September 15, 2019, 11:07:11 PM

Author Topic: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG  (Read 115992 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Asmodai

  • Lurker
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #600 on: January 02, 2011, 06:02:57 PM »
Thanks for the hard work Nate!  I appreciate the work you have put in to making a good list for the Tau.  I have re-written this post several times trying to figure out how I could get you to at least consider one last look at  something.....I figured it would be just best to just be direct. I agree with Horizon, we have a playable list that has its strengths and weakness, which is how it should be.  However, I dont think that any list should be hurt in such a way that you don't want to take one of their ships.

I have really only three comments that will result in a request for you to just look at one of them:

1.  The ability to get my Custodian where I want it due to its turn rate and no CTNH.  I feel like it needs to stay with the protectors and rest of the fleet to maximize use of the tracking systems and 45cm range benefits, but it has a hard time doing so.

2. I have play tested the heck out of the emissary, but I have come to the conclusion of just not including if it can be helped.  The 1 shield and 4 hit REALLY hurts and I dont think that it really gives you enough time to reap any benefits from its offensive capability.  It goes pop once its in range to use its lances.

3. I think Castellans are probably worth their points.  I think as a personal preference though, I avoid taking them because they are at half strength when you fail a leadership test by the time you get them to reload (this fleet needs a lot of tests).

So if I had to pick just one thing to make me happy, it would be doing something so that I could REALLY want to keep the Emissary in my list!!!  I think its an awesome model and I really want to play with it, but I would like to request if you could take one last look at it and see if there is anything that can be done to tweak it so its more playable?

Thanks!  and Happy New Year!

Offline lastspartacus

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1279
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #601 on: January 02, 2011, 06:44:13 PM »
Sig, I feel like I wrote that post myself.  I agree exactly, strongly, one hundred percent with every word, which is shocking! :)

I can't write much, you described it all perfectly.  I logged on here to talk about how some things, especially the Custodian, were actually broken and were counterintuitive with the flow of the fleet.  If you are listened to, the kororvesh will be a perfect fleet.  Not korvattra level, but damn fine and balanced.

Give the damn Custodian cruiser status or 90* at 15cm.  Its stupid not to. (But the prow deflector is a good first step) :)
Biggest issue.  If nothing else changes, this must, as its a fat pelican in a fleet of sparrows.


20 points and 4+ armor on the Warden is a neat idea, it certainly needs something.  It additionally makes the hook Emissary versions underpowered because they bring an overpriced ship at the cost of no lances.  It would be fine at 25 points and be just an ever-so-slight Orca improvement.

25cm is a big duh, and 'why not?' on the Emissary.  It aint getting emissaries around in a hurry as it is.  Deflector option is neat, good idea.
2 fighters on the main variant, or what Sig suggested.  I think it was 2 torps and a bay.

Protector is overpriced.

45 and 20cm on Castellan.

Perfect fleet, dream fleet.  
« Last Edit: January 02, 2011, 07:42:13 PM by lastspartacus »

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3865
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #602 on: January 02, 2011, 07:39:56 PM »
LS, drop that Protector remark. If it is something it is undercosted by 5 points (they made it 185 so it could fit into the Cruiser Clash scenario!).
Really Protector is fine.


Castellan,
wel I think the Infidel has a good place in the Chaos fleet, even at 40pts. Lot of people do, even though Chaos it the cruiser fleet.
So we also know they won't change profiles in the rulebook for a long time (??), thus do we make the Castellan cheaper to be a tad-ish more balanced or do we keep it fair vs the other escorts? If we can update Infidels etc it is easy to chip in a Castellan at that point for a change,


Offline lastspartacus

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1279
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #603 on: January 02, 2011, 07:44:00 PM »
What?  Obvious LS hatred, not telling Sig to drop it too ;)
 170 point ship though.  Dropped 2 points in battery strength even, and you want to increase the points.  Hilarious.
I won't drop it, because its true. Its not the biggest issue in the fleet though.  The Custodian is, which is why I wasn't going to mention it until Sig did.

Offline Vaaish

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 986
    • Digital Equinox
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #604 on: January 02, 2011, 08:04:52 PM »
There's a lot of talk about the custodian needing to keep up with the fleet and it seems to center in part on the tracking system, but why does the custodian HAVE to do this? I don't think the protector is that much faster that it can't slow down to stay with the Custodian if you feel the need to keep the fleet clustered and there's nothing saying you have to take the custodian if you want a faster and more maneuverable fleet. I understand people want to use particular models, but can't you adapt your tactics to a slower battleship if you bring it? For that matter you are facing the same problem the IN and Chaos has had for ages with battleships that are slower and take longer to turn than the rest of the fleet. True there are a couple that make up for it like the Desolator and Retribution, but by and large, at least you can still turn after taking a BM.  
-Vaaish

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3865
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #605 on: January 02, 2011, 08:27:05 PM »
Heh, I just noticing Sigoroth posted 170 for the Protector as well. Just didn't register it I guess.

