Specialist Arms Forum
Battlefleet Gothic => [BFG] Discussion => Topic started by: afterimagedan on February 28, 2013, 06:16:09 PM
-
Jovian. This is the FAQ 2010 version.
-
Yes. I don't see why you shouldn't be able to reserve it just cause "there's only one". It is just a modified Mars after all, and whether or not it's popular is beside the point. Player have made, and do use the Jovian so just let it in.
Hell, if you don't like it DON'T USE IT
-
Uh, could you recap its current stats in the OP, just to make things clear? Is it the original or some BFG:R variant?
-Duke
-
I have been looking at the 2010 version. Is there another one?
-
I just dislike the Jovian because:
1) it makes the IN more AC-ish, yet the restriction tempers this, but nonetheless it does turn the IN into AC-ish.
2) even more for me: I still stand the ground the Styx should be the only 6 lb cruiser sized vessel. >:(
-
I don't have all of BFG:R bookmarked, so I was unaware if Plaxor had revisited the ship/if that was the variant being voted upon.
-Duke
-
Here, Compendium2010, it is in Battlefleet Bakka.
http://tinyurl.com/23nul8q
-
I dont really care for this ship for a few reasons but the highlights are the cheap AC it provides the IN fleet, something they should not have and the fact that its fluff is so opposed to what one would expect from Bakka.
"We HATE attack craft, they are the worst things ever!!!! Everytime we have attempted to work with attack craft it has been a laughable failure!!!! Oh, well ya except then we went ahead and made the biggest turd carrier of them all because of a suddenly perceived weakness", gag.
-
Could you show us where the lore says that the Bakka hates attack craft? This is how the BFB document puts it:
"This incident left for many centuries a suspicion of attack carriers in Tempestus battlefleets, and even today there is a tendency for such fleets to favor big-gun ships. This is particularly true of Battlefleet Bakka where the Big-Gun Lobby had subsequently reigned supreme."
This is NOT "We HATE attack craft, they are the worst things ever!!!! Everytime we have attempted to work with attack craft it has been a laughable failure!!!! Battlefleet Bakka page 1: "This 'Young School' proposed a complete change to Imperial Navy fleets based on attack-craft carriers as such tactics had proved highly effective against pirate squadrons." AND "Therefore, there has been a tendency for Tempestus battlefleets to concentrate on small flotilla and anti-piracy tactics rather than a Grand Fleet strategy." Oh, well ya except then we went ahead and made the biggest turd carrier of them all because of a suddenly perceived weakness"
"The Jovian is viewed with misgivings by many authorities in Battlefleet Bakka, as history and tradition are hard to set aside in the Imperial Navy in general and by the fleetlords of Bakka in particular. With the history of the Garerox Prerogative required reading in the fleet academies, the very idea that the Imperial Navy should need a dedicated attack craft carrier is viewed as anathema. However, the horrors of the First Tyrannic War cast a negative light on Battlefleet Bakka‟s inherent distrust of attack craft, and while their tactics of relying on massed battery and lance fire proved effective, it was only prudent that more attack craft should be made available to support the battlefleet." How is this "so opposed to what one would expect from Bakka?" Do you have evidence of that from official sources?
-
Well I thought it was clear I was going for an over the top approach :P.
There is nothing official on Bakka other than blurbs, thats the problem. The only thing we have to go off of is what was written for BFG as fan work and its not consistant.
Things like the Dominion, why would they design a ship that they will immediatly distrust? Oh and it was a flop, apparently so was the Jovian, but really in any other fleet they would both do ok, its just that these ships are not setup for the kind of work Bakka normally deals with. So once again why would they build these ships, the Jovian in particular when they have seen (to them) that time and time again carriers are just inferior. No I would see them going "Our turrets are not enough, lets add more turrets" not "Hum maybe we should throw away thousands of years of beliefs and build a a supercarrier!"
-
Make it with the +1 Leadership bonus for the prow antennae array and lower prow armor to 5+
and btw.....what happens with the enforcer light carrier? (dauntless with 2 LB instead of WB)
listed on many non official documents with a 120 pt value..
-
We could bump it's topside lances to 3 to compensate for lack of firepower.
-
I dont think theres anything wrong with its stats per se. If anything it should have the option to include its Nova cannon, this would probably help appease some of us that see the problem with the ships as its low AC/Point for IN.
-
what would that be for a ship with no frontal weapons, 30/35pts?
Just thought, If it's 25 to give a vengence S6 torps, it's safe to assume it would be the same for other ships with no prow weapons, and the given value to replace the S6 torps with NC is 20pts, that works out at +45pts! 295 for a NC armed Jovian?!...
-
That sounds about right :D. No I would think no more than 280pts, 270 is probably more accurate as it only got 1.5 broadside strength but meh it pays a penalty for existing in the first place.
-
I dont think theres anything wrong with its stats per se. If anything it should have the option to include its Nova cannon, this would probably help appease some of us that see the problem with the ships as its low AC/Point for IN.
I can see this.
-
Adding the NC doesn't do anything to address the 6LB. That's the root of the issue.
-
I dont think theres anything wrong with its stats per se. If anything it should have the option to include its Nova cannon, this would probably help appease some of us that see the problem with the ships as its low AC/Point for IN.
Hi,
Sorry, I'm not sure I understand this. As long as the option exists not to take the Nova Cannon, the problem still exists. The off-set only works if the Jovian is forced to take the Nova Cannon.
The problem might be solved for many people once the base-cost of the Jovian becomes higher than that of the Exorcist grand cruiser. Exactly how to do it is the question. It could be done by adding a mandatory Nova Cannon or even something different (but more thematically suitable) like a mandatory sensor array for +1Ld for a total cost of 280pts, or whatever.
Of course, this problem (among others) goes away if the Jovian is simply restricted to Bakka as it always has been.
-
Unless the base cost of the Jovian hits near 300 I doubt the issue will go away. 280 is near Mars territory in the BBB and it doesn't deter folks from using them. Leave it in Bakka, it works that way and we don't have to complicate things with adding bits or inflating costs.
-
Since I was not allowed to vote: my vote is 'Make it Official'.
-
You were just one day to late.
-
You were just one day to late.
Eh. Not that it matters anyway, but that's my vote. I've tried to vote in several of these now and cannot.
I really don't care much, but people have started to complain that no one cares about BFG:R other than the people writing it, and you yourself pointed out that only a handful of people were voting.
Maybe if people could vote in them, they might vote more. I can't, for some reason, even vote in th ones that still are open.
-
That is weird, you should report this to CyberShadow or mod-lex. Which browser are you using?
-
Firefox. How do I report it?
Make it with the +1 Leadership bonus for the prow antennae array and lower prow armor to 5+
and btw.....what happens with the enforcer light carrier? (dauntless with 2 LB instead of WB)
listed on many non official documents with a 120 pt value..
Enforcer and several other 'traditional' Bakka ships like the Cardinal got shouted down during FAQ 2010. Cardinal and enforcer got tossed for Long Serpent and Defiant. Long Serp got renamed Mercury and Jovian had a lot of restrictive rules added.
These were all largely over the protests of people who actually played bakka in interests of making it more like all other IN fleets.