September 17, 2019, 04:05:00 PM

Author Topic: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG  (Read 116169 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 #615 on: January 03, 2011, 02:57:40 AM »
/agree

I can live without Castellans.  But REALLY want the Emissary to be worth it, and if it was faster, then I can see taking it in my fleet even if it is almost balsa-wood-like (at least then there is a reason)...and the extra squadron comment actually would make it worth it too, because then I could change how I use my protectors.

As for the Custodian....yes, its more about your flagship being able to keep up with your fleet.  I have had to not do 90 degree turns a lot of the time because then I would be leaving my custodian out for fodder....in a place where its not getting many of its shots and ships out of its range.  However, it doesnt kill the entire fleet if it doesn't work...thats why I REALLY would like the emissary fixed the most.  Great model, would love to play with it.
« Last Edit: January 03, 2011, 03:12:35 AM by Asmodai »

Offline flybywire-E2C

  • BFG HA
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 400
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #616 on: January 03, 2011, 03:14:17 AM »
Okay folks, here's the scoop on the Custodian so we can lay this to rest once and for all. Forgeworld says its a battleship. GW says it officially is nothing but an Explorer in a different hull, thus a battleship. In the end, what makes all this work official is when GW goes over it, blesses it and posts it to their website.

Whatever improvements we are trying to make absolutely HAVE to fall inside the constraints we are given. If the HA's decide to go outside the constraints because we want to or even if EVERYONE wants to, GW will simply decide to stick all this work in the round file. Then not only is all this time and effort wasted, but in the end all we get is a really pretty Explorer along with an entire fleet which is little more than re-hulled versions of the Tau fleet we have now, along with a really pretty fleet list no more official than any other homebrew list out there.

This brings me back to the "90% right" outcome I spoke of earlier. The Custodian is not what everyone wants, but it is a WHOLE LOT BETTER than an Explorer. The Kor'or'vesh is not what everyone wants, but it is a fine addition to the current Tau fleet. Now you have to ask yourself what is more important: having an official Kor'or'vesh Fleet List where the Custodian is a battleship, or having a Custodian Grand Cruiser on a fleet list that is just one more fan product? Many people have stated, "I'm going to ignore it and make it a homebrew GC anyway."  That's fine! In fact, that's gaming! I have plenty of homebrew ships that will never be official, ships that will make EXCELLENT Warp Rift articles when our rule projects are complete. That doesn't mean they should or even can be made official.

Remember folks, we're fans just like you. We're not just sitting up here making arbitrary decisions to hurt the fans' feelig just because we can. Heck- we're not even getting paid! In the end, these projects are probably the most fan-involved of any set of rules in the history of Games Workshop. I said from the outset that we weren't going to make everyone happy, but at least recognize that 90% success is a lot better than 100% failure.
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 Plaxor

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1106
  • Tyrant of BFG:Revised
    • BFG files
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #617 on: January 03, 2011, 03:26:52 AM »
Nate has the best arguing chip of all. A big GW hammer.

I don't think ships should be ideal, or even work together like clockwork, this is a GW game, bureaucracy abounding, even in the rules!

We had a similar argument about the effectiveness of the Tyrant, and how it would be perfect if it had 12wb@45cm. Even I notice that most IN/Chaos ships that are homebrew designs are essentially just a current ship with one weapon swapped out, such as a dictator with the wbs swapped for lances in the case of the dominion.

Having the Custodian with extra turning power makes it perfect for its intended function, sitting around and giving tracking systems to all the ships around. However the quirk is that since it doesn't have this, it makes you have to sacrifice something when turning, either the tracking systems, or your other vessels 90' turns.

That said, I do think that it should be balanced for what it does, and I think that both parties could be satisfied if it were given 90' turns and maintained it's battleship-ness.

Offline lastspartacus

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1279
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #618 on: January 03, 2011, 05:15:22 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.

The Emperor is a much better support ship.  It has 60cm threat range and, more importantly, broadsides. 
I'm not saying its a completely worthless option.  But its an ordnance support ship that can only support with its weaponry in the front arc.  And once locked into that front arc, its forced to go right through the close range broadside fire while the rest of the fleet can be more mobile.

