July 23, 2019, 12:07:18 PM

Author Topic: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG  (Read 112126 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline flybywire-E2C

  • BFG HA
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 400
Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« on: August 22, 2010, 03:06:10 AM »
Please review the attached draft rules for the Tau Kor’or’vesh and Demiurg Fleet List. We would like to hear any thoughts about these before we try to get them cleaned up and pushed past GW. Any thoughts, comments, complaints, etc. would be greatly appreciated.

-   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 horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3865
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #1 on: August 22, 2010, 08:12:58 AM »
Custodian : cool. Pretty strong, finally defense.

Protector: 190pts was good for that vessel. Especiaaly with Tracking Systems!!!
I mean this vessel eats equal prized Chaos/In vessels in 1:1 duels most of the time.

Emissary: URGR & ok. Ok=finally grav hooks. URG = still too slow and ponderous. It needs 25cm and/or 90* turns. Otherwise it remains half a$$Ed useless.
edit: Oh noes! 15pts for Prow Deflector! eeek, bad.

Castellan: URG! Too expensive!!! 50pts is already high. Change weaponry. 1 battery is crap. Make this thing no Ion (doesn't have Ion on the model anyway!), 2wb @ 45 or 3wb @30.

Demiurg Citadel.... did someone read this file before GothiComp?

Other aliens: Later.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO fleet list:
you kept that horrible thing that is called a fleet list. When the HA released the FW list (the one that got removed on FW request) we community burned the list mostly on the korór'vesh fleet list.

Protectors must be taken without restriction. Really. They aren't as good as Hero's. Who have a design flaw (fluff says weaker then Lunar, stats say much much better then Lunar, restictions are half a$$ed solutions.

Fleet wise: Tracking Systems are cool.
Stat wise: I still hoped for a faster/manouevrable fleet. I mean, this models are so different to the GW ones they warrant different stats not the same. TS doesn't count in that regard.


All in all: I would not play with this list, preferring FW one. Mainly because of the fleet list. To be honest: Because of the fleet list!!!! Castellan is also fail. Emissary SHOULD change.

I mean, I got good results with my FW list.


Oh, if you want spicy things, check this: Project Distant Darkness. Tau with flava (too much, but stats resemble the models. :)

http://www.tacticalwargames.net/archive/rules/gothic/ddarkness.html

« Last Edit: August 22, 2010, 08:59:16 AM by horizon »

Offline flybywire-E2C

  • BFG HA
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 400
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #2 on: August 23, 2010, 04:08:55 AM »
Custodian : cool. Pretty strong, finally defense.

Protector: 190pts was good for that vessel. Especiaaly with Tracking Systems!!!
I mean this vessel eats equal prized Chaos/In vessels in 1:1 duels most of the time.

Emissary: URGR & ok. Ok=finally grav hooks. URG = still too slow and ponderous. It needs 25cm and/or 90* turns. Otherwise it remains half a$$Ed useless.
edit: Oh noes! 15pts for Prow Deflector! eeek, bad.

Castellan: URG! Too expensive!!! 50pts is already high. Change weaponry. 1 battery is crap. Make this thing no Ion (doesn't have Ion on the model anyway!), 2wb @ 45 or 3wb @30.

Demiurg Citadel.... did someone read this file before GothiComp?

Other aliens: Later.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO fleet list:
you kept that horrible thing that is called a fleet list. When the HA released the FW list (the one that got removed on FW request) we community burned the list mostly on the korór'vesh fleet list.

Protectors must be taken without restriction. Really. They aren't as good as Hero's. Who have a design flaw (fluff says weaker then Lunar, stats say much much better then Lunar, restictions are half a$$ed solutions.

Fleet wise: Tracking Systems are cool.
Stat wise: I still hoped for a faster/manouevrable fleet. I mean, this models are so different to the GW ones they warrant different stats not the same. TS doesn't count in that regard.


All in all: I would not play with this list, preferring FW one. Mainly because of the fleet list. To be honest: Because of the fleet list!!!! Castellan is also fail. Emissary SHOULD change.

I mean, I got good results with my FW list.


Oh, if you want spicy things, check this: Project Distant Darkness. Tau with flava (too much, but stats resemble the models. :)

http://www.tacticalwargames.net/archive/rules/gothic/ddarkness.html



I will give lots of consideration to what you wrote here, and I will bring it up with the other HA's. The problem is that IMHO the FW fleet list was created to sell models. The FW fleet list isn’t simply better than the GW Tau ships, they were better for the points than anything out there! No wonder everyone loved them- for the points, they couldn’t be beat!

