Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Howdy do all, just a quick question. How important are squadrons of escorts in an Imperial BFG fleet? For the points of 3 swords and 2 firestorms I could get another cruiser. I realize that they are fast moving and can prevent out flanking maneuvers and cause them, but I personally would rather have another Lunar, Gothic or even some light cruisers. I'd just love to know how effective they are and how to properly use them.

Flipside of the coin, if anyone out there has had success without using squadrons of escorts and instead relying on a vanguard of cruisers I'd love to know about it and tactics for dealing with greater numbers and escorts.

Thanks in advance.

For most of the races, cruisers are going to be superior to escorts. (most tournament Imperial and Chaos lists aim for all Cruisers and up) Basically anything escorts can do Attack Craft can do faster and more effectively. It is unfortunately one of the weaker points of the game. A poor Force Org chart and limited survivability really hurt escorts.

One of the house rules my group personally runs is allowing Escorts hit Ordinance on a 5+ and get a left column shift when shooting at them. Actually lets them screen capital ships, and compete more effectively with Ordinance.

Cobras are good for launching very large torp salvoes from odd angles.

Swords are good too, use them in pairs with a capital ship. This is so the formation has +2 turret strength against attack craft.

Firestorms. Give me a Dauntless instead.

Escorts are a great way to get a bigger torpedo formation, and to just soak some damage.

Of course, I played Tyranids in BFG, so I had some GREAT escorts. It was my cruisers that sucked...

Ok, so I realize that for the price of a torpedo kitted Lunar cruiser I could get 6 cobras which would give me a hell of a lot more torpedoes.

The only list I've got with escorts has just a single midsized squadron of 3 swords with two Firestorms, I figured the lances would give the squadron some extra "oomph" against enemy capital ships.

Additionally, how screwed am I if my opponent has several escorts but less cruisers? Say if he makes repeated torp salvos against my line ships, with my current list the only fighter bays I have are on my Mars. Is it worth it to get a Dauntless or change out my Apocalypse for an Emperor?

Also, can somebody give me the skinny on Battleships vs. Cruisers? Is it a good idea to take a big nasty as the fleet centerpiece at 1500 pts? It's just that with one of them and an admiral it's almost a third of my total fleet cost. Do love the high strength lances and nova cannons on the Apocalypse though. It also seems that the Emperor is the only real heavy carrier besides the Mars.

All escort groups will start out with more firepower than an similar points in capital ships. The problem is that that firepower starts dwindling very quickly when they start taking losses, while Capital ships keep on trucking till they are crippled.

Your big concern if your that low on Attack Craft and using Escorts is going to be assault boats. Since every one that connects is probably going to kill an Escort, its going to get costly very quickly.

Personally I think the Mars is extremely overpriced for what it does, and that the Dictator fills its shoes more efficiently than the Mars. The Emperor is the most efficient battleship the Imperials have. Imperials can put more markers on the board than any other faction. If your looking to mix escorts into that mix then I would definitely suggest Cobras, maybe with a sprinkling of Swords.

I just liked the mars for its inclusion of fighters, since unless I get an Emperor it's my only carrier. Plus it has a Nova Cannon and a nice sprinkling of lances and weapons.

For one, escorts eat torpedo spreads that would otherwise hit your cruisers. Also, while risky the added firepower a base touching escort can add goes a long way if facing a bomber heavy force.

Escorts are underrated.

They require more tactical finesse to be handled properly.

The problem with escorts is that many people use them as a screening and/or flanking force, similar to the way there are used in real life navies (and, incidentally in the fluff of BFG and most other space-combat games)

The problem is that they are too fragile to fill this role successfully. Where you get the best out of them is as a mobile reserve, hanging behind your cap ships so they are protected from fire but can fire past the heavier ships. After the initial engagement your cruisers will have passed the enemy line and your escorts can add a huge amount of firepower into already damaged ships while your line ships come round for another pass.

Of course, this breaks down against Eldar and to a lesser extent 'nid fleets but these have their own vulnerabilities.

A cruisers-only Imperial Navy fleet can be effective.
Nonetheless imperial escorts are very useful cause they bring firepower where it is needed, as they are fast but also can turn 90° before shooting or fire all-round.

Just keep them behind the cruisers until needed.
The right escort must be chosen to compensate the weaknesses of your cruisers, so Dauntless and Gothic must be backed by Swords, Tyrant and Dominator must be backed by Firestorms.

Chimera_Calvin wrote:The problem with escorts is that many people use them as a screening and/or flanking force, similar to the way there are used in real life navies (and, incidentally in the fluff of BFG and most other space-combat games)

I concur with this , but only Imperial and Chaos have a recognisable fleet doctrine to translate from convention. Its not just Eldar who throw out convention, orks do too. Orks need to have swarms of escorts and need to lead with them. Necrons are a law unto themselves and can be nasty no matter what they take.

Well, the importance of escorts varies with the fleet in questions, from must-take to not necessary. Here are the fleets I have direct experience with:

Chaos: Easily gets by without them. Chaos cruisers are fast, cheap, powerful, and long-ranged enough to do anything you would want an escort to do.
IN: Can get by without them, but having a solid (4-5) squadron of swords is a huge help (especially against Eldar). Cobras are also good to help close the ordnance gap IN experiences against many opponents.
Tau (GW): Orcas are great, but the rest are a little too expensive when there are things like Strongholds and Heros to pay for.
Eldar (CE): Escorts are pretty much mandatory here. CE cruisers are powerful, but really expensive and really fragile. The escorts aren't any more durable, but there is more of them, they are a bit faster, and they don't get degraded by criticals. The Hemlock and Nightshade are favored.

As for the Battleship vs. 2 cruiser question, I was experimenting with just such a list for IN last year. It seemed to perform well, as long as I focused on the enemy's smaller ships before trying to tackle his BB. One thing I found that helped was squadroning my cruisers to avoid the downfalls of IN leadership and to allow for effective AAF rolls. One tactic I was experimenting with was a well-timed AAF that could get me suddenly into torp (and, if I was lucky, bomber range) to get an Alpha strike in.

You can play any fleet without, even eldar and orks. Though I dont see orks profiting much without as it really cuts down on what few options you had to bwegin with. Eldar capital ship only fleets do work, as they like Chaos capital ships mimic the movement profiles of their escorts, but in the Eldar case escorts are there to spread the risk not to enhance mobility.

Orlanth wrote:Eldar capital ship only fleets do work, as they like Chaos capital ships mimic the movement profiles of their escorts, but in the Eldar case escorts are there to spread the risk not to enhance mobility.

Yeah, that's pretty much how I feel about it. I didn't mean to suggest in my previous post that it was impossible to field a CE cruiser fleet; I just meant that such a fleet would be at a large disadvantage against many opponents. IMO the Eldar cruisers that are really worth taking are the Aurora CLs; my usual 1,500 point list would include 1 Voidstalker, 2 Auroras, and the rest filled out with Hemlocks and Nightshades.

Orks do NOT need escorts.

In fact, Ork fleets that use escorts are MUCH weaker that capital ship only fleets.

Escorts as a general rule are complete garbage (unless we're talking eldar/dark eldar). Generally, whatever an escort can do...scads of ordinance can do better.

Escorts=Weak
Ordinance=Strong

How do you get more ordinance? Capital ships.

Conclusion: Capital Ships>Escorts

But Escorts in base contact with the capital ships can add +1 to turrets to try to stop ordance actually hitting the capitals.
Thats a use I've found apart from in scenario play and against newer players.

VikingScott wrote:But Escorts in base contact with the capital ships can add +1 to turrets to try to stop ordance actually hitting the capitals.
Thats a use I've found apart from in scenario play and against newer players.

Escort in base contact with Capital ship gives one more turret (killing one torpedo on a 4+ or one fighter on a 4+).

Fighter in base contact knocks out the entire wave of torpedoes.

Fighter in base contact also knocks out a single bomber/assault boat counter...no 4+ required.

I should add what I didnt add before, Necrons and Chaos can eshew escorts in general without penalty, but the only fleet that ought to proactively say 'no escorts' are the Space Marines. I must admit I still take even Space Marine escorts, but then I was drawn to to minimaxing my gaming.

Ruckdog wrote:

Orlanth wrote:.....in the Eldar case escorts are there to spread the risk not to enhance mobility.

Yeah, that's pretty much how I feel about it......I just meant that such a fleet would be at a large disadvantage against many opponents.

Its the 4+ critical that is the killer. Most fleets capital ships degrae slowly, wheras escorts die fast individually. Thus until you cross a threshold of damage and cripple or kill a capital ship you still face a full strength opponents, wheras escorts deplete steadily as each one is destroyed. There is no element of safety for Eldar, wheras any ship can suffer an unluicky critical eldar suffer more than most, even monir criticals are troublesome as the Eldar have only two fire platforms rather than three or four and fewer hull to effect repairs. However maneuver damage is a slow death and anything rolled above an 8 results in a very quick one. I find that Eldar capital ship losses are still relatively rare as Eldar disengage easily, but all too often a capital ship needs to ber disengaged after only one or two hits due to a nasty critical effect.

Ruckdog wrote:
IMO the Eldar cruisers that are really worth taking are the Aurora CLs; my usual 1,500 point list would include 1 Voidstalker, 2 Auroras, and the rest filled out with Hemlocks and Nightshades.

They are all good, however you can do without the Shadow and Solaris, they are nasty but not really necessary. Eclipse can be deadly because Eldar lances are deadly, squadron two together and you have four lances and beyond that eight squadrons launched at a second target. If you are locked on that turn you can guarantee two capital ship kills in a single attack run.

I love the Void Stalker, the extra range comes in very handy, you can use it in straight see saw attacks, move forward fire and retreat on the same axis, normally this is a dangerous tactic for Eldar because you can never get far away enough. Four launch bays cant hurt either.

Aurora, fantastic ships, very nead armament selection. I have been meaning to get some from Forgeworld since when they were nearly half the price they are now. Mea Culpa.

I have seen Eldar capital ship fleets quite a lot, and always thought; Why? Of all the fleets to go Capital ship only with you choose Eldar.

Deadshane1 wrote:Orks do NOT need escorts.
In fact, Ork fleets that use escorts are MUCH weaker that capital ship only fleets.

Ork escorts work because they have a 6+ front armour, face the enemy and plow forward. Some have torps some have big gunz some have ordinary gunz, all are useful and should be massed in mixed squadrons. Lead with the torpdo ships, orks dont get to reload ordnance, they suck at it anyway, like AFF a lot and should concentrate on 'locking on' if they can. Fire the torps on the way in, remembering the ordnance is not halved by maneuver orders, then allow the torp ships to die first. The gunz ships are generally useful, especially against Eldar, its the big fgunz ships that really hurt though, keep those ones alive and they will pay you back.

You could replace all this with Kroozers, Kroozers have the best hull point per point ratio in the game, but their shields stink as does the fire arcs. Each arc offers the firepower of two escorts only and none of the arcs overlap. Escorts present double the firepower for roughly the same cost and the intermittent shield between each kill adds up unlike the single sghield on the Kroozer. Also the single turret is also a real killer, dont holsd your breath waiting for orks to reload their launch bays, you had better make the initial waves of fighter bombers last, the bombing half doesnt work anyway. Enemy bombers and assault boats can have some difficulty if ork escorts band up close, but a Kroozer or two is an optimum target. 4+ armour and 1 turret is happy hour for bombers, to even individually attacking should be enough to at least cripple a Kroozer.

Ram ships are not included in the discussion so far as they are in a class of their own, cheap and very nasty and able to do a lot of damage, they come hgihly recommended.

Capital ships are needed to provide a sufficient strength of fighta-bommas, there is nothing wrong with a Kroozer or two either, but what you really need are escorts and roks. Both are cheap, overgunned, hard to ignore, relatively hard to kill if used right and far more trouble than they are worth. Take enough of them and the Kroozers and Karriers have something to work with.

Combined posts:

Deadshane1 wrote:
Escorts as a general rule are complete garbage (unless we're talking eldar/dark eldar). Generally, whatever an escort can do...scads of ordinance can do better.
Escorts=Weak
Ordinance=Strong
How do you get more ordinance? Capital ships.

