I meant that only 10% of population remains at best most likely
A Different Breed (Warhammer 29K)
Mechanis
Confirmed Extremely Screwed
- Location
- Absconding with Alacrity
Yeah, it's mostly general shaping/arrangement there, trading the whole "Industrial exposed Pipes and hoses" greebling for crystals, blisters and the occasional fin. those are more to give an idea of the general sorts of shaping than a direct 1-1.
But I saw those long ago and said "huh, with some minor changes these would make great heavy chunky armor for the Eldar" so they're my default option ha.
- Pronouns
- Reader
Ahh. Well that's a little presumptive given we have the craft world that withstood daemon incursions for 500 years and still had people when they fell in the eye of terror, and that we don't actually know what happened to them. They could just be trapped in a webway labyrinth or be stranded somewhere with much worse engines than us.
- Location
- Somewhere Beyond the Sea
So, what's our current consensus on Burden of Command?
Currently drafting up a preliminary plan (at 2 am, bah)
Currently there's 2 plans thanks to learning that the Song of War ability only effects the detachment, so here you go.
[ ] Draft: How Do We Do a War Again? (2 Warsingers edition)
-[ ] Vehicle Design: Default
-[ ] Force Commander (2 turns)
-[ ] Warpriest (1 turns)
-[ ] Warsinger Captain (5 turns)
-[ ] Warsinger Leader (2 turns)
-[ ] Muirgaythh | The Inescapable Labyrinth
-[ ] Stel'iy-Rann | A Pearl Without Price
Pretty bare bones plan atm, but lemme just explain everything.
I'm gonna assume everyone knows about Total Warhammer and the relations between hero and lord units, and that's basically the principles I've gone with for this vote, however nothing's really stopping us from cranking out force commanders as our leaders in a pinch / if we need to shock grow our military.
Warsinger Captain for our Warhost leaders means that we can take advantage of using advanced tactics (which, we probably are going to use since fighting fair should be our last resort) and being able to select which unit goes where is always a handy choice, force commanders to act as either our "emergency" Warhost leaders (say if our general drops dead or we need 50 warhosts yesterday) or as subsidiary commanders underneath our Warsinger.
Currently there's a free slot for a command unit that Idk what to spend it on, so any suggestions welcome.
Finally, the Warpriests, I'm currently forseeing them as our frontline "Fuck this hero unit/carnifex in particular" leader, give them the best melee weapons + armour, slap em on the rear and throw our murderhobos at whoever tries to bother the Warsinger, or alternatively they could commissar equivalents with the whole "reinforcing morale" ability.
(Off topic but for a Warpriest's loadout, how about we give them a power maul and gravity blade? I could definitely imagine Khaine picking up Vaul's hammer and duel-wielding it with his own sword during the Final Days)
Second plan is gonna be taking a different approach to the command structure
[ ] Draft: How Do We Do a War Again? (Force Captain Edition)
-[ ] Vehicle Design: Default
-[ ] Warsinger Leader (2 turns)
-[ ] Warpriest (1 turns)
-[ ] Force Captain (4 turns)
-[ ] 1 Free Slot (TBD)
-[ ] Muirgaythh | The Inescapable Labyrinth
-[ ] Stel'iy-Rann | A Pearl Without Price
Basically replacing the Warsinger Captain for a Force Captain that can take advantage of deploying some of our forces with an advantage on initiative (very nice Warhost bonus since shooting first is always a handy thing to have), keeping our murderous cats (the Warpriests) so they can either inspire or brutalise whoever the leader tells them to, and warsinger leaders to take advantage of advanced tactics like I said earlier
In terms of justification for the craftworlds, we've already committed to saving Nacretinel as of last turn, might as well follow through with it, and Muirgaythh is selected because of three reasons.
1. We very much want a Daemon-trapping device sooner rather than later
2. It's implied in the flavour text that we might find some other Necron goodies or technologies (very tasty, very nice, grab it now)
3. The longer we leave them alone, the more likely it is that Chaos gets the bright idea of trying to spite us with destroying the research, and I'd rather nip that potential loss in the bud now rather than risk it for another term.
Ulthwe will be fine for a turn, Saim-Hann isn't expecting an answer until another 4 or 5 turns from now and we can probably grab any other diplomatic actions next turn (hoping to grab Kher-Ys afterwards so we have both the R&D craftworlds working on the "Fuck Chaos" project)
Currently drafting up a preliminary plan (at 2 am, bah)
Currently there's 2 plans thanks to learning that the Song of War ability only effects the detachment, so here you go.
