Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 80 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Nerroth's Q'orl Swarmhood fleet list, v5.0.3

 Post subject: Nerroth's Q'orl Swarmhood fleet list, v5.0.3
PostPosted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 1:30 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 12:00 pm
Posts: 573
Location: Canada
Hi!


I finished reading Xenology yesterday, so today I had a go at writing up a first draft of some rules for the Q'orl space fleet - handy thing to do when a 2-hour seminar at university gets cancelled at the last minute! (maybe I'll enter the list in that BFG competition, if it seems decent enough)

EDIT: Here's V5.0.3!


Please tell me what you think!


Gary





_________________


Gue'senshi: The 1st Kleistian Grenadiers

v7.3 pdf

Human armed forces for the greater good.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Nerroth's Q'orl Swarmhood fleet list, v5.0.3
PostPosted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 2:38 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 10:11 pm
Posts: 515
Interesting. Very interesting.

Seriously. I've no idea where to start intuitively with balance issues, but the idea seems like exactly what they should have from the fluff(seems I did get the book before you  :p )

A question to you though: Can those Demiurg Spyglass things see a Hrud Warren?  ???

The Umbra were pretty nice as well.



SPOILER ALERT

I take it you've also been piecing the pieces together. The Eldar stole the Q'orl diamond thing so it could be implanted in the engineered Ethereals. My bet is that Demiurg, Eldar and perhaps Hrud have all been working on this together to try and fix what the old ones failed to do. Demiurg 'guide' the Tau, Eldar do all the sneaky stuff, protecting them from beyond the borders etc, and the Hrud...well, they're still very ambiguous...

I really like the idea of the Demiurg and Eldar being 'partners' in a sense in 40k, it's a nice contrast to...well...almost every other Elf and Dwarf archetype that ever existed...

_________________
"Number 6 calls to you
The Cylon Detector beckons
Your girlfriend is a toaster"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Nerroth's Q'orl Swarmhood fleet list, v5.0.3
PostPosted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 9:10 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 9:40 pm
Posts: 2838
Location: Netherlands
Cool. I think very plausible as a BFG race. Must say you already did a good job on the chain ships. Some fleshing out needed but really good.

_________________
Light at the Horizon.

Warp Rift
Project Distant Darkness
Eldar MMS

GothiComp Hall of Fame
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=19176


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Nerroth's Q'orl Swarmhood fleet list, v5.0.3
PostPosted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 12:26 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 11:41 pm
Posts: 276
Location: Southampton
Hmm, Nice!

The attack rating should be 1. They have really crapy warp drives which will make them suffer!

Should they be raiders?

How does thier lance technology work (or where does it come from).

Why so few in the chain?
(I would say 6 for BB's, 4 for cruisers, 2 for light cruisers).

You need more balanced options for the 'links'! I.e. 1 lance (LFR?), 1 launchbay, 4WB's(LFR?).

What about critical hits? Could they cause the destruction of modules? Or decoupling them? Is a new critcal table called for?

Anything special for Leadership, boarding, teleport attacks, H&R attacks, ramming, cellestial navigation, Blastmarkers, ordnance, or anthing else that I should of thought of?

How do area affect weapons work on chain ships? (like SPG's or NC's, AG!?)

Are the core modules the only ones capable of warp travel? (If so special rules for traversing warp rifts with split off modules need to be made!)

Can you uncouple modules together, e.g. 2 modules acting as one ship? (if not why not?)

**Actually, you could just say that under 2 modules acts like a light cruiser, under 4 as a cruiser, 6 or under as a BB.

What happens when you have escorts (modules) squadroned with capital ships for purposes of targeting (i.e. the right shift!). Or when traversing asteroid fields, warprifts etc?

Should thier really be a support module? It's open to bullet shield abuse! (I think it's a bad idea!)

How will the victory points work?

That's all for now, cheers,

RayB

_________________
DON'T DATE ROBOTS!!!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Nerroth's Q'orl Swarmhood fleet list, v5.0.3
PostPosted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 5:40 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 12:00 pm
Posts: 573
Location: Canada
Hi!


