Specialist Arms Forum
Battlefleet Gothic => [BFG] Discussion => Topic started by: Hengest on December 20, 2010, 07:02:50 PM
-
For info
http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Badab2contents.html
Index page for Imperial Armour 10.
Battlefleet Gothic and the Badab War
Vessels of the Badab War
-
intriguing
-
Holds breath. I hope it is checked with BFG knowledgable people which I doubt immensely/ :/
-
I have the sneaking suspicion that I will be laughing soon.
-
You can start laughing now if you want and it still doesn't change the fact that it's from Forgeworld which is a dubious source as well as probably doesn't even consult with BFG/HA as Horizon has posited.
-
*Months of yelling, screaming, shouting, compromise and under the table deals*
2010 FAQ released!!
*IA10 released, blows the balance right out of the door*
coming soon... 2011 FAQ...
-
*Months of yelling, screaming, shouting, compromise and under the table deals*
2010 FAQ released!!
*IA10 released, blows the balance right out of the door*
coming soon... 2011 FAQ...
I figure the same thing.
-
Forgeworld books, scenarios and even some equipment are rarely that balanced. Thats not their purpose.
Personally I am glad that at last a publication from GW (or a subsidiary anyway) actually recognises that BFG and BFG players still exists. The last time this happened was a couple of scenarios and background stuff in IA3
I spoke to Alan Bligh last year at the open day about BFG (along with AI). He said then that the models were still profitable to FW and he didnt think they would drop them. He did hint that there might be material on the cards.
If a writer can incorporate BFG (plus any other SG) into his books then good. If it gets a negative response though then they are unlikely to do it again.
-
Hey, I am glad too.
I am just sitting here thinking "Oh good, here comes the port and starboard strength 8 nova cannons with a dorsal strength 8 nova cannon space marine super 'i am utter hotness' battle barge"
-
Nah, I think more in the line of the old Seditio but like this:
8 lances per broadside @ 60cm
12 dorsal BC @ 60cm
Added is the AdMech AWR = no right shift above 30 and a 6 for lances is double hits.
plus str3 NC on the prow being LFR.
heh
6+ armour
5 deflector shields
5 turrets
and 6 t-hawk bays.
25cm speed.
OWN.
-
Nah, I think more in the line of the old Seditio but like this:
8 lances per broadside @ 60cm
12 dorsal BC @ 60cm
Added is the AdMech AWR = no right shift above 30 and a 6 for lances is double hits.
plus str3 NC on the prow being LFR.
heh
6+ armour
5 deflector shields
5 turrets
and 6 t-hawk bays.
25cm speed.
OWN.
Nah, Speed 30 IN BS with 12 LBs per side, a Str 8 dorsal 60cm lance, and a blackstone mega beam on it's prow for 500 pts. And an note form GW that it's 'official for BFG'.
More realistically, we'll probably have SC variants and Chaos SC/BB 'upgrades' with some new scenarios.
-
UPDATE: from the FW site's new pre-order section for IA 10
"A new campaign siege special mission for use with the Badab War campaign rules found in Imperial Armour Volume 9, three new Apocalypse formations, ten new special characters for the Space Marine Chapters featured in this book, new ships and fleet lists for Battlefleet Gothic and a phenomenal range of colour profiles and pictures. "
New ships? Betting SM ships at that.
-
You guys are probably right about the new ships, but with all those upgrades, they will have to cost at least like 490 or something crazy like that,
so it will balance out with 'who wants to pay for that?'
-
And a glimpse!!!
from Warseer:
There is 4 pages of bfg. One page has loyalist and secessionist fleets on. The otjer three pages have new vessals. The nicor, night hag, raptorus rex, a SM vanguard cruiser and the imperial high conveyor; massive transportd
Nicor?
Night Hag?
Raptorus Rex?
SM Vanguard Cruiser?
High Conveyor?
I see troubles with tribbles. :)
-
this....can only end in tears
-
Uhm.. the Raptorus Rex is the Firehawks battle barge.. aka.. legion of the damned.
This MAY actually be awesome.
-
NOOOOOOOOOOO!
heh dunno....
The Night Hag- Executioners Chapter
A Cruiser taken from a chaos tainted Rogue Trader household
Got Port and St'd Batteries, Launch bay, lances and a 'Macro Cannonade' basicaly a Fusion bomb launching weapons battery, very nasty :P
Also got Funky engines that help protect the ship
The Nicor- Grand Cruiser Flagship of the Carcharodons
A warship design hardly seen since the Heresy
A Teleporter fan's wetdream, extra bonuses to teleport attacks
Got a mixture of weapon batteries, launch bay, torps and a 'Plasma Destructor'- a nastier short range battery that grants bonuses to hits and critcal hit rolls
The Vanguard is a strike cruiser with Weapon batteries. launch bay and Torps and improved thrusters
Imperial High Conveyor, Battleship sized transport, small section of weapon batteries and a lance.
