Joined
Last Online
Recent Posts
posted in BFG - General Discussion read more

the first game handled hangars much better imo. defensive fighters could deal with twice the amount of offensive hangars, turrets would deal the same amount of damage per squadron regardless of number of attacking squadrons, you could not outrun squadrons to force more turret damage (some eldar craft could do that once), hull damage would guarantee perma destroyed turrets and you could crack defensive fighter screens by forcing turret checks with your own ships.

posted in BFG - General Discussion read more

@ashardalon: 5 executors cannot outcrit well managed shooty hive ships at short range. you would need both broadsides constantly firing to have high enough crit-rates to compensate the different crit-reduction between GCs and BBs. the only advantage the GCs have, is having more weapon subsystems to lose, which is not that usefull if the nid player keeps his prow weapons safe, if shields are down.

posted in BFG - General Discussion read more

@ahriman the game had imo too high weapon crit-rates compared to hull damage and the solution so far is sort of fix it for two ship classes only.

since release there were only two competitive LC spam lists and that were dauntless spam and SM torp-LCs (ork LC spam was fun but not very competitive).

dauntless were simply underpriced for their damage-output compared to the rest of the navy roster and SM LCs offer better gameplay than the standard torp-cruiser list.

the majority of meta builds were cruiser heavy with bigger flagships in a few cases. thats infinitely better than the current situation, where it is (with a few exceptions) a liability to take smaller stuff than grand cruisers.

chaos, orks, nids, necrons, arguably both tau, arguably navy and DE can ignore most of their roster for this reason and the only exception builds want to mass either torpedos or novas only.

posted in BFG - General Discussion read more

@CANNED_F3TUS try five executors for example.

the current crit system, with BBs being four times more crit-resistant than cruisers, hurts the game imo. it shifts the meta towards BB/GC heavy fleets and it makes builds that rely on disabling systems quite weak against these top-heavy lists.

posted in BFG - General Discussion read more

@Skalgrim-Fellaxe you need some good old cheese to kill the sperenza in the first cron mission, but so far I like your mod. having faster crons is very nice.

some small issue I have found: if you re-crew a hulked vessel, you only get one crew, while you spent five with the troop transfer skill. that's very likely not mod-able, but I guess having a better troop transfer before a ship gets hulked, is probably worth it.

posted in BFG - General Discussion read more

a hive-ship heavy pyro fleet has 106 raw dps in prow weapons with the option for 300% crit chance increase and standard accuracy. a slaughter build has less raw dps if you count only one side of the broadsides. a full avenger list (without any escorts) has 112 raw dps per broadside. even if you take the slower projectile speed into account, that's very shooty.

posted in BFG - General Discussion read more

it would have been fun if the players could set one VP for their side with the last VP being always in the centre of the map.

posted in BFG - Faction Discussion read more

@Uniquecalin I don't think you lose rank by not playing. I asked a dev some time ago and it was not implemented and I would be surprised if they surprise patched it in.

but I would expect that if you lose once against a much lower ranked player, you lose more ranking score compared to what you gain by winning several times.

posted in BFG - Faction Discussion read more

@ashardalon: ok, thx for the quick answer. too bad though.

@Uniquecalin try one hiveship (double bio artillery) as admiral and two bio-acid hiveships (double pyro-acid artillery) + kraken escorts. man, the nid names are confusing as fuck.

posted in BFG - Faction Discussion read more

@tyran272 damage needed to destroy kraken = 400 (hull) / 0,17 (DR 83 armor) = 2352 raw damage vs damage to destroy other nid escorts = 200 (shield) + 200 (hull) / 0,33 (DR 67 armor) = 806 raw damage. two and a half was actually too low, because I was using 80 armor for a quicker mental calculation. if you use only lance damage, instead of generic raw damage, the gap closes to roughly 1:2 in favor of the kraken. lastly if you take into account, that the first 200 raw damage can deal full damage or fire crits on the kraken, the gap is even closer, but I am too lazy to calculate the average extra damage through crits you can have from 200 damage. to be more precise, you would need to have include damage over time rates to include hull, shield regeneration and fire damage.

from my game experience, I know that bioplasma escorts lose horrible to kraken and kraken survive much longer in non-nid match-ups. it could be worthwhile to test how non-kraken pyro escorts perform against kraken in a mirror match. it would really help to improve the bio-plasma list, if non-kraken pyros had a edge case use in mirror matches.

@ashardalon: game mechanic question: the fast crit repair upgrade, does it reduce fire duration?

@Uniquecalin afaik reload does nothing for bio-plasma firing rate. it is a lance weapon. you want heavier ships and escorts to suffer less crits that destroy your weapons.


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