Fair and Balanced Edition
Previous Thread
>>46161725
>Where can I find the rules?
http://www.forum.specialist-arms.com/index.php?topic=5203.0
>What the FUCK? What rules books do I actually need?
http://pastebin.com/6AGsum1s (Updated again)
(Short version: 2007 edition of the rulebook, 2010 Update, and Armada)
>Where can I find physical miniatures to use/proxy with?
http://pastebin.com/jC96JeMV (Updated, but still incomplete: feel free to chip in with others in-thread)
>Paper ship Proxies:
https://www.sendspace.com/file/h6zp53
http://imgur.com/a/MhFcj
(uploading more)
>Boarding action rules
https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/resources/fw_site/fw_pdfs/Warhammer_40000/Zone_Mortalis_Expansion.pdf
See the physical models link for some appropriate options for Navy troops
>Tactics and strategy resources
[Still coming soon] [ish]
Marine Tactica underway.
>BFG:Armada beta is now live
>Battleflee/tg/othic Steam Group
http://steamcommunity.com/groups/bfgtg
First for the futile hope that Armada actually released tomorrow and not on the 31st.
>>46184498
I hope it will, but usually Dev's give out a release date when it's somewhat close by. The fact that they haven't said anything makes me think it'll get pushed back.
I want to get my WAAAAGH on something fierce.
>>46184540
The strongest sign is that the online shop of their publisher lists it as the 31st. Of course there's always the chance that that shop is operating on old data or just lateballed the date to be on the safe side, but that doesn't seem too likely.
A quick review from the polls in the last couple of threads:
We've got at least 30 people here who play or have played, about two thirds of whom are tabletoppers.
Of them, pretty much everyone uses the Imps.
I was actually surprised to see how popular the AdMech and Rogue Traders are; I'm not sure if that's just people using them as allies (which I suspect is the case given the "full-fleet" numbers in the other poll) or what.
I'm also apparently the only person on here who's ever used the Dark Eldarto be fair, I only have a DE fleet because I'm a foreverGM and they were a major villain in one of my campaigns.
Polls (still open)
>What factions do you play?
http://strawpoll.me/7117168/r
>How many fleets do you own?
http://strawpoll.me/7119796/r
>>46184498
Is it better to have a game released on time, or better to wait for it to be done right?
You guys see Angry Joe's sneak peek of Armada?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zw5V2O7jQJU
I'm kinda hyped. The devs are GIANT fanboys.
>>46184865
The the /r off of those links if you want to vote.
>>46184865
derp
http://strawpoll.me/7117168/
http://strawpoll.me/7119796/
>>46184416
Ok hear me out. I have a serious plan.[spoilers] As all devs say its subject to change and isn't representative of final product[/spoiler]
I am in my last year at Uni atm so will have a lot of free time over the summer after graduating. As always I will need something to do to fill the time until I start work.As I recently got back into BFG I want to organise a TT campaign starting about mid May(still time to learn if you dont know it) and running for 12ish weeks any input would be sweet.
I have a few initial thoughts and these will be fleshed out more over time(ie when I have time) or changed due to someone with more experience than I advising otherwise.Should say Im not following lore, I just want to make a fun and unique campaign with the lore as a backdrop.
C pic.
I want all the sub sectors to be grouped together and made into one big map. From this the IN would start with ALL the planets and Chaos would have to attack. Ork and Eldar would do as they normally do throughout. Im thinking one game a week for every participant rounded up with a AAR from every match.Now these could be as long or short as the players wanted and I would encourage writefaggotry and even recreating something cool in a new program calledBFG Armada Vidyafor the screens or webms would go amiss and would bring this to life a bit more.
Now logistics and initial thoughts on twicks to rules/new ones. I would like to use original campaign rules and revised ships rules. I'm looking for a MINIMUM of 4 chaos and IN player and 1 or 2 eldar/ork players( I want to play orks but I dont want to stop others so the slot is open). I dont know about max numbers a would like some input on that. I would try some who to make a group for each the IN and Chaos to discuss tactics because the Chaos players can start to attack anywhere and could if they wanted focus on one area. There are a few more things I would add or put my own mark on.
At this early stage, any interest?
>>46184498
With you, anon. However if they delay it a week, I'll deal with it in the hopes that they're doing it for a good reason.
For example, I'd rather have a stable product later than a buggy mess sooner.
what is the average point value for a BFG fleet?
1000?
1500?
2000?
im trying to make a nid list
>>46185206
Friends and I usually did 1500. Games were quick enough to not drag on, but there's enough stuff on the table at 1500 to have some tactical options.
Did 2500 a few times, that was fun, but you'd need to set aside a fair chunk of time for that.
>>46185206
I'd say 1500.
A lot of people take their fleets to 2500 (large game size), but it's perfectly reasonable and common to stop at 1500. For secondary fleets, 1000 is acceptable but you'll only be using it in raid-type missions using 750-1000 pt fleets.
>>46185206
>what is the average point value for a BFG fleet?
For a campaign:
750 per "Raider" player (not counting their base), averaging 500-1000 points per game depending on the campaign stage. Raider fleets typically top out at around 2k in assets unless they're extremely aggressive, so it's a great way for someone with a limited collection or interest in the campaign to get involved.
2000 per "fleet" player; games will average 1500pt, but they're also playing scenarios against raiders. Endgame "fleet" players are often rolling with over 3k in games once the Crew Skills and appeals upgrades are counted in, and may have up to 5-10k in ships.
For a pickup game: 800 for a Convoy Run, 1500 for a Meeting Engagement or other "stand-up" fight. Tyranids do well at both point levels - Vanguard fleets are great Raiders, and the standard Hive Fleet is good for fleet engagements.
>>46185080
I'd be principally interested, though I haven't actually played TT BFG yet (I'm fairly familiar with the rules, though). I've been doing a similar thing with a Blood Bowl league until recently, and overall it worked out pretty well. Pretty much all you need is just a simple forum somewhere and you're good. If you want to get a little meta you could even set up semi-private subforums for each faction and introduce some information warfare by strategically leaking intel from those if the situation calls for it.
How would the actual battles be played? Is there a usable Vassal module around, or something for tabletop simulator?
>>46185559
I did wan to get a but meta so forums were a thing I wanted
One of the things I didn't mention was a weekly or biweekly special mission to add into the Appeal system.If a number of players or a single complete said mission they get faction or individual bonus.
The thing the game could be played irl ,on vassal or TTS I'm not fussed as long as you play a fair game
>>46175261
>>46178811
>>oponent's flagship is trying to warp jump
>>ram it
>>push it halfway across the map
>>the warp still happens and the camera zooms into the ship as my own is T boning it.
I'm guessing that is a glitch.
>>46175321
>And that is how little Space Hulks are made.
hehehe.
I could totally see that as being at least one way Space Hulks can begin.
>>46185546
I would like to see a chaos fleet where at least some of the units are custom modeled as various daemonic monstrosities (organic or otherwise) instead of the usual "ships that have fallen to chaos".
Hokay, so I need critique and suggestions. Statted up a Taiidan Destroyer, under the pretense that Ions and Mass Drivers function normally as Lances/WB's.
Theory behind it is long range, stand-off firepower. The lack of shields is canon-based, and would be compensated for somewhat with dedicated defense frigates - escorts that, in this instance, would provide a small amount of shields to everyone within, say, a 15cm radius. The lack of turrets however is a (rather unfortunate) trait of the majority of HW ships. Fighter cover would be mandatory.
Suggestions, criticisms, etc? Never sure how to put a points cost on things, especially since it would need to be balanced to the rest of its fleet.
