Page 2 of 3

Re: Overlord or Mars?

Posted: 05 June 2016, 17:32
by Bludfist
Imperator5 wrote:
Bludfist wrote:Why would you ever take lunars?

Lets all be real here guys

It's a lack luster ship


A Gothic is better, and than a Tyrant is even better.

Push base range IN lances to 9k or give back the 300% crit upgrade, otherwise i simply cant take them seriously

Re: Overlord or Mars?

Posted: 05 June 2016, 17:54
by Imperator5
Bludfist wrote:
Imperator5 wrote:
Bludfist wrote:Why would you ever take lunars?

Lets all be real here guys

It's a lack luster ship


A Gothic is better, and than a Tyrant is even better.

Push base range IN lances to 9k or give back the 300% crit upgrade, otherwise i simply cant take them seriously


9k range would be good, yeah.

Re: Overlord or Mars?

Posted: 05 June 2016, 19:01
by Kashtano
Imperator5 wrote:9k range would be good, yeah.


When they announced a ranked mode without upgrades and skills, my first thought was: a Gothic without 9k upgade? Not fun.

Re: Overlord or Mars?

Posted: 06 June 2016, 04:39
by Sovereign
Bludfist wrote:Why would you ever take lunars?

Lets all be real here guys

It's a lack luster ship


Because people think they're terrible and always under-estimate them. ;)

Because they have lances and macros I upgrade the lances to do extra damage vs shields and run two. It means that when focusing on a single enemy vessel shields come down quickly. I appreciate that over-all the DPS of the ship is not particularly impressive but the higher rate of fire on the macro-batteries mean that I've got a chance to score a critical hit before my opponent and potentially cripple their ship. It can be a risky strategy but it's bagged me a few battleships who weren't prepared for it. ;)

I appreciate that the more focused weaponry of the other ships makes them better at damage but the Gothic's lower rate of fire can see it struggling in chaotic close-quarters engagements against multiple opponents and the Tyrant's macro-cannons just miss at long range. I'd rather take the jack-of-all-trades and then tailor my tactics to what my opponent is weakest at because they've over specialised.

Re: Overlord or Mars?

Posted: 06 June 2016, 07:38
by Scorch715
Sovereign wrote:Overlord it is. I'm kind of hating that it has a nova cannon though. I've always, always preferred torpedoes, even when the nova was better.


Do you actually mean Overlord, or did you mean to be Mars? Because the Mars is the one with the nova

Re: Overlord or Mars?

Posted: 06 June 2016, 11:20
by Sovereign
Scorch715 wrote:
Sovereign wrote:Overlord it is. I'm kind of hating that it has a nova cannon though. I've always, always preferred torpedoes, even when the nova was better.


Do you actually mean Overlord, or did you mean to be Mars? Because the Mars is the one with the nova


Sorry, for some reason I thought the torps and nova were switched on the two ships. Derp.

So yeah, woo Overlord!

Re: Overlord or Mars?

Posted: 06 June 2016, 19:30
by Beernchips
Having at least 1 Mars is good because he allows some defensive fighter cover in 600-700 points game without taking Emperor. He is also far better than Overlord vs Eldar.
I think Overlord and Mars are just here are "extra slots" from cruisers. If you take tyrants and dominator to fill brawl cruisers, having Overlord in addition is too much so you can take Mars for defense carrier.

Re: Overlord or Mars?

Posted: 07 June 2016, 12:40
by Ubikuuu
It's wierd.
Overall I prefer the Overlord too.
Proplem is: you need fighters, and this kind of screws up fleet building.

You are either stuck with the costly paperweight Dictators or the super slow Emperor that takes a big share of your deployment points. Or take no fighter and get stuck in a uphill battle versus quite a few, very popular strategies.

Mars still got respectable long range firepower, can keep up with the rest of the fleet, and Nova is actually pretty good when taken en masse especially against few, but very powerful strategies IN struggle very much against (Ork mass escorts, Chaos carriers and Eldar... well... everything Eldar-related).

Also, for bonus points, which cool-named, top-dps, single-offensive-upgrade-dependant cruiser carries the Nova?

I tried, really. Brought a ram+torp based fleet with Dictators and Overlords up to lvl 8 and then some.
In the end tho, I feel 3xDominator + Mars is the best we have got. And that's saying a lot.

Not saying other strategies are not viable, it's the wierd list sinergies (or rather lack of thereof) that make me go "I actually can't round up this strategy", forcing me to make inefficient decisions or just glaringly incomplete setups.
Like in 3.5 D&D when a useless prerequisite Feat, together with how scarce such resources are, ruins your character plan.

Meh.

Re: Overlord or Mars?

Posted: 07 June 2016, 20:24
by CALiGeR190
Why not just do both?

Re: Overlord or Mars?

Posted: 08 June 2016, 05:53
by MYNAME?
Bludfist wrote:I dont believe in brawling fleets anymore simply because you need a fleet to fight every threat and brawling fleets are weak vs Orks, Thats why i belive that plasma macros are all around the best tools to have with targeting matrix which lets you have 50% acc at 9k, which is out of trakktor range and can be pushed to 15k where with lock on, you can trade hits with chaos.

I keep an emperor and dictator for my carrier needs but everything else is overlords and tyrants


Brawling would be fun if it wouldnt end up in a ram fest.

Tried Chaos 6-9k Brawler fleet. It was very fun to play against imperials but found that chaos brawlers get hard countered by Taunt spam... because the second you cant maneuver you are fucked....