Specialist Arms Forum
Battlefleet Gothic => [BFG] Rules Questions => Topic started by: horizon on September 22, 2010, 08:33:31 PM
-
Hi,
"throw the bone..."
I called this thread Eldar because it will be about all Eldar:
Corsair
Craftworld
Dark
- The blue book brought us Corsair Eldar with the furiously debated move-shoot-move system
- Armada brought us Dark Eldar with a more standard movement system, added some flavour from Corsair and got added some new things which results in an one-trick pony fleet.
- The Doom of the Eldar pdf brought us Craftworld Eldar with the move-shoot-move system. A cruiser fleet compared to the escort fleet the Corsairs are.
Now, all three are Eldar. Yet all three have different rules. A remarkable note is that Corsair cruisers have 4+ Wraithbone and Craftworld cruisers 5+ wraithbone.
That shall be no more.
Here are my main rule ideas towards all three of the Eldar, later in this post I'll adress the individual flavour.
Movement
To be in the core of BFG we shall have none of this move-shoot-move business. A system so debated is not good to be in a rulesystem we like to show to our friends.
Eldar shall be faster then the other fleets.
But we shall keep the Sunward movement system. Why? Because it is cool.
But what about Dark Eldar? They have no sails! Well, the only fleet with sails are the Craftworld, the Corsairs are more panel like. The Dark Eldar also have these pointed wings, the have solar collectors for movement.
With that out of the way we established the following movement.
Eldar have 3 speeds, into, abeam and away from the sun. Abeam being fastest. Into slowest.
All Eldar have +5d6 AAF
Come to New Heading gains an extra turn.
Turning
Eldar may make two turns per movement phase at any point during their movement up to their turn rate per turn they make.
Above is bad...think about it: when to determine speed, keeping in mind how much it moved.
No MMS system is adapted:
1) turn up to turning value, 2) move according sunward value, 3) turn up to turning value, 4) move according sunward value.
Turn-Move-Turn-Move
The Eldar speed is determined upon the heading they had before the turning.
Note: if this is too fiddly we can drop it.
Holofields
Eldar do not have shields until someone convinces everyone else that they do have shields.
The holofield system makes it hard to target them. Enemy sensors will be thrown in dissarray.
But how do we represent this? The system should be more effective at long range then short range.
Weapon Batteries already have a build-in range effect.
Lances do not.
Many routes lead to a system.
i) Enemy must take a leadership to see if they can shoot at Eldar, use following modifiers:
above 30cm -2 Ld
between 15-30cm - 1 Ld
under 15cm no modifier
If test failed the ship may not target another Eldar ship. If failed a blastmarker is placed on the Eldar ship.
I like this. Balanced it seems
BlastMarkers
When in contact with blastmarkers apply normal movement & leadership penalties. But unless the holofield is offline the Eldar ship will take no damage for being in contact with blastmarkers.
When being shot no blastmarkers are being placed. Whenever an Eldar ship travels through a blastmarker it takes damage to its prow armour value (5+). Thus per blastmarker a D6 is rolled, on a 5+ the Eldar ship takes damage.
Armour
Alle Eldar vessels:
5+ prow
4+ sides & rear
This shows the hard to hit sleek approach silhouette and the large, more vulnerable, easier to hit side with its sails / sun collectors.
Critical Hits
Eldar take critical hits on a roll of 5+.
Turrets
With the holofield not offering protection against orndnace the ships need turrets. I'd say turrets hit on a 4+, they may re-roll missed dice (like Tau tracking system).
Leadership
All Eldar have +1 Ld to the standard leadership table.
Weaponry
Weapon Battery
Eldar have a left shift on the gunnery table.
Pulsar lance
Roll a d6 per point of strength:
4-5 = 1 hit
6 = 2 hits
Ordnance
Is hit by enemy turrets on a 6+ (instead of 4+)
Yes, that's the only special ordnance rule for them.
The Flava Part
Above everything is the same for all three Eldar flavours. Now we should start adding flavours, but lets what we have:
Corsairs: raiders. Defend their position, raid anyone who trespasses, do little trade.
Craftworld: defend craftworld (incl pre-emptive strike on possible dangers), reclaiming lost maiden worlds.
Dark: collecting slaves for perverted "things".
Fleet Command
Corsairs
A bold strong individual will be needed to lead larger Corsair fleets. At any point value a Shadow Lord can be taken for 100pts. Above 1000pts he must be taken. He has Leadership 10 and 1 re-roll.
He may add a re-roll for 25pts.
He may add old friends the aspect warriors for 25pts (giving +2 in boarding and +1 on hit&runs)
Craftworld
The Craftworld fleet is led by a skilled High Admiral. For 100pts he must be taken above 1000pts. He has Leadership 10 and a re-roll.
In smaller battles he will send forth another Admiral. For 75pts he has leadership 9 and a re-roll.
Both can add 0-3 farseers for 25pts per Farseers. Farseers have a re-roll which can be used on the ship they are mounted on or a vessel within 15cm.
