Specialist Arms Forum
Battlefleet Gothic => [BFG] Rules Questions => Topic started by: flybywire-E2C on September 24, 2010, 04:09:27 AM
-
Hi! One of the most annoying long-term issues that has annoyed the BFG community is the weakness of escorts against a-boats. An interestingly simple and elegant solution was proposed on the BFG-List, and the HA's are currently hashing it out. Here's the proposal:
Due to their much smaller size, escorts do not have a specialized critical table. Instead, assault boats and any other hit and run attack destroys escorts on a roll of 4+ (as opposed to 2+). Fleets that enjoy a bonus to their hit and run rolls still benefit from this bonus, needing a 3+ to succeed in hit and run attacks.
Now of course, I am almost certain that someone out there is going to totally hate this. Once again, all I ask is that we all respect each other's opinions. Thanks.
- Nate
-
Hi,
I'm good with it.
cheers,
horizon
ps what about boarding torps? They have to pass through armour first, then make their hit&run. Keep them the same?
Teleport attacks? Need shields to be down first and are more tricky to use.
-
Escorts can BFI the H&R attack anyway right? So am good with it.
-
I think this sounds fair. Marines retain a slightly better capability to take down escorts and escorts gain some needed durability.
One question, how does BFI impact this roll? Can escorts BFI and gain a 4+ saves rather than a 3+?
-
I think this sounds fair. Marines retain a slightly better capability to take down escorts and escorts gain some needed durability.
One question, how does BFI impact this roll? Can escorts BFI and gain a 4+ saves rather than a 3+?
We haven't even begun to discuss it, but BFI will still work normally as it does now. Cruisers can BFI H&R damage if they desire to, there just isn't a lot of incentive to do so unless they happen to already be braced so there isn't anything to change.
What we are looking at to make it simpler is to require a 4+ roll for ANY H&R attack against escorts (b-torps, teleporting, etc.). This new rule is not intended to be a save. In other words, escorts now get a crit table, a very simple one that requires no bookkeeping whatsoever. 4+ means the escort survives to fight on. <4+ means engine room hit (or whatever) +1Hp damage and the escort dies. BFI works normally against any crit except boarding actions, just like they do now, and SM's still get their +1 bonus.
BTW: This is NOT official yet! Bob likes it, but we haven't tested it for bugs, and Ray is still out of town.
- Nate
-
I completely support this, and I'm glad it came up. Don't see enough escorts as it is.
-
BFI works normally against any crit except boarding actions, just like they do now, and SM's still get their +1 bonus
So you are saying that an escort could ALSO BFI against the hit and run and gain a second 4+ against the H&R?
Secondarily, this means boarding torpedoes much roll vs armor to hit and then roll a 4+ against escorts?
for example, the situation could play out like this:
AB touches base of escort.
Escort braces.
AB survives turrets.
AB rolls 4+
Escort passes brace save and is not destroyed.
I don't mind if this is the case as it significantly improves the durability of escorts, but I think it should be clear that the 4+ is more of a to hit roll rather than a save.
-
I think Nate mixed up in that line. It is as you line out, the AB needs a 4+ to be succesfull. This dice roll replace the current critical hit roll (eg 2+ is death escort).
-
I am good with this
-
So to summarize:
1. ABs need to roll a base 4+ to make a successful H&R attack vs Escorts. This is subject to race modifiers.
2. Escorts can BFI and get a 4+ save vs successful H&R attacks.
That basically it?
-
As far as I see: yes.
-
As far as i understand it, it would be a great way of seeing more Escorts on the battlefleet, especially against some fleets like chaos. Btw does chaos have a H&R bonus? If they have one th rule should renamed into +3, because as i see it all fleets that make heavy use of Assault Boats do have a H&R bonus (if i remember correctly that whould be SM, Chaos and Orcs).
-
Chaos needs CSM to get a bonus for a-boats.
