[House Rules] A drone nerf and some cloaking changes.

Discuss Mongoose miniatures game here, including Mighty Armies, Gangs of Mega-City One, and Battlefield Evolution.
logical_proof
Weasel
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 1:03 pm

Re: [House Rules] A drone nerf and some cloaking changes.

Postby logical_proof » Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:34 am

I have brought actual data to the table and the only response I have gotten from this "community" has been to be told that I am foolish or just bad. But hey fanboi, you keep on drinking that Kool-aid. The proof is in the pudding, who was your 1000 point fleet race choice totenkompf? Was it Klingon? I kinda don't doubt it.

This game is perfectly balanced. Everyone just needs to play it right and pick Klingon.
gord314
Mongoose
Posts: 134
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:38 pm
Location: Irvine, CA

Re: [House Rules] A drone nerf and some cloaking changes.

Postby gord314 » Wed Feb 29, 2012 2:18 am

Romulans have some problems. I played 1000 pts against the Federation today (it was my first game as Romulans, we didn't use any of the house rules posted) and it was a fairly resounding federation victory.

After that we played another 1000 pt game with all the listed house rules (note the updates to them). I was Federation and took:
3x BCH
1x NCL
1x DW

plutonyum took:
The Behemoth
2x War eagle
3x skyhawk

First turn I moved to 15 inches and fired close to 40 phasers and 29 photon torpedoes at the lead skyhawk, it took minimal damage.

Next turn I backed up 4 inches with everything but one kirov, which rushed forward. Everything reloaded photon torpedoes. I fired another 32 phasers at the skyhawk, 8 in kill zone.

At this point my opponent was in a bit of a bind, since most of his fleet was more then 10 inches from my fleet, so I could pretty easily back out of optimal range of most of his ships, but I had a battlecruiser in at close range causing damage even through the cloak.

By the time we called it, I had destroyed 1 war eagle and 2 skyhawks. I had crippled the last skyhawk, and had the behemoths shields down and was well into hull. I had taken some shield damage and superficial hull damage on a few ships.

The problem with the Romulans is that by cloaking you give up anything resembling control of the flow of the game. Even with all the house rules presented, which were apparently ZOMGUNPLAYABLYBROKEN, the Romulans got crushed. Ok, some of this probably has to do with how ridiculously good the Kirov is also.
Photon torpedoes don't kill people, Kirov Battle Cruisers kill people.
Totenkopf
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 305
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 11:22 pm

Re: [House Rules] A drone nerf and some cloaking changes.

Postby Totenkopf » Wed Feb 29, 2012 3:06 am

logical_proof wrote:totenkompf
Totenkopf, I don't know what a totenkompf is.
logical_proof wrote:I have brought actual data to the table and the only response I have gotten from this "community" has been to be told that I am foolish or just bad.
You brought incomplete data that do not take all factors into account, yes on a blank board where ships do not move, players make no mistakes, your opponent walks straight into your trap, and ships cannot move to support each other all of your "awesome amounts of analytical data" would be "proof". However, boards are not blank, ships do move, players make mistakes, your opponent does not always obligingly walk into traps, and ships can move to support each other (making maneuverability an advantage but not an overwhelming one). If you like your boring blank data of what will happen in a "vacuum" absent all of these "factors" (aka things that make these sort of games fun/frustrating), and FedCom meets your needs for satisfying your need for obscenely boring amounts of number crunching (which may the only sort of interaction you get/enjoy, so whatever tickles your fancy) then please go play FedComm...again, Bye!
logical_proof wrote:But hey fanboi, you keep on drinking that Kool-aid.
Actually not a "fanboi" (also, seriously who uses "boi" - oh I'm sorry, maybe you're just a skater "boi" ;) ), I just reserve judgement until a point has been proven EMPIRICALLY (on the field of battle so to speak, I've always ignored armchair generals who think they know something). That said, I have been curious about how well balanced the play testers found the Romulans to be, and that is also why I posted a thread regarding ideal Romulan fleet composition and tactics/counter tactics/counter to counter tactics. Anyways, have fun with your numbers and Fed Com, and again, Bye!
logical_proof wrote:The proof is in the pudding, who was your 1000 point fleet race choice totenkompf? Was it Klingon? I kinda don't doubt it.