Dark
The Dread Archon, has +1 boarding, Leadership 10 and a re-roll for 100pts. He must be taken above 1000pts.
Under 1000pts the normal Archon may take charge for leadership 9 and +1 boarding.
Both may add a re-roll for 25pts.
Specific Race Weaponry
Corsairs
None
Craftworld
Vampire Raider assault boats.
Ghostships.
Dark
Impaler Assault Modules
Leech Torpedoes
Mimic engines
Overall quirkness
Corsairs
Will have fastest ships, short ranged weaponry. Good turn rates to escape.
Craftworld
Slowest (yeah right..) fleet consisting of mostly capital ships unless defending Craftworld directly. Longer ranged weaponry, lower turn rates.
Dark
Stealthy speedy approach. Will love to take slaves. A bit of both regarding ships. Good escape run.
...
bring out the torches.
This is just a brain melt.
:)
Enjoy!
-
BMs ought to affect them since they have no shields. However, as they have no shields, any misses will not generate any blast markers. Then let them get a 5+ save for going through BMs. If they fail, they take a point of damage. Save also applies to an NC blast damage. They get a 5+ save against each point of damage.
Their bombers should have re-rolls to hit. As a complete opposite, Eldar should be better at Orks when making attacks while having fewer attacks than Orks.
Don't really like the Ld thing for lances. Just make it that the Eldar race in general cannot be Locked On. Then any hits by lances have to be re-rolled. Second roll stands.
-
The Ld thing is for lances & gunnery. If you only do a re-roll the range effect is gone.
Bombers with re-roll to hit. Dunno, being hit on a 6 is already advantage one, or not?
Blastmarkers: ok.
-
I just don't like my lances being rendered inutile just bec I fail an Ld check. I'd rather they shoot and if they miss, they miss rather than a ship spending turns doing nothing. I mean, really, will an Eldar ship stay within 15 cm of my Gothic?
With respect to bombers, I don't mind them getting some more bonus. They are Eldar. They should shoot better as well as evade enemy fire better. Their fighters can even break the regular rule and be allowed to take out multiple enemy markers on a 2 enemy:1 Eldar ratio.
-
Here is my idea, to replace the current holofield/shield thing.
'Eldar ships go back to standard 4+ armor, base.
While holofields are active:
Eldar ships to not suffer the left column shift when targeted under 15cm.
Eldar ships always benefit from a right gunnery shift when targeted.
The armor value of an Eldar ship, when fired upon, depends on the enemy ship's range. Beyond 30cm 6+ armor, 15-30 5+ armor, 15> 4+ armor.
Lance shots at Eldar are subject to a saving throw to avoid. over 30 is 4+, 15-30 is 5+, 15> is 6+'
(can go to 3+, 4+, 5+ if it is felt that this makes Eldar too lance vulnerable)
As to the simple reroll hits suggestion that someone posted, has anyone done the math on how much defensive value this provides when compared to shields?
-
The re-roll is quite balanced but misses the range idea.
Your idea... hm right shift with increasing armour... pondering. Does not sound bad but I would rather have a same system for lances & batteries then two different systems.
Admiral, what about the torpedoes then? As it stand the most evil Eldar weapon under official rulings.
-
Problem with Eldar torps is they are available en masse. My old idea was to make the ship taking them more expensive to balance the evil. Then again, the ships are already expensive as it is. How about Eldar torps do not get a re-roll but do crits on 4+ instead of the normal 6+ when it hits?
I don't really think range is that big a factor to consider. Just re-roll the hits. If it hits, then it really hits. Adding different rules for different ranges will make things unwieldy. I don't want to have to remember too many stuff. If 4+ is too good odds, then make it that against holofields, lances need 5+ to hit.
As for the different armor/saves, again, I do not want to have to remember too many stuff. Try to keep things simple.
-
Critical hits on a 4+ is an idea worth considering regarding Eldar torps.
To be honest: I still need to look up values on the gunnery table, thus looking up a value with lances values does not seem a problem to me.
The playtesting with mms already makes for fact that I remember the holofield save vs lances with ease (5+ above 30, 6+ between 15-30, none under 15cm).
In that regards I don't think it is highly difficult.
Back to an earlier comment:
if it miss you want it to miss.
In the original msm rules it was 4+ for the lance, then a 2+ save from holo.
mms did the same but a weaker save with range modifier.
now I say Leadership test before the lance shot (followed by no saving throw).
Thus you roll same number of dice and the end effect is the same :
original/mms v19
when lance misses, it misses
when lance hits it can be saved
when lance hits it can be succesfull
Ld idea
when Ld test fails, it cannot shoot
if Leaderships test succeeds, it can hit succesfull
if Leaderships test succeeds, it can miss
Different order same achievement or am I missing a crucial part?
-
I'm already looking up things with the gunnery table. I'd rather not have to add anything else in addition to that. I just feel it's complicating things.
Why not just a 5+ to hit with lances vs holofields with re-rolls on all the hits? Simpler to remember.