In missons where transports are used counts as two normal transports
Raptorus Rex- mobile starfortress of the Firehawks chapter
Lots of hits, very slow, lots of sheilds and turrets
a large weapon battery, Bombardment Cannon, Prow Port and St'd Torps and a Launch bay
'Leviathan of Iron'- Has a saving throw against damage
'Rain of Fire'- Huge Bonuses when conducting Exterminatus attacks in missons
The Fleet lists both include a selection of Imperial navy ships and Spacemarine vessels, Loyalists can take a few Mechanicus ships, Secessionists can use some Rogue Trade vessels as well as equip Battlebarges with Terminator Boarding parties
-
Wierd and unnessesary, we will see. High Conveyer is definitly the wierdest concept by far.
I at least really hope there will be models for these.
-
I like the high conveyor idea actually, the others successfully confirmed that they will destroy whatever balance we were looking for :P
Still.. Firehawks barge.. badass..
-
The High Conveyor will be a great way to represent a super-heavy transport at least. Without having to kitbash stuff.
-
I actually think the High Conveyor is the coolest idea.
Firehawks = lots of turrets. As in six and immune to attack craft?
On the teleport bonus things and all I wondered if this are just the Terminator/Honour Guard options we already know.
-
Raptorus Rex has 8 turrets. Its described as a mobile Star Fortess. There is a blurry photo under it that looks a bit like a modified Ramilies to me.
Apart from the Vanguard Cruiser and the High Conveyor the other 3 ships are all unique vessels. Unless you are trying to relive the Badab War campaign probably not much use except as modelling projects.
There isnt much clue what they look like. The night hag is a strike cruiser that was formally the flagship of a rogue trader fleet and the nicor is a heavily modified charibdys class grand cruiser.
I like the concept that strike cruisers and battle barges even when they have the same stats arent all built along the same chassis and actually look different depending on where and when they came from. I built a battle barge kit bashing the BB model with grand cruisers and others to get the look I wanted
-
Raptorus Rex has 8 turrets
Haha. :)
-
Well, they do give an advantage against torps and assault boats.
I still think we should move to bomber attacks being independant of turrets anyway. D6-2, with a handful of modifiers.
-
Charibdys? I do not recall such a hull design... anyone care to enlighten us on it's stats?
-
At last, the Bountiful Beast may yet have a model!
-
Okay folks, thanks to the mighty power of 4chan, we now know the rules for the new BFG ships.
First things first, I am pretty sure the forgeworld guys were high as a concord when they wrote up these rules.
Night Hag (chaos)
Cruiser/8 25cm speed, 45 turn, 3 shields armor 6, 3 turrets 275 pts
Port/starboard st 6 WB 35cm range (wtf?!)
prow launch bay, st 2 thunderhawks
3 dorsal lances FLR 40cm (I am tripping balls)
st 6 Macro cannonade F 20cm (the hell?)
Special rules
Macro cannonade fires the same way a battery does, but separate (akin to old rules) lets you re-roll to hit.
Darkling Engines: any direct fire weapon (no templates or astral phenomina) can be saved on a roll of a 6.
Thoughts: Someone needs to take the happy pills away from forgeworld, the ranges are just silly. Macro cannons are nothing to flip out about though, they are a weaker bombardment cannon.
The Nicor 305 points
Grand cruiser/10 speed 25(!), armor 6 shields 5(!!!) turrets 3
Port/starboard st 7 wb 45cm
prow st 2 launch bay, thunderhawks.
st 6 prow torps
plasma destructor st 15 15cm
Special rules
Plasma destructors are basically a poor mans bombardment cannon, always hits and crits on a 5
Teleport assault lets the vessel re-roll all hit and run attacks, and all boarding actions.
thoughts: Less trippy then the first one, designed off of something called a "charybdis grand cruiser". Anyone have a clue as to what this is?
Vanguard cruiser: 130 points
SAME STATS as a strike cruiser, with the following profile changes: 3 turrets
st 5 port/starboard weapons batteries
NO prow bombardment cannons
st 4 torpedo's
st 1 launch bay.
5d6 on all ahead full.
High Conveyor
Battleship/12 speed 15, armor 4 2 shields 3 turrets
Port/Starboard/Prow weapons battery st 4 15cm L/R/F respectfully.
lance battery st 2 30 cm FLR
special rules
No AAF or CTNH, all critical rolls against the vessel are reduced by 1.
counts as 2 normal transports
notes: this could be a lot of fun in certain scenario's.
The Raptorus Rex: 575 points
(This is where they went full stupid)
Battleship/20 speed 10cm(!?!?!?!) shields 5, armor 5, turrets 8
armament
weapon batteries(no given facing) st 15 FLR 60cm
bombardment cannon (no given facing) st 12 30cm
prow torps st 10
port torps(?!) st 4
starboard torps st 4
prow launch bay st 4 thunderhawks
special rules
Ignores damage on a roll of 5 or 6. never runs out of torps (woo for special ammo!) gets +1 to defensive boarding actions
Cannot CTNH OR Burn retros.
Exterminates planets on 2+, does not require exterminatus weapon.
notes: This is just insane. the vessel cannot turn. All you need to do is get behind it, and the ship is doomed. Hope you have a planet ready, because if you don't your going in a single straight line the whole game.
Fleet lists: They had no idea how to set them up.
Loyalist fleet
Commander ld 8, 50 points
OR
space marine master of the fleet, 75 points
both have 1 re-roll, can purchase up to 2 more. (25, 50 points)
Battleships
0-1 retribution
0-1 any other imperial battleship (ark mechanicus!)
