June 18, 2019, 09:44:33 PM

Author Topic: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG  (Read 109535 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3865
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #210 on: October 20, 2010, 02:18:51 PM »
Fine with me. I just wanted to point it. Still flufwise I could see an unofficial house rule being like what I said (+15-20pts for Firewarriors on 'old' vessels).

I am just waiting for the new draft. :)

Sure, of course they can! Like I said, WR is going to be awesome! I certainly don't mind at all this being a house rule and I have a whole slew of house rules I use. However, because this disturbs the balance we are trying to program into the fleet, we can't acually make it official.
I agree. :)

Quote
Yes, I know the new Tau draft is late. Unfortunately, real life got in the way of me getting it done last night. I should have both this and the new Rogue Traders draft out today. Sorry!  :-\

- Nate

You have a real life? lol. What's a real life?
Just kidding. Take it easy. :)

Offline flybywire-E2C

  • BFG HA
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 400
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #211 on: October 23, 2010, 08:46:44 AM »
Hi everyone!! Okay, the latest Rogue Traders Draft Rules and Tau Kor'or'vesh draft rules are on the street. Please review, comment and complain.

These are DRAFTS so make your complaints known of something is really broken. Rogue Traders in particular has a LOT of good easter eggs in it!  Make your comments known!

I also posted the Space Marines final in the same place. They can be seen here:

http://tinyurl.com/23nul8q*

Now I'm going to bed!   8)

- Nate
Check out the BFG repository page for all the documents we have in work:
http://tinyurl.com/23nul8q
:) Smile, game on and enjoy!           - Nate

Offline KivArn

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 36
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #212 on: October 23, 2010, 09:04:16 AM »
Looks pretty good. I'll probably not bother using the 45cm ion cannon variant of the protector for 2 reasons though, i'd only be fielding 1 at most (3-4 protectors => 1 45cm IC protector max) at so i'd employ the KISS principal :D

Good change on the wording of the custodian. Much clearer now. (though still feel it's a little too common... but that's by the by)

Then there's the long standing wishes...
cruiser turn rate on custodian... maybe at cost of 2 wb >_>
25cm speed on emissary (and 90* turns - though 90* turns and 20cm is better than 45* and 25cm - so please don't go back ;)


Elsewise, looks pretty good :D

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3865
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #213 on: October 23, 2010, 10:42:10 AM »
Ok, low on time:

Custodian fine: one might consider to extend TS to 20cm. But Grand Cruiser status is to be adviced.

Vior'la Protector : eeeeek, 12 batteries + 2 IC at 30cm possible, that's too much. We in this thread adviced to give it 4 prow 2/2 on the sides. You just increased it with an extra 4. Too much imo. 30cm IC is what we also said, so good.

Tol'ku Protector : I like it, 5 missiles should be it.

Thus: Vior'la seems too strong. Both should have 5 missiles.

Emissary: launch bay variant is ill adviced. 3 missiles is much better. I still am against Ion Cannons on the model. Now we have 6 RG + 2IC = 6 + 6 = 12 is a lot. ;)

No, really, can we sway you in dropping the main railguns to 2/2 and give the vessel a speed of 25cm? But otherwise I can live with 3/3. The launch bay needs upping to 2. And 4/4 railguns is too high imo.

Oooh, Castellan. Nice. Don't change a thing. Yay yay yay. 25cm...

Fleet list okay.

Good step in the right direction. I think the Vior'la Protector is the only main issue at the moment as I see it as too strong.

The Emissaries could need a test run, though 1 lb is not enough.



Offline Sigoroth

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1386
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #214 on: October 23, 2010, 11:33:36 AM »
I don't like the extended cutting beam range. Is it for this ship only or all Demiurg cutting beams?

To me Castellans are too expensive and Wardens are just not on a par with the Orca, but I might throw in a couple of Wardens to fill points when using a pure fleet. Otherwise I'd just use Orcas. Not terribly fussed about the Castellan, but it's a shame that none of the variant Wardens discussed were used (2IC, 1IC+3WB, 1IC + 1WB @ 25 pts, 4WB @ 25 pts or 4WB w/ 4+ armour @ 20 pts).

I think the Protector variants are much closer in value now, but I don't like the difference in torp values. I think they should both have 5. Apart from that it would require some sort of conversion work to represent the sort of variation we see between these ships.

Emissary - Again, why is there a fighter variant? Personally I think that the other variants should just have the fighter included, but assuming this isn't the case, then why would someone chose 1 fighter over 3 torps? I wouldn't chose 1 full launch bay over 3 torps, let alone a cut down bay.

I would just have 2 variants. 3 torps, 1 fighter, 3/3 p/s WBs and either hooks or lances. I'm not sure about upping the firepower of the hooked variant to 8 total.

