A little Idea

[The Eagle]

There has Been a lot of complaints lately that some ships, while fine on there own, get drastically unbalanced in large groups. (saggitarius anyone ? ) After some thinking i have come up with a way of solving it and still keep the scalability of ActA (one of its biggest strengths in my opinion.)

Some of the ships in the fleet get the descriptor " Mainstay" and some get the descriptor "Specialist".

In order to take specialist ships in your fleet you need to have an even amount of points worth of mainstay ships.

To demonstrate: if the hyperion heavy cruiser is a mainstay ship and the saggitarius is a specialist, you would need to take one hyperion for every two saggis in your fleet.

Each race should have only a couple ships of each type leaving most ships to follow the normal rules.

for instance the EA could have Mainstay: Hyperion heavy, Nova, Omega
and Specialist: Saggitarius, Delphi, Apollo, Olympus Gunship.

Do you think this could work, or should i get medicated? :wink:

 

[Wulf Corbett]

I've suggested the same idea, rating ships as
Unique: Only one of this design may be taken for any fleet, including Campaign Fleets (where they may not be replaced if destroyed)
Rare: Only 1 in 5 ships in any fleet may be Rare, including Campaign Fleets, although more may be taken in individual Campaign battles
Uncommon: No more than half the ships in any fleet may be Uncommon, including Campaign fleets, although more may be taken in individual Campaign battles
Common: Any number of these ships may be chosen for any fleet

So far it's been declared an an unneccessary complication to fleet selection, but we have now seen some Unique ships (Dusk Coutari, etc), so maybe it could meet with official support.

Wulf

 

[TenaciousB]

Definitely like that idea, Eagle, and I think Wulf's breakdown is pretty good. Would certainly stop the 10 Sag onslaught :shock: , if it was adopted for tournaments as well as campaign.

 

[The Eagle]

Wulf. The problem with hard limits on certain ships is making sure it works on all combinations of points/level, having a maximum of 3 sagis works fine in 5 pt. raid but gets a little skimpy in a 10 pt War or Armageddon. Thats why i tried to make a System that could scale easily.

 

[Burger]

Restrictions on freedom of choice is a bad thing, sorry I disagree. Bring on the men in white coats!

 

[TenaciousB]

of course, the easiest way to fix the Saggi problem is to bring it up a level, to raid where it belongs, but I think that was covered in another thread. :wink:

 

[Voronesh]

Bring on the man in the white coats..........crap thats me. OK so here goes:

Having overpowered ships is one thing.

Having them reduced to 0-3 or whatever does not make them balanced. Instead you are only masking a problem.

Sag is 150% better than it should be. In a 5 point raid, being allowed to take only 2, already gives you a 10% advantage over the enemy.
(Disclaimer: Numbers are conjecture and subjective, this being my opinion.)

 

[Tank]

Medic!!!!!! :lol:

 

[philogara]

A good idea, and like Wulf, similar to one I've suggested/supported before.

Restrictions on freedom of choice is a bad thing, sorry I disagree.

Why, what Admiral/General/Marshell gets what he wants in war? It would add some realism and could be used to give the game a more B5 feel.

 

[Burger]

Why, what Admiral/General/Marshell gets what he wants in war?

Tank does... he secretly wants lots of 1's, cos he likes losing all the time

 

[philogara]

Why, what Admiral/General/Marshell gets what he wants in war?

Tank does... he secretly wants lots of 1's, cos he likes losing all the time

Yeah, but he's only playing to his strengths (besides he manages more than ones when its my Minbari stealth :evil: )

 

[Tank]

One day my dice will come through for me and then you'll all suffer!!! :evil:

 

[Stonehorse]

Part of the attraction to this game is the freedom of selecting a fleet, some combinations work better than others and some ships in the same Priority class out class the ships of other classes. But looking at the background of Babylon 5 this does make sense. Makes some engagements rely more on tactics than good dice rolling.

Medics it is for you I'm afraid.

 

[Wulf Corbett]

Restrictions on freedom of choice is a bad thing, sorry I disagree. Bring on the men in white coats!

The problem is, if we are to keep anywhere near the background canon, there simply are some ships that should be restricted. There are, for example, only 10 Solarhawks in existance, so you should not be allowed any more than that in any campaign. The Vree Scout (Vaarl? I forget) is noted as rarely seen at all, almost never two at once. Those restrictions should be enforced for accuracy to the background, otherwise why are we calling this a Babylon 5 game?

Wulf

 

[Burger]

Restrictions on freedom of choice is a bad thing, sorry I disagree. Bring on the men in white coats!

The problem is, if we are to keep anywhere near the background canon, there simply are some ships that should be restricted. There are, for example, only 10 Solarhawks in existance, so you should not be allowed any more than that in any campaign. The Vree Scout (Vaarl? I forget) is noted as rarely seen at all, almost never two at once. Those restrictions should be enforced for accuracy to the background, otherwise why are we calling this a Babylon 5 game?

That is if we are re-creating a historical battle. But, we are not, we are taking control of the empires ourselves, and doing things that were not done in the series. If I am playing the Drazi commander and I order 20 more Solarhawks to be built, then 20 more solarhawks will be built! :twisted:

Besides, are Vaarls or Solarhawks in the "canon" you quote, or did you mean to write "fluff" instead?

 

[Tank]

And of course no more than 2 Vaarls were seen at a time, they have good stealth :lol:

 

[Voronesh]

Gotta agree here.

and just something else 40k is based on restrictions, but i guess many here will cry how broken the game is anyway.

Restricting stuff is alos a bad thing i think, for historical its great, but then wadmaiou play a normal one-shot, you dont really care about that. Plus you can call it what-if battles,and tadaa no need as wel.

And if i play a campaign, you are kinda considered admiral? So i would write many letters home, requesting useful ships. Its wartime after all. If you want to include restrictions there, you might as well have stuff like, oops no, 'you failed to address the council properly, RR lost, but you dont get the ship you wanted but a useless variant....'

At a tourney having historical restriciton is kinda pointless, as not a single of those battles is historical anyway.

 

[Wulf Corbett]

That is if we are re-creating a historical battle. But, we are not, we are taking control of the empires ourselves, and doing things that were not done in the series. If I am playing the Drazi commander and I order 20 more Solarhawks to be built, then 20 more solarhawks will be built! :twisted:

But to me, that's no longer within the game. It's not a game of empires, you aren't in command of military budget allocation. You use what you have to hand. So there should be restrictions. Otherwise, as I say, it's no longer a Babylon 5 game.

Besides, are Vaarls or Solarhawks in the "canon" you quote, or did you mean to write "fluff" instead?

I meant to write "canon" actually, as in, them's the rules within this subset of the B5 universe, they ought to be enforced. True, neither are canon in Babylon 5 as they're both creations of game companies, but within the GAME canon they should be restricted. Naturally, anyone can bend, break, or change any rule they like, but the rules themselves should be clear. Why bother with any 'fluff' text at all if it's essentially meaningless?

Wulf

 

[philogara]

That is if we are re-creating a historical battle. But, we are not, we are taking control of the empires ourselves, and doing things that were not done in the series. If I am playing the Drazi commander and I order 20 more Solarhawks to be built, then 20 more solarhawks will be built! :twisted:

So a Drazi commander gets to spend the military's budget? Wow he has some clout!

 

[Burger]

That is if we are re-creating a historical battle. But, we are not, we are taking control of the empires ourselves, and doing things that were not done in the series. If I am playing the Drazi commander and I order 20 more Solarhawks to be built, then 20 more solarhawks will be built! :twisted:

So a Drazi commander gets to spend the military's budget? Wow he has some clout!

What do RR's represent, if not military budget?