Escort in base contact with Capital ship gives one more turret (killing one torpedo on a 4+ or one fighter on a 4+).
Fighter in base contact knocks out the entire wave of torpedoes.
Fighter in base contact also knocks out a single bomber/assault boat counter...no 4+ required.

Conclusion: Capital Ships>Escorts

There is a lot wrong with the above. Scads of ordnance are the privilege of the Tyranids, everyone else has some practical limitation. betwen reload failures, running out an limits on carrier capacity you have to make do with what you have got. The idea that fighter CAP is superior to escorts as close escorts hold some merit but for every strength there is a corresponding weakness.
- Yes fighters will kill a wave dead, but a smart opponent will send in two torps first then the big wave afterwards, Eldar and Space Marines can do something about that, on a 4+, everyone else falls for the sucker punch every time.
- Yes ordnance can get where it is needed quickly and can outmove even escorts, but the escorts will be there where they are needed, your carrier bays need to be close enough to supply, which is not always a given and they must reload successfully.
- Most tellingly if you are considering fighters as defensive tools in lieu of escorts then you are already thinking defensively not offensively and lose initiative to ones opponent. While defensive play is good, defensive fighters dont win battles, they just help you prevent the oponent from winning battles swhich is not the same thing. Unless you go for full on carrier spam, which is a step beyond recommending capital ships only, you will not really be able to afford to use your precious limited attack craft capacity this way. Yes by all means allocate fighters to CAP if yopu need to, its good and it works. But it must be situational, with escorts in place to protect your key ships you can afford to divert your fighters to more profitable enterprises like turret suppression.

Escorts are useful escorts work. Chaos can do without them, they have ample oportunisies for swift movement power projection and defensive launch capacity spare, Eldar can do without them for exactly the same reasons, but its a high risk strategy offering little advantage over an escort fleet, Necrons can do without them because they are Necrons and have funky necron abilities that outperform anyone at one thing or other as and when required. tyrandis and Tau i dont really know, but Tyranid escorts are ridiculously cheap and Tau get escorts are part of the capital ships anyway, or at least are recommended to do so.
Only Space Marines shouldnt have them. the reason for this is twofold, first every Space Marine capital ship is a carrier, so what you say about using fighters as CAP works well, also because Thunderhawks tend to linger after they munch some torpedoes, and because assault boats and bombers have problems attacking Strike Cruisers anyway there is nothing to apply here. The second and most important reason is because all Space Marine capital ships have and pay for a 6+ armour rating. Wheras escorts do not. as fire is concentrated at the weakest point taking escorts in a Space Maerine fleet gives enemy bombers and batteries something to do, eschew them and the oppnent is looking for lucky 6 all game for everything other than a lance. As strike cruisrrs are mobile and can perform like escorts do, and are cheap enough to be taken in number there is no good reason to take escorts at all, in fac t it does weaken a Space Marine fleet considerably. Yes Novas have lances, but Space Mariens can do perfectly well without, thery have bombard cannon whicgh more than makes up. If you don't like escorts DeadShane, play Space Marines and take none. you will be doing yourself a favour.

Otherwise a fairer conclusion is Capital Ships \= Escorts.

On the SM side, while I've never fielded a fleet I have faced them quite a bit. Now, this is a particluar case, SM vs. IN. From what I've seen, my opponent did a lot better when he fielded a strong escort squadron or two. They were a lot more difficult for me to shut down effectively, since IN lacks assault boats outside the Emperor (I prefer the Retribution). They also provide a bit of target saturation, as my Nova cannons would eat Strike Cruisers for breakfast fairly freqently . I really like Strike Cruisers a lot, but even with the 6+ armor they are still a bit delicate as they still have only 1 shield and 6 HP.

@Deadshane1: While we are on the topic of IN, I would point out that IN carriers are quite expensive. An Exorcist is 230, while the Dictator is 220 (if memory serves..I might have those points swapped), for example. Typically, I've found this means that my opponent outnumbers me in ordnance. Escorts fill a couple of vital roles in the IN fleet; they offer high firepower, lower cost, higher speed, and better maneuverability than any of my curisers do. This serves as a good counter-balance to the correspondingly higher costs of IN cruisers, and prevents the fleet from being sliced and diced by more agile opponents (i.e., Eldar).

@Orlanth

You've obviously never faced a well piloted Kill Kroozer/Terrorship fleet.

Orks have NO problem whatsoever reloading ordinance.

-They're called Warlords...with up to 9RR's for a 1500pt fleet. Combine those RR's with Squadroned Terrorships (so as to use the best leadership) and an opponent on special orders and you've got EASY Ordinance reloading.

When those Warlords are placed on KK's that dont have to reload ordinance and go AAF every turn, you dont care about your fire arcs either. Its called boarding...its how Orks win at gothic.

They dont win with Escorts. Escorts/Roks is a noob ork totally. Its a terrible fleet compared to the power that a Kroozer/Terrorspam fleet can give you.

In fact, if you run into the Eldar with Orks, the ONLY way to beat them is thru ordinance superiority. Escorts will never catch them, and your capitol ships have a hard time weathering the storm in the time it takes to reach them across the board at AAF. (and thats choosing the correct sun facing if you can and utilising spacial terrain the best you can to cover your advance.

BTW, Kroozers might have only a single sheild and low turret power, but when you're running all Kroozers/Terrors, no other fleet in the game can hold a candle to the amount of hull (and boarding power as a consequence) that you can feild. You've got damage that you can take. Low sheilds are really not much of a problem.

Using ordinance on defense also insnt neccessarily a defensive posture...not if you've got enough ordinance to put a little either way.

If you've got air superiority...you maintain it. If you opponent can put out more ordinance in the form of fighters and bombers than you can...your only option is defensive. It's pointless to go after a superior carrier force with bombers. They can knock your stuff out of the sky and still afford to send a wave or to in for a bombing/boarding run.


I ran a carrier heavy fleet of Orks three years running at adepticon Placing Overall/Best Adm/Best Adm and have played gothic since the release. I play the ordinance game in gothic because its a winning strategy. Escorts arent. Early I saw the power of ordinance over escorts. The only fleets that escorts are trulyl useful are eldar...all others TOTALLY fall prey to any fleet with superior ordinance (and especially AB capacities)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ruckdog wrote:
@Deadshane1: While we are on the topic of IN, I would point out that IN carriers are quite expensive. An Exorcist is 230, while the Dictator is 220 (if memory serves..I might have those points swapped), for example. Typically, I've found this means that my opponent outnumbers me in ordnance. Escorts fill a couple of vital roles in the IN fleet; they offer high firepower, lower cost, higher speed, and better maneuverability than any of my curisers do. This serves as a good counter-balance to the correspondingly higher costs of IN cruisers, and prevents the fleet from being sliced and diced by more agile opponents (i.e., Eldar).

Dictators ARE expensive, but they DO spit out lots of ordinance. 4 bombers AND a spread of 6 torps? Not too shabby. The EMP is on the other hand a FABULOUS ship.

I would wager that in a well built and trim Imperial navy fleet, an EMP and 1-2 Dictators would easily cover all "escort" needs for a 1500pt all comers fleet.

Smart torpedo use is of course generally key with the Imperials. Unless of course you're going NovaCannon Crazy. Imperials are actually a little tougher of a fleet to play than Chaos for a beginner.

Chaos on the other hand...easy as pie to go without escorts. I do it with a VICIOUS 1500 that only features two carriers. and a fighter capacity of 8 across the fleet.

Deadshane1 wrote:@Orlanth
You've obviously never faced a well piloted Kill Kroozer/Terrorship fleet......
I ran a carrier heavy fleet of Orks three years running at adepticon Placing Overall/Best Adm/Best Adm and have played gothic since the release.

Ok it works for you and where you went to. Normally I have no problems against fleets like you are mentioning.

Warlord are useful becuse of 20pt rerolls, ye and squadroning helps too but you will only occassionally get better than Ld7, and that fails often enough even with ample rerolls. Once it does no more special orders for the turn. I find that level of risk hurts, but it is orky.

Deadshane1 wrote:
In fact, if you run into the Eldar with Orks, the ONLY way to beat them is thru ordinance superiority.

I have problems with what you are sying right here. Roks are the perfect anto Eldar weapon, cheap batty armed with long range all round firepower. Eldar cant get away from 45cm guns not if they want to attack themselves, their only option is to take down all roks in range or hide behind celestial phenomena.
Eldar also dont care about ordnance, given a pressing need they could outrun a bomber wave anyway. Eldar fighters are superior and eldar escorts supermobility will get out of arc of torpedo fire. If they do hit its 2+ save time.

Deadshane1 wrote:
BTW, Kroozers might have only a single sheild and low turret power, but when you're running all Kroozers/Terrors, no other fleet in the game can hold a candle to the amount of hull (and boarding power as a consequence) that you can feild.

I will give you that, your boarding value will be high, but with 1 shield a good opponent should be knocking down your hull strength. Perhaps your opponents are trying to kill a kroozer rather than weaken many. A qwell run Chaos fleet should have no problems reducing your hull point sdurplus into a hull point defecit before contact. Imperials will have more problems.

Deadshane1 wrote:
If you've got air superiority...you maintain it. If you opponent can put out more ordinance in the form of fighters and bombers than you can...your only option is defensive. It's pointless to go after a superior carrier force with bombers. They can knock your stuff out of the sky and still afford to send a wave or to in for a bombing/boarding run.

First theat is not true, but an inferior carrier force needs to be more careful, normally fewer launch bays means more direct firepower and thus encouragement to close. Carriers especially if they are squadroned do very well up close, the trick to optimise attack craft use is to hit the turn you launch, so you are free to reload sooner and tom avoid any fighter reactions other than CAP.
Orks ought to have good CAP, but I think this will meainly be because as bombers they suck. d3 bombing attacks is frankly laughable, even regular cruisers only take one hit roll on a 5+, upgrade any further and bommas are useless. Yers turret supression is built in, but you would need a lot of it to even begin to get anywhere.

If you are winning so readily with this fleet I am doubting your opponents knew how to deal with it. Ork players are relatively uncommon after all.

Deadshane1 wrote:
The EMP is on the other hand a FABULOUS ship.

Here I agree without a moments hesitation. my favourite 750pt fleet was three Dauntless and an Emperor, it had everything, evwen room for a cheap admiral and would knock any other 750pt fleet, most of which had no means of taking a battleship in that low a points bracket. Emperors recently swapped points with Retributions, a fair move IMHO, its quite possibly the best ship in the game, certainly the best in the Imperial fleet.

Orlanth wrote:
Warlord are useful becuse of 20pt rerolls, ye and squadroning helps too but you will only occassionally get better than Ld7, and that fails often enough even with ample rerolls. Once it does no more special orders for the turn. I find that level of risk hurts, but it is orky.

using this strategy its VERY seldom to fail. You've generally got an above average chance to reload at worst. Assuming you've got at least one Terror out of say...4 in a 1500pt fleet....rolling a high leadership of 8, you're in good shape. It's more rare that problems crop up than not.

I have problems with what you are sying right here. Roks are the perfect anto Eldar weapon, cheap batty armed with long range all round firepower. Eldar cant get away from 45cm guns not if they want to attack themselves, their only option is to take down all roks in range or hide behind celestial phenomena.

No way, Eldar are WAY too good at maneuvering and dancing away. Roks even give up what little maneuverability orks HAVE availiable. You totally give the initiative up and allow the eldar to dictate the flow of battle. Beleive me, good eldar players will have no problem targetting the lead rok and exploding or causing it to brace at the very least, then dancing away out of your range once again. 45cm weapon batteries fired at long range thru a holofeild at abeam or fleeing escorts? Even at a cruiser that plan is laughable. The eldar will toy with you....and you'll get massacred.

Eldar also dont care about ordnance, given a pressing need they could outrun a bomber wave anyway. Eldar fighters are superior and eldar escorts supermobility will get out of arc of torpedo fire. If they do hit its 2+ save time.

You're wrong here on many levels. You have to think outside the box.

Eldar ordinance IS superior, however, most fleets can easily make up for that in numbers. Eldar ordinance is EASY to gain air superiority from. My fighta-bommas generally outnumber eldar fighters by 3 or 4 to 1. Eldar superiority putters out when you get to that point.

They also cannot outrun bomber waves. I dunno how you get this. Eldar move on their turn....ordinance moves on yours AND thiers. Ordinance is faster...especially ork ordinance which is a little faster than regular bombers.

2+ save is well and good, but the key here is to hit as many targets as you can. Each wound hurts an eldar, especially with a 4+ possible crit. Make them roll those saves. You also do NOT concentrate on a single target. Hit everything within reach...THEN on their turn, they have to make MORE saves when they move away from all the blast markers you created across their fleet. Fighting eldar with ordinance is a game of pinpricks and patience. It's really the ONLY game orks have against them....then if they get impatient or desparate...they might fly into your guns.

I will give you that, your boarding value will be high, but with 1 shield a good opponent should be knocking down your hull strength. Perhaps your opponents are trying to kill a kroozer rather than weaken many. A qwell run Chaos fleet should have no problems reducing your hull point sdurplus into a hull point defecit before contact. Imperials will have more problems.

Well run chaos fleets are indeed a problem...but only ones that are built on 60cm range and staying away. Others that have to get close dont have enough time to knock down enough ships/hull. An ork Kroozer fleet can massacre an opponents entire ability to make war in a single or two turns. Ork boarding can be that devestating. Supported by ork ordinance...its hard to avoid. (I actually run a chaos fleet and built it to be able to fight these tactics...which are gaining popularity on the gothic forums over at the waagghh.

Deadshane1 wrote:
If you've got air superiority...you maintain it. If you opponent can put out more ordinance in the form of fighters and bombers than you can...your only option is defensive. It's pointless to go after a superior carrier force with bombers. They can knock your stuff out of the sky and still afford to send a wave or to in for a bombing/boarding run.

First theat is not true, but an inferior carrier force needs to be more careful, normally fewer launch bays means more direct firepower and thus encouragement to close. Carriers especially if they are squadroned do very well up close, the trick to optimise attack craft use is to hit the turn you launch, so you are free to reload sooner and tom avoid any fighter reactions other than CAP.
Orks ought to have good CAP, but I think this will meainly be because as bombers they suck. d3 bombing attacks is frankly laughable, even regular cruisers only take one hit roll on a 5+, upgrade any further and bommas are useless. Yers turret supression is built in, but you would need a lot of it to even begin to get anywhere.

Ork fighta bommas do not have d3 attacks, they have d3 plus the number of turrets shooting at them. Its not that hard to get shots thru.

Deadshane1 wrote: No way, Eldar are WAY too good at maneuvering and dancing away. Roks even give up what little maneuverability orks HAVE availiable. You totally give the initiative up and allow the eldar to dictate the flow of battle. Beleive me, good eldar players will have no problem targetting the lead rok and exploding or causing it to brace at the very least, then dancing away out of your range once again. 45cm weapon batteries fired at long range thru a holofeild at abeam or fleeing escorts? Even at a cruiser that plan is laughable. The eldar will toy with you....and you'll get massacred.

In other words you dont know how to use roks.

Roks are cheap dirt cheap so you can take many and you can keep them close together because they never blow up when destroyed. Thus you never should have an opportunity to blow one up and run away. Roks have d6+6 gunz with 45cm range and all round fire arcs, there is not running away from that. Kroozers are far easier to get a bead on and survive return fire.
This is ignoring the big gunz and torpedoes roks also have. Best 'ships' in the ork fleet.

Deadshane1 wrote:
Eldar ordinance IS superior, however, most fleets can easily make up for that in numbers. Eldar ordinance is EASY to gain air superiority from. My fighta-bommas generally outnumber eldar fighters by 3 or 4 to 1. Eldar superiority putters out when you get to that point.

Terror ships cost 185pts, Eclipses 250pts but dont need much support, just a few Nightshades is enough, though you can add to that. If we are playing carrier fleet games you will be lucky to get 2:1 odds on carrier heavy Eldar, ansd if you are not expect your Karriers to ber lanced to death even quicker. Whatever odds you don get, you wont keep long. yes 2+ saves run out eventually, but ork shields and hull run out a whole lot sooner to the Eldar gunnery.
Eldar can do a very nasty carrier fleet, if you like taking carrier spam against balanced fleets then so be it, but its not exactly freindly gaming to do that. For you to get your 3 to 1 odds your Edlar opponejnt is playing fairer than you, if they sank to th same level and took massed Eclipses you wouldnt have much hope really Eldar bombers are a mismatch against ork capital ships.
I have three Eclipses, I dont use more than two except in a very big game, its just unfun for most players.

Deadshane1 wrote:
They also cannot outrun bomber waves. I dunno how you get this. Eldar move on their turn....ordinance moves on yours AND thiers. Ordinance is faster...especially ork ordinance which is a little faster than regular bombers.

I assumed some distance between the carrier and target so the eldar actually get a run away move. Yes ordance moves twice, but then so do Eldar. Running from ordance is not a usual or recommended tactic, but can be necessary against some forms of extreme ordance spam, it gives the Eldar player time to react.

Deadshane1 wrote:
It's really the ONLY game orks have against them....then if they get impatient or desparate...they might fly into your guns.

Sorry a ridiculous thing to say. Orks dont need to rely on ordnance to fight Eldar, thery haver no lances only gunz/big gunz both of which are weapons batteries. As weapons batteries are the defacto Eldar killing tools (excepting Fireships and anything Necron) that is what you should be using. Kroozers have a poor fire arc spread, ewcorts cant turn very well. Roks are still the answer.
What you should have said was 'I took so many Terror ships that ordance was all I had to use','even that would only partly be true as there is some weapons battery firepower on terror ships too.

Deadshane1 wrote:
Well run chaos fleets are indeed a problem...but only ones that are built on 60cm range and staying away. Others that have to get close dont have enough time to knock down enough ships/hull. An ork Kroozer fleet can massacre an opponents entire ability to make war in a single or two turns. Ork boarding can be that devestating. Supported by ork ordinance...its hard to avoid. (I actually run a chaos fleet and built it to be able to fight these tactics...which are gaining popularity on the gothic forums over at the waagghh.

Against Imperials you have a point, your prow stops their torpedoes and so you can get inc close and use heavy gunz and boarding. The rest arent impressed.

Deadshane1 wrote:
Ork fighta bommas do not have d3 attacks, they have d3 plus the number of turrets shooting at them. Its not that hard to get shots thru.

Nope, each fighta bomber acts as a fighter or a bomber, not both. You have to allocaste members of the wave to bombing or turret supression they cant all do both. No wonder you think ork attasck craft are powerful if you plasy by that rule. Orks are supposed to have versatile but inferior attack craft not versatile and highly superior attack craft.

Orlanth wrote:

In other words you dont know how to use roks.

Roks are cheap dirt cheap so you can take many and you can keep them close together because they never blow up when destroyed. Thus you never should have an opportunity to blow one up and run away. Roks have d6+6 gunz with 45cm range and all round fire arcs, there is not running away from that. Kroozers are far easier to get a bead on and survive return fire.
This is ignoring the big gunz and torpedoes roks also have. Best 'ships' in the ork fleet.

Slow, cannot maneuver, fly straight at enemy and shoot with random gunz str....hope for the best. Best ships in the Ork Fleet? Orlanth, I really just dont know what to say to that.

Rok's and Hulks are pretty much the reason why people get so frustrated with playing ork fleets...they're so easy to beat. Use your roks against any OTHER fleet out there, even assuming they would be effective against Eldar (which I doubt).

I'd like to see you play a Rok fleet against a 60cm range Chaos fleet, Nova Cannon spam, or anything else with SERIOUS punch at range. Your gunz may have range, but your dog-slow maneuvering is a total hamstring in any take-all-comers fleet.

Terrorspam and Kroozer fleets dont have that problem. Fleets like that we have AAF without leadership checks and ordinance to keep them busy.

Tactical flexability...something your "best ship in the fleet" doesnt have in the least.

Terror ships cost 185pts, Eclipses 250pts but dont need much support, just a few Nightshades is enough, though you can add to that. If we are playing carrier fleet games you will be lucky to get 2:1 odds on carrier heavy Eldar, ansd if you are not expect your Karriers to ber lanced to death even quicker. Whatever odds you don get, you wont keep long. yes 2+ saves run out eventually, but ork shields and hull run out a whole lot sooner to the Eldar gunnery.
Eldar can do a very nasty carrier fleet, if you like taking carrier spam against balanced fleets then so be it, but its not exactly freindly gaming to do that. For you to get your 3 to 1 odds your Edlar opponejnt is playing fairer than you, if they sank to th same level and took massed Eclipses you wouldnt have much hope really Eldar bombers are a mismatch against ork capital ships.
I have three Eclipses, I dont use more than two except in a very big game, its just unfun for most players.

I'm sorry, are we talking about fun or effectiveness in fleets? The two are rarely the same.

Eldar Carrier fleets could indeed be a possibility...if their firepower/dancing away game wasnt so good. You'll rarely see all Carrier fleets built by eldar players because thats simply not what the Eldar fleet DOES (especially with the possibility of bumping into a Necron). It's not the most effective way for them to go to battle. Sure your Eldar Carrier spam may swat down an ork Terrorspam fleet...if you actually build it. I think its much more likely that you'd go for more escorts (which are pretty good for eldar) and direct firepower with an eldar fleet....because its more effective.

Terrorspam and Kroozer fleets for Orks, on the other hand, is pretty much the best way for them to take on all comers. If we're talking about tailor making our fleets to clobber each other I may choose something different, but for maximum tactical flexibility against different fleets and abilities....You're saying ROK's are the answer? All I can say to that is "Wow"...then try to stop laughing.

This also brings to mind another point. I suppose your Rok fleet would be OMFGAWESOMESAUCE against this alleged Eldar Carrier fleet correct? Care to explain THAT one? Myself I think my Terrorship heavy fleet would do better...at least they could make a fight of it. My point here is your Eldar Carrier fleet would indeed be pretty good against orks...but you're pretty much not going to see it very often. It's not the best way to run eldar.

So, what are we talking about here? Fun fleets or tactically effective? Tailor making for each other or Take-all-comers?

I assumed some distance between the carrier and target so the eldar actually get a run away move. Yes ordance moves twice, but then so do Eldar. Running from ordance is not a usual or recommended tactic, but can be necessary against some forms of extreme ordance spam, it gives the Eldar player time to react.

Time, yes, but the ordinance is still faster. Like I said, you cannot outrun it. Eldar get, what, two moves at 15-20cm MAX (often less if you've got the sun in a less favorable position thanks to a shrewd opponnent)? Fightabommas get two per player turn at 25cm...even basic bombers get 20cm...which is still faster than any eldar capital ship even WITH favorable sun facing.

Next time just agree that ordinance cannot be outrun!

Against Imperials you have a point, your prow stops their torpedoes and so you can get inc close and use heavy gunz and boarding. The rest arent impressed.

Every fleet is impressed by Ork Boarding. (the only exceptions being Tyranids, Eldar, and sometimes Necrons) If you're not impressed, they havent been doing it right. (very likely if someone is taking advice on adding Roks and escorts to an Ork Fleet )

Nope, each fighta bomber acts as a fighter or a bomber, not both. You have to allocaste members of the wave to bombing or turret supression they cant all do both. No wonder you think ork attasck craft are powerful if you plasy by that rule. Orks are supposed to have versatile but inferior attack craft not versatile and highly superior attack craft.

Read your 2007 FAQ for how Ork fightabommas work. You're doing it wrong. d3+3 attacks each...period. (with the +3 being dependant on turret strength of the target)

I'm left wondering how you think this is superior attack craft? Especially when we're really talking about taking on eldar...who have no turrets, leaving the orks with a straight d3 attacks each.

Actually, against other fleets its not reallly even "superior"...just not as inferior as people generally think.

Deadshane1 wrote:
I'd like to see you play a Rok fleet against a 60cm range Chaos fleet, Nova Cannon spam, or anything else with SERIOUS punch at range. Your gunz may have range, but your dog-slow maneuvering is a total hamstring in any take-all-comers fleet.

Tactical flexability...something your "best ship in the fleet" doesnt have in the least.

The all round fire arcs make maneouverability an irrelevance. Make the enemy come to you and face your gunz. roks are there to ensure he rest of your fleet dont lose because of poor mobility leading to fire arc blind spots. Toks are the most unmaneouverable of them all, but have no blind spots. You can also field them in large numbers for little resources.

Deadshane1 wrote:
Eldar Carrier fleets could indeed be a possibility...if their firepower/dancing away game wasnt so good. You'll rarely see all Carrier fleets built by eldar players because thats simply not what the Eldar fleet DOES (especially with the possibility of bumping into a Necron). It's not the most effective way for them to go to battle. Sure your Eldar Carrier spam may swat down an ork Terrorspam fleet...if you actually build it. I think its much more likely that you'd go for more escorts (which are pretty good for eldar) and direct firepower with an eldar fleet....because its more effective.

I haver seen Eldar carrier fleets, but more honestly they are simply Eldar capital fleets, they become carrier fleets because there are few designs so half end up being carriers anyway, you could say the same about Ork kroozer fleets, they end up being launch bay heavy simoply because with onlt two common designs carriers turn up half the time anyway.

The only real caveat is that Eldar carrier fleets dont behave like other carrier fleets because irregardless of what you arm Eldar with they all do the same thing: dart in, fire and evade. When you are very maneuverable and fast there is no need to launch from long way away so torpedos and attack craft are launched at the same time as the batteries and lances. I mentioned in a earlier post the nasty combo of two Eclipse squadronned deploying eight attack craft against one target and four locked on lances against a second, and how that usually results in two wrecked cruisres or one wrecked battleship from a single turns firing.
I dont do these types of flets because escorts are effective and a whole lot safer, and also because Eldar carrier spam is just unfun and unfair to play against.

Deadshane1 wrote:
You're saying ROK's are the answer? All I can say to that is "Wow"...then try to stop laughing.

This also brings to mind another point. I suppose your Rok fleet would be OMFGAWESOMESAUCE against this alleged Eldar Carrier fleet correct? Care to explain THAT one?

Sure. Everyone knows the way to kill Eldar is with weapons batteries, nothing provides battery firepower in an ork fleet quite like roks, in fact d6+6 batteries for 80pts with 45cm range and above all four fire arc firepower is IMHO the best anyone can get. Even Necrons have trouble being that good against Eldar, well lets not overdo it, eveything else except Necrons has trouble being that good against Eldar. I didnt mention Eldar carrier fleets specifically, I am confident in a rok havy fleet against any Eldar.

Now the rok fleet I recommend still has Terrorships even room for Kroozers in it, roks are so cheap there is a lot of space left for other things. Orks really do need fighter CAP, more than any other fleet, but they dont needd as much as you think.

You want to stop Eldar with attack craft they get a 2+ save against, I want to kill Eldar with batteries they get no ho,lofield save against and cant evade because of their range and ability. I am the one who should be laughing. Roks are the answer for orks when fighting Eldar.

Deadshane1 wrote:
Time, yes, but the ordinance is still faster. Like I said, you cannot outrun it. Eldar get, what, two moves at 15-20cm MAX (often less if you've got the sun in a less favorable position thanks to a shrewd opponnent)? Fightabommas get two per player turn at 25cm...even basic bombers get 20cm...which is still faster than any eldar capital ship even WITH favorable sun facing.

Next time just agree that ordinance cannot be outrun!

Ordanance can be outrun, you just forget why. Its not a race iaccross the board ts a point of practicality. Its not a matter of top speed but endurance over a given time. The time being long enough to get fighters in play to counter. Given unlimited time the bombers would catch the Eldar, but that would be pointless like every other races escorts the Edlar simply woundlnt bother trying to run. However Edlar are fast enough to outrun the bombers long enough for the fighters to be launched and save them. Other races cannot say the same.

Deadshane1 wrote:
Every fleet is impressed by Ork Boarding. (the only exceptions being Tyranids, Eldar, and sometimes Necrons) If you're not impressed, they havent been doing it right. (very likely if someone is taking advice on adding Roks and escorts to an Ork Fleet )

Orks get +1 factor, thats nice. However to get outnumber they have to have more hull points when the board. chaos ships cost about the same and have far more firepower, they wikl ensure by the time the roks get to board they have less not more, they also get +1. Space Marines have the same advantages more or less but get +2. Eldar could be good victims but only if the Eldar player is unaware of the risk, they wont make that mistake twice. You could make a mess of Tau. So you can board Tau and Imperials as a general strategy, thats about it really.
I am not impressed because I know how to run a Chaos fleet, and for that matter Imperials, Space Marines, Necrons and Eldar too. All those fleets have a good counter to boarding except an Imperial cruiser line, even then there are tricks you can play.

Deadshane1 wrote:
Read your 2007 FAQ for how Ork fightabommas work. You're doing it wrong. d3+3 attacks each...period. (with the +3 being dependant on turret strength of the target)

Link please. Port Maw is gone, and I found nothing on the GW specialist games site to support this. Yes, I looked before I posted earlier, the reason for the delay in replying.

Deadshane1 wrote:
I'm left wondering how you think this is superior attack craft? Especially when we're really talking about taking on eldar...who have no turrets, leaving the orks with a straight d3 attacks each.
Actually, against other fleets its not reallly even "superior"...just not as inferior as people generally think.

From what you are claiming its d3 net attacks rather than d6-turrets net attacks, thats a major improvement. In fact it means you get the same chances irregardless of the number of turrets the target has. I smell BS here, or Gav Thorpe, whichever stinks the most.

We'll just have to disagree about Roks then.

I prefer to "Pilot" a fleet and have some bit of tactical maneuverability in order to respond to threats.

Orks get more than a +1 for boarding. Warlords DOUBLE the hull value for boarding (just like your Khorne Warlords..but they're easier to include multiples in ork fleets), which is already normally larger on Kroozer hulls to begin with. Add Mega armour for the warlord and you're looking at a +2 and a hull value of 20...combine ships for overwhelming boarding that has the capacity to KILL an enemy cruiser....oh, and no bracing for impact against that damage. If its a warlord aboard one of their battleships...forget it, the ship being boarded is scrapped.

When orks board ships...those ships are finished.

.....people are impressed by ork boarding done well. I'm surprised you didnt notice. Anyone giving advice on Orky tactics NEEDS to take boarding into account. It's the MOST DESTRUCTIVE weapon in the ork arsenal. (and Roks with their poor maneuverabiility dont help...you need ships)

I'm at work right now and cannot track down the FAQ due to the net nanny here. when I get a chance I'll post it but I beleive its already availiable at warseer and it isnt hard to find on a Google search.

Its a long FAQ with all races included....and indeed ork fightabommas work as I've stated.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
How Fightabommas work:

"Fighta-Bommas only roll a D3 instead of a D6
when rolling their attacks against ships.
However, as they are also fighters, they get a
+3 modifier when reducing the number of
attacks each squadron marker makes against a
target’s turret value."

Link to the FAQ:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cacheKj0zc5Oj7cJ:www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php%3Ft%3D211641+Battlefleet+gothic+2007+FAQ&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Deadshane1 wrote:We'll just have to disagree about Roks then.

Very well back to escorts then.

Deadshane1 wrote:
How Fightabommas work:

"Fighta-Bommas only roll a D3 instead of a D6
when rolling their attacks against ships.
However, as they are also fighters, they get a
+3 modifier when reducing the number of
attacks each squadron marker makes against a
target’s turret value."

Link to the FAQ:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cacheKj0zc5Oj7cJ:www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php%3Ft%3D211641+Battlefleet+gothic+2007+FAQ&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

I will have to reluctantly give you that, but I am 99% sure its exceptionally sloppy example writing. According to RAW here each fighta-bomma gets d3+3, why plus three, fighters normally get +1. I think this is supposed to mean a wave of four fighta-bommas gets d3+3 each. d3+3 is clearly better than d6 so they become superior bombers, I doubt that was intended. Fighta-bommas are supposed to work as a bomber and a fighter, not a bomber and three fighters, so it must be talking about other fighta-bommas in the wave.

The definative FAQ also completely failed to mention how turret supression works for other fleets, but covers just about all other rules from outside the BBB and Armada. I found it interesting that ordnance no longer runs out, at all, on doubles I was sure that applied only to attack craft.

It's not really "superior".

The "+3" is simply to counter the turrets. Against a target without or few turrets...the regular bomber is clearly superior. You never actually "get" that +3 for damage rolling. If the target bombed, for example, only has 1 turret you'll only get d3+1 since the 'plus' is only a modifier for turret supression.

The regular bomber also hits harder when accompanied by a fighter escort.

In my long history of running ork ordinance, I find that they dont hit nearly as hard as regular bomber waves do, especially if those waves have fighter escort for turret suppression.

Fighta bombaz are good at "making sure" you get a reliable few attacks in...thats about it. Their real advantage is not having to differentiate between fighters/bombers. You can have your full compliment of ordinance on the board and abort a bombing run in order to intercept torps/other fighters/attack escorts....whatever.

....again, part of the reason that Orks dont need escorts...their ordinance is so versitile.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Orlanth wrote:
I will have to reluctantly give you that, but I am 99% sure its exceptionally sloppy example writing. According to RAW here each fighta-bomma gets d3+3, why plus three, fighters normally get +1. I think this is supposed to mean a wave of four fighta-bommas gets d3+3 each. d3+3 is clearly better than d6 so they become superior bombers, I doubt that was intended.

Reluctantly?

Thats ok, you dont have to GIVE me anything....I TOOK it!

Why would it mean a wave? Isnt it easier to simply explain how each individual counter works....like the rules generally do? I dont think its sloppy writing, its actually quite clear. Maybe sloppy if you're trying to read something else in there...which doesnt exist.

(BTW, I'm sure this is the way it was intended...as I used to play my orks against one of the game designers )

Deadshane1 wrote:It's not really "superior".

The "+3" is simply to counter the turrets. Against a target without or few turrets...the regular bomber is clearly superior. You never actually "get" that +3 for damage rolling. If the target bombed, for example, only has 1 turret you'll only get d3+1 since the 'plus' is only a modifier for turret supression.

That is not how the original wording of turret suppression works, and why it was odd not to have been included/clarified/modified in the FAQ. Turret supression is normally played to mean a fighter neutralises a turret as you assume here, but in the RAW its +1 per fighter added to the total, and has no limit and is not linked to the number of bombers used. So essentially so long as at least one bomber is present in the wave a turret supressing fighter counts as bomber with 1 attack that cannot be reduced further by turrets (though it can be shot down as normal).

Deadshane1 wrote:
The regular bomber also hits harder when accompanied by a fighter escort.

Four fighta-bommas under this crap wording means 4d3+12 with turrets counting against each d3 roll reduced to a minimum of 0 each. This is exactly what the RAW says, is this what you are doing?

A four strong wave wave of fighters and bombers yields either 4d6 , 3d6+1, 2d6+2, 1d6+3 with turrets counting against each d6 roll reduced to a minimum of 0 each.

Our group uses the normal house rule common to many players: turret supression neutralises one turret for the duration of the attack per fighter.

Without further interrpretation avaiable (until here) Fighta-bombers count as bombing or turret supressing in any combination (which is a powerful compensation as and of itself, though not excessive).

Deadshane1 wrote:
....again, part of the reason that Orks dont need escorts...their ordinance is so broken.

Fixed.

You TOOK broken rules, and exploit them. No glory in that. This needs fixing fast, its interesting that this FAQ is not to be found on the GW site, perhaps they pulled it for some reason. The rules for all the other specialist games are upto date and FAQ'ed I think because this FAQ has been withdrawn it can be safely ignored as the brainfart it is. Therefore you took nothing, show this document to me under the current canon rules from the GW specialist games site or its apocryphal.

Thee fact you have been following this FAQ is not your fault, but I wont be joining you.