>>46185559
Not that guy, but there is a very usable vassal module for BFG
>>46186261
No shields + no turrets makes a big deal towards giving the fleet some flavor
That being said I thought homeworld ships had point defense
The mothership certainly did
>>46186212
To be fair, most dont do that because the rules for daemonships make you pay for shooting yourself in the foot
>>46186306
Just about everything bigger than a Destroyer did, so I figured only the Battlecruisers/BB's would have turrets, since we're probably not going to be seeing something like the Mothership for a fleet combat game. The Kuun-Lan, maybe, as it was more combat oriented.
>>46185080
I would certainly be interested, and even worse I would also volunteer for sharing some of the organizational load if you dont wanna do everything by yourself
>>46186309
Not him but it looks ok to me,it only costs
Battleship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .+50 points
Grand cruiser . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +30 points
Heavy cruiser . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +25 points
Cruiser . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .+25 points
Is it really not that worth it?
>>46186451
You are a gentleman and a scholar Sir. All help is good help from my point of view
>>46186261
Seems ridiculously fragile.
>>46186261
Have you set on what would be escort sized yet. I'm curious with my passing kNOwledge of HW
>>46186515
Indeed, and you only have to first roll 2+ to be set within 20. Then do nothing for a turn. Then do something.
But if you get damaged it can warp out!
And maybe get a few hull back.
And then come back in on a 2+ and do nothing
and wait a turn.
yay?
>>46186558
Dont forget that I'm also incredibly humble.
But do you have a means of staying in contact, or shall I simply offer you an email address?
>>46186578
It is, but that's where the fleet synergy comes in. Still coming up with statistics for them, but the Defense Frigates will share shields with ships in their bubble, and they will stack (but will be limited per a certain point value, to keep them from being bullshit). The trick will be keeping everything covered in shields while still not bunching up for things like Nova cannons and torpedo waves.
>>46186618
I think the Escorts are going to be the Assault and Ion Cannon Frigates for Kushan/Taiidan, while the Somtaaw will have a whole pile of varying 1 and 2 HP escorts. Still not 100% on anything, as the models aren't here yet. Most of this is still best-guess.
>>46186309
>>46186515
>>46186665
no I meant use the rules for normal chaos ships bit different models of similar dimensions.
like a horrible custom modeled monstrocity that is stated as a Murder class ship.
>>46186665
I can see that but surely a small LC could be used to piss off a formation have a round or two of shooting and them bug off.
In your eyes would a simple points drop fix it or do the rules just not agree with you not matter what?
>>46186710
Early stages yet mate but I would be happy to share anything. Im still spitballing ideas and dont expect much in the way of progress at the moment as I'm writing my dissertation and group project. Any progress will be slow but pick out during late April/May as I hand stuff in and sit exams.
However a point on contact would be nice, an email would work. You could send it through steam if you like if not here
>>46186792
You can add marks to a ship so a horrible abomination/twisted remains of a ship is a realistic objective to go for if thats your thing
Anything kustom isnt a problem with most people as long as it represents a ship with rules
>>46186745
You're not planning to make them roll dice to replace lost ordnance, right?
>>46186881
Well the problem is that you are placing something within 20 of a capitol ship, and then not moving at all. Which means that you do not gain any positional advantage, as you could just as easily have simply moved those 20. So you gain nothing there.
And if you want the negative ld option, the mark of slaanesh does the same thing, for less cost, with less restrictions.
Barteameus on Steam.
In the vidya, if I have a ship with only radial weapons is it worth setting it to the head on stance in order to expose less of it to incoming fire from the target?
>Got a proper metal Emperor class battlship for 80 buckaroos
I'll regret this later but right now cooooooool.
>>46187237
Buy an Aliexpress battleship of some sort, build both, and tell us how it went. We'll give you moral support when you start to go insane.
>>46187001
Considering their ships manufacture their own ordnance, probably not. Canonically, the HW fleets relied very heavily on both fighters/bombers and missiles, to the point where losing access to one would absolutely cripple a fleet action. Then there's things like the Missile Destroyer, and if that thing could run out of ordnance, you'd have pissed away its point value entirely.
>>46187292
>relied very heavily on both fighters/bombers and missiles
Aren't there like 1-2 ships max per canon fleet that use missiles?
>>46187290
eventually
>>46187379
>Missiles
Yeah, in the first game, but later series of ships made heavy use of torpedoes (cluster munitions as well). The Somtaaw fleet also made good use of them.
>>46187408
Second game has the Hig Destroyer and Torp Frigate, Varg their Destroyer and Missile Frigate. Might be that I'm forgetting a ship.
Are Somtaaw canon?
>>46187482
You know, I have no idea if they are or not. However, they're sort of awesome, so I was going to include them regardless.
Their missile armed craft included the Acolyte fighters (so maybe a fighter/bomber ordnance token?), the Destroyer, and the Dreadnought. Also, the Vaygr battlecruiser had a rack of torpedo launchers mounted dorsally.
>>46187537
What are you planning to do with their carriers?
Light cruiser, 2 hangars which can launch either 2 squads of fighters or 1 squad of bombers each, 2 fleet turrets, str 1-2, F/R/L WB?
>>46187640
That sounds about right, actually. I like the idea of fleet turrets as well.
>>46187073
I would assume so. Especially if you're IN as their prow armor is greater.
Hmm...
Something isn't quite right here
>>46187073
If they've implemented TT rules, then, no. It would make more shots hit as your ships shift into a really shitty column on the gunnery table.
If it's only a flat chance to hit based on distance in the vidya like the gunnery tooltip implies, it makes no difference unless your ship has better frontal armour.
>>46188109
>It would make more shots hit as your ships shift into a really shitty column on the gunnery table.
To expand on that - it happens because BFG:A makes ship stop moving once their reach the selected range if head-on attack mode is activated.
>>46186439
in BFG not having turrets at all is going to be too crippling i feel.
in the homeworld games ships would engage fighters/bombers with their main weapons so you could give them very low turret value for those "pot shots". say just 1 for that example ship.
>>46187292
BFG doesn't have ordnance run out for anyone anymore.
>>46188044
lol
If a lot of people didn't notice it's because we have no way of getting those smaller Voss ships =[.
>>46186138
I think rams should stop warp jumps myself.
After the advice some anons gave me about Retribution class battleships I have now essentially become an ork player.
>>46186261
>Theory behind it is long range, stand-off firepower. The lack of shields is canon-based, and would be compensated for somewhat with dedicated defense frigates - escorts that, in this instance, would provide a small amount of shields to everyone within, say, a 15cm radius.
The Castellan Shield-ship from Space Fleet gives you some precedent here. I'd give it 4-6 "charges" worth of shields it can distribute in the Orders Phase of each turn. At 30cm it takes two "charges" to get one shield, and one charge at 15cm.
Shield ships should have ~6HP, and some kind of comp limit (one per 3 ships seems reasonable).
>The lack of turrets however is a (rather unfortunate) trait of the majority of HW ships.
1 Turret could be justified (as it is on some other ships) by fluffing it as point-blank battery fire. But see below.
>Fighter cover would be mandatory.
Yeah. Remember, though, that you can also use Batteries against ordnance at long range; since you can't shift off the edge of the table, at 45cm you're actually doing just as well against ordnance as you are against a cap ship moving abeam.
>>46188044
the scale is all wrong but that's normal.
so what is "not quite right"?
>>46189086
There's only one Falchion shown in that picture. The other two are an Endeavour and an Endurance.
Hey everyone,
So, it appears as though my future chinamanning is a go, but, before I start buying originals off of ebay for Battlefleet Tiji's use, I'd like to find out what ships people are looking to buy.
