to shoot and then to scoot back.  Not a perfect rule by any means but it keeps you from just doing that endlessly without risk which really would make them OP.  An annoying rule but needed as things stand.

Surprise Attack is not a very balanced scenerio no matter who you play against.  Try Planetary assault against the Necrons too.   I'd have to say the scenerio was bad not the Eldar fleet rules.

A lot of people, at least here, are very pro MMS and anti regular way.  I hear what you are saying and I agree that the rules are not perfect.  I can only tell you what I see here around the Philadelphia area.  I am not seeing the eldar fleet as broken.  I had a tournament here a few months ago and we had set terrain.  A planet, some asteriods and some dust.  According to the responders here on the forum the eldar player should have crushed all other nine guys easily.  He came in 3rd or 4th.  He won two and lost one.  He is an experienced player who has been playing eldar since they came out in 1999? or was it 2000?  His results were very average and not overpowered at all.  All his games were close.  I am just not seeing it.  If any of you guys live near philadelphia and are Eldar fleet masters, please come here and show me the way.  Beat me down mercilessly.  Seriously though the data I am seeing just doesn't support the need for MMS. 

I haven't yet run my eldar against the evil Necron menace but the eldar players( all two of them ) around here haven't faired well so I will have to make time to try it soon. 

[AndrewChristlieb]

I never had any problems with an autowin eldar either (although no terrain is really rough on them) but mms is a solid system and it seems a lot easier for someone just starting. 

[Khar]

well, ok I agree. Autowinning isn't that obvious and still require good understanding of your fleet.
Autolosing, thogh, can in some cases be mitigated only by 1st turn disengage to cut your losses. It's not fun for either side, and MMS always gives Eldar player a fighting chance.

I've used MSM for years before discovering MMS but after some games I just had to agree it's superior ruleset.

[horizon]

I never had any problems with an autowin eldar either (although no terrain is really rough on them) but mms is a solid system and it seems a lot easier for someone just starting.

That's exactly the same opinion Bob Henderson has.

[unseelied]

Sure, I can see where you are coming from.  It may be a really, really good rule set but the old one works fine for most people so there really isn't a "need" for MMS.  There could be a desire for it in some but not a need so it isn't a huge surprise that it hasn't really gained popular support amongst the unwashed masses.  This is also true for IN and many other fleets.  They work fine so why go through the trouble of finding new rules/lists, changing your fleet and then having to convince your gaming group to accept these "fan rules"? 

The Necron fleet, in my opinion, needs to be toned down but that's going to be a hard sell to Necron players who basicly want to keep their 2++.  I have to somehow convince someone to replace there fleet with basicly a crappier fleet.  I don't think new Necron rules will be popular with anyone who plays a necron fleet unless they remain OP and that kind of defeats the purpose.

The Ork fleet is terrible.  The new 2010 FAQ seemed not to make them any better (although to be fair I really play tested only twice)  Why does the most disorganized race have the most strict fleet list?  New Ork rules could be the break that BFG-R has been hoping for.  There is a definite Need as they suck out loud now.  If the new rules are great then people will be more likely to give the other BFG-R lists a chance and that could be the path to greater acceptance.   Also I would honestly think about changing your name.  If there is a previous version of BFG-R out there it will only confuse people.   If it isn't clear and easy people are not going to go for it.

[afterimagedan]

On MMS: suit yourself and agree to disagree.

On Necrons: the BFG:R necrons don't have the annoying VP system and just integrate it into the point cost. If anything, it makes the Necron ships feel more appropriate to their killing value and makes the VP system more easy to deal with. Also, that makes whatever size necron fleet they have a bigger fleet points wise.

On Orks: nice.

On the name: I proposed that too but it didn't take. I agree though, changing the name would be a good option. Now to find a sweet name... Battlefleet Gothic: Transformed? Implies too much change. Most of the other names out there are also R's. Battlefleet Gothic: Reformed would be my favorite at the moment but that won't do.

[Armiger84]

BFG:TNG?  To Boldly Go Where We've All Gone Before

NetBFG, similar to NetE:A, which also uses the last major FAQ and has expanded/tweaked the army lists?

