Jump to content



Photo

Secutor class monitor cruiser build - what would you do?


  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#21 Chopper Greg

Chopper Greg

    Member

  • Members
  • 56 posts

Posted 11 December 2013 - 07:52 PM

You already have Ship Master's Bridge so there's precedens. But Nova Cannon on a LC - not in my taste.

 
Mine either, nice to think about ( even fun as a paper exercise :P - especially if we had many more SP to work with  ), but not very practical.

 

Back to your build: your ship gonna capture and cannibalize other ships so most likely you'll get basic supplemental components for (almost) free. As such I'd skip taking most of then (well, all of them except repair deck and matrix) and use saved SP to get best quality goodies - i.e. bq disruption cannon, which should make good impact on your gains.
 
Secondly just possesing archeotech and bq components - in theory, depents on your GM - mean better times at bartering with AdMech. Even if just fluffwise: "venerable Arch Magos as you can see the Machine Spirits of this technical marvel are content aboard this ship, I can assure you than same'll happen with this <insert component>".
 
edit. And Miloslav warp engine can save you 2 power - something to consider thinking about energy matrix.

 
A possibility - don't know for sure, the majority of my RT books are on loan to a couple of potential new players right now. :wacko:  All I have on hand for the next couple of weeks is BK and IntotS.
 

Well, if you guys really want the Nova Cannon, you get into the really pricey range. 73 SP is about the max, 5 points above what you listed.
 
I fit in a Cargo Hold and Lighter Bay (costing 3 Man) which will house your craft and loot. I was going to put in a Trophy Room, but the Manufactorum to build your nova cannon shells takes priority.
 
Not too happy with the port/starboard weaponry, if you can find 2 space you can fit in Mars broadsides instead. I couldn't fit in a Warcruiser either, so the 2 space could go to that.
 
(If your group's feeling dangerous, you can get the Wrested from a Space Hulk quality for +1 Speed, +3 Man, +1 Armour and plenty of rope for your GM to hang your entire group with.)
 
 
SECUTOR Class Monitor Cruiser 
 
SPEED 5
MANOEUVRABILITY 17
DETECTION 20 
TURRET RATING     2
SHIELDS     Dual Void Shield 
ARMOUR     20    
HULL INTEGRITY     65
 
SPACE AVAILABLE     58 POWER AVAILABLE:     65
SPACE Left Over           3 POWER USED               59
 
Skill Test Modifiers
Ballistic Tests 5, Navigation/Warp 10, Command  5, 
 
Achievement Bonuses
Achievement Bonuses: Trade + 110  Crime + 100  Explore + 50  
 
Essential Components
Jovian Pattern, Class 4.5 'Warcruiser' Drive (LC) , Strelov 2 Warp Engine (CL,C) , Gellar Field, Command Bridge (CL,C,CB,CG) (If CRIT'd Unpowered on roll of 3+ on d10) , Vitae Pattern Life Sustainer , M-201b Auger Array , Voidsmans Quarters
 
Supplemental Components
Cargo Hold & Lighter Bay, Augmented Retro Thrusters, Manufactorum, Add Energistic Conversion Matrix (Archeotech) [ PWR to SPD 4 for 1],
 
Weapons
Mars Pattern Nova Cannon [Damage: 2d5+4, Range: 6-40] Location: PROW
Disruption Macrocannons  [Strength: 3, Damage:1d10+1, Crit Rating: --, Range: 5]  Location:DORSAL
Sunsear Laser Battery  [Strength: 4, Damage:1d10+2, Crit Rating: 4, Range: 9]  Location:STARBOARD
Sunsear Laser Battery  [Strength: 4, Damage:1d10+2, Crit Rating: 4, Range: 9]  Location:STARBOARD
 
 
The Secutor, and really all Light Cruisers, need some House Rules I fear. A Lunar seems such a great deal for only 2 more SP.

As I said, the NC is nice to think about, but not really practical, while we all kind of liked the idea, once I pointed out that many of our SP's and a chunk of ship space would be tied up in a weapon with a limited arc of fire which would leave our flanks fairly soft, we laughed about what an NC would do a little more and then moved on to more practical loadout ideas, leaving the NC to a larger ship that should come later in the campaign.

 

That being said the Manufactorum is so versatile, that we would probably keep it ( as long as we have points ) regardless of the lack of NC ( our Explorator keeps talking about building all sorts of interesting things with it ).  Much the same could be said of the Cargo Hold & Lighter Bay.