Thanks for the feedback, now on to the questions/comments:

*Attack Rating: Well, if 2 is high enough for the Kor'vattra from Armada (let alone the better-diving craft of the CPF) then it should do fine for the Swarmhood - dive tech is sufficient for the task at hand!


*Raiders/Full fleet: Well, I've been thinking of letting them operate as a full battlefleet (they have to fight the odd Waaagh, Crusade or do some old-fashioned conquest) or as a raiding force - perhaps the choice of one or another restricts access to the heaviest ship class or to the use of captured Navigators and salvaged Warp drives... though I'm still trying to work out how best to represent that aspect of the fleet.


*So few in the chain? Well, originally each module had 2 hit points (the Support module is meant to have 2 in 1.0, oops!) so 4 from a Homeworld-class Core module and 4 Segment modules took you up to 12.

However, I hit on the idea that the support module should perhaps allow one to try and balance the durability of a Chainship and its firepower. (Well, I remembered the way Andromedan capital ships in SFB use either true satellite ships or can fill up a space in its satship hangar with a punch-bag module...) So, only the Support Module ups the Core modules' turrets and shields, plus gives +2 hits instead of +1, but makes you sacrifice a portion of your firepower options to get it. A similar balance one needs to work out for Armada Tau Orbitals...


*Balanced options: I wanted to start off by establishing which kinds of modules I wanted the Chainships to be able to take. So, I plumped for the WB, Lance, LB and Support modules (I want to leave out torps for now - I am keen to see how well the fleet can do without them...) and the 2 Lances was to make up for having no torp option.

I was thinking of maybe upping the WB to 6 and making each Segment module 40 points - so a Homeworld and 4 modules comes to 260, a Hivestation+3 to 195 and a Swarmhood+2 to 130.

Or I can just make the lance and lb modules 40 and leave the WB and support modules at 30...

Or go with your suggestion...

I'll have to think it over!


*Critical hits/hits in general: Well, hmm. I was thinking that a Chainship and the modules attached are treated as a single target, but any hits scored on the vessel are allocated randomly (so the Core is hit on 1-4, a Segment 5-6. The segment is determined randomly in turn)

Regarding crits, it could be either one chart for the Chainship as a whole, whether there are attached Segments or not (so a result of, say, Mag Clamps Disabled results in the other Segments de-coupling if there are other Segments still attached, otherwise choose the next highest crit instead) or the location of the crit would be determined randomly - if it lands on a Segment, that module is destroyed and de-coupled by the Core module (and adds a BM to the ship's base) while Core crits are rolled for on the table normally.

In either case, I'll probably need to work out a specific critical hit table...


Leadership, boarding etc: Aside from the lack of torps issue, I'm not sure the Chainships need any special rules in these areas, for the time being working out the Chainship modular system seems like enough to worry about! Well, that and working out what, if any, difference the Warp drive/Navigator thing can make.


AoE weapons: While a Chainship is together, it counts as the dot in the middle of the flying stand, so it would be treated as one target for AoE weapons, and the hits would be allocated randomly (as discussed above). Detached modules would work under normal rules for AoE weaponry, of course.


FTL travel: Both Core and Segment modules would have dive engines, but ships with salvaged Warp drives can only mount them on their Core modules - which would likely be relevant for Warp rift navigation.

There's a point: Should Tau ships (not Kroot or Demiurg - well maybe Demiurg, if it could be said that they use highly-advanced dive engines) be able to navigate a Warp rift at all, or does the rift include enough of the 'ocean' between warpspace and realspace to allow Tau dive engines to get through it? If the former, then Q'orl ships need those Navigators if a rift shows up, while if the latter, they would not be too worse for wear without one...


Support modules together: Only the Core modules are designed to take the Segment modules - you can't just clamp two Segment modules together by themselves. Otherwise, you wouldn't have to take the Core modules!


Support module: As referred to before, the support module is somehing I want to persevere with for the time being (maybe it can either increase planetary assault points, or act as cargo capacity, or some such) and while it is a bullet shield, it is also one less weapon system your Chainship can take. (I'm thinking of limiting it to 0-1 or 0-2 per Chainship, to keep things from getting out of hand...)


Targeting: Perhaps we could either make the opposing player target the nearest ship type or make a Command check to target another class of ship, or make the player decide before rolling to hit whether the targets will be the escorts or cap ships  (a loose approximation of shooting at mixed AP/AT formations in Epic - you concentrate on one or the other... while Lances, like Macro-Weapons in Epic, are less fussy about their targets, so are allocated normally)

The squadron would roll once for the lot when navigating a field, yet allowing a detached Segment to re-roll individually (they are still Escorts, after all)


[VPs:] Based on the cost of the Chainship as a whole, plus its starting hit points (as even fully decoupled groups are not true squadrons in the traditional sense)


Can those Demiurg Spyglass things see a Hrud Warren? They're the Wise-Gifted Ones, they can do anything!



Gary





_________________


Gue'senshi: The 1st Kleistian Grenadiers

v7.3 pdf

Human armed forces for the greater good.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Nerroth's Q'orl Swarmhood fleet list, v5.0.3
PostPosted: Sat Feb 18, 2006 9:07 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 12:00 pm
Posts: 573
Location: Canada
Hi!


Here's v2: http://www.savefile.com/files.php?fid=2186818


CS, could you please change the title? EDIT: Thank you!


Gary





_________________


Gue'senshi: The 1st Kleistian Grenadiers

v7.3 pdf

Human armed forces for the greater good.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Nerroth's Q'orl Swarmhood fleet list, v5.0.3
PostPosted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 1:22 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 12:00 pm
Posts: 573
Location: Canada
Hi!

I was wondering if there was anyone here with better artistic skills who wouldn't mind helping out with the designs for the Chainships, as you can tell I'm not so good at the whole drawing thing!


Gary

_________________


Gue'senshi: The 1st Kleistian Grenadiers

v7.3 pdf

Human armed forces for the greater good.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Nerroth's Q'orl Swarmhood fleet list, v5.0.3
PostPosted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 1:32 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 11:41 pm
Posts: 276
Location: Southampton
Where are the pics? I can't see any on the pdf!

Back to rules:

(Attack Rating) My point on the attack rating was that they won't have that many ships that are truely warp capable. Also the reason the Tau have an attack rating of 2 is because they are seriously well organised! But 2 is fine as 1 is quite drastically bad!
**Attack rating 2

(Full Fleet) This seems fine!
**Full Fleet!

(Number of links in the chain) Do you mean for the modules to have 2 hits? I would think not as you want them to act like escorts when they're detached. Either way I think you should increase the number as I suggested and reduce the firepower of the modules.
**Numbers of Modules: 6 for BB's, 4 for cruisers, 2 for light cruisers.

(Lances replacing Torps) What do you mean have lances instead of Torps? Why can't they just have lances like everybody else?
**Have normal str lances compared to WB equivelents.

(Super escorts!) The modules have too much firepower! An escort with 6 Wb's LFR! or worse 2 Launchbays! As a non advanced race this is just too much! The escorts should be limited to 'normal' standards of fire, also it would be good if they were of roughly equal value (explain below).
**Firepower of escorts: 4WB's LFR or 1Lance LFR or 1 Launch bay.

(Fire Arcs) Thinking about it, why would the modules weapons be LFR? Shouldn't they be L/R (which bit of the chain ship is at the front?, the main bit?) In any case it could be LFR if the weapons were dorsal and ventral. But you wouldn't be able to get a F only. But as they will be acting as escorts LFR is the way to go!
**All weapons should be L/F/R (Launcbays N/A)

(Randomising target) I think randomising which parts of the ship get hit is clumsy and slow.
**Get rid of the mechanic!

(Critical hits) I think you should have the core modules at the front and therefore have prow weapons (not Dorsal), also it'll be more likely!.
It may seem harsh, but I think having the modules get destroyed instead of disabled would be balanced, as they won't have that much firepower compared to a normal crit result. Also, they're escorts! This will make them vulnerable to hit and run attacks, but it's just a weakness to exploit!  
**So have the following crits in this order:
2:A Launchbay Module has been destroyed!
3:A Weapons battery Module has been destroyed!
4:A Lance Module has been destroyed!
5-12 (as normal).

(Loosing more hits than you have modules!) It would be possible to to loose more hits than you have modules, so how would you decouple them?
**When you decouple modules the ship's total hits and starting damage will drop by 1, you cannot reduce the ships hits below 1 in this fashion. (note it is possible you may cause the core module to be crippled by decoupling other modules).

(Leadership) Normal Ld is fine! I think that when the Core module is destroyed the remaining modules (if there are any) should act as if they have a bridge smashed (-3 Leadership). With out this rule, if this crit did happen and then the ship was destroyed the escort squadron would be cured of the crit. As a reality point goes, the bridge has been destroyed!!!
**-3Ld to a squadron if the Core ship has been destroyed!

(Teleport attacks) Do they have the technology?
**No teleport attacks!

(Ramming) Since it could break the chain, and that you'd need to use different D6 for a leadership test beacuse of escorts and a capitalship being in the same squadron I think they shouldn't be able to ram! It also doesn't fit with thier mentality, they don't do suicide runs!
**No Ramming. If Rammed always counts as if you're ramming the side.

(Area affect weapons)
**No special rules!

(Traversing Asteroid fields) This becomes complicated when escorts are allowed a reroll but capitalships aren't.
**When escorts gain a Leadership reroll and a capitalship doesn't, roll the first leadership test, if failed the capital ship suffers the negative affects, then the escorts get thier reroll.

(Support Module) I think if you do have a Suport Module it shouldn't be allowed to decouple. It's too intergrated into the core module..
**Support Modules can't decouple!

(Targeting) This is quite simple when you think about it!
Because the capitalship is easier to hit by 1 shift you treat as such,
**so you pick how easy the targets are you wish to shoot at, just as escorts with different arcs. (Usually the capitalship will be easier to target, so if the enemy wanted they could poor all thier fire into it, but if destroyed any left over firepower wouldn't spill onto the harder to hit targets).

(Vps) I think you should bury ALL of the Vps/points into the Core modules! You work out if they're crippled for VP purposes by comparing the chain ship and surviving modules total hits with what it started with!
**The Chainship as a whole is all that counts for Vps!

(Disenagaging) I think they should have a natural Leadership 10 when attempting to disenage. And all modules decouple. Test for each module individually! Should they get a negative modifier for modules of the same chainship being within 5cm? (it would be characterful!)  

Cheers,

RayB

_________________
DON'T DATE ROBOTS!!!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Nerroth's Q'orl Swarmhood fleet list, v5.0.3
PostPosted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 12:10 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 11:41 pm
Posts: 276
Location: Southampton
Right, I reread relevant parts of xenology last night and have this official fluff summary (to do with BFG or broad points on the empire):

Q'Orl Swarmhood:

Focused around a single holy world - Loqiit

Chainships: Elegant, unbelievabley advanced, heavily armed, made of numerous segments which can decouple aiding disenagagment (not noted as a form of combat!), incapable of warp Travel*

*Warp Travel is achieved using captured/salvaged alien (including Imperial) warp drives. With the combined capture of Navigators (32 so far) (controlled with grubs at the base of the spine!)

Terrible in boarding actions!

Deep Space Monoliths (anybody seen Red Dwarf? GELF's!), would make cool terrain or even scenarios.

Their goal is the domination of the Galactic hub!

Males live for roughly 10 years.

1 Queen, sires the entire race, several thousand a day (this fluff 'fact' is insane! If she can only birth several thousand a day, there is NO chance for population growth. If assuming no unnatural deaths for 10 years you'd expect an optimistic population of only 20 million! So we 'have' to assume that there are more queens (but not royal!) or that the queen can birth far more than stated!)

The Q'Orl live in vast honeycombed structures orbiting Loqiit, on which the loving bodies of the dead rest (these things would have to be ridiculously gigantic! or numberlous, or BOTH!)

Fanatical ancestor worship.

Well that's all that's really relevant to the fleet!

So from those points changes should be made:
1. When boarded count the segments as escorts in a multiple boarding action (that way they can be destroyed by crits, making them pretty crap in a boarding action!)
2. Better manuverability! (everything moves and 'counts' like an escort with a 90* turn..)
3. No Aboats!
4. Better Ld?
5. Better weapons (e.g. longer range, lances cause criticals on a 5+ (4+ against eldar), WB's count everything as closing!)
6. Get rid of core sections...(Bridge smashed critical also decouples the chainship!)
7. Have good shields and turrets. (slightly higher strength than IN).

Cheers,

RayB

_________________
DON'T DATE ROBOTS!!!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Nerroth's Q'orl Swarmhood fleet list, v5.0.3
PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 2:23 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 12:00 pm
Posts: 573
Location: Canada
Hi!

2 posts' worth of comments to reply to? Hmm...

First of all, here are a few preliminary sketches for the Core and Segment modules, from Christian Schwager:






*Attack Rating: Glad you agree on AR 2!


*Full Fleet: The main list you see here is for a full fleet, but I am considering a raiding fleet (with AR3) composed entirely of refitted Chainships - as well as a character ship I'll put into v3 (since I technically need a character ship for the BFG competition!)


*Modules (number and weaponry): Ok, the original idea I had was to have the Support segment as a module a Chainshp would need to fully bulk up (so a Homeworld-class which only took 4 weapon Segments would have 10 hits total, while with 2 support modules you's get 2, but with less firepower to dish out...)

However, having seen Christian Schwager's designs for the Chainships, and thinking some more about the issue, I guess it's enough to have the Support module up the ship's shields and turret value, plus I will lower the weapon loads of each module. So, 6-4-2 of 4WB/1Lance/1LB it is!


*Lances and Torps: The point I was trying to make was that the Q'orl don't use torps, relying on direct-fire weaponry and attack craft to do the job against enemy starships. Which they will still have to do with 4/1/1...

*Fire arcs: When you se the module designs, you'll see why they would be FLR (now the lances are str1, and based on the design as it stands, they can be FLR too, as you suggest)


*Randomising/Criticals/etc: The Core modules won't be at the front, but the Core modules' WBs will be - so I will adjust the Crit table accordingly.

You have a point regarding just integrating the Segment modules into the regular crit table, but the issue of having more hits than modules was the reason why I was not keen on having them count as one target (without randomising the hits)

Perhaps instead of randomising the hits, the defending player allocates the hits using either the squadron rule - so enough hits to destroy the closest module before allocating to the next closest?

I'm content to leave the randomisation in for now, though. It's not that time-comsuming and it fits better, in my view.


*Leadership: Good point, though as you also say there should be a bonus when disengaging in this situation.

So, if the Core module/s is/are gone, the squadron takes a -3 to ld, except when rolling to disengage.


*Ramming/Teleport Attacks: Fair enough on each - we can leave the crazy ramming to the Thyrrus fleet! (and since they are also in Segmentum Pacificus, the Swarmfleet may well have to deal twith that eventuality...)


*Asteroid fields: I probably should have spelled that out in v2! It'll be in v3.


*Targeting: Your idea seems to match what I have in there already - I'll leave it as written, since it is as well to clarify the point!


*VPs: I've clarified it in v3, count the starting 'whole' Chainship.


*Support Module: The clamps are uniform for each additional module, so the Support module can be de-coupled as normal (although it would be perhaps unwise to do so unless attempting to disengage...) as it can't benefit the Core module while detached if WB fire is focussed on it.


*Disengaging: I think that ignoring the -3 Leadership penalty for losing the Core module is enough to help them run away if necessary...


*Xenology fluff and BFG relevance Well, I don't agree with all of your interpretations of the fluff we have for the Swarmhood in Xenology. There is no explicit negation of Core modules in the material presented. 32 was the figure from a few hundred years ago, so it is likely that there are more Navigators in captivity (or that some of the older ones have died, or the Q'orl have managed to adapt the Navigator gene to a tailor-made Q'orl breed...) The boarding action thing is in the face of Stormtroopers - of which not every Navy ship has an ample supply - so making them worse than average seems a stretch, given that we know little about the race as is (plus we don't want to pillage the Kor'vattra's list of special rules too much!)

The Swarmhood-class (and the Segments) serve as the more manouverable arm of the Swarmfleet, I'm happy keeping the larger Core modules at 45*.

Again, we don't know if Q'orl troopers are really that bad in combat (what if that particular Chainship didn't have its own LBs?) so I'd say that ABs are fine for now.

As far as weapons go, Eldar get crits on 4s anyway! WBs as closing might be interesting, but I'd want to see if the fleet needs any additional bonus rules in this area before adding such rules in.

As far as better shields and turrets go, if you take all 2 Support modules you get 5 and 5 on a Homeworld-class and 4 and 4 on a Hivestation-class etc (but the cruiser classes lose out on striking power if you do so!)


I'll have v3 up soon, with revisions and additons to pore over...


Gary

_________________


Gue'senshi: The 1st Kleistian Grenadiers

v7.3 pdf

Human armed forces for the greater good.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Nerroth's Q'orl Swarmhood fleet list, v5.0.3
PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 3:21 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 12:00 pm
Posts: 573
Location: Canada
Well, here you go, version 3.0!


Gary

_________________


Gue'senshi: The 1st Kleistian Grenadiers

v7.3 pdf

Human armed forces for the greater good.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Nerroth's Q'orl Swarmhood fleet list, v5.0.3
PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 3:29 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 2:43 pm
Posts: 2084
Location: Reading, England
Just noticed this very interesting thread and idea.  I'll read V3.0 and reread xeno biology tonight and get some feedback up.

_________________
Tyranid air marshal


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Nerroth's Q'orl Swarmhood fleet list, v5.0.3
PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 4:24 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 11:41 pm
Posts: 276
Location: Southampton
I'm in a rush so i'll be brief (also it looks as though I won't have internet access for a bit!).

'Every' Imperial Navy has Storm Troopers!!!! And if a boarding action is described as an easy massacre (IIRC) they probably aren't thaty graet in boarding actions! Also how does them counting as escorts in a boarding action relate anyway to the Tau and thier half boarding mod? (It just measn that the individual modules will be destroyed by crits caused in the boarding action).

Gotta go!

RayB

_________________
DON'T DATE ROBOTS!!!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Nerroth's Q'orl Swarmhood fleet list, v5.0.3
PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 12:10 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 12:00 pm
Posts: 573
Location: Canada
But the Segment modules are escorts anyway, so should they not automatically count as such in a boarding action?

(perhaps the Chainship emergency de-couples when faced with a boarding action, to minimize losses...)


Gary

_________________


Gue'senshi: The 1st Kleistian Grenadiers

v7.3 pdf

Human armed forces for the greater good.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Nerroth's Q'orl Swarmhood fleet list, v5.0.3
PostPosted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 5:56 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 6:31 am
Posts: 88
I like where this list is going.  The base idea had the potential to go in the direction of really good or really bad, but the rules concept you came up with is excellent.

I also have to say that the concept sketches turned out great, and I hope you'll get pictures of the Homeworld and the Hivestation to go with the swarmhood pic you posted.

The list is solid, I still need to digest the seperation rules though, they probably could be streamlined a little more.

I think the lance and launch bays are too weak at str 1.  Putting them back to strength 2 and tweaking the points would be better, and it would be best to have modules with differing points costs anyway.

I'd actually like to see some more "utility" modules myself.  An unarmed cargo module that counts as a transport would be cool, maybe some sort of boarding module (boarding value 4) too.  Something like this:

Weapons Segment(as current)                30 pts
Lance Segment(Str 2)                           35 pts
Launch Bay Segment(Str 2)                    45 pts
Support Segment(as current)                  30 pts
Boarding Segment(Fpr 1 batt, board val 4) 20 pts
Cargo Segment(Fpr 1 batt)                       * pts
    *Fills mission's allotment of transports

The Navigator is a cool idea, but his ability is incredibly narrow.  I'd recommend something like "once per game, a ship with a navigator may roll 3D6 on a leadership test and remove the highest result." Reduce the cost to maybe 10-15 pts abd he's a usable upgrade but not overpowering.  And he'd be even more useful if the fleet commander had no re-rolls.

I hope you take some of my suggestions, and great list once again.  With a little refining, it'll be ready for battle.

_________________
The Construction Worker Space Marines like to paint Yellow and Black Stripes on Everything.  This is for Safety.  They also like to Blow Up Stuff.  This is for Unsafety.  They are very complicated people.  This is why they are very (x2) popular.  ? Sneak Preview of Construction Worker Space Marines


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 80 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net