What happened was FW produced a fleet list having little experience with BFG and without input from the HA’s. Why we had to pull the fleet list was before FW’s version was released to the masses, they already put it in print in IA#4, again without talking to any of the HA’s or even with Andy Hall or Matt Keefe for that matter. We obliged them by pulling the list, but FW’s list is rubbish, not because it isn’t powerful enough, but precisely because it is TOO powerful. A fleet that could evolve this quickly in so short a time will be able to take on the Necrons in about another 2k years and win!

No, the solution is NOT to make the models more expensive- these are not Necrons! The solution set is to bring the stats congruent to what the fleet should have been: much better than the GW Tau but not yet as good as Imperials, with models that were slightly cheaper than or at most equal to Imperials as far as point cost was concerned. 60cm weapons should be absent. 45cm weapons should be rare and reserved for the battleship. 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+!

To be honest, the Warden and Castellan were made hopped up versions of the Orca and Defender on purpose, mainly for simplicity’s sake. If there’s a lot of flak in this regard, we can look into changing them, but we were trying very hard to avoid any prolonged playtesting, which would be required if we started tinkering with the profiles to any great degree. 

I wasn’t at GothiComp so I didn’t get the significance of what you said concerning the Demiurg. The Demiurg Citadel was created because if the Demiurg are going to exist as a pure fleet, they need a cheap ship that can be purchased for 185 points in order to fit into some of the more limited scenarios. Because nobody is ever going to make new models for the Demiurg in particular and BFG in general, we had to design a profile that fit the models that already exist.

Now for the good news: for the Kor’o’vesh fleet list, I don’t have a problem eliminating Protector restrictions. They’re passable cruisers but not overpowering enough to require a restriction, as long as they are NOT turned into super-Heros, which they shouldn’t be. I don’t have issues with tweaking other aspects of the fleet list as well. What else do you not like about it besides the fact that you hate it?

I don’t have an issue re-examining the Emissary. I want this to be neat, but NOT so neat it’s able to kill Space Marine strike cruisers!  For the Tau and this ship, I think 25cm speed is more realistic than 90deg turns, but I will have to bring that up with the other HA’s.

Smile, game on and enjoy!

-   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 horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3865
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #3 on: August 23, 2010, 04:56:37 AM »
Hi,
ah, a setting for a cool discussion. :)

Do you really think the FW list is all that powerfull? In battles under 1000pts the list is pretty okay, but once you go over 1250pts the GW Tau fleet is much stronger! Yes, GW Tau won adepticon 2008-2009. If you want do something about strong things the GW list is to fix first.

The Protector as stands is a capable vessel, better then Lunar on attack (what you pay for +10pts) but less then the Hero. The Hero wins against both. So there logic fails, as said, background said weaker ship, stats make it better. Restrictions to size down problems is not a good solution. The Hero should drop weaponry all around.

The FW list isn't as over-powered as you say. I have won with them numerous times but I have also beaten them. They are on the fragile side. The Explorer is a better carrier then the FW Custodian. Now, this new Custodian by the HA is better then the Explorer for what it needs to do. Going from 2 to 3 shields, adding Tracking Systems. You give it 45cm Ion Cannon.
On the prow deflector: it are shields that are formed that way, not the hull. So a prow deflector could be mounted on any vessel. But, alas, with all improvements giving no deflector won't matter tbh because you just created a beast. ;)

I think, as it stands with powerfull, the FW list is fine. Not too strong, not to weak. A fleet like Imperial Navy & Chaos. Fine with me. It needs some finesse to play with.

The GW list, harder to learn, but in the end much better in larger battles. A list already capable of running down Necrons!

GothiComp = running paiting competition and one entry is called a Commerce Citadel vessel, first time I heard it and now it is in a list. Coincedence. Funny.


Playtesting : the FW list is used by everyone around and has seen many playtesting by now as far as I see. The main complain is that the Emissary is useless. Everyone screams 90* at least. It is a sitting duck and easy victory points to any opponent.
And the Emissary cannot kill a Marine cruiser as it stands, even with 90*. The whole fleet par Custodian should be 90* ;)

The fleet list: if you keep this list, which means, limited Protectors, everyones FW fleet will become a fail. Everyone has more Protectors then Emissaries and now this list means you need more Emissaries. You are urging players to spend money. I do not have that money for example. ;)
So that is a NEEDED fix.

cheers!