-
Well, I could make a reference sheet with both tables next to each other ;)
Shouldn't you be dissecting the new Space Marine rules the HA is proposing? ;)
lol
thus your idea:
right shift vs batteries
lances hit on 5+
Succesfull hist be re-rolled
That means a lance has following chance to hit:
11%
And a single battery :
11% vs 5+ armour
25% vs 4+ armour
msm was:
50% for battery
8% for lance (followed by another 16% chance if bm was placed).
mms (no holofield under 15cm):
for battery 33% vs 5+ armour (right shift above 15cm + shielding, so more hits needed to do damage.)
for battery 50% vs 4+ armour (right shift above 15cm + shielding, so more hits needed to do damage.)
for lance under 15cm 50%
for lance 15-30cm 41%
for lance above 30cm 33%
MSM is just unbalanced with its battery-lance difference.
MMS is quite balanced and under 15cm Eldar pay for it. At distance quite hard to hit.
Your idea: quite low hit chance with batteries and lances being levelled same effect vs 5+ armour.
-
Sorry if this is a personal discussion, but you keep saying so many interesting things, and I eat up all things BFG.
Its time I asked, who exactly is this HA? And what new marine rules are they proposing?
As to the eldar, if I were playing/facing the fleet, I don't think it would be complicated to just remember you have a save/higher armor depending on the type of attack type attacking you.
However, if thought to be too convoluted, how about this, very similar to the other guy's idea, but tweaked.
Eldar ships go back to standard 4+ armor, base.
While holofields are active:
Eldar ships to not suffer the left column shift when targeted under 15cm.
Eldar ships always benefit from a right gunnery shift when targeted.
Hitting an Eldar ship, when fired upon, depends on the enemy ship's range. Beyond 30cm 6+, 15-30 5+, 15> 4+
Lances are still quite useful as they are uneffected by the shift or position of the eldar ship.
I too am not a fan of Leadership based mechanics governing holofield technology, in my humble opinion.
-
Hi,
HA=High Admirality=BFG rules committee.
In this thread you can see some drafts they have released. At a certain time going official I guess:
http://www.sg.tacticalwargames.net/forum/index.php?topic=1730.0
There are drafts for:
FW Tau (don't like it)
Eldar Haven & refits (okay)
Space Marines (don't like it)
Rogue Traders (sufficient)
The Leadership idea I propose is the sytem being used in the Rogue Trader RPG for holofields. I really like it :(
-
What else is there to say about SM? Just add another shield to the BB and SC and they're good to go. ;D
And as for low chances of hitting, without shields, a hit is a devastating hit. It hurts the Eldar more unlike the current rules. They now have to really think about going on BFI which will also hurt them if they do go onto BFI.
-
I think vs everything else than lances SCs with 2 shields would be a bit over the top, the already have very goof stats for light cruisers, especially if you compare then to other light cruisers (like endeavour, emissary ...).
-
Let's not derail the thread into an SC one.
To answer your points though, just another shield to help them be more survivable is enough to fix the SM fleet. Add 5 points to the cost if need be and reduce the TH they have to 1. I can never figure out how a small ship can carry almost as much THs as a battleship. Yes, they are in a sense the best light cruisers in the Imperial arsenal. But then again, the SM are marginalized by having no regular cruisers. Adding the shields would make them tough and yet they still won't be able to take on regular line cruisers with ease. 2 shields can still be taken down and being crippled by 3 hits is no small matter. Lances are still their bane but even WBs can get in the 6s. Their weapons loadout is ok. They don't have an easy time focusing even if they're in a squadron. WBs still won't mesh with BCs well.
The SCs main problem since the beginning has been survivability. I would think that with the handful of Marines per Chapter that the Imperium would load them on the hardiest ship they can give them without being an antiship unit.
Anyway back to the Eldar discussion.
-
Dont take away a TH, give one to the battlebarge ;)
Now someone comment on my holofield ideas. ;)
-
Nope. 3 TH for BB is enough. 1 TH for SC should be enough. It's a light fer Emperor's sake.
As for your HF idea, still too complicated fer me.
-
How complicated? Nothing could possibly simpler than: Measure range. Set effect.
I definitly wouldn't have a problem with it.
Now if its a matter of taste, thats a different story. Like my thoughts on the LD based idea, simply how it feels over if its a good option, for me.
But I think it gives them a characterful and defensible option.
-
You're variable to hits are for WBs I gather upon rereading your last post. The current WB rules are fine as they are even with the 5+/4+ armor upgrade proposal. Actually the idea is to limit the effectiveness of lances. Because they always hit on a 4+. If you allow the lances to hit without penalty, lotsa Eldar ships are going to die even with those saves. It's those "if within x" conditions that I am leery about.
My proposal is simpler. Lances hit on a 5+ against ships with holofields with any hits being re-rolled. No checking to see if Eldar within a certain range.
Going back on topic, how do ordnance work vs the proposed Eldar change? Personally at so close a range, I don't see how the Eldar can be spoofing the bombers or torps into missing. I can understand with torps, you roll D6 and the number rolled = number of torps that lose the target (I mean even dumbfire torps have to have some targetting system in place). But bombers and ABs shouldn't be affected as such.
-
See turret entry. ;)
-
You're variable to hits are for WBs I gather upon rereading your last post. The current WB rules are fine as they are even with the 5+/4+ armor upgrade proposal. Actually the idea is to limit the effectiveness of lances. Because they always hit on a 4+. If you allow the lances to hit without penalty, lotsa Eldar ships are going to die even with those saves. It's those "if within x" conditions that I am leery about.
My proposal is simpler. Lances hit on a 5+ against ships with holofields with any hits being re-rolled. No checking to see if Eldar within a certain range.
Maybe I didn't word it properly. Lances take the same modifiers to hit that batts do.
There is no 'having to measure'. You measure when you attack the eldar ship. The distance is right there, no steps required, to know what you
need to roll to hit it. What issue would come up that would cause you to be leery?
Going back on topic, how do ordnance work vs the proposed Eldar change? Personally at so close a range, I don't see how the Eldar can be spoofing the bombers or torps into missing. I can understand with torps, you roll D6 and the number rolled = number of torps that lose the target (I mean even dumbfire torps have to have some targetting system in place). But bombers and ABs shouldn't be affected as such.
I think everyone agrees that the closer you get to the eldar ship, the less dramatic the HF effects are. Still, I can see some kind of effect on the electronics of torps and bombers. Even so, I feel the effect should not be dramatic.
I would rather see Eldar deal with ordnance through super accurate turrets or countering with their own advanced fighters.
-
Hi,
on the re-roll hits option:
vs lances:
all ranges
1 lance 0,25
2 lances 0,50
3 lances 0,75
4 lances 1,00
5 lances 1,25
re-roll after lock on
1 lance 0,50
2 lances 1,00
3 lances 1,50
4 lances 2,00
5 lances 2,50
vs batteries:
under 15cm
1wb = 1 0,17 0,25
3wb = 3 0,50 0,75
6wb = 5 0,83 1,25
9wb = 8 1,32 2,00
12wb = 11 1,82 2,75
15-30cm
1wb = 1 0,17 0,25
3wb = 2 0,33 0,50
6wb = 4 0,66 1,00
9wb = 6 0,99 1,50
12wb = 8 1,32 2,00
above 30cm
1wb = 1 0,17 0,25
3wb = 2 0,33 0,50
6wb = 3 0,50 0,75
9wb = 5 0,83 1,25
12wb = 6 0,99 1,50
When on Lock-on (per Ray) the lock on dice are rolled and then succesfull hits are re-rolled.
With this system, I fear that Eldar are very weak to fleets with long range lance fire. These can go on Lock On easily and pound the Eldar ships with ease.
In a battle without or little celestial phenomena it'll be a gallery shooting game I fear.
hmmm
-
Not with my suggestion! Look at me! ;)
Also, on a completely different note, the new Dark Eldar models made me realize, Horizon, that you made a DE version of the MMS too, it seems.
How current is that to 1.9, and do you consider them to be complete? They sure do have limited model choices, but seem interesting.
-
Heya,
in above the two values for batteries are vs 5+ armour followed vs 4+ armour
slight adjustment for lances, per admiral on a 5+:
all ranges
1 lance 0,17
2 lances 0,33
3 lances 0,50
4 lances 0,66
5 lances 0,83
re-roll after lock on
1 lance 0,50
2 lances 0,66
3 lances 0,99
4 lances 1,32
5 lances 1,65
Seems good to me.
On the DE:
The ruleset you find on the MMS download page is only given form by me I did not write a single rule in it. Old, not updated and only cool for the pictures :)
As for fleet models I say:
cruiser
light cruiser
escort
and the admiral's long lasting in the build DE battleship ;)
-
If he came up with a DE battleship, I'd sure like to hear it.
If you are in a number's crunching mood, I'd be interested in seeing the exact maths on the survivability of my own suggestion, with WB and lances hitting on 6s beyond 30, 5s beyond 15, and 4s within 15, with holofields causing a right shift to batts and denying close range left shifting.
-
Attempt at wording the Holofield rule:
Holofields
The Eldar are not protected by shields like other races but by advanced holofield technology. This sophisticated ECM produces multiple local engine signatures whilst actively masking the parent ship’s engine signature. The effect of this is a general interference that makes accurate targeting extremely difficult.
* Against attacks which make use of the gunnery chart the Holofields force one extra right shift on the gunnery table, this in addition to any other shift on the gunnery table. Any succesfull hit must be re-rolled.
* Against attacks which make no use of the gunnery table and target the ship directly the holofield makes targetting of the Eldar vessel difficult, to represent this a 5+ is needed to hit the Eldar ship (instead of the regular 4+ for lances). Any succesfull hit must be re-rolled.
When the enemy vessel is on Lock-On Special Orders the holofield forces the re-rolls after the re-rolls for Lock On have applied.
When the Nova Cannon rolls a direct HIT on the scatter dice when targetting an Eldar ship this result is re-rolled.
Note: in no case a blastmarker is placed when shooting at an Eldar ship. If an Eldar ship travels through a blastmarker is takes a hit on D6 roll of 5+.
