Are Drazi a comedy race in ACTA?
- Thread starter marsa10
- Start date
Wulf Corbett
Mongoose
Quad Damage isn't unbalancing because of WHO gets it. I didn't even find it first time I read the playtest rules. It is not, by any measure, widespread.marsa10 said:
Wulf
lastbesthope
Mongoose
Wulf Corbett said:
[crosses fingers]
WSC-L, WSC-L, WSC-L
[/crosses fingers]
LBH
emperorpenguin
Mongoose
lastbesthope said:
Hah hah you wish!
lastbesthope
Mongoose
Can't hurt to wish :lol:
LBH
LBH
Triggy said:
So what? There have been many, many discussions on the board regarding damage multiplier weapons, especially in relationship to the critical chart. All the quad damage does is make things blow up faster. Oh look, my Lightning cannon hit your octurian 9 times doing 36/36 and 3 Criticals. Ooops I got a 6/6 Critical, take another 60 and 32. I think your Octurian just died in 1 turn. What a shame. (sarcasm)
Come on everyone. Lets not go down this road.
Dave
Have to agree on the quad damage being a really disturbing thought, and no offense to Triggy, no matter what ship you put it on, it will be blowing up small ships first and only moving on to other folks big boys at the end of a fight.
ACtA is really about removing AD from the enemy in the most efficient manner possible. That usually means you find the opposing ship you are most likely to blow up in a single shot to shoot at, which is very rarely your opposing number of equal pl. Causing explosions is so common now that it is just a standard tactic and viewed almost as part of the standard AD of larger DD/TD beams, not only will I blow up that ship but you little dog Toto too.
That could of course be just our play group.
Ripple
ACtA is really about removing AD from the enemy in the most efficient manner possible. That usually means you find the opposing ship you are most likely to blow up in a single shot to shoot at, which is very rarely your opposing number of equal pl. Causing explosions is so common now that it is just a standard tactic and viewed almost as part of the standard AD of larger DD/TD beams, not only will I blow up that ship but you little dog Toto too.
That could of course be just our play group.
Ripple
Oh and on Drazi...=p,
They do have two turns, but one is used up boresighting so don't count that too highly.
The beams thing is good, except the secondaries still have to go through the interceptors. Given the beam is only single damage they really aren't that good against interceptor fleets (EA Abbai Centauri and Brakiri I think...oh wait Raider.) Most of those races are fairly chunky so you basically crit fishing until the interceptors are dealt with.
A good number of troops per hull is actually one of their strengths if you remember to use it.
All the Drazi really need is some changes in the SA's to allow more turning or changes to boresight so the ships are less likely to just be stalled, unfiring for a turn. A decent change to the sunhawk and the Fireraptor would also help...the other hulls are pretty much close enough.
Ripple
They do have two turns, but one is used up boresighting so don't count that too highly.
The beams thing is good, except the secondaries still have to go through the interceptors. Given the beam is only single damage they really aren't that good against interceptor fleets (EA Abbai Centauri and Brakiri I think...oh wait Raider.) Most of those races are fairly chunky so you basically crit fishing until the interceptors are dealt with.
A good number of troops per hull is actually one of their strengths if you remember to use it.
All the Drazi really need is some changes in the SA's to allow more turning or changes to boresight so the ships are less likely to just be stalled, unfiring for a turn. A decent change to the sunhawk and the Fireraptor would also help...the other hulls are pretty much close enough.
Ripple
Greg Smith
Mongoose
Quad damage only appears on four ships. And you guessed it, three of those weapons have 'Lightning' in the name (as ever 2e is subject to change).
Lower AD but higher damage multipliers means less change of criticals, ergo less damage.
Example 8AD triple damage (ignoring other traits) - if all dice hit, 24 damage, an average of 1.33 crits.
6AD quad damage - 24 damage if all dice hit, average of 1 crit.
Greg
Lower AD but higher damage multipliers means less change of criticals, ergo less damage.
Example 8AD triple damage (ignoring other traits) - if all dice hit, 24 damage, an average of 1.33 crits.
6AD quad damage - 24 damage if all dice hit, average of 1 crit.
Greg
Thats a bit deceptive, in fact its just wrongGreg Smith said:
The extra damage from those crits will make up for the reduction in frequency.
A single-damage crit does an average of 1.5417 extra damage.
8AD triple damage - if all hit, 24 damage and 1.3333 crits, for total damage of 24+(1.5417*3*1.3333) = 30.17
6AD quad damage - if all hit, 24 damage and 1 crit, for total damage of 24+(1.5417*4) = 30.17
In terms of raw damage potential they are identical. The only reasons 8AD TD is better than 6AD QD are:
1) statistical sample size... you are more likely to get an "average" result with 8 dice than with 6.
2) crit effects. More crits means more chance to get weapons offline, speed 0, etc.
3) Bulkhead hits penalize QD more than TD (assuming QD still only does 1 damage on a bulkhead hit)
Greg Smith
Mongoose
Burger said:
So my maths was flawed but my results sound?
Da Boss said:
If it is based on AoGs original, the Claweagle could almost fill this role quite nicely. Basically it was a ship sized breaching pod.
Now you could stick Purple Drazi in one claw and Green Drazi in the other claw, and they could fight it out on the enemy ships bridge to see who wins the prize.
