Will Space Marines be a ramming focused faction?

Discuss the Space Marine fleet. There is only the Emperor, and he is our shield and protector.
MYNAME?
Posts: 881
Joined: 19 March 2016, 18:39
Contact:

Re: Will Space Marines be a ramming focused faction?

Postby MYNAME? » 16 May 2016, 09:39

Space marine ships can ram quite effectivly however they wont have the numbers to go all out in peoples faces. If you are ramming your gonna be all up in that salad and if your surrounded and out numbered your gonna have a bad day. No matter if you got 75 armor all around because atm armor doesnt count for shit due to the poor game design that AP rounds and bullshit armor pen torpedoes that is not true to fluff. Torpedoes are supposed to be shield piercing not AP as well cept for some special variants... I can see the devs reworking torps and AP I hope because if they dont Space marines will get owned.l 9/10 times when they are playing against brawler armies

Auzor
Posts: 88
Joined: 08 April 2016, 16:50
Contact:

Re: Will Space Marines be a ramming focused faction?

Postby Auzor » 16 May 2016, 15:55

MYNAME? wrote:Space marine ships can ram quite effectivly however they wont have the numbers to go all out in peoples faces. If you are ramming your gonna be all up in that salad and if your surrounded and out numbered your gonna have a bad day. No matter if you got 75 armor all around because atm armor doesnt count for shit due to the poor game design that AP rounds and bullshit armor pen torpedoes that is not true to fluff. Torpedoes are supposed to be shield piercing not AP as well cept for some special variants... I can see the devs reworking torps and AP I hope because if they dont Space marines will get owned.l 9/10 times when they are playing against brawler armies


I've been pondering about torpedoes and AP myself;
I do think torpedoes being AP can be removed; but then boarding torpedoes become truly powerful, relatively.
Also, melta torpedoes are then even more an upgrade.
In addition, I would then want to see tighter torpedo spreads.

Finally:
torpedoes being AP is not the most illogical thing.
Lore: 100m long. Yeah.. in space, you don't need constant propulsion, so a lot of that is gonna be warhead.
Relative to that, the idea that a what.. 10m? size macro cannon suddenly pierces armor at shorter range is ridiculous.

Beernchips
Posts: 824
Joined: 12 March 2016, 09:53
Location: Strasbourg
Contact:

Re: Will Space Marines be a ramming focused faction?

Postby Beernchips » 16 May 2016, 16:07

Removing AP will bring back torpedoes to the useless state they were in beta so no thx.
It is logical because almost all missiles/torpedoes in real life have a bit of piercing head because exploding on the surface of the target is useless. So 100m missiles loaded with explosives should pierce a part of enemy armor.
Only Eldar torps truly ignore armor

On a sidenote, "physical" piercing (torps/macros with upgrade) should reduce armor by 25 and not to 25
Only lances and some really specific weapons such as Eldar torps or some other specific weapons should have more piercing
Repent, for tomorrow you die

User avatar
Bludfist
Posts: 997
Joined: 14 March 2016, 22:46
Contact:

Re: Will Space Marines be a ramming focused faction?

Postby Bludfist » 16 May 2016, 16:10

Torps didn't price armor on TT that's true but they did a lot more damage than they do here

So it's compensation

Nerf torps and we have the same issue of novas > torps and torps are weak on a faction ment to have strong torps

In already have less torp spread if they slot short burn torpedos

Faster torps = less time to spread + they reach the target faster so their is less time for the enemy to destroy them
Chaos walking into Aldorf be like
Spoiler : :
Image

MYNAME?
Posts: 881
Joined: 19 March 2016, 18:39
Contact:

Re: Will Space Marines be a ramming focused faction?

Postby MYNAME? » 16 May 2016, 17:31

Beernchips wrote:Removing AP will bring back torpedoes to the useless state they were in beta so no thx.
It is logical because almost all missiles/torpedoes in real life have a bit of piercing head because exploding on the surface of the target is useless. So 100m missiles loaded with explosives should pierce a part of enemy armor.
Only Eldar torps truly ignore armor

On a sidenote, "physical" piercing (torps/macros with upgrade) should reduce armor by 25 and not to 25
Only lances and some really specific weapons such as Eldar torps or some other specific weapons should have more piercing


Remove armor pen and increase damage significantly.