Offline lastspartacus

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1279
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #619 on: January 03, 2011, 05:33:10 AM »
Nate.  That sounds really nice.  But do you really honestly think that GW will stop the project, that already has so many changes from the original, because the Custodian is made into what it should be, even if the players, the group that supports BFG entirely, want it in vast majority?

I call bologna :)

Edit:  So I guess a 45 point Castellan or 25cm speed 4hp light cruiser is against the proscripted fluff as well?
« Last Edit: January 03, 2011, 05:38:20 AM by lastspartacus »

Offline Vaaish

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 986
    • Digital Equinox
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #620 on: January 03, 2011, 06:03:18 AM »
Quote
The Emperor is a much better support ship.  It has 60cm threat range and, more importantly, broadsides.
I'm not saying its a completely worthless option.  But its an ordnance support ship that can only support with its weaponry in the front arc.  And once locked into that front arc, its forced to go right through the close range broadside fire while the rest of the fleet can be more mobile.

That's debatable. The empy doesn't have a tracking system, 6+ prow, resilient AC or guided torpedoes and the vast majority of it's broadsides are on the prow and dorsal mounts effectively limiting you to one side for engaging with the slow speed ensuring that you won't be turning when the shooting starts. Regardless, the effect is still the same in terms of maneuver especially with the marine example since it only has 45cm batteries.

The custodian's no more forced to go through that close range fire than any of the other IN, Chaos, or Marine battleships so why should Tau be different? TBH, if you are going through head on and taking broadsides you're likely presenting an abeam aspect which is one of the better places to be and if you aren't, the 6+ prow is giving almost the same effect.

Now, while I think the Custodian should have CG status because of its stats, it certainly doesn't break the fleet or hamper it any more than any other fleet outside perhaps eldar or necrons taking a BB.
-Vaaish

Offline lastspartacus

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1279
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #621 on: January 03, 2011, 06:16:01 AM »
But we weren't comparing the Custodian and Emperor ship to ship.  I was just saying that the Emperor is much better able to support Dauntless squadrons, because it is better able to stay at range and moving away from the enemy, while keeping anything the Dauntless' are firing at in its fire arc as well.

Offline Zelnik

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 771
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #622 on: January 03, 2011, 09:25:08 AM »
guys, that distinct booming sound was Nate slamming down the GW gavel.  No more changes are going to be made because If any more are made, GW will pitch this in the trash.

YES they would can this project, why? because if we give too many other people glitter, and not enough to their darling little space marines (who got buko insane shit), steam shoots out their ears, fire out their noses, and napalm out their ass. We should be happy with what we have. Drop your arguments, they are extremely weak at this rate and we should focus on getting this stuff out and stamped official.

So instead of arguing over the turn power of the ship, you should look for rules flukes or typos. We can worry about making the Custodian better in the next set of FAQ's. 


Offline tinfish

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 46
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #623 on: January 03, 2011, 10:59:03 AM »
All I will say is remember BloodBowl LRB 6 and the Great GW legal IP purge. If we want anything done we unfortunately have to dance to their tunes, or they will take away all the toys.

Offline lastspartacus

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1279
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #624 on: January 03, 2011, 04:37:51 PM »
guys, that distinct booming sound was Nate slamming down the GW gavel.  No more changes are going to be made because If any more are made, GW will pitch this in the trash.
Well, then that was all a huge waste of our time, from the moment we started commenting on the PDF, rather than just figuring out what needed changing and houseruling it ourself.  Its what I'll be doing.  Pitiful situation, whoever's fault it is.

Its fine really, I'm totally happy within my playgroup.  I was just rather excited that there was potential I could have another fleet besides chaos for official events at the GW Bunker that didnt need houserules to be fun.
« Last Edit: January 03, 2011, 04:42:50 PM by lastspartacus »

Offline Sigoroth

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1386
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #625 on: January 03, 2011, 05:17:40 PM »
@Vaaish

The Emperor sits back, goes abeam, uses long range guns and doesn't close with the enemy. The Custodian on the other hand has shorter ranged weaponry and it's forward firing. This means it has to close with the enemy. This means the Custodian will have to turn far more often than the Emperor to keep targets in its fore arc, and have a harder time doing so. This increased turning circle causes a heap of trouble keeping targets where they belong, particularly when the Custodian becomes crippled.