0-5 battle barges
the raptorus rex.
any barge or the raptorus rex can take termie boarding parties for 50 points (no longer restricted to one vessel)
Grand cruisers or battle cruisers
0-2 grand cruisers (imperial navy)
0-3 battlecruisers
the Nicor (can take termies for 50 points)
cruisers
0-10 imperial navy cruiser or light cruisers
0-10 strike cruisers
0-4 vanguard cruisers
0-2 admech cruisers
escorts:
any number of imperial or space marine escorts.
Notes: notice there is no compulsory cruisers for battleships or battlecruisers? These people are high.
Secessionists
traitor captian (ld 9) 60 points
or
Space marine master of the fleet 75 points
tyrants flag: one barge may take the tyrant, ld 10 and gets a free re-roll per turn (like abbadon, just without the "you have failed me for the last time" or any of the marks) 100 points
battleships
0-3 barges (can take termies)
Grand and Battlecruisers
0-1 imperial grand cruiser
0-4 imperial battle cruisers
0-1 rogue trader cruiser
0-1 Cardinal heavy cruiser (what the hell is this!?)
0-1 Acheron heavy cruiser (counts as space marine cruiser)
The Night Hag (can take termie parties for 50 pts)
Cruisers:
0-6 imperial cruisers
0-10 strike cruisers
0-4 vanguard cruisers
escorts:
any imperial or space marine escort
0-4 rogue trader escorts
0-5 infadels
Armed freighters (these do not count for victory points if destroyed)
Final thoughts: Again, no compulsory needs for bigger ships. There is a mystery "Cardinal" heavy cruiser, whatever the hell that is. It is NOT in the rules given.
None of their new ships break anything, but their fleet lists are impossible to follow in any sort of a reasonable way. Why bother taking any cruisers when you can slap down three battle barges?
-
Zelnik, see the ships compendium for cardinal heavy cruiser.
The Raptorous Rex is just hilarious. My first thought, well it could turn if it burned retros.... oh wait....
20 hits.... ok.... with 6+ armor? and 5 shields.... k. Immune to bombers....
Oh, one thing that is absolutely hilarious, is that the RR can destroy a planet in exterminatus on a 2+, but it will inevitably crash into the planet that it is destroying, as it can't turn.
I'm pretty sure forgeworld thinks like this for anything they make; hey what crazy idea can we apply to BFG today?!
The high conveyor has 4+ armor? what? Transports have 5+, which given doesn't make sense, as they shouldn't have armor like a cruiser, but it's 5+ so you don't lose every transport mission ever. I would've rather seen this 'super transport' have 20 hits than the RR.
The vanguard is fine.
The Night Hag... WTF? Cocaine. Clearly.
They were trying to make this ship unique, so they decided to give slightly different range. I'm trying to decide if it's broken for its points cost, but the thing just seems like a lie....
The Nicor.... well, I would love to see a design that didn't have 6+ armor, but methinks that this Charybdis Grand Cruiser must be appearing somewhere in BFT... :)
-
I found it, though I am not sure I wanted to.
-
Hopefully some of these were transcription errors like the 35cm batteries. At least no fleets of s12 lave strike cruisers. No comment to the rest.
-
Knowing how forgeworld works, I am not so sure.
-
well to be fair there's nothing that says weapon ranges HAVE to be multiples of 15cm, but some of these ideas are pretty trippy.
-
Wow. The direst predictions weren't far off in their level of ludicrousity. (tm) ;)
This isn't a complete wash. If this accompanies new models, its extremely welcome.
-
... my head hurts, since these would both technically count as SM and IN lists rather then a chaos list...
I'm reading this. I'm not sure if IN and SM are broken now or what. What prevents people from taking some of these monstrosities as reserves in other lists???
-
Could it be that the Raptorus Rex should be a kind of "loyal Space hulk" and they forgot to mention it? Hits as well as speed point in this direction...
-
The picture shows what looks sort of like a ramilies, IIRC. Could be why it doesn't list weapon facings.
-
So they did have model pics?
-
So they did have model pics?
From what I've been told it was a blurry picture of a ramilies. No sign of minis yet.
-
... my head hurts, since these would both technically count as SM and IN lists rather then a chaos list...
I'm reading this. I'm not sure if IN and SM are broken now or what. What prevents people from taking some of these monstrosities as reserves in other lists???
Well, technically they are not chaos, the badab war is about a loyalist marine chapter that was trying to break off from the imperium because of not getting enough support or resources to do their duty, they're renegades and not chaos. So they would have the newer ships the Imperial navy built after the heresy because they are just that, Imperial navy/Marine Navy that are breaking off from the empire.
-
... my head hurts, since these would both technically count as SM and IN lists rather then a chaos list...
I'm reading this. I'm not sure if IN and SM are broken now or what. What prevents people from taking some of these monstrosities as reserves in other lists???
The fact that these will never be official.
-
... my head hurts, since these would both technically count as SM and IN lists rather then a chaos list...
I'm reading this. I'm not sure if IN and SM are broken now or what. What prevents people from taking some of these monstrosities as reserves in other lists???
The fact that these will never be official.
Of course, now that you've gone and SAID that, it will be made official by GW, just like the Tau list was for me, and the SM dominion list was for Horizon.