Auzor
Posts: 88
Joined: 08 April 2016, 16:50
Contact:

Re: Will Space Marines be a ramming focused faction?

Postby Auzor » 16 May 2016, 18:33

Bludfist wrote:Torps didn't price armor on TT that's true but they did a lot more damage than they do here

So it's compensation

Nerf torps and we have the same issue of novas > torps and torps are weak on a faction ment to have strong torps

In already have less torp spread if they slot short burn torpedos

Faster torps = less time to spread + they reach the target faster so their is less time for the enemy to destroy them


Usually I can see your points, this one though.. 'ere we go :?

-Torps armor piercing as compensation for low damage: hmm.. not really.
Macro cannons: for each point of "weapons battery" in TT, here macro cannons deal 1 dps (before armor, different accuracy etc).
What is the DPS of a torpedo? 1. (45 damage, 45second cooldown). So, that fits reasonably well. Unlike macro-cannons, you can drastically increase this pure dps by using crew skills for 12% faster skills; and there is reload ordnance.
The thing is, if your ship (TT) was hit by a torpedo marker from a cruiser, *all 6* torpedoes would go against your armor. And failures would not "fail to penetrate", but continue on their merry way.

With tighter torpedo spreads, aiming your ship "in between" two torpedoes from 1 volley would not be possible anymore. But, it should be easier to go around a spread or in between two spreads.

Torpedoes also still feel pretty slow.

Faster torps do NOT have less spread. The angle of fire is the same, they just travel on the lines faster.
Picture the enemy fleet *closing in*:
You launch standard torpedos, I launch short-burn.
Short burn: they travel faster, meaning they will encounter the enemy *further away*, and thus actually be *more* spread out.
Obviously, the reverse holds in chasing an enemy.
And faster torps are still an advantage; easier to aim, less time for enemy to change flight path etc.


TL;DR: torpedo spread is why torpedoes are armor piercing: it is pretty likely a cruiser will be hit by only 1 torpedo from a volley at most.


Moving on: less time to destroy them: eh.. not really.
If a torpedo enters "turret range" on an enemy ship, every turret has a 10% chance of hitting that torpedo. Regardless of the amount of torpedoes etc. Eldar torpedoes then have dodge, giving them a chance to survive being hit by a turret.
The turrets you see firing in-game are basically graphics only.
*Maybe* vs slow torpedoes by flying away you can get a second volley of turret-fire, but that is probably not intentional.
Faster torpedoes DO have an advantage for penetrating through fighter screens: if the fighters only arrive after the torp has hit, well.. good job torpedo.


A "rebalanced" torpedo:
60 damage/torpedo, divided into 6 10 damage warheads/torpedo. Tighter torpedo spread, possibly higher speed.
No AP. In the above, even if you hit 75 front armor, dealing 0 damage is unlikely.
Average damage vs 50% armor would be 30.
Currently: 45 x 0.75 (25% armor still counts!)= 33.75 damage on average.
Issue: hi, boarding torpedoes. Tighter spread, faster boarding torpedoes = the OP-potential is real.
Not sure how to resolve that one.. give each ship a repair capability, based on hull points remaining, so a ship doesn't lose a weapon system/engine/.. for an entire match? Make boarding torpedoes go vs armor too? (oh man.. IN & especially SM would be hilariously better off then)

Etellerandet
Posts: 6
Joined: 28 April 2016, 21:28
Contact:

Re: Will Space Marines be a ramming focused faction?

Postby Etellerandet » 17 May 2016, 09:27

The TT space marine fleet where kind of a weird animal because of the strike cruisers. To properly explain it, let me first explain something importent about the TT version of the game. The TT version was first build with a string focus on movement and concentrating fire. Two cruisers moving along side each other and firing would be able to take out each others shield each turn, so you had to either concentrate fire from several cruisers or fire at them from the front or rear to actuelly do damagde.

The other really importent thing is that turrets could fire several times each turn, but you had to either fire at torpedoes or at airplanes. So if you choose to fire at the first airplanes that hits you, then you could fire at all the airplanes that came, but you would be open to torpedoes.

The last really importent thing was leadership and special orders. You needed them to make a leadership test to for example reload ordenance, lock on, brace for impact etc. If you failed a test for special orders, then you could make no more special orders that turn. A leadership test was done by rolling two dices and then trying to get equal to or under your leadership score, that ranged from 5 to 10 depending on fleet admirals etc. You could get re-rolls in different ways and they where costly and importent.

