Specialist Arms Forum
Battlefleet Gothic => [BFG] Discussion => Topic started by: Kelsik on September 07, 2011, 06:50:19 AM
-
Ive been looking at that question for the last week, ive looked at it mostly from the Tau mantas point of view. Ive looked at it through many filters, like from craft design, systems installed both offensive and defensive. Ive examined many of the weapons that each faction uses to destroy bombers.
What Id like to discuss is when you take it all in, what factor gives the manta a 4+ save when intercepted.
Attributes.
All around coverage by a high rate of fire point defense.
Energy shield
ECM
Armour
I know that its a combination of all of those factors but does one stand out more than the others to contribute to the resilience of the manta.
-
It is friggin big.
If you look at BFG the ordnance marker for bombers it is 3 bombers per marker. For a Manta it is one Manta per marker.
I would actually go so far to remove the Manta from the ordnance list. Create a new type:
Manta, may be bought for 5pts per unit.
Acts precisely as ordnance regarding movement and attacking (bombing run) but it has a 4+ save versus everything.
Then add the Tigershark Fighter-Bomber to the ordnance list of the Tau fleet.
-
It is friggin big.
If you look at BFG the ordnance marker for bombers it is 3 bombers per marker. For a Manta it is one Manta per marker.
I would actually go so far to remove the Manta from the ordnance list. Create a new type:
Manta, may be bought for 5pts per unit.
Acts precisely as ordnance regarding movement and attacking (bombing run) but it has a 4+ save versus everything.
Then add the Tigershark Fighter-Bomber to the ordnance list of the Tau fleet.
Indeed, The Tigershark is outstanding for bombing runs, both the standard and the ax-1-0.
I tend to aggree, The Manta is more akin to a mini escort class. but what attribute gives it its potency? Im thinking its raw firepower of its forward and closing arc. Rail guns could be made usable on small fast moving targets with the use of sensors and fire control. Ion cannon batteries is the sustained assault of its forward profile. For its medium to close range support seeker missile and missile pods. Point defense provided by 16 burst cannons under drone control.
Its shields are strong enough to take at least 1 potent hit. Their not void shields, but it does have that all important invulnerable save in 40k.
5 pts. would it have ammo for a total number of attack runs? or would it have to run back to its carrier to rearm after only 1 attack run? Both would limit the total number of attacks a single platform could strike in any given game.
-
If it failed its 4+ save it is gone. Otherwise it stays on the field. Eg it is deployed along the fleet at the start, thus not launched.
Perhaps it has a range of 15cm versus enemy ships. Attack vs armour rating.
-
The following regards my fluff, rather than game balance opinion. The 4+ save is baseless. 'Big' is something that has been used as an excuse by GW since the manta rules came out for the Tau fleet, but its sensibility comes from the company that named two different vessels 'Orca'.
On the scale of BFG, the Manta is miniscule. Nowhere near escort size, and I'm talking the tiny Cobra.
If the fluff is to be believed, the Manta is only of comparable size to Imperial Bombers.
And there is only one Manta supposedly per marker, rather than 3 or so counterpart bombers. Hardly a qualifier of what it means to get the 4+ save.
Thus, the simple fluff correction of referring the markers to Manta squadrons would be acceptable. Say the 4+ save comes from excellent shielding, point defense, and air caste piloting.
-
perhaps mini escort was over stating the mantas over all place in void warfare. It is large by small craft standards. its not a shuttle, its not a fighter, its not a bomber. It is akin to an assault craft. Its 4+ save is ment to show its resiliancy vs craft of its size and smaller and what Id like to hear is opinions of that attribute most over all contributes to justify its 4+ save.
guns
shields
armour
ecm
-
It really is no bigger than the typical BFG bomber.
I'd say, from fluff, two things are probably the most likely cause. First, piloting. Air caste are literally raised from birth for this sort of thing.
Secondly, the thing is bristling with point defense weapons. It has no blind spot to other attack craft, with seemingly many times more thought to its defense from attack craft than other similar builds, just by looking on the outer hull of the Imperial variants.
-
I've never seen any fluff suggesting that other bombers are as large as the Manta. Eldar bombers, for example, are not as large. I've seen no IN/Chaos model comparable in size. The closest I've seen is the TH, and the Manta is larger than a TH. It is pretty much a mini escort. It is easily as large as the system defence ships which are listed as an escort and it's also capable of interstellar travel, which is actually something that some larger ships are not capable of. Where the larger escorts are frigates and the smaller ones are Destroyers this ship pretty much comes in at Corvette weight.
It is also shielded, and a once per turn 4+ save pretty much counts for half a shield, which is what you'd expect for a Corvette. Of course, if it were a true half-shield it should get it against direct fire weaponry too. I think it should get this and it should stick around on the tabletop after bombing runs (so needs to be destroyed by direct fire, BMs, or fighters to get rid of). But by the same token I would also limit their numbers. Each carrier could launch 1 Manta per point of launch bay strength for the entire game. Once gone they're gone. Further bombers would only be normal bombers (Tigersharks). Mantas could be purchased as independent ships in any scenario that allows defences (5~10 pts each) and/or purchased for any unused hooks at 5 pts each.
