Jump to content

Dabat

Members
  • Content Count

    95
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Everything posted by Dabat

  1. According to a guy at my FLGS, Only War ships from his distriutor tomorrow, so he should see it by Monday. God I hope that is true.
  2. Currently I am working on a Scholar/Explorer (my dream job) the kind of person who flies into a system and catalogs what is there. A young hopeful out to make a difference in the galaxy, finding things no one has seen before or has not seen in thousands of years. Kinda a younger, more idealistic, Indiana Jones. I'd toy with the idea of adding Force traits but that seems to be a little fan boyish, so maybe-maybe not. All seems moot, since I am likely to end up running the **** thing.
  3. I actually really like all the work you put into these Necrons. This is well structured, and you managed to transfer the rules from systen to system while keeping their intent. I am a fan of the Necron's back story (the new not quite as much, but it's still good), as well as a HUGE fan of BFG. Honestly, my only comments that aren't 'this all is ******* cool' is that I think you underpowered their guns a little, I'd bump the damage up by two or three points across the board, as their weapons far outclassed my poor Imperials. As well as I think they need a special rule that makes them vulnerable to boarding actions and hit and runs, which was hands down the easiest way to deal with them in BFG, especially the escorts. With the majority of their active crew concentrated in a few key areas, I always likened their ships to a kind of tomb inside, with the majority of the ship running itself there was nothing to stop those who boarded from doing their job and getting out… Most of the time.
  4. I have actually, through the course of my convoluted life, had to come up with workable plans of this nature. While this specific scenario is a new one the same rules do apply. OVERVIEW: -You are the leader of the world who is about to incur the wrath of the Imperium and the forces of Him on Earth. You have reason to believe His retribution will be spearheaded by the Astartes. Your planet has a population in the mid billions. Your planet has only recently seceded from the Imperium. ASSUMPTIONS: -The planet is largely habitable with relatively few natural choke points and/or areas normally impassible (excessive mountain ranges, gigantic bogs, etc...). -The planet is self sufficient. All resources required are either able to be grown/mined/fabricated locally, or significant stocks (years or more) already exist. -The population of the world is on your side, as well as the majority are agnostic and/or otherwise not faithful to Him on Earth. -The planet possesses significant travel infrastructure; roads, rails and the like. At least the equivalent to 1950's Earth. -The planet possesses significant production capacity, though not likely anything near a true Forge World (see complications), enough that it can produce it's own arms and fortifications (which likely do not exist yet) and continue to supply them during a conflict. Additionally, this production capacity exist WITHOUT a significant Adeptus Mechanicus presence, unlikely, but not totally unheard of in the Imperium. -The planet's population already enjoys a higher than normal wide spread technology level, higher than normal for the Imperium. EX: The average person has access too and already knows how to use AT LEAST as much, and as many different types, of technology as the average 1950's American citizen. -The planet's secession has already been fully successful and the succession was relatively bloodless, leving the vast majority of the infrastructure and production capacity intact. -The government of the planet (You) has come into possession of an authentic copy of the Codex Astartes, perhaps as a relic from seized from the Ecclesiarchy, and have studied it throughly. You are well aware of the capabilities of the average Astartes as well as their normal modes of combat. -You have an unknown quantity of time before the Imperial reply arrives. But it will likely be at least six months, if not a year or two, before an effective response can be assembled. COMPLICATIONS: -Space forces: Your planet has next to no chance of preventing the Astartes from achieving total space superiority. It is highly unlikely your planet possessed the space docks needed to build ships of the line. The same goes for any armed orbital station your world possesses. Even on the unlikely chance your world is heavily defended from orbit, the defenses and ships are most likely geared to ward off pirates and minor raids (see below), While Astartes ships are purpose built for situations like the ones will encounter in your system. -It is highly unlikely your world will have significant production (Forge World level) or already be powerfully defended. Any world important to require the upkeep these defenses would require would almost certainly already have a significant Imperial presence, precluding the successful secession of the world with infrastructure and production capacity intact. -If your world is a normal Imperial world, it likely has an entrenched nobility/other ruling class. They will be very resistant to any major change, and will likely pose a serious problem to the changes required to fend off Him on Earth's response to your secession. They will likely insist on being in charge of several vital areas (generals, ship captains, defense planners) even if there are obviously better qualified persons to fill those slots. (If you think for a moment that just ignoring the upper tiers of society is a possibility, you have obviously never dealt with real world aristo's, much less the those Imperial society produces) -You must accept that whatever you try, the Astartes will very