I currently have:
Metal escorts for Chaos (all types)
Metal BBs for Chaos (all types)
NIB plastic cruisers for Chaos
but nothing else. I assume people will want copies of the Imperial BBs, the Imperial plastic cruisers, the Imp escorts, but, what else?
Should I start looking at grabbing some of the Shapeways ord tokens? Defense monitors, Oribital defenses, ect?
Eldar, Tau, 'Crons?
>>46188650
>>46188338
Hrm. I might have to poach those Castellan rules, as that's an excellent idea. The thing is, the Defense Frigates are very small, even scaled up as I've done for other ships in the fleet, so I'm thinking three charges per ship, out to a maximum of 20cm. Three ships per 1000pts, and give them a "Heavy Escort" stat line of 2 HP and their own intrinsic 2 Shields that aren't part of the charges. Otherwise I fear they'd get focused right away by 60cm lances.
As for the turrets, I think until the Battleship class, I like the idea of each class getting 1 turret point to represent point blank shots from Mass Drivers and Ions. Should help a little bit. And while the batteries will be useful at range for ordnance clearing, as you pointed out, it would be an interesting trade-off of either removing ordnance or actually damaging the enemy fleet.
>>46189148
Ideally I'd like some Demiurg and FW Tau, but that's like asking for the moon with prices as they are these days. Necrons otherwise.
>>46189148
If you can do Eldar I will throw all the money at you
Also grey knight strike cruisers, those are rare as fuck and impossible to find recasts for
>>46189148
Da WAAAGH is short on hulks humieplease help
>>46189763
So I have found Demiurg, Tau, Eldar, Grey Knights Strike Cruisers, a sweet sweet Pre-heresy looking Cruiser, and a whole bunch of stuff, but, I need to know what the #s of ships people would want before I go blowing my wad on a good recasting kit.
>>46189148
If you could get a Ramilles Star Fort you'd make bookoo bucks
>>46189148
VENGEANCE
CLASS
GRAND
CRUISER
>>46189901
Hell, I'd buy a Necron fleet in its entirety, some GK Strike Cruisers, and likely an Eldar fleet as well. And some Tau. Rather pay someone from here than some guy on shapeways or Bao from China anyways.
>>46189148
Anything Forgeworld. They are impossible to find.
>>46188546
>After the advice some anons gave me about Retribution class battleships I have now essentially become an ork player.
What advice in particular? I found anything with prow torpedoes makes a good rammer cause you can stick a torpedo salvo into them before the ram lands.
Does anyone have that image of the two dauntlesses ramming a single ship? I can't seem to find it.
Repostin
Rate my list:
Space Marines 1480 pts
Fleet Commander, +2 Re-Rolls ~~~ 100 pts
Battle Barge, Honour Guard ~~~ 435 pts
Reserve Vengeance Grand Cruiser, Space Marine Captain, Honour Guard ~~~ 265 pts
2 Strike Cruisers, extra shields, Honour Guard ~~~ 340 pts total
2 Strike Cruisers, extra shields, swap Launch Bays for Bombardment Cannon, Honour Guard ~~~ 340 pts total
>>46190032
Here you go
>>46189148
Space Marine FW escorts
Falchions & the Endeavour/Endurance light cruisers
Ork battleships
IN/Chaos Grand cruisers
>>46189935
eh. personally i didn't really like that sculpt. there are some conversions around done from a chaos cruiser sometimes with an imperial one that look better IMO.
>>46189909
At 250$ to buy (before stripping and re-building and casting) absolute fuckinglutely not. Build your own.
>>46189935
MOTHERFUCKER - why didn't you tell me like 5 days ago - I sold my last cruiser for 40USD.
>>46189961
Yeah, I could do second-handers from Shapeways and then cast those, but, true blue Necron stuff is $$$$ at best.
>>46189961
Honestly, DELdar, Eldar, and Orks are best scratch-built instead of purchased. The designs are pretty, teh materials are cheap, and you'll be far more customized than my stuff (besides it'll look better).
>>46189988
Agreed, but, what in specific? I don't want to try and buy an Imperial Dry dock for 80$ only for 0 people to order one.
>>46190104
Yep, those are tough too.
As for the Voss-ships - I'd actually rather get the copy for Shapeways and then cast that, having owned the real pewter, those were POORLY built minis.
Second question - how many ships per poster are we looking at buying? 1-2 is meh, but, if everyone's looking for 5+ or 10+ ships, it'll allow me to drop my prices immensely.
>>46190151
I'd spend $50-$100 even though I don't have immediate plans to assemble them.
>>46190098
that is sexual
>>46190151
>Agreed, but, what in specific? I don't want to try and buy an Imperial Dry dock for 80$ only for 0 people to order one.
I personally want the eldar light cruisers, but the Tau are probably more popular.
>>46190151
>how many ships per poster are we looking at buying
I'd guess most people will order 1 or 2 ships at first to check the quality.
>Honestly, DELdar, Eldar, and Orks are best scratch-built instead of purchased
It's like you hate money.
>Agreed, but, what in specific?
I'd assume stuff people actually play, I'd focus on light cruisers to BBs. Escorts cost way too much for their points value. The updated Tau models would also come to mind.
>>46190046
Looks good, altho I'm not sure if you need the honour guard for the two launch bay strike cruisers. Remember that you cannot do the teleport assault if you are on lock on or, in this case more importantly, reload ordnance.
I'm not entirely sure what you could do with those extra points.
Could swap out the vengance for either a souped up Repulsive (if you want a gunship) or an Exorcist (if you want more launch bays).
Ofcourse this is all empty chatter if you dont do revised, but I dont have the normal books anymore and my memory isnt 'that' good.
>>46190151
>I sold my last cruiser for 40USD
>>46190323
Where is the BFG:R rulebook?
All I can find are fleet lists.
>>46187237
The pewter ones are too heavy. They constantly snap their bases. Irene's resin forecasts are better imo. I have a genuine Emperor class and a recast Oberon.
>>46190536
Right here my friend
https://www.dropbox.com/s/7szco4nhxyfvqv2/Bfg%20Revised.pdf?dl=0
>>46190323
>Teleport attacks can be conducted by capital ships that are on Lock On or Reload Ordnance special orders. All other special orders preclude the use of teleport attacks
p 64 BFG:Revised Big Book 1.3
>>46190852
Oh blast, I had it the other way around. Thank you for the correction
so what does bfgg think about close combat hive ships?
feeder tentacles/massiveclaws
bioplasma, (15cm range)
14 wounds
4 shields/turrets
20 speed
useless or horrifying death dealers
>>46191007
How many points?
>>46191007
>>46191040
tencles/claws 15
bioplasma 20
3 b ioplasma 60
solar veins 15
adrenaline 10
2 spore cyst 20
4 carapcae 40
discharge vents 15
395 total
The guy who streamed ork and eldar gameplay is doing a "how to be better at RTS" stream featuring BFG:A
This is the post he made:
Will be hosting it on my Twitch channel tonight, at around 8-9pm PST: https://wwwDOTtwitchDOTtv/lkhero
It should be an hour long and will cover a lot of basic to advanced concepts of how to improve as an RTS player. I highly suggest those players who are transitioning from the table-top to this genre to check it out, as I think this will help those players a lot.
Topics that will be discussed:
Intro - This is not a How to play, but how to play better.
Efficiency - What does it mean? How can we do it?
Speed - The quickest route to the same result.
Macro - What is it? Does it pertain to BFG?
Strategy - The strategies that exist in BFG.
Tactics - How we actually implement our strategy.
Micro - All these clicks, but are they worth it?
Timing - What does it mean? How do take advantage of it?
Game Sense - What do is this? Do you have it?
Learned Lessons - What you should be thinking about after the game.
Design - What does it even mean to be a competitive game?