This game is perfectly balanced. Everyone just needs to play it right and pick Klingon.
I have NEVER said this game is perfectly balanced, and I personally do not believe there exist such a thing as a "perfect balance". If a fleet is at a slight or severe disadvantage against another fleet then I can accept that, but if one fleet is at a major disadvantage against every other fleet or completely unable to beat one particular fleet then I think there are issues that must be addressed. This has not yet been proven EMPIRICALLY.

Enjoy Federation Commander, and please feel free to come back again to tell us how you tried to convince us all how broken this game is based on your number crunching logical_poof ;)

Bye!
plutonyum
Cub
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2012 5:24 am

Re: [House Rules] A drone nerf and some cloaking changes.

Postby plutonyum » Wed Feb 29, 2012 5:52 am

in the fight where gord314 took:
3x BCH
1x NCL
1x DW

I took:
The Behemoth
2x War eagle
3x skyhawk

I am afraid that a decent chunk of the 'overwhelming-ness" of the loss was due to a massive fail to premeasure. if the close-in BCH where in the front arc of The Behemoth (what i failed to verify) the difference would have been one badly hurt, possibly dead, BCH. i feel badly about this, but also that it would not have changed anything other then by how much i was crushed.

the War Eagles had some bad plasma rolls, but average roles wouldn't have even crippled the target. (by the way if someone decloaks a War Eagle toss a few drones at it, with underpowered and one tractor beam, its either shoot down the drones and no plasma, or fire the plasma and take a pounding. a rather unpleasant choice)

the effect of letting other ships shoot at drones that have been fired at over 18inches as if they had defensive fire, was mainly of changing the order of who got shot. he shot the closer Skyhawk, within 18 inches, rather then the Skyhawk he had been focusing on as we closed while cloaked, slightly more spread out damage, but not overly significant.
Spelling? Punctuation? Capitalization? I try, the red underlines help with some of it, but Im just bad at the mechanics of writing.
plutonyum
Cub
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2012 5:24 am

Re: [House Rules] A drone nerf and some cloaking changes.

Postby plutonyum » Wed Feb 29, 2012 6:08 am

Da Boss wrote:Ok the House rules did not say this so I like others assumed it was a normal decloak in all respects. In that case - when does the ship that's doing this have to declare it is doing so - I assume you still have to nominate it during the normal turn sequence and then just not either move it or carry out a Special Action??
the way it worked is that movement happened normally. after all movement was done i pointed out several ships, most notably not the one that i was about 3 inches in front of two BCHs one with overloaded torpedos, and said "these ships all drop cloak, that one remains cloaked" we then started the attack phase.
Spelling? Punctuation? Capitalization? I try, the red underlines help with some of it, but Im just bad at the mechanics of writing.
User avatar
Da Boss
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 7221
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 5:49 pm
Location: UK

Re: [House Rules] A drone nerf and some cloaking changes.

Postby Da Boss » Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:18 pm

plutonyum wrote:in the fight where gord314 took:
3x BCH
1x NCL
1x DW

I took:
The Behemoth
2x War eagle
3x skyhawk

I am afraid that a decent chunk of the 'overwhelming-ness" of the loss was due to a massive fail to premeasure. if the close-in BCH where in the front arc of The Behemoth (what i failed to verify) the difference would have been one badly hurt, possibly dead, BCH. i feel badly about this, but also that it would not have changed anything other then by how much i was crushed.
Yeah premeasuring (and sometimes agreeing details with the opponent is very important) especially when nearly a third of your fleet is tied up in the Dreadnought! But I guess you know that now!

How did you use your in sinks - the Skyhawks - if they can be kept out of the way, behind terrain is ideal - would that make any difference? They also don't then need to be cloaked and can maneuvere much more freely?
Lincolnlog
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 410
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 1:14 pm
Location: St. Louis, Missouri

Re: [House Rules] A drone nerf and some cloaking changes.