-
Guys, Forgeworld is part of GW... Therefore it IS official. As official as it could get without coming right from GW itself.
Insane? stupid? yes. Forgeworld, like GW wants to turn profits, and BFG still turns profits for them.
-
Did FW remove the disclaimer they used to put with their rules that required permission to use them?
-
Did FW remove the disclaimer they used to put with their rules that required permission to use them?
YES
Or at least they did as of IA 7, which is why DKoK armored companies are so popular right now, assuming you can afford one at FW prices.
-
If it aint published under Specialist Games then it aint official. Even White Dwarf rules wouldn't be official.
-
Unfortunately Sig, that's just not true. The FW tau list was official for years and not published under SG. Same goes with the rest of the FW line and 40k now that they removed the disclaimer. Good news is that none of this will likely show up very often and even then most of crazy stuff is one of ships.
-
Unfortunately Sig, that's just not true. The FW tau list was official for years and not published under SG. Same goes with the rest of the FW line and 40k now that they removed the disclaimer. Good news is that none of this will likely show up very often and even then most of crazy stuff is one of ships.
You talking BFG Tau? Because then we're talking Kor'or'Vesh rules, and they were never official. It was always that players could use FW models as 'counts as' for the original Tau list. If you turned up to a tourney with rules printed by Forge World and not ratified by the SG or the HA then you'd be SOL.
-
Unfortunately Sig, that's just not true. The FW tau list was official for years and not published under SG. Same goes with the rest of the FW line and 40k now that they removed the disclaimer. Good news is that none of this will likely show up very often and even then most of crazy stuff is one of ships.
You talking BFG Tau? Because then we're talking Kor'or'Vesh rules, and they were never official. It was always that players could use FW models as 'counts as' for the original Tau list. If you turned up to a tourney with rules printed by Forge World and not ratified by the SG or the HA then you'd be SOL.
Um, Sig, admittedly, I'm not familiar with how current tourneys for BFG go, but I've already seen this argument lost for 40k with DKoK. At the time that the Kor'O'Vesh was published, IA 3, IIRC, the books were still being published with the 'opponents consent' disclaimer. Though, I also seem to recall someone mentioning that SG officially adopted it at some point.
Hopefully the HA will FAQ IA 10 next...
-
You talking BFG Tau? Because then we're talking Kor'or'Vesh rules, and they were never official. It was always that players could use FW models as 'counts as' for the original Tau list. If you turned up to a tourney with rules printed by Forge World and not ratified by the SG or the HA then you'd be SOL.
Yes BFG tau. Those rules were available on the FW site for some time and I've always seen them accepted as official rules for the FW tau fleet.
-
So if 'Darkling Engines' were an upgrade in the rogue trader world (akin to the others available to them) how much would it cost?
-
So if 'Darkling Engines' were an upgrade in the rogue trader world (akin to the others available to them) how much would it cost?
Hard to say without a description, but I'd limit it as archeotech/Xenotech and have it give a penalty to ballistic and detection tests against the ship. It would definitly be a 'Unique' upgrade to limit the parties ability to buy one.
Or did you mean the BFG Rogue Trader list? ;D
-
Yes. Basically a 6+ BFI save.
-
Yes. Basically a 6+ BFI save.
Ahh, see, I was interpreting what we know as it begin a separate save like necrons.
-
Well, we will see how these potentially function in a tournament format because I have decided to allow the SHIPS into the Adepticon tournament. I hope I haven't made a huge mistake with this.
-
Yes BFG tau. Those rules were available on the FW site for some time and I've always seen them accepted as official rules for the FW tau fleet.
If they weren't on the then SG resource page then they weren't official. If they were then that means they were ratified by SG. Just because it comes out in FW or WD or black library or whatever doesn't mean it's official. In fact, BFG used to have even more stringent rules about what was and wasn't official, though that has slipped by the wayside somewhat. For it to be official it had to make it to a SG publication with the tag line "New Rule". Other articles published had "Experimental House Rule". Things were only made official after feedback from the fans was taken.
Now the process is less stringent and active from GWs side and I could well imagine them, if they were asked, to say "yeah, sure, whatever FW does is official", but it hasn't been the practice so far, and I see no reason to adopt that sort of practice now. Unless some nob from SG stamps it official then it's not. This doesn't have to be a bald statement of course, it could be something as simple as hosting a pdf of the FW rules along with the other BFG pdfs.
As for FW not bothering with the "with opponents permission" by-line, I think that has more to do with them realising that they make terrible rules, and that no one takes them seriously anyway. I personally think that with this latest effort they're trying to deliberately provoke us. They're wondering just how much crap we'll tolerate.
Um, Sig, admittedly, I'm not familiar with how current tourneys for BFG go, but I've already seen this argument lost for 40k with DKoK. At the time that the Kor'O'Vesh was published, IA 3, IIRC, the books were still being published with the 'opponents consent' disclaimer. Though, I also seem to recall someone mentioning that SG officially adopted it at some point.
Hopefully the HA will FAQ IA 10 next...
No, iirc SG didn't ratify the FW list as official. What they did do was remove their own list for the FW models in deference to IA3 being released. This was, of course, pure marketing. It doesn't do to tell people that the information in that terribly terribly expensive book is junk, so you may as well not buy it. The "counts as" rule was still in effect up till the recent(ish) release of SGs Kor'or'vesh.