Why? Because it is UTTERLY overpowered if it came at 170pts. At 185 it is fine.

I cannot imagine why people think 185 is too much. In Distant Darkness the pIII variant had less firepower, but tracking systems (thus equal in a way). It had more restricted arcs. It costed 190pts and it had seen a lot of play test and it was fine.

Dropping a Castellan to 45 I can see but do not feel as necessary.
Making the Custodian a Grand Cruiser is something I advocate since the beginning (DD)
The Emissary variants densen @ 25cm ok with me (in a diplomatic way it is given).

But dropping the Protector in value: No Friggin Way.

So LS and Sigoroth ;)
No point drop on the Protector.



Offline Zelnik

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 771
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #606 on: January 02, 2011, 08:31:46 PM »
Guys, Nate made it clear.

He does not give a damn. He wants to paint and polish the crap so he can sell it. He does not want to actually fix them.

He is looking for the broken, not for the improvement.  Consider him an underpaid auto repair man for this thread.  He is not paid for this, He does not give a damn, and he has a deadline.

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3865
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #607 on: January 02, 2011, 08:39:05 PM »
What's broken then Zelnik?

I mean: really broken?

We shall keep in mind we forum people are not the only ones. Other forums have sayings. The HA gets personal mails as well.

Back in da days people where friggin shocked, outraged when Sigoroth and I kept pushing 90* degrees on the Protector. Look how far we came now. :)
We are friggin discussing a Custodian to have better turns (CG). heh heh

Offline tinfish

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 46
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #608 on: January 02, 2011, 08:52:40 PM »
As Horizon said - there can't have been more than 10 people in this discussion - it needs more input than that to re-write a fleet and there has been, between many forums and the Yahoo Group.

Zelnik - I think that's an unfair statement you have made, the HA have re-written the FAQ as well as several other fleets, they have done a lot of work and we should be grateful that they persuaded GW to let them do it. GW would probably have been happy to let the game die as they have no intention of promoting anything outside the 3 core games. Just because you aren't happy you don't need to throw a hissy fit. Don't like it - house rule it in your own group.

I am pretty happy with it - with the one exception of the Emissary's speed. If something is done then great, if not, I will live with it.

Offline Zelnik

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 771
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #609 on: January 02, 2011, 09:01:19 PM »
It was mostly sarcasm, but his last post did not help his case. They are not taking suggestions anymore, they just want us to make sure they didn't screw up the rules as they wrote them.

Offline fracas

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 882
    • WarMancer
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #610 on: January 02, 2011, 09:21:49 PM »
i agree with Nate

fix what needs to be fixing first.

Offline Zelnik

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 771
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #611 on: January 02, 2011, 09:36:27 PM »
I don't think we are here to be a glorified spellcheck. 

Offline lastspartacus

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1279
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #612 on: January 02, 2011, 11:25:41 PM »

[quoteI cannot imagine why people think 185 is too much. In Distant Darkness the pIII variant had less firepower, but tracking systems (thus equal in a way). It had more restricted arcs. It costed 190pts and it had seen a lot of play test and it was fine.[/quote]
If you improve poop, it doesn't mean its quite fertilizer yet :p  
Seriously though, thats not nearly as important as the other issues, so I'll personally leave it alone.  I havn't had the same experiences playtesting it though.
Quote
Dropping a Castellan to 45 I can see but do not feel as necessary.
Couldn't hurt! :p
Quote
Making the Custodian a Grand Cruiser is something I advocate since the beginning (DD)
The Emissary variants densen @ 25cm ok with me (in a diplomatic way it is given).
Nate, if you keep up with the various threads, the very fact that all the vocal members strongly agree on a point seems about as rare as a solar eclipse.  That should tell you something.  If you want more proof, take it to other threads.  I can't imagine anyone disagreeing with this.
Quote
So LS and Sigoroth ;)
No point drop on the Protector.
Thats more like it ;)

@Vaaish:
I think it is important, because its not the speed but the manouverability of the Custodian that is the issue.  What is the point of 90 degree turns when your flagship cant keep up? It causes a big fork in the fleet's road.
« Last Edit: January 02, 2011, 11:27:36 PM by lastspartacus »

Offline Zelnik

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 771
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #613 on: January 02, 2011, 11:58:31 PM »
possibly because you don't have to make a full 90 degree turn.

Offline Vaaish

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 986
    • Digital Equinox
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #614 on: January 03, 2011, 12:20:51 AM »
Quote
I think it is important, because its not the speed but the manouverability of the Custodian that is the issue.  What is the point of 90 degree turns when your flagship cant keep up? It causes a big fork in the fleet's road.

It's no more of a fork than an empy supported by dauntless faces and I don't see complaints than IN BB need to have better turning. It's no more a fork than a Marine BB supported by SC faces either and again I don't see people clammering for the BB to get better turns since it makes the 90` turns on a SC useless. My point is despite not getting CG status it doesn't break the fleet. It means you have to work a bit harder to use the fleet but I can't see the fleet or the Custodian as worthless unless it has better turns.
-Vaaish