Lightnings strikes where called hit-and-run and worked by you rolling on a table. 1 did nothing, while 2-6 took out different sub-systems until they where repaired. A 6 would also deal a small amount of damagde. Space marines would add 1 to this value when they use hit-and-run and subtract 1 when hit-and-runwhere used against them.

Now with these rules the battle barage was a monster of epic proportion protected against the most common ways to take down battleships. It had the higest armor in the game all around, high shield and turret value, lots of hit points, big weapon batteries, bombardment cannons, torpedoes and launchbays. Now having all this stuff was cool and all. You could fire of a salvo of torpedoes at an enemy cruiser and if he used his turrets to defend himself, then your airplanes would hit him straight after. It was also kind of a problem though. If you wanted to maximize your weapon batteries and bombardment cannon, then you wanted to lock on, but to use your ordenance, you would need to reload ordenance. This was not that big a problem for the battle barrage, but it was for the Strike Cruiser.

See the Strike Cruiser, just like the battle barrage had a little bit of everything, but on the body of a light cruiser, which meant that it wasn't what you expected at all.

It was not hard as a rock, because it had only 1 shield and 6 hit points, compared to 2 shields and 8 hitpoints of a cruiser. That meant that an attack that would deal 1 damagde to an imperial cruiser, would almost cripple a strike cruiser.

It was rather horrible as an aircraft carrier as the small strenght of its launchbays meant that 25% of the time the average cruiser would be able to shot them all down before getting hit.

It was bad at boarding actions. Space marines get +2 in boarding action, but chaos for example got +1 and because the strike cruiser had fewer hitpoint, the chaosplayer would get +1 more, leaving them on equal fighting ground. But because the defending player could add turrets to his hitpoints, then a strike cruiser only needed to take 1 point of damagde and then he would be outnumbered 1 to 2, which meant that the chaos player would have the upperhand.

The strike cruiser where bad at actuelly hurting other cruisers. Because of the low weapon battery and bombardment cannon values you could expect no more than to take down 2 shields if you where in a good or perfect firing position. You had to lock on to actuelly be able to expect to damagde the enemy ship.

It was bad at hit-and-run atttacks. Space marines might get +1 on hit-and-run attacks, but you could only make a teleport attack if you had equal or more hitpoint than the ship you wanted to attack, which the strike cruiser rarely had. Also you couldn't make a teleport attack the same turn you used a special order and you already want to lock on and reload ordenance.

So to actuelly get anything out of your strike cruisers, they would either have to run with in pairs (One exhanging launchbays to get torpedoes) or with a small escort. Torpedo escorts where lovely for it. They could take down a shield or two with their firepower, thus enabling your strike cruiser to actuelly hit with its crit heavy cannon, while at the same time forcing your opponent to either use his turrets at torpedoes or aircrafts. Space marine escorts where very good. They where faster and the torpedo escorts where also hevaier armored than their imperial counter parts.

So that often left space marines with less and weaker cruisers and slightly more and better escorts than their enemies. The equaliser here was the strong leadership of the space marines. Where a an imperial navy ship would have betwen 6 and 9 in leadership. The space marines had betwen 8 and 10. Their admirals where cheap and so where their rerolls. Ramming where really hard for other fleets, because you first had to succede an all-ahead special order and then another leadership test to hit, but pretty easy for space marines because of their high leadership and for a lone strike cruiser without escort, it might have been the only way to get through the enemies shield. A space marine player could send his ships through astroid fields and hit from unexpected direction, because he could actuelly be sure that his ships would be able to steer it safely.

I doubt the devs will include anything that shows the good leadership from the game. It would be cool if they did, but as long as they are fast and have bombardment cannons, then I guess I am happy.

User avatar
Bludfist
Posts: 997
Joined: 14 March 2016, 22:46
Contact:

Re: Will Space Marines be a ramming focused faction

Postby Bludfist » 17 May 2016, 16:08

They could do for them like the did for eldar and give them a special attribute like reduced taunt duration

We already know that they will get +10 base troop value and +1 assault actions just like orks


So strike cruiser is a LC? What about vanguards? I'm trying to figure out which all ship slots the devs will fill with unimplemented IN ships
Chaos walking into Aldorf be like
Spoiler : :
Image

Cripple X
Posts: 72
Joined: 25 April 2016, 22:21
Contact:

Re: Will Space Marines be a ramming focused faction?