Offline Caine-HoA

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 136
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #4 on: August 23, 2010, 09:18:31 AM »
Only a short replay fornow, i think ill come back later when i have more time (ave to got to work).

I cant see why the FW-Tau List should be that much overpowered... The Emissary is mostly useless, Costodian you only can have 1 in a meduim sized battle, therefore you can never bring more that 3 wardens. The only ships that were good are the castellan (even though quite expensive for 2 torpedos, nevertheless useful) and the protector (that for me cant stand his ground against many other cruisers with only 6 hitpoints).
Having less hitpoints (all capital ships) and in some cases shields (Custodian) is a HUGE disadvantage in the BFG system.

So i mixed the GW and FW fleets, what means to me that the FW fleet cant be so much better, why would i use GW models anyway if they were so bad?

In some games i even thought my pure GW-Fleets were stronger.

Btw a problem for all Tau fleets was: Yes they do have a lot of weapons but every singe ship needs to reload to make use of them thus you cant use lock on at all without losing other firepower.
The next problem ist, that Bombers are "pure luck weapons"...

Overall i had pretty even games with Tau, some i won some i lost. I didnt feel they wree too strong in some cases even felt they were weak due to some of the descibed problems (one early failed Leadership roll can be far more fatal than for other fleets).
« Last Edit: August 23, 2010, 09:20:55 AM by Caine-HoA »

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3865
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #5 on: August 25, 2010, 07:01:08 AM »
Hi,

made a run through of all vessels (of the pure Tau fleet, no allies) compared to the FW list (especially since you called it overpowered) :
(thus this list vs FW, when I say +20 that means this list is more then FW list).

Custodian
+20pts
- prow deflector
- 1 turret
+ 1 shield
+ better boarding
+ tracking systems
+ 15cm range on Ion Cannon
The extra shield compensates for the loss of prow deflector (only front arc and useless vs lances) and is better then the Prow deflector. The loss of the turret is compensated by tracking systems. Tracking systems make batteries by a good percentage better. Ion Cannon improved. Overall I think +20 is not enough for all the improvements.

Protector
- 5 points
+ better boarding
+ tracking systems
So quite a better ship now for less points!

Emissary
= 0 pts
+ better boarding
+ tracking systems
- 4 weapon batteries @ 30cm
+ 2 ion cannon @ 30cm
- prow deflector
Hm. when 2 lances = 6 batteries (rough count) then the ship gains +2wb, thus better. Taking Grav Hooks is cool. Thats a given. However, it still remains an easy target, especially with prow deflector gone. 130 for the taking!


Castellan
+ 5pts
- 2 weapon batteries
+ 1 ion cannon (= + 3 batteries)
I dislike ships like this with 1 wb. Useless. The Warden is the lance ship. Not the Castellan, it isn't even represented on the model. The ship got significant less attractive. Escorts are vulnerable, 55 is easy taking for enemies. less flexible fire arc means vulnerable prow on position.

Warden
= 0pts
+ 5cm speed
The fire arcs changed. Pity, liked the FW approach.

So:
Custodian = stronger
Protector = stronger
Emissary = stronger on attack, weaker on defence.
Castellan = weaker
Warden = slightly better
Heh, so this list is stronger per ship then FW list on average. :)

The fleet lists:
FW gave 1 Custodian per 750
No restrictions on Protector, Emissary & Castellan
3 Warden per Custodian
Nice & Clean. With straight forward allies/reserve rules.

HA fleet list: (pure kor'or'vesh)
Custodian = 1 per 3 cruisers + Kor'o required.
Protector = 1 per 2 other ships
Emissary, Castellan = unrestricted.
Wardens per grav hook (3 on Custodian and/or 2 on Emissary).
And just like the Armada Tau list the fleet is "fixed" in the fleet selection. That is just a pity.
You, see, if you keep your stats and apply FW fleet list this fleet will be very very strong!!! You are thus reasoning wrong way around.


so
I think FW list is fine. Restricting Protectors is bad. Most, like everyone, owns a lot of these vessels which would be rendered useless in your fleet list. This is the main stay ship like Lunars.
The FW list gives a good raider feel on an overall level with the Protector-Castellan core.

