Last Online
Recent Posts
posted in BFG:A2 - Technical Feedback read more

@jaheit said in Imperial Navy's lances are underpowered:

@Ashardalon Actually in tabletop shields had the same armor as the hull of the ship. The reason you fired macros first in tabletop was due to hits on shields making hit markers that lowered accuracy for subsequent hits, but lances always aimed perfectly.

I have browsed original bfg rules and the 2010 FAQ to find something about shields having armour and didn't find anything. Could you provide a source? Another matter is, it doesn't matter if they had armour because on a roll of 4+ a lance weapon ignores armour anyway and hits the target as long as its in rage.

@dire_venom said in Imperial Navy's lances are underpowered:

Some lances do need a buff, For example the Imp Apocalypse Battleship has 6 Macro and 6 Lance dps.
Guess what also has the same dps but costs over 100 points less?
Chaos BC Archeron also has 6 macro and 6 Lance (and has more range than Apoc!!)

Gothic in general has felt underperforming and simply does not stack up to similar cost cruisers.
My suggestion would be to increase Imperial lance battery (not turrets) damage from 12 to 16
Thus taking the Gothic up to 5.5 Lance dps and Apoc up to 8 Lance dps.
Personaly I would also apply the Lance battery buff to Mechnicus.

So like I said, make it more true to the tabletop by making them ignore ALL armour. The 25% damage reduction on all lance weapons I don't understand why its in the game while all other aspects mostly try to keep to the tabletop 😛 On the other hand someone could say that they did hit on a 4+ in TT and in the game they ALWAYS hit so its kind of a point of debate.

Still "standard" macro gun does 18 dmg per 12 seconds minus armour, while a lance does 12 per 12 seconds -25%.Doesn't reflect the strategic value and incredible destruction power lance weapons in the TT at all.

posted in BFG:A2 - Technical Feedback read more

Lances are fired after macro battery fire in TT and lore because they are high damage dealers, not because they are bad in anyway at overloading void shields so it makes no sense to fire them at void shields unless necessary. Ghotic class cruisers are renowned as escort ship killers for this very reason because they can kill an escort in a single broadside including their shields.

I wonder why lances reduce the armour to 25% instead of ignoring it completely. Armour now is a % damage reduction so it doesn't make any sense for a weapon that punches through most ships both way in and out to have a 25% damage reduction. Just remove the de-buff and voila, lances are more viable again.

posted in BFG:A2 - Technical Feedback read more

I can agree that now that the armour is a flat % damage reduction instead of % chance to mitigate all damage, the lances feel much less powerful. As it is, a Lunar class cruiser, the work horse of the Imperium has little more firepower than a light cruiser, and Ghotic even less than a light cruiser. Someone could take a look at this.

posted in BFG:A2 - Technical Feedback read more

It is clear to everybody that Astartes need a rebalancing in the game as they have been copy-pasted from BFG with slight point rebalances and are currently the worst multiplayer faction.

Battle barge is fine as it is with its full battleship health pool and shields, and heavy armour all around. What needs to be looked at is its cost. It has 3 launch bays so if you launch fighters you can defend against all but the most concentrated attack.

Lorewise, NEW astartes vessels (after HH) except for escorts shouldn't have lances at all because of Imperial divison of power after HH. Navy jealousy.
Typical barge is 8-9km long so having kilometres of adamantium armour is impossible. It still has heavy armour all around just like necrons.

Strike cruiser need a 400 hp health buff to be equal to other cruisers.
Vanguard cruisers likewise need a health buff to light cruiser levels.
Both need a point cost rebalance.

A guaranteed assault action that cannot be shot down is a lightning strike. Any other form is a bad idea.

I don't see why Astartes of all factions would have unlimited boarding actions. Doesn't make any sense lorewise, nor balance wise.

Astartes boardings are already really powerful, point rebalancing should increase the number and tonnage of ships, so making it even more powerful may potentially end with it being OP, especially for a point and click ability. Homing boarding torpedoes also come into play here.

Strike craft: If Mechanics of launching fighters/ bombers is changed to separate cooldowns it would make carrier heavy factions OP so its a terrible idea. Of all Imperial factions Astartes should have the weakest strike craft capability for obvious reasons.

Summary: rebalance Astartes by health pool and point cost, after that is done take a look if they aren't op because of boarding torpedo/thunderhawk boarding/boarding action spam.

Last but not least, lets forget the over the top Astartes novels and look at all wh40k lore. Astartes are hardly the scariest thing that can board your ship. Do not forget that when working on the balance Tindalos.

PS. I am surprised that Mechanicus has the lowest troop values and boarding damage, but I respect the fact its because of the TT and doesn't take into the account the new lore in which boarding an explorator fleet full of skitarii cohorts is a bad idea.

posted in BFG:A2 - Technical Feedback read more

Ah indeed, I missed the collapse-able little menu.

Thank you very much for pointing that out.

However it would be nice if the range grids described the range in units instead of "medium" it should be "medium 9000" just like in the mini ship profile :).

posted in BFG:A2 - Technical Feedback read more

Hello everyone!

In BFG:1 inside an battle there was a way to see each ships weapon layout including their ranges which allowed a player to easier set up engagement ranges.

In BFG:2 we need to remember what ranges and indeed what armament a certain ship carries in order to set up this engagement range. I think it would be much better if some changes to the UI were made so that we can see the weapons inside an battle.

Especially if the Imperial Compaign contains 3 factions which amounts to a lot of vessels, players new to the game are going to struggle to learn all the battery ranges at first.

Another issue is, it is much harder to see which weapon modules are critically damaged now aka which side batteries are dead.

Last thing is, that the engagement choice in the UI doesn't say what range it is, only describes it as medium, long etc. A tooltip has to be added that says that medium range 9000 units etc. I hope you find this insightful.

Looks like your connection to Focus Home Interactive - Official Forums was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.