My problem with the Custodian is an oldy but a goody. Drop AC and gain cruiser turn rate (turn after 10cm). Also, extend range of tracking system. At least double. Should be a better C&C ship than a little escort.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2010, 04:29:54 PM by Sigoroth »

Offline Trasvi

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 47
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #215 on: October 23, 2010, 02:25:57 PM »
I just noticed the custodian entry no longer specifies Prow deflectors. Did I miss the discussion on this earlier?
Edit: lol, first page. Following the reasoning there I agree with you, however it seems slightly illogical that the largest ship in the fleet has a different defence system. I like being able to play opponents who haven't seen tau and say 'all capital ships have 6/5 armor'. Keepin it simple.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2010, 02:37:51 PM by Trasvi »

Offline Sigoroth

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1386
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #216 on: October 23, 2010, 04:51:17 PM »
There is NO WAY the Custodian with its enormous gaping maw and huge, prow-facing hangar bays should have a 6+ prow.  If anything, the deflector is the only thing keeping the prow from being 4+!

Having just read Travsi's post I checked out what he was talking about and saw the above. I must say that I disagree with the notion. That "gaping maw" is a hole. Any shots going into it will miss the ship. They won't hit some critical internal component or anything. Also, on the prow facing hangar bays, well the Despoiler has prow facing bays and yet has 5+ armour. Sure, you could argue that the stats don't say prow bays, but they should. Also, even without the stats saying that, the model still has that gaping maw, much more so than the Custodian. That's just the Despoiler of course. There's also the strike cruiser and battle barge which both have "gaping maws" and prow facing hangar bays. They've got 6+ armour without the virtue of Tau deflector shielding.

So I see no reason why the Custodian couldn't have it. Given this then perhaps it should, as I suppose the Tau would certainly try to protect it. It is still a primarily forward facing ship like the rest of the fleet, but suffers much much worse manoeuvrability (only 45 ship in the fleet and the only one that requires 15cm move before turning). This would make it both desirable to get the target into the front arc and also very hard to prevent the opponent from getting to fire at the prow. Given how ponderous this ship is compared to the rest of the fleet one would think that it should get the 6+ prow. It is, after all, merely a function of their shield/drive technology, not one of actual armour (for which a precedent has been set possibly in the Despoiler and certainly in the SC/BB).

Still, I don't mind them having 5+ prow armour. I figure it'll divert a lot of firepower away from Protectors and Emissaries into a ship that could possibly handle it better. Still, you might want to look at who is supposed to be protecting whom. If Custodians are so precious that they can't be left unescorted then it would seem that the Tau would prefer fire to be directed at the Protectors and escorts. In which case maybe the 6+ prows are appropriate.

An option to give them the prow might be the easiest fix.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2010, 04:53:16 PM by Sigoroth »

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3865
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #217 on: October 23, 2010, 06:53:43 PM »
On the Custodian without the prow deflector: I don't think it is missed but the reason is wrong. I mean, prow deflectors is a shield layering technique to make better warp dives and a better protection. Thus has absolutely nothing to do with how the ship looks.
But yeah, 5+ doesn't ground it.
(I do still like 2/2 launch bays + 8 missiles more, then the current but alas. Grand Cruiser status is more important ;) ).

I don't think the HA will do a change to the Warden and they have tried 2IC versions so I guess we'll need to adapt to a variant which plays really well.

The Castellan now has 25cm speed Sig, so increased. Thus it now has the greatest range on the whole Tau fleet! Cool. (25+45 = 70cm). 50pts is fitting.

Sig's right on the Emissary with the weapon layouts.

Sig, no problem with the Vior'la Protector as being to strong?


edit
page 2 : the picture of the Custodian is to large.
special rule page: Tracking Systems: mentioning of Custodian would be good (like boarding is changed as well).

On the fluff part.... since we went 90* I think a special notion must be made to:

Fio'O Ly'tan
Por'el Wt'ail
Kor'o Ry'zon

:)
Project Distant Darkness key figures.  ;)
« Last Edit: October 23, 2010, 07:26:45 PM by horizon »

Offline fracas

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 882
    • WarMancer
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #218 on: October 23, 2010, 08:01:23 PM »
excellent changes  to the Kroot sphere! :)

Offline Caine-HoA

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 136
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #219 on: October 23, 2010, 10:13:40 PM »
From Nates last battle report i dont think the protector is too strong, you should always keep in mind that it only has 6hp and most weapons are only front arc so that you have to be closing to the opponent to be most effective.
And you dont have the possibility to use twice the firepower as imp ships if they have opponents on both sides.

Offline Vaaish

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 986
    • Digital Equinox
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #220 on: October 24, 2010, 03:05:25 AM »
Where is that batrep located?

Thoughts:
Custodian: seems alright, 6+ isn't required. I would also advocate increasing the range to the tracking system, if anything, based on just the practicality of placing the models physically. It is for all intents and purposes a grand cruiser, but I guess the Tau could happily call it a battleship based on its weapons load out.

Protector: Agree with most comments, the T'olku does seem rather strong in battery strength. S16 equivalent isn't so bad though, it brings it brings it on par with the hitting power of a Carnage. I would feel more comfortable with a little less batteries, but I'll reserve judgment for more battle reports on how this fares. Agree with missile strength set to 5.

Emissary:  The Sa'Cea is still problematic. You think that two gravhooks and two points of battery strength equals two lances? That seems a stretch to me. The grav hooks let you take wardens, sure, but it takes an extra 100 points to fill them out and not taking the wardens means they effectively give you nothing. The other two don't really have much difference. Missiles are better than the fighter, and that's makes the Bork'an a better choice.

Maybe give the Dal'yth the deflector standard since it seems much more defensive oriented, make the Bork'an pay for it, and drop the Sa'cea entirely?

Castallan is an interesting beast. Expensive, but man, that's some nice firepower and maneuverability. It's even LFR so it can hit pretty hard from abeam and fire those nice guided torpedoes. Should it really get 45cm batteries though for how small this guy is? Have Tau really advanced enough to get 45cm range on an escort chassis with few drawbacks? Should it have some limit to how many can be taken?



-Vaaish

Offline lastspartacus

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1279
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #221 on: October 24, 2010, 05:24:54 AM »
Ya, id definitly never ever take a warden over an orca, if given the chance.

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3865
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #222 on: October 24, 2010, 08:03:21 AM »
Orca : port or starboard fire strength = 2 weapon batteries.
Warden : port or starboard fire strength = 1 ion cannon = 3 weapon batteries.

Squad of 3 will be 6 vs 9.

Being in an abeam position is an advantage. Warden is also faster. It is good.

Vaaish, Castellan should have 45cm batteries as it stands. Though in PDD I fixed them forward. But leave 'em as is. They die and are playable. ;)

Caine-HO : If you don't think that 12 railguns + 2 ion cannon as focussed weaponry is too much, plus 5 missiles to add. Then I'm numbed. ;)
The essence is the scenario & tactician who uses the turn rate. In a sluggish fleet engagement a well played IN/Chaos fleet will be on top after the Tau did their alpha strike and failed it by a medium margin.

Vior'la 12+2 = 12+6 = 18 (medium-short ranged)
Carnage = 16 (long-medium ranged)
Slaughter = 22 (short ranged)
Lunar - Gothic - Dominator = 12 (short ranged)


Offline Sigoroth

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1386
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #223 on: October 24, 2010, 09:13:54 AM »
Orca : port or starboard fire strength = 2 weapon batteries.
Warden : port or starboard fire strength = 1 ion cannon = 3 weapon batteries.

Squad of 3 will be 6 vs 9.

Being in an abeam position is an advantage. Warden is also faster. It is good.

So, let's say you have 5 Warden, and went abeam to get as much survivability as you could. That gives you 15WBe firepower. Now let's say you had 6 Orcas (same cost) but didn't give a rats about survivability because you have an extra hit/shield. In this case you get 30WBe firepower. So, an extra hit/shield & twice the firepower for the same cost. Only thing you lose is going survivability due to being prow on rather than abeam. If you limit the number of prow enemies to just your target, he'll likely be braced or crippled anyway. So, with more firepower and more hits for the same price, I don't see the prow/side argument holding any weight.

So, if the Wardens are going to be prow on so that they're not at such a disadvantage compared to Orcas then the slightly better swinging firepower is merely the most incidental of advantages. That simply leaves the extra speed vs the cost. Speed is good, and useful for escorts to get into that prime position. All other things being equal though the speed simply is not worth the increase of 20% cost. 6 Orca > 5 Warden for same price. Therefore 1 Orca > 1 Warden at current prices.

While it does require another hook to take the 6 Orcas over 5 Wardens in the former case wherever there are hooks I'd be inclined to take Orcas. In the latter case I feel no such compulsion. They're for left over points only.

The problem is that they're so much like an Orca. There were a tonne of other options given. The 2IC one is popular with a lot of people. There are objections to that. Rejected. The 1IC+3RG variant overcomes most of those objections. I can see people not liking so much firepower in such a small ship though, so reject that. That leaves 1IC+1RG or 4RG. The former is a bit of an odd duck so I'd prefer the latter. This option would give Tau a Firestorm version (Orca), a Sword version (Warden) and a couple of Cobra versions (Defender/Castellan). This could either be implemented as 4RG@25pts each or, my preferred, 4RG&4+ armour @20pts each. Seriously though, pick any damn option that isn't an Orca clone.

As for the 25cm speed on the Castellan, well, as a ship designed to sit back and pepper from afar this increase to minimum movement doesn't seem like an advantage to me. 20cm was fine for the ship. Much rather the Emissary go to 25cm.


Offline Caine-HoA

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 136
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #224 on: October 24, 2010, 10:48:50 AM »
@horizon

its just different how these front arc weapons work out on a cruiser with 90. Can we really say how it will work out from the paper comparing it with Imp cruisers who gameplaywise work totally different?

Of corse 90 and many weapons are an advantage, still  it is a big disadvantage to have only 6hp. The slaughter is short ranged and has 22  but its also 15points less for more HP AND a faster ships. I just want to point out that thoase ships are all very different in how you have to play them so the raw WB numbers wont tell you much if the weapons on the protector are too strong.