Jump to content

Cannonballninja

Members
  • Content Count

    56
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Cannonballninja

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    -
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    , Lancashire, United Kingdom
  1. BaronIveagh said: JuankiMan said: That's why RPGs have the GM, because no rulebook has enough room to cater to everything. Perhaps a Logistics test rated Rare for enivromental sealing could make the Sentinel not be Open-Topped anymore . Yeah, except we know they're coming in another book, so it's sort of pointless to draw up rules for x/y/z when we know that an 'official' version is most likely in the pipeline somewhere. I grant, my fan stats for tanks ran much longer then anticipated, and indeed, a lot longer then FFG originally announced, Though perhaps there would be more room without things like hunting lance that have no real use, as we have no rules for rough riders in the book, either. The rules for removing open-top from Sentinels are in the book though. In the Sentinel's special rules section, it states that you can switch out the enhanced motive systems trait for the reinforced armour and/or the enclosed vehicle traits. And that if the sentinel has the enclosed vehicle trait, it loses its open-topped trait.
  2. I agree entirely. When you compare Mechanised Infantry to both Recon and HK regiments, both the latter come up short. My solution is to make them both light infantry upgrades. Recon and HK regiments get a flak vest, a helmet and las carbines. The HK regiment also gets a supply of greandes (two frag, two something else - haven't decided). The Recon regiment gets no grenades because it comes equipped with magnoculars by default. It is my belief that this balances both the Recon and the HK regiment with the other regiment options. And it allows the regiments to actually take the Sentinel and not feel completely naked. Or to take the Chimera and not feel stupendously jealous at their Mechanised Infantry counterparts.
  3. Command is exceedingly easy to boost. Without considering backgrounds, you can start with a 45 in fellowship and boost it up to 65 with advances. WIth backgrounds, you can start with another 13 more just from the core book alone (not counting Into the Storm's additional options and those backgrounds are on the way to being a Rogue Trader via the origin chart). Now, even considering you can improve fellowship at character creation far more easily than you can BS, Command is also a skill: so you can pick up Command +20 and Talented (Command). Peer (Navy or Military) would also apply to Command for Attackcraft I should think. And the Agent of the Throne elite advance could well get you +10 more. Then all you need is a bridge that gives you a Command boost (of which there are several to chose from). Addmittedly, a lot of that is applicable to more uses of Fellowship than just command - and it's an investment to be sure. But still, the Command score with just what I can think up easily is 138. That's a lot of Command.
  4. Moribund said: Okay, I've got some number for bombers. They are pretty impressive. If your Command Skill is 70, a wing of 4 bomber squadrons will do an average of 14.41 damage against a Cruiser with an elite crew. That's better than a Ballistics Skill of 70 and a pair of Mars broadsides with a DPR of 13.28, but not as good as a pair Lathe Broadsides with a damage of 16.61. Since you can launch from both sides of your ship, you can deal a lot more damage against a single ship with a huge massed wing. An eight squadron wing deals 30.95 damage per run to an elite cruiser. The numbers make it look like it is generally advantageous to group your squadrons in as big a wing as possible, and replacing bomber squadrons with escort fighters is usually a waste in terms of damage since turrets don't make enough of a difference that the -10 is worth it. I may have to find a way to get some bombers for my rogue trader, since I have a command skill of 103. This was more or less my conclusion too. Thanks to the ease of getting high command checks (relative to high BS checks), bombers can certainly deal worthwhile damage. Their drawbacks, however, are their expense - you definitely need a light craft repair bay if you want to use attack craft - and their very short range. Honestly, the range is the biggest issue with them. Yes, attack craft can fly for X turns but every turn they're flying they aren't bombing (when a longer range pair of macrobatteries would be causing damage every turn). They're definitely an excellent choice at knife fight ranges though.
  5. thor2006 said: For carriers what is better as a bridge Fleet Flag Bridge, Bridge of Antiquity or Flight Command Bridge? Tricky question. There are actually four bridges that aid flight craft and each one does slightly different things. The regular command bridge gives a +5 to all command checks (including squadrons) in addition to +5 BS. The flight command bridge is only a +5 to command when dealing with fighters (objectively worse than the command bridge's bonus) and without the BS increase - but you do automatically ready all craft (less tests to potentially fail). The Flight Command Bridge would give you a +10 bonus to command checks for craft, in addition to its other bonuses, but it's only available on Battlecruisers and Grandcruisers. The Bridge of Antiquity beats the pants off the Flight Command Bridge for the most part but it's archeotech so that's what you'd expect. Were I choosing a bridge, it would depend on how many craft I were planning to use. If I were a grand cruiser with six launch bays, I would be sorely tempted to roll with the flight command bridge unless my command check were high enough to not fail the ready roll (because that's a lot of rolls to make when you can fail). If I couldn't fail, I would try and swing a flight command bridge or a bridge of antiquity for its bonus in actual operations. If I only had a couple of launch bays and lots of other guns, I'd would probably go for a regular command bridge.