Please come join! I will also be saving this as a highlight video for everyone so they can refer back to it.
Live demos in solo skirmish, as well as links to previous games for analysis.
>>46191175
>Use vidya as a substitute because the next guy I know who plays BFG lives 300km away
>Only play skirmish
>Press space
>Don't need to give a fuck about any of that
>Also don't have to deal with a retarded "community"
Solo masterrace.
>>46191175
Weren't you going to share the save files?
>>46189742
>Hrm. I might have to poach those Castellan rules, as that's an excellent idea. The thing is, the Defense Frigates are very small, even scaled up as I've done for other ships in the fleet, so I'm thinking three charges per ship, out to a maximum of 20cm. Three ships per 1000pts, and give them a "Heavy Escort" stat line of 2 HP and their own intrinsic 2 Shields that aren't part of the charges. Otherwise I fear they'd get focused right away by 60cm lances.
To clarify, those are just rules I'm suggesting for your situation, loosely based on the original Castellan.
If you want to do the Heavy Escort thing, there's another ship in Space Fleet that does something else - The Stalwart-class Escorts, which block LoS. You could give them a Large Base and say any LoS traced through them fucks with shooting (maybe a 3-4+ Holofield save for any ships behind them). Give them a couple shields, though, they're gonna get a LOT of love.
>>46189742
>it would be an interesting trade-off of either removing ordnance or actually damaging the enemy fleet.
That's actually one of the things I wind up having to teach newbies with Imperial fleets to do against Chaos (the Tau don't have this problem as much because of their decaying ordnance). It's way too easy for an Imperial player to fire a wave of torpedoes and ordnance from outside sixty cm, giving the enemy two or three turns unmolested to knock down their ordnance without having to worry about ships. Imps really only get sixties on their biggest ships, so it's easy to forget that a Murder or a tacking Devastation/Carnage are throwing two 6+ dice at ordnance, and a nose-on Carnage gets one 6+ chance at that range. Within 45, a tacking Slaughter has a 50/50 shot to take out a wave, and the Dev and Murder are still rocking 33% chances as well.
Basically, you're just wasting reload orders if you shoot before your ships get into jousting range, although a good torpedo wave can make Murderspam make some tough decisions.
>>46191313
I'm not him, but he posted them in his stream.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/f1opjgewdurzhsy/BattlefleetGothicEldarAndOrk.rar?dl=0
>>46191007
I tried something similar.
It's hard to get use out of even with 20cm speed.
I had better luck with long range hive ships and leaving the c/c build for cruisers.
>>46191125
400 pts for one ship.
Seems a bit extreme, but on the other hand, fairly terrifying.
Given it will likely serve as a fire magnet extraordinaire, I'd be quite worried about redundancy. IDK tyranid rules that well, but I'd make sure you have at least some other synapse units in case focused fire DOES bring that down.
>>46191175
>Micro - All these clicks, but are they worth it?
This is the only thing I'm curious about. Cause he does click an awful lot.
Also after having seen his play videos I don't think he has that much to offer. At least for Armada.
This is sort of a generic 40k question, but with relevance to the Imperial Navy and thus BFG - does anybody know what type of ship the Relentless (from the novel of the same name) was?
>>46191007
>so what does bfgg think about close combat hive ships?
Today, on "will it blend" - a Hive Ship versus a Mars-class battlecruiser.The Hive Ship blends.
Hive Ships are already a priority target. If you're not playing Revised (and I don't; it's still a fan ruleset, even if Horizon is a pretty cool guy we violently disagree on certain things), you simply do not have the speed to use a Hive Ship effectively in CC. The free AAFs are only 2d6, so you have to burn Orders to close quickly, and they have serious problems once they hit blast markers (you can basically escort a Hive Ship off the table once you start slapping it around). Refits are not normally allowed in one-off games. Unless, of course, you think it's a good idea for everyone to get Turbo-Weapons and Excellent Pilots at-will, or AdMech and Rogue Trader players to be able to choose their bonus refits without paying for it..
You really should check out the Nid 2010 FAQ though, it's got some very useful shit in it (see pages 28-31).
>liberties were taken
I spent a handful of hours one the weekend only to lose them to a shit usb......will run a test print in the next couple days.
Anyone have an official length on this guy? Cheers
So do the minis come prepainted?
Chaos lord's view
>>46191998
Carnage-class Cruiser
>>46191627
He could be on the tweak - I'm doing stimulant therapy for my ADHD and when I'm having a bad hyper episode or I'm under the influence it makes clicking on things SUPER satisfying.
>>46192209
>>46192236
I can't remember, are these Infidels or Idolators? If they are Infidels, try to make sure that they have two barrels for torpedoes. If they are Idolators, give them the "arms", those are more iconic than the bridge shape.
>>46192209
>>46192236
>>46192209
>liberties were taken
Good, that means you can sell them openly and laugh in the face of lawyers.
>>46192209
>>46192236
That's actually super sexy. A little more tweaking (multibarrel gun? More gothic and less baroque?) and you could probably get away with selling that outright.
>official length.
4cm for all three hulls. The prow probes on the one with four diagonal augurs and the one with two running parallel to the nose both extend 1cm exactly beyond the nose of the hull proper. The outrigger engines are 8mm long.
The silly fucking augur probe on the one with parallels is 17mm long
The diagonal probes are 13mm long.
The lance turrets are 1cm long in all cases.
The nose probe on the last hull is also 1cm long.
The main body of all three bridges is ~6mm tall.
The gun batteries amidships are exactly 1cm from flat-to-flat, with .25mm projections. The body narrows to 6mm in front of the gun platform.
The "arrowhead" on the nose is about 6mm as well, give or take a mm.
>>46192378
These are meant to be idolators with the prow bfg lance. im concerned about the printability of the spindly arms, but ill do a test at some point.
it seems like both idolator and infidel have the arms, or do you mean the straight forward arms, id imagine thats the '45cm aliums tech' sensors. I see now
>>46192526
Well done that man!
>>46192538
>it seems like both idolator and infidel have the arms, or do you mean the straight forward arms, id imagine thats the '45cm aliums tech' sensors. I see now
Yeah, the forward arms, those have always screamed Idolator.
>>46192287
Possibly, that's certainly the impression I got from watching his videos.
>>46192204
>Refits are not normally allowed in one-off games. Unless, of course, you think it's a good idea for everyone to get Turbo-Weapons and Excellent Pilots at-will, or AdMech and Rogue Trader players to be able to choose their bonus refits without paying for it..
I think the tyranid refits are neccessary to allow in a game to make the tyrands viable. Other races also pays 10% extra points for each refit so it's not like it was free.
Sadly, there are some rather beardy extreme builds possible with this so giving the tyranid player the go ahead to buy refits can backfire...
>Why did they give tyranids such tedious, complicated and time wasting rules for instinctive behaviour?
>>46191351
I like the idea of a ship that blocks line of sight, but I'll have to dig around and see if anything fits the bill.
Also have a Defense Field Frigate for critique and suggestions.
>>46192762
I agree that the prow probes are part of what makes it seem like an "Idolator", but the GW execution was really fragile and frankly a bit silly-looking due to the constraints of the one-piece pewter molds. If I may, I'd suggest mounting a probe or two embedded in the bow like an Emperor-class's, or having one hang below the prow (kind of like a Nova cannon does) rather than mounting all the probes on the "waterline" like the other Chaos escorts. You could also give the Infidels augurs arranged like the "wings" the Repulsive has under the keel instead of the side augurs (to better distinguish them from each other), or even build a mast into one or more of the vertical supports your 3d printer model is using.
>>46192204
I'm curious, which parts of revised do you disagree on? I quite like the set myself...And if you want to be technical, the 2010 faq is also a fan ruleset
>>46193436
yeah, but, it's made by the original designers, which makes it more like a fan++ codex.