-
This is a good idea, but ...
wasn't BFI save to H&R introduced mainly to improve escort survivability? Maybe this could be ditched then.
It's still a good idea though. ;D
Btw does chaos have a H&R bonus? If they have one th rule should renamed into +3, because as i see it all fleets that make heavy use of Assault Boats do have a H&R bonus (if i remember correctly that whould be SM, Chaos and Orcs).
Chaos and Ork have a +1 boarding modifier. SM get +2 for boarding.
Only SM and few specials get a +1 to H&R (e.g. Ork Refit 'Improved Tellyportas').
-
@ Don Gusto
wasn't BFI save to H&R introduced mainly to improve escort survivability? Maybe this could be ditched then.
Yes it was but is was not sufficient enough and since capital ships got the same BFI save vs Hit and Runs it did not improve escorts towards capital ship.
if you ditch the BFI save, add the 4+ attack roll escorts would become weaker!
Thus the BFI save can (and must) be kept.
Assaults succes on 4+ dice. Yay.
-
here is a shocker for you all... I really don't mind this too much.
Here are my concerns on the matter though.
Right now the best way to defeat tyranid escorts is via assault boats (especially those thrice damned krakens). While everyone else gets a 'comfortable' boost to their escort capabilities, the nids, who use them HEAVILY, have their staying power go through the proverbial roof.
I don't want to sound like an ass so much, but just because one fleet is less played (nids) then others (everyone else), doesn't mean you should forget them. Nid escorts are CHEAP as SPIT, and they can swarm the table with them. With the current rules, A-boats are now the most effective means of surviving the "bazillion feeder tentacle attack" tactic.
-
Ha!
One more reason to add the rule. Thanks Zelnik. :)
Assaulting Nids should be a disaster. These are the close combat specialists!
-
Ok if only SM have the bonus its ok.
-
Ha!
One more reason to add the rule. Thanks Zelnik. :)
Assaulting Nids should be a disaster. These are the close combat specialists!
Thats a point.
-
I'm sorry for being really slow on this one, but your suggesting that I can BFI prior to the H&R attack roll and IF their are any successful H&R (+4 , +3 SM ) I still get the +4 save for BFI as a last ditch effort to save my escort? I just want to make sure I understand that you also get the BFI as a second roll.
That means an escort on BFI who faces a H&R gets a 75% chance of staying on the table or 58% against SM. This greatly increases their survivability. I'm cool with that!
Russ
-
There is already a rule in place to represent that, Horizon, all H and R attacks are at -1. That's all they need.
Against a nid escort, you need a 5+ to do anything under these new rules.
PLEASE understand that when i make this argument, you are taking away strength from assault boat heavy fleets (SPACE MARINES, dark eldar, chaos, etc) and giving it to escort strong fleets (Eldar, Tyranids).
So unless you can justify giving Tyranids, one of the strongest fleets in the game who (evidently) can use campaign upgrades (since they removed the restriction from the WIP pdf), and have access to more ordnance then any other fleet as it is... NO this should not be implemented.
-
wait, what? the nids got their campaign refits back in one of games? that is VERY VERY bad. How are you figuring that you need a 5+ to do anything? I assumed that they nids only gained the +1 when THEY were performing the hit and run attack, not when they were the target based on this line "The Tyranid player adds +1 to the result when making hit-&-run raids" (emphasis mine). following that, I thought that the intent was the 4+ to successfully destroy the escort was only modified if the side performing the attack was granted +1 to the critical roll.
Nids would still be bad since you have to roll the 2d6 and take the lowest to making the odds, what 25% to kill an escort with an aboat?
-
shows ya what i know, your right it's 2d6 pick the lowest.
I still think an impaler assault module should kill em on the 2+ one way or another.
-
Well, I'd say the easy fix would be to get rid of the -1 to hit and run attacks. :)
-
sparticus, there isn't anything to fix. the +1 isn't a defensive bonus, it's only for the side that is attacking and provides flavor to several of the races.
-
I agree.
