EA Main line warship

What would do you prefer?

  • Omega, the show rules!

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Marathon, who doesnt like black ships?

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Orestes, old technology is the best.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters


So we get the Orestes, the Omega and the Marathon now.

So the Orestes was already outclassed by the Omega.

The Omega gets an extra boost in Armageddon, but theres a new contender, the Marathon.

Marathon has much more maneuverability.

The main gun deals 50% extra damage, same number of crits though. It is 5" shorter ranged, but the Marathon moves those 5" extra every turn.....
Only the rear beam loses some range. But still retains the damage bonus.
The secondary batteries have 4 AD less, but 3" more range, plus can be turned to beam mode.
Side firepower is pretty much the same, its just longer ranged, same accounts for the aft firepower.
Downside is less damage taking ability and a smaller fighter complement (though the rest of the fleet isnt much better of for Furies).

So is there a good reason to take an Omega even if there would be only a single EA list? Excluding the fact that Omegas were on the show and Marathons werent.
I would never, ever take the Orestes as a battle-level choice. In a big enough fleet, I'd probably take a mix of the two (which is a cop-out answer :) ).
I take the Marathon.
It has the nice TD Beam and has Laser/Pusle Arrays which give him a better range edge against the Omega.
And it´s more manouverable with the 2/45°.

So it´s the only ship from the EA which can outmanouver other Battel Level ships.

It will be destroyed much easier as the Omega but have the chance to move fast enough out of the danger zones, where the Omega must hold out.
Have to say, that while I love the look of the Omega, I've been consistently disapointed by their performance on the tabletop. In fact, Hyperion cruisers regularly kill more enemy and survive longer than Omega destroyers on a one for one level.

I'd not bother with the Orestes, the lack of speed means any half way compentant enemy commander will leave them APTE at the wrong end of the table for most of the battle.

Not tried the Marathon yet, but given I'd currently take Hyperions over Omega's, it's looking tempting.
The problem with the omegas is that its the weakest Battle PL choice of the 4 main races by far. Tinashis have stealth, tertius and primus have much nastier beams and better P/S weaponry, and G'Quans can have more damage and more weapons. Being outclassed by the minbari is alright(everyone is to a certain degree) but it should at least be on par with the centuari and Narn, which it isnt.

If the omeags secondaries were beefed up to the Novas stats, I believe it would be a much more viable battle choice.
I´d say Omega, purely because I like the look of it, AND it´s available in most time periods which are interesting for games... sure, the Marathon is definitely the better ship, but it can usually only be used in Crusade-era games (given that the players use in-service times in the first place).

And with the new fighter rules and the "beef-up", it´s abilities have increased quite a deal compared to SFOS, even if it´s still far from being the best battle choice in the game...
MustEatBrains said:
I´d say Omega, purely because I like the look of it...And with the new fighter rules and the "beef-up", it´s abilities have increased quite a deal compared to SFOS...

Completely agree. Omega all the way - one of the coolest looking ugly ships around. EA engineering, yeah!
The Omega IS the iconic Earth warship, and you've got to love her for the looks alone.

Angelus 2000 was on the money about her stats, though; the boost in Armageddon helps, but the Omega is still on the back foot compared to her opposite numbers in other fleets. Still, the INTs help and the four flights of fighters are less useless than they used to be.

The Marathon looks like a very useful ship - her speed and agility may make up for her rather thin skin. And that main beam battery rocks.

However, I've found the Early EA fleet to be the most useful at the 5-Raid
PL level, and in larger actions, the Orestes is far from useless, as long as you can deploy her somewhere the enemy can't avoid, or has to go - depends on the scenario. I'd certainly include one in a campaign fleet.
Omega is one of the Iconic ships of the show. It is the ship of the line for Earth Force. If the game stats don't reflect that, than blame Mongoose. One of my pet peeves has always been that the Vorchan and Omega's stats do not reflect their dominance in the show.
near 100% extra for the Omega for the style bonus :D

And while i think thats how appearance should not be a reason to promote strong ships...(its too dangerous for the overpowered syndrom to appear) it is very unfortunate, that Vorchan and Omega are rather underpowered.
Yep... Omega rocks.
the look of the ship is quite...impressive (or ugly, how you mean) 8)
ok ok..stats are more importantly, but it is the premier warship of the EA
Given the original poster specifically said 'other than the omega is in the show', no...no reason to ever take an Omega over a Marathon.

In service dates just do not seem to be used much as most folks do not want to be restricted in what races they can play. Given we have collected the minis for the extreme ends, it just does not work in our group.

Considering that these are now in different Fleet lists. I know exactly when I take an Omega over a Marathon, when playing the 3rd Age fleet where I can't have a Marathon...

And since the Orestes can't be taken with either of the other two anyway that's a bit of a moot point (as to whether its actually worth taking at all is a completely different question).

The Omegas are slow. The boresight and low beam power makes the ship weak. I think that if the beam AD was made a few AD higher, then the Omega becomes a more worth while ship.

The question is now, what would make the Omega level with other ships of the same level, without giving it an unfair advantage? I think that giving it a 6AD or higher boresite might be the answer, or that having a boresight gives the beams a benifit in terms of range or percision.
I think part of the point of the poll was that these were all the same level and clearly not of the same utility, and at least the orestes and the omega were desinged in the original game as being part of the same fleet.

While list wise they are not currently take-able together, for those feeling historical all of them could easily show up in a scenario together during one of the time periods where the service overlaps.

There is a element in this game where a lot of ships seem to be outclassed by another design, but for some reason are still on the lists. Often, by variants of the bases design, but not always.

This topic covers my my biggest beef with B5:ACTA which is the game's fleet/ship balance. I think the core rules are great and the overall game is a lot of fun, but there are some definite balance issues regarding several of the ships in the game. Compounding the issue, is the fact that many of B5's iconic ships tend to be a little underpowered. If I'm going to play Earth Alliance I don't want to have to play with a bunch of Saggitarius, Novas, and Hermes just to be competitive. I want to play with Omegas and Hyperions. Mongoose should have erred on the side of excess rather than caution with the iconic ships. I'd much rather them be a little overpowered than under.
Honestly, I've always had a place in my heart for the Orestes.
Maybe because it always performed well for me in B5wars, but I love it's design too.
Ripple has hit the nail.

While i know that one should not compare different fleet lists on a 1:1 basis, it is a special case with EA.

Orestes and Omega even started out in the same fleet list as direct competitors. And when playing a campaign with ISDs its gets hard to keep the fleet list split active. Its far better to go by ISDs alone.

And Marathon actually are competitors in the Crusade era fleet lists. Since ill get 2 of preludes great ships as Marathons, i thought about pairing them with Omegas for coolness. But apart from coolness there is little reason.
I love the look and the stats of the Marathon, but I have to wonder where it came from.
There's no precedent in the EA list; for the look of the thing, sure, for the arms layout, yes, for the main beam's killing power, dubious- but the speed and agility of it are a massive step forwards. So much so that I can see a fleet composed of a couple of them and a huge swarm of Hermes emerging- there's nothing else in the EA Crusade fleet list that can keep up with it and support it.
There's the Veshatan, whose speed was achieved by using a War- level engine plant and radically reducing the weight of the ship it's attached to; the severely nerfed Double Malt (WSC-2), which is so far undergunned by comparison it isn't even wrong- and apart from the Shadow special move, I don't think there are any other Battle- level ships of speed 12 or better. Even the Stormfalcon's not that fast.