>>46191361
tanks ya git
>>46193647
That it is, and while they did quite a few things I very much enjoyed...I like the direction BFG:R takes, especially how they change quite a few ships/fleets which under/over performed
>>46193771
Would you mind explaining some of the differences? I've (admittedly) never played the reloaded system before.
I'd be interested in anything that makes Orks playable, and Necrons less playable.
>>46194053
Right, well I havent looked at necrons. But I have a friend who plays orkz and he is praising it to high heaven. Basically the most obvious and simple changes are to the standard ork gunz, kill krooza's have d6+6 prow range 45 instead of (I think) d6+2. for 150 pts. Onslaughts have d6+1, Savages get an extra d6 on AAF.
You still have some options for upgrades, everything from a simple "+1 shield" or "replace 1 shield with d3 shields, roll each turn" for mad mekkz.
Choices between a warboss (double boarding value) or a Freeboota Kaptin (+1 ld) for your characters.
Its really neat.
Would you like the ork book for comparison?
>>46191007
it's a nice idea but doesn't work well. you're giving up a potential carrier and you'll be far more effective spending those points on a melee kraken squadron, or some lightly upgraded cruisers it'll be almost as durable (light cruisers would end up more durable) but faster and delivers a lot more damage when it gets their.
>>46184416
>>46184416
Any good gameplay videos of BFG Armada?
I don't mean like showcasing the game, I mean good players duking it out.
>>46195113
I don't know if there are even any good players yet.
>>46195113
good players? dont know if there are any, and even if there are, theres no elo set in the beta so its a mixed bag.
how well does armada run on older computer? I've got a 3 year old laptop and I don't want to get screwed.
>>46195262
>gaming laptop
No.
i hope armada's campaign is long and one for each faction, i love me some single player with voiced pixels.
>>46195262
MINIMUM:
OS: Windows 7, Windows 8.1, Windows 10 (64-bit versions only)
Processor: AMD FX-4100 X4 (3,6 GHz)/Intel Core i5-2500 (3,3 GHz)
Memory: 4096 MB RAM
Graphics: 1 GB, DirectX 11, AMD Radeon HD 6850/NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560
DirectX: Version 11
Network: Broadband Internet connection
Storage: 10 GB available space
Sound Card: DirectX compatible
Additional Notes: Internet connection required for online gaming and game activation
Your processor is likely fine, so the question is do you have a decent graphics card? The 560 isn't exactly high end these days.
>>46195365
I thought it was only Imperials. You play as the Captain/Admiral Spire guy.
I want a galactic war (well probably sector war) that all players can take part it. Kind of like the Neroimus War in Chromehounds.
>>46195427
>Unlocked New Part! Armored Prow #07
>Unlocked New Part! Heavy Godsbane Lance!
Now I'm imagining dropping macrocannons into a hex grid.
>>46193436
>if you want to be technical, the 2010 faq is also a fan ruleset
Except the guys who wrote it were the ones GW put in charge of maintaining the game, while the game was still being actively sold by GW. So you're basically claiming that the Chapter Approved rules for the SoB were "fan" rules because Andy Chambers didn't write the 3e sisters from the rulebook and the rules weren't in something labeled "codex".
Anyway.
The short answer is, I feel like he (Horizon) went in the wrong direction with several of the changes, especially reducing the penalties for certain Special Orders and front-loading all the special species rules for ordnance instead of leaving them in the species lists.
Necron changes:
• Lightning Arcs now have a left shift instead of treating all targets as closing (reasonable)
• You can now use the Sepulchre when on Lock On orders ('Crons don't get ordnance to begin with). I disagree with this, since it's supposed to represent the Necron admiral lighting off a psychic attack instead of leading his crew. It does cost much more, and taking one is now compulsory if you take any cap ships at all - and available to any cap ship. (also disagree with this, since you're not going to have a Phaeron jerking off on every light cruiser that moves out independently to raid)
• Star Pulses can be used while Lock On orders are up (This is utter bullshit. It removes one of the key dilemmas in the fleet; full firepower or ordnance immunity.)
• Ship's prices are increased, but the VP bonus for killing one is removed. Given that Necrons can still auto-disengage, this has removed the only penalty keeping a 'cron player from doing the good old Captain Faggoteer "cripple one ship and fade" thing.
• ALL Living Metal saves are 4+, instead of escorts saving on a 6+, Cruisers on a 5+, and BBs on a 4+
• The campaign repair points penalty is removed
• Adds a Cruiser, a Light Cruiser with a Particle Whip, and a Grand Cruiser
• Small points increase
>>46195427
From what I saw on the Angry Joe preview, yeah, the single player is going to be at it's heart a Imperial game set around Port Maw and going from a light cruiser captain to a whole fleet.
>last opponent's ship trying to warp out
>hitting it with everything I have
>its hull is down to ridiculously miniscule values
>the end round screen comes up as the camera zooms into the warp portal in slow mo
>when the ship would normally enter the warp it instead explodes
>>46195427
eh i was hoping the prologue was just a mini teaser and not the only race campaign. Still i like your idea, like a multiplayer daily mission thing on a huge map with persistent overall outcomes/changes would be freaking awesome.
>>46195690
yea, like helldivers, though helldivers only has the one race. would be nice to have one where either you have pve versions (humans vs a bunch of ai taking over worlds and such, you have to defend them and attack taken worlds) and a pvp version in which every race has their own territory and branches out to others
>>46195646
>when the ship would normally enter the warp it instead explodes
>>46195690
Probably Tindalos doesn't have the manpower to crank out 4 decent campaigns. They would end up just doing a super generic framework with maybe a unique opening and closing movie. I think one of the DoW games did that.
>>46195113
Dunno about any good gameplay videos out yet since the game's still in beta, but the guy >>46191175 mentioned is streaming now and he just started multiplayer.
>>46195751
Soulstorm.
>>46195398
>>46195279
Yeah, it just fatal errors each time, though the audio is nice. I'm dropping a grand on a desktop soon so I'll just hang onto it for now.
>>46192981
looks good.
I'd probably have it fairly cheap too. it's unarmed and basically mandatory for the fleet plus doing a hard limit means you don't need points cost too discourage spamming.
>>46195919
Shh, don't say its name, you might invoke the curse of bad 40k vidya upon us!
>>46196014
I really don't understand peoples' problem with Soulstorm. Sure it was just a bigger version of Dark Crusade but that's just lazy, it doesn't make it shitty.
>>46196118
Bad voice acting, super buggy, and the aforementioned lazy level design for me. But yeah, it wasn't nearly as bad as some other 40k games we've got over the years.
>>46195536
To clarify on the BFG-R Living Metal save, I'll compare a Dirge to an Iconoclast and a Jackal to a Gladius
Necron escorts have 6+ armor and a 50/50 chance of ignoring any hit, compared to the usual 100% chance of ignoring the first and destruction by the second. This can shift to 4+ armor and a 2+ save with BFI orders.
Put another way, this means that a Dirge is getting hit only one third of the time that an Ico would, and ignores half of >those< hits. It takes the same amount of firepower to destroy an entire squadron of six 30pt Icos as it does to (maybe) kill two 45pt 'Crons. If they BFI, the odds are about the same. The Dirges also have the same raw firepower, but with a Column shift. And they get to save against Hit and Run attacks, one of the most reliable escort clearers you've got.
Is triple the durability, nearly twice the speed, and an effective 50-100% more firepower really only worth 15pt?
The odds are even sillier with the Jackals, since they can do Teleport attacks against lightly-wounded (or Eldar..) Light Cruisers and other escorts, and have the ability to get literally anywhere on an average 4x6 table within a turn or two. Compare that to a BFG-R Gladius, which has 10 less speed, armor of only 5+, an additional turret, and a bonus that works out to a 6+ save against H&R attacks.
Necrons also do not generate blast markers when hit, or suffer any effects for running into them. So they can use BMs to corral enemy ships with no penalty whatsoever to themselves, and ignore the biggest weakness of having no shields. This is true of both lists, of course, and it's part of what makes 'Crons overpowered, but with the drastic strengthening of their other defenses this could have used some changing. It beefs up their escorts in particular, since they can force enemy ships to slow with no risk to themselves, and they fire their battery weapons in a group
I >do< think the VP penalties should have been lowered, but not dropped entirely.
>>46192256
I doubt that it's the same Relentless.
>>46192981
do you know what you want too with corvettes. I've had a few idea of my own if youre interested.
>>46196235
<cont>
The proposal I'd made back when we were playtesting on the old SG forums fed off of that:
• Living Metal Saves go to 5+ for Escorts, 4+ for Cruisers, 3+ for battleships
• Being in contact with a blast marker negates Stealth, reducing the Necron's armor to 4+
• If the Necron player rolls the lowest possible result on a Living Metal save, place a blast marker in base-to-base with it.
• Necron ships no longer ignore the damage effects of Blast Markers, but are allowed to take Living Metal saves against any damage inflicted (do not place an additional BM, regardless of the result)
• The speeds of the Necron escorts are lowered to 35 (Jackal) and 40 (Dirge).
• Phaseout and crippling penalties remain in full effect. Phase-out requires a LD test as usual, with a +1 bonus for each point of damage inflicted on the ship.
• Killed cap ships give only 150% VP
• Hulks give 200% VP
• Lightning Arcs (as in BFG-R) get a column shift instead of counting all ships as closing.
• Eldar and other "shieldless" Escorts are allowed their Holofield save against an SPG. If they are successful, they are knocked to the closest part of the edge of the Pulse area, a blast marker is placed in base contact with the ship, and the Necron Player may choose their heading. Capital ships are affected normally.
• Solar Pulse Generators must be fired before any other weapon. (we also experimented with firing them in the Ordnance phase, but nobody liked the way it played out)
When we playtested these rules, the Necron players were forced to engage more tactically. It also made Eldar stop completely fucking evaporating on turn 2, and the 'Cron players tended to stick around for longer in the fight - playing to the objectives rather than raw survival.
So.. yeah. I also have problems with the execution on 'Nids, but I think they were handled better than the 'Crons or some of the main rules modifications, and I actually quite like the subtle tweaks to Orks.
>>46190151
I'd prolly buy a full tau fleet off of you, depending on price. And an imp BB or two depending.God willing I get the job in a couple weeks I'd buy more Eldar too
>>46191361
Just tried eldar for a while. The go-to tactic against them will be targeting their engines or shield generators, once the holofields are gone they crumble. It shows that, once again, emergency repairs need to be able to do more than just putting out fires.
>>46191998
>>46192256
>>46196273
Page 9
>'As you all know, we received this communication from the Imperial Warship Relentless, a Lunar-class cruiser, currently on extended patrol through the outer sub-sectors.
>>46196682
>emergency repairs need to be able to do more than just putting out fires
they don't? I assumed they repair systems, guess i'll leave them on autocast
Anyone have any tips for controlling torpedo escort squadrons in the vidya? I love these little bastards but it seems like they need way more micro than they are worth.
>>46196707
They repair a bit of hull as well. I haven't seen them fix damaged systems though.
>>46196801
They don't do anything except regen health and put out fires. They don't prevent fires, and they don't put out fires that start when the effect is activated.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiHiov4Hcec&feature=youtu.be&t=256
>>46196772
Protip: If you have a torpedo squadron selected and tell them to launch torpedoes, only one ship in the formation will launch and the rest have to be selected manually.
>>46196851
Yeah I found Tab will cycle through ships you have selected so you can volley fire pretty quickly. The default distance between ships is pretty big so you end up with gaps you can drive a BB through.
>>46196894
Oh damn, that is useful.
>>46196894
So just angle the ships on the sides to intersect their torpedoes.
>>46196851
>>46196894
The squadron mechanics in the game are really lacking.
Issuing hard turns for a squadron is a bitch, volley fire is a bitch, trying to find all the ships in the squadron is a bitch and taking a formation any else than a line is a bitch.
I hope devs are reading this. And I hope more someone else has complained about this earlier.
>>46196982
Yeah obviously I do it by hand. I tried a system where fire each ship in sequence and then order them off to a safe distance to reload. But that's 4 separate actions (line up ship, fire, order to safe area, select next ship) for 2 torpedoes. Compared to a cruiser it's pretty time inefficient. Although that reminds me that I need to use the cogitator more. Might make torpedo escorts more useful.
>>46197070
Yeah if there was a close formation for torpedo runs it would make things easier.
>>46196704
Thanks, anon. I can't find my copy, and wanted to name a ship of the appropriate type after it.
>>46196772
>>46196851
Set 'em to auto-fire torps?
>>46197243
How do they even decide when to shoot? I need to try this when I get home.
>>46190009
Essentially the advice was to slap every manoeuvrability upgrade you can on it - warp jump, better turns, better speed, fuel recharge, then with appropriate cruiser support (I rather like two dominators) use the whole lot as a turbo battering ram. With all of the above perks the retribution can and will ram any and all things while unloading short range broadsides (I also just got it armour piercing) and is far too large a threat to ignore.
On a personal level, I also find this tactic hilarious.
Target enemy engines by preference and they can't run, they can't hide and you gloriously yolo to victory.
(Yes it is weak to this itself and you need to be hyper aware of your objectives)
>>46187482
>Are Somtaaw canon?
The Kiith and their Kharak history is, but not the game Cataclysm currently.
>>46197438
Additional thoughts:
Naming a retribution class "the phallus of justice" is very worth it it.
Also swords and well levelled dauntless are very good.
In the vidya, how many different classes of ships will there be?
Also I just got the Dominator, the nova cannon seems OP as fuck.
>>46197647
I don't think they have at the moment plans to add more ships (aside from possibly adding extra factions in the future: Space Marines are already confirmed to be added as a bonus for buying the game within month of launcher). Imperial Navy, and the somewhat lesser extand Chaos, have considerably more ship classes than other factions so adding all their ships would give them far more variety than other factions (they already have a lot more cruisers, although both Orks and Eldar have more light cruisers).
When the fuck are they going to implement the patch? I cannot even finish one game without fatal error.
>>46197792
Depending on which particular release date they're aiming for, they might just fold it into the full release. They're probably in super crunch time right now, so preparing a client-side patch and sending it through steam auth and everything might just be too much "wasted" time and effort that would be better spent polishing the main build.
>>46195238
There is a very basic ELO system in the beta, it's just hidden.
>>46195262
I've been running it on a computer with a Radeon about half the minimum specs, and it works in almost all situations. The ships look like they're made of lego, and it Fatal Errors every time I'm the attacker in Space Station Assault, but other than that it everything is fine.
>>46197647
Currently Nova-spam is the multiplayer bugbear, everyone rails against it. Dominator is just a good chassis anyway, and a pair of them can pull you through most things. Nova's are getting nerfed next patch (and Torpedoes buffed), but mostly they seem to reward specializing your fleet in one or the other.
Patch notes:
http://forum.battlefleetgothic-armada.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1042
Is there any reason why despite it being the ass-end of March he released date is still listed as only March 2016? I have never seen someone not release an actual date this late.
>>46198806
I'm worried they're pushing it significantly further back.
>>46198806
I thought today was the release date.