Postby Lincolnlog » Wed Feb 29, 2012 1:12 pm

The Gorn theoretically should never fight the Kzinti, Romulan Kzinti eencounters should be fairly rare. Yes, I know in tournament play, anyone can encounter anyone. The Federation and Klingons in response to the Kzinti developed full and limited Aegis ships. The meaning of Aegis in SFB or FC is completely different, but we house ruled and applied it here.

Limited Aegis Ships may use the IDF SA without a CQC roll. But that is the only SA that may be used in the turn.

Full Aegis Ships may use the IDF SA naturally, and still may use another SA in the same turn.

This doesn't hurt game play, since Aegis ships are high cost, and have little offensive capability. They also don't exist in the system yet. This was why I started the Phaser-G thread, Aegis ships normally are Phaser-G equipped in the case of the Federation, and lots of Phaser-2 in the case of the Klingons.

Agreed this doesn't help the Gorn or the Romulans, but if I was a tournament organizer, sticking with the background of the SFU, only given fleets would be able to pair off against other fleets. Putting the Gorn up aganst the Kzinti just doesn't seem fair.
Captain Jonah
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1758
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 9:58 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Re: [House Rules] A drone nerf and some cloaking changes.

Postby Captain Jonah » Wed Feb 29, 2012 1:30 pm

Against most people a Fed force with three BCHs is a bit like a force of 8 Kzinit ships 7 of which are FFs. Its unbalanced and while the game has free reign as far as fleet design goes it has the slightest wiff of cheddar.

Still the Romulan’s AND the Gorn share many problems which while reflective of SFB are much worse than SFB or FC.

Both cannot handle Drones in any numbers, both have massive problems matching a mobile enemy (Roms can remain uncloaked but if they cloak they are as manoeuvrable as lumbering Gorns just slower.

Both have short weapon ranges and easy to destroy heavy weapons which require a concentration of fire on a single target which is complicated by the lack of manoeuvrability and short range.

The Drone side races are all able to handle each other, the Feds, Klingons, Kzinti and presumably Methane suckers and Lyrans are all able to fight each other reasonably well. Most have good drone defences or are highly mobile to offset Drone swarms.

Its the Plasma side that comes of worst against those races. Drones are a complete pain, with or without a cloak. A cloaking ship is dog food if there are Drones in range and with a 36" range its fairly hard to be out of range, cloaking in waves should in theory allow other Roms to provide cover. Except that the best way to do that works 50% of the time because of IDFs crew check. So you can have two ships cloak, two other cover them and both fail the crew check, one dead Rom ship. You reach the point where re cloaking isn't worth the time or risk since you can just reload rather than having to run behind some terrain then cloak in safety then come back out, you may as well just reload and keep going.

With Hawks or Klink ships its easier to just not cloak most of the fleet. Treat them like a normal plasma fleet, use superior manoeuvrability to get those plasmas on target and save the cloak for emergencies or special tactics.

Its much like the Gorns except the Gorns don't bother with the whole cloaking thing, we just take the Drones on the chin from the get go.

Yes people keep saying its SFU and the Plasma races are not designed to fight Drones. This doesn't stop them fighting Drones in SFB or FC. Its in ACTA-SF where the drones are significantly more dangerous that the problems are found. No chance of other ships to destroy them, no Drones on the map you can avoid, no mines, EW, Scouts breaking lock ons etc.

If Drones are not changed then IDF should be or some other defence should be introduced.

Balancing entire fleets against each other is not possible at a fine scale. But given roughly equal skills on the players sides the Plasma races should have a roughly equal chance of winning.