Yet, the FW list does not create an unique fleet. Just ammended Armada, just like your new Tau list. Nothing new. The Integrated Tracking Systems are cool but not enough to create an unique feel.

Compare FW & Armada ships. Entirely different. Use that.

Like Project Distant Darkness. Really, read it and check out. It works.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2010, 07:47:39 AM by horizon »

Offline flybywire-E2C

  • BFG HA
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 400
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #6 on: August 28, 2010, 10:56:48 PM »
Hi everyone! You may not believe so, but I am listening. Horizon, I have looked at the comparisons you provided, but I'm not entirely convinced the profiles need to be tweaked any further. The Protector was dropped in price for no really good reason so I bumped that back up. I did look at your Dark Horizons article, but the Protector there is even more powerful than this one, except that the Ion Cannon range is -15cm. Also, your use of a keel launch bay would have necessitated the need for a new critical chart or a "counts as" note, neither of which I thought was warranted. Alo, I know you are worried about what one ships are more powerful than the other, but as a whole the Forgeworld ships are intentionally more fragile than their Imperial counterparts. That being said, I did note some significant problems with our list, which I hope is somewhat addressed here. How is this for a proposed fleet list? I hve not yet brought this to the HA's so do NOT take this as gospel!


CAPITAL SHIPS

Battleships
Your fleet may include any number of Explorer battleships. If your fleet is worth more than 750 pts it must include at least one Explorer. Your fleet may ONLY include one Custodian per FULL 750 points of Tau vessels. In other words, if your fleet is equal to or more than 750 points, it may then include one Custodian, but it cannot include a second unless it already includes 1,500 points of Tau vessels, etc.

Custodian class starship . . . . . . . . . . 330 points 
Explorer class starship . . . . . . . . . . . 230 points

Cruisers
Your fleet may include any number of Merchant or Emissary class starships. It may also include up to one Hero or Protector class starship for every Merchant, Emissary, Explorer or Custodian in the fleet.

Protector class starship . . . . . . . . . . . 190 points
Hero class starship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180 points
Emissary class starship . . . . . . . . . . .130 points
Merchant class starship   . . . . . . . . . .105 points

ESCORTS
Your fleet may include up to one Messenger class starship per 500 points.

Messenger class starship . . . . . . . . . . .50 points

Your fleet may include any number of Defender and/or Castellan class starships.

Castellan class starship . . . . . . . . . . . .55 points
Defender class starship . . . . . . . . . . . .45 points

You may not have more Orcas and Wardens than the gravitic hook capacity of the fleet. Much of the cost of these vessels is included in the value of the parent ship. 

Warden class gunship . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 points
Orca class gunship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 points
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 tinfish

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 46
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #7 on: August 28, 2010, 11:36:18 PM »
I have just had a small game using the draft list - I couldn't build a legal list as I don't have enough cruisers, so I had 2 Protectors, 2 Emissaries and 4 Wardens at 750 pts v a Dark Eldar fleet with 2 cruisers and 4 escorts (I think). I posted this on Warseer:

Well - that didn't go well. Emissaries each died to one concentrated shot from a DE cruiser despite being braced. At least one had the good sense to blow up and almost cripple the cruiser. It was good to have the option of taking grav-hooks and the Wardens did well, but the Emissaries are left so under-gunned that they are pointless. I missed the deflector and having Fire Warriors was also pointless as a 4 HP Cruiser isn't going to board anything.
Protectors did well enough, the change in fire arcs for the Ion Cannons is very useful, but are not overpowered at 185pts. I can see no point in restricting them. If I had followed the fleet list restrictions I would have had to taken Castellans and they would have died even quicker.
Tau ships are under gunned anyway, so the built in Tracking System was useful, but against DE I was only rolling 1 or 2 dice most of the time any way, but without it it could have been 0.

So I suppose my fleet was legal in the new list, but 10 points over.

A few thoughts from the game.

Emissaries - what are they supposed to do? I like the grav-hooks, but could they not drop the launch bays for them. Could you not drop the Fire Warriors and keep the deflector.

Protectors seem fine for the points, just not against Dark Eldar (or Eldar either) as they don't have enough rail guns to hurt them and they dodge everything else.

Wardens are fine.

Castellan - what is going on with the weapons? A bit of everything and not enough of any of them. Make it into a Hunter or just go for 2 Ion Cannons and make it a Cylon Raider :)

I don't have a Custodian, but it looks fine, if a bit undergunned for a battleship.