[ ] Draft: How Do We Do a War Again? (2 Warsingers edition)
-[ ] Vehicle Design: Default
-[ ] Force Commander (2 turns)
-[ ] Warpriest (1 turns)
-[ ] Warsinger Captain (5 turns)
-[ ] Warsinger Leader (2 turns)
-[ ] Muirgaythh | The Inescapable Labyrinth
-[ ] Stel'iy-Rann | A Pearl Without Price
Pretty bare bones plan atm, but lemme just explain everything.
I'm gonna assume everyone knows about Total Warhammer and the relations between hero and lord units, and that's basically the principles I've gone with for this vote, however nothing's really stopping us from cranking out force commanders as our leaders in a pinch / if we need to shock grow our military.
Warsinger Captain for our Warhost leaders means that we can take advantage of using advanced tactics (which, we probably are going to use since fighting fair should be our last resort) and being able to select which unit goes where is always a handy choice, force commanders to act as either our "emergency" Warhost leaders (say if our general drops dead or we need 50 warhosts yesterday) or as subsidiary commanders underneath our Warsinger.
Currently there's a free slot for a command unit that Idk what to spend it on, so any suggestions welcome.
Finally, the Warpriests, I'm currently forseeing them as our frontline "Fuck this hero unit/carnifex in particular" leader, give them the best melee weapons + armour, slap em on the rear and throw our murderhobos at whoever tries to bother the Warsinger, or alternatively they could commissar equivalents with the whole "reinforcing morale" ability.
(Off topic but for a Warpriest's loadout, how about we give them a power maul and gravity blade? I could definitely imagine Khaine picking up Vaul's hammer and duel-wielding it with his own sword during the Final Days)
Second plan is gonna be taking a different approach to the command structure
[ ] Draft: How Do We Do a War Again? (Force Captain Edition)
-[ ] Vehicle Design: Default
-[ ] Warsinger Leader (2 turns)
-[ ] Warpriest (1 turns)
-[ ] Force Captain (4 turns)
-[ ] 1 Free Slot (TBD)
-[ ] Muirgaythh | The Inescapable Labyrinth
-[ ] Stel'iy-Rann | A Pearl Without Price
Basically replacing the Warsinger Captain for a Force Captain that can take advantage of deploying some of our forces with an advantage on initiative (very nice Warhost bonus since shooting first is always a handy thing to have), keeping our murderous cats (the Warpriests) so they can either inspire or brutalise whoever the leader tells them to, and warsinger leaders to take advantage of advanced tactics like I said earlier
In terms of justification for the craftworlds, we've already committed to saving Nacretinel as of last turn, might as well follow through with it, and Muirgaythh is selected because of three reasons.
1. We very much want a Daemon-trapping device sooner rather than later
2. It's implied in the flavour text that we might find some other Necron goodies or technologies (very tasty, very nice, grab it now)
3. The longer we leave them alone, the more likely it is that Chaos gets the bright idea of trying to spite us with destroying the research, and I'd rather nip that potential loss in the bud now rather than risk it for another term.
Ulthwe will be fine for a turn, Saim-Hann isn't expecting an answer until another 4 or 5 turns from now and we can probably grab any other diplomatic actions next turn (hoping to grab Kher-Ys afterwards so we have both the R&D craftworlds working on the "Fuck Chaos" project)
Last edited:
... I don't think this is true?
Or rather, as I read it as Warhost leader a Warsinger's Song of Battle special (that grants a chance to force success on an advanced tactics role) will still only apply to their own detachment.
If we want many detachments using advanced tactics, we're going to need many Warsingers.
- Location
- Somewhere Beyond the Sea
Really?
Bah, I'll try and redraft the plan, (tbf there isn't anything stopping me from just adding another warsinger for our detachments but I'll hold off for now unless consensus says yes)
DarkLight140
Credit to Team
- Location
- Lost in my thoughts
Yes. All the leader options have their abilities listed in the format "X possess the A and B special abilities." Ability A is when they're used on the detachment level, and ability B is when they're used on the warhost level.
RandomTechPriest
He Who Steals Toasters
To be fair, I dont think that many detachments will be using advanced tactics. There will always need to be a anvil for the hammer after all.
Alectai
Speaks Words of Wisdom... On occasion
And it's good taste, I approve.
Professor Vesca
Good News Everyone!
A flying oval with a gun on top.
While true, I'd prefer not being restricted to using HQ detachments for the hammer. We're going to want Warsingers in positions other than overall commander if we plan to use advanced tactics frequently.
Basically, I want Warsingers for all our special operations teams &c.
Also, detachments used for advanced tactics will probably need better training and leadership anyway, so if we're already putting that much WAP into them...
Don't forget we still haven't looked at
this yet. Getting worse Warsingers to put them everywhere might well make them partially redundant with Squad level options.
Last edited:
Honestly, In terms of 40k, Their aren't a whole lot of factions that a Tank with Dual Plasma Cannons can't engage and expect their weaponry to do good enough as a generalist. Plasma weaponry sits in a great median between AOE effect, Range, and Armour piercing effect, Unless your name is the necrons, and even then it's pretty decent. In terms of 30k Necrons aren't a problem, At the same time, Imeprials have better tech, and Orks will be at higher end waaaaghs.
Dual Suncannons are about 60EP, which all things considered are a very nice package. The graviton thruster Lance said it has similar ranges to energy weapons of the same size, Is the King of Armour Pen and lacks AOE, and in tabletop terms might be lacking in "wounds".
With a vehicle sized Graviton thruster sitting at 65, I wonder if we might get better usage out of a Generalist Dual Suncannon tank, instead of a graviton Thrust lance pair with some form of anti-horde as our generalist, and then pairing that Generalist Dual suncannon tank with More expensive "Specialist" vehicles such as a tank with a Vehicle grade sweeper field and anti-horde weapon for anti-infantry work, and a Specialized Tank destroyer.
So you have more numerous Dual suncannon Battleline tanks, Your anti-horde with a vehicle grade sweeper that can turn any charged into a Literal slog, and your Anti-Tank vehicle with Imploders/Thrusts to smash anything that is packing enough armour the plasma doesn't kill it fast enough.
Dual Suncannons are about 60EP, which all things considered are a very nice package. The graviton thruster Lance said it has similar ranges to energy weapons of the same size, Is the King of Armour Pen and lacks AOE, and in tabletop terms might be lacking in "wounds".
With a vehicle sized Graviton thruster sitting at 65, I wonder if we might get better usage out of a Generalist Dual Suncannon tank, instead of a graviton Thrust lance pair with some form of anti-horde as our generalist, and then pairing that Generalist Dual suncannon tank with More expensive "Specialist" vehicles such as a tank with a Vehicle grade sweeper field and anti-horde weapon for anti-infantry work, and a Specialized Tank destroyer.
So you have more numerous Dual suncannon Battleline tanks, Your anti-horde with a vehicle grade sweeper that can turn any charged into a Literal slog, and your Anti-Tank vehicle with Imploders/Thrusts to smash anything that is packing enough armour the plasma doesn't kill it fast enough.
- Location
- Somewhere Beyond the Sea
Added a second plan and modified the first one, thoughts on this?
- Pronouns
- Reader
So my thought are that when we agreed to this, we should try to have 4 refit Carracks ready to participate in the training ahead of the campaign, which means we probably need to readjust our plans for turn 6 unfortunately, but it should be manageable.
I'm not sure we can expect to have more than an average showing in the wyld hunt in terms of warhosts, since I don't see us using FoV AP to drum up equipment for specifically out fitting a few.
@Mechanis How sufficient for a wild hunt would 4 carracks and 16 war ketch prove? Under Committing? Just right for a craft world of our size and peaceful disposition?
We're doing a cruiser design this turn. Carrack or Caravel, we should be able to put together something acceptable to send, at which point it's just finding where to cut the BAP for the refits from.
Personally, I think a battlefield control Caravel with a bunch of heavy torpedo tubes and a heavy lance would have a perfectly reasonable role in our doctrine, but a refit of our Exotic-armed Carracks that doesn't add any new exotic weapons might be able to finish refitting in time too, and would represent more firepower.
- Pronouns
- Reader
There not going to vanish in a turn or two. It's been two decades since the fall. They lasted long enough to end up know as a world that Slaanesh targeted in the first place before the Aeldmoot.
If we have time in which we who revealed the curses three are safe, then the Adaptionists worlds are also likely to be safe until we can come back to them in a turn or two.
Stel-Uit on the other hand has no allies, no intact defensive fleets, and anyone with shipyards can take them on as an ally. We need to strike while the Irons hot.
I'm more be in favor of a tank with a vehicle Amplifier and Imploder combo over dual Suncannons.
While vehicle scale Imploders don't seem to have much of an AoE in exchange for being able to crush tanks easily Amplifier Culverin's can hit entire squads at a time and the two weapons should be able to compliment each other quite well.
While vehicle scale Imploders don't seem to have much of an AoE in exchange for being able to crush tanks easily Amplifier Culverin's can hit entire squads at a time and the two weapons should be able to compliment each other quite well.
Imploder Cannon said:
While this would be more expensive (85EP vs 60EP) I would argue that the Amplifier Imploder combo would offer even greater flexibility since not only would it be able to engage infantry and vehicles effectively but the Amplifier should buff the Imploder's lethality enough to allow it to seriously threaten superheavies which is something dual Suncannons wouldn't be as capable of.Amplifier Culverin said:
Good news, we're actually doing two Cruiser designs this turn so we can do both
Turn 5 Vote said:
Last edited:
- Pronouns
- Reader
We are doing two. We spent 4 AP to tackle both together.
I'm in favor of carrack with 4 Starlance naval weapon batteries and an Amplifier & Imploder heavy weapon pair. It would give us slightly more starcrystal power split between more volume lance fire and add a powerful weapon pair for medium to close range engagements. The loss of fatetwister cannons is regrettable but we do need more of those freed up for our fighters and eventual sword of Vaul Class refits.
Our Strikecraft aren't going to need that many Psy-Scopes unless we go really heavy into Fatesevers.
We currently have 288 strikecraft, if we replaced each Starlance with a Fatesever it would cost 1152 Psy-Scopes (288*4) to refit them all, if we only went with 1 it would only cost 576 Psy-Scopes (288*2).
Now let's say in order to beef up our strikecraft numbers we refitted each of our 73 Caravels one hangar each for a total of 1314 strikecraft (73*3*6). That would be an additional 2628 Psy-Scopes (1314*2) if we went with a single Fatesever per strikecraft or 5256 Psy-Scopes if we went with 2 Fatesevers (1314*4).
If we refitted all our Carracks with non Fatesheer PD we'd get 3456 Psy-Scopes back.
3456 Psy-Scopes is more than enough for our existing strikecraft (3456 vs 576 or 3456 vs 1152) and would pay for all of the rest if we went with 1 Fatesever per strikecraft (3456 vs 576+2628=3204) or pay for about half of the total cost if we refitted all our current and future strikecraft with 2 Fatesevers (3456 vs 1152+5256=6408).
Considering the fact that we've also got Brigs to refit which have 360 Psy-Scopes apiece the cost of 2 Fatesevers can be offset through refitting the Brigs without Fatesever PD or by removing 2 of the 3 Fatetwisters for an extra 5.4k Psy-Scopes (54*50=5400).
As for why we might go for 1 Fatesever over 2? It's because Fatesevers don't really have any kind of AoE while missile launchers can have warheads with an AoE (like the Melta munitions we just developed) which would allow them to threaten both vehicles and infantry so that our future strikecraft aren't limited to purely anti-strikecraft/vehicle duty.
As for the Sword of Vaul, Fatetwisters aren't as big of a jump in lethality as Starlances unless you're fighting Eldar so we're probably going to be focusing on giving it Starlances.
Last edited:
Something to keep in mind: Fatesever PD is extremely good PD. Nobody puts defenses capable of standing up to Fatesevers on torpedoes, and voidcraft are frequently going to be pretty dependent on their ability to dodge.
Stuff like our battleships probably should keep their single Fatesever PD. Past the first we should be mixing PD types.
That all said, we've currently enough Psy-Scopes to refit all our fighters with a Fatesever each (and more than a bit left over after that), and we're producing a fifth of what we'd need for that every turn. We don't need to strip the PD off our ships to do that with our fighters. Which is good - the same factors that make Fatesevers such a good PD weapon make them a very nice interceptor weapon, too.
- Pronouns
- Reader
[ ] Plan Don't Get Into An Art Fight
-[ ] Vehicle Aesthetics : Default
-[ ] Force Leader
-[ ] Warsinger Captain
-[ ] Warlord
-[ ] Warseer Commander
-[ ] Stel'iy-Rann | A Pearl Without Price
-[ ] Stel-Uit | The Bladefleet
So, regarding burden of command, my opinion is that we A, don't want to pass entirely on any of these tactics even if we think some of them are better than others, and B, do favor some of them over other options.
Force Leader will do because given our plans situations in which our warhosts will be ambushing aren't a tactic they need much help with do to tech and we retreats are typically handled by attached transports.
I'm grabbing warsinger captain and warlord because succeeding at none critical failures and rerolling critical failures is a worthwhile combo.
Have to grab warseers. Once we deal with the eye of Tzeench they'll be critical to how we fight.
Fatetwister are great, but I don't see them as irreplaceable. Not in an offensive role anyways. I'd rather keep the defensive system slots investment.
But I'm capable of compromise, so how about we only strip 2 of the fatetwister weapon batteries, and keep one and pair it with 5 Starlance and 1 Heavy Imploder Bombard? A variety of damage to great the enemy, full defensive suit without pairing down to a las or a plasma fighter defense, plenty of defenses, and still gets us 100 Fatebender Psyscopes.
-[ ] Vehicle Aesthetics : Default
-[ ] Force Leader
-[ ] Warsinger Captain
-[ ] Warlord
-[ ] Warseer Commander
-[ ] Stel'iy-Rann | A Pearl Without Price
-[ ] Stel-Uit | The Bladefleet
So, regarding burden of command, my opinion is that we A, don't want to pass entirely on any of these tactics even if we think some of them are better than others, and B, do favor some of them over other options.
Force Leader will do because given our plans situations in which our warhosts will be ambushing aren't a tactic they need much help with do to tech and we retreats are typically handled by attached transports.
I'm grabbing warsinger captain and warlord because succeeding at none critical failures and rerolling critical failures is a worthwhile combo.
Have to grab warseers. Once we deal with the eye of Tzeench they'll be critical to how we fight.
No but our sword of Vaul Class might, especially if we go fatesever PD and weapon batteries. It's big enough that less than a fourth of it's total weapon batteries can hold half a dozen Special Weapon Slots, and that's before the high likelihood we also include fatetwister cannons.
I like the fatesheer CI(PD is Fatesever). I'd prefer to keep it on ships that have a solid amount of exotics invested in them, our Carracks and Combat Brigs especially.
Fatetwister are great, but I don't see them as irreplaceable. Not in an offensive role anyways. I'd rather keep the defensive system slots investment.
But I'm capable of compromise, so how about we only strip 2 of the fatetwister weapon batteries, and keep one and pair it with 5 Starlance and 1 Heavy Imploder Bombard? A variety of damage to great the enemy, full defensive suit without pairing down to a las or a plasma fighter defense, plenty of defenses, and still gets us 100 Fatebender Psyscopes.
I think there is a case to be made that we plan to use refit Carracks as Naval Squad fleet leaders in the future for forces and missions we don't feel require Combat brigs, and thus protecting them with at least fatesheer PD has some appeal.
I know I just talked about how we probably aren't going to sink that many Psy-Scopes into the Sword of Vaul but that doesn't mean we aren't going to use any.
The reason as why you're advocating for retaining the Brig's Fatesever PD is also the same reasoning that would justify equipping the Sword of Vaul with Fatesever PD. If a Brig needs 180 Fatesevers for a single PD battery then I shudder to think how many the much bigger Sword of Vaul would need.
While we could potentially cheap out on Psy-Scopes by going for Fatesheer CIWB instead if the Sword has a ton of spare System Slots since CIWB is cheaper in exchange for taking up more space it should still be pretty costly to dot the Sword with a bunch of them.
Now relatively speaking we're not going to spend as many Psy-Scopes as we are Starcrystals (probably well over 10k going by how heavily armed the Sword from the faction creation vote was just out of the box) but we're probably still going to be spending upwards of 1-2k between Fatetwisters for all round anti-ship capabilities and Fatesevers/Fatesheers for aimbot PD/CIWB.
With that I mind it is probably a good idea to get a decent bank of Psy-Scopes first for when we do get the Sword of Vaul especially since we wouldn't be getting the giant Psy-Scope injection from refitting all our cruisers all at once.
RandomTechPriest
He Who Steals Toasters
The fact that this rule allows us to theoretically use super heavy tank detachments in ambushes is all the reason I need to pick all Warsingers for my vote.
I disagree, Fatetwisters are a huge deal for us because their ability to continue firing when we are flying away from our enemy makes it the ultimate kiting weapon which when combined with its ability to always go for weak spots makes it and Starlances and insanely good combo.
When we're outnumbered we are going to be forced to kite which means there will be a decent amount of time spent where our ships cannot fire their non Fatetwister weapons.
During the opening salvo prior to when we need to kite the Starlances should knock out or weaken a significant number of our enemies shields. Once that is done the Fatetwisters should be able to directly attack the ships weakpoints which should include the engines.
Even if the ship isn't destroyed by Fatetwister fire if the engines are disabled it is functionaly out of the fight since it'll be left behind which allows us to defeat our enemy in detail much quicker.
That is not something any of our other weapons can do.