Army of Light - no more League? Playtest rules questions.

[Ripple]

For the record...

I know I'm being grouchy... things aren't at their best right now in general... but I'm seeing a lot of issues that remind of some bad times. Before we start get preemptive with out changes, lets define some combos that are a problem, and try to define some ships that are definitively not problem ships.

Milani - why not this ship in a AoL list?
Halik - we have the Bimith, why not this one?
Nightfalcon - what about this ship makes it too good for a mixed fleet?

If we went through the league thoroughly I'm sure we would end up with a very small list of problem ships that can actually cover over real weaknesses that don't have native solutions.

The issue race I see here is the Gaim... as the turret e-mine plus fighter stack adds two complementary specials to the fleet.

For the most part we aren't talking about the straight up attackers, we're talking about specialists... carrier, fleet carrier (both already restricted in mix and match for fighters), scout, AoE ship (dodge/stealth bypass, fighter solution), escort, command.

The suggestions above are pretty good as one solution... but I would be surprised if most fleets didn't at least try to cover most of these roles in some way. Any attempt to make fleets 'interesting' by making them missing a step in the rock paper scissors dance just seems to fail the smell test.

If the game continues to flourish, I expect they will fill many of the holes they leave now... that shoudn't be inherently unbalancing nor should it result in races that all look alike. Lots of way to do each role.

Chris listed a few examples a page or two back of bad mixes

Drazi have a weakness for fighters... guardhawks and their own fighters
Vree vs interceptors... overwhelming AD, replacing with beams ships won't solve this problem for the remaining Vree.
Pak vs Crew Quality... Brakiri also have comm disruptors to start, but I'm not sure that giving up patrol ships to get disruptors fits the bill. There aren't that many on any one ship, and they have to affect their target... maybe... but not sure this is that big a deal given All hands being auto...

Just saying that because I can fix an issue by going to another race doesn't mean I can't fix it within my own either. Otherwise what your saying is that the races are intentionally rock paper scissors, and the drazi empire should never have existed as any local fighter race would have destroyed them.


Ripple

 

[Ukezwoll]

As I understand it the issue would then be LONAW being able to support fleets with a growing number of ships. This could potentially enable a LONAW-player to select a ship from the top of the power curve for every role in his fleet. While if the player had been restricted to ships from one fleet, he would have been forced to include a number of weaker selections to fulfill the same roles.

Consequently, the more factions a player includes ships from in his LONAW fleet, the higher the average power for each ship. Still many, including myself would like to se LONAW as a viable option also in the future. And restrictions on which ships could be included in a LONAW fleet would intrude on how players could use their miniature collections with LONAW, to some degree invalidating them.

The solution already in place, is to penalize the initiative of LONAW fleets. The in-game rationale being the coordination problems that arise from making diverse and not always that friendly factions to cooperate. As I belive was suggested earlier, this initiative penalty could easily be made cumulative, increasing the initiative penalty for every faction included in the fleet.

However, this solution does seem to have its limits. A player can't really act later than last. Beyond that there is no penalty. Furthermore, with a large number of high quality selections available at lower levels the difficulties of always losing initiative could probably be minimized. Whether a penalty to initiative, even a cumulative one would be enough does seem questionable.

It would then seem desirable with a way to impose another penalty which, perhaps running in parallell to a cumulative initiative penalty would increase with the number of factions. While at the same time ideally providing a match with the problems of coordinating a diverse LONAW fleet.

One way would be to impose restrictions on the activation order, where the different factions of the LONAW fleet would be forced to act sequentially.

The idea being that once the different factions congregate there need to be some sort of order established. One way to establish order would be to give each faction influence with the fleet relative to the firepower they contribute. The faction with the highest level ship would be the highest ranked, draws decided by ship numbers on the highest level. Consequently the fleet would act mostly according to the wishes of the the highest ranked faction. Because of this the other factions would however be less pleased with the LONAW fleet and more inclined to hold back, saving their assets. Only once the more influential parties have made their committments would the less influential be willing to act.

Thus the "most influential" faction in a LONAW fleet would always have to move first, followed by the second most influential faction and so on. This would make the activation order predictable for the opponent. And if every ship was from a different faction the movement order would be 100% predictable. In other words the penalty would tend to increase with the number of factions included in the LONAW fleet.

Also, should this penalty be considered too weak, the restrictions on the activation order could be extended also to the shooting phase. Again, this penalty would increase with the number of factions included, as the activation order options for the LONAW player would decrease.

 

[silashand]

I still don't see the abusive League fleet that people keep citing as being all that bad. I certainly don't see them winning so many tournaments that they are OTT. Ah well, as I said earlier it looks like certain folks want to drop it so not much we can do IYAM. Maybe I'll just stick with the 2nd edition list and not worry about any newfangled stuff.

FYI, I've asked, but no one's yet provided an actual example of a broken League fleet. If that can be shown then maybe I might change my mind, but I've seen no actual evidence to date, just speculation and theorymongering.

Cheers, Gary

 

[Lord David the Denied]

As I understand it the issue would then be LONAW being able to support fleets with a growing number of ships. This could potentially enable a LONAW-player to select a ship from the top of the power curve for every role in his fleet. While if the player had been restricted to ships from one fleet, he would have been forced to include a number of weaker selections to fulfill the same roles.

This isn't a problem with a League fleet - this is a problem with the PL system. There shouldn't be a "power curve," a ship of the same points value as another ship should be as valuable as that ship.

Binning the combined League and providing rules tweaks and cool ideas is, at best, a band-aid fix for the wider problem. The PL system is the issue, and that's what needs to be addressed. When that's done, it won't matter if a League fleet has a Vree scout or a Drazi one, they will be worth their cost and won't get any extra free or be slightly sub-par just because they are Vree or Drazi, or whatever...

 

[Triggy]

I still don't see the abusive League fleet that people keep citing as being all that bad. I certainly don't see them winning so many tournaments that they are OTT. Ah well, as I said earlier it looks like certain folks want to drop it so not much we can do IYAM. Maybe I'll just stick with the 2nd edition list and not worry about any newfangled stuff.

FYI, I've asked, but no one's yet provided an actual example of a broken League fleet. If that can be shown then maybe I might change my mind, but I've seen no actual evidence to date, just speculation and theorymongering.

Cheers, Gary

I've posted a couple abusive League fleets but you just don't agree with my definition of abusive (i.e. covering designed weaknesses that balanced out a fleet with ships that not only cover the weakness but have no penalty too). If you want more:
pak'ma'ra Porfatis horde with any Gaim ship to cover enemy fighters and a Raiders Strike Carrier for Fleet Carrier.
Batrados covered by a Bimith for Interceptors that aren't fighters.
Drazi Strikehawk horde with a Vaarl and Stuteeka for Scout and Fighter support.
etc.

Also, there isn't really the suggestion that the League will be dropped, just individual fleets encouraged and "proper" mixed fleets encouraged too.

As I understand it the issue would then be LONAW being able to support fleets with a growing number of ships. This could potentially enable a LONAW-player to select a ship from the top of the power curve for every role in his fleet. While if the player had been restricted to ships from one fleet, he would have been forced to include a number of weaker selections to fulfill the same roles.

This isn't a problem with a League fleet - this is a problem with the PL system. There shouldn't be a "power curve," a ship of the same points value as another ship should be as valuable as that ship.

Binning the combined League and providing rules tweaks and cool ideas is, at best, a band-aid fix for the wider problem. The PL system is the issue, and that's what needs to be addressed. When that's done, it won't matter if a League fleet has a Vree scout or a Drazi one, they will be worth their cost and won't get any extra free or be slightly sub-par just because they are Vree or Drazi, or whatever...

Actually it's nothing to do with the PL system, it would be exactly the same with points costs too. The issue is that ships that fill gaps in fleets are worth more than they would be in their native fleets. Points costs make no difference to this.

 

[Triggy]

(these comments were through discussion after the Psi Corps vs AoL game I played, posted in the stickied thread at the top)

We were happy for fleets to be broken up into League, AoL and ISA.

League
We discussed this at length and had to balance the fact that on one side with the expanding options they are getting better all the time and on the other side the League really worked together as a single entity in the Dilgar War (but this was the only time) and people have fleets they don't want to see invalidated. Our suggestions ultimately agreed on:
1) League fleets need to be revisited (probably in the Dilgar War supplement) and limited properly eventually but now may not be the best time.
2) What are ways to promote "proper" mixed fleets rather than cherry picking? One would be to give (initiative) bonuses to using multiple fleets (e.g. start with -2 and add +1 for every fleet after the first). The other would be to say, "we expect all League fleets to be based on one race and for every ship you take from another fleet you get -1 initiative).

AoL
This fleet we found worked really well (the ships give excellent choice without being everything) and more importantly was fun. The only comments are that the Centauri need dropping, Strikehawk, Warbird and Sky Serpent need adding.

ISA
This fleet is pretty much complete now with choices at all PLs. Therefore allies aren't anywhere near as needed as they were. Either give the fleet a -2 initiative penalty for taking allies or a +2 initiative for not taking allies (their command structure is easily as good as the Minbari's in the show).

 

[Hindsight]

I'd like the Skirmish tier revisted for ISA. Its the ranger ship... or a pair of Blue Stars. I'd almost like to see a Skirmish variant Blue Star, just to give us some variety at that PL. Raid is Solid, we have a ton of Patrol ships, but Skirmish is that missing link between what we have, and what ideally I'd like to see us with.

I wish the Dag'Kar was included in the Army of Light.

 

[Foxmeister]

I wish the Dag'Kar was included in the Army of Light.

The Dag'Kar is often seen in ISA lists which include allies, because it provides exceptional fighter defense for a list which is often "low" on fighters. It's not in the AoL list, because I believe they are trying to restrict this to canon ships.

Regards,

Dave

 

[Ripple]

Guess we really do have to disagree on this one Triggy. (Did the Bimith gain the Maximus ability? Didn't think it could loan interceptors...)

You list fleets that do indeed cover their weaknesses. What you haven't proved is that they are overpowered in doing so. They give up normal PL sections to gain an advantage, the question is whether that advantage is too strong.

The Strikehawk fleet could have two eyehawks instead of a Vaarl... They gain little advantage from being Scout supported, and two sources that are easier to kill vs one tough to kill should not be a huge change. The fleet carrier is quite good, but the Sky Serpent is still a bad choice for a dogfighter and can't be saved by the carrier. What would be the native equivalent.... five wings of Star Snakes (30 flights), or four wings and a guardhawk... maybe three wings and two guardhawks. Doesn't get to an AoE effect though... but that I think is the point... cover this later...

There is a bonus there, not sure it's overpowering.

My question about it becomes is the Drazi balanced then? Your telling me flat out the Darkhawk is not worth its points... and likely not the Nighthawk either, to keep racial flavor. So why include them in the list if they aren't going to be good choices? Again, we're back to the argument over the Sag... is it okay to be over the top, because something else sucks and if you take them both you even out... but what happens when you take nothing but the good stuff?

Or in the Drazi case... if you balance when you take the 'good' stuff, what happens when you take one of the not so good stuff...

Variety in an of itself should not be an unbalancing factor. Hitters for me are hitters... it's the special hulls that seem the concern... fighter issues, AoE issues (largely a fighter issue) and scouts... and almost all the fleets listed are involving Gaim and the Vaarl.

I just feel that the case hasn't been made yet for the league being top dog... or frankly even contender dog... minus the Gaim and/or Vaarl. And that makes me think the issue is with those fleets/ships... not the league. I would like to see some changes to encourage core ships too... but more for fluff than balance and I don't want those changes to be raw penalties for wanting to use all my models.

Ripple

 

[silashand]

You list fleets that do indeed cover their weaknesses. What you haven't proved is that they are overpowered in doing so. They give up normal PL sections to gain an advantage, the question is whether that advantage is too strong.

My point exactly. Until there is actual play evidence, e.g. consistent tournament wins over and above any other non-League force then as far as I'm concerned this argument is smoke & mirrors. Theory is fine, but I simply don't see this one play out in practice at all based on the available evidence.

Cheers, Gary

 

[Foxmeister]

I rather think that the on screen evidence of the the League when engaged in diplomacy shows how little they actually agree on and how poorly they get on in general. For the most part, they bicker and squabble almost continually.

Given that's the diplomatic face of the League which can be smiles to each others faces but daggers to each others backs, I see no reason why they should get on any better "militarily" so I'd like to see combined League fleets operate generally less effectively that a "purebreed" because that is what the show leads me to believe would be the case.

Regards,

Dave

 

[Lord David the Denied]

Actually it's nothing to do with the PL system, it would be exactly the same with points costs too. The issue is that ships that fill gaps in fleets are worth more than they would be in their native fleets. Points costs make no difference to this.

There shouldn't be gaps in fleets, Trig. No race would be stupid enough to refuse to field a scout or fleet carrier, for instance, but ACtA has races that do just that. The Vree have no fleet carrier, and the Vorlons have no scout. Are we asked to believe that the mighty First Ones are too thick to understand the value of electronic warfare? Or that the Vree, who've been among the stars for nearly a thousand years, can't be bothered to build a proper carrier?

Design weaknesses should be in weapons fits - reflecting race philosphies, and the relative capabilities of each type of ship - one race might have better carriers than another, reflecting their increased reliance on fights, for example - not in missing essential units out of the fleet lists.

 

[l33tpenguin]

I rather think that the on screen evidence of the the League when engaged in diplomacy shows how little they actually agree on and how poorly they get on in general. For the most part, they bicker and squabble almost continually.

Given that's the diplomatic face of the League which can be smiles to each others faces but daggers to each others backs, I see no reason why they should get on any better "militarily" so I'd like to see combined League fleets operate generally less effectively that a "purebreed" because that is what the show leads me to believe would be the case.

Regards,

Dave

A CQ for any inter-racial interactions would cover this. Not something overly difficult, but enough to demonstrate that they aren't exactly a cohesive unit.

As for the whole 'how does the league out perform' issue. Take a Pak fleet and throw in a single Gaim scout. Now you have a fleet that will out perform a 'purebreed' Pak fleet.

Mix a point or two of Var'Nics in with some Abbai. Now, where do you focus your fire? The Abbai ships that are shielded and moving into range, or the Var'Nics that are sniping from 30 inches? Hit the Abbai and you are going to be grinding on their shields while getting slammed with lasers and torpedos. Go for the long range guns and the Abbai are going to get that much closer and are bringing their loads of twin linked AD with them

 

[Lord David the Denied]

How are you going to get Var'Nics in a League fleet? Since when is the Narn Regime a member of the League of Non-Aligned Worlds?

 

[Triggy]

How are you going to get Var'Nics in a League fleet? Since when is the Narn Regime a member of the League of Non-Aligned Worlds?

OK, Xixx saucers then...

 

[katadder]

the vree are gaining a fleet carrier, am sure its a typo on the z'trikk (as it was my design anyway)

 

[l33tpenguin]

How are you going to get Var'Nics in a League fleet? Since when is the Narn Regime a member of the League of Non-Aligned Worlds?

OK, Xixx saucers then...

Those work too, thank you Triggy

Someone had mentioned something about narns and weak fighters and e-mines and for some reason I brain farted and was thinking Narn were part of the League there.

Regardless, my point is still valid, and the Xixx is even worse than the Var'Nic in that example.

 

[CZuschlag]

If you thought the Var'Nic might be a nasty beam example, I'm betting the Hyach will put that to shame.

 

[eldiablito]

Without trying to be rude, it just seems lazy to think that the LoNAW would be too good. There have been numerous suggestions as to how to moderate the fleet, including the strongest: make it something to properly wage the Dilgar War. Why not just limit the LoNAW much like the existing AoL list?

Here is my own personal take on an appropriate fleet roster... IMO, this should include the Dilgar War and a little after as well.

Abbai: Bimith, Kotha, Lakara, Milani, Shyarie, Tiraca, Bisaria
Brakiri: Avioki, Batrado, Corumai, Brikorta, Pikatos, Riva
Drazi: Firehawk, sky serpents, star snake, Stormfalcon, Sunhawk, Darkhawk, Eyehawk, Guardhawk, Jumphawk, Warbird, Sleekbird, Strikehawk
Gaim (although, their listed dates seem wrong IMO): all
Pak'Ma'Ra: Porfatis, Sunhawk, Urik'Hal, Warbird
Vree: Tzymm, Vaarl, Vaarka, Xarr, Xill, Xeel, Xonn, Xorr, Xirr, Xixx, Zorth
Ipsha: War Globe (only because I saw their hull flying in and trying to lay legal claim to the Dilgar, "Deathwalker")

I personally think people would be hard pressed to tell me that this is an unbalanced fleet roster.

 

[Foxmeister]

Again, the issue here is potentially invalidating someones fleet roster. If you've a combined League fleet and it contains ships not on that list, you've just become unable to play with some of your toys.

However, it's also true to say that you can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs, so something has got to give somewhere. Changing the FAP table may already mean that some players have minis they can't really use very often any more.

Regards,

Dave