Btw, what is DKoK? Death Korp of Krieg? (Shouldn't that be "Corp"?) Been a while since I've played 40k. Which is a different kettle of fish mind you, they get their "official" rules from a number of different sources. Much harder to keep straight what's what in 40k.
-
Well, we will see how these potentially function in a tournament format because I have decided to allow the SHIPS into the Adepticon tournament. I hope I haven't made a huge mistake with this.
Wait, what? You're allowing the FW rules? Of course you're making a huge mistake. That's a given. It's FW rules. There isn't even a passing attempt at sanity. Well, OK, the strike cruiser variant seems only a little excessive. The same people that came up with those ridiculous fleet lists came up with those ships ... That should be enough of a turn off rigth there.
-
Sig, do you see that little symbol down at the bottom of the forgeworld site?
you know what that says? games workshop.
It's part of GW, that means it's rules are viable in official play. You can say "no your a jerk" to forgeworld users, but your more likely to play fewer games.
You can split hairs about it, but they are way more official then our opinions and feelings. They are even more official then the High admiralty. Do I like all their rules? no. Occasionally they come up with something pure gold (XV-9's and the tau crisis suits), and sometimes they are "flying to potato" stupid.
-
You can split hairs about it, but they are way more official then our opinions and feelings. They are even more official then the High admiralty. Do I like all their rules? no. Occasionally they come up with something pure gold (XV-9's and the tau crisis suits), and sometimes they are "flying to potato" stupid.
Sorry, a pal of mine once had a webcomic called attack of the flying potato. And when we say stupid, we mean Land Raider Achilles stupid.
Wait, what? You're allowing the FW rules? Of course you're making a huge mistake. That's a given. It's FW rules. There isn't even a passing attempt at sanity. Well, OK, the strike cruiser variant seems only a little excessive. The same people that came up with those ridiculous fleet lists came up with those ships ... That should be enough of a turn off rigth there.
I doubt we'll see Raptorius Rex win anything other then maybe the convoy run, unstoppable juggernaut that it is, it still can only move in a steight line, unless it uses rok movement rules. I do like the weird ranges on some of them (since they will throw a lot of people off)
Some tourneys for 40k have always allowed FW, mostly due to SoB and Tau. GW has been slowly blurring the difference between FW and everything else over the last edition (see Codex IG for FW spewing forth in great gouts. The only thing they didn't make official from IA 1 was auto cannon chimeras and the rather redundant laser destroyer.
-
isn't nates CPF tau fleet done? it doesn't say draft. I think that would mean its official (its got a funny number and everything).
don't get me started on autocannon chimeras. that's supposed to be executioner territory. its a transport for crying out loud.
-
isn't nates CPF tau fleet done? it doesn't say draft. I think that would mean its official (its got a funny number and everything).
don't get me started on autocannon chimeras. that's supposed to be executioner territory. its a transport for crying out loud.
What does a plasma cannon have to do with a autocannon? I think you mean exterminator.
And, frankly 'transport' does not mean 'unarmed' even in BFG... look at the Razorback... or the Devilfish!
-
More precisely, what's not legal from IA 10 is the transport and the fleet lists. The ships are going to be part of their respective racial fleet lists. As I said, I don't know if it's going to wholly work or not and if it ends up a screwup then I'll apologize to everyone there if something blows up.
-
So they can be taken as reserves by SM, Admech, and RT.
Will the Cardinal be permitted for IN?
Damn, you know, Rogue Traders get all the cool toys.
-
Sig, do you see that little symbol down at the bottom of the forgeworld site?
you know what that says? games workshop.
It's part of GW, that means it's rules are viable in official play. You can say "no your a jerk" to forgeworld users, but your more likely to play fewer games.
You can split hairs about it, but they are way more official then our opinions and feelings. They are even more official then the High admiralty. Do I like all their rules? no. Occasionally they come up with something pure gold (XV-9's and the tau crisis suits), and sometimes they are "flying to potato" stupid.
Rubbish.
-
Sig, do you see that little symbol down at the bottom of the forgeworld site?
you know what that says? games workshop.
It's part of GW, that means it's rules are viable in official play. You can say "no your a jerk" to forgeworld users, but your more likely to play fewer games.
You can split hairs about it, but they are way more official then our opinions and feelings. They are even more official then the High admiralty. Do I like all their rules? no. Occasionally they come up with something pure gold (XV-9's and the tau crisis suits), and sometimes they are "flying to potato" stupid.
Rubbish.
Sadly, not rubbish. The same people that make what the HA does official also make what this does official. It's why Dakka was up in arms over the Achilles. It's stupid tough.
Most convention tourneys just have a blanket FW Yes/No policy, so just allowing the ships instead of the list is actually more restrictive then most. Most GW run 40k tourneys permit FW as long as you meet the Super Heavy requirements (IE your list is high enough points for a SH detachment) since most people can't actually afford to field the FW lists. They're too expensive.
-
Sadly, not rubbish. The same people that make what the HA does official also make what this does official. It's why Dakka was up in arms over the Achilles. It's stupid tough.