Edited by Chopper Greg, 11 December 2013 - 08:29 PM.


#22 Wincent

Wincent

    Member

  • Members
  • 132 posts

Posted 12 December 2013 - 12:24 AM

Yeah with NC you'll end as a kind of imperial Hemlock. But if you want some weapon of mass destruction on board I suggest taking a squadron or two of torpedo bombers - torpedos are weaker option then macrocannons and generaly suck, but virus ones are fluffy, can help cleaning ships-to-capture and it's all GM decision what'll happen if you throw them at a planet :D .

 

Manufactorum is great, also consider Laboratorium from HA.

Damn are those LC small.



#23 Tenebrae

Tenebrae

    Member

  • Members
  • 925 posts

Posted 12 December 2013 - 04:01 AM

 torpedos are weaker option then macrocannons and generaly suck

That's an interesting statement.



#24 Wincent

Wincent

    Member

  • Members
  • 132 posts

Posted 12 December 2013 - 04:43 AM

 

 torpedos are weaker option then macrocannons and generaly suck

That's an interesting statement.

 

 

Torpedoes's damage isn't so predictable as macrocannons and you have to pay dearly for every shot. Because of this they're highly circumstantial, to highly imo. Firing 5 (for sake of testing aquisition modifieres) plasma torpedoes is equal to throwing a +0 or +10 aquisition test (if you happen to do shopping at forge world) with no guarantee to actualy make any significant damage (unless you're shooting at something insignificant already).

On the other hand Virus and vortex ones are good and fluffy indeed but also near unique and unique, so as such I consider them more a special corn flake than reliable, everyday weapon option.



#25 Chopper Greg

Chopper Greg

    Member

  • Members
  • 56 posts

Posted 12 December 2013 - 02:23 PM

Yeah with NC you'll end as a kind of imperial Hemlock. But if you want some weapon of mass destruction on board I suggest taking a squadron or two of torpedo bombers - torpedos are weaker option then macrocannons and generaly suck, but virus ones are fluffy, can help cleaning ships-to-capture and it's all GM decision what'll happen if you throw them at a planet :D .

 

Manufactorum is great, also consider Laboratorium from HA.

Damn are those LC small.

 

 

HA is about the only one that I don't have yet ( perhaps Santa will bring it to me this year ;) ).

 

What does a Laboratorium do?



#26 Sebastian Yorke

Sebastian Yorke

    Member

  • Members
  • 307 posts

Posted 12 December 2013 - 03:11 PM

Lab: Grants a +20 to all tests to repair, analyse, and identify ancient or xenos artefacts, or to craft single items. Use GM's discretion.

Google for Warhammer 40k Roleplay Armory, it's a great compilation of equipment, specially awesome for ship-building.


  • Fgdsfg likes this

RT Wannabe Shipwright & Frustrated GM


#27 Chopper Greg

Chopper Greg

    Member

  • Members
  • 56 posts

Posted 12 December 2013 - 03:20 PM

Lab: Grants a +20 to all tests to repair, analyse, and identify ancient or xenos artefacts, or to craft single items. Use GM's discretion.

Google for Warhammer 40k Roleplay Armory, it's a great compilation of equipment, specially awesome for ship-building.

 

Ohhhhh ............ Shiny!

 

I was already thinking about some kind of lab for my Explorator ( yes, our group is a slightly Explorator heavy ), nice to know that someone already put something like that together!


Edited by Chopper Greg, 12 December 2013 - 03:21 PM.


#28 Chopper Greg

Chopper Greg

    Member

  • Members
  • 56 posts

Posted 12 December 2013 - 03:35 PM


 
As I said, the NC is nice to think about, but not really practical, while we all kind of liked the idea, once I pointed out that many of our SP's and a chunk of ship space would be tied up in a weapon with a limited arc of fire which would leave our flanks fairly soft, we laughed about what an NC would do a little more and then moved on to more practical loadout ideas, leaving the NC to a larger ship that should come later in the campaign.

 

 

 

You know.....

 

I was thinking about the Nova Cannon, and I suddenly had a question pop into my head -

 

Would it be possible to either scale down a NC ( reduced SP, ship space, range, damage, inaccuracy, ect... ) so it would be more appropriate for a Light Cruiser or scale up a single MacroCannon ( increased range, damage, ect ... ) for an effect similar to a scaled down NC?

 

What do you think?   Say scaled to about 2/3 or 3/4 current NC stats?  Would something like that be more Light Cruiser appropriate?



#29 Erathia

Erathia

    Member

  • Members
  • 655 posts

Posted 12 December 2013 - 04:03 PM

Fluff-wise, that's not really feasible. Nova Cannons require special-made shells built for them, and it seems like there's really just one size produced by the Imperium, who aren't that big on renovating their technology for scaling things up or down.

 

As from balance you could do that if you want, but I'm disinclined to allow it because if my players want a Nova Cannon, then they should buy a Cruiser and go from there. Nova Cannons are already really powerful, and even slightly scaling one down opens up a whole issue of balance problems, because I find they unbalance combat whenever a PC is firing one.


Citizens of Grace! We have defeated both the Dark Eldar and Ork menaces that threatened your system! We need no thanks nor payments, so long as you do not leave the atmosphere during our salvage operations under pain of death! - Jequin Hos of The Hos Dynasty


#30 Chopper Greg

Chopper Greg

    Member

  • Members
  • 56 posts

Posted 12 December 2013 - 04:25 PM

Fair enough.



#31 Tenebrae

Tenebrae

    Member

  • Members
  • 925 posts

Posted 12 December 2013 - 04:59 PM

 

 

 torpedos are weaker option then macrocannons and generaly suck

That's an interesting statement.

 

 

Torpedoes's damage isn't so predictable as macrocannons and you have to pay dearly for every shot. Because of this they're highly circumstantial, to highly imo. Firing 5 (for sake of testing aquisition modifieres) plasma torpedoes is equal to throwing a +0 or +10 aquisition test (if you happen to do shopping at forge world) with no guarantee to actualy make any significant damage (unless you're shooting at something insignificant already).

On the other hand Virus and vortex ones are good and fluffy indeed but also near unique and unique, so as such I consider them more a special corn flake than reliable, everyday weapon option.

 

I've seen my players positively rip cruisers apart with torps. Thus my comment.



#32 Chopper Greg

Chopper Greg

    Member

  • Members
  • 56 posts

Posted 12 December 2013 - 05:44 PM

 

 

 

 torpedos are weaker option then macrocannons and generaly suck

That's an interesting statement.

 

 

Torpedoes's damage isn't so predictable as macrocannons and you have to pay dearly for every shot. Because of this they're highly circumstantial, to highly imo. Firing 5 (for sake of testing aquisition modifieres) plasma torpedoes is equal to throwing a +0 or +10 aquisition test (if you happen to do shopping at forge world) with no guarantee to actualy make any significant damage (unless you're shooting at something insignificant already).

On the other hand Virus and vortex ones are good and fluffy indeed but also near unique and unique, so as such I consider them more a special corn flake than reliable, everyday weapon option.

 

I've seen my players positively rip cruisers apart with torps. Thus my comment.

 

So lets put both theories to the test.

 

What do the side-by-side numbers say for macrocannons and torpedoes, from acquisition to hitting the target and the resulting damage - that way we can see what would likely happen in a average encounter for each, and discount freak hits that look real spectacular, but can't be relied on.

 

Heck for that matter, lets toss in lance batteries for comparison.



#33 Tenebrae

Tenebrae

    Member

  • Members
  • 925 posts

Posted 13 December 2013 - 12:50 AM

So lets put both theories to the test.

Sure, if you like. I was kinda done with this.

What do the side-by-side numbers say for macrocannons and torpedoes, from acquisition to hitting the target and the resulting damage - that way we can see what would likely happen in a average encounter for each, and discount freak hits that look real spectacular, but can't be relied on.

RAW rules for macro cannons or some form of houseruling?
Since only the mathematically indept* use RAW macrocannons because everyone else can see what the problems are (FFG: HINT!), presumably some form of houseruled macrocannons?

Also, what sort of ship will we be assuming?
I have observed PCs killing cruisers with raiders, by using torps. This was all I stated.
It is entirely possible that my players have just been consistently more lucky with damage rolls for torps than for macro cannons. Attack rolls as well, possibly.
But from 2 campaigns (both curently active) I have fairly consistently seen better killing power from torps than macro cannons.
Also rather more consistent crits, now that I think about it. Could this be luck? Sure, but it's been a lot of torps fired over the years.

Heck for that matter, lets toss in lance batteries for comparison.

Sure, if you like.






* and this was about as polite a choice of words as I could come up with.