Just as a final note because its gone a bit quiet on that front. Why oh Why are the Gorn cruisers lumbering. :roll:

It seems to me that to stand a reasonable chance as a Gorn fleet I need no more than one Lumbering ship or even none. That restricts the entire fleet choice to 4 ships. Beware the Gorn HDD pack (6 HDDs and a BDD) :lol:
Lincolnlog wrote:Agreed this doesn't help the Gorn or the Romulans, but if I was a tournament organizer, sticking with the background of the SFU, only given fleets would be able to pair off against other fleets. Putting the Gorn up against the Kzinti just doesn't seem fair.
It isn't :roll: :wink:

However this would mean Gorn would only ever fight Romulan, Klingon/Kzinti/Fed would only ever fight each other. Every tourney would have one set of tables for the Drone side of the map and a token table for the plasma fools.

I have never played an SFB campaign where we were limited to fighting the traditional Fluff enemies, games like Fed and empire yes but in a free campaign if using the SFU map as Gorns I have Rom, ISC and Fed on my borders plus its not far round the neutral zone to the Tholians and Klingons. Plus in games where I have been allied to someone I end up with fleets in their space and so come under attack from races the other side of them anyway. On free campaign maps, all those little Galactic clusters out there then anyone could be next to anyone else.

This game is based on the SFU, it doesn't (well so some people say anyway) follow the SFU with ironclad locks where the Gorn never ever fight the Kzinti because they never did in the SFU background.

Its a free flowing game, player against player, fleet against fleet. It is its own game. That’s why the fleets should have at least a chance against each other. If Gorn players are saying they will simply resign when they find they are facing Kzinti fleets something has gone rather wrong somewhere.
Traveller: Nonsense, those rumours about me and crashes, no truth in them at all. I never had a landing I didn't walk away from!

ACTA-SF: Who are we, GORN. What do we want, Cruisers that can turn.... Wait, OK Escorts... Wait. I'll get back to you !
McKinstry
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 751
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 10:13 pm
Location: Atlanta,GA

Re: [House Rules] A drone nerf and some cloaking changes.

Postby McKinstry » Wed Feb 29, 2012 4:27 pm

I'm in agreement with Cpt. Jonah.

Short form version -
1) Fix drones
2) Fix Lumbering
3) Fix Gorn
4) Fix drones - can't stress that enough
5) Tweak cloaking - recloaking can't be a death sentence
User avatar
Da Boss
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 7221
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 5:49 pm
Location: UK

Re: [House Rules] A drone nerf and some cloaking changes.

Postby Da Boss » Wed Feb 29, 2012 4:44 pm

McKinstry wrote:I'm in agreement with Cpt. Jonah.

Short form version -
1) Fix drones
2) Fix Lumbering
3) Fix Gorn
4) Fix drones - can't stress that enough
5) Tweak cloaking - recloaking can't be a death sentence
question? Do you think fixing drones would sort out the recloaking issue?
storeylf
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 319
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 2:38 pm

Re: [House Rules] A drone nerf and some cloaking changes.

Postby storeylf » Wed Feb 29, 2012 4:56 pm

The Federation and Klingons in response to the Kzinti developed full and limited Aegis ships.
I may be misremembering my SFU stuff, but I believe this is wrong.

Aegis ships were not developed to counter kzinti, Aegis ships were designed to protect carriers. As much as I dislike it, SFB was trying to port 'modern' naval warfare into space, wth carriers and their escorts, fighters and large missile attacks etc (partly why I gave up on SFB). Fighters in the original SFB were very heavily drone based (klingon, fed or kzinti) a carrier strike could pour out a large amount of drones against an enemy carrier, so they had escorts.
Yes people keep saying its SFU and the Plasma races are not designed to fight Drones. This doesn't stop them fighting Drones in SFB or FC. Its in ACTA-SF where the drones are significantly more dangerous that the problems are found. No chance of other ships to destroy them, no Drones on the map you can avoid, no mines, EW, Scouts breaking lock ons etc.
The problem here is you are creating a game based on a license with a well defined 'history' and ships. Whether it is SFB/FC or ACTA some empires just don't match up well. This is no different to historical wargaming, Germanic barbarians are going to struggle against Parthian archers on a desert map, the Parthians struggle in a heavy forest against the Germanics. In SFB the tourney is balanced not because SFB was balanced for free play matchups, but because they created and tweaked the hell out of Tourney specific ships. They do not use the 'real' ships in tourneys for exactly this reason. In FC Gorns and Romulans do struggle against drone empires more than others do, not as pronounced as this game, but they certainly don't find it easy either.
McKinstry
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 751
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 10:13 pm
Location: Atlanta,GA

Re: [House Rules] A drone nerf and some cloaking changes.