That's my thought on the matter anyway. So I obviously feel that the 4+ save is not just warranted but should be improved.
-
My line of thinking.
I was also in the believe the Manta is a fair amount larger then an IN bomber. So, LS if you have evidence that it isn't please enlighten us.
-
The best way I have found to give a visual representation of the difference between Manta and other ordnance is this:
Aeronautica. The Manta is there in all it's glory. Compare it's size and armament to the fighta Bomma, nightwing or barracuda, and you will see why it is so damn tough.
The manta is the best defended aircraft in that game, loaded with extremely deadly all-around defenses and extremely tough armor. It's firepower is designed to isolate weaknesses in enemy armor and blow huge gaping holes in them. All-in-all, it's a remarkably effective craft, and still extremely maneuverable compared to imperial ships of similar scale.
When the troop section is replaced with missiles (becoming the legendary Manta Missile Destroyer), it is even more of a threat. This is what you get when torpedo bombers are used.
-
Are there any size comparison pics floating around of an imperial bomber and a manta? I'd be interested to see the AI difference.
My perspective is thus. Firstly, many races, such as Imperials, use completely different types of AC in space, for obvious reasons. The space versions are larger. The Fury interceptor, for instance, measures in its smallest variant at around 60 meters in length. I wasn't able to find the exact size of the Starhawk, besides 'larger', but we can assume rough fighter/bomber size differences.
Irrelevantly, it is also why I don't like the size excuse for why Marines get half the AC, as Thunderhawks seem about Fury size. Rarity to manufacture, limited amount of marines to pilot them makes more sense. And Mantas in a squadron and its all fine. Only thing that bugs me currently is the size excuse for both things. Its true they are shielded, so that and excellent weaponry are reason enough for the 4+ save.
As for Mantas as mini-escorts, they are far, far too small. A Cobra is the size of multiple aircraft carriers, and would cram into 10 or more tabletops if it 'landed'.
-
Zelnik has AI so I take his word on it.
Manta is 6 times larger then a Thunderhawk.
It can hold 48 firewarriors. 8 crisis suits. 4 Devilifish.
Compare this to a Strike Cruiser which can hold 100 Marines + equipment. A Strike Cruiser has 6 hits. So you see a Manta is quite large.
-
They put it in the rules what other attributes are needed? On a side note corvettes would be an interesting addition... Something like a 5 pt one wep no shield ordnance that moves 20 - 25cm like ordnance
-
Not trying to contrary, Horizon, but the strike cruiser being able to support 100 marines I think means that in addition to the thousands of serfs and servitors, and space for the massive weapon systems, sleeping quarters, everything else; it also manages to house the facilities to arm, armor, equip, and support 100 marines. Rather than 100 marines just sitting tightly together waiting to be deployed.
-
not to mention the thunderhawks it holds...
-
Why does the Manta get a 4+ save?
Its model costs over 1500 bucks:
http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Warhammer-40000/TAU-MANTA.html
-
Nonsense, it costs about 60 bucks!
http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Aeronautica-Imperialis/Aliens_and_Renegades/AERONAUTICA-IMPERIALIS-TAU-MANTA.html
Or you can be really industrious and get 8 of them
http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Battlefleet-Gothic/BATTLEFLEET_GOTHIC-TAU-MANTAS.html
So, to summarize:
1. Its really tough. It has great armor (F:13 S:12 R:11 i think). And it has ten freaking structure points. In Aeronautica it has 10 hits.
2. It is VERY well defended. It's burst cannons provide complete defense coverage on all facings. (In aeronautica, it can throw more attacks per round then any other ship BY A LONGSHOT)
3. It's main weaponry can stomp titans flat, and can defeat reaver titans with little problem.
4. The Tau needed an edge somewhere because their ships alone are weaker by comparison. Resilient bombers bring them well into the competitive zone. Resilient torpedo bombers are just silly ^_^
-
Nonsense, it costs about 60 bucks!
http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Aeronautica-Imperialis/Aliens_and_Renegades/AERONAUTICA-IMPERIALIS-TAU-MANTA.html
Or you can be really industrious and get 8 of them
http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Battlefleet-Gothic/BATTLEFLEET_GOTHIC-TAU-MANTAS.html
So, to summarize:
1. Its really tough. It has great armor (F:13 S:12 R:11 i think). And it has ten freaking structure points. In Aeronautica it has 10 hits.
2. It is VERY well defended. It's burst cannons provide complete defense coverage on all facings. (In aeronautica, it can throw more attacks per round then any other ship BY A LONGSHOT)
3. It's main weaponry can stomp titans flat, and can defeat reaver titans with little problem.
4. The Tau needed an edge somewhere because their ships alone are weaker by comparison. Resilient bombers bring them well into the competitive zone. Resilient torpedo bombers are just silly ^_^
Works alright for me, though I still don't know about one Manta being better, not equal to three Starhawks.
