Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 55 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

The Demiurg, a second installment

 Post subject: The Demiurg, a second installment
PostPosted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 5:35 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 10:11 pm
Posts: 515
Sorry for the double post, but it *is* another seperate reply  :p

Well, I spent all afternoon writing up a bit more about the Demiurg. See what you think. It should be a MS Works document, but if you don't have Works then Notepad or Wordpad should open it okay.

I'm still awaiting my 'full' document from my Dad, so that way I'll be able to have the 'whole shebang' all put together eventually.

The refits table is at the end. I did them a bit 'better' since they've a lower attack rating than the Eldar and Orks(and DE etc etc), but they simply aren't as 'raidy' as the Eldar and Orks(and others).

So, what do folks think? Good direction? Wrong direction? Shoot Xisor?

Xisor

_________________
"Number 6 calls to you
The Cylon Detector beckons
Your girlfriend is a toaster"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The Demiurg, a second installment
PostPosted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 5:46 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 10:11 pm
Posts: 515
Woops. Silly bugger :blush:

_________________
"Number 6 calls to you
The Cylon Detector beckons
Your girlfriend is a toaster"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The Demiurg, a second installment
PostPosted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 7:29 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 11:41 pm
Posts: 276
Location: Southampton
Hi Xisor,

This brings up the question about the Strongholds torps and launch bays! Are they seperate weapons? Or and 'OR' weapon?

I think the following stats are more appropriate to those in your doc:

Siege............245pts
Cruiser/8, 20cm speed, 45*turns, 2 shields, 6+F/5+, 2 turrets
Prow Weapons battery, 45cm, 10, Front
Prow cutting beam, 15cm, Special, Front
Dorsal lance silos, 60cm, 4, L/F/R
Port Weapons battery, 45cm, 8, Left
Starboard weapons btry, 45cm, 8, Right

NOTES: Ld 9 dropping by 1 Ld every damage point to Ld 5 when crippled (having the same rules as the Stronghold). Same Mercenary Rules, Ork rules and Celestial rules.

Notice that the Siege trades its 2 launchbays (or 4 torps) for 4 Dorsal Lances, then trades its broadside lances (2 at 60cm) for stronger broadside WB's (+2) and increased range (45cm), in addition it gains +2 Str to its prow WB's. (This all seems about right for a trade and points change).

In addition to my stats you suggest the return of the port and startboard lances and to restrict the dorsal Lances to prow only.

Garrison?????450pts
Battleship/10, 15cm speed, 45* turns, 4 shields, 6+F/5+, 5 turrets
Prow Weapons battery, 45cm, 14, Front
Prow cutting beam 15cm, Special, Front
Dorsal Torpedo Silos, 30cm, 8, ALL
Dorsal Launch bays, Varies, 4, N/A
Port Lance battery, 60cm, 3, Left
Starboard Lance btry, 60cm, 3, Right
Port Launch bays, Varies, 3, N/A
Starboard Launch bays, Varies, 3, N/A

NOTES: Ld 10 dropping by 1 Ld every damage point to Ld 5 when crippled (having the same rules as the Stronghold). Same Mercenary Rules, Ork rules and Celestial rules. The Garrison gives +1 Ld to reload to all Demiurg vessels when Enemy is on special orders.

Notice that the diferences between the Garrison and the Stronghold are swaping the port and starboard (12,30cm)Wb's for (3) launcbays each side and an additional launchbay in the dorsal silos. (note that the torps should have been Str8!).

You suggest swaping a lance each side fro Srt 8 Wb's at 60cm, and allowing the broadside launchbays to launch torps as well while reducing the dorsal launchbay by 1 (which i'm against).

All in all i think your changes to the stats make these ships a little too good! (especially the Garison!).

I'll comment more later!

Cheers,

RayB

_________________
DON'T DATE ROBOTS!!!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The Demiurg, a second installment
PostPosted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 7:30 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 11:41 pm
Posts: 276
Location: Southampton
Hi Xisor,

This brings up the question about the Strongholds torps and launch bays! Are they seperate weapons? Or and 'OR' weapon?

I think the following stats are more appropriate to those in your doc:

Siege............245pts
Cruiser/8, 20cm speed, 45*turns, 2 shields, 6+F/5+, 2 turrets
Prow Weapons battery, 45cm, 10, Front
Prow cutting beam, 15cm, Special, Front
Dorsal lance silos, 60cm, 4, L/F/R
Port Weapons battery, 45cm, 8, Left
Starboard weapons btry, 45cm, 8, Right

NOTES: Ld 9 dropping by 1 Ld every damage point to Ld 5 when crippled (having the same rules as the Stronghold). Same Mercenary Rules, Ork rules and Celestial rules.

Notice that the Siege trades its 2 launchbays (or 4 torps) for 4 Dorsal Lances, then trades its broadside lances (2 at 60cm) for stronger broadside WB's (+2) and increased range (45cm), in addition it gains +2 Str to its prow WB's. (This all seems about right for a trade and points change).

In addition to my stats you suggest the return of the port and startboard lances and to restrict the dorsal Lances to prow only.

Garrison?????450pts
Battleship/10, 15cm speed, 45* turns, 4 shields, 6+F/5+, 5 turrets
Prow Weapons battery, 45cm, 14, Front
Prow cutting beam 15cm, Special, Front
Dorsal Torpedo Silos, 30cm, 8, ALL
Dorsal Launch bays, Varies, 4, N/A
Port Lance battery, 60cm, 3, Left
Starboard Lance btry, 60cm, 3, Right
Port Launch bays, Varies, 3, N/A
Starboard Launch bays, Varies, 3, N/A

NOTES: Ld 10 dropping by 1 Ld every damage point to Ld 5 when crippled (having the same rules as the Stronghold). Same Mercenary Rules, Ork rules and Celestial rules. The Garrison gives +1 Ld to reload to all Demiurg vessels when Enemy is on special orders.

Notice that the diferences between the Garrison and the Stronghold are swaping the port and starboard (12,30cm)Wb's for (3) launcbays each side and an additional launchbay in the dorsal silos. (note that the torps should have been Str8!).

You suggest swaping a lance each side fro Srt 8 Wb's at 60cm, and allowing the broadside launchbays to launch torps as well while reducing the dorsal launchbay by 1 (which i'm against).

All in all i think your changes to the stats make these ships a little too good! (especially the Garison!).

I'll comment more later!

Cheers,

RayB

_________________
DON'T DATE ROBOTS!!!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The Demiurg, a second installment
PostPosted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 8:14 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 10:11 pm
Posts: 515
Hmmm. Well, I always forget the Stronghold can do both 'silo-wise', but the Bastion is clearly one vs the other.

In this regards, I changed the Garrison as you suggested, but also:

Port/Starboard silos are 'either or' S6 vs S3, whilst the dorsal is S8 *and* S4.

Keeps the ordnance power-house idea strong. I mean, it can be shooting out S20 Torps   :devil:

(Unique, actually, to have such a focus on torps).

Still, with the Seige, I'm a bit more keen on your proposal now. The main quibble IMO is whether the dorsal should be FLR or not.

I've changed it slightly now in this new document, more in line with your thinking. What about the rest though?

Xisor

_________________
"Number 6 calls to you
The Cylon Detector beckons
Your girlfriend is a toaster"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The Demiurg, a second installment
PostPosted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 10:21 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 11:41 pm
Posts: 276
Location: Southampton
Hi Xisor,

What new document?

(Renown and rerolls) There are too many! It should go 0,1,2,3,4,5.

(Repair points from Garison and Stronghold) This should only be if they are not crippled. Also Garrisons offer too much, it should be D3 repair points and that's all. There shouldn't be a pirate base, with the repair points from thier own ships i don't think its needed!

(Re-rolls cost) should be, 1= 25pts, 2= 50pts, 3= 100pts, 4=150pts, 5=200pts.

(squadrons) They can squadron normally, why can't they squadron in thier own fleet?

(Fleet list) I think it would be better as follows:

Battleships (Garrison and Stronghold) max of 1 per Cruiser. (0-1 Garrison).
Cruisers (Bastion and Siege), max of 1 Siege per Bastion or Battleship.
Escorts (unlimited)? (perhaps 0-20).

Cheers,

RayB

_________________
DON'T DATE ROBOTS!!!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The Demiurg, a second installment
PostPosted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 10:37 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 10:11 pm
Posts: 515
Bizzare. I seem not to have posted the 'oops silly bugger, here it is' reply I thought I did.

Most perturbing.

_________________
"Number 6 calls to you
The Cylon Detector beckons
Your girlfriend is a toaster"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The Demiurg, a second installment
PostPosted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 10:57 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 11:41 pm
Posts: 276
Location: Southampton
Hi Xisor,

(Torp silos oin the Garrison) I would think that a single str8 torp salvo would be fine. The other launch bays shouldn't have the option to shoot torps! That's just too good!!!!

(Refits) first impressions: Engine 5: I really don't like the ability of moving blast markers, but what if you could use the stored up blastmarkers to give you an extra speed boost (+1D6cm per BM sucked up) up to a max of +4D6. This can be combined with AAF!
Ship 3: This shouldn't offer a +1 modifier, +1 to Boarding value as if a turret is fine though.
Ship 4: This should slow the ship down or something..
Ship 5: you should never increase weapons strength so obviously, especially as it's a ship refit! Replace this with Weapons 1!
Ship 6:This should be combined with a further right shift to enemy gunnery weapons firing over 45cm.
Weapons 1: assuming the swap, this should be may use special torps of your choice.
Weapons 2: This is too good! Just have it as a left shift.
Weapons 5: There shouldn't be a reroll, but allow the BM to be automattically sucked up on a 5+ or 6+.
Other than that this is pretty much fine.

Also make a note that refits increase the amount of VPs earned by the enemy by 10% (so a Stronghold would bleed 440pts if destroyed against Orks). Actually ships in a demiurg fleet should always disenage as if fighting orks and therefore always offer the extra Vps!

Cheers,

RayB

_________________
DON'T DATE ROBOTS!!!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The Demiurg, a second installment
PostPosted: Thu Jan 19, 2006 5:35 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 10:11 pm
Posts: 515
I'll likely take on board most of the suggestions on the refits. Mostly, I just plucked them out of their air as ideas, so changing them isn't a problem for me.

As for the multi-torp launches? Is it too much? I'd not be adverse to seeing them be noted as unable to combine into waves with each other as a very simply abstraction for...something.

With the 'no squadronning' thing, I propose that as a change to all Demiurg Capital Ships. Interesting, IMO, and allows for partly more reliable individual ships but none of the benefits that come from squadronning.

What about the proposal for 'No Fleet Commander'? Quite 'characterful' IMO(whatever their character is...).

As for the the VPS, I'd wait to sort them before settling on a points cost myself, but a standard +10% would be interesting 'across the board'(rather than individual rules for each ship and type).

Xisor

_________________
"Number 6 calls to you
The Cylon Detector beckons
Your girlfriend is a toaster"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The Demiurg, a second installment
PostPosted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 1:45 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 11:41 pm
Posts: 276
Location: Southampton
Hi Xisor,

(torps)The broadside torp silos don't work for me as they shouldn't be multiple arc (only L or R depending on the broadside) That would be fine, then you could have a mean ordnance broadside and still be able to shoot with your prow weapons if you beard your firing angle. (torps should always be able to combine unless specific to that races rules, like orks)

(squadroning) I really don't see a reason why they wouldn't squadron, this would also make the Bastions torps beyond crap without the possibility of combining them with another salvo. (They should be allowed to squadron, even orks can squadron!)

(Commander) no fleet commander is fine (like Necrons).

(VPs) these should be noted with each ship (remember you only get the extra Vps if the ship is destroyed, and in the case of the Stronghold that's +15%), +15% across the fleet would be fine (as a guide) when they are destroyed (excluding escorts) but it should also be noted exactly what they are worth when destroyed as well.

Cheers,

RayB

_________________
DON'T DATE ROBOTS!!!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The Demiurg, a second installment
PostPosted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 2:27 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 10:11 pm
Posts: 515
Quote (Raysokuk @ 20 Jan. 2006 (12:45))
That would be fine, then you could have a mean ordnance broadside and still be able to shoot with your prow weapons if you beard your firing angle.

I hope you're not advocating a similarity with the Squats! All this 'beard'!  :80:  :p

For the Torps, I'm happy to see them broadside arc for the broadsides, suppose that makes sense and keeps up the output of the ship.

Squadroning works for the Orks because they're actively working together under one leader(he has the biggest guns pointed at them), with the Demiurg I, personally, think it's an interesting scenario. That is, the Demiurg are very solitary folks. They have loose affiliations between Brotherhoods, the closest of those coming from the Brotherhoods that reside in the same vessel, otherwise they're largely independent. A nice way to reinforce that, as I see it, is to disallow squadroning. Perhaps it's a mere fancy of mine, it's not exactly dear to my heart, but I'd like to see it through. Still, it may be an unneccessery complication at this stage.

VPs 15% is fine(with the obvious editing), but if ever a full list is produced, I don't see why we couldn't just add it as a fleet special rule than need to note it in aside every ship(rather simply bracket it next to it's points cost).

On thinking, I came up with an alternate name for the ships, and thought I'd see what you thought of them(or if I should ditch them). The thing was, they didn't really sit ideally with me. I was thinking change the Garrison to Citadel and the swap the Seige with Garrison.

Thinking: Well, the Seige doesn't 'quite' sit ideally alongside the other names we'd used(Buttress, Rampart, Bastion, Stronghold), but Garrison is far more 'military' or aggressive sounding than any of those so far, so it works in place of Seige(which I personally, again, don't find works well enough). The Citadel though simply sounds nicely impressive compared to the Stronghold, which it essentially is. That said, Citadel would have been prime for a Demiurg Station.

(And as for a Demiurg Station, I'm quite keen to do a Demiurg model representing a station that resides at the centre of orbit of a Binary Star! Like the supernova station from Homeworld, but with two big plate things!)

_________________
"Number 6 calls to you
The Cylon Detector beckons
Your girlfriend is a toaster"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The Demiurg, a second installment
PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:28 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 11:41 pm
Posts: 276
Location: Southampton
You found me out! :D

Broadside only torps is fine.

Squadroning should be allowed IMO (my point about orks is that dispite being disorganised they can still pull a squadron together), I could see not allowing the Battleships to squadron for your reason but the cruisers (and escorts!) are more like extensions from a BB (a branch from the family tree).

Changing the names is fine.

Demiurg Space stations: Keeps!

Cheers,

RayB

_________________
DON'T DATE ROBOTS!!!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The Demiurg, a second installment
PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:13 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 10:11 pm
Posts: 515
The Keep can probably be done by mutilating a pair of Bastions, but I'm looking set to get a Citadel at some point.

For squadroning though, I'm still keen to see it banished(not from escorts though), but not terribly so.

Keeping them individual gives an interesting take on the fleet IMO. Still, it's not to do with being disorganised so much as disjoint. The 'squadron' is more what the fleet itself is(IMO).

Xisor

_________________
"Number 6 calls to you
The Cylon Detector beckons
Your girlfriend is a toaster"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The Demiurg, a second installment
PostPosted: Sun Jan 22, 2006 1:10 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 11:41 pm
Posts: 276
Location: Southampton
I would totally agree with not letting the BB's squadron given your fluff reasons, but the cruisers and escorts should simply because they need to!

I could stretch to smaller squadrons than normal though: max of 2 in a cruiser squadron, max of 4 in an escort squadron. This stays with your fluff and remains useable! How does that sound? (almost the opposite of Orks given thier escort squadron sizes, upto 11!)

Cheers,

RayB

_________________
DON'T DATE ROBOTS!!!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The Demiurg, a second installment
PostPosted: Sun Jan 22, 2006 3:02 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 10:11 pm
Posts: 515
Hmm, sounds quite viable!

I'm not too sure about reducing the Escort squadron sized(I always fancied a Buttress only having a handful, literally, of Demiurg on it, so across a Squadron you *could* have a Brotherhood, but you're likely only for them to come in smaller groups), but certainly only allowing pairs of cruisers makes good sense to me, a healthy compromise.

PointyDeath put up a bit about back-story to the Demiurg on SG, but I'm not too sure about dealing with the back story. I know how *I* would like it to pan out, but I think if we stand a chance of convincing anyone at SG with the proposals we need to stick closely to not *really* giving anything away about the Demiurg. Hence my Inquisitor Article doesn't really deal with anything, except 'including' Demiurg.

Thoughts there?

Xisor

_________________
"Number 6 calls to you
The Cylon Detector beckons
Your girlfriend is a toaster"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 55 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

cron

Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net