Raiders?

Tankdriver

Banded Mongoose
I know they are not exactly the strongest of fleets, but to read the basic tactics manual from the latest S&P you would think they should be left out of 2e. Not that it was a bad article, it just left me thinking the raiders are the grass and everyone else, including the leaguers are the lawnmowers.

Does ANYONE use raiders on a regular basis?

And why do they not have a scout?
 
Tankdriver said:
I know they are not exactly the strongest of fleets, but to read the basic tactics manual from the latest S&P you would think they should be left out of 2e. Not that it was a bad article, it just left me thinking the raiders are the grass and everyone else, including the leaguers are the lawnmowers.

Does ANYONE use raiders on a regular basis?

And why do they not have a scout?

they do have a scout, remember they can spend points on league ships, so a Brakiri flying wang, or an eyehawk are buyeable.
 
You grab a scout from the allied fleet point (and, it should come from the Vree.)

The Battlewagon is quite capable, even for a raid ship. It has Hyperion moments. Its worst problem is that it can't really sink out with opponents really well, as its swarm ships (Strike Carrier, Modified Freighter) just really suck. If the modified freighter was good, the whole fleet would become viable. But, it's not.

Seriously, if your best part of the race is the one point of League allies, just play League. The Raiders around here have been played by one persistent, enthusiastic, and hardworking soul (J.T.), but the fleet deserves better -- from the Modified Freighter and the Delta-V.

I don't like the theory -- Raiders are weak, so the ships at each priority level are weak. That's a macroeconomic consideration making its way into a tactical game system, and I just don't agree with the methodology.
 
I think that article was massively underestimating Battlewagons. They can really hurt. And their analysis of the EA fleets was a rather amusing. If I was a raider player and an ea opponent fielded a Nemesis or an Arm level warlock I dont think Id stop laughing long enough to actually fight :P

Simply put the Early years EA fleet is probably the nastiest of the lot still thanks largely to the saggitarius (ok so its not disgustingly broken any more but its still VERY nasty) :P

The Battlewagon for my money is one of the best raid ships in the game. with only a few excellent examples like the Chronos, the Whitestar the Tagrath and the Nova and the Prefect being better. Ok so thats a fair few and theres others as good but its still a very tough little ship and mounts a pretty powerful beam if used well.
 
Well i sure hope they get some love in 2nd edition cos thats one of the fleet i'm planning to do in the near future :)

Like a small box the size of the reinforcements box for the other races would be nice.
 
More ships would be greatly appreciated. But the way tings stand, I think I am going to stand pat with the EA early years.
 
The battlewagon is a nice ship...played one in a tourney as part of my league force...but...it is by no means equal to the main line raid ships of nearly anyone else. Your relatively tough with hull 6 and interceptors, but your firepower aside from the laser is not up to the task. Even the laser is only range 20 and bore sighted. You carry four flights...but they suck so how big a deal is that.

The raiders do need better ships at the lower levels or massively better fighters so the carriers are relevant.

You can do well in larger games where you can sink out a bit and still get a good number of shots with your battlewagons. The one 45 makes getting shots after the first pass very hard though, especially against ships that can get around to fire arc faster due to not being boresighted.

Ripple
 
CZuschlag said:
I don't like the theory -- Raiders are weak, so the ships at each priority level are weak. That's a macroeconomic consideration making its way into a tactical game system, and I just don't agree with the methodology.
/signed.

And yeah, battlewagon is a pretty good ship... shame about the rest.
 
i agree, it's a shame that they have wonderful miniatures that are underused because their stats are just unatractive :(

Anyway there is still hope for 2nd edition.
 
Yeah, maybe the Strike Carrier will pack enough Delta-Vs to make it worthwhile attacking a ship with the new AF ratings.
 
The strike carrier has to reflect what was on screen, so it can only carry a similar number of fighters that can be counted on its appearance in the show.
 
it might be better. you don't really know yet, ships might have lower Af ratings than they had Af guns?
 
My first and foremost fleet are Raiders.

I, for one, look forward to the challenge 2E represents for them.