How are people finding Imperial escorts in vidya? Personally I've been sticking to the Sword as a decent, durable mid-range harrier.
I often take a Sword and Firestorm just for variation but really I prefer macro cannons.
I don't find much use for Cobras because I only really use torpedoes effectively at point blank range, before I ram. Cobras are too flimsy for that strategy, methinks.
>>46198806
>>46198919
>>46198918
Steam has been updated to show a 31st release date, I'd say that's the most likely scenario.
>>46199051
Just says March 2016 for me.
>>46199129
Pre-purchase option ends on the 31st. That's what I'm going off.
>>46199027
Yeah, I generally end up going with Swords as well. Most of the time I use the escorts as a screen against ordnance, to combat enemy escorts, and to hunt down light cruisers (particularly chaos carriers, three swords will easily wreck a Hellbringer). To that end, the 270° coverage and the option for AP ammo seems more useful than the slightly higher damage potential of the Firestorm. Doubly so because I already have a fair amount of lances on my cruisers, so I'd rather have the extra shield-stripping from the Swords.
Agreed about the Cobra, in real-time it's just too finicky to properly line up their torps. I still like to take the Navy favour to spawn in some free ones. Just tell them to attack head-on at short range, put torps on auto-cast, and then just send them right into the fray. They probably won't do all that much damage, it'll often cause some distress in the enemy and forces them to make hasty emergency maneuvers, giving my cruisers more time to do their thing.
>>46196384
I've had some ideas put out, mostly centering around them being upgrades for launch bays, but I'm welcoming all suggestions at this point.
>>46197792
I had this too but then got a virus and had to format my pc. After that everything went alot smoother and I almost don't crash anymore.
So you may want to clean up your pc and update some stuff.
>>46200159
I found verifying the game cache helped a bit too, although I still get the odd crash when doing Space Station Assaults as Imperials. Doesn't crash for Chaos, oddly.
Neat.
>>46199198
Firestorms can really rack up crits though.
>>46197070
Yeah, formations would be nice. I keep making escort squadrons in specific patterns, and then they just revert to line and it's annoying.
>>46200084
i waa thinking something similar. make them resilient(4+ save) ordnance tokens, though relatively slow. regular corvettes are fighter-bombers. Multi gun corvettes are super fighters, they remove 2 enemy tokens instead just one.
perhaps have them be treated seperately for the ordnance limits, so you if you have X launchbays you can have X fighters/bombers as well as X corvettes. Let them have more fighters on the feild since being turret light they'll be more dependant on them.
>>46201592
Hrm. I'm worried about there being too much ordnance out if they were allowed to double up the launch bays for both fighters and corvettes. With how cheap their ships are probably going to end up being, I don't see acquisition of launch bays as being too hard to come across. I think paying a points cost to upgrade launch bays from fighters/bombers to Light Corvette/Heavy Corvette or what have you might be an easier way to go about it.
Also, have a Heavy Cruiser/BB replacement. Trying to keep the feeling of long range, forward facing firepower without it being bullshit. Too much dice on the WB's? Leaning that way, but this would be their heaviest class of ship, and would have all the hallmarks of typical battleships, i.e. no come to new heading, AAF, etc.
>>46201804
I wouldn't worry too much about the double limits. Tyranids get it too and they can also launchbay spam woth the besr of them if you want too.
>>46200404
>verifying the game cache
What do you mean by this? I have never managed to start a Space Station Assault as the attacker (and just put it down to having nowhere near enough graphics card), is there a way to fix it?
>>46201804
are the mass drivers just regular weapon batteries?
if so seems fine. Its a little more firepower than a retribution gets in its broadside, but most is shorter range on a more fragile platform.
>>46202078
Yeah, they're just regular weapons batteries. I was contemplating getting all special snowflake with them, but that seemed like it would be too confusing in the long run.
>>46201993
When you right click the game in steam, go to the properties menu and search through there for "Verify Integrity of the Game Cache." It didn't solve all my problems, but it confined my crashes to just IN doing Space Station Assault.
Your mileage may vary, but it's worth a shot.
>>46202103
for the homeworld universe id give them a serious accuracy increase at least one column shift in their favor. Also they are way more maneuverable than that. 45 degrees really, have you played that game those things can turn on a dime magically.
>>46202117
>it confined my crashes to just IN doing Space Station Assault.
Ah right. I'll do it, but that's the main crashes I want to get rid of. Any idea why that happens? It only happens when I'm attacking with IN, and just after I finish deployment.
>>46202144
I was thinking of doing something involving their accuracy (as yeah, they never seem to miss once they're in range), but I'd have to playtest them first to see if it's something they'd need. Don't want them to be too ridiculous at range.
The Taiidan fleet in particular is going to be about synergy - their individual ships are going to lose against their IN equivalents, but when properly supported by the tools at their disposal they should be able to hold their own.
All conjecture at this point, but we'll see how it goes. Gonna do some playtesting this weekend once I get these ships done and points-costed.
>>46202201
It sprung up after their first patch for me, and has been lingering since then. It's probably not going to be patched before launch.
>>46194211
Not surprised, orks were always a little underpowered.
>>46202244
Hell, if you want super-accurate mass drivers, you could also just do a lance in reverse. Always hits with the full firepower (which should probably be about half-ish of a comparable IN battery), but still has to roll against enemy armour.
can anyone hard counter necrons? Is there a dream fleet to take against them?
>>46202376
Hrm, that's an interesting idea. I'd have to retool some of the stats, but I'll try that out and the regular WB rules this weekend. I think that would give them a bit more flavor though, without making things too complex.
>>46202144
You also have to keep in mind the largest homeworld ships are barely escort sized in reality, so if they're being scaled up by 10x the size to fit the rest of the game they'll naturally be less agile
>>46202390
I vaguely recall that Nids did very well against them generally. If only due to being able to pump out masses of ordnance.
I think there was something of a rock-paper-scissors situation with nids, necrons and eldar, at least in my area there was.
>>46199051
>>46199129
>>46199167
For me it doesn't even say March 2016 anymore, it just says "Coming Soon"
What the fuck
>>46202687
The Pre-purchase is still running until the 31st, tho.
>>46202666
>rock paper scissors
Yeah. The only real problem I have with necrons is that they essentially have a special rule that just says: fuck holo fields
>>46202707
But why would they change it from releasing March of 2016 to just Coming Soon?
I don't know anon...
>>46202741
As an eldar (among others) player. I know your pain.
>>46202791
It appears my hopes of a staggered release where perhaps we might get single player soon then orks and eldar in multi later appear to have been dashed.
As I am really mostly interested in the campaign multiplayer is trojan white elephant for me. It's pointless, taking up resources and full of people of questionable sexuality who want to stab me.
>>46202791
The beta may have made them realize everything that still need to be fixed.
Rumors has that in the closed beta Eldar were shit and they decided to remake them and those things take time.
>>46203058
From the sound of it, Eldar were good on paper but required a disproportionate amount of micro to actually reach their full potential. I've been doing some testing with the hacked savegames, which seem to support that. In small-scale games it's very doable to utterly clown on other factions, for example I managed to kill a Gothic with an Eclipse 1 on 1 within like a minute while suffering pretty much no damage in return. But when you're dealing with larger battles with 4+ capital ships to handle it seems like it'd very quickly go beyond what you could reasonably handle.
>>46203178
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RR7CU3CJ7iU
Left: IN/Chaos/Ork players
Right: Eldar players
Is anyone else a bit concerned at the lack of dev communication?
>>46203368
Its crunch time for a small studio. They've got a lot of shit to put together under a lot of pressure in a small amount of time. Probably more than they expected due to unforeseen problems in the beta. Its over a week until the end of march. Worry if you don't hear much by the 30th.