Aren't Impalers a whole different kinda of weapon? So they could keep something special...
AS it stands 50% of the fleets has assault boats and the other half doesn't.
-
Yup, i like this :)
-
sparticus, there isn't anything to fix. the +1 isn't a defensive bonus, it's only for the side that is attacking and provides flavor to several of the races.
I'm speaking of the -1 hit and run attacks against the nids suffer.
-
Impalers function exactly like an assault boat, but on a 2+ they cause a FULL crit, the way the rules work, the escort survives on a 4+
See what i mean? try and change ONE stinkin' rule, and everything goes to shit.. we really should just leave the rules as they stand.
-
No way Zelnik. We are pretty close to changing the game to the better. A lot better. The Main reason a lot people ditch escorts is because of the dreaded a-boat auto kill.
One race should not determine the game. The Nids aren't that uber strong, except the over-graded Hiveship.
For the record, from now on the Impaler worked like an assault boat. ;)
The Impaler already has added SPECIAL rules opposed to assault boats, thus it is in no way an assault boat.
:)
IIRC Ray Bell was in favour of changing the Impaler. I don't know what Bob/Nate think about this though.
I think it is the other way around: Do not change the rules and it stays sh*t.
Yes, I admit, I don't face or play Nids (one opponent does have Nids in the painting phase) but I really give nothing about a DE Impaler or defeating Nids with assault boats.
Assault boats are still a good instrument.
This (proposed) rule change is one of the best since launch bay limits and scattering nova cannons.
-
"This (proposed) rule change is one of the best since launch bay limits and scattering nova cannons."
Signed
-
Impalers function exactly like an assault boat, but on a 2+ they cause a FULL crit, the way the rules work, the escort survives on a 4+
See what i mean? try and change ONE stinkin' rule, and everything goes to shit.. we really should just leave the rules as they stand.
Why is this an issue? If anything it will just cause DE to target other ships with the impaler if it makes it worse, or if it makes it better (much more likely since I think the procedure would be to roll the d6 for to see if the run is successful and then see if the combined 2d6 roll is a 4+ killing the escort.) This is NOT grounds to scrap the entire proposed change.
-
Impalers function exactly like an assault boat, but on a 2+ they cause a FULL crit, the way the rules work, the escort survives on a 4+
See what i mean? try and change ONE stinkin' rule, and everything goes to shit.. we really should just leave the rules as they stand.
What's the problem? The escort will go on BFI. They're rendered ineffective come their turn. So far the rules have not been changed that one ship in a squadron going on BFI will result in all ships in a squadron going on BFI. A ship/squadron on BFI is a plus for me.
-
And to add: why would a DE ship waste an Impaler on an escort in any form of rules?
-
Look, I am not justifying the use of impalers on escorts, but the end result is IT CAN HAPPEN, so we must address it in rules!
-
The rules don't always address every possible situation that can happen. That's what we have FAQ's to explain the nuances and if it comes down to it, roll off to see what happens.
-
SPEAKING AS A DARK ELDAR PLAYER
I see this A-Boats rules change as a GREAT thing for the game!
The Impaler is NOT an A-Boat squadron, therefore it should still work normally as it does right now vs escorts (turrets hit it on 6, 2+ for successful crit attack, BFI can save this). Impalers should be DEVASTATING to escort ships. If you are putting out a Module that has enough warriors to hypothetically give a bulkhead collapse to a capital ship, then an escort sized ship is doomed if it's turrets cant drive it off. Impalers dwarf A-Boat squadrons in terms of warriors so keeping the 2+ roll to successfully do a Crit (and in the case of escorts, destroy the ship) should stay.
@Horizon- DE escorts can have Impalers, meaning they have the speed to catch and devastate enemy escorts in the opening phases of the game. Since the DE cruisers have no advantage to carrying Impalers over the escorts, it frees them up for the other weapons (especially traditional Launch Bays). I have used them as this and they are highly effective at stripping enemy fleet of all their escort ships early on so the DE escorts can harass the capital ships freely.