Cheers,
Bry
 
To actually answer your question :wink: I use Raiders on a regular basis, & I consider them my main fleet (other then my rarely used Vorlon fleet).

I love the raiders for their conversion possibilities. I personally have 5 different Strike Carrier conversions for example.

And actaully I have had a good record with them: 6,2,0. I lost to a Minbari fleet then in a follow up game wiped them out. And my main opponent runs Crusade, beat him 2 out of 3 games (Damned Chronoii!).
 
I'm still puzzled by the RM-Freighter. They welded on some extra plating and some better sensors to defend the ship (+1 Hull), dumped on some minor weapon batteries, but it's still as slow as a civilian freighter. Either you'd want to make it a slow weapons platform, a smuggling rig or a raider with the power to run down freighters.

A smuggling ship without speed doesn't make sense for a tactical game since it's point is to not be in combat. (short of being used in scenario specific escape missions)
A weapons platform might work but not at patrol level.
That leaves using it as a raider proper, so why not build the hull off of the Traders rather then the Freighter, they are probably just as accessible if not more so then the Freighters.

Though if I was modifying a freighter I'd probably use some of the extra space provided over the Trader to kit bash in some flights of fighters for support or shuttles to move people & cargo faster and try to boost speed as much as possible to run from the law.


EDIT;
Raiders Modified Trader MkI;
Speed 8, Turn 1/45, Hull 5, Damage 8/3, Crew 8/4, Troop 1, Craft n/a, Specials n/a
Medium Pulse Cannon 10" F 4AD
Medium Pulse Cannon 8" P 3AD
Medium Pulse Cannon 8" S 3AD
Particle Beams 4" T 2AD Anti-Fighter, Weak

Raiders Modified Freighter MkII
Speed: +2, Craft: +1 Delta-V2
 
I'm a great fan of raiders....and - as pretty much everyone has said - adore the battlewagon. Its fighter cover may be so-so, but 4 wings is still fairly impressive, and the hull 6, interceptor protected hull is as tough as nails.

The common theme with raider ships is that they do extremely well picking on stuff smaller than they are; the battlewagon resembles a half-sized version of a 'normal' ship a priority level larger, and takes apart patrol and skirmish ships very well (where the 20" laser is more than sufficient and virtually nothing can scratch its outrageously tough hull).

This is perhaps why the modified freighter is so bad - there's nothing smaller to attack!

The strike carrier is kind of stuck - for canon reasons - at 4 wings. Not necessarily a problem; 4 wings of fighters that can be launched simultaneously is better than many larger ships.

The problem is the near universal 1st edition weakness of carrier ships - with a few notable exceptions (white star carrier, morshin) where you essentially get the carrier for free, there's no reason to by a carrier over a broken-down point of fighter flights. Especially when the ship doesn't offer fleet carrier abilites.

Now I DON'T think a strike carrier should get fleet carrier. The nature of the design means that it can't recover fighters during a battle.

But the strike carrier itself could do with being gunned up a bit. The particle beams (which offer damn good flak for a ship of its size, by the way) will probably disappear into an anti-fighter trait in 2e, which leaves you with the pulse cannons to compare with other ships for firepower. It is outgunned, but not outrageously (although admittedly by far more manourvable ships). A few extra pulse battery dice would be nicest - especially on the flanks. A couple of missile racks would rock, but are hardly crucial. Its problem is that it cannot take on anything with protective interceptors - I've seen an artemis heavy frigate railgun two to death in quick sucession whilst they simply couldn't hurt it in reply.

32 Hull points is damn tough for a skirmish ship (lets face it, it's not bad for a raid ship). It fails in heavy combat because it has hull 4 and no active defences. As the article succinctly put it, laser-bait. Fortunately this should go away significantly in 2e without anything needing to be done.

Speed - speed I see the point. A Raider ship, by definition, needs to be able to outrun normal freighter traffic or it can't catch its prey. I know it's a rebuilt liner, and getting half again the speed is good, but it still can't keep pace with a trader.



The modified freighter suffers from this even more.
Give it the same speed as a strike carrier; if you can boost the speed of a liner that much, why not a freighter? As to the weapons; they're not bad; they just could do with being combined into one or two arcs (one forward and one turret, perhaps). A slower, more hit-point dependant parallel to the Myrmidon LCV, if you like.


The Nova is good for big games - but not so hot when asked to take on a battleship itself (again, it does far better when facing two raid ships or three skirmishers to when taking on a battleship). I'd happily take the free upgrades from battlewagon to nova when splitting down points, but wouldn't sacrifice two for one. Three for two, maybe.





'Special' Raiders

There are two variant raider fleets - the ghosts of omelos and argent's crusaders

Ghosts - The Extinction battlewagon sacrifices fighter capacity, and a handful of odds and ends (one dice of flak, one troop, a couple of hitpoints) and ups the prow pulse cannons to bolters - and adds a pulsar turret to boot. Much nastier close-in.

The mauler omelos, jashakar, and rah'kahm are Dilgar variants and therefore go play dilgar if you want them....

Crusader - The assault freighter! Now that's a quality idea for a ship...
It's not the most devastating ship out there - since once it's launched its slower and even worse armed than a strike carrier - but nobody ignores 8 breaching pod wings. Ive used them on a Tertius-Tertius-Prefect force before and obliterated it (they'll fetch a good price on the open market!)
An assault freighter would really work well in the normal fleet - and its statline is perhaps a better one to base the modified freighter off - even if that pulls it off patrol level.

The Endgame is quite a tasty ship as well - although it lacks a few hit points and interceptors (although 4 doesn't actually offer that much more protection than 2) has hull 6, is far scarier prow on (yes, it's an actual heavy laser, not some shoddy short-ranged abbai salvage), and whilst it lacks the pulse broadsides (swapping them for some unbeknown reason for some naff plasma guns), it packs a nasty missile broadside - making it a great support ship (especially with fleet carrier as well).

Endgame can stand up to other battle-level ships and it's rather depressing that the nova doesn't - just because youre from a raider race doesn't mean a battle priority ship shouldn't be able to take on either another battle-priority ship or a pair of raid-priority ships. Put a raider nova up against two 'proper' nova dreads and see what happens.
 
It has to be said, any fleet with such a limited choice of ships is going to struggle. When one is terrible (strike carrier) and another poor (modified freighter), the situation becomes impossible.

SO IT SHOULD BE!!!!!

These are pirates, they should only turn up to fight against civilian ships, if real navy warships turn up they should be getting the frack out of there at best speed (which I know isn't much)

As said previously, there has to be a weakest fleet if all fleets are not created equal, and the Raiders ARE the logical choice to be the weakest fleet.

I have written an article for S&P which expanded raiders into larger pirate and privateer fleets capable of taking on real warships, unfortunately it hasn't been taken up (yet). Has over a dozen new raider ships for general use, and four specialist raider fleets with their own rules.
 
Nightmares about Minbari said:
I have written an article for S&P which expanded raiders into larger pirate and privateer fleets capable of taking on real warships, unfortunately it hasn't been taken up (yet). Has over a dozen new raider ships for general use, and four specialist raider fleets with their own rules.

This I would like to see. And I am not after making the raiders a new ISA, but making them survivable and giving them options is the point. If the raiders are as wide spread as we are lead to believe they have to have had some success, and I doubt a bunch of independent thinking individuals would all use the same ships! Also, think of the raider Mercenary idea.
 
Tankdriver said:
This I would like to see. And I am not after making the raiders a new ISA, but making them survivable and giving them options is the point. If the raiders are as wide spread as we are lead to believe they have to have had some success, and I doubt a bunch of independent thinking individuals would all use the same ships! Also, think of the raider Mercenary idea.

I second this!

Raider Mercs is a great twist. Additionally not all Raiders are human, why have just human based ships for the basic fleet? I know thats what the "allies" point is for but 1 FAP is very limiting imo.

I would love to see ideas for Variant Raider fleets & ships. And personally I hope the 2 "official" (said lightly) variant fleets get a quick update when 2E comes out.
 
Back
Top