Postby Cripple X » 18 May 2016, 23:06

Etellerandet wrote:I doubt the devs will include anything that shows the good leadership from the game. It would be cool if they did, but as long as they are fast and have bombardment cannons, then I guess I am happy.

I'm hoping the Devs Implement "And They Shall Know No Fear" somehow--maybe make Adeptus Astartes vessels immune to Insubordination.

As for the rest, I'd guess the faction will basically work like an IN vessel with the Adeptus Astartes favour, but with more armor and way less ranged firepower.
The Emperor is master of the galaxy, but the Captain is master of his ship.

Auzor
Posts: 88
Joined: 08 April 2016, 16:50
Contact:

Re: Will Space Marines be a ramming focused faction?

Postby Auzor » 19 May 2016, 18:57

Etellerandet wrote:The TT space marine fleet where kind of a weird animal because of the strike cruisers. To properly explain it, let me first explain something importent about the TT version of the game. The TT version was first build with a string focus on movement and concentrating fire. Two cruisers moving along side each other and firing would be able to take out each others shield each turn, so you had to either concentrate fire from several cruisers or fire at them from the front or rear to actuelly do damagde.

The other really importent thing is that turrets could fire several times each turn, but you had to either fire at torpedoes or at airplanes. So if you choose to fire at the first airplanes that hits you, then you could fire at all the airplanes that came, but you would be open to torpedoes.

The last really importent thing was leadership and special orders. You needed them to make a leadership test to for example reload ordenance, lock on, brace for impact etc. If you failed a test for special orders, then you could make no more special orders that turn. A leadership test was done by rolling two dices and then trying to get equal to or under your leadership score, that ranged from 5 to 10 depending on fleet admirals etc. You could get re-rolls in different ways and they where costly and importent.

Lightnings strikes where called hit-and-run and worked by you rolling on a table. 1 did nothing, while 2-6 took out different sub-systems until they where repaired. A 6 would also deal a small amount of damagde. Space marines would add 1 to this value when they use hit-and-run and subtract 1 when hit-and-runwhere used against them.

Now with these rules the battle barage was a monster of epic proportion protected against the most common ways to take down battleships. It had the higest armor in the game all around, high shield and turret value, lots of hit points, big weapon batteries, bombardment cannons, torpedoes and launchbays. Now having all this stuff was cool and all. You could fire of a salvo of torpedoes at an enemy cruiser and if he used his turrets to defend himself, then your airplanes would hit him straight after. It was also kind of a problem though. If you wanted to maximize your weapon batteries and bombardment cannon, then you wanted to lock on, but to use your ordenance, you would need to reload ordenance. This was not that big a problem for the battle barrage, but it was for the Strike Cruiser.

See the Strike Cruiser, just like the battle barrage had a little bit of everything, but on the body of a light cruiser, which meant that it wasn't what you expected at all.

It was not hard as a rock, because it had only 1 shield and 6 hit points, compared to 2 shields and 8 hitpoints of a cruiser. That meant that an attack that would deal 1 damagde to an imperial cruiser, would almost cripple a strike cruiser.

It was rather horrible as an aircraft carrier as the small strenght of its launchbays meant that 25% of the time the average cruiser would be able to shot them all down before getting hit.

It was bad at boarding actions. Space marines get +2 in boarding action, but chaos for example got +1 and because the strike cruiser had fewer hitpoint, the chaosplayer would get +1 more, leaving them on equal fighting ground. But because the defending player could add turrets to his hitpoints, then a strike cruiser only needed to take 1 point of damagde and then he would be outnumbered 1 to 2, which meant that the chaos player would have the upperhand.

The strike cruiser where bad at actuelly hurting other cruisers. Because of the low weapon battery and bombardment cannon values you could expect no more than to take down 2 shields if you where in a good or perfect firing position. You had to lock on to actuelly be able to expect to damagde the enemy ship.

It was bad at hit-and-run atttacks. Space marines might get +1 on hit-and-run attacks, but you could only make a teleport attack if you had equal or more hitpoint than the ship you wanted to attack, which the strike cruiser rarely had. Also you couldn't make a teleport attack the same turn you used a special order and you already want to lock on and reload ordenance.

