Update 1.5.8536 - Patch Note

The latest news and announcements for Battlefleet Gothic: Armada.
User avatar
Imperator5
(Former) Technical Tester
Posts: 3063
Joined: 22 December 2015, 07:46
Contact:

Re: Update 1.5.8536 - Patch Note

Postby Imperator5 » 24 June 2016, 13:51

Drakki wrote:
Imperator5 wrote:
The Imperium reactors are very powerful, I doubt it would be a problem, plus battlebarges are more advanced than the usual IN ships.

The other one does 45x3 bombardment cannon damage with much higher crit chance, boarding torpedoes and less point cost.


At a distance of 6000 units.
The generator output is indeed a problem in Wh40k ship design, many vessel class descriptions state that. The most advanced generators and power couplings are within Apocalypse class battleship which has 6 lances per broadsie (12 total)
Astartes ships may be more advanced than some Navy vessles but they aren't than Mechaniucs own vessels, and they too face power output limitations. What else would prevent ships from using lances only since they are a lot better than weapon batteries. (Including collapsing shields)


Actually in books and lore Batteries got higher damage dealing through superior rate of fire and area of effect and they can bracket areas with lot of firepower. Lances are like ship to ship snipers, while batteries are like rapid fire mortars. Both got their own use.
http://forum.battlefleetgothic-armada.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=621

Please help me change skirmish to be customisable. Its very important for PVE players.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=515 Mod idea.

BabyLionCub
Posts: 53
Joined: 29 March 2016, 20:20
Contact:

Re: Update 1.5.8536 - Patch Note

Postby BabyLionCub » 24 June 2016, 14:03

Are they going to fix it so I can bring Battlebarges in 2vs2 AI skirmish, no matter what mode I end up inn? This is honestly the only thing I care about at the moment. Balance for me is whatever, I just want to play with my friend.

User avatar
Imperator5
(Former) Technical Tester
Posts: 3063
Joined: 22 December 2015, 07:46
Contact:

Re: Update 1.5.8536 - Patch Note

Postby Imperator5 » 24 June 2016, 14:52

Drakki wrote:
Imperator5 wrote:
Actually in books and lore Batteries got higher damage dealing through superior rate of fire and area of effect and they can bracket areas with lot of firepower. Lances are like ship to ship snipers, while batteries are like rapid fire mortars. Both got their own use.


"Through superior rate of fire and area of effect" Because there is more of them, and there is more of them because they use much less power, they also have less damage dealing capability than lances because of armour. Which the lances melt through not caring if it is a Tyranid flesh ship or an Traitor battle barge with meters thick adamantium armour.

And of course you are right that both got heir use, that is why Lunar which combines both armaments is a decent and versatile cruiser in the lore, the very backbone of the Imperial Navy, called sometimes "The Leman Russ of the void"


I also meant blanketing the void as in their weapons had enough of an area of effect to actually matter in space. Not an easy feat!

But this allowed Batteries to do well against smaller ships or hard to see targets like eldar.

Also, a book said the Battlebarge does not have meters thick armour, but a kilometer thick one. Navy ships got hundred meters thick prows.
Lances should go through medium (50) armour, but not heavy (75) one.
http://forum.battlefleetgothic-armada.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=621

Please help me change skirmish to be customisable. Its very important for PVE players.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=515 Mod idea.

User avatar
Imperator5
(Former) Technical Tester
Posts: 3063
Joined: 22 December 2015, 07:46
Contact:

Re: Update 1.5.8536 - Patch Note

Postby Imperator5 » 24 June 2016, 15:56

Drakki wrote:
Imperator5 wrote:
Also, a book said the Battlebarge does not have meters thick armour, but a kilometer thick one. Navy ships got hundred meters thick prows.
Lances should go through medium (50) armour, but not heavy (75) one.


That is plain ridiculous, a battle barge is 8 km long so it can't possibly have kilometres thick armour.

