September 17, 2019, 04:07:37 PM

Author Topic: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG  (Read 116171 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest 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 #555 on: December 20, 2010, 08:18:34 PM »
What?
Keep Protector/Emissary at 90* turns. ALWAYS.

:)

Offline Asmodai

  • Lurker
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #556 on: December 20, 2010, 08:29:17 PM »
Well, you can get more mobility/flexibility out of 45* at 5 if you are also allowed to retain the 90 at 10.  Don't you agree?  Or are you just saying that you should keep it the same for simplicity purposes?
« Last Edit: December 20, 2010, 08:38:56 PM by Asmodai »

Offline Zelnik

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 771
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #557 on: December 20, 2010, 09:00:30 PM »
I think your over-complicating the matter..
Personally, I don't see a need for 90o turns on the protector, it being a ship of the line.

The emissary? that can have 90 degree turns, though it's variants need balancing. Lets face it, the lance boat is CLEARLY the best choice, but i think all of them need a standard st 3 grav launcher.. since it's clearly placed on the model.

Offline lastspartacus

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1279
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #558 on: December 20, 2010, 09:16:02 PM »
Id like a 2 fighter variant actually. 

Offline tinfish

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 46
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #559 on: December 21, 2010, 10:29:44 PM »
For ********************'s sake. Will some of you try playtesting the fleet instead of shouting for changes to the changes to the changes that we spent months arguing for. Some of you are now going back on what you said a few pages ago. Drop the theorygothic, get some figures out and play against the other fleets and see how you get on.

They aren't going to please everyone with the fleet, but the current (draft)version is fine. The Custodian isn't going to get 90 turns, the Protector needs them and the Emissary is never going to be a good ship with 4 HP's. The odd torpedo or LB isn't going to break a ship.

Just let them finalise the list and you can house rules it to your hearts content afterwards. I am happy with the list, I'd still like some changes, but they weren't adopted (probably 20 pages ago) so I dropped it. Hint, Hint.



Offline Sigoroth

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1386
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #560 on: December 21, 2010, 11:06:31 PM »
I agree the Custodian won't get 90° turns, but it should get cruiser status. And by "should" I really mean they should. It makes no sense that they don't. If they're going to have BB status then give them 12 hits. They're large enough to warrant it. If they're going to lose hits then they ought to gain something from it. That spiel that Nate spun is utter drivel.

Offline lastspartacus

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1279
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #561 on: December 22, 2010, 12:52:15 AM »
Well, you know my stance on it.  90* turns would be great, but it absolutely needs something.

Cruiser status and 6+ prow, that'l do it.

2 fighter bays on the emissary variant.  Stripped down no-bay Protector variant.  Or, as the theme seems to be keeping the variants the same cost, Protector with normal stats but replaces bay for Internal Tracking System, like Horizon's idea, I really like that.
It makes pure Kororvesh fleets great at smaller games, and less reliant on the Custodian.  Emissary's providing fighter cover, and Protectors doing pure gunship duty.  Great potential build.

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3865
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #562 on: December 22, 2010, 03:57:17 AM »
But not the truth Tau spirit: take on all.
Which the Protector should.
:)

And Tinfish is correct. Sig also.

Offline lastspartacus

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1279
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #563 on: December 22, 2010, 04:51:00 AM »
So the idea is that every Tau ship must be balanced to take all comers?  I don't remember ever reading that.  I always assumed it was because Tau ships couldn't hold their own as warships, and relied on their attack craft, something they were actually good at, to win the day.

Oh, and I don't think the Custodian should have 12 hits, but a prow deflector, of course.

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3865
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #564 on: December 22, 2010, 05:47:52 AM »
Quote
The Protector is theTau’smain fighting vessel, designed and built solely for the purposeof engaging and destroying the enemy in fleet actions. It is heavily armed and versatile, carrying a full array of different weaponry to best meet any foe. A Protector is designed to meet Imperial cruisers on even terms, and whilst lacking the great bulk and structure of a cruiser, packs comparable firepower.
Imperial Armour 3.
Yes, the FW rules we are replacing to give the kor'or'vesh fleet more 'Character'.

So you might denounce it from that pov, perhaps not. Your call.

However, to add, from the current draft:
Quote
While it does not have the same bulk and durability as comparable Imperial vessels, it is the first Tau design capable of meeting Imperial cruisers on nearly equal terms
Meeting Imperial cruisers on nearly equal terms. Now given that the IN uses carriers & gunships it is in the line of reasoning that such a warship, being able to face IN cruiser has a carrier capacity of its own.

Also because of the fact the Custodian is fewer in numbers, more precious to the Tau and less likely to be present in small engagements. Thus the Protector should have its own attack craft, hence a single bay is needed: enough to thwart enemy AC (as every Protector has one), plus to assist its missiles and also to engage small targets during raids (transports etc).


Offline Zelnik

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 771
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #565 on: December 22, 2010, 06:07:44 AM »
Hold it, should the void stalker be a cruiser? it has 10 hits.. what about the stronghold battleship? it has 10 hits too.

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3865
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #566 on: December 22, 2010, 06:53:05 AM »
Not only because of mass, but also because of doctrine and fleet build.
The only difference from BB to CG for the Custodian is that it could turn after 10cm and do a CTNH. In line of the rest.

Eldar are Eldar and different. Void Stalker CG or BB status wouldn't change a thing. Stronghold could be 12 hits from my pov.

Offline Zelnik

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 771
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #567 on: December 22, 2010, 07:22:02 AM »
Honestly, it SHOULD be 12 hits, considering how MUCKING BIG IT IS!

I don't mind CG for Custodian, but i DON'T know why the Stronghold is only 10! it's not built under the constraints of the youthful tau, but the much older and more experienced Demiurg.

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3865
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #568 on: December 22, 2010, 07:27:00 AM »
Agreed. I will go to that other thread. :)

Offline lastspartacus

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1279
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #569 on: December 22, 2010, 12:00:45 PM »
A Protector is designed to meet Imperial cruisers on even terms, and whilst lacking the great bulk and structure of a cruiser, packs comparable firepower.
Imperial Armour 3.
Yes, the FW rules we are replacing to give the kor'or'vesh fleet more 'Character'.

So you might denounce it from that pov, perhaps not. Your call.

Also because of the fact the Custodian is fewer in numbers, more precious to the Tau and less likely to be present in small engagements. Thus the Protector should have its own attack craft, hence a single bay is needed: enough to thwart enemy AC (as every Protector has one), plus to assist its missiles and also to engage small targets during raids (transports etc).


[/quote]
I don't denounce it, I agree it is an ok idea.  But I wouldn't quote doctrine behind it, because Tau are all about different caste systems and working together, if anything they would have radically different ships filling specialist roles.  All I'm saying is a non-LB would be a cool variant.
With your ITS idea filling the space of the LB, actually.

And indeed, the Protector is obviously more manouverable than the typical battleship by pure hull design.
Eldar are Eldar, and I agree the Demiurg ship could use more hits.