September 21, 2019, 06:09:52 AM

Author Topic: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG  (Read 116519 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline lastspartacus

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1279
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #705 on: January 18, 2011, 04:19:00 AM »
What about the stronghold getting 12 hits?

Also, can only the citadel increase the range of its cutting beam?

It doesnt make sense that Demiurg ships cant store up cutting beam energy.  Its a mining ship, after all.

And finally, its simply interesting that a Citadel can muster the same amount of beam attacks that a stronghold can.
« Last Edit: January 18, 2011, 04:32:09 AM by lastspartacus »

Offline Zelnik

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 771
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #706 on: January 18, 2011, 10:12:01 PM »
Because it is identical equipment for a mining job, sparticus. It is a weapon of war only in emergencies.

The strength 12 battery in the prow is what makes the difference ;)

I agree, the stronghold should be 12 hits, but the cost of the vessel would probably swell to close to 400 points.. it is a BEHEMOTH already!

Offline lastspartacus

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1279
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #707 on: January 19, 2011, 01:51:24 AM »
I just always put the amount of attacks to storage space.  I don't think it would be imbalanced for the blast markers to carry over, judging on how pricey the ships already are.  Would be a great deterant to normal fire.

I'm assuming even after max accumulation, blast markers are still removed?

Still need to know if the 'shoot to 30 for 2' cutting beam ability is Citadel only.

Also, why the disparity in weapon ranges, 60cm straight to 30cm?  Why did dwarves give inferior ion beams to the Tau? :)

Edit: Just noticed a big goof.  Demiurg should say they have ion beams, not lances.  Ion beams are Demiurg tech for lances, and the Tau got it from them.  I realize its superficial but  the Tau fleet set the precedent for different names.
« Last Edit: January 19, 2011, 01:56:48 AM by lastspartacus »

Offline Vaaish

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 986
    • Digital Equinox
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #708 on: January 19, 2011, 02:42:54 AM »
When the Tau bought the cannons, they didn't have enough coin for the enhanced generator package needed for 60cm lances.
-Vaaish

Offline lastspartacus

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1279
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #709 on: January 19, 2011, 02:51:43 AM »
Lol.

Also, just a general question for someone who has tested all 3 classes:  Are they not overpriced?  I mean, can they stand up to ships of comparable points costs?

The way they seem to want to approach an enemy fleet is weird, closing abeam and then going prow-on when close.

Offline Sigoroth

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1386
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #710 on: January 19, 2011, 03:58:07 AM »
From what I can see the Stronghold is pretty much in the right region. It's worth its cost. Could maybe use the extra hits given its early departure in most fleets. The Bastion is terribly overpriced. A good 30 odd points. It's not a bad ship, but just way expensive. I have not tested the other one, but my objection to it is that it shouldn't exist. It uses the same model as the Bastion but has a completely different profile, including reduced hits. This is absurd. Nate's "logic" was that he made the Bastion's stats before seeing the model and upon seeing the model thought it was too small to justify 8 hits. He also wanted the Demiurg to be able to field a ship in the cruiser clash scenario.

In the first instance I think he's wrong. The model seems to be quite clearly on a par with an Imperial or Chaos cruiser to me, in terms of displacement. They're not small at all. Grey Knights Strike Cruisers on the other hand have a much harder time justifying their 6 hits, particularly when compared directly to the standard SC.

On the second point I absolutely think it's unnecessary. Cruiser clash is a beginners scenario and the 185 pt restriction is for beginners, which really should be using IN/Chaos in the first place. Looking a little further into the scenario people have the option to remove the point limit on cruisers or simply select cruisers up to a set points value. So if you're a beginner, learn the game with standard fleets. If you're not you can simply modify the selection restrictions to allow for more diverse ships, enabling the Bastion to be taken.

So, given this, I haven't even considered the new Demiurg cruiser. If FW ever make a smaller Demiurg vessel then I'll revisit the stats. It's not likely that they will though.

Offline lastspartacus

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1279
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #711 on: January 19, 2011, 11:38:18 AM »
Is there a way to easily convert it?  Leave out some pieces?  I was looking at the models as well, and they do seem on par with cruiser/battleships.  Stronghold definately seems beefier than a Custodian, for instance.

Any answer on the 'can the other 2 use the 30cm beam' or 'why no lasting beam storage'.

Offline lastspartacus

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1279
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #712 on: January 21, 2011, 01:18:49 AM »
What if Demiurg could automatically spend a cutting beam shot to auto pass a move through asteroids?

Offline Sigoroth

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1386
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #713 on: January 21, 2011, 01:43:09 AM »
Is there a way to easily convert it?  Leave out some pieces?  I was looking at the models as well, and they do seem on par with cruiser/battleships. Stronghold definately seems beefier than a Custodian, for instance.

There is no real easy way to convert the Bastion by leaving stuff off. The Stronghold is definitely big enough to count for the full 12 hits. With the release of the CL stats I've spent a little time thinking on how one would go about making a Demiurg CL. You could use the same bridge/cutting beam as the Bastion and the same armour plates, though with a little chopped off the inside of each. However, instead of the split body adjoining the bridge section, mock up a thinner single body from plasticard that would slot around the bridge section. You could build it up to the same thickness as the Bastion with successive layers. As for the shape, I would make it pretty much identical to the Cardassian Galor class cruiser's main body and rear.

Quote
Any answer on the 'can the other 2 use the 30cm beam' or 'why no lasting beam storage'.

I think this is partly a balance issue, and partly a feel thing.

What if Demiurg could automatically spend a cutting beam shot to auto pass a move through asteroids?

That actually seems pretty cool.

Offline Plaxor

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1106
  • Tyrant of BFG:Revised
    • BFG files
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #714 on: January 21, 2011, 02:02:24 AM »
I've played Demiurg for a while now. I think to construct a 'Citadel' I would simply reduce the size of each of the 'side' pieces by shaving down the fronts of them up to 1.5cm. Thereby shortening the vessel slightly, and applying the vessels prow pieces back on the shaved parts, hiding the cuts nicely.


The Stronghold is worthwhile for its points. The Bastions however are about 30 pts overcosted. However I do generally use Xisor's rules when playing with demiurg, and you can build the escorts rather easily. The smaller ones are just the rear half of a defense monitor (from the defense monitor and system ships blister) which actually looks like it was intended to be a demiurg ship.

The Ramparts, I actually used a plasticard mockup that I made following instructions from someone on port maw. Now I think I'll actually build one out of bastion parts.