#34 Chopper Greg

Chopper Greg

    Member

  • Members
  • 56 posts

Posted 13 December 2013 - 12:33 PM

RAW rules for macro cannons or some form of houseruling?
Since only the mathematically indept* use RAW macrocannons because everyone else can see what the problems are (FFG: HINT!), presumably some form of houseruled macrocannons?


The problem with using house rule macrocannons, is that not everyone will have the same house rules - I also suspect that this thread may end up being referenced by new players that don't have much in the way of house rules.
 

Also, what sort of ship will we be assuming?
I have observed PCs killing cruisers with raiders, by using torps. This was all I stated.
It is entirely possible that my players have just been consistently more lucky with damage rolls for torps than for macro cannons. Attack rolls as well, possibly.
But from 2 campaigns (both curently active) I have fairly consistently seen better killing power from torps than macro cannons.
Also rather more consistent crits, now that I think about it. Could this be luck? Sure, but it's been a lot of torps fired over the years.


Does the ship type matter? We are not looking at how fast we are killing another ship - just a side by side damage potential ( min, max, average - that sort of thing ). The easiest way, might be to assume that all the weapons are on the same ship shooting at the same target - each weapon shot independent of the others using the same modest ballistic skill.

 

Torps may show more variability to hits and damage, given they have variable warheads and drives - but even macrocannons might have atomic warheads, which can significantly alter damage potentual.



#35 Tenebrae

Tenebrae

    Member

  • Members
  • 925 posts

Posted 13 December 2013 - 12:49 PM

 

Does the ship type matter? We are not looking at how fast we are killing another ship - just a side by side damage potential ( min, max, average - that sort of thing ). The easiest way, might be to assume that all the weapons are on the same ship shooting at the same target - each weapon shot independent of the others using the same modest ballistic skill.

Batteries vs broadsides. Overlapping fields of fire vs absence of same

 

Excellent assumptions, please proceed.



#36 Erathia

Erathia

    Member

  • Members
  • 655 posts

Posted 13 December 2013 - 01:50 PM

Your question really can't be answered by just hand-waving away these assumptions as unimportant.

 

Your basic question as I understand it is "Should I put a torpedo launcher in my Prow slot, or something else?". Before we can answer this, how much power/space is available for "something else", because Torpedo launchers are the only weapon to take up space predominately, and power as an afterthought. If we're putting something else in, what are the limits on what can go there?

 

As for firing, the Secutor has a Dorsal weapon as well, so what should we assume is supporting this hypothetical weapon? Is it a macrocannon designed to take out void shields, a Las-burner designed for short-range burnination of the enemy, a Disruption cannon for salvage? Are you planning on fighting in concert with the prow weapon, or using it as support? Should we assume that the Port/Starboard weapons will also somehow get in on this damage?

 

What is the Crew Rating of your vessel? For low Crew Rating ships torpedoes have an advantage because of their inherent bonuses to hit, but then at high-levels they suffer because you can't boost the Ballistic Skill of the person firing. What about the Ballistic skill of the supporting weapon? How many extended actions are we going to allow for Macrocannon/Lance shots?

 

What are the statistics of the enemy vessel? Does it have one or two void shields? Does it have one or two turret ratings? What is its armour? What is its range from you? These questions matter because they determine if there's a bonus/penalty to firing for the hypothetical weapons.

 

Ultimately void combat is (despite my complaints about the default system) quite strategically deep. If you build a ship with torpedo launchers, then you can engage people at vast, vast distances and get a number of shots away before they close in on you. If you have close-range weapons then you try to focus on boosting speed/sneaking up to unleash a devastating salvo on them from up close. If you have mid-range weapons then you can do a little bit of everything, and gain adaptability on the battlefield which helps.

 

My GENERAL statement is that if you're not going to allow Light Cruisers to have a 90-degree turning arc, then I find torpedoes should be reserved for Frigates and below. The best strategy with them is their ability to bomb the Hell out of things from 40 VU away, turn, retreat, then once you're reloaded and at a safe distance, turn and fire again. The Secutor really is incredibly versatile, but the loadout of your ship will affect what tactics you use.


Citizens of Grace! We have defeated both the Dark Eldar and Ork menaces that threatened your system! We need no thanks nor payments, so long as you do not leave the atmosphere during our salvage operations under pain of death! - Jequin Hos of The Hos Dynasty


#37 Wincent

Wincent

    Member

  • Members
  • 132 posts

Posted 16 December 2013 - 01:20 AM

As Erathia had pointed there're a lot of assumptions to made.

Bearing this and a fact that I'm, at best, medicore at maths I'd like to point that no matter how much damage you'll score by shooting torps you'll have to pay for every single one of them. And you can miss or torps can get destroyed by turret fire or enemy small craft - or, if you house ruled it, even macrocannons ( http://community.fan...showtopic=44371 ). Secondly a ship can carry only a limited stock of torps.

I guess what I'n trying to say is that I don't try to compare damage output point-per-point and don't need to be proven that torps provide versality, diffrent strategic options and can wreck things up - it's just those two things: (imo to high) unpredictability and stock limits.

That's also why I suggested torp-bombers: there're the same (well, almost the same) drawback, but without need to invest ships space and weapon slot solely for torps.

 

Tenebrae, I don't think your players have too much luck or there's something wrong with your expierences GMing - for a matter of fact I haven't really took a torpedo shooting raider into consideration (thinking about this: it must have been a hell of suprise for players enemies to be torped by a raider :) ). Possibility of destroying ships with torps isn't something I'd even remotly try to negate. Torps just (imho) aren't cost effective.

 

And admittedly when looking for - let's say 4th or 5th ship - to complet a warfleet a torpedo shooter will be better option than yet another macrobattery/lance gunship, but this is something beyond scope of putting up a starting light cruiser.



#38 Tenebrae

Tenebrae

    Member

  • Members
  • 925 posts

Posted 16 December 2013 - 05:16 AM

Tenebrae, I don't think your players have too much luck or there's something wrong with your expierences GMing - for a matter of fact I haven't really took a torpedo shooting raider into consideration (thinking about this: it must have been a hell of suprise for players enemies to be torped by a raider :) ). Possibility of destroying ships with torps isn't something I'd even remotly try to negate. Torps just (imho) aren't cost effective.
Cost effective is a very relative term.
It should include things like access and time consumed.
 
Group 1 didn't operate in the Koronus Expanse, they operated mostly in the Hazeroth Subsector and in the volume just trailing of the Calixis sector, This meant they did not have the 1 month trek through the Maw to get to a forge world,

The ship is a Meritech Shrike with archeotech torp launcher. It works wonders!

 

Group 2 Started out with a cruiser, armed with torps. They have had much less success with this config (nor with macro cannons for that matter), since none of them are quite as good at BS. By the same token, the RT is even better at Command and they have the space for a barrack, so boarding is the name of the game here.

Except that they also have a raider (captured from pirates) with torpedoes, which has historically caused almost as much damage as the cruiser, but doesn't like boarding nearly as much.



#39 Wincent

Wincent

    Member

  • Members
  • 132 posts

Posted 16 December 2013 - 07:15 AM

Sure it is and maybe its interpretation is main diffrence between our attitude towards torps.

 

Your Group 1 is in a relatively best position to get torps refreshments. Do your group take +5 BS form hull type into account when firing torps? It isn't from a component or extanded actions, so by raw...

 

I guess that torp equiped raiders are quite effeciant. Maybe it's an effect of uncommon merging archeotech luncher goodness with their speed and mobility. Also great rpg opportunity I think. Sticking on a - lets say - lunar cruiser tail and intimidating them with possibility of shooting torps at their softies ;) .


  • Sebastian Yorke likes this

#40 Tenebrae

Tenebrae

    Member

  • Members
  • 925 posts

Posted 16 December 2013 - 07:39 AM


Your Group 1 is in a relatively best position to get torps refreshments. Do your group take +5 BS form hull type into account when firing torps? It isn't from a component or extanded actions, so by raw...

It's been debated back and forth. In the end I gave up caring. Sometimes they take it, sometimes they don't. +5 is not enough to make a big difference for that void master ;)

 


I guess that torp equiped raiders are quite effeciant. Maybe it's an effect of uncommon merging archeotech luncher goodness with their speed and mobility. Also great rpg opportunity I think. Sticking on a - lets say - lunar cruiser tail and intimidating them with possibility of shooting torps at their softies ;) .

Torp raiders are awesome. It's a light, fast ship, packing a punch it would have trouble bringing in any other format.

Double Sunsears probably, but they far greater resources (space/power).

Not sure if they work well on their own, far from re-supply though.

 

But then, as a GM I've found re-supply a good thing. Not to limit power so much as to get PCs to go sensible places.






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS