Antonious:

Falklands, again a conflict between a battle tested nation vs a novice in warfare.

I did not contradict myself. The problem with the French Admiral was from the start he believed he could not win. So no matter how much quality and quantity you give anyone with that mindset, he won't win. So in a situation where both commanders believing he can win, both with excellent training, the one with quantity will win. It is not foolish. It is being practical. Luck will be the one that will mess things up. But a well prepared commander will take this into account.

Now an inferior numbered but battle tested unit can win against an untried unit. Your examples shows this. In this case, quality will win since the battle tested ones are more used to the nature of combat and can asjust accordingly. I never disagree that it can't happen. Just that they are fewer than norm.

What Ifs, I agree, are not precisely useful in discussions but they also serve to emphasize the point. Why did the English win in Trafalgar? Yes, it was because they had the better tactics and training but it also didn't help the French and Spanish that they had a wimp of an Admiral at the time. That was a boon for the English.

Vaaish:
The relation to the topic of Tau vs IG or IN resulted from the question of whether a newcomer to war and mainly peaceful expansionist nation could be much better at warfare than a nation that has been at war for 40,000 years.

Admiral d'Artagnan and Vaaish i will concede that the Imperial Navy has greater abilities at this moment in time.

Vaaish,

Tau players are used to a young empire with little exerience but good training, ability and tech. This is reflected by powerful weapons and equipment as well as some capable elites. However the Average statline of the Tau shows how truly inexerienced and normal they are with Toughness and Strength being average. Leadership being average and Weapon skill being very poor. They also have as i said less flexibility than other armies and this could be displayed as a lack of experince due to the fact that they haven't yet commited to battles where the situation has relied on individual sqauds taking control and fighting with their initative.

The fleet was given poor floor to reflect this. I could understand the Empire having slower ships in warp (thus having Grav hooks for escorts), not as well trained individuals (Using a lower Leadership table than the normal one) and perhaps not as well built ships as regards survivability (So a few less hit points, not many shields). These are things that experience would have taught the Imperials well in.
The Tau fighters/bombers are capable but show their lack of experience in that Baraccudas are no where near as fast as Tau pilots can handle because they have not come up against dedicated air opponents yet.

However the fleet has poor range with its weapon batteries on top of this, despite a main point of playing Tau being superior forward firing weapons batteries. Ion cannons are understandable as even on the ground the Tau see limited use of Ion and Fusion weapons. The are availiable on 2 units (3 if you take forgeworld).
Add in the fact poor broadsides and a Tau player playing any fleet that can include battleships and the like has no choice but to spam torpedos.


Now Vaaish while accepting fluff is good on the whole, when a large portion on a community as whole says "we don't like the models, feel, fluff or rules for the Fleet" then you proably have a poorly designed list.
Especially when people play FW rules for the most part and even then loads and loads of FAN lists, not just ships, crop up.
The Imperial fleet SHOULD be versitile, well experienced and with some of the best admirals the game has. It SHOULDN'T be able to out match every opponnent.
Playing Eldar, no problem take big gun boats (of which you have plenty of nasty ones!)
Playing Space Marines, no problem plenty of lance, Nova Cannon vessels supported by massed Ordnance
Playing Tau, no problem lots of Nova Cannon vessels to pummel them as you close the range and then turn too with plenty of big broadside vessels.
Playing Chaos, no problem massed Torpedo strikes are going to cause chaos (pun not intended) with a Chaos fleet trying to close.
The Imperials can be tailored to fight just about any enemy on pretty good odds.

Admiral d'Artagnan;
It is extremely rare to find an army that has as much experience as a smaller more elite army. That large army would have to have so much more combat time for its troops... And training time. Large armies are Usually conscripts as well so they lack the fighting spirit and rigerous training that professional armies have to offer.

Yes if you could find two armies of equal quality and equipment then the one with quantity is very likely, i say that because nothing is sure in warefare, to come out on top.
However that has never happened in History... Except for maybe the Roman Legions for a time and with the British Navy after Trafalgar and up to the end of WW1!
However at that point it wasn't quantity over quality. In your examples there and my examples above the army has both quality AND quantity.

I still hold however give me a situation were it is Quality or Quantity and i will choose Quality every time. The individual odds for survival are much better and the army will probably be lead and fought by more capable, intuative and initative taking men.

Now Vaaish while accepting fluff is good on the whole, when a large portion on a community as whole says "we don't like the models, feel, fluff or rules for the Fleet" then you proably have a poorly designed list.

_________________
-Vaaish

I dislike SG/GW fluff heavily, almost as much as i hate their Models.

The Kor'Or'Vesh and its models has relatively decent fluff, although not enough official fluff unfortunately. Then again some of the Fan Fluff you find is really quite lovely.
The rules from forgeworld are good enough, they are just very very basic with few "unique" ship classes that the Eldar, Imperials, Chaos, Space Marines and Tyranids all have. Then again the designers have had longer to work with them.

Perhaps i'm being impatient. I would just love to see a fleet that can be made "standard" one that really emphasises Mont'Ka and one that Emphasises Kayuan. It would allow more versatility and fit quite nicely into the current background for Tau warefare.

I am sure i am just being impatient but then again GW/SG seem to have stopped developing BFG completely.

EDIT:
Weapons that do double damage on a hit (like orc Heavy Guns) if they hit a hull and thus do 2 hit points damage do they roll for 2 criticals or only the one. It says roll for every hit against the ship but in this case the exact meaning of hit seems a little garbled. Is a hit points being removed (thus always roll for a critical as each HP is removed) or is a hit the weapon attack (thus in this case does 2 damage and you roll one critical, which seems more fair in this senario.)

I do not have much problems with Tau as they are. I think the GW models aren't that bad and have a charm in them.

Also Railgun Batteries have longer range then Imperial Batteries for most part. 45cm vs 30cm. It is when Battleships or some Battlecruisers come into play the IN can go 60cm.

With their missiles (long range weapon) the Tau have a clear advantage over Imperial Navy.
Their Manta's are resilient bombers, an advantage over normal IN bombers.

Tracking Systems to improve railguns and turrets.

I think Tau are technological pretty advanced in space. Losing out on teleport isn't a real issue.

A ship I do have a gripe with is the Hero. Fluffwise it should be weaker then a Lunar but game wise it is stronger/more versatile. They reduced its threat by limiting it in the fleet. A bogus solution imho. They should just reduce some stats.

_________________
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

Never happened in history? I point out to you Germany vs Russia in WW2. Quantity won out over quality. Germans started out having the better soldiers. And the Russians started out as conscripts but became better afterwards. Their tanks and weapons were about equal tech wise.

The Americans vs Japanese. Same situation. Americans started out lagging slightly behind tech wise. They overwhelmed the Japanese by the end of the war in both quality and quantity.

Quality is nice but I'm with the quantity side, especially if it is more than 2 to 1 and the tech level is not that huge a difference as with your Zulu example. Give the Zulus pistols and guns and they would have won.

The Imperial Fleet most certainly does NOT outmatch every opponent.

1. Which ones? The Tyrant is the most effective of the regular cruisers against Eldar. The Overlord, slightly so. But the advantage over Eldar is just about what those two ships are good for. Against other races, there are better options. The Retribution, Emperor and Oberon are ok but even the Ret suffers from poor broadside strength while the Emperor and Oberon lacks manueverability and is easily hampered by having a BM on its base. Eldar can easily beat these ships with high amounts of Escorts.

2. Against SM, they're about equal. Sure IN have lances but that's assuming you know your opponent is SM and you specifically tailor your fleet against them. Otherwise, lances are just about typical and the ranges of the cruisers are not that great.

3. Tau have the advantage in ordnance and have a strong forward weapons strength. I am pretty sure the Tau players with experience here can tell you how hard it is for IN to beat Tau, even with the NC who really is only effective against the large based battleships. Against cruisers, it's questionable.

4. Against Chaos, IN are just about at par. Torp strikes, while scary require time and good RO checks to hit the Chaos fleet. Chaos on the other hand have the advantage of long range weaponry.

Yes the IN can be tailored to fight almost every race but then the same can be said for the other races. Tailoring really shouldn't be done. Which is why when I and my friends play, we don't tell each other what race we're playing to keep tailoring down. You have just started out BFG if I am not mistaken. learn the game more and you'll probably be changing yor mind soon about your current beliefs.

Perhaps, i understand the advantages of Tau however when you try and play to what fluff is out there and you are a new player you tend to get... soundly beaten by players who seek to tailor forces. That is me being polite by the way.

Perhaps it is my inexperience but then i have played other systems from GW and a few from other companies so its not like i'm a novice in table top gaming. It just frustrates me when your aiming to build up a fleet with things like Emmisarys in it supported by a couple of Protectors and the opponent turns up with a tailored list.

We shall see, as i said its just first impressions.

Admiral d'Artagnan,
The Russians had superior tanks to the Germans, they were more reliable, better armoured and their guns were just as capable. I can't remember the name of the book however i have seen comparisons done by an unbiased source and the Russians came out very well.

I don't know much about the Americans and Japanese on the land front but the Americans were certainly not lagging on the Naval front. The Americans had some of the best carrier opperations in the war and some good designs (Though they didn't pick up on the usefullness of an armoured flgiht deck!) they also had some good battleship designs. For all their hyper Japanese battleships were flawed in design in my humble opinion. The 18" shell was no more effective than the 16" shell the Americans used when you study the two and the opperational restrictions on the battleships.

The Japanese did have superior torpedoes and a brilliant fighter however i would say the Americans out fought and out thought them before they overwhelmed them with numbers. That as i said is not a topic i am as knowledgeable in as Western European Naval history and Classical History.

I was about to say Black Horizon, they Hero has odd fluff and the Protector is almost a Carbon copy of the Hero, although i would say i do prefer the Protector just because of how it looks.

The Tau list has potential but i don't think they fully grasped that potential.

Hmm. I hate tailoring.

We never tell each other what fleet we'll bring.

_________________
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

Tell me about it, i'm half tempted to just take a fleet that has as much missiles and attack craft in it as possible and surge forwards with everything go for an aggressive alpha strike and see what happens. But then that would be sinking to their level. Perhaps i'll try and start up a 3-4 way campaign so that my opponent can't tailor agaisnt me.

Maybe then i can learn how to play with the Tau instead of having to use desperate measure after despeate measure just to keep my fleet alive.

I agree that tailoring is annoying. If that's your experience so far, then it's pretty skewed. We don't tailor and it makes things much more interesting for all parties. Actually I tend to just have a few set balanced lists for various point values and go with that. Sometimes though I do switch up the type of fleet to have some variety between standard IN and a more light cruiser fleet.

_________________
-Vaaish

Yeah, my fleets are mostly background driven. More fun and personal.

Though my biggest successes are with the FW fleet. I consider it a pretty strong fleet. The Armada list is a tad stronger though. Though it also has options in the list which aren't that good.

Here is something I replied at Warseer:

-----
The Hero is the restricted cruiser with 4 railgun batteries, 4 Ion Cannon, 2 Launch bays and 6 missiles. 2 shields, 8 hits, prow deflector. 180weasily points.

In F arc it can combine 4RG & 4IC at 30cm (RG are 45cm) and as broadsides it has 2-2

The Protector has 2 shields, prow deflector, 6 hits. Unrestricted at 190pts. 6 railguns @ 45cm in F arc + 2 Ion @ 45cm in F arc plus 6 missiles and 2 launch bays.
As broadside the Protector can only do 2 railguns + 1 IC.

The Hero has more firepower (but lesser range on Ion Cannon), better staying power and better broadsides when splitting.
It is cheaper but restricted (need 1 Explorer or 1 Merchant first).

The Explorer battleship is a cheap ass carrier with 8 bays (resilient Manta's) at 230 points. Though 12 hits they are fragile to raw firepower with armour 5+/4+(rear) and only 1 shield. 5 Turrets protects then well enough.
With its Grav Hooks it can take 3 Orca's but they do not add shields.

The FW Custodian battleship is more expensive at 320 points. Has 2 shields, 6+/5+ armour, 4 turrets, 10 hits. Same amount of bays but better armed with a broadside still weaker then a Lunar (4 railguns + 1 Ion Cannon).
In the front arc it can use 8 railguns + 2 Ion cannon. Has 4 missiles as well.

All in all the FW fleet has a better front arc weaponry, the Armada fleet has much more staying power. The FW fleet should be used agressively, The Armada fleet slowly.
----

I also love the Protector. In a 1000pts battle the FW list has an edge because of the unrestricted Protector I think.

Though I'm of the believe that FW should have created a whole other approach to the fleet of the Tau. Such different designs warrant that.

The Emissary clearly should have 90* turns. Zhai Morenn normally upgrades this vessel with mines.

_________________
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

Vaaish coming up with an unusual but interesting list with a background is one thing. So it might do well against one enemy if you play with it regualarly then it will have weaknesses exposed. So a light cruiser fleet could be really interesting and fluffy . A Tailored fleet is annoying just because it has no background or fluff its just.

"Your playing Eldar so i have best take Dictator (NC and strong WB), Overloard and Retribution class ships for plenty of long range WB firepower."

The forgeworld protector is lovely as regards its variety of firepower and mix of weapons. Something that suits the Tau way of war i think. One of them acting alone won't be impressive but i rekon two acting in squadron have the potential to start dealing some serious hurt with 45cm RG and IC, as well as good Ordnance to force other ships to risk taking damage to close or to scatter.

I can imagine it is annoying to think "Yes im within 40-50cm" and then have two protectors Alpha strike one ship with 12 WB's and 4IC's before launching two waves of 6 Tau Missiles and 4 AC to cause the other cruiser some serious problems.

Its a shame though that they made the Emissary such a bland cruiser. If they had had the Protector as the mainstay and bland cruiser they could have come up with an interesting Diplomatic Light cruiser. Ie something that turns well at 90*, has only 4 HP but maybe 2 Shields. And also has Grav Hooks. That would fit the bill fluff wise as well. If the cruiser runs into trouble it drops its warden gunships to engage the enemy while it either uses its agility to evade combat and get out of there or join its gunships and provide some muscle to the sqaudron (and some missiles )

I would have liked the Custodian to feature as a Carrier with interesting Command and Control options added to it. Tracking Systems and perhaps a Sensor array like the Imperial Empreror class Battleship. Something that is meant to hang back out of harms way and drop of a Warden Attack group that is supported by 8 or so Squadrons of Attack craft. While hanging back it can direct the fleet using Command and Control abilities.

Eh, it sounds good on paper, but really at >30cm, you are looking at 6 dice best case and more likely 2 or 4 dice for those 12WB because of the column shifts for range coupled with heading. The ion cannons are alright but again only two hits. Going against 5+ armor you will probably only drop shields under most circumstances.

_________________
-Vaaish