likely be better at it. Siege warfare, mobile battles, space combat, even straight up fistfights. Those in charge of the chapter are centuries, possibly tens of centuries, old and have encountered situations which your planners likely not even DREAMED of. -No matter what you do, no matter what happens, no matter what you try to secure victory, the infrastructure of your world MUST remain intact. Otherwise what is the point of even trying to resist? -You do not know which chapter will respond first. Different chapters fight in different ways, and different leaders in the same chapter even more so. The best information you will have access to can only be read as a rough guide as to what will happen when the invasion does come. If you spend all your resources to set up defenses to resist a protracted siege and protect your leadership, all of that effort is waisted if the Astartes simply blow up your power stations, torch your farmlands and then leave to let your population starve to death in the dark. -You likely have no nukes. Sorry, but 40k downplays nuclear power, atomic weapons essentially do not exist, and the use of the few that do, for any reason, is heavily frowned upon. -Shelling your own troops and/or tons of high explosives to be detonated under fighting positions as soon as the Astartes land is a horrible idea. There is NO faster way to get your troops to turn on you than doing this, and there is no way to keep this secret if you do it on the large scale required for it to be effective. Remember, it could be months or even years before the Astartes' response comes. If you want to win you have to keep moral up and (more importantly) the troop's loyalty to you if you wish to have a chance to win. Strategies: -Quantity has a quality all it's own: The battle is going to be brutal, it is going to be bloody, and your only real advantage over the Astartes are your numbers, both in bodies and equipment. Make sure you have excessive amounts of both. -Mass conscription, but well trained and well treated: As a caveat to the last point, not only do you need large numbers, but they need to be well treated. You must keep the moral and loyalty of your forces up until the Astartes arrive, otherwise your forces will just walk off the field before the first shot is fired. -Spread everything out: Give the Astartes more important targets around your planet than they have battle groups to deploy. Whichever targets they hit first will (hopefully) let you know which parts of the codex the commander is employing against you, as well as how closely the chapter is following the codex. Possession of that information may allow you to plan a counter strategy. -Place equipment in caches ahead of time: If the population is against you this is a recipe for disaster, but it will ensure that no matter how hard your supplies get hit you will always have resources to fall back on. -Plan on losing: As backwards as this sounds, it's true. Anything the Astartes want to take or destroy on your world, no matter how well you defend it, they will. So plan accordingly, ensure that strongholds have escape routes, ensure that no one area is vital to your entire defense. -Fortify everything: Power stations and supply stations should be within fortresses, cities should be liberally sprinkled with fortifications towns should be walled if possible. Everything you defend is one more thing they need to expend resources to take. -Make them come to you: With the Astartes in possession of total space superiority, any significant reply you make from any staging point will possibly come under bombardment. Any movement you make will either have to be underground (impossible in the large scale) or small enough as not to be worth attacking from orbit. -Cross train your troops: Combat losses will be overwhelmingly disproportionate and favoring the Astartes. Your units committed to combat will likely be destroyed in short order. In order for you to continue fighting you need your troops to be able to form ad hoc units as well as to be used to serving under different leaders at the drop of a hat. Without training like this your formations will cease to be combat effective almost instantly upon engagement, as well as you will have no control over an area the Astartes have already been. -Build fortifications that mean nothing, but tell everyone how important they are: Build a massive fortress at the intersection of two important highways (that you don't plan on using for strategic redeployment of forces) and defend it to the death. Build a huge fortification on a polar tundra, staff it with a hundred thousand of your best trained and best equipped troops, make it the headquarters for your royal guard, call it impregnable, make it the center of your government shown around the world with huge amounts of pomp and ceremony... And then simply don't be there. Even if the Astartes' losses taking these useless fortification are limited to ammo and stress fatigue on their equipment, you are still able to afford whatever losses you suffer defending these useless locations, they can't. There you have it. This might not allow you to win, you might not even survive, but you can sure as hell bet you are going to make the Astartes PAY for setting foot on your world. -Dabat
  5. I may very well be in the minority here, but I like the psychic powers system from Dark Heresy better than the system from RT onward. Psychic powers are powerful, yes, but they are also corrupting and extraordinarily dangerous to use. A danger is totally mitigated in the later systems. The DH system prevented psykers from being shoehorned into simple spell monkeys like the 'spell-casters' are in so many other systems. Something I enjoyed playing, and something I enjoyed running. far more than "Well, if I don't push I can use my powers all day."
  6. DarianBlood said: Fgdsfg said: Dabat said: Fgdsfg said: Dabat said: In the BFG fluff Necron ships were likened to tombs, and like tombs they were largely empty. Their ships are advanced enough that they effectively run themselves. And while Necrons, even single specimens, are incredibly dangerous there simply are not enough of them active to effectively guard the ship against intrusion. While there will be enough Necrons to do this, some day, --Some horrible, horrible black day yet to come-- at the current place of the time line their ships are particularly vulnerable to boarding actions. That's.. that's somehow even scarier. Isn't it? So much in sci-fi tries to humanize the bad guys for... Whatever reason. But something I always liked about 40K is that they don't try. The Tyranids and the Necrons can't be talked to, they can't be reasoned with. And above all, as bad as things are now, they are only going to get worse. Until Matt Ward. The whole humanization change and necron retcon is something I will forever ignore and pretend never happened. Necrons are silent, malevolent, uncaring slaves to entities that defy understanding, ancient beyond count, with technologies the rest of the galaxy can only dream of. In nightmares. End of discussion. Agreed, the moment i heard about this abomination i got hold of an old 'Codex Necrons' to work from. This recton is just plain made of horrible. I might make a tiny exception for the idea of a free willed Necron Lord as thats almost canon from their description, not that they would likely have much to say to any PC they encounter though... On the subject of the ships they look great and i'm going to have some fun with them but isnt 2.3km for their largest vessel a bit on the small side? It is. The sizes for the ships in 40K are debatable and tend to vary a lot in the fluff. The art from Battlefleet Gothic, the first place where ships were shown consistently, gave us a range for the sizes. However, a lot of things still had to be estimated, and so the margin of error was still pretty wide. This caused most fans to just compromise that the ships were somewhere between one and four miles long (for the crusiers). Whoever wrote the fluff for RT was a fan of the higher numbers, while Spelleth it appears supported the more conservative estimate. For the record, my views were in the middle of the spectrum, and they still are.
  7. Fgdsfg said: Dabat said: Fgdsfg said: Dabat said: In the BFG fluff Necron ships were likened to tombs, and like tombs they were largely empty. Their ships are advanced enough that they effectively run themselves. And while Necrons, even single specimens, are incredibly dangerous there simply are not enough of them active to effectively guard the ship against intrusion. While there will be enough Necrons to do this, some day, --Some horrible, horrible black day yet to come-- at the current place of the time line their ships are particularly vulnerable to boarding actions. That's.. that's somehow even scarier. Isn't it? So much in sci-fi tries to humanize the bad guys for... Whatever reason. But something I always liked about 40K is that they don't try. The Tyranids and the Necrons can't be talked to, they can't be reasoned with. And above all, as bad as things are now, they are only going to get worse. Until Matt Ward. The whole humanization change and necron retcon is something I will forever ignore and pretend never happened. Necrons are silent, malevolent, uncaring slaves to entities that defy understanding, ancient beyond count, with technologies the rest of the galaxy can only dream of. In nightmares. End of discussion. Yeah, that's one of those books that I think a lot of fans are going to pretend never happened. Like the Star Wars Christmas Special or the X-Men/Star Trek crossover novel.
  8. Fgdsfg said: Dabat said: In the BFG fluff Necron ships were likened to tombs, and like tombs they were largely empty. Their ships are advanced enough that they effectively run themselves. And while Necrons, even single specimens, are incredibly dangerous there simply are not enough of them active to effectively guard the ship against intrusion. While there will be enough Necrons to do this, some day, --Some horrible, horrible black day yet to come-- at the current place of the time line their ships are particularly vulnerable to boarding actions. That's.. that's somehow even scarier. Isn't it? So much in sci-fi tries to humanize the bad guys for... Whatever reason. But something I always liked about 40K is that they don't try. The Tyranids and the Necrons can't be talked to, they can't be reasoned with. And above all, as bad as things are now, they are only going to get worse.
  9. In the BFG fluff Necron ships were likened to tombs, and like tombs they were largely empty. Their ships are advanced enough that they effectively run themselves. And while Necrons, even single specimens, are incredibly dangerous there simply are not enough of them active to effectively guard the ship against intrusion. While there will be enough Necrons to do this, some day, --Some horrible, horrible black day yet to come-- at the current place of the time line their ships are particularly vulnerable to boarding actions.
  10. If you read the description of the Mantis Warriors, it states that they worked closely with the Deathwatch for centuries, ever since taking up residence so closely to The Maelstrom. As well as hinting that there were/are several Deathwatch watch stations in and around the hotly contested areas.
  11. Hi Sazabi, welcome to the forums. No offense but it sounds like your player has cherry picked through several books and may or may not be 'conveniently' forgetting the rather serious drawbacks to his chosen path. 1. I have no problem with the Temple Calix. It takes away many of the tactics/social skills the psyker would have gotten and replaces them with combat skills. A little cheasy? Yes. But it allows for more of a 'Star Wars'-esque kind of psyker, and is not in itself game breaking. 2. Soul Killer has a threshold of 25, which requires a lot of dice to be rolled, which means he runs the risk of psychic phenomena. It is also a full round action, which means your psyker can do nothing else that round. If your psyker is using a focus power test to reduce the dice that need to be rolled then he reduces this power to once every other round. Also, Soul Killer is a Telepathy power, which means that EVERY TIME your psyker uses it on someone who has twice his insanity or corruption score, he muse make a WP test or gain 1d10 insanity/corruption points (ref: DH core book, pg 179) 3. Yeah, but with a +20 to psychic phenomena ans perils of the warp being a malefic psyker is dangerous (ref: Disciples of the Dark Gods, pg 119), this applies to . Being a sorcerer is also like having an huge 'kill me now' button taped to the sorcerer's forehead which lights up the instant anyone finds out about what he does. Just wondering... What is your player's Inquisitor like? 4: Chameleon only gives a -20 to BS tests (ref: DH core book, pg 165) and where does it say flying gives an extra -10 to hit? Ways to solve the fact he is hard to hit are to have his enemies use aiming and autofire. Both of which will offset Chameleon's -20. Since your Psyker is sustaining two powers (Chameleon and Shape Flesh) All of his other psychic tests are at -8, which means that Soul Killer now has a threshold of 33, even with a WP bonus of 7, a successful Focus Power check and two levels of Power Well your player still requires four dice to get it off reliably. Which means he has a 4 in 10 of triggering one psychic phenomena and almost a 1 in 4 of triggering more than one (ref: DH core book, pg 161 "When the Psyker rolls a 9 on any of the dice used to manifest a power, they will invoke Psychic Phenomena and must roll on table 6-2: Psychic Phenomena, page 162, once for each 9 rolled.") with a +20 to the roll. And if any of those Psychic Phenomena invoke a Perils Of The Warp, the roll on the Perils table is at +20. AND, according to page 119 of DotDG, all of this happens even if your psycher did not use any bonus dice from the Sorcerer talent, it happens JUST FROM having the talent. So there you go, your psycher is pretty much fixed. Powerful, yes, but he shouldn't outshine the rest of the group any more.
  12. Sadly I am willing to bet you will be dissapointed, I do not think FFG had the rights to alter anything GW has already done. I am awaiting the book, despite being in the same boat as you, however. As I have found (almost) all of the FFG 40k books to be at the very least a good read.
  13. lurkeroutthere said: First off as a matter of personal recommendation unless your PC's have interacted with Quist A LOT I would avoid having her have any romantic affiliations at all. To just tag the settings (as in Deathwatch) highlighted high power female NPC be tagged with a romantic subplot and a baby plot just seems cliche and tacky. IMO I agree almost totally with what you said except for this. In a game cliche isn't always bad. And I for one think it would be interesting to see how warrior demi-gods deal with something that they are genetically and hormonally programed to ignore, namely someone having a child.
  14. While a good portion are sent to the Schola, not all of them are. In Gaunt's Ghosts children, though rare (only two are named), are kept with the unit, while in an older White Dwarf there was an overview of a retired IG regiment, and it was mentioned that the children that the regiment had brought with them when they retired. I would believe that the parent's, or at the very least a regimental commander, would make the call as to if the child stays or goes. And unless a conclave has a standing order, the same would go for an Inquisitor. Most would likely send their child away, if just to protect him/her/it/them, but perhaps not all. As for retirement... Well, I doubt you get t become an Inquisitor unless you are a tiny bit work obsessed, but on the flip side, if an inquisitor did decide to call it quits, who would tell them no?
  15. AluminiumWolf said: I'm not saying that all games need to feature the trinity, I'm saying that there is no really pressing reason why a Space Marine game shouldn't, and a number of reasons it would be quite a good idea if it did. Really? Because you have stated up front that every combat oriented game should conform to those archetypes. AluminiumWolf said: a game that is going to feature as much fighting as a Space Marine game is likely to ignores all that work at its peril. AluminiumWolf said: We need to be asking - is this fight as much fun as it is in WoW? AluminiumWolf said :Whichever way you slice it there is going to be a lot of fighting in a Space Marine game. So it behoves us to make that fighting as entertaining as possible. AluminiumWolf said :Turning your back on popular, entertaining and well developed methodologies for no good reason (sic) is foolish in the extreme. AluminiumWolf said :This does not vastly matter, as the combat in CoC is not the main attraction of the game. This is much less true of a Space Marine game, which is likely to feature combat as a much more important draw for the players. Never mind the numerous combat focused games that did just fine without them, including Deathwatch. Also, as Morangias said, it would be very thematically inappropriate. No one in 40K has a zone of healing which can be used X number of times per day, healing Y damage a turn, or has a Thunderstrike with a cooldown of 55 seconds. nor are there weak healer space marines and very touch space marines running around that need to work together to fight off the Eldar. All of that is a very, VERY, good reason not to use the trinity mechanic. Now, as I said earlier in this thread, I LIKE MMORPGs, they are fun. But that is not a good reason to tell everyone who makes a product even remotely like them that they all need to reinvent their wheels.
  16. Moirdryd said: And please, please, please boys and girls. Can we drop the waspish and snippy and oblique verbal attacks. We all indulge in the same hobby, we all (hopefully) have fun doing so and we are all capable of discussing this matter without getting hostile about it? It's a game folks based entirely upon a work of fiction that exists for toy soldiers to be played with in a formalised way. It's worth investing emotion in for sure, because it delivers back melodrama in spades, but it's not worth getting emotional over. Or, as Phil Brucato once wrote "See **** Game, See **** use Rules to make Sue cry. Don't be a ****" wise words for us all right there. Yeah, not my proudest moment online. But there are some things that significantly irk me when it comes to RPG's, chief among them is an assertion from another person that "all games (of type X) must conform to (idea Y) or they are (doomed/inferior/being foolish)". As someone who literally grew up in the industry, my parents and their friends were all RPG designers and/or computer programers in the 80's and 90's, I can not tell you how bothersome that assertion is to me.
  17. AluminiumWolf said: The important thing is that with the Holy Trinity (Tank, Healer, Damage Dealer) everyone has a role to play in the fight and everyone has to work together to win. RPGs are a team sport, so I think it is great to have mechanics that so obviously require teamwork. Using it also has the advantage that everyone already broadly understands how it works, so you are not trying to reinvent the wheel for not reason other than snobbery. As you are the one insisting everyone else conform to your idea that all RPG's should be like World of Warcraft, and that any combat focused RPG that does not conform exclusively to WoW's archetypes will fail (or at the very least, be taking an extreamly risky path), so who is trying to re-invent the wheel again? As an example of combat focused RPG's that do not need these archetypes, I would point out Robotech, Werewolf, Champions, Rifts, All Flesh Must Be Eaten, Hunter, Mechwarrior, Twilight 2000, Alpha-Omega, Dark Heresy and Rogue Trader. Only in a few of them are the 'needed' archetypes even possible, and in most they do not exist at all. And, once again, for your wheel comment, I would point out that all but the last three significantly predate WoW.
  18. crisaron said: Had much issue finding good groups I see? Ever tried a RP server? Yeah your so right, I mean DnD is not about selecting a set of SKILLS AND POWER or acsension at level up... You are so totally rigth, they did not even make a huge sets of super dupper classes with combat hability just for players who like to +-... Man it's an RPG you can't say to anyone how it should be played. And all RPG have the DPS class, the utility class, the tanker classes... sorry m8te to break your little fantasy... p.s. All pun intended. p.s. Not all of them are as obvious as 4th ed and some will allow you to create a Tanker mage... but usually will have **** dps or other kind of skills... Every RPG has classes that conform to online archetypes... Except for those that don't. Like Twilight 2000, Traveler, Champions, Twilight 2013, the WoD series, All Flesh Must Be Eaten, Witchcraft, Fifth Cycle, Necessary Evil, Deadlands, GURPS, Alpha-Omega, Legionaire, Mechwarrior, Shadowrun, Blood Rose, Serenity, pretty much every superhero and/or modern RPG as well as any game where character development is decided by the player rather than a pre-determined class. While I agree with you on MMO's actually being RPGs, and I have found great role play on more than a few. My family has been in the RPG industry since the late 70's, and I can tell you with absolute certainty that the the majority class ideas of which you speak are actually a fairly recent (last ten years or so) concept, and even after their invention the majority of non-computer RPG's ignore them entirely.
  19. Watch-Captain Albus said: AluminiumWolf said: Especially since we are talking about playing Space Marines here. If you are the kind of person who talks about roleplaying not rollplaying you are probably in the wrong place. I am sticking to my opinion about tankers. It still is not role-playing in my opinion. Everyone who emphasises combat over other skills and traits are on the same list in my book. Perhaps I am too severe, but I advise the PCs in my group to think about who they are, what they need, and what they think is important outside of combat. I know this is a space marine game. But I throw a lot of mystery, diplomatic actions, negotiating, figuring out at my players and make sure that they use those non-combat skills that they have. If one of them attains a new rank and comes to me saying that he chose only new combat skills for all the XP I gave him, then I will always advise against it. Combat-only characters are dull and boring characters and should not be a part of any role-play, or at least not a part of my (our group's) personal Deathwatch micro-universe. People should be playing the game and not be gaming the system. Quoted for truth and agreement. If you want to use MMORPG terms and ideas, even where they don't fit very well, then I can not stop you, but please don't tell everyone to agree or else.
  20. bobh said: Yep, I've been working on their vessels for some time now and I call that bit of fluff 'sophisticated firing arcs'. Sweet, I look forward to seeing your work.
  21. Works for me. Though one thing to remember as you are designing the Tau ships is that their broadsides can fire to the front as well as to the sides. They are by far thier nastiest in a head on confrontation. And one last thing I would like to point out is that BaronIveagh was right about the dates of the Damoclese Crusade. I had thought it was in the 890's, not the 740's. I had meant to point this out in my last post, but it got swept up in a revision and accidentally deleted.