Okay folks, here's the scoop on the Custodian so we can lay this to rest once and for all. Forgeworld says its a battleship. GW says it officially is nothing but an Explorer in a different hull, thus a battleship. In the end, what makes all this work official is when GW goes over it, blesses it and posts it to their website.

Whatever improvements we are trying to make absolutely HAVE to fall inside the constraints we are given. If the HA's decide to go outside the constraints because we want to or even if EVERYONE wants to, GW will simply decide to stick all this work in the round file. Then not only is all this time and effort wasted, but in the end all we get is a really pretty Explorer along with an entire fleet which is little more than re-hulled versions of the Tau fleet we have now, along with a really pretty fleet list no more official than any other homebrew list out there.

This brings me back to the "90% right" outcome I spoke of earlier. The Custodian is not what everyone wants, but it is a WHOLE LOT BETTER than an Explorer. The Kor'or'vesh is not what everyone wants, but it is a fine addition to the current Tau fleet. Now you have to ask yourself what is more important: having an official Kor'or'vesh Fleet List where the Custodian is a battleship, or having a Custodian Grand Cruiser on a fleet list that is just one more fan product? Many people have stated, "I'm going to ignore it and make it a homebrew GC anyway."  That's fine! In fact, that's gaming! I have plenty of homebrew ships that will never be official, ships that will make EXCELLENT Warp Rift articles when our rule projects are complete. That doesn't mean they should or even can be made official.

Remember folks, we're fans just like you. We're not just sitting up here making arbitrary decisions to hurt the fans' feelig just because we can. Heck- we're not even getting paid! In the end, these projects are probably the most fan-involved of any set of rules in the history of Games Workshop. I said from the outset that we weren't going to make everyone happy, but at least recognize that 90% success is a lot better than 100% failure.

Firstly Nate, I do not believe that GW would bin the file on the back of changing the way the game classifies it. In fact, I do not even think they'd notice. Secondly, I very much dislike the notion that you're so afraid of them that you won't even try to pass something that makes a difference in real terms to the way the fleet plays as well as makes sense. I would rather you tried and failed than wimped out.

Now, assuming that you're sure that giving it "cruiser" status is definitely out of the question, despite it only being a game mechanic, not an actual role or function distinction, then you could give it BB status and just write a note saying how its reduced/better distributed mass allows for it to manoeuvre better and so it automatically gains the effects of the manoeuvring thrusters refit.

Offline lastspartacus

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1279
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #626 on: January 03, 2011, 05:23:04 PM »
90* turns lets it keep BB status as well, if thats so important.  (Dumb)
Itd be the only ship in the game that both had to move 15cm to turn and made a 90* of it, kinda neat.  
(goes back to formatting pdf for correct houserules.)

Edit:  Sig's idea works too.  Easy fixes.  Methinks I see someone hiding beind the GW banner because of his own fluff view ;)
« Last Edit: January 03, 2011, 05:26:23 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 #627 on: January 03, 2011, 07:26:28 PM »
I think GW can be an **** and Nate is walking a safe path.
Who's the blame in a business model where BFG is sooner axed then relived?

Offline lastspartacus

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1279
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #628 on: January 03, 2011, 07:55:18 PM »
But what does it hurt to ask?  surely a quick email such as 'hey, we have a lot of stuff and I really think the Custodian needs a change in how it moves, but wanted to clear it with you before i went ahead with it' would verify it if he for some reason thinks that that change out of all the rest of the changes to the core rules of the fleet would send GW (no greater contempt could be held for a gaming company) over the edge.
My personal thought: Using GW as cover because he wants something different with the fleet/has different fluff ideas than all the other players ;)

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3865
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #629 on: January 03, 2011, 08:03:52 PM »
Go ahead.

d/l the FW pdf (it is on this site) about the kor or vesh.

d/l the old shinnentai/xisor tau kor or vesh (massive forum support years ago!)

Then check the draft.

Nate has done a great job. :)
Sigoroth will approve of that in the light of the past.

Nate does not want something different. He isn't the only HA member! Bob & Ray need to accept it as well. Especially Bob is really conservative! Good on balance and reality check but not a wild shooter like Nate or Ray.