Offline Caine-HoA

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 136
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #8 on: August 29, 2010, 01:32:22 AM »
@ flybywire-E2C

sry but i dont see what this channges help to do against the main problems they even make them more obvious. Its simply the same layout from GW list taken over to the FW ships.

Taking in a restriction for Protectors wont do any good. Both the Merchant and the Emissary are more or less dead points (who wants to play them if not for "fluff"?) as 4 Hitpoints on a Capital ship is simply nothing, even more with the one shield they have.

Like tinfish pointed out Castellans focus on no weapons but are one of the most expensive escots out there. And we all know that escorts are destroed quite easily. My way of using them would be to keep them out of trouble and use theri torpedoes, but i dont think the missile system boosts them so much to be worth having 2 torpedo ships for 55p. If they fly into the infight and try to use their other weapons i see them reloading their topedoes all the time not beeing able to get into good positions or get lock on because they cant use special orders then. (they remind me a bit on corsair eldars hellbores which seem pretty useless to me as for only 5 points you can have 2 escorts with the same weapons but far more survivability). So if you want lances you would go for orcas/wardens.

I dont think any but the heroes are overpowered ships in comparison to other fleets and still tau has one of the most restricted fleet lists, i dont really see why.

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3865
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #9 on: August 29, 2010, 09:08:36 AM »
Hi Nate,

first Project Distant Darkness : the phase iii Protector (thus not the special one). Has Forward fixed batteries only, lesser range on Ion Cannon, fewer missiles and less ordnance, More nimble (like model should), shootier then normal Tau but less ordnance. Hey an unique Tau fleet while still being Tau. :)
(Heck, the keel bay can be entered as dorsal if it fits the chart).


Your fleet list approach still invalidates my and other Tau list. Protectors unlimited. Really really.
It is also a mix list where GW ships are needed. So, that'll be off as well with all the sole FW Tau fleets out there.

Agreed on Castellan, like I pointed out before too expensive and daft weaponry. Make it an all battery escort.

And Emissary is, indeed, not worthwhile as a mainstay ship.


Tinfish? Custodian isn't undergunned persé. It has 8 batteries with no right shift and 2 Ion Cannon. Add in a lot of bombers & missiles, plus its still cheap-ish on the overall field of battleships for what it can do.
It is stronger then the FW version.


Offline tinfish

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 46
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #10 on: August 29, 2010, 03:10:53 PM »
Something has to be done about Emissaries before anyone would want to take them in any numbers. They are too light for the main battle line, have practically no weapons if they take grav-hooks and are far too slow. All of the CPF ships look sleek and fast, but aren't, I can't understand that at all.

The Emissary could maybe some sort of heavy escort/escort hunter, but it needs to be faster and more manoeuvrable (as Horizon said in his first reply). I wan't to take grav-hooks, but not at the expense of the ion cannon, if they stay like this I would rather have a 6 HP Merchant, at least it is more resilient in the second line and still has 6 RG batteries.
At 25cm & 90 deg turns it would operate more like the Dauntless. It would still be fragile, but at least it would have a use in the fleet. The option to loose launch bays for grav-hooks would also fit this role.

I still can't see why Protectors are being restricted like this. Even with the changes to the Emissaries I wouldn't want to take more than a couple of them.



Offline Harrypotter

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #11 on: August 29, 2010, 05:34:41 PM »
OK, time for me to add my 2 pennies worth.

I freely admit I do not play Tau, but am right on the brink of pulling the trigger on a FW Fleet, although the pending / proposed rule changes are making me hesitate.

I'm (hopefully) wise enough / old enough to not want to see a killer fleet list, but equally I don't want to see things nerfed to such an extent that they'd be unplayable, the current proposals almost have that feel.

IMHO (and that of a few non forum using BFG Tau veterans that I've been discussing the proposals with) there is very little wrong with the FW fleet list, mainly because point for point you can achieve a more effective build using the GW list.

I have no problems with the relative fragility of the FW list as this (for me) is offset by it's offensive capability.

If it were me, and I were tasked with changing the FW list I would possibly consider something along the following lines:

Go with your limit of one Custodian per full 750 points as I agree these should be (fluff wise) relatively rare vessels and 2 in a 1500 point list feels wrong, but drop all the requirements for ethereals etc. if people want the re-rolls etc. they will take them. I'd also leave it's stats (and that of the Protectors) as per the FW list.

