Centauri_Admiral said:
@ GhostRecon.
First of all, my arguement is with the G'Vrahn as it is, as a war level ship. For goodness sake, look at it, there are no weaknesses to succesfully exploit. And by your own statement you have contradicted yourself with regards to the Liati, you said it is the elimination of all centauri weakness bar one, its damage score and how succesful emines will be. Forgive me for appearing to steal your crown of idiocy but I believe that counts as two weaknesses.
I simply reply how I feel I am treated in kind..
And claiming I have contradicted myself by claiming "two weaknesses" is factually incorrect. The Liati's low damage score only matters against weapons that ignore dodge or can get past it, which is what the E-mine does. E-mines highlight the Liati’s weakness of low damage, it is not a wholly disparate and independent weakness all of its own, separate from that. Rephrased, the Liati’s weakness of Low Damage is supposedly covered by its Dodge, which means that this weakness is only a true weakness against weapons that can reliably bypass its Dodge. Which is what E-mines do.
I’ll quote myself.
Its only weakness is low damage, which only matters if you can keep it in the arc of your weapons and get past its dodge. Which E-mines do quite handily.
That is what I said. Next time, perhaps, "get your facts straight pal."
And as I stated in my posts, I do not disagree that the G'vrahn could use balancing. But by that same exact vein, there are other ships in other lists that are -just- as unbalancing.
More importantly, the purpose of the majority of my posts in this thread are to point out how threadbare, flimsy, or weak the arguments used for "nerfing" the G'vrahn, and against "nerfing" the Liati truly are. You need more than personal insults and claims of "fluff." Oh, and saying "My Liatis die" is also incorrect. Even in the battle reports of the Earth-Centauri War, G'vrahns were killed, so that argument is terribly weak as well.
Secondly, if you'd read the other threads, before jumping into this one and going straight down katadders throat, you would have found ME stating that I wouldn't argue with tweaking the Liati. Even though this thread is about the G'Vrahn and perhaps the Bin'Tak, YOU have turned this into a general rant about ships that you don't like either, I think you're behaving in a very hypocritical manner. But for arguements sake let me say that I wouldn't object to the Liati turns being made 2 45, to keep consistency with the vorchan, and have the liati as the logical progression of the vorchan hull to a battle level ship. So in fact you'll find that I am not screaming blue murder, saying YOU CAN'T NERF MY LIATI, quite the contrary.
Quite the contrary, and conversely, had you read the other posts I made within this thread, you would have realized I am simply using the Liati as a foil to illustrate the general weakness of arguments used advocating change for the G'vrahn, and conversely and equally against the Liati. Arguments that defend the Liati would just as equally defend the G'vrahn. That is what I was illustrating. And arguments that advocate change for the G'vrahn apply just as readily to the Liati. That, too, is what I was illustrating. See my Marathon vs Liati comparison.
And my remarks were more of a general nature of the entire sentiment directed towards me when I made the suggestion there may be a problem with the Liati, if somehow that was construed as a personal attack, then an apology is in order. To others who feel I was “yelling at them” for saying they were “screaming about things” my posts were likely not directed at you, regardless, if you feel they are, I owe you an apology as well.
So before you rip my head off, and fail at trying to use my own arguement against me, read what I've said. So far, the rest of us have managed to have a debate about this, and while I may have a strong opinion, there are plenty of others advocating their opinions as well. So far you're the only thats been a complete arse about it.
Although its a very childish saying; here I think it applies quite well. "Get your facts straight pal."
Well, thus far I have simply seen alot of personal attack and strawhouse arguments, not to mention a few cases of selectively ignoring many of my other posts and arguments, instead refuting small elements of those posts then claiming that I am an asshole, an idiot, and have no actual point other than to, apparently, be stupid. If this is your “strong opinion” and my “strong opinion” somehow construes to me being an idiot, or an asshole, yet I have not yet made any personal attacks or direct insults, I dread to think what I might do should I start flaming people.
I have repeatedly stated I was not against changing the G'vrahn, but similarly, if the G'vrahn is going to be balanced, then -other- ships that suffer from imbalances -need- to be examined in -order- to
better balance the game. Just balancing the G'vrahn won't fix things, and neither will just balancing the Liati in turn, even if you balance both there are several clear imbalances that, while not game breaking, -do- have a severe impact on game balance.
For example, just how overpowered would the Liati be if ships could boresight without being affected by initiative sinks? I know people hate to reopen that can of worms, but I see this thread as indicating how several smaller imbalances in the game can, have, and do impact the overall balance and play of the game.
So, again to the question. Would the Liati be as good as it was, if the problem formed between its speed, combined and working synergistically with how the initiative system and initiative sinks work, and thus prevented boresights from working effectively was resolved?
We routinely hear of how EA fleets do poorly; would they do so poorly if something was implemented that allowed boresight ships, both lumbering and not, to boresight more reliably, as if the initiative system worked “ideally?” (Such as a WEGO system, or a I go, You go system… And no, before someone flips out again, I am not advocating a change to the initiative system. It is the third rail of ACTA, and one I am quite happy with).
Similarly, what sort of broad based changes do we need to make to better balance the Narn’s War and Battle level choices, and make them viable choices to each other?
And more importantly, just how different is the face of the Narn fleet in the light of a balance fix that makes boresight more reliable, and less affected by initiative sinks?
Personally, I’m of the mind of leaving the G’vrahn’s weapons as is, removing the “unfluff” traits such as AJE, Interceptors, and Command +2, and “essentially” trading damage values of the G’vrahn with the G’quonth (Making the G’vrahn 55/13, or more appropriately using the G’tal’s values, 60/14, and making the G’quonth a 80/13 hull) and giving the Bin’Tak slow-loading E-mines.
This makes the G’vrahn an excellent Var’nic style hunter-killer, which is essentially what the G’vrahn is, yet appropriately more fragile; makes the G’quonth a more viable choice, and the Bin’Tak a more viable choice. And all three are appropriately weapons studded pain-in-the-ass-to-kill Narn monsters.
Further, if a boresight fix that works for both lumbering and non-lumbering ships, then the G’quon, G’lan, and G’tal become more attractive choices as well.
My point with every post I have made in this thread: You cannot balance just one ship without addressing other ships that share and contribute, even in small parts, to the “general” imbalance. Just as the G’vrahn was “discovered” to be “broken” in the Earth-Centauri War, so to did it illustrate that there are apparent problems in the Liati, and the possible issue of problems with EA fleet performance (Which, again, might be resolved if boresight was more effective and initiative sink independent).
“Just” fixing the G’vrahn fixes, really, very little except to address the ship’s relative power and if anything, does more to exacerbates problems that are not readily apparent in high priority level battles with the Narn against fleets such as the Centauri. (Such, as I earlier illustrated, the general inability of a Bin’Tak to survive too long against ultra-maneuverable ships such as the Liati, or alternatively, the White Star Gunship).
As for the Liati, I am absolutely against 5+ dodge. I think a reduction in maneuverability, as Centauri_Admiral pointed out, to 2x45A would work very well and be more appropriate.
The Earth-Centauri war has highlighted several imbalances, and not just the G'vrahn, and in addressing the G'vrahn, we need and should address the rest. As I said,
to better balance the game.
)