BFG:U  - "BFG: Updated", also works from a marketing perspective because the fleet adjustments have been voted on by the community (at least those who are aware of the S-A forums and want to participate), so it's also BFG:"You"

Man, I should apply for a marketing job at Nintendo.

[unseelied]

I love BFG-U.  It is funny also because it sounds a lot like F--K You as well.  It works on so many levels and it makes it all seem less "SERIOUS" and more fun and approachable.  It is a game about little spaceships after all.

That's the great thing about living in a free country we can agree to disagree.  mms ,may never become mainstream but it exists and for those who use it it's like a beer and a bag of chips.  For the rest of us its always there to try in the future as a little something different to spice things up or even if we never use it it doesn't hurt that's its around.

[Sigoroth]

Well, breaking the core mechanic does make the fleet unique.  Its kinda what they are about. 

Yes, but the MSM rule breaks the abstraction of the game.

I am not up on the lore behind wraithbone but I thought it was supposed to be some kind of organinc thing like bone.  If spaceships made of metal are 5+ why wouldn't super bone be less strong? 

It's psychically grown and stronger than adamantium.

I had always imagined weapons batteries were like shotguns, just filling space with tons of crap.  If you depended upon not being seen as your defence then the shotgun being your weakness would make sense.  Why they only rely on only that is a mystery but we play in a world where people punch tanks to death with giant fists so I can let it go.

Eldar also hide out in asteroid fields. Asteroid fields are also a form of "shotgun". Why would Eldar be trying to "trick" the rocks into not seeing them? It is absurd to think that the Eldar would rely upon holofields to the exclusion of all else.

Space rocks are the bane of the eldar.  The fall is just propaganda.  Space rocks are the real reason they are nearly extinct.  I don't know how many times I've lost a ship with high leadership popping thru to shoot and then to scoot back.  Not a perfect rule by any means but it keeps you from just doing that endlessly without risk which really would make them OP.  An annoying rule but needed as things stand.

It is an annoying rule, mainly due to its absurdity. However, it is by no means necessary. You can prevent Eldar from safely playing peekaboo all day long by simply removing the second movement after the shooting phase.

A lot of people, at least here, are very pro MMS and anti regular way.  I hear what you are saying and I agree that the rules are not perfect.  I can only tell you what I see here around the Philadelphia area.  I am not seeing the eldar fleet as broken.  I had a tournament here a few months ago and we had set terrain.  A planet, some asteriods and some dust.  According to the responders here on the forum the eldar player should have crushed all other nine guys easily.  He came in 3rd or 4th.  He won two and lost one.  He is an experienced player who has been playing eldar since they came out in 1999? or was it 2000?  His results were very average and not overpowered at all.  All his games were close.  I am just not seeing it.  If any of you guys live near philadelphia and are Eldar fleet masters, please come here and show me the way.  Beat me down mercilessly.  Seriously though the data I am seeing just doesn't support the need for MMS.

I "mastered" Eldar in the first game I played with them. I have played scores of MMS games and lost once. That was with a tremendous amount of bad luck and an opponent who went carrier heavy with old ordnance rules. I would have lost a lot more games had there been no terrain of course, but we set up terrain according to the rules for battlezone selection and strategy rating. This greatly skews things in favour of Eldar. Regardless though, my opponents should have had more of a chance despite the heavy terrain and I should have more chance in its absence.

All that aside, the most compelling reason to dump MMS is that it breaks the abstraction of the game. It is quite literally like trying to mash two different game systems together.

[AndrewChristlieb]

I "mastered" Eldar in the first game I played with them. I have played scores of MMS games and lost once. That was with a tremendous amount of bad luck and an opponent who went carrier heavy with old ordnance rules. I would have lost a lot more games had there been no terrain of course, but we set up terrain according to the rules for battlezone selection and strategy rating. This greatly skews things in favour of Eldar. Regardless though, my opponents should have had more of a chance despite the heavy terrain and I should have more chance in its absence.

Mms or msm?? This is getting confusing!