No the, lances should go even through Necron tomb ships armour like it was nothing. Those are millions of gigawatt of energy able to raze entire cities or burn through the planets crust.


I think a book hinted at them being exaton grade. But 8km is fanon, there is no canon 40k ship measurements. Some books put battleships at 16km, which would mean a BB would have enough for heavy armour.
http://forum.battlefleetgothic-armada.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=621

Please help me change skirmish to be customisable. Its very important for PVE players.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=515 Mod idea.

User avatar
Imperator5
(Former) Technical Tester
Posts: 3063
Joined: 22 December 2015, 07:46
Contact:

Re: Update 1.5.8536 - Patch Note

Postby Imperator5 » 24 June 2016, 16:45

Drakki wrote:
Imperator5 wrote:I think a book hinted at them being exaton grade. But 8km is fanon, there is no canon 40k ship measurements. Some books put battleships at 16km, which would mean a BB would have enough for heavy armour.


Horus heresy book 3 says IMP battleships are 8 to 12 km long depending on the model,

Ships of Mars from 2010 says Gloriana is 20 km long and she is supposedly over 2 times longer than a battle barge. And even Gloriana couldn't fit a kilometre of armour.

There are also many sources stating the size of IMP cruisers in comparison to Barges as "almost half longer and broader than a standard Lunar class cruiser" , along with actual numbers from Rouge trader battlefield koronus for most common IMP ships.

In the case of ships sizes rulebooks always overrule novels just like is the case with IMP Titans and ARE cannon.


I do not subrscribe, nor ever will, to the fan theory that rulebooks are higher tier than other GW publishings. Either it is ALL canon or NONE. And I accept nothing else.
http://forum.battlefleetgothic-armada.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=621

Please help me change skirmish to be customisable. Its very important for PVE players.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=515 Mod idea.

User avatar
Imperator5
(Former) Technical Tester
Posts: 3063
Joined: 22 December 2015, 07:46
Contact:

Re: Update 1.5.8536 - Patch Note

Postby Imperator5 » 24 June 2016, 17:20

Drakki wrote:
Imperator5 wrote:I do not subrscribe, nor ever will, to the fan theory that rulebooks are higher tier than other GW publishings. Either it is ALL canon or NONE. And I accept nothing else.


Differences to what is in the rulebooks and source books vs what is in the novels are a result of author mistake, that is the reason why official GW publications > Black library novels.

One would think though they would have established an official line for both by now so things like a 70 meters tall Warhound titans and nonsense like it could be avoided.


GW usually does worse than Black Library, and forge world does the stupidest of lore. I sometimes feel that GW can't do scifi at all, only fantasy but than I look at Age of Sigmar.....
http://forum.battlefleetgothic-armada.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=621

Please help me change skirmish to be customisable. Its very important for PVE players.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=515 Mod idea.

User avatar
Imperator5
(Former) Technical Tester
Posts: 3063
Joined: 22 December 2015, 07:46
Contact:

Re: Update 1.5.8536 - Patch Note

Postby Imperator5 » 24 June 2016, 18:18

Drakki wrote:
Imperator5 wrote:
GW usually does worse than Black Library, and forge world does the stupidest of lore. I sometimes feel that GW can't do scifi at all, only fantasy but than I look at Age of Sigmar.....


Dont go there please. I was collecting Dorfs since I was a kid and have all Gotrek & Felix novels in my bookcase. Only fortunate thing that happened was that I sold my army less than a year before age of Sigmar. To this dau I ponder why did they kill their own milk cow, the sales on the "new" warhammer fantasy are pathethic :P


Poor Gotrek and Felix. I really loved all William King novels. Best things in GW.
http://forum.battlefleetgothic-armada.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=621

Please help me change skirmish to be customisable. Its very important for PVE players.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=515 Mod idea.