-Zhukov
-
Okay, cool with me. Keep Impalers at +2. As it is already a special weapon I see no problem with it. The rules make it so the Impaler can be lost forever. So balanced right away.
-
I'd be fine with the impalers as well.
-
So escorts can indeed BFI the crit hits?
I really support the 4+, the more I think about it.
Sure, let the Impaler be.
With the boost that this will give nids, I fully support the removal of the -1 that nids benefit from.
All is pretty much lost if they are within teleport range anyway, I like the idea of desperate teleport actions for those mad enough to close.
-
Yeah, h&r, teleports etc can be BFI'ed. Was in older FAQ as well.
I wouldn't remove the Nid rule.
-
I say that simply because the rule never made much sense to me. As the ships may be less navigable, I also don't see swarms of combat organisms just walking around the halls in between planets, ready to react at a moments notice. I see them being able to respond after being brought out of hibernation.
-
With the boost that this will give nids, I fully support the removal of the -1 that nids benefit from.
There is no -1 modifier to H&R against Tyranids. H&R attacks against Tyranids have to roll 2 dice and take the lowest.
While this is even better the "4+" would be a general rules change and as such doesn't require further, fleet specific, considerations. Whatever advantage Tyranid escorts have now, they should have in the future as well.
-
Agreed. Tyranid rule about defending H&R attacks should stay even with this proposed rules change.
-Zhukov
@Spartacus- Tyranid ships may not have warriors roaming on the inside of the ships but surely they dont have hallways and corridors either!! I imagine teleport attacks and such are transporting a squad of warriors INTO a vital organ to detonate explosives on the walls of it (killing the escort sized creature). The reason for the defensive modifier is for two reasons: 1. It's hard to move around in a liver, lol. 2. I imagine Tyranids would have immune systems that would be attacking anyone doing the H&R attacks.
-
I don't deny the fluffyness of it, really. Its just a balance thing.
1. You are utterly boned as it is if you get that close to nids.
2. The universal 4+ change makes tyranid escorts even tougher, and it has always bothered me how well armored the nids can be with just organic armor. So you have, already, very tough, very numerous, very deadly nid escorts to kill, you make them harder to hit with a reliable kill tactic that some fleets have, and then if you keep the current 2-dice-take-lowest, they are even more gauranteed to stick around.
I love the way nids play for the most part, but if you have such a hard hitting, cheap, vast swarm, it shouldnt be harder to kill than pricier, adamantine clad space ships.
-
Thus we hit the problem.
I will support the rules we have come up with, AS LONG AS: the Nids do NOT get campaign upgrades in one shot games!
-
When you say campaign upgrades, do you mean the ones at the end of the pdf that let you do things such as, say, get a hiveship from 10 to 14 HP?
-
yes, the evolution of the hive mind refits. I don't think any other race outside of nids are allowed to use refits outside of a campaign and the ability to jack their hive ship up with them is a bit problematic.
-
Ah. Makes sense then. But why then would it have points next to the refits if its not meant for one off games?
If it helps balance though, of course, throw it out.
-
yes, the evolution of the hive mind refits. I don't think any other race outside of nids are allowed to use refits outside of a campaign and the ability to jack their hive ship up with them is a bit problematic.
Apparently the posted SM Draft PDF allows them too take refits as well for +20 points each. So in the current incarnation you can pickup a 8HP Strike Cruiser for 165points via "Reinforced Hull". Sorry about the tangent...
Russ
-
This draft should not be taken as is. It should be discarded. :)
-
In regards to "tough to kill Tyranids", I think it is totally un-fluffly to make the most reliable way to kill a Tyranid escort ship is to essentially "board" it. Should find something else that gives the Tyranid's a weakness. Maybe giving Kraken 5+ armor and everything else 4+ armor? This would make sense to me. Nids should be nigh unstoppable at close actions, so logically that makes ranged defence weaker for game balance. Thoughts?
-Zhukov
-
In regards to "tough to kill Tyranids", I think it is totally un-fluffly to make the most reliable way to kill a Tyranid escort ship is to essentially "board" it. Should find something else that gives the Tyranid's a weakness. Maybe giving Kraken 5+ armor and everything else 4+ armor? This would make sense to me. Nids should be nigh unstoppable at close actions, so logically that makes ranged defence weaker for game balance. Thoughts?
But Tyranids are also VERY slow compared to others : giving them an inferior armour value would make them a "too easy target" for almost every other race, especially if the Nids can't take the refits from the Evoloution of the Hive Mind anymore in one-off game (which I think is a really good idea)
(IMHO)
P.S. : Sorry for the intrusion :)
-
Testing...needed.
I always did feel them having better armor than some adamantine armored equives was kinda silly, but...testing needed.
-
I completely agree that if the armor values are reduced, then the Evolutions need to come back. I think the Evolutions are needed for one off games for Nids to be successful anyway but their should be a limit imposed on how much you can take.
Playtesting definately needed.
-Zhukov
-
Zel, there's been plenty of play testing with the Nids and evolutions. I mean, it's not like the rules just came out yesterday and it's not chance happening that two of the evolutions are taken as many times as possible. Will losing the evolutions in one of games make nids weaker? Yes, it will, but it isn't going to kill the fleet.
-
Zel, there's been plenty of play testing with the Nids and evolutions. I mean, it's not like the rules just came out yesterday and it's not chance happening that two of the evolutions are taken as many times as possible. Will losing the evolutions in one of games make nids weaker? Yes, it will, but it isn't going to kill the fleet.
Well yes, i completely agree with you, maybe i didn't make myself clear on what I was trying to say
(Sorry, English is not my native language) .
I was trying to say that I agree with the restrictions on the Evolutions in one off games ,
but I'm not convinced on also reducing their armour value, as suggested by Zhukow
Maybe, as suggested by Zhukow again, lowering their armour without losing the Evolutions in one off games could be a solution .
But for now, I would prefer losing the Evolutions, but keeping the armour value as they are .
-
ah sorry about that... too many names starting with Z around here. That was actually pointed at Zhukov.
-
zzzzz
I think no changes are needed to the Nid fleet and rules in combination with this assault boat change. Ofcourse the evolution thing should be gone for one -off games.
-
zzzzz
I think no changes are needed to the Nid fleet and rules in combination with this assault boat change. Ofcourse the evolution thing should be gone for one -off games.
That's what I think too
-
This just occured to me,
How would DE leech torpedoes be handled with this rules change? (they inflict an automatic critical without to hit roll)
How about Fire Ships, Melta and Vortex Torpedoes?
Right now all of the above will kill an escort and BFI doesn't help.
-
Torps need to pass armour first.
Fire ships = such a rare occurence = leave as is (BFI still works).
Leeches = Seriously... I forgot they inflicted a critical, I believed they drained range...They don't need to pierce armour first?
-
You are right about the torpedoes.
The rules for leech torpedoes don't explicitly state that no to hit roll is needed, so they probably need a hit as well.
Fire ships, rare granted, but you can't BFI versus their effect. The FAQ2007 only allowed BFI to criticals from H&R attacks.
... which brings me back to what I was pondering about ... ;D
I would still like to see this rule addition dropped if H&R attacks are handled differently versus escorts.
The original rule is: BFI doesn't protect against critical damage. Plain and simple but tough on the escorts. To help them out BFI was allowed versus H&R and I agree it was needed. But now another rule is proposed to remedy the same problem.
Why have two special rules when you can do it with just one?
If a 4+ for H&R is still too hard on escorts (I doubt it) 5+ surely will do it.
For comparison:
A single bomber attacking an escort (5+ armor, 1 turret) has a 2/3 chance of killing it if he's not shot down and the escort is not on BFI (someone did the math on another board).
A single assault boat now has a 1/2 chance after surviving turret fire. BFI would reduce this to 1/4.
-
For comparison:
A single bomber attacking an escort (5+ armor, 1 turret) has a 2/3 chance of killing it if he's not shot down and the escort is not on BFI (someone did the math on another board).
A single assault boat now has a 1/2 chance after surviving turret fire. BFI would reduce this to 1/4.
Ooo, I like a good mental work out! I believe your odds are actually off, which only matters to me because it paints a different picture...
A single bomber actually only has about a 14% chance of destroy a single +5 armor, 1 turret escort: It must first survive the turret (1/2), it must then roll a 2+ for attacks due to the -1 turret modifier (5/6), and then it must roll a 5+ to hit the armor (1/3). This gives 30 possible successful combinations from 216 different combinations (30/216) or ~14%
vs
A single assault boat does indeed have a (1/4) or 25% chance.
Add BFI into the equation and you have impossibly small odds for a bomber to destroy an escort and only a 1/8 chance with a single assault boat. So it's still easier to destroy an escort with a single assault boat, it's just not favorable odds.
Personally, I think adding BFI is just fine. A single assault boat should have small odds of destroying an escort and 1/8 feels alright. Having a 25% chance is still pretty silly in my opinion. Besides, most people send 2 to 4 assault boats which GREATLY increases the odds.
Russ
-
Sorry guys,but I really don't understand: why do you want to weaken the assault boats?Yes now they can easily destroy escorts....but this is their best use!!(and almost their only use!!)
in comparison to bombers and mixed waves they are very weak VS cruisers and Battleships (many bombers often destroy a single target ship,many assault boats often only "disarm" a ship) .... if you make them comparable or even weaker against escorts why players should launch them instead of bombers/bombers+fighters???? :o ???
sorry for my bad english
-
I sure as heck use assault boats for more than just escorts.
Do you know what str8 boarding torps combined with str8 dreadclaw wave from my Despoiler does?
Takes an enemy battleship out of commission without having to destroy it, thats what.
-
Hi Tanith,
wrong. A great way of using assault boats is to attack high turreted ships and high armour ships. Vs a 6+ ship bombers lose weight, against a high turret ship, eg 5 turret Emperor, are nigh on useless (d6-5), but assault boats just need to be not hit. Doing crits on a battleship like that en masse can be rally usefull.
Many bombers don't do crap vs battleships, many assault boats do.
So assault boats are very useful. And still bs escorts. 4+ is still a good 4+ but not the dumb auto.
-
I thought assault boats had to bypass armor like boarding torps. Yay if they dont.
-
ok you are right in this...my esperience is mostly against tyranids using imperials or chaos...until now my dreadclaws were my bestweapon against his many escorts...(and they force him to launch fighters and only few assault boats)
-
@LS, <facepalm> haha. Well, that was the aboat problem vs escorts, pass escorts, roll a dice and on a 2+ the escort was gone. Marines did this at a 1+.
So no armour bypass for assault boats.
@Tanith. True, they will still be a good weapon vs escorts. Imperial Navy as such needed to use different tactics allready as they only have assault boats on the Emperor or Oberon.
-
Ah ok, still have to roll against armor then to get the crit, if i understand correctly.
-
No.
Okay, old style:
Assault boat hits base.
roll turret = 4+ to hit.
If turret missed assault boat attacks:
D6
check the critical hit table:
1 = miss
2,3,4,5,6 = apply hit table result (eg prow or port damaged or ... ).
vs escort this meant that at 2,3,4,5 or 6 the escort was destroyed (Brace for Impact allowed though).
So nothing vs armour rolling.
In the new style vs cruiser nothing changes but for escorts it is changed to a new sort: 4+ to destroy escort. 1-3 is miss.
So no armour rolling.
-
So, to be clear, if you board in a torp and not an assault boat, you still need to bypass armor?
-
Yes. BT need to roll vs armor.