What about Armageddon guns & Starfield Pulses?
Celestial Phenomena?
ps I'll have some math for yours later...
-
I do think after looking over the current rules again that some kind of save is needed against ordnance, but I think a set variable is always preferred to dice rolling. say, +1 or +2 to hit for bombers and torps, or eldar turrets counting as double for suppression and torps rerolling hits, or something. Just throwing out thoughts late at night ;)
-
Second time: Turrets
With the holofield not offering protection against orndnace the ships need turrets. I'd say turrets hit on a 4+, they may re-roll missed dice (like Tau tracking system).
That's enough protection. Same system as any other race, slightly better. No holo save vs ordnance I'd say.
Your holo systems comes out weaker then the admiral's system. Weaker as in : Eldar suffer hits more easily.
-
I did mention no lock on against Eldar holofields, right? :)
That plus gorced re-roll on successful hits should aid greatly in Eldar survival even at long ranges.
Also means I have to revise my experimental NC rules if No Lock On rule is enforced.
-
Guessed I missed the lock-on memo. lol.
Well, if people would go by that. (I'd even allow Lock On tbh for playtesting).
-
I'd say no. Basically the Holofield messes up with the targeting systems of the opponents. If you want Lock On to still be available limit it to 30cm and below ranges. This way, it addresses Eldar survivability on long range lance and non-WB table weapons. WBs will still be able to fire but they can't really get a solid lock and have to rely on area saturation. Lances can try for a hit but good chances of missing.
If an Eldar is caught in the 30 cm band by a ship on Lock On. WBs get their re-rolls while for lances and other non-battery weapon system, I would say for simplicity's sake that it cancels the re-roll on hits. Let that work for non-Eldar races.
Against another Eldar player, I would suggest holofield has no effect since they know how the system works.
-
So with all these ideas in this thread about Holofields, what about Shadowfields? The DE currently have all the advantages of the Holo with 5+ armor. So maybe we can keep the Shadowfields the same making these two systems different? With no vessel bigger than a 6 hit point cruiser it gives them some needed staying power since they don't move as fast as their Craftworld or Corsair brothers.
-Zhukov
-
That's the advantage of DE. They have better armor. I think we can have the same rules for them as their regular brethren. Unless you want to include the 40k mechanic (though I don't know if this changed in the upcoming DE Codex)?
-
I do not play 40K so what is the mechanic you are refering to?
-Zhukov
-
As said the aim is the same Core rules for all three Eldar fleets!
Rename holofields to shadowfields if you wish it stays the same per rules.
Read the first post.
All three same movement, holofields, turns, etc
No seperate rules for DE.
THus all Eldar 5+ prow armour, 4+ rest.
That is my suggestion.
-
As eldar are an extreme alpha strike fleet, I think no allowing lock on would be going too far, as its something relating to the firing ship, and not the holofields, which still make hitting harder. With my rules, you are still needing sixes for everything, before the eldar close and get the first heavy handed strike.
I will be playtesting a few games using my suggestions, I'd encourage others to do the same with all proposals.
I also forgot about nova cannons, and would add the reroll direct hits to my own rules, either that or half damage due to never knowing where the eldar ship actually is.
I like rerolling turret hits rather than the +1.
Edit: Looking over the PDF again, shouldn't it be eldar fighters test against each fighter marker, rather than fighters in the wave, to represent being outnumbered? It looks like the other way around, maybe I'm reading it wrong.
-
I am actually very happy with the current rules for eldar.. Yes they are strange as fuck, but so are the eldar.
Trying to unify the eldar under one ruleset really ruins their variety. The point of the different rules was to show a different philosophy between the three major factions of eldar, namely the Corsairs, the Dark eldar and the Craftworld eldar.
So, unless you can give me a REAL GOOD REASON to unite the three fleets under a single ruleset... not happening. We had enough of a bitchfest when someone tried to give turrets to shadowhunters!
-
Well actually that was turrets under msm rules, which in all its aspects is ofcourse ridiculous.
Why one ruleset (With flava assets to spice em)?
Because they are Eldar.
They use the same material.
They use the same (old) technologies.
The variety in the core Eldar rules is not a good way to show diversity among them. It are unique traits - ship design philosophies that do.
The current rules are just.... well.... not very well written (to be honest : the DE rules are better then the CE/CWE rules).
-
Example of ships
Corsair Eldar
Destroyer Class - 50 points
hits: 1
speed: 15/25/30
turns: 90*
Holofield
Turrets: 1
armour: 5+ prow/4+
Hemlock Weaponry
dorsal weapon batteries - 30cm - str.1 - F
keel pulsar lance - 30cm - str.1 - F
Nightshade weaponry
dorsal weapon batteries - 30cm - str.1 - F
keel torpedoes - 30cm - str.2 - F
Craftworld Eldar
Wraithship Class Attack Cruiser
hits: 6
speed: 10/15/20
turns: 45*
Holofield
Turrets: 2
armour: 5+ prow/4+
Weaponry - I
Prow Weapon Batteries - 45cm - str.8 - F
keel torpedoes - 30cm - str.4 - F
Weaponry - II
Prow Weapon Batteries - 45cm - str.8 - F
keel launch bay - 30/25/25cm - str.2 - NA
Weaponry - III
Prow Pulsar Lance - 45cm - str.2 - F
keel torpedoes - 30cm - str.4 - F
Weaponry - I
Prow Pulsar Lance - 45cm - str.2 - F
keel launch bay - 30/25/25cm - str.2 - NA
Nightwings - 30cm - fighters
Phoenix - 25cm - bombers
Vampires - 25cm - assault boats
Or sumtin like that, just threadin waters.
-
As eldar are an extreme alpha strike fleet, I think no allowing lock on would be going too far, as its something relating to the firing ship, and not the holofields, which still make hitting harder. With my rules, you are still needing sixes for everything, before the eldar close and get the first heavy handed strike.
They maybe an alpha strike fleet but as long as there are no MSM shenanigans, giving them some measure of protection vs ranged attacks should be normal. They have no shields. Their shields give them a measure of stealth. Like the F-117 and B-2, the signal is fuzzy enough that you can't lock on to it. I think it's fluffy.
-
Poorly written? they seem to make plenty of sense to me...
Tell me, if it's made with the same old technology, and same old materials, can you then compare a ford pinto to a GTO?
No. because the eldar actually had, during their empire days, competing ship classes and designs... just like we do. It just so happens that they tended to end up in different hands of different people. It's why the Dark eldar jetbikes don't look like Eldar jetbikes.
I am open to hear what ya say, because most people REALLY hate playing against the eldar, but so far i have not seen rules suitable to replace the current ones without making them feel different.
-
As eldar are an extreme alpha strike fleet, I think no allowing lock on would be going too far, as its something relating to the firing ship, and not the holofields, which still make hitting harder. With my rules, you are still needing sixes for everything, before the eldar close and get the first heavy handed strike.
They maybe an alpha strike fleet but as long as there are no MSM shenanigans, giving them some measure of protection vs ranged attacks should be normal. They have no shields. Their shields give them a measure of stealth. Like the F-117 and B-2, the signal is fuzzy enough that you can't lock on to it. I think it's fluffy.
I think the holofields are enough on their own. They are the eldar replacement for shields.
I really dislike the idea of simply denying a special order when going against a certain fleet. Its a game of tactics and choices, and if I have an option taken away, I would like that a whole lot less than a benefit given to the opposing fleet.
My proposed holofield rules protect much better than standard shields at range, without needing added rules of gimping the enemy fleet.
Edit: Zelnik, are you upset because you like the MSM eldar, or you like the MMS rules as they are?
Because I would never go back to playing with or against that clunky ruleset now that I have seen the joys of MMS :)
I am totally for the 3 fleets sharing the same general rules. The way they actually play and their special abilities, drawbacks, rules, etc, I feel should be pretty different, to make me want to play one or the other. Holo/shadow-fields, MMS, armor/crit values, star-based movement, weapon bonuses. Then the rest is different.
-
Zelnik, I didn't pay LS. ;)
Anywhoo,
here is exact rule from the Rogue Trader book regarding Eldar Ghostfields/Holofields:
All ships firing at a ship with functioning Ghost Fields (it is earlier stated this is the defence system on Eldar ships, background states it is the same as holofields) suffer a -20 to their ballistic skill tests. If the ship is firing a lance weapon it suffers a -30 instead.
The game gives shooting modifiers for:
- firing further away then range of weapon (!) = -10
- target at half range = +10
To fire a character makes a ballistic skill test.
Skill value is between 01-100.
-
Heh found this,
the PortMaw - Xavi Version:
Eldar 'Back to their Core Wraithbones'
Movement:
apart from having high speed and good turning rate Eldar follow all normal special rules.
* Eldar do not need to pass a Leadership test to go on Come to New Heading
Weaponry:
pulsar lances: per current pulsar rules (up to three times)
torpedoes: may re-roll misses
Shields/Holofields
???
Leadership
+1 to Ld table (per current rules)
Armour:
5+ prow / 4+
Turrets:
standard
Example ships:
Corsair Hemlock
hits: 1
speed: 50cm
turn: 90*
armour 5+/4+
turrets 1
shields/holofield
pulsar lance - str.1 - 30cm - F
weapons battery - str.1 - 30cm - F
Craftworld Wraithship:
hits: 6
speed: 35cm
turn: 90*
armour 5+/4+
turrets 2
shields/holofield
pulsar lance - str.2 - 30cm - F
torpedoes - str.4 - 30cm -F
speeds:
Nightshade, Hemlock, Shadowhunter: 50cm
Aconite, Hellebore, <heavy CWE escort (old spacefleet)>, 45cm
Aurora, Solaris, Wraithship, <CWE light cruiser (old spacefleet)>, 40cm
Eclipse, Shadow, Dragonship, Flame of Asuryan, 35cm
Void Stalker, 30cm
---
lol, always the holofields question marks,
-
I think the holofields are enough on their own. They are the eldar replacement for shields.
I really dislike the idea of simply denying a special order when going against a certain fleet. Its a game of tactics and choices, and if I have an option taken away, I would like that a whole lot less than a benefit given to the opposing fleet.
Exactly. No shields means they will die easily if no measure of protection is given them. What's so bad about not being to lock on at ranges more than 30 cm? Stealth Fighters and Bombers are harder to lock on these days at closer ranges. Again, it is quite fluffy that one cannot Lock On on them.
My proposed holofield rules protect much better than standard shields at range, without needing added rules of gimping the enemy fleet.
But they're not supposed to be protected much better than standard shields. They should be protected about the same. That's for game balance. That was the problem with MSM. They were protected waaaaaay better than they should have been.
So to summarize:
1. No Lock On at ranges beyond 30 cm. Fluffy and definitely smacks of Stealth.
2. WBs hit normally but at 1 column shift to the right.
3. Lances hit at 5+ with hits being re-rolled.
4. Against ordnance their turrets roll 4+.
5. AC attacking Eldar do not get penalties to hit.
6. Torps attacking Eldar lose D6 torps to show how the torps spoof the torps into missing.
I think that's balanced enough.
-
That brinks on the edge of being no longer K.I.S.S.
Too many rulings.
People dislike that.
-
Well, Item 5 isn't really a special rule.
Item 6 can be dispensed with.
Items 1-4 should be good.
-
No re-roll on weapon batteries?
Only right shift?
-
Yup. Thinking if they can Lock On at ranges beyond 30 cm applies to them compared to lances. What do you think?
-
That would be fiddly. All or nothing. (regarding lock on).
I am also considering re-rolling for batteries. Otherwise they (Eldar) die like flies under 30cm.
-
No Lock On for all ranges and all weapons is going to be a major change. Eldar prolly need it though.
-
Exactly. No shields means they will die easily if no measure of protection is given them. What's so bad about not being to lock on at ranges more than 30 cm? Stealth Fighters and Bombers are harder to lock on these days at closer ranges. Again, it is quite fluffy that one cannot Lock On on them.
My proposed holofield rules protect much better than standard shields at range, without needing added rules of gimping the enemy fleet.
But they're not supposed to be protected much better than standard shields. They should be protected about the same. That's for game balance. That was the problem with MSM. They were protected waaaaaay better than they should have been.
I'm definitly not trying to make something better than shields in general, but here are what I consider to be some definites.
1. Eldar ships, shields or no, are much more fragile, point for point, to their counterparts.
2. Eldar ships, point for point, hit much harder than their counterparts.
3. Eldar have almost absolute power to choose where and how they engage an enemy fleet, with their superior speed and agility. Eldar should usually be able to achieve a decisive alpha strike.
4. Holofields, in game-mechanic and fluff, should function increasingly well at further ranges. Thus, at long range, it should average less damage to the Eldar than comparable shields at long range, and equal or more damage at short range.
5. Given the agility of the Eldar, positioning to avoid a lockon order should not be terribly difficult, if there is a ship left that you have not yet pwned. ;) But give the poor sap a chance, so he doesn't hate playing you.
6. Given the playstyle of the Eldar, your goal is to do as much damage as possible to minimize return fire, while being balanced enough that the enemy fleet still has a chance to wreck you.
I think my rules perfectly represent my idea of holofields along with game balance, but I still need to figure out the maths, and then compare to shields.
Of course, they are my ideas, so im biased ;) and would readily admit I'm wrong for the sake of balance :)
-
Being hard to hit at long ranges already works with the present WB table setup where one rolls lesser dice the farther out the target is. The issue right now then are lances. My proposal is simple enough to represent the HF effect on lances.
-
Being hard to hit at long ranges already works with the present WB table setup where one rolls lesser dice the farther out the target is. The issue right now then are lances. My proposal is simple enough to represent the HF effect on lances.
Do you realize my proposed rules have the same effect on lances as they do on batteries?
-
Yes and I don't want it to change into a WB. It's a lance. It shouldn't have the same result as WBs as it deviates drastically on how a lance works against other races.
-
Yes and I don't want it to change into a WB. It's a lance. It shouldn't have the same result as WBs as it deviates drastically on how a lance works against other races.
Thats confusing to me. It simply accomplishes the target of allowing WBs to be more effective against Eldar, as they should. Not even that much more effective, depending on range and orientation. Having lances gaurantees you will get to shoot that many shots, regardless.
And its Eldar, its going to work differently against it.
Didn't you suggest yourself having lances hit on higher dice? Maybe that was someone else.
Also, it keeps it as simple as possible, no special rules denying or rerolling required. I'm going for a passionate but effective KISS here, as it were. Lances are effected as WBs for simplicity, to keep one system for holofields throwing off enemy shots in place. If wanting a different mechanic for lances is the only complaint, then I'd say we hit our target ruleset. If we are going for something easy of course.
-
Lances hit at 4+ no matter what the range. Changing that into something like a WB table changes the flavor too much. I'd rather do a straight reduction in the to hit requirements rather than have to go through a WB-like procedure. It's closer to the lance mechanic.
-
Hmm. Ok. How do my rules make lances something like the WB table?
What do you mean in a straight reduction to 'to hit' requirements?
I think maybe I have failed to word my rules properly.
-
Basically if I understnad correctly, your rules make the lance roll different "to hits" at different bands. Similar to a WB table where it would roll less dice at farther ranges.
I just prefer one reduction or "penalty" due to the holofields. So that the flavor of one "to hit" roll per lance is maintained.
I can also go with lances hit on straight 6+ to hit against holofields but without re-rolling hits and Lock On is allowed. Someone do the math though. ;D
-
lances vs holo ideas
4+ = 0,5
forced re-roll = 0,25
5+ = 0,33
forced re-roll = 0,11
6+ = 0,16
forced re-roll = 0,03
with lock on, no re-roll
6+ = 0,16 = no lock on
6+ = 0,33 = lock on
If I am not off.
So 6+ for lances with lock on option is slightly better then 5+ with forced re-roll and no lock on.
---
5+ for lances with lock on and forced re-roll after comes out at about 0,22.
-
You don't roll less lance shots as you go further out the range bands, the difficulty to hit just increases.
Also, I hope whatever is decided, its something more intuitive than forcing rerolls on all hits. That would be frustrating for the opposing player, as well as more complicated than a simple modifier.
-
Horizon's computations show flat 6+ "to hit" and allowing Lock On seems viable.
-
Edit:
Does that mean you like my idea? What more is there to talk about? I wanna know how to play my friend's eldar fleet :)
-
Double post, damn it.
-
No, I mean that it's either choose 5+ with forced re-roll and no Lock On or 6+ with no forced re-roll and Lock On.
-
No, I mean that it's either choose 5+ with forced re-roll and no Lock On or 6+ with no forced re-roll and Lock On.
When you say no forced reroll and lock on do you mean 'no forced reroll and no lockon allowed'?
Because otherwise, thats exactly my proposed rule, past 30cm anyway. Simplicity and survivability making sweet interstellar love.
-
No, I mean that it's either choose 5+ with forced re-roll and no Lock On or 6+ with no forced re-roll and Lock On.
When you say no forced reroll and lock on do you mean 'no forced reroll and no lockon allowed'?
Because otherwise, thats exactly my proposed rule, past 30cm anyway. Simplicity and survivability making sweet interstellar love.
I mean 6+ to hit and no forced re-roll on hits. Lock On is allowed. Both of my suggestions reflect how the lances work for all range bands.
-
Right, thats exactly my proposal, except I feel like allowing it, no matter how close the enemy ship is, is OP.
I always felt holofields were better at range.
-
Yes but they already have so many special rules. Adding more special rules, in this case to an already special rule, is detrimental. Granted it will benefit the non-Eldar race more but I prefer simplicity more at this point.
-
I dunno. I wouldn't find it hard at all to remember them. Its pretty simple, and requires no extra measurement.
'Holofields:
Shooting at a ship with holofields requires a 5 to hit beyond 15cm, and a 6 beyond 30cm.
Weapon batteries always suffer a right column shift.
Nova cannons reroll direct hits.'
Pretty simple, to me.
Being right next to an eldar ship and 6s to hit is rough. Actually I was also going to suggest a self denial of my previous 'ignores column shift for under 15cm just to give the opposing fleet a chance.
I mean, look at how hard the Eldar hit right now. I think this system allows superb protection at long range, get first strike, and then give the enemy fleet some chance at retaliation with what remained of it.
I guess now all we are arguing is whether or not Eldar deserve the same saves at close range, so at least we are getting somewhere :)
-
I'm willing for them to get the 6+ save vs lances at any range. They should be more vulnerable to WBs anyway.
-
Thats something I'd be willing to concede on. But let me say two things.
1. Keeping everything getting the same reduction to hit makes things simpler.
2. I havn't really crunched the numbers, but wouldnt lances hit less simply because they get less shots? I should see after the column shift how batteries do vs lances.
Working...
-
After thinking about it, I have to admit, that I think lances should indeed simply get a save against them.
They just are indeed quite different from batteries.
Also, it makes rolling 6's with necron lances actually worth something :p
Edit: Speaking of the Eldar's ancient enemy, check out the thread I made in the exp. rules section. I posted some more questions/comments for you guys since the initial post.
-
Ok. How about a modified oldschool fix?
Holofields: For direct fire weapons such as lances or batteries, holofields allow a 2+ if beyond 30cm away.
4+ at 16-30, and 6+ 15 and below. Maybe batts suffer a right shift still, maybe remove easy crits.
Or just apply a save to lances and keep the armor/column shift idea for wbs?
Or: Holofields cause eldar to be +6 armor unless inside 15cm. Vessels under holofields never suffer from left column shifts at 15cm. Holofields allow a 3+ save from lances.
The last just occured to me, and I really like it. Allows batts to be more effective even at range than lances.
*edited typo, 6+ when OUTSIDE of 15 cm*