Jump to content
Lerriano

A Nemesis Always Helps?

Recommended Posts

I've chatted with LikeAsir regarding the sttength of the BW Nemesis class, and we concluded that it's always a strong unit thst is never unhelpful. It is fast (or slow!), hugely gunned at close range, with great protection capability and solid personal defences, stoic crew included. It's your best option, man!

But is it?

As a Dane, I'm already struggling to balance all the great toys in our medium and non-core sections, and I've already got a strong non-core small, so thanks, mr wolf, but I'll recommend you to my ottoman chums.

Anyone else looked at their list and thought they didn't think a nemesis would improve it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

overall i think the downside to taking allies is the fact they are non core....for things like KOB its ok, but as French i need my non core for Tourbillons and the like.

A Nemesis is good, but not worth killing a good chunk of your non core allowance for

Not all Allies are non Core.

For instance Free Australians or LoIS can take Mercenaries as Core.

KoB takes RA and Raj as Core.

And there are other combinations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think before our ORBAT change when much more of the force was in core it was definitely an option worth considering. It mostly competed with air power, and while I love Fafnirs, its nice to shake things up sometimes.

Now? I dont think its ever going to leave the drydock.

Yeah, it's just not as good as a fafnir, much less than two or a unit of Magni.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its my major complaint about the ORBAT change- with so little now actually in-core, it seems to stratify list building quickly. How on earth can I conscience taking destroyers when theyre non-core for example?

 

I think it brings the Danish flavour out a lot more. No longer can we just rely on being propped up by prussian models, we must build lists from our own synergies. You now don't need the destroyers because rather than hitting that thing with guns, you should drop mines on it from the Magni as they smash into their actual target with 12 angry vikings (16 if you fancy playing a cheeky stormtroopers card  :ph34r: )

 

It's worth noting that I played a game on Saturday (now typing up the report) where a combination of calcification and boarding was ruinous.

 

The thing I love about Danes is that they rely on arguably one of the most powerful ways to win a game, so either crush their opponents or get slammed in crossfire failing to do so. As a player of a certain space-elf race of jesters in another galaxy far, far away, I enjoy that. I find the speers and tesla technique a little grating because it's not Danish. (admittedly the destroyer doesn't do that, but still)

 

That said, I'm a bit glum that the Emperor is now non-core because it's definitely not as valuable as two fafnir, and the Asgard is a little more vulnerable to firepower and boarding for the Commodore to be sitting on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that making the list as linear as just using said jesters list is bad for gameplay- if thats all you could take. That other place has much more fluid force organization though. Boarding is great, but it was nice to be able to take units that added variety to the strategies you could employ.

Id rather have a smaller list of prussian models we could take, and take them as core. *shrugs*

This time last year there were three or four effective builds for the list, and if one wanted to splash of color you could take mercs or prussians or even italians in the force and have some fun. Losing that for one, maaaaybe two builds?

An Affontodore was a fun example. Remember the guy who did a whole italian contingent as viking longships? Thats the kind of fun that brings people to your table.

Sorry to derail a bit, Ill quit complaining here. Its just frustrating, and the nemesis hits close to home as I actually Danished one and some furies to include in my force, for the occasional bit of fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that making the list as linear as just using said jesters list is bad for gameplay- if thats all you could take. That other place has much more fluid force organization though. Boarding is great, but it was nice to be able to take units that added variety to the strategies you could employ.

Id rather have a smaller list of prussian models we could take, and take them as core. *shrugs*

This time last year there were three or four effective builds for the list, and if one wanted to splash of color you could take mercs or prussians or even italians in the force and have some fun. Losing that for one, maaaaybe two builds?

An Affontodore was a fun example. Remember the guy who did a whole italian contingent as viking longships? Thats the kind of fun that brings people to your table.

Sorry to derail a bit, Ill quit complaining here. Its just frustrating, and the nemesis hits close to home as I actually Danished one and some furies to include in my force, for the occasional bit of fun.

No worries! It's a forum! Opinions are requisite!

I think you still have a few options, but that's still more than the FSA, whose list is just repeating the same unit in different sizes (Boston excepted)

We can still bring those to the table, and if you feel frisky then you can just run prussian core because danes are prussian core. Plus you then get overcharged coils making the tesla you're looking for even better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can still bring those to the table, and if you feel frisky then you can just run prussian core because danes are prussian core. Plus you then get overcharged coils making the tesla you're looking for even better.

That's a very pertinent point... Under the old system, you could create a Danish or Prussian fleet with exactly the same models, but choosing your national commodore. In the grand scheme of things, as the Danish get more models, it does make some sense to reduce the levels of Lend-Lease.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But they didnt reduce the levels of lend lease- they expanded it, they just reduced its availability! Thats the frustrating part. They actually gave me more options and then gutted my ability to use them.

And honestly Im not really sure why... was there something missing in the ORBAT that required the use of the Havel or the Adler? Theyre both beautiful vessels, but we already had light carriers- both fafnirs and merchant carriers- and the Geier and Gevvittirvolke were fine for bombing runs...