From a fluff point of view (and if you were determined to limit the numbers of Protectors) I'd be happy to see a limit of one Protector per Emmisary, but you'd first need to fix the Emmisary, it may have a place in the fluff but has no place in combat, it should get the h*ll out of there as it stands once the shooting starts (i.e. not appear in a fleet list), as others have observed, it has no role, like the much maligned Voss light cruisers it's to weak to sit in the battle line and too ponderous to go escort hunting - it either needs 6 hits or 2 shields to sit in a battle line (even in a secondary role) or needs to get a heck of a lot faster and more agile (speed boost and an increased turn rate) and maybe get Mantas to go hunting, if that's not feasible then the restrictions should be dropped.

All in all, IMHO the FW list could maybe withstand a tweak but doen't need the major rewrite that's being proposed, the kind of 'don't fix it if it aint broken' mentality.






« Last Edit: August 29, 2010, 05:39:35 PM by Harrypotter »

Offline Don Gusto

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 97
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #12 on: August 29, 2010, 11:01:52 PM »
I'm postively surprised at the effort the HA is putting into this whole rules revision. :)

My major concern with the Tau Draft are the Integrated Tracking Systems.

In the original lists theres only 1 ship mounting a tracking system. For 50 pts the Messenger can provide a substantial advantage to the big ships but this is balanced by the fact that it is quite vulnerable itself and its lack of effective weaponry.
A true support ship. I find the concept tactically interesting.

But I've always frowned on the idea of having tracking systems on all the big ships (e.g. Project Distant Darkness and the Tau CPF Article).
Fluff-wise the argument seems to be that tracking systems are the pinnacle of current Tau-tech and each and everyone of the next generation of warships just has to get one. I don't really want to go into a fluff argument here but I disagree on this. By that logic every US navy carrier would have its own aegis air defense system but they don't.
Imho more important is balancing and gameplay. The advantages offered by tracking systems are easily worth two refits. That's +20% in points value and none of the ships in the draft go anywhere near that. It's also boring to have the tracking system on every ship with 45cm railguns and 3+ turrets. Essentially turns it into a race bonus.
There was some overall balancing in the fleet lists that maybe accounted for the added benefits of the Kor'or'vesh but you already made it less restrictive and I wouldn't go that way anyway.

Suggestion:
Give the Emissary the option of carrying a full tracking system and leave it at that. The Emissary seems to fill a somewhat similar role as the messenger and that would make it a lot more attractive without forcing it into every fleet list.

The Protector was dropped in price for no really good reason so I bumped that back up.
A friend of mine (my Tau friend ;D) pointed out to me, that the basic Cruiser Clash Scenario has an upper points limit of 185 for each cruiser. Maybe that was the reasoning for the 5pt reduction.

Custodian 3 shields, 4 turrets: Well a change that balances itself out but I would rather leave it specialized versus ordnance (2/5).

Demiurg Citadel, Kroot Warsphere and Nicassar Caravan: Very Nice :)
« Last Edit: August 29, 2010, 11:03:47 PM by Don Gusto »

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3865
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #13 on: August 30, 2010, 06:30:16 AM »
Basic cruiser scenario ; ey, that could be it. Doh.... lol


I think tracking systems is cool and conceptual within the line of a new Tau fleet. And yes, that means extra costs.

AND I WANT PORT MAW back since I made EXACT calculations on how much a TS costs per ship


Offline tinfish

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 46
Re: Tau Kor'or'vesh Commerce Protection Fleet draft rules for BFG
« Reply #14 on: August 30, 2010, 09:58:13 AM »
We all want Port Maw back.

Another thing I noticed in this new list - You must take an Explorer if the fleet is over 750 pts, you may take a Custodian Blah, Blah...

This means that in a standard 1500 pt fleet, if I want a Custodian I need to spend 560 pts on Battleships, at least 60 pts on Commanders, so 620 pts leaving 880 pts for the rest of the fleet. I can hardly spam Protectors under these restrictions...

Surly it should be - If the fleet is larger than 750 pts you must take a Battleship. You can include any number of Explorers, but can only include 1 Custodian per full 750 pts - i.e. 1 if the fleet costs 751 - 1500 pts, 2 if it costs 1501 - 2250.

I can still only take 5 Protectors with these restrictions, but if the Emissary was more attractive I would take some of them and Escorts instead of one or two Protectors.