  6. It's certainly the case that a small craft repair bay is mandatory when attempting to seriously use fighters and bombers. Of course, if you do have a repair bay, you're probably never going to lose a single craft at all. Which is certainly nice.
  7. Got it backwards. A component with an SP cost doesn't increase the SP you have, it increases the SP the ship costs. So a ship that costs 40 SP equipped with an SP 1 component requires you to pay 41 SP to get the ship.
  8. All grand cruisers and battlecruisers have the trait "Grand Cruiser" or "Battlecruiser" that allows them to use cruiser only components.
  9. I can only assume that the side block was removed to make the rules feel more like Battlefleet Gothic - the whole book has that tone. And in BFG, you can't shoot fighters with battery or lance fire (they're very, very tiny compared to ships and much more manouevrable). That would be my guess.
  10. For the barracks, I estimated 5000 personnel before BFK came out - I don't know if it has any rules concerning barracks in there. I based the number off the smallest self-sufficent military organisation I could find at the time (Brigade Combat Team). So the Barracks would have 5000 personnel including Infantry, Cavalry, Artillery and command/support elements (including mechanics, combat engineers, medics, etc).
  11. Once the final number of hits has been determined, roll the weapon’s indicated Damage once for each hit, adding the totals together. The final total is the amount of damage dealt to the target. If a ship fires multiple macrobatteries at a single target, before rolling to hit and the determining the damage total for each macrobattery, the character directing the firing has the option of adding the totals together and applying the new, larger total to the target ship once, rather than applying each damage result separately. This represents a ship combining its weapon fire into a single, devastating salvo. - Rogue Trader, pg. 220 Combining macrobatteries into a salvo is the act of chosing, before you fire, to add their damage totals together after you roll to hit for each battery seperately. The advantage of this is it allows macrobatteries a better chance at overcoming enemy armour. The drawback is you can only score one critical hit with the combined salvo. Regardless, you still roll to hit for each battery in question.
  12. I rule that components come with everything they need to run correctly if you've bought them for your ship. Macrobatteries come with ammunition, cargo bays come with hauling craft, extended supply vaults come with extra supplies and so on. This appears to be the case in the rules anyway; a drop pod launch bay wouldn't provide any bonus at all if it didn't have any pods - same with things like a barracks: you wouldn't get a large bonus to military objectives if the thing was just sitting there, empty and doing nothing.
  13. It's supplies for six months apparent time for the crew. They experience time spent in the warp 'normally' regardless of how long actually passes in real space.
  14. The Imperium's already figured out how to interface those ancient xenos weapons into their own technology. That's how they installed them, linked them up to their targeting systems and why they can control and direct the weapons. It's not really much of a stretch for other pieces of technology to work with them in a similar way. Remember that these ships are possibly as old and advanced as the shard weapon batteries themselves - and they may have been constructed by a long-dead, highly skilled magos eight mellenia ago who just so happened to have a thing for shard xenotech. And honestly, your tool isn't much good if you don't follow the rules. You're better off doing everything as it's written in the book and then making a house-rule version just so it's applicable to more people.
  15. bobh said: The Munitorium isn't a xenostech component. The utility isn't really for the construction of xenos vessels, that has not been completely added yet. I'm trying to make the munitorium work as intended as it is not a homebrew component. An Imperium Munitorium would not add +1 to the damage of a xenostech shard battery - which doesn't need ammunition to begin with. If you want to say it does that is perfectly fine. Even better make a series of homebrew components to complement the shard battery, say a 'munitorium' called a 'Monopole Charging Interface', a few hulls, some xenos background and a series of components that can be used and i'll include them (if I can) in the utility so you can make 'shard' ships. The munitorium works exactly as intended: it applies, by RAW and clear as day, a +1 bonus to all macrobatteries. No ambiguity. No room for argument. Any macroabttery, whatever the type, gets the bonus. If you want to invent a fluff explanation as to why it doesn't work with a particular component, then it's equally fair to invent a fluff explanation for why it does. Leave the specific fluff justification to ship in question - these things are ancient and unique after all - and stick to the rules printed in the books for a publicly released tool.
×
×
  • Create New...