About the Narn...
- Thread starter Jim?
- Start date
Foxmeister
Mongoose
Greg Smith said:
Well to me, that simply means they are flying towards their intended target. If you are attacking a single target which is ahead of you at a distance, you are most likely to fire at it straight ahead as you will probably want to close on the target. As you get closer, and swing by, your then likely to fire an angle - which is what we do see in the show.
The refit table thing doesn't work for me - it only works in the context of a campaign and given the performance of the G'Quan, it's not likely to be a ship of choice for many!
Regards,
Dave
Well this is my point you fly towards your target firing and then once there you have to try and turn and keep a track on it which becomes increasingly impossible if your lumbing and have a B arc weapon. The Omega stands off, I wouldn't want both ships to be being usesd in the exact same way.
I guess we have a different approach to screen evidence Greg.
When I see something on screen, it tells me that they CAN do it that way, not that they must do it that way. Mr Foxmeister is again correct, if your ship has multiple weapons, effective at multiple ranges wouldn't you want to close range, fastest way to do that is head directly for them.
In the fight with the shadows where we see three G'Quans firing on a single shadow ship, the beams swing together don't they. Did the ships all swing together to get this effect?
Similar to the Omega that destroys the two space liners. Did they pivot in place, or does the beam track sideways?
And I do agree that the beam is a single one that shoots to the side, the single beam seemed to be enough... I wonder if that beam was the only one fired because they knew they didn't need more.
Just saying there are other equally valid assumptions. We know from direct evidence what they CAN do, we are inferring everything else, and that is generally a lesser argument.
Ripple
When I see something on screen, it tells me that they CAN do it that way, not that they must do it that way. Mr Foxmeister is again correct, if your ship has multiple weapons, effective at multiple ranges wouldn't you want to close range, fastest way to do that is head directly for them.
In the fight with the shadows where we see three G'Quans firing on a single shadow ship, the beams swing together don't they. Did the ships all swing together to get this effect?
Similar to the Omega that destroys the two space liners. Did they pivot in place, or does the beam track sideways?
And I do agree that the beam is a single one that shoots to the side, the single beam seemed to be enough... I wonder if that beam was the only one fired because they knew they didn't need more.
Just saying there are other equally valid assumptions. We know from direct evidence what they CAN do, we are inferring everything else, and that is generally a lesser argument.
Ripple
Greg, please, advise what you would do to fix the G'Quan instead of arguing why we should ignore on screen evidence of it's weapons.
Basically we ignore on screen evidence on almost every fleet to some extent anyway so fine whatever (apart from when we see minibeams added to the omega?!) so just what should be done in your personal opinion not the playtesters or anything.
Basically we ignore on screen evidence on almost every fleet to some extent anyway so fine whatever (apart from when we see minibeams added to the omega?!) so just what should be done in your personal opinion not the playtesters or anything.
Greg Smith
Mongoose
Ripple said:
But it took three beam shots and some pulse hits and in return they took enough return fire to critically damage their jump engine. If only they'd lined up a boresight ...
I agree. In fact I think the on screen evidence is in short supply and often contradictory.
Greg Smith
Mongoose
hiffano said:
I would change the light ion cannons to regular ion cannons, ie 12" range, DD, TL. It would require the AD to be dropped a bit though.
Tzarevitch
Mongoose
Greg Smith said:
That just turns the G'Quan into a differenly shaped primus though.
Tzarevitch
Greg Smith
Mongoose
Target said:
That would work too.
Lord David the Denied
Mongoose
A better idea is to drop this complex advanced technology altogether and go for Dilgar/EA-style pulse cannons with decent range and AD numbers...
I think there is a pretty clear response from the playtesters that they have little to no interest in giving the G'Quan a decent beam. so people have kind of moved on to secondaries in the hope of getting SOMETHING! I may ask my group if I can use the early era G'Quan from mine and morgs supplement! or even katadders G'Kar stats!
I dunno, i'm loosing the will to be bothered any more. when you can get a large percentage of players in loose agreement on something, but the playtesters disagree, you are reasonably sure Matt will agree with them and it's doomed :-(
I don't want to be house ruling if i can help it, I WANT to take the coolest looking ship the G'Quan in a tourney , and I once did, and it was a waste
I don't want to be house ruling if i can help it, I WANT to take the coolest looking ship the G'Quan in a tourney , and I once did, and it was a waste
Greg Smith
Mongoose
Well, we playtesters often disagree about things, and Matt usually comes up with something entirely different. Plus 2 out of 10 playtesters expressed an opinion on this thread.
One thing for sure is we all agree that it needs improving,
One thing for sure is we all agree that it needs improving,
Greg Smith said:
sorry Greg, just fed up by it all really. I am aware that many of the playtesters don't even seem to post on the forum any more. just you and katadder are pretty vocal, Tank is quiet but about, and as to the rest... 10?! i thought it was 7. and of course the most vocal are us tier two guys lol. but hey I got a whole paragraph in the fleet book written by me
ooh you know what, forgot about triggy there, my bad.
I'm just concerned at the number of changes I am hearing about for summer release that seem a lot more drastic for certain ships/fleets than giving the g'quan a 4 dice forward beam.
Foxmeister
Mongoose
hiffano said:
I concur - I really want to take the G'Quan, but its performance is so poor compared to its contemporaries that you really are making a rod for your own back by doing so. A Var'Nic and Dag'Kar combination is a much better use of a Battle point than a G'Quan, and a G'Vrahn a much better use of 2 Battle points than two G'Quans.
Considering that it by far the most "seen" Narn ship in the show, that's a real shame!
Fixing the G'Quan, and "adjusting" the G'Vrahn and the Bin'Tak (down and up respectively) are probably the only changes required to give the Narn a that little bit more fight that the majority seem to think they deserve.
My preferred choice for the G'Quan is still a F arc beam, and an SL e-mine.
Regards,
Dave