Postby McKinstry » Wed Feb 29, 2012 6:20 pm

Da Boss wrote:
McKinstry wrote:I'm in agreement with Cpt. Jonah.

Short form version -
1) Fix drones
2) Fix Lumbering
3) Fix Gorn
4) Fix drones - can't stress that enough
5) Tweak cloaking - recloaking can't be a death sentence
question? Do you think fixing drones would sort out the recloaking issue?
I think it might. I'm less concerned about 'fixing' cloaking/Romulans as I think that with the drones at least semi-nerfed, they may be OK although making them stealth +3 when recloaking is a fairly minor tweak that could wait for after signifcant play on however the drones get changed.

In my opinion, the Gorns probably need a bit more help beyond just fixing drones. Fixing/changing so much of their stuff from lumbering seems to be in order but, I have not had a chance to play for or against them.
plutonyum
Cub
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2012 5:24 am

Re: [House Rules] A drone nerf and some cloaking changes.

Postby plutonyum » Wed Feb 29, 2012 8:41 pm

McKinstry wrote: 1) Fix drones
2) Fix Lumbering
3) Fix Gorn
4) Fix drones - can't stress that enough
5) Tweak cloaking - recloaking can't be a death sentence
1) allowing ships to fire at drones fired at a target more then 18inches away as if they had IDF should help with drones some, possibly not enough. though as we have been fighting Fed Romulan it has not come up much.

2) a possible change to Lumbering is to just make the unmaneuverable ships movement more then 6 inches, the effect would be the same as lumbering unless you All Power To Engines. this wouldn't improve a ships turning radius, but would let them do it slightly faster at the cost of power drain

3) i cant talk to this one haveing only played with Gorn once, i wouldnt know where to start or stop

4) number one had some help against drones, possibly not enough. we had considered shortening the distance to 12 inches, but we havent seen the 18inch come up enough to have a good opinion of how much more too tweak it.

5) we have been tweaking cloaking quite a bit.
on the cloaked side of things: i think after movement is over (normally), and before the attack phase, allowing cloaked ships that took no special action to turn off the cloak (no movement, no rotation, just flip the cloaking device to off) is good, the opposing fleet does not know what turn to all point at you vs when then can set up for the turn after this one. makes cloaking slightly more surprising rather then just damage mitigation at the cost of speed.
on the re cloaking side of things: changing the cloaking stelth from 4+ to 3+ sounds strong and wonderful (for the Romulan) but even with that as an option i have not been of the opinion that cloaking would be a good choice.
Da Boss wrote: Yeah premeasuring (and sometimes agreeing details with the opponent is very important) especially when nearly a third of your fleet is tied up in the Dreadnought! But I guess you know that now!

How did you use your in sinks - the Skyhawks - if they can be kept out of the way, behind terrain is ideal - would that make any difference? They also don't then need to be cloaked and can maneuvere much more freely?
as for the premeasuring, that was just a total mental screw up, most of the time we premeasur and ask the other person if they agree with out distances and facing arcs, i just dropped the ball that time.
as for the sinks, keeping them out of the fight behind some terrain would be fighting with less the all of my points, and Romulans already are at a disadvantage point wise when it comes down to the fight itself. the skyhawks used one of our house rules and moved normally while cloaked and after i used the Decloak special action on my dreadnaught they all announced they where also dropping cloak. the turn we attacked i think me had maybe one ship lined up on one of mine. on the movement sink part i think i was as close to optimal as i could get. as i had said before even if my dreadnaught had been in optimal position i would have badly hurt or maby killed one of the BCHs, but not won the fight.
Spelling? Punctuation? Capitalization? I try, the red underlines help with some of it, but Im just bad at the mechanics of writing.
User avatar
Rambler
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 529
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2011 11:04 pm
Location: Western Wisconsin, USA

Re: [House Rules] A drone nerf and some cloaking changes.

Postby Rambler » Wed Feb 29, 2012 10:32 pm

I have a suggestion if people really think drones are over powered. Figure out way this is. Has any one tried just dropping the Devastating Trait and see how that affects them? Honestly the D6 MultiHit is a nerf to start with, droned would probably be a MultiHit 5 weapon if they had a direct translation.

As far as Plasma goes has anyone tried opening the range of Type S and R Torpedoes up to 24". This would help Wareagles because they can decloak a little further out increasing their survivability.

Just a background note on ageis. The Klingons developed a limited form of Mitford thief D5/D5W strictly for ship/squadron defence not for carrier escort. It coveted just thief Phaser 3s and Antidrone Racks. Another option might be exploring allowing all Phaser 3s and Drones in a fleet to be used as if the the IDF special action was taken eiether the IDF was taken or not.

Just a couple of thoughts.
Family Motto since 1861. A good run is a heck of a lot better than a bad stand.
User avatar
Da Boss
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 7221
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 5:49 pm
Location: UK

Re: [House Rules] A drone nerf and some cloaking changes.

Postby Da Boss » Thu Mar 01, 2012 1:24 am

plutonyum wrote:
McKinstry wrote:
Da Boss wrote: Yeah premeasuring (and sometimes agreeing details with the opponent is very important) especially when nearly a third of your fleet is tied up in the Dreadnought! But I guess you know that now!
How did you use your in sinks - the Skyhawks - if they can be kept out of the way, behind terrain is ideal - would that make any difference? They also don't then need to be cloaked and can maneuvere much more freely?
as for the premeasuring, that was just a total mental screw up, most of the time we premeasur and ask the other person if they agree with out distances and facing arcs, i just dropped the ball that time.
as for the sinks, keeping them out of the fight behind some terrain would be fighting with less the all of my points, and Romulans already are at a disadvantage point wise when it comes down to the fight itself. the skyhawks used one of our house rules and moved normally while cloaked and after i used the Decloak special action on my dreadnaught they all announced they where also dropping cloak. the turn we attacked i think me had maybe one ship lined up on one of mine. on the movement sink part i think i was as close to optimal as i could get. as i had said before even if my dreadnaught had been in optimal position i would have badly hurt or maby killed one of the BCHs, but not won the fight.
I was only going by your own statement that the loss was signifcantly due to not measuring.......... I note that the entire Fed fleet fired at one of your in sinks and it pretty much bounced off - which is pretty impressive?

In sinks are a very important part of the game - by keeping a ship both completley intact and forcing other ships to move is using it effectively. Small ships can come into their own later in the game picking off other ships, if a ship is behind terrain and safe it can be declaoked and able to move quickly to take advantage of weakened ships.

against the listed fleet of:

3x BCH
1x NCL
1x DW

I have not played with the Romulans but I would try:

3 KF5R Destroyers - In sinks - keep them out of the way of ships they are there to try and make your opponent move his ships as you want them to. They can hopefully swoop in mid to late game to try and get kills but in the meantime use terrain or the cloak and their better front shields - if not cloaked send them round the flanks to lurk ready to pounce.
1 KR Heavy Cruiser - In sink taking advantage of its better front shields
1 Sparrowhawk Light Cruiser - attack ship - alt in sink if it can reach terrain to hide behind after declaoking and firing as it is agile.
2 King Eagle Cruiser try and killl things with these ships - also for Command

I really don't know if it would work but he should be moving almost all of his ships before you move your King Eagle and Sparrowhawk ad if you win initiaitive - all of his ships. This should be important in the turn after you declaok as he has likely to move all of his ships and you cna then either choose to recloak or run for terrain....
gord314
Mongoose
Posts: 134
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:38 pm
Location: Irvine, CA

Re: [House Rules] A drone nerf and some cloaking changes.

Postby gord314 » Fri Mar 02, 2012 7:26 am

We updated the house rules found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eEO ... L59uY/edit today and tested out the changes. The Romulans won their first game in a while under these rules, it seemed like a close fight but we might have overbalanced it in the Romulans favor, only more play testing will tell. The games were a lot of fun and did NOT consist of moving my fleet backwards 4" a turn while plutonyum advanced 6" a turn, so I will definitely call it progress.

I changed the free defensive fire range on the drones to 12", it didn't seem to change much, so more testing is needed, especially testing against the Klingons. Speaking of Klingons, we will probably test Romulans against Klingons tomorrow. I expect it should go ok, the Klingons don't really like it that the Romulans can close faster now, but their reinforced front shields and excellent maneuverability should be up to the task.

The combination of drone changes and Romulan boosts might put the Kzinti in a tough spot, to this I say meh, we'll deal with that when someone in our group plays them.

Finally, yeah the Kirov is to good for the points, we are changing it to 270 for the BCH, 245 for the BCJ, and 265 for the BCF. This feels about right to me, and makes the CC and the NCC viable choices. Before the NCC was 5 points more then the BCJ, had slightly worse phaser arcs, 6 less shields, 8 less hull, and was just all around worse. Now its 25 points cheaper which seems like a lot, but the fact that the Kirov has 30 shields (and therefore gets 3d6 shield boosts) is a pretty big deal.
Photon torpedoes don't kill people, Kirov Battle Cruisers kill people.
Target
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1358
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 6:46 am
Location: NZ-Invercargill

Re: [House Rules] A drone nerf and some cloaking changes.

Postby Target » Tue Mar 13, 2012 8:38 pm

Im not so sure about nerfing of the drones, Ships in SF are fast 12", doesn't take long to close.
Romulans can cloak right up to the Kzinti & pop out facing any direction without facing the drones. Only get hit once decloaked & it's not like you get hit by huge numbers of drones once you decloak & they can't fire all ships at once. You can fire back. Romulans should be destroying little ships as soon as they come out of cloak. Not sure about cloaking again unless you can get behimd some terrain. Everyones going on about this huge number drones hitting you but forgetting about your fire back. It's a bit different on the board. I don't have my book with me but can't you also evade drones with a SA doing a CQ or something like that. The games about concertrating your firepower to a ship is dead, both sides can do that.
Just my opinion cause it's not like the B5 Sag issue where ships were slow, couldn't defensive firepower or evasive manuevers. Crits could take out a ship in one hit
gord314
Mongoose
Posts: 134
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:38 pm
Location: Irvine, CA

Re: [House Rules] A drone nerf and some cloaking changes.

Postby gord314 » Tue Mar 13, 2012 9:57 pm

I suggest playing a game or two against an opponent who is trying to keep you at range and drone you to death, then see if you think they are to powerful. The federation can pack 36 drones an a thousand point fleet. If anything, these house rules don't go far enough on the drone nerf.

In the Romulan vs. Kzinti (or really anyone) fight, the Romulans only move 6", why would the Kzinti ever let you get in plasma range of them? They can sit back and shoot you with disruptors. The problem here is that the "correct" strategy is boring. Just think, by turn 8 they might have crippled one of your cloaked ships and win by a few points.
Photon torpedoes don't kill people, Kirov Battle Cruisers kill people.
Target
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1358
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 6:46 am
Location: NZ-Invercargill

Re: [House Rules] A drone nerf and some cloaking changes.

Postby Target » Wed Mar 14, 2012 2:04 am

Even a move 6 you can't run away. You will be pointing the wrong way.
gord314
Mongoose
Posts: 134
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:38 pm
Location: Irvine, CA

Re: [House Rules] A drone nerf and some cloaking changes.

Postby gord314 » Wed Mar 14, 2012 2:33 am

Trapping someone with the Romulans requires either positioning which is to precise to be viable, or an opponent who lets themselves get trapped. If you are close enough that they can't back out of weapons range, there is a very good chance they can all power to engines far enough behind you that you can't use your de-cloak move to get them in your front arc.
Photon torpedoes don't kill people, Kirov Battle Cruisers kill people.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 96 guests