*spreads hands* One reason I didnt take the nemesis as often as I might have, even when I went with alot of smalls and mediums, was to put in Speerwurfs. A full squadron is about the same points, but fills a vital roll in the line- killing Submarines. They had the speed, and speerchleuders being able to cut through the water is wonderful. Now theres something the Danish fleet could really use- its own answer to subs that are put out there by our biggest in-world opponents the Ruskies and the Brits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Grey mage you raise a valid point.

i for one would like to see on the smaller nations a bit more thought into who they fight on a regular basis and streaming there rules to be better equipped to face them. the danes as you say lack some of the tools to take on the opponents they often face....though not so much the Russians.

The PLC was an odd one I was discussing with Presedente....there positioning puts them at odds with Prussia and the Danes, other than the fact they have a few flamethrowers whats the purpose of desinging armour to be flame retardant...surely tesla dampning amour would be far more useful to them.

It would be nice to see nations rivalries be reflected in their rules a little more. That being said its a fine balance as it is and one nation shouldnt have a massive advantage over another....but it might help the ao called weaker alliance nations to at least have a benefit against a hated core fleet

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Grey mage you raise a valid point.

i for one would like to see on the smaller nations a bit more thought into who they fight on a regular basis and streaming there rules to be better equipped to face them. the danes as you say lack some of the tools to take on the opponents they often face....though not so much the Russians.

The PLC was an odd one I was discussing with Presedente....there positioning puts them at odds with Prussia and the Danes, other than the fact they have a few flamethrowers whats the purpose of desinging armour to be flame retardant...surely tesla dampning amour would be far more useful to them.

It would be nice to see nations rivalries be reflected in their rules a little more. That being said its a fine balance as it is and one nation shouldnt have a massive advantage over another....but it might help the ao called weaker alliance nations to at least have a benefit against a hated core fleet

To be fair it's probably because they don't want to accidentally set fire to themselves...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*shrugs* Compare the Dazbog to the Ragnarok with Shield generator- same points, near identical stats, but the Dazbog has superior firepower at long ranges and is a skimmer, and has flame retardant. In return the Rag can go one inch further when going straight, has two mines, and sharp turn. Im not quite sure who the winner is, but the Dazbog feels stronger....

In the cruiser section we see markedly lower firepower, but a host of defensive advantages, not the least of which is the ubiquitous shield generators as well as broadsides.

Their air cadre suffers from being flamethrower heavy, but Id say theres nothing wrong with their skimming fleet point for point compared to Danes, Italians, or the Raj... They just lack options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a very pertinent point... Under the old system, you could create a Danish or Prussian fleet with exactly the same models, but choosing your national commodore. In the grand scheme of things, as the Danish get more models, it does make some sense to reduce the levels of Lend-Lease.

So, thinking it over- this is still the case.

A Prussian player can take anything in the Danish fleet as core, because the Danes are close allies. They can even take Danish versions of Prussian ships for the CQG rules if they want- though I suppose those atleast will come out of the non-core section.

Which means this may have been a roundabout nerf to the Prussians, which is even worse when a small note saying 'A prussian player may not take Danish versions of Prussian lend-lease ships' would have stopped it.

As it is, I can still take a 100% Danish and Italian fleet as long as I say I have a Prussian commodore and use 10 Prussian TFTs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's true. I'm approaching this from the perspective of the Chinese and Blazing Suns, where the smaller alliance nation cannot squeeze much in, whilst the core nation can put whatever they want to. In my case, the pretty tasty Chinese commodore doctrines mean I'd prefer to take a Chinese core, but then I run into the same problems as you've outlined - how to fit Blazing Suns and aerial models...

To be honest, I'm not sure where I stand on the alliance system - I've really enjoyed collecting my Chinese, and appreciate that I can field them in my 'regular' forces, but I wouldn't want to start a brand new faction (time and money).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, but thats apples and oranges to an extent. Removing all prussian and aerial models for amoment, that leaves a Danish player with 2 larges, 2 mediums, 1 small. A chinese player has 2-3 larges, 4 mediums, 2 smalls, just in the naval theatre. In the air weve got a massive, 2 mediums and a small... compared to the Danish 1 medium and 1 small.

If the Danes had twice as many ship types as they currently have, I wouldnt complain. The lend-lease rules as they stand would just be icing on the cake to upgun a few close ally ships for a few extra points. Instead Ive got no replacement for a true battleship, no aerial large, no sub hunters, no aerial hunters, no battle cruiser, and the only small is an admittedly excellent corvette...

Even if it is functional, its very cut and paste.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, but thats apples and oranges to an extent. Removing all prussian and aerial models for amoment, that leaves a Danish player with 2 larges, 2 mediums, 1 small. A chinese player has 2-3 larges, 4 mediums, 2 smalls, just in the naval theatre. In the air weve got a massive, 2 mediums and a small... compared to the Danish 1 medium and 1 small.

If the Danes had twice as many ship types as they currently have, I wouldnt complain. The lend-lease rules as they stand would just be icing on the cake to upgun a few close ally ships for a few extra points. Instead Ive got no replacement for a true battleship, no aerial large, no sub hunters, no aerial hunters, no battle cruiser, and the only small is an admittedly excellent corvette...

Even if it is functional, its very cut and paste.

The common excuse is very fluffy, something about resources and the size of their empire.

So spare a thought for the ottomans, who have the empire, the resources, the contacts with the covenant, and nothing of value to show for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


×
×
  • 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.