>>46203368
>>46203415
Yeah, they're like a dozen people total, and they don't have anything like a dedicated PR team. Basically they've shit to do right now.
>>46203415
>>46203445
fair point anons. I am just very very hype for this game.
>>46203368
http://forum.battlefleetgothic-armada.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1213&p=10892#p10892
>>46203707
Those are some fucking hysterical people in that thread.
>>46203832
Just another reason to not use forums if not absolutely essential
>>46184416
So what's going on its on the store page and achievements have popped up in library
But started the game it still says beta
>>46203832
Jesus, yeah there are. Sort of embarrassing how seriously hindpained these people get.
>>46201804
Feels a lot like a Tau ship, honestly. In fact, compared to an equivalent Tau ship it's seriously >under<-gunned, since it's got no shields or ordnance.
(The Custodian carries three discounted escorts, has six LBs and 8 tubes, and 6B/1L with identical arcs ,as well as 3 shields.)
Hell, it's almost the same armament as an old Lar'Shi Hero-class.
I'd either give it some missile launchers (if hte class has them in Homeworld, since I think I see some racks on the rear wings), or give it some spinal weapons that fire F-only. Maybe jack the speed down 5cm.
>>46204699
They forgot to change their placeholder release date.
Achievement don't mean anything since a lot of game in early access/beta have achievements.
>>46204699
According to the forum thread linked above you, there's going to be a post/announcement/patch in a few days where they will have info about what's been going on, and the release date.
>>46204736
Yeah, on its own it's not too terribly special, but think of the fleet as one giant clockwork machine - that thing will end up with 4 shields a turn from its Defense Frigates, and because of its stats will have a reduced points value compared to battleships typical to other races.
That said, I'm still in the very early stages of development, so there will definitely be changes forthcoming. Another anon mentioned some changes to their Mass Drivers that I'm going to be testing soon, to see if that might make things more interesting.
I keep trying to launch the game but it just gets stuck on this screen. Any help?
>>46205593
When in doubt, verify integrity of game cache.
>>46204813
You could also allow carriers to get an upgrade that gives them a squad of repair corvettes that allows to repair 1 HP of damage every 2 turns.
Or maybe the ships get crippled at 25% instead of 50%. There should definitely be some adjustment in that department as HW1 ships function at full efficiency until they're destroyed.
>>46205593
Check your anti-virus, I had to make an exception for BFG in mine
how would you stay Star Wars ships?
>>46205733
...play X-Wing?
>>46196118
>>46196213
Also they made it so you can no longer build up defenses in a map hex to keep it from being retaken.
>>46205672
I think regen'ing HP might be a bit much, but a repair corvette upgrade could contribute to things like automatic crit repairs, and the like.
For carriers, you're going to have the option of a vanilla carrier that carries the usual squadrons of fighters and bombers, or paying an upgrade cost to bump it to a Corvette facility, granting access to light corvettes (durable fighters), heavy corvettes (bombers of some type, not sure yet) and minelayer corvettes(replace squadron with mine token). Decided that adding things like Multigun corvettes would start getting a bit complicated and bog the game down - imagine having 4 token types in one wave, each doing something something different, and four waves from four different carriers...that would be an unpleasant amount of dice rolling and rulebook-skimming.
Also, due to the fact that their carriers have literal fighter and corvette manufacturing facilities as part of their basic makeup, they reload ordnance automatically. In that regard, though, I still haven't made up my mind on the Missile Destroyer - canonically it was used to decimate fighter screens and small groups of frigates, but pushing it into that role on the tabletop would be a bit redundant. Thinking of a torpedo boat, but still working out the numbers, and how it could dump all its ordnance at once without it being silly on the TT.
>>46205638
>>46205706
Verified integrity and paused my anti-virus...still not working.
>>46206378
Well, if that didn't work, best bet is to reinstall. Sucks, but that's sorta all you can do at this point.
>>46206378
What sort of pc/laptop are you running it on? In my experience, half of the time the problem is nvidea.
>>46203249
That's what RTS are about now. Fuck Blizzard and Starcraft 2 for killing RTS.
BFGA will probably also fail badly like all RTS from the last couple year, regardless of how good it is.
>>46206450
Yeah, do have nvidea.
>>46206769
Sorry I'm just a bit sad about that.
>>46206378
Thanks for beta testing for the rest of us.
>>46206769
its going to be niche regardless because its not a standard rts, its more of a rpg/battle royale due to a lack of basebuilding/unit creation and such.it has great reception though, very few people are actually giving it negative feedback outside of retards that only played for a few hours.
>>46206797
In my experience, nvidea graphics cards are the most contrary fuckers going. Your best bet is looking up the most common issues for your graphics card and trying t fix those.
>>46206919
I agree. I hope Armada will do well.
>>46205899
Keep in mind that the canonical Bombers and A-Boats in BFG are what would be considered Corvettes in modern naval terms. The Starhawk, according to Forge World's blurbs on it, has a crew of a dozen men, plus gun-servitors and an Engineseer. Eldar Vampires are a bit smaller, but still have a crew more fitting to a small ship than even a WWII "bomber", and Tau Mantas literally ARE Corvettes.
Making "corvettes" an upgrade to Resilient Ordnance (~7.5pt/bay?) is simple enough, and there are already rules for Torpedo Bombers >and< Minelaying bombers.
Something like -
Space Superiority Corvette - As fighters, higher speed, Resilient.
Assault Corvette - Resilient Fighter/Bomber
Repair Corvette - Not Resilient. Adds one point to the Damage Control capacity of one ship within 15cm
Missile Corvette - +10 points (+5/bay) Resilient Torpedo Bomber. (Remove from table at beginning of ordnance phase, replace with a missile/torpedo salvo of S2 per Corvette, missiles are removed at end of Ordnance Phase. This clears fighters and boarding torpedoes, and gives you a solid chance of killing an escort, with no other special rules needed.) Note that these are existing BFG rules.
Minelayers can be removed from play to drop an S1 minefield and cost +10/bay (again, this is standard BFG rules)
>>46207474
You know, the more I think about it, the more I'm leaning towards having Corvette's be the standard setup (i.e. every launch bay comes with Fighter and Bomber corvette variants), and letting you purchase the Repair Corvettes, Minelayers and Missile Corvettes as upgrades. That way you wouldn't look at a pile of tokens and say "Wait, is that a fighter, or a Corvette fighter? Which one is which?"
I'd totally forgotten about the scale of BFG attack craft, so thanks for the reminder.
>>46207008
Ugh, I hope that's not what's up with my game. Mine crashes after I click "ready" on a space station assault mission when I'm attacking. Every time, as far as I can tell.
>order a bunch of BFG ships from Irene on aliexpress 3 days ago
>haven't gotten a shipping email yet
>check orders on aliexpress
>Processing time remaining: 6 days, 6 hours, 39 minutes
Fucking why! I've ordered from her twice before and gotten my shit in 2 weeks, but now it's telling me it'll be 10 days from the time of order before it even ships? Anybody have any idea of why the fuck it's taking so long? There were at least 3 left of every ship I ordered.
>>46208197
700pt station assault missions crash for everyone, it's a known issue and has nothing to do with cards or drivers.
Might as well just alt f4 your game when you get that mission.
>>46208261
My one experience was on the slow side.
>>46208294
>might as well just alt f4 your game
That's another thing that bugs the shit out of me: you can't back out of the mission menu. You either play the mission or you hard-close the game.
>>46208597
If that had been an option, I think a lot of people would never have tried some of the mission types long enough to figure out how to do them.
Have a tyranid cruiser
>>46209439
Nice work. Stats?
(I'm guessing claws and Bio-plasma, but what else?)