Most convention tourneys just have a blanket FW Yes/No policy, so just allowing the ships instead of the list is actually more restrictive then most. Most GW run 40k tourneys permit FW as long as you meet the Super Heavy requirements (IE your list is high enough points for a SH detachment) since most people can't actually afford to field the FW lists. They're too expensive.
Yep, it's rubbish. Just because it has a GW logo on it doesn't mean it's official. Official is something that you can take to a tournament and not have to worry about whether it will be acceptable or not, because it's official. Tournament organisers weighing up whether they'll allow FW rules just goes to show they're not official.
GW shunted the BFG project, along with a heap of other games, across to SG. SG then instituted a rule review board constituting 2 SG employees and 3 fans. Then they instituted a process whereby rules would be published and then feedback received from fans before being ratified, abandoned or adjusted. This system worked well enough. The Necrons, Nids and Kor'vattra Tau are testament to this (if you think they have balance issues now, look at their original iterations).
While this process has slipped quite a ways it is still the case that new rules have to be ratified by the HA (who now consist of the 3 fans and 1 overworked and under-invested SG employee) before being official. "Ratified" now basically means either approved by the 3 active members of the HA and rubber stamped by SG or simply just put up on their website in pdf form.
-
Yep, it's rubbish. Just because it has a GW logo on it doesn't mean it's official. Official is something that you can take to a tournament and not have to worry about whether it will be acceptable or not, because it's official. Tournament organisers weighing up whether they'll allow FW rules just goes to show they're not official.
Sig, Tourniment organizers can restrict whatever they want. I remember one, I want to say Dragoncon, but it's been a while, where I didn't get to compete in the 40k tourney because Tournament Organizers had prohibited Codex: Imperial Guard and Codex: Tyranids.
GW shunted the BFG project, along with a heap of other games, across to SG. SG then instituted a rule review board constituting 2 SG employees and 3 fans. Then they instituted a process whereby rules would be published and then feedback received from fans before being ratified, abandoned or adjusted. This system worked well enough. The Necrons, Nids and Kor'vattra Tau are testament to this (if you think they have balance issues now, look at their original iterations).
While this process has slipped quite a ways it is still the case that new rules have to be ratified by the HA (who now consist of the 3 fans and 1 overworked and under-invested SG employee) before being official. "Ratified" now basically means either approved by the 3 active members of the HA and rubber stamped by SG or simply just put up on their website in pdf form.
Sig, I hate to rain on your parade, but there's a lot more strings to it then that. FW also reserves the right to produce offical minis and rules for them for every game GW has made to date.
FFG has gained an unnatural power over BFG through the use of a mythic substance known as Cashium to basically urinate on BFG's fluff, if they want to. In theory, FFG could even publish a totally legal, BFG list for the Calixis Sector and the only thing the HA could do in the short term would be to bend over and take it.
-
I am going to ask lordgoober if he will accept my ham sandwich rules for the adepticon tournament.
-
You want me to drop a space colony on your head? :o ^_-
-
Ooooh... colony drop... *gets into his Gundam*
-
Sig, Tourniment organizers can restrict whatever they want. I remember one, I want to say Dragoncon, but it's been a while, where I didn't get to compete in the 40k tourney because Tournament Organizers had prohibited Codex: Imperial Guard and Codex: Tyranids.
Well they were fuckin' morons then. That's their problem and nothing to do with this discussion.
Sig, I hate to rain on your parade, but there's a lot more strings to it then that. FW also reserves the right to produce offical minis and rules for them for every game GW has made to date.
FFG has gained an unnatural power over BFG through the use of a mythic substance known as Cashium to basically urinate on BFG's fluff, if they want to. In theory, FFG could even publish a totally legal, BFG list for the Calixis Sector and the only thing the HA could do in the short term would be to bend over and take it.
If it doesn't get passed by SG, it aint official. Don't give a flying fuck whether FW boohoo at that or not. They want their rules official, they gotta get 'em approved.
-
If it doesn't get passed by SG, it aint official. Don't give a flying fuck whether FW boohoo at that or not. They want their rules official, they gotta get 'em approved.
Sig, maybe you missed it, but SG's rules get ok'ed by GW, not the other way around.
-
Sig, maybe you missed it, but SG's rules get ok'ed by GW, not the other way around.
I doubt that very much.
-
I doubt that very much.
I wouldn't. I read the process. GW has final say so.
Oh, and there is this....
As far as we are concerned, it’s all official as-is if GW says it is. If Forgeworld actually comes out with any models to support these new rules, I will be quite happy and might even buy some.
From the HA.
-
As far as we are concerned, it’s all official as-is if GW says it is. If Forgeworld actually comes out with any models to support these new rules, I will be quite happy and might even buy some.
??? :o >:( :'(
It's nice to see the possibility of new models, but I really doubt these guys even play the game themselves before they write rules for anything.....
-Zhukov
-
I wouldn't. I read the process. GW has final say so.
Oh, and there is this....
GW wouldn't even have a clue what's happening the realm of BFG. Hell, I imagine they barely have an idea at SG. They'd just take what the HA gives them, rubber stamp it and put the file up.
As far as we are concerned, it’s all official as-is if GW says it is. If Forgeworld actually comes out with any models to support these new rules, I will be quite happy and might even buy some.
From the HA.
Yes, this is Nate being a politician. Firstly, GW doesn't say it's official. Point me to one line saying "the ships and lists produced by FW for BFG are official". If FW comes out with models for the ships of course he'll be happy. Most people will. It means we can produce real rules to go with the ships.
-
Yes, this is Nate being a politician. Firstly, GW doesn't say it's official. Point me to one line saying "the ships and lists produced by FW for BFG are official". If FW comes out with models for the ships of course he'll be happy. Most people will. It means we can produce real rules to go with the ships.
Specifically for BFG, no. There's usually just a broad statement that the rules are allowed in the games they are for. (Hence the absolute SCREAMING about the Achilles, as it's listed as a heavy support choice for Codex: Space Marines [personally, I think it's meh. It's nearly indestructible, but it's damage output is sort of...eh. That and it's special rule doesn't take into account weapons OTHER then meltas and lances that roll extra penetration, such as a Vanquisher Cannon])
And I can already hear Sigs mind revving up to try and rules lawyer it.
-
So GW has a general policy of letting FW have their way. Big deal. The only way rules become official for BFG is through SG. SG have control of BFG and blanket policies by their parent company regarding the doings of a sibling company are neither here nor there. Sure GW can make it official by telling SG that it's official. Until it appears on the website alongside all the rest of the rules then it's not officlal. As for rules-lawyering, it seems to me more a case of rules-lawyering to try to imply that these rules are legal. "Ah but FW is a subsidiary of GW, which is the parent company of SG, and they have in the past allowed FW rules to be official for other game systems so I don't see why I can't go around the HA and SG and take a 7 BB fleet and the Nicor". Fuck off.
-
Sure GW can make it official by telling SG that it's official.
Which would explain the HA's statement that it's offical if GW says it is.
Until it appears on the website alongside all the rest of the rules then it's not officlal. [/color]
Not true, it doesn't have to appear on the site to be official.
-
Not true, it doesn't have to appear on the site to be official.
Where, then, should it appear? How would the typical BFG player out there become aware of this new "official" rule? What point to SG administering the game and having a rule review committee if they can be ignored? Tell me, would these rules be "official" if the HA flat out said no (as they bloody well should mind you)? Would you then say "well, you're just the HA, what would you know, these rules are official because FW says so"?
If you wouldn't say that, if you would follow their edict that it was not official, then that would mean that it isn't official until it passes their inspection. In BFG Mag this would be labelled an experimental rule, awaiting feedback before final decisions made. As it stands, it's almost as if Forgeworld resent the game being so good and want to find ways to fuck with it.
-
Not true, it doesn't have to appear on the site to be official.
Where, then, should it appear? How would the typical BFG player out there become aware of this new "official" rule? What point to SG administering the game and having a rule review committee if they can be ignored? Tell me, would these rules be "official" if the HA flat out said no (as they bloody well should mind you)? Would you then say "well, you're just the HA, what would you know, these rules are official because FW says so"?
If you wouldn't say that, if you would follow their edict that it was not official, then that would mean that it isn't official until it passes their inspection. In BFG Mag this would be labelled an experimental rule, awaiting feedback before final decisions made. As it stands, it's almost as if Forgeworld resent the game being so good and want to find ways to fuck with it.
Conversely, then, none of the rules of the game were official for many years, as they were not printed on the site (there not being one) you had to buy the book. Which is, I might point out, how most of GW's games work.
Personally, I figure that, like they did with BFG in the past, once they feel that sales of the book have plateaued, they'll allow the stats to be posted on the site. This is what they did before, and probably will do again.
I can say that someone at FW must like the game, otherwise they wrote a list with some obscure ships for hating it...
-
Wrong BaronI,
the rules have been official for many years and always. At the former SG site (when it was hosted/sanctioned by GW) there where sections for each SG game. Labelled Official rules, Experimental rules, FAQ, Fanatic Online, Support (markers etc), etc.
Then that SG site went, official pdf's went to the GW site itself.
This site came.
-
Nah, it isn't going to be that bad. Alan does actually play BFG, but as to what level of update he works to is up for debate.
-
I can say that someone at FW must like the game, otherwise they wrote a list with some obscure ships for hating it...
I'm sorry, but how does the fact that they wrote terrible rules that rip apart all balance and precedent show that they like BFG? Because they included named and obscure ships? That seems an even greater act of spite as far as I can see. Classes that no one has heard of even in the voluminous and often crap fluff, 5 shield monstrosities, ships that can't turn (wtf!?), a 6+ armour Chaos ships, ridiculous range breaks and terrible strength/hardpoint ratios ... This ruleset looks to have been put together by a blind man that glanced at BFG once.
-
Wrong BaronI,
the rules have been official for many years and always. At the former SG site (when it was hosted/sanctioned by GW) there where sections for each SG game. Labelled Official rules, Experimental rules, FAQ, Fanatic Online, Support (markers etc), etc.
Then that SG site went, official pdf's went to the GW site itself.
This site came.
Horizon: I dug up the SG site using the Internet Wayback machine: while there were some rules on the site, the official rules for BFG were not posted on the site until 2005. Otherwise you had to buy the book.
Sig's assertion was that no rules were official unless posted on the SG site. This is not the case.
I'm sorry, but how does the fact that they wrote terrible rules that rip apart all balance and precedent show that they like BFG? Because they included named and obscure ships? That seems an even greater act of spite as far as I can see. Classes that no one has heard of even in the voluminous and often crap fluff, 5 shield monstrosities, ships that can't turn (wtf!?), a 6+ armour Chaos ships, ridiculous range breaks and terrible strength/hardpoint ratios ... This ruleset looks to have been put together by a blind man that glanced at BFG once.
It's forgeworld. If there's one thing they're really good at, it's throwing precedent out the window. Balance, YMMV.
I think of it this way: if they make new minis for BFG, dealing with oddities like this is a small price to pay for renewed GW support of the game. The downside, of course, of GW actually looking back into BFG is codex creep.
-
Horizon: I dug up the SG site using the Internet Wayback machine: while there were some rules on the site, the official rules for BFG were not posted on the site until 2005. Otherwise you had to buy the book.
Sig's assertion was that no rules were official unless posted on the SG site. This is not the case.
Do you really think that my argument was that the BBB wasn't official? Obviously the rules published by GW for the game are official, and then the rules published by SG when they gained custody of the game were also official. FW does not have custody of the game. They're a subsidiary of the parent company of the company that does have custody. The way in which rules become official is pretty clear. They're published on the GW website.
The process is HA get together to have a chat, most times getting feedback from us, send off their findings to SG, they give it a once over for policy breakers (I doubt very much they have any opinion whatsoever of how the state of play should be) and then rubber stamp it, publishing the pdf to the website. I very much doubt that it even goes to GW. This process could no doubt be circumvented. The suits could bypass the HA and even SG altogether.
They could even bypass the way we consider something official. They could, for example, release a statement saying that the FW rules are official. So far they haven't though.
It's forgeworld. If there's one thing they're really good at, it's throwing precedent out the window. Balance, YMMV.
I think of it this way: if they make new minis for BFG, dealing with oddities like this is a small price to pay for renewed GW support of the game. The downside, of course, of GW actually looking back into BFG is codex creep.
No doubt if GW actively poked their noses into BFG there would be more than just codex creep, there'd be all sorts of crap, some nearly on par with FW ideas. Most likely they'd even decide to make the IA10 crap official, to try to extort more money from people in sales. My reasons for believing this is that I think that those at GW have been so long out of BFG that they have no idea.
However, if FW does make models for these crap ships then that would be great. More models is always good.
-
To be fair, there's nothing that says weapon ranges HAVE to be multiples of 15cm, but some of these ideas are pretty trippy.
To get back onto a proper subject, like what to do with these ship ideas and such, I agree with this statement. I think something that has severly limited the possibilities of BFG as a whole were the 15cm brackets for seeminly everything. We open a WIDE range of possibilities if we start breaking that norm. That's my opinion anyways.
-Zhukov
-
To be fair, there's nothing that says weapon ranges HAVE to be multiples of 15cm, but some of these ideas are pretty trippy.
To get back onto a proper subject, like what to do with these ship ideas and such, I agree with this statement. I think something that has severly limited the possibilities of BFG as a whole were the 15cm brackets for seeminly everything. We open a WIDE range of possibilities if we start breaking that norm. That's my opinion anyways.
-Zhukov
Hmm... for once, you me and Gothic agree on this then, I think that it'd be a good idea to have ships with a greater range of ranges too.
-
I do no agree. The 15cm breaks aren't bad. And topping it at 60cm is very fine. I'd rather see 10cm steps then going over 60cm.
-
I'm with Horizon. I don't think there is any reason to add the increments of 5 to the game for range. Look at 40k, every weapon fires in a multiple of 6" EVERY ONE.
15cm ~ 6"
Although contrary to Horizon, I could see up to 90cm weapons, but only on defenses. (like the blackstone) and they would have to suffer an additional right shift for over 60cm.
-
Ok. I saw the book today. For purposes of Adepticon if people want to use these ships. The Loyalist ones will be legal for the Space Marine fleet and Battlefleet Armageddon only in standard force org positions (IE Vanguards in Cruiser slots, The GC ship needing 2 Cruisers and the Raptorus Rex in the Battle Barge slot) and the Secessionist ship in the Chaos Fleet.
I'm going to give FW an email mentioning to them that the Raptorous Rex as written cannot turn. I'm going to be potentially making a simple house rule with that ship for Adepticon (IF I am allowed to do it because the rules deadline change was Feb 1) changing the movement rules for the R.R. to function like a Space Hulk with respect to turning only.
This is interesting. Here is the response I just got from FW.
"Hi,
Thank you for your email. The Raptorus Rex is listed as a battleship in order to provide the size of ship and base size that should be used, however it is in effect a special ship and is slow moving. It is to be moved as you suggested like a Hulk, i.e it can move 10cm then make a single turn upto 45 degrees.
"
So. For Adepticon If anyone decides to use a R.Rex, It will be moving as if it was a Space Hulk.
-
I'm with Horizon. I don't think there is any reason to add the increments of 5 to the game for range. Look at 40k, every weapon fires in a multiple of 6" EVERY ONE.
Um... Plax... that's not entirely accurate... things with the flame template. Or anything to do with fliers and bombs.