So to actuelly get anything out of your strike cruisers, they would either have to run with in pairs (One exhanging launchbays to get torpedoes) or with a small escort. Torpedo escorts where lovely for it. They could take down a shield or two with their firepower, thus enabling your strike cruiser to actuelly hit with its crit heavy cannon, while at the same time forcing your opponent to either use his turrets at torpedoes or aircrafts. Space marine escorts where very good. They where faster and the torpedo escorts where also hevaier armored than their imperial counter parts.

So that often left space marines with less and weaker cruisers and slightly more and better escorts than their enemies. The equaliser here was the strong leadership of the space marines. Where a an imperial navy ship would have betwen 6 and 9 in leadership. The space marines had betwen 8 and 10. Their admirals where cheap and so where their rerolls. Ramming where really hard for other fleets, because you first had to succede an all-ahead special order and then another leadership test to hit, but pretty easy for space marines because of their high leadership and for a lone strike cruiser without escort, it might have been the only way to get through the enemies shield. A space marine player could send his ships through astroid fields and hit from unexpected direction, because he could actuelly be sure that his ships would be able to steer it safely.

I doubt the devs will include anything that shows the good leadership from the game. It would be cool if they did, but as long as they are fast and have bombardment cannons, then I guess I am happy.


An important tidbit in comparing the strike cruiser to an imperial cruiser: the /drumrolls..
Point cost.
The lunar & gothic were 180 points; the dictator with launch bays .. 220 points.
The dauntless was 110 points, regardless of version.
the strike cruiser was.. 145 points.

Take a dauntless, lance version.
1)Exchange the front-only lance with a 270° arc bombardment cannon; lose some accuracy, gain triple the crit chance, much better odds of hitting eldar, and of course, broadside ability: side weapons battery + bombardment cannon focused on a single target.
2) Add a launchbay, with durable assault-boat fighters; launch and decide if you want to use them as assault boat or fighter. oh, and as space marine, a bonus to boarding.
3) Better leadership.
4) Better armor, because the dauntless did NOT have the armored prow.
5) twice the turrets; okay, from 1 to 2 is not hugely impressive.

Compared to the TT dauntless, the strike cruiser is a steal IMO.

Those assault boats may be crap due to small numbers vs a BB, but they can murder escorts pretty handily I think.

Strike cruiser also turns *twice* as fast as an IN cruiser; unlike the IN, the SM are actually pretty good about moving and focusing all fire into a single ship.

-> Overall, with a battlebarge, the strike cruiser I think is pretty fine.

The problem is implementing that into a computer game, where armor doesn't matter nearly as much.

Edit: had to go elsewhere.
Another way to look at the strike cruiser, as you did, is to compare it to an actual cruiser.
The Dominator is clearly a *very* different beast, with 12 dps, and nova cannon.
Compared to the lunar:
180->145 points: 35 points cheaper.
Same turrets, -1 shield, -2 HP; but faster and also faster turning. Also: I think in TT, shields did benefit from armor, meaning against normal macro fire, the shields would average out to be the same, except from the front...
Lose 2 dps of macro, for 1 dps of bombardment.
6 torpedoes traded for 2 (=1 in BFG:A) launch bays.
and then of course, SM boarding, leadership etc.
Now, 35 points is not enough for a SM escort.

However, consider the fleet:
a dominator, a dictator, a lunar, a gothic, and a dauntless. Total 880 points. (blood for the bloo..!). Total 5 ships, 4 launch bays (2 in BFG:A).
Or, 6 strike cruisers, for 870 points. 1 extra cruiser, despite bringing a Dauntless. 12 (BFG:A: 6) launch bays.. and those are "resilient" strike craft, acting as both fighters & assault boat. So yes, a normal cruiser may have 25% chance of destroying both squadrons in a wave. When there are 6 waves hitting that cruiser, the average is still 6 assault boats making it through.
4 bomber squads hit a strike cruiser (so no thunderhawk-fighter cover..): 1 killed by the turrets.
3 x (D6-2): average of 5 attacks, going vs the armor. We'll say, on average, 1 point of hull damage.
Which is better: 6 assault actions, or 100 damage? I think I'd take the 6 assault actions..


Return to “Adeptus Astartes”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron