Page 2 of 2

Re: Gothic cruiser, the worst cruiser in game?

Posted: 01 October 2016, 12:35
by Atherius
I quite like the Gothic...

Pure dpm doesn't show everything. Lances reduces armour. Lances are automatic hits.

The Gothic, because it only has lances, is very easy to upgrade. Because it has lance only armaments its very efficient versus high armour vessels. It is no less tough than or less nimble than the other cruisers, if nimble can be used in any way or form about Navy ships.

I'll concede it loses out in a 6000 or less broadside duel against a macro heavy ship, especially an ork ship. However with upgrades it is a very nice stand-off vessel at a range of 9000. It works very well in support of other vessels fighting closer in.

On top of that, because its underestimated it is often left alone. In a tight battle, having a close to undamaged or even pristine vessel, can be decisive. Back when Taunt was around, you could then even force an opponent to attack a full health ship. Miss those days, and it is besides the point, for it no longer applies.

However, I do like the Gothic simply because it is... reliable. It does damage at a steady pace, never missing, pacing its battle.


To be fair, I can understand how it lacks competitiveness in the player versus player arena, where a player will just smartly close the distance, or overwhelm it. And I understand some change to it might be required. Somebody once commented it was like the Imperial Guard, flashlights in space.

In the fight against the AI however, in Skirmish and Campaign, it is a solid ship, as solid as the others. Against a computer it does its part, and for me at least, I would say it has even been instrumental and helped determine the outcome of several battles. Also, just seeing that four blue lances broadside into a shieldless enemy... pretty, pretty lightshow.


I guess I just felt somebody should step up to the Gothic's defense.

Re: Gothic cruiser, the worst cruiser in game?

Posted: 01 October 2016, 12:48
by Atherius
And to be blunt, if the Gothic is a bit underpowered it is accuratly represented.

On the tabletop it had two batteries each rolling two attack die. 2x2.
A Lunar class had a macro rolling six dies and a lance battery. 6x1 and 2x1.
A Dominator class had two macro batteries rolling six dies. 6x2.

On the tabletop a Gothic could only do 4 damage at best in a full broadside.
Other Imperial Navy ships could do between 8-12 potential damage.

The difference was the reliability of that damage. Lances simply had a better chance at getting in hits, automatically hitting and reducing armour, where as macros could fail abysmaly. A Gothic would do a steady 2-3 damage. While a Lunar or Dominator would average 3-4 damage.

They still did more damage. I agree it is unfortunate for the Gothic class, but its much how it performed on the table-top as well.

Re: Gothic cruiser, the worst cruiser in game?

Posted: 29 October 2016, 00:48
by feld
Believe the TT background on the Gothic mentions pairing it with another macro cruiser as very effective. The macro ship brings down the shields and the gothic does the criticals. Anyone had any success doing that in real time? Maybe microing the "hold fire" command on the Gothic?


Re: Gothic cruiser, the worst cruiser in game?

Posted: 29 October 2016, 09:19
by Beernchips
The Gothic is a support ship which could shine if the game had more support skills for the moment only shield transfer and rally are real support skill and both are not that great).
With upgrades he can bring 9k range lances, other IN ships have best role at 6k or lower.
If more skills like shield transfer exists, Gothic could have a good role but for the moment it is always better to take another IN cruiser and engage at 6k range, trying to get double broadsides

Re: Gothic cruiser, the worst cruiser in game?

Posted: 17 January 2017, 00:02
by McNash
I suppose this is one of those units which are added just for the flavor of it.