  22. BaronIveagh said: Damocles Gulf Crusade was 742 M41, current time for RT/Deathwatch/etcis 815, M41 (or so). The first direct conflict between these new types on any sort of large scale (that anyoen lived to report) ws at Taros (998, M41), however, it's stated that several of them were developed rapidly following the Gulf Crusade. So, really anything short of a Custodian class battleship is a possibility. Further, Tau ships are typically physically smaller then other ships in their same weight class, so it would make sense that thier actual components would be a of a higher quality. From the description of the Lar'Shi (Hero), the aformentioned design that the Tau built from their experiences during the Crusade: "The pinnacle of Tau technology, the Hero class was the product of the Damocles Gulf Crusade. The Tau were determined that they should have a ship that could match the Imperial Lunar class. As it became evident, they failed but did succeed in producing a credible ship of the line." Also, according to the BFG ships, which are all built in the same scale, and the Tau ships have roughly the same size and volume as their Imperial counterparts. As the ship designations were Imperial designations (at least in BFG magazine), the Imperials classed them by tonnage/size. So a Tau cruiser is roughly the same size as an Imperial cruiser, it doesn't matter if they have the same firepower or not. Don't get me wrong, I like the Tau ships, but don't turn them in to something they are not.
  23. BaronIveagh said: Dabat said: I disagree pretty strongly. The Tau have comparatively little experience in ship building or navel combat to, well, pretty much any other race in 40k, ad in combat their best warships were unable to stand up ship to ship against the Imperium. Stated out in BFG their standard cruiser fitted for combat was was roughly the strength of an Imperial light cruiser. This does not mean that the Tau should not have their own advantages, superior fire control and whatnot. But to give any race the ability to have every component on their ship best quality is literally game breaking, and those are words I do not use lightly. I know this from experience. For fun a friend and I build ships using nothing but best quality components, kind of a 'what if' senario. All of the best quality ships were able to punch well above their weight, with frigates easily besting light cruisers, and light cruisers besting battle cruisers and grand cruisers. This is not what the Tau ships were supposed to be able to do. I disagree with your assesment of the Tau pretty strongly. As of BFG's FAQ2010, they're now rolling out new ships that at least equal to IN. Granted these were developed post-Damoclese Gulf Crusade, but that would take in RT and DW. I disagree with your assessment if my assessment pretty strongly. Even during the time that the Tau are making warships which are able to stand one for one against the Him On Earth's Imperial Navy, then they certainly still do not qulaify for having every component on their ship be best quality. And, unless I am off on my 40K history, DH, RT, DW and BC take place pre-Damoclese Gulf crusade, the Tau wouldn't yet have access to their better ships.
  24. Dabat

    New Specialties

    First Foundings is cool, but after it I would like to see a book exclusively focused on other chapters. -The Mantis Warriors and their Dust Prophets, a chapter which always worked closely with the Deathwatch. -The Minotaurs, a chapter which has focused almost exclusively on fighting other space marines. -The Astral Claws, at this time believed to be one of the most pure and noble of space marine chapters -The nearly unknown Carcharodons and Star Phantoms. -The dour Red Scorpions and Charnel Guard -Dare I say it... The Rainbow Warriors. And literally a thousand other options.
  25. bobh said: I've been re-writing a copy fo the RTSU to produce Xenos Tau vessels and I have a question, want an opinion: Should all Tau vessels be considered of BEST craftsmanship. To me it seems that, yes, they should. All the components shoudl be of best craftsmanship et cetera. Your thoughts? I disagree pretty strongly. The Tau have comparatively little experience in ship building or navel combat to, well, pretty much any other race in 40k, ad in combat their best warships were unable to stand up ship to ship against the Imperium. Stated out in BFG their standard cruiser fitted for combat was was roughly the strength of an Imperial light cruiser. This does not mean that the Tau should not have their own advantages, superior fire control and whatnot. But to give any race the ability to have every component on their ship best quality is literally game breaking, and those are words I do not use lightly. I know this from experience. For fun a friend and I build ships using nothing but best quality components, kind of a 'what if' senario. All of the best quality ships were able to punch well above their weight, with frigates easily besting light cruisers, and light cruisers besting battle cruisers and grand cruisers. This is not what the Tau ships were supposed to be able to do.
×
×
  • Create New...