Hell, I'd say 230 points for a ship packing 8 AC is a steal BEFORE the resilient stuff, but thats icing on the cake.
-
Nonsense, it costs about 60 bucks!
http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Aeronautica-Imperialis/Aliens_and_Renegades/AERONAUTICA-IMPERIALIS-TAU-MANTA.html
Clearly doesn't have the 4+ save. :P
-
No, it has 10 hits and is almost impossible to kill.
And yes, it is better then three starhawks, since starhawks use single-use bombs, while the manta has a cannon system that can be fired repeatedly.
You will have to deal with the fact that the Tau do make good stuff, some better stuff, some worse stuff, then the Imperium
-
Not saying they don't but I was under the impression that the Manta assigned for bomber duty used its transport capacity for a payload.
-
Not saying they don't but I was under the impression that the Manta assigned for bomber duty used its transport capacity for a payload.
Iv also read that the manta is a missile bomber. but Ive also read that the manta on anti ship ops will attempt to get in under a starships shields and use its rail guns. The ammo is a drone controlled cluster munition that is ment to be fired on chinks in a ships armour. The round is moving at a hyper velocity that depends on its inertial mass and explosives to deliver its kill potential. Both attack methods are well with in the crafts capabilities.
-
Kelsik reminded me that the manta has 14 hits, not 10.. my bad.
I don't own one (yet) but when i do.... BWA HAHAHAHAHHAHA
-
Not saying they don't but I was under the impression that the Manta assigned for bomber duty used its transport capacity for a payload.
Iv also read that the manta is a missile bomber. but Ive also read that the manta on anti ship ops will attempt to get in under a starships shields and use its rail guns. The ammo is a drone controlled cluster munition that is ment to be fired on chinks in a ships armour. The round is moving at a hyper velocity that depends on its inertial mass and explosives to deliver its kill potential. Both attack methods are well with in the crafts capabilities.
The normal manta is a multi-purpose warship. The standard manta (the one that forgeworld sells) is NOT the missile destroyer. When attacking enemy targets in BFG, like Kelsik said, it uses drone controlled munitions to find weaknesses in armor and exploit them (with devastating effects, remember you don't need to bomb the ship to bits in a vacuum, just blow open a few big holes and the ship will do it all on it's own).
The Manta Missile Destroyer is what happens when the large hold is replaced with an anti-ship missile launcher. When you upgrade Manta's to torpedo bombers, this is what you get.
-
If you say so, I always assumed it was just loaded with bombs. Just going on that it takes very specific munitions, rather than missiles and lascannons that fighters are armed with, to do a hit of damage on a typical starship, which is coated in adamantine and a hull point represents a thousand cubic yards of structure. Bombers load up on extreme stuff like huge melta bombs and such, but if fluff says some missiles do the trick, then I guess thats just semantics.
-
The tau, like eldar, do not believe in indiscriminate destruction. They will always aim for what is most efficient over something that will cause lots of bang and hopefully cause lots of damage if they are lucky.
Think of it like this: If you put a load of powerful (but not hugely powerful) explosives in a weak armor point in the side of the ship, then detonate them, the effect of explosive decompression that the resulting hole will cause will be just as damaging as, say, if you blow a bunch of holes in the toughest part of the armor. The imperium can waste huge melta warheads en-masse because they have the resources of a gigantic empire to pull upon, where the Tau and Eldar do not. It's all a matter of resources.
Also, Tau missiles are standardized drone controlled numbers, why make a smaller version when the bigger one is just as effective? by doing so you can launch them at a safe distance and not risking valuable attack craft in a close in assault on an enemy ship.
-
So, it looks like you may want to try using persistant mantas as well. And not just a standard bomber but a persistant and resiliant torpedo bomber with 40cm stand off range. its a formidable weapons platform, one that requires a opponent to divert resources to deal with or suffer the consequences.
If a manta is purchased for use off of a protector with launch bay str 1. would that protector be able to just launch the manta alone or would it just kick out the manta and support a fighter or tigershark bomber as well?
It gets tricky as you go up in scale, The hero with bay str 2, custodian depending on what rules goes from 4,6 or 8. same with a explorer, 4 or 8 bay srt.
Take the explorer for further example,
Pay 230 for the base cost of the ship ( I think its still 230, if not Ill edit this later) then pay 5 pts for 8 mantas for 40 more points, ( add 15 more pts per manta to upgrade to torpedo varients? brining the total costs for the mantas to 5+15=20 per manta x 8 = 160 for the cost of just the mantas, 230+160= 390 for a explorer and payload. expensive but would it give you the desirable edge?
In old rules for purchasing bay str for torpedo bombers it was a all or nothing purchase.
Has any one concidered a option to allow purchase up to half of the bay str in torpedo bombers?
Same question and probosal for purchasing mantas seperate from the cost of the ship. All or none or up to half?
And are the mantas seperate or in addition to supported bay srt? (reiterating but I want this question to be looked at)