Jump to content

Endgame

Member
  • Posts

    223
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by Endgame

  1. Really what is bothering people is they see battle station and think of it like a space castle. This isn't helped by the fact that the MV value is like 1" on stations if they aren't movable terrain. Of course, it doesn't really make sense why battlestations would move so much faster in orbit around something than moving on their own in deep space. Really, they should all have a MAR like Energy Transfer (MV, 5), and reduced weapon values stock, as that would get rid of a lot of the arguments seen here. So, for example, the Terran station would be MV 6, but could could reduce its MV by 5 to increase its weapon values. This way the rules would match the intent of a mobile battle platform.
  2. The vastness of space means stationary fortifications would be a waste of resources - just build more dreadnoughts and get a better bang for your buck.. To justify the expense as a defensive structure, they would need to be able to move about the local star system, at least. More than likely you'd want them to be able to move between systems fortifying different areas as the front shifts one direction or another. And, if they are maneuverable enough to move between star systems, using one to establish a local beachhead would make total sense. In that case, having 2 battle stations at the same battle would be totally logical.
  3. I think you would just want to keep it as simple as possible. Overall, taking 1 from each tier is essentially most of a patrol fleet, so you won't be abusing much of anything there. In a Battle fleet, really all we're saying is that the second required T3 can be from a different fleet. Really, a 2000 point Grand Fleets is where you might get some abuse where you only take ~550 points of your core fleet and 1450 points of other fleets, but you would still need to fill the minimums. Is there some abuse I'm not thinking of?
  4. Endgame

    Terrans Underway

    The Terran fleet has also received substantial reinforcements. Still working out the magnets on the Light / Torp cruisers which are not pictured, but I now have everything available to the terran fleet
  5. Endgame

    Terrans Underway

    lol! Nope, I wanted to go with the red and white stripes and do something a little unique. I knew the red and white would stand out well against brown, and the green was just a good compliment color to the brown.
  6. Endgame

    Terrans Underway

    I created a gallery and uploaded the pictures of the Razorthorn. Not the best pictures ever, but they get the idea across
  7. You also pickup extra linked fire if you manage to swing two arcs with the upgraded light cruiser squadron. 2 arcs, all Lt Cruisers, presuming I'm doing the math correctly. Turrets linked into S/P, all at RB 2. S/P: 12AD Fore: 6AD Torp: 8AD Upgraded squad with Normal Cruiser w/ Speed and Beams: S/P: 13 AD Fore: 9 AD Torp: 9 AD If you go shields instead of turrets, though, I think you really want to stick with all Lt. Cruisers. If you can arrange the correct arcs, you'll end up with reinforced Fore + 3 shields to the fore that save on 3+. That should make for a tough little squad.
  8. Endgame

    Terrans Underway

    I've put a little work here and there in on the razorthorn. Haven't had much time to really do much with it, but while turning on (i.e. painting) the guns and the engines, I just realized that one of the guns on is miss cast. Probably a little late to bring it up with spartan Since it seems I can only attach so many MB of pictures to a thread, what is the common solution to adding images?
  9. Agreed on not wanting that many destroyers, and double agree on a reduction on the core requirements for alliance fleets. It would be fantastic to just have to field 1 T1, 1 T2, and 1 T3 from the core fleet (though you would have to still fill the minimum fleet construction allocations). That means any of the patrol fleets could fit the core requirements. If necessary, there could even be a requirement that any category cannot exceed the number of choices from the Core fleet. For example: You are running a Ba'Kash core. If you want to run 1 squad of RSN cruisers and 1 Squad of RSN Heavy cruisers, you would have to bring 2 Ba'K T2s. But if you want to bring 1 Works Rapotr T2, 1 Ba'kash T2, and one RSN T2, that would be fine.
  10. Looks like Ba'Kash is the way to go for the core, then! Even better, it seems to be about the cheapest core you can field, so it gives the most opportunity to mix in other ships.
  11. I'm definitely not very interested in playing a full fleet of one thing or another. For Zenian League, I'll want to mix and match ships, I just need to pick a core to pull T1, T2 and T3. For example, do I run a Ba'Kash Battle Carrier, Cruiser Squadron and frigates, and supplement with Works Raptor Cruisers and battle cruisers? Do I pull T1, T2, and T3 from WR and then add Ba'Kash heavy cruisers?
  12. OK, so for a unit of ships like the Tarakian Cruisers, the interceptors can only add PD to one attack. What about this case? Terrans have an Apollo, and a unit of Harpoons. Targets are an Aquan BS with 3 interceptor tokens on it, and a unit of Cruisers within 8" of the interceptors . Apollo fires 8 AD of torps at the Hydra, interceptors add 6 PD to the BS PD. Harpoons link fire next activation for 14 AD on one of the Cruisers - the Interceptors add +6 PD to the Linked Cruiser PD, correct? *Edit* Ah, another poster covered this situation. My suggestion is that the interceptors add +6 PD to the battleship since they are on CAP of the battleship. However, those interceptors only add half PD (+3) to a model within 8" they are not directly assisting via CAP.
  13. Huh, then I'm not understanding how MKII PD mountain works. Its all way different than 1.0
  14. You know +X PD to nearby models wouldn't be so bad per interceptor flight. In other words, Interceptors benefit one model with full PD, and others within 8" for a lesser amount - say 1/2 PD or less. CAP around 1 ship for full PD and a small benefit to others would still be better than escorts, though, so it might not be a great solution.
  15. I just pulled out my old 1.0 rulebook - the Tyrant and the old Razorthorn are pretty comparable at RB 2. At RB1 the old Razorthorn is much better of course, but you're looking at linked RB 2 of 16 for the old Razorthorn vs 15 on the Tyrant. The Port Starboard firepower is better on the tyrant too, and you get the option of Wings, shield projector self, etc. The Tyrant seems solid, IMO, enough so I can see myself taking it frequently.
  16. Upgrading one of the light cruisers to a cruiser seems like a solid way to run the LC squadron. You pickup better fire to link off of, another HP, and a small boost to PD. You'll want to upgrade the movement on the normal cruiser, though, it seems to keep the squad mobile, and you'll want the beam upgrade to keep everything with the same weapon type. The torp cruisers seem good, but they trade direct firepower for better torps. If your opponent is running lots of PD, you may actually be better off with normal cruisers.
  17. LOL! I talked to Spartan Neil at Gen Con and he said that given the popularity of the Razorthorne, they are going to work on bringing it back sometime in the future. I don't know what the time frame for that is, but know it is coming
  18. What are the preferred allies in a DIndrenzi Fleet? I assume RSN is big with the natural allies, but on the other hand, RSN seems to be variations on the main Dindrendzi theme - where generally CR is dropped a little but DR is up a little, and Fixed Fore kinetics are dropped a little to enhance the Port and Starboard weapons. Ba'Kash seems like it would pair nicely with their short range scatter weapons and wide arcs to offset Dindrendzi reliance on fixed fore. I'm not sure Raptor or Kedorian add much to a Dindrendzi fleet, but that is just from reading it on paper.
  19. I have a good selection of Terran ships, and for any game I play I love to have 2 or 3 different factions. Looking through the various alliance and league ships, by far my favorites are Ba'Kash and Works Raptor. If I were to give Zenian League a go, which makes the better core between Ba'Kash and Works Raptor? Ba'Kash seem a little more well developed, but it seems like the combination of Raptor Assault Carrier, Torp Crusiers, and corvettes would be perfect options for a long range and sneaky core than can be expanded by Ba'Kash the close range ships.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.