The BFG: Expanded Revised Rules Thread (New Years 2022 Update!)

[Xca|iber]

Been mulling over a slight refinement to the previous idea:

Leadership & Knowledge Values:
When generating random leadership for an Admech capital ship, the result on the D6 is used as the vessel's "Knowledge value" (Kn), representing the level of technological knowledge and secrets aboard the ship.

So the Ld table for the Admech would look like this:

D6/Kn.........Ld
1.................7
2-3.............8
4-6.............9

A ship led by an Archmagos has Kn6 by default. A ship led by a secondary commander (new, to be added) adds +1 to its Ld (max 9) and +1 to its Kn (max 6).

Archmagos Explorator (Ld9, Kn5).......same cost
(0-3) Magos Explorator (Ld8, Kn4)......25pts
Vault of Technology (+1Kn upgrade for any capital ship).......10pts

A battleship, due to its size and age, adds +2 to its Kn, while a battlecruiser adds +1 to its Kn (max 6 for both).

Mechanicus Gifts:
At the start of the game, after rolling for Ld, a capital ship may choose one Gift from the following list for which its Kn equals or exceeds the upgrade's requirement:

Req Kn............Gift
1......................EER (50% armament penalties reduced to 25%, speed penalties cannot exceed -5cm)
2......................Efficient Launch Bays (Launch bays count double for launch capacity, ACs from the ship get +10cm speed on the turn they are launched)
3......................Adv Engines (current book version)
4......................FDT (re-roll only version)
5......................AS (current book version)
6......................AWR (Lock On only version)

I think this solution covers the issues pretty well. It improves choice, reduces prep-time (# of steps), while still maintaining some random variation.

Edit: In other project news, I've updated the Main Rulebook and Dark Eldar documents to reflect the relevant rulings from the 2016 Mini-FAQ posted in the Rules subforum. The scenario rulings will make their way into the BFG:XR scenarios document when it gets written. That's all for now!

[Blacksails]

Looks good.  I personally prefer the idea previous, but both work for eliminating most of the random and making all the choices workable.

Quick clarification though, by battlecruiser you mean ordinary cruiser, seeing as the Ad Mech doesn't have formal battlecruisers, correct?

Looking forward to the scenario/campaign rules.

[horizon]

Edit: In other project news, I've updated the Main Rulebook and Dark Eldar documents to reflect the relevant rulings from the 2016 Mini-FAQ posted in the Rules subforum. The scenario rulings will make their way into the BFG:XR scenarios document when it gets written. That's all for now!

[Xca|iber]

Looks good.  I personally prefer the idea previous, but both work for eliminating most of the random and making all the choices workable.

Quick clarification though, by battlecruiser you mean ordinary cruiser, seeing as the Ad Mech doesn't have formal battlecruisers, correct?

Looking forward to the scenario/campaign rules.

Ah, yes... somehow I had convinced myself that the AdMech had the Mars battlecruiser because, well, the name. In that case I guess I'd make it: Battleships +1Kn, everything else gets no bonus. I don't really want to give a blanket bonus to standard cruisers; after all, they are supposed to be "standard." So under that system, you'd be able to have up to one ship guaranteed AWR or less (Archmagos on a battleship or w/ a vault), and up to three ships guaranteed AS or less (Magi w/ vaults), and any number of capitals guaranteed Efficient Launch Bays or better (regular cruiser/CL w/ vault).

Edit: In other project news, I've updated the Main Rulebook and Dark Eldar documents to reflect the relevant rulings from the 2016 Mini-FAQ posted in the Rules subforum. The scenario rulings will make their way into the BFG:XR scenarios document when it gets written. That's all for now!

I was pretty pleased to see that the FAQ mostly lined up with what I already had, or otherwise took a less restrictive approach. The scenario rulings are especially exciting. Glad to be rid of the temptation to instantly disengage all my defenders around a planet every time it's attacked 

[Blacksails]

So, unrelated to AdMech, I've been going over the IN fleet again in prep for building some cruisers I recently won on ebay (those bidding wars get vicious!) and I just don't understand the Cardinal class.  I've personally longed for a Gothic based BC, and while the Cardinal attempts this, I don't feel like it really fits with the general theme of 6+ prow and torps.

Plus, the cost seems off to me.  Its the same cost as the Dominion and a nova cannon equipped Armageddon, both of which have the exact same lance armaments, but have a few extra bonuses.  Namely, the 6+ prow armour, the torpedoes or nova cannons, and sporting either the same strength broadside batteries (at 15cm less range and not firing forward) or launch bays.  The Cardinal's primary advantage is the 60cm batteries that can fire forward with the dorsal lances and an extra 5cm of range.

When compared to the Acheron, it seems odd to pay an extra 70pts for some minor range swaps on the lance and weapon battery armaments.

I guess I'm just confused at its price when in the Bakka list you have the Dominion which sports the exact same lance configuration, but with the ever versatile launch bays and torpedoes (plus, one RO order for both weapon systems, yay!) for the exact same cost.  Outside of fluff reasons, I don't see a reason to ever take a Cardinal.  If it was priced more like an Overlord, I could see its usefulness as a cheap lance boat.

Plus, I'd love for a standard IN battlecruiser with all lances.  S2 45cm broadside lances with S2 60cm dorsal lances, 6+ prow armour and torpedoes.

[Xca|iber]

So, unrelated to AdMech, I've been going over the IN fleet again in prep for building some cruisers I recently won on ebay (those bidding wars get vicious!) and I just don't understand the Cardinal class.  I've personally longed for a Gothic based BC, and while the Cardinal attempts this, I don't feel like it really fits with the general theme of 6+ prow and torps.

Plus, the cost seems off to me.  Its the same cost as the Dominion and a nova cannon equipped Armageddon, both of which have the exact same lance armaments, but have a few extra bonuses.  Namely, the 6+ prow armour, the torpedoes or nova cannons, and sporting either the same strength broadside batteries (at 15cm less range and not firing forward) or launch bays.  The Cardinal's primary advantage is the 60cm batteries that can fire forward with the dorsal lances and an extra 5cm of range.

When compared to the Acheron, it seems odd to pay an extra 70pts for some minor range swaps on the lance and weapon battery armaments.

I guess I'm just confused at its price when in the Bakka list you have the Dominion which sports the exact same lance configuration, but with the ever versatile launch bays and torpedoes (plus, one RO order for both weapon systems, yay!) for the exact same cost.  Outside of fluff reasons, I don't see a reason to ever take a Cardinal.  If it was priced more like an Overlord, I could see its usefulness as a cheap lance boat.

Plus, I'd love for a standard IN battlecruiser with all lances.  S2 45cm broadside lances with S2 60cm dorsal lances, 6+ prow armour and torpedoes.

There was a price inconsistency in the original BFG:R Bakka fleet document, and I copied the higher cost by mistake. It should be 200 points. Thanks for catching this  I'll have it fixed shortly.

[Blacksails]

Well that makes a lot more sense.

Still, I'll have to homebrew an all lance standard IN BC though.

[Blacksails]

I also noticed that the shield portion of the XR ruleset doesn't expand on when shields come back online.  The base rulebook explains that they have to escape the BMs in a subsequent movement phase, while the XR rules don't.

Clarification would also help new players as to specifically when the shields come back online (beginning of movement phase, end of movement phase, beginning of shooting phase) so its clear how it interacts with the BM rules for moving away from them in base contact.

[Xca|iber]

I also noticed that the shield portion of the XR ruleset doesn't expand on when shields come back online.  The base rulebook explains that they have to escape the BMs in a subsequent movement phase, while the XR rules don't.

Clarification would also help new players as to specifically when the shields come back online (beginning of movement phase, end of movement phase, beginning of shooting phase) so its clear how it interacts with the BM rules for moving away from them in base contact.

I've updated the main rulebook to be a bit clearer on this (page 21). Also updated was a misleading section for BFI+other special orders (page 21), the paragraph on shield-less ships moving through blast markers (page 22), and the short descriptions for special orders (page 9).

++++++++++++++++

In other news, is everyone okay to move forward with the changes to AdMech (as described in the last few posts)? I'm hoping to get that finalized while I'm putting together the RT fleet list (it's coming along nicely).

That's all for now!

[Thinking Stone]

Finally had a chance to read the revised system fully! I like it, it's a cool way to re-use existing mechanics (and is easily extensible or modified by future rules) and it gives the player ways to mitigate the randomness if they choose. Though like @Blacksails, I did like the other, less random option (not just because I helped with it ) but this one regains that 'experimental' feel for an Adeptus Mechanicus floating throughout the Galaxy pillaging technology as they go.

Maybe the AM could swap one of their battleship choices for a Mars? Though I suppose you do get the Mini-Mars (Dictator with Nova).... All silliness aside, one question I've had for a little while is the placement of upgrade options in the list. In the original rules, most of the upgrades were almost like 'character ships', relatively unique instances of certain modifications performed throughout the Gothic war, and so it made a bit of sense to keep things like the Lunar Nova cannon in the Lunar description rather than in the fleet list. The downside is that you have to flip through the fleet list to find all the actual list point options.

Now, some upgrades are seen as general upgrades (and, with the AM, all cruisers have access to Nova cannon). Is it worth moving these upgrades to the Fleet List? Is there a reason they're kept within the profiles section (like formatting, etc.)? Just out of curiosity! It seems like it would be helpful to include them in the Fleet Lists so you only have to look in one place when making a fleet (maybe even as footnotes?).

On another unrelated note, we should send someone over to WargamerAU to talk about BFG:XR! There has been a little discussion recently about a new player starting but my acquaintance ZenithFleet (who frequents many fora, like this one on occasion) couldn't say much about the R/XR options because he's not familiar with them.


Thinking Stone

PS: @Blacksail's comments about home-brewing (what's essentially) a model option missing in the rules reminded me about a discussion that was once had about having meaningful differences between different weapons battery types on models etc.. For example, Dominators look the same as Tyrants with Nova cannon: but they're different! Might be a discussion for another time and place but my mathematics/physics-inclined mind would like to classify weapon options more rigorously and orthogonally (maths speak for mutual exclusive existence ). Which might already exist with some lance representations but weapons batteries are more askew!

[Xca|iber]

Finally had a chance to read the revised system fully! I like it, it's a cool way to re-use existing mechanics (and is easily extensible or modified by future rules) and it gives the player ways to mitigate the randomness if they choose. Though like @Blacksails, I did like the other, less random option (not just because I helped with it ) but this one regains that 'experimental' feel for an Adeptus Mechanicus floating throughout the Galaxy pillaging technology as they go.

Thanks! I also liked the totally non-random setup, but it's such a radical departure from how the AdMech played previously; I can see horizon's point about it being too much. This way is more of a compromise.

Maybe the AM could swap one of their battleship choices for a Mars? Though I suppose you do get the Mini-Mars (Dictator with Nova).... All silliness aside, one question I've had for a little while is the placement of upgrade options in the list. In the original rules, most of the upgrades were almost like 'character ships', relatively unique instances of certain modifications performed throughout the Gothic war, and so it made a bit of sense to keep things like the Lunar Nova cannon in the Lunar description rather than in the fleet list. The downside is that you have to flip through the fleet list to find all the actual list point options.

Now, some upgrades are seen as general upgrades (and, with the AM, all cruisers have access to Nova cannon). Is it worth moving these upgrades to the Fleet List? Is there a reason they're kept within the profiles section (like formatting, etc.)? Just out of curiosity! It seems like it would be helpful to include them in the Fleet Lists so you only have to look in one place when making a fleet (maybe even as footnotes?).

For the most part, I've tried to balance keeping the original formatting intact, whilst also collecting more general upgrades together at the final list level. That said, in this case I think you're right actually - the nova cannons and some of the other upgrades could be put directly in the fleet list (I have the space for it, thankfully). Usually this isn't possible because of discrepancies between individual classes (such as slight cost changes or effect differences like in the Dark Eldar book). For AM though, I guess I got distracted and didn't notice... I'll work on it next time I'm in the AM document.

On another unrelated note, we should send someone over to WargamerAU to talk about BFG:XR! There has been a little discussion recently about a new player starting but my acquaintance ZenithFleet (who frequents many fora, like this one on occasion) couldn't say much about the R/XR options because he's not familiar with them.

I'm not personally familiar with WargamerAU, but I'd be happy to answer any questions they have - just point me in the right direction 

Thinking Stone

PS: @Blacksail's comments about home-brewing (what's essentially) a model option missing in the rules reminded me about a discussion that was once had about having meaningful differences between different weapons battery types on models etc.. For example, Dominators look the same as Tyrants with Nova cannon: but they're different! Might be a discussion for another time and place but my mathematics/physics-inclined mind would like to classify weapon options more rigorously and orthogonally (maths speak for mutual exclusive existence ). Which might already exist with some lance representations but weapons batteries are more askew!

This is interesting, but a bit outside the scope of the BFG:XR project at the moment. If you're looking for a place to start though, the BFG: Armada videogame actually does this to a certain degree, differentiating macro- and plasma- batteries, as well as giving them slightly different damage amounts (partially representing "Firepower/Strength" from the tabletop stats, but also to allow for slightly more granularity between ship broadsides). What this idea might be most interesting for would be some kind of BFG "Kill-Team" equivalent where you only control like 1-3 capital ships, but the focus on each one is much greater and the individual interactions are less abstracted. (So you really get into the minute details between each ship and its customizations).

^^ Responses above in red.

As always, thanks for the comments! 

[Thinking Stone]

Byzantine politics are very reflective of the source material, after all Haha though points on all sides were valid, of course

On the upgrades: ah, of course! I'd forgotten how many discrepancies some of the other lists have! At least the AM is a relatively easy one on this case—I suppose the options could be listed under each ship in the list (and the effects stay in the profiles section) but maybe that's an experiment for another project.

I'm familiar with WargamerAU because Australian online fora are a bit rare They have some interesting stuff about BFG and Epic floating around, as well as some generally interesting discussion about rules and background.

Indeed, I agree it's beyond BFG:XR's scope (and would harm efforts to use it as a new standard). I'm glad to lend a physics-trained mind to the mix of liberal artists and games designers at some future point!

I think the BFG:Armada game is very interesting from a game design point of view because of the sacrifices and changes they've had to make for a working game system. I'm not sure if I'm so keen on every second ship ship getting dorsal turrets standard or some of the other positioning choices but I really like how they've created the bomb mechanic to bring some more parity between Nova Cannon Imperials and the others. Another subtle change they've made is improving the power of things like powerful prow (e.g. Murder, lance escorts, Dauntless) and broadside lance weapons—the Dauntless is pretty scary in BFG for a lance shot but an Acheron can rival other Chaos gun battery cruisers for sheer damage output (where its table-top version cannot).

On a different point, Videogame Armada shows how deterministic special orders (rather than the random rolling test) can work (though my thoughts are less in that direction and more in making Special Orders a consumable resource). Command and Control can be experimented on quite well with such a sturdy engine as table top BFG.

There were ideas floating around about a Skirmish BFG (@horizon had some work on it, if I recall correctly!) and I think Videogame Armada (VGA) is, as you say, an excellent starting point. And might make for some interesting comparisons with WH40K Roleplay space ships in Rogue Trader....


Thinking Stone

PS: I've always wanted to make the Rouge Trader, ever since misspelling it the first time....
PPS: You're very welcome for the comments! I'm glad I can spout my ideas at receptive people! One day I might even become less verbose... (though I like to try to help others understand why I have certain ideas).

[horizon]

Huh? A Chaos Acheron can perfectly hold its position in any Chaos fleet with its medium ranged lance volleys. It is a perfect support vessel to the weapon batteries one. I really like it.
If BFG: Armada changed already such a thing then the tactical aspect of BFG is kinda lost. Pity.

My skirmish things (on the forum, free to use) are indeed a BFG mix with Rogue Trader RPG ideas.

[Thinking Stone]

@horizon The real time strategy medium does allow (and perhaps cause) fundamental changes to how the weapons systems interact: BFG's rules very conveniently give complementary roles to weapons battery fire and lance fire but that's kind of an artefact of the rules system (though by no means an unwelcome one!). It's not that lances and weapons batteries are not different from each other, it's more that it's a different game engine.

Lances still have the advantages of higher accuracy and armour reduction, and weapons batteries still have the advantages of more shots but the Chaos fleet in particular can be, essentially, a lance fleet with little drawback. Part of the reason is the cheap and effective long-range lance light cruiser and the Devastation as a lance carrier.

The way damage is calculated also contributes. In BFG, a firepower 16 Carnage broadside to a station could cause 14 damage (at most) compared with the Acheron's maximum of 8. In the more usual situation of firing on an abeam capital ship, the difference is more modest, of course, Carnage at 2 (on average) and Acheron at 2 2/3 (on average). In Armada, the Acheron seems to be able to match the Carnage for peak damage output. This could even be due to Chaos weapons batteries firing more numerous small shots compared with lances firing fewer powerful shots (with the same damage per second). Damage in Armada is also deterministic rather than probabilistic (though shot accuracy is probabilistic; actually the opposite to BFG:TT!) and I presume they have therefore also scaled the damage output of different weapons systems because of that (so that lances are actually high-peak output rather than just more likely to cause damage but with far fewer shots). The Murder's tabletop BFG lances are a bit mediocre but they're a powerful peak output weapon in Armada.

As an anecdote (I don't have the game open to check the other stats directly, alas ), an Acheron blasted half the hull points of one of my Imperial cruisers by itself! And then Warped out before I could board it... rotten Nurgle, but that's a story for another time

A long post, I know, but I've tried to convey some of the mechanical and 'feel' differences that are a bit hard to enunciate.

As an aside, I actually think that the slow manoeuvring of ships is the key tactical element of BFG. That's what makes a game between 4 models interesting, at least in my experience (modern WH40K is quite dull with just 4 units, for example!). Armada replicates that very well, and I think it captures the spirit of the different weapons systems if perhaps not the mechanics. I enjoy it because it harks back to the original—I'd be interested to hear what you think of it, @horizon, if you one day have the chance!

I wasn't sure if your skirmish bits were still around! I shall have to visit them again! Whereabouts are they again?

PS: I also like the Acheron. B)

[Blacksails]

Friendly bump.  I'm happy to lend a hand now that I'm home for a while.