User avatar
Cryhavok
Posts: 292
Joined: 03 June 2016, 16:02
Contact:

Re: Update 1.5.8536 - Patch Note

Postby Cryhavok » 24 June 2016, 19:00

Imperator5 wrote:
Drakki wrote:
Imperator5 wrote:I think a book hinted at them being exaton grade. But 8km is fanon, there is no canon 40k ship measurements. Some books put battleships at 16km, which would mean a BB would have enough for heavy armour.


Horus heresy book 3 says IMP battleships are 8 to 12 km long depending on the model,

Ships of Mars from 2010 says Gloriana is 20 km long and she is supposedly over 2 times longer than a battle barge. And even Gloriana couldn't fit a kilometre of armour.

There are also many sources stating the size of IMP cruisers in comparison to Barges as "almost half longer and broader than a standard Lunar class cruiser" , along with actual numbers from Rouge trader battlefield koronus for most common IMP ships.

In the case of ships sizes rulebooks always overrule novels just like is the case with IMP Titans and ARE cannon.


I do not subrscribe, nor ever will, to the fan theory that rulebooks are higher tier than other GW publishings. Either it is ALL canon or NONE. And I accept nothing else.


You should skip the Tannith First and Last line of stories then, because that author makes up his own lore almost entirely and I am not sure he even heard about the concept of canon lore.
Do you hear the voices too?!?

User avatar
Cryhavok
Posts: 292
Joined: 03 June 2016, 16:02
Contact:

Re: Update 1.5.8536 - Patch Note

Postby Cryhavok » 24 June 2016, 19:18

Drakki wrote:
Cryhavok wrote:
You should skip the Tannith First and Last line of stories then, because that author makes up his own lore almost entirely and I am not sure he even heard about the concept of canon lore.

I don't mind author making their own lore, works well sometimes like in Helsreach

In my personal opinion Abnett is allowed to that with Ghosts, Eisenhorn, Horus heresy because he is for sure the best selling author for Black Library and on top of that his warhammer books actually win awards. And in my opinion he deserve that because his books are an example of proper literature within warhammer just like the mentioned W. King instead of just space marine gore porn [which can be fun to read too, but so are shampoo instructions if your doing something else during reading it kek :P] Cheers.


I feel about Abnett's 40k books the same way I feel about Peter Jackson's Hobbit movies: The are great at making money, but they are still heretical abominations :P Still it's mostly his earlier books that were bad like that, his newer stuff is a lot more lore friendly, and he is a great author, lore issues aside. I love his non-black library novels.
Do you hear the voices too?!?

Perturabo-Liberal
(Former) Technical Tester
Posts: 33
Joined: 22 October 2015, 19:51
Contact:

Re: Update 1.5.8536 - Patch Note

Postby Perturabo-Liberal » 24 June 2016, 20:02

Drakki wrote:
Perturabo-Liberal wrote:
Yeah, because having no counter at all to a certain tactic as one faction is incredibly fun. God forbid the devs slightly going against the stats in a tabletop game thet's been practically dead for several years in their RTS to solve major balance issues. It's not like we want people to enjoy playing the game, that stuff is for dorks.
Also, currently we have 1 completely inferior screen on a barge against 4 squadrons from another battleships with carrier capacity. Does this seem equal to 3 vs 8 or 2 vs 4 to you? Can you even count?


1 squadron effectively counters 2 enemy bomber squadrons, so the screen is not inferior at all.You also seem to forget about the 3 superior squadrons the battle barge sends in return. [ 10% bigger chance to hit enemy ordnance, 3 more shoots per squadron than defensive squadrons, -10 to enemy troop value if boarding, 1 boarding more than enemy assault boats squadron.]

We also have 9 upgrade slots on a battle-barge so it should be possible to fit 3 extra turrets to its already buffed turret array. If you put an support vessel next to the barge with another squadron then you would have neutralized an enemy specialized carrier ship and now can proceed to deal 100+ guaranteed damage to it at 12000 units, and that is not counting the thunder hawks which are the best ordnance in the game atm and will rip through the enemies 4 cover squadrons in one attack run.

Battle barge is not a carrier and ordnance is not the way of the astartes, if you stopped for a second and considered the balance of what you are proposing you would perhaps realize that giving it a full fighter screen would create a totally overpowered ship with, what you have put as "no counter at all to a certain tactic as one faction is incredibly fun".

Also, ""Can you even count?""
Take this 12 years old behaviour elsewhere, we are exchanging arguments here.


Stormhawks are inferior because they are just a fighter squardron with nothing fancy about them, but they are not affected by refueling system upgrade and also hog 1 skill slot. Barge may be fine with that, but SCs have just 2.
So, it you are fielding a battle barge it's 3-4 wasted slots on a fleet that doesn't have many to beguin with to get 3-4 fighter squardons which are actually worse than any other fighters in-game.

Can you read? Or count? Or listen to any arguments? Because you are wrong on so many levels I don't even know where to start.

Each thunderhawk squadron contains 3 thinderhawks, each one takes 3 shots at an enemy ordnance. That's 9 attacks in total. Total HP pool is 6.
Now, chaos assault boat squardon has 2 actual boats and 4 fighters that shoot 2 times. That's 8 attacks in total. Total HP pool is also 6.
Not a huge difference, is it? Hardly any difference at all, actually. Thunderhawks do have better chances to get through, but only by a small amount, so RNG can still often negate the benefits.

Now to getting through fighter screens. This one is even easier. Let's say Despoiler has 3 launch bays just for balance's sake, even though it's not true. So it has 3 fighter squardons 6 crafts each 2 attacks per craft. That's 12 attacks per squadron against thuderhawks' 9. With the same HP pool of 6.
Now, i'm not really sure how attacks are applied because I don't think all the squadrons of 1 wave reach their destination simultaneously and I don't feel like digging through the whole Codex Sages topic, but we are looking at at least 27 attacks made by thunderhawks and 36 attacks made by fighters. Each has a 35% chance to hit, so approximately one third. That's 12 HP off thunderhawks which is 2 out of 3 squadrons disregarding the turrets and 9 off the fighters which is 1.5 of 3 squadrons.
SM on the other hand have a whopping 1 fighter wing per ship, so 12 attacks and 6 HP versus 24 attacks and 18 HP on chaos assault boats. Stormhawks get obliterated no matter what, while taking 3 HP off the assault boats disregarding the turrets only 1 of which statistically applies to an actual boat and not a fighter.
So, in the end of the day, there are 3 thunderhawks left to get through the ship's defence and attempt to deal a maximum of 3 crits, while chaos has 5 assault boats to deal a maximum of 5 crits.
Sure, SM have better chances of succeeding, but it is still 3 vs 5.
Do you understand what I'm saying? It doesn't get more basic than this.
A single Styx has the capacity to almost completely pulverise 2 fighter squadrons with 1 wave of it's assault boats. And what if chaos player decides to take *gasp* 2 carriers? Or even 3? Crazy, right. Never happens in game. But in the case such extremely unlikely situation happens, what should SM player do? Should he rejoice at a sight of his strike crusiers geting torn apart by masses of attack crast in the first engagement, because "ordnance is not the way of astartes" so it's fine for them to suck ass against certain fleets with no way of defending themselves? Should he be happy because everything should be as close to the tabletop as possible, beyond any point and reason, even though that game was turn based and had drastically different mechanics?
Oh, and by the way, scince you've glossed over this point like the rest of my argument I'll say it again - you can't even deploy your precious thunderhawks if you don't have any visible targets because marines can't seem to be bothered to just shoot incoming enemy attack craft. But I guess it's fine - it's not like we have running silent, disruptor skills, tzeentch clouds and fllets built entirely around stealth that you won't have any way of detecting, scince those stormhawks take up a skill slot on your every bloody ship.
I also find it hilarious how you are totally fine with 3 launch bays on the barge and therefore 3 squadrons of assault craft/bombers, but fighters are a no-no. I guees it's fine to break canon, but only when you feel like it, am I right?


Return to “News & Announcements”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron