Boresight question

[Ripple]

Triggy -

I though largely that was what I was pushing for, but my communication skills are not up to the challenge.

I though it was a good alternative for bore ships to CAF in 1st ed, as it somewhat evened the firepower issue of re-rolling beams to getting to shoot. Under 2ed I thought there was still a place for it, as initiative sinking had recieved such boosts (two for one buys, greater numbers from buying down generally, improvements to many low pl/patrol hulls).

And to go way back to the beginning... boresight in itself is not the worst thing, I can certainly play EA/Narn and largely not worry about if I want through fleet choice. Even Drazi can do by stacking up on Darkhawks/Solarhawks (sink with the ones on slow load)...but...

The idea that an Omega/Stormfalcon/G'Quan cannot target a ship directly in front of it due to there being a pack of scouts running the table edge remains, and is frankly stupid.

So...

SA - Follow that ship - CQ (no worse than CAF so...) 8, boresighted ship may reserve it's final turn, it must turn as much as possible to target the ship nominated as the target with it's boresight when the SA is used. If the SA is failed there is no further effect.

A bit different than triggy's idea but I liked the feel and fluff of the omega trying to keep with the ship in front of it and maybe making it maybe not. But they wouldn't know until they tried.

Ripple

 

[Harry Lonsdale]

SA - Follow that ship - CQ (no worse than CAF so...) 8, boresighted ship may reserve it's final turn, it must turn as much as possible to target the ship nominated as the target with it's boresight when the SA is used. If the SA is failed there is no further effect.

I would add that the ship using the SA must take this final turn immediately after its designated target moves, rather than having them all wait until the end of movement. It will help other ships avoid non-boresight weapons on the ship.

 

[SylvrDragon]

I would add that the ship using the SA must take this final turn immediately after its designated target moves, rather than having them all wait until the end of movement. It will help other ships avoid non-boresight weapons on the ship.

No offense, but is there really any point to this? Why not make the turn when activating the ship to fire. Keeping track of when to move all ships using this SA is just unneeded paperwork. If I've used the SA I"m going to track the ship so you know where I'll be facing when I go to shoot. What am I going to do, move the bore sighted weapon to a broadside to throw you off? I'm sorry, if you can't predict where the bore sighted ship will be facing then you deserve to get hit with whatever you failed to try and avoid. no offense.

 

[harikaridog]

This is a really interesting discussion...what i am getting is that people feel uncomfortable that the Boresighted ship is not directly (or near enough directly) facing the target ship when it fire, supporting the feel of the show.....if that the case i have nothing against that ...as I seem to roleplay most of my ACTA games and in my minds eye do see the beams or pulses or even hear the weapons firing (personally I love the sound of an Omegas pulse cannon firing (a'la Face of the Enemy) .

The reason I was quite pro the 1/2 AD is that personally I see the battle turn as a dynamic thing, assuming firing and moving happening simultaneously (hence why i like Move-Fire)........so although the Omega or G'quan might not be directly facing the target at the end of the Turn...it would have had the opportunity to fire at some point during it or the targets movement. I see dynamic movement taking place in the show.....the cool shots where the Omega beams do not just stab the target but move across the hull as either the firer or target moves. The beams we see in B5 sometimes sustain for quite some time...especially the Narn Heavy Lasers'

So I guess if you want the look/feel of a boresight weapon firing directly against a target then i guess you go with the SA and the additional parphanalia.....if not then I think 1/2 SA Fwd Arc is not a bad solution.

All the best

 

[SylvrDragon]

This is a really interesting discussion...what i am getting is that people feel uncomfortable that the Boresighted ship is not directly (or near enough directly) facing the target ship when it fire, supporting the feel of the show.....if that the case i have nothing against that ...as I seem to roleplay most of my ACTA games and in my minds eye do see the beams or pulses or even hear the weapons firing (personally I love the sound of an Omegas pulse cannon firing (a'la Face of the Enemy) .

The reason I was quite pro the 1/2 AD is that personally I see the battle turn as a dynamic thing, assuming firing and moving happening simultaneously (hence why i like Move-Fire)........so although the Omega or G'quan might not be directly facing the target at the end of the Turn...it would have had the opportunity to fire at some point during it or the targets movement. I see dynamic movement taking place in the show.....the cool shots where the Omega beams do not just stab the target but move across the hull as either the firer or target moves. The beams we see in B5 sometimes sustain for quite some time...especially the Narn Heavy Lasers'

So I guess if you want the look/feel of a boresight weapon firing directly against a target then i guess you go with the SA and the additional parphanalia.....if not then I think 1/2 SA Fwd Arc is not a bad solution.

All the best

I agree. Especially about the sounds of the pulse cannons. I just love watching the Omegas lay down withering amount of firepower with them.
As far as the changing of the bore sight issue, I don't see any changes being made by Mongoose and we'll never come to an agreement on the boards. The problem is conflicting interest. Some want bore sights stronger, others like having superior beams, some only care about appearance, there are those with rule balance in mind, not to mention those that care about how the game feels. And of course some people have mixed opinions.
I know I do like the move-shoot idea, though the SA certainly has its perks. Move-shoot does have a more "living battlefield" sort of feel to it though and I really like that. I'd actually thought about trying to impliment a simultaneous damage rule much like Battletech had; that might actually work well with the move-shoot.

 

[Ripple]

We discussed at one point not actually marking damage until after th fire phase to better represent simultaneous fire. It felt weird leaving defenses being reduced during fire but damage resolved after though and we didn't want to change more than one rule. That's been a big deal in any attempt we've made to house rule something, don't change more than one overall rule.

Little extras, like putting maneuver to shield back in, is something we'll consider fairly easily, but we like to leave the mechanics alone, even when we don't like them. Helps any new guy play out of the book easier and we can just say, 'oh yeah, we've added an option for x'. As long as the list of adds if very very short it should work smoothly.

Ripple

 

[darklord4]

Ugh. I might have missed this question being answered in this thread, but what part of the target needs to be on the boresight line? I think it should be the target's stem as that is what is used for ranging, which means you can really only get a boresight if you move the sight onto a ship that has already moved. For fighters, it would be their base by the rules, though it seems kind of silly that a fighter flight is easier for an Omega's main gun to hit than any Armageddon ship.

As far as seeing the Omega's beams move, is it the beam being moved or slight movement's of the ship moving the beam?

 

[Da Boss]

fighters move after ships so can't boresight them..............

 

[nekomata fuyu]

You measure to the edge of a fighter base rather than to the stem. As such, you have accidental boresight against fighters if they move so that any part of their base is along your boresight line.

 

[nekomata fuyu]

But only if the ship in question actively uses its special action to do so. This means that it can't launch fighters, or do other special actions such as CAF.

Yes because CAF is sooo useful for a Nova (3rd age, anyway)...

Sure, and those fighters are doing so much good for you whilst they remain unlaunched. We all know that closing blast door is pointless too. Hell, I don't know why we bother with having special actions at all because they're all so useless that noone will ever want to use them

 

[ShopKeepJon]

Ugh. I might have missed this question being answered in this thread, but what part of the target needs to be on the boresight line? I think it should be the target's stem as that is what is used for ranging, which means you can really only get a boresight if you move the sight onto a ship that has already moved.

Yep, you're correct on both counts.

The upshot of all of this is that a fleet with enough initiative sinks (i.e. more than you) can usually prevent you from lining up a boresight shot on the ship that you really want to shoot by simply moving the prime target after all of your ships have moved. This means that your main armament is going to be expended on small, relatively insignificant ships just because they moved first. It also makes initiative sinks a vital part of fleet building. Many people don't like this, hence the long discussion.

ShopKeepJon

 

[ShopKeepJon]

What affect do you think a SA to reserve a turn would have on a fleet like the Drazi? It seems to me that it could allow them to concentrate an awfully large amount of firepower on a single target. Is there anyone out there that has actually tried something like this? Would it be as overwhelming as it seems?

ShopKeepJon

 

[GhostRecon]

One thought:

Why not simply have it so ships must move in priority order?

Like, it still has the same movement system we have now, except that you need to move the higher priority ships first, then down, until you reach Patrol.

So if you have 2 War, 1 Battle, and 3 Raid ships, you have to move the war ships first, then the battle, and downward until you're out of ships to move.

You still work in initiative order, but essentially you and your opponent also have to move downward in the priority level order as well, meaning the war ships must be moved before you can move the battle-priority ships, and so on down the list.

It represents that those larger ships are (generally) less maneuverable and reduces the effect initiative sinks have by forcing players to move the big ships: Sort of creates the dynamic of the big cruisers duking it out with each other, while the smaller ships swarm around them.

Initiative sinks still matter, because if you have more lower priority ships, you'll have an easier time lining up boresights and the like on other enemy vessels, particularly the faster ones.

 

[Greg Smith]

So if you have 2 War, 1 Battle, and 3 Raid ships, you have to move the war ships first, then the battle, and downward until you're out of ships to move.

...

Initiative sinks still matter, because if you have more lower priority ships, you'll have an easier time lining up boresights and the like on other enemy vessels, particularly the faster ones.

So if the enemy has no war, but 1 battle and 22 skirmish, it would go:

your war, his battle, your war, his skirmish, your battle, his skirmish, your raid, his skirmish.... Or did you have something else in mind?

Your war ship has nothing to line up on. His battle ship has only one target and his 22 skirmish level initiative sinks do not help it aquire a target if the war ship is hidden or out of arc.

The only way I can see this working is if you move the smallest ships first. Which tends to be what happens anyway.

 

[Triggy]

One thought:

Why not simply have it so ships must move in priority order?

Like, it still has the same movement system we have now, except that you need to move the higher priority ships first, then down, until you reach Patrol.

So if you have 2 War, 1 Battle, and 3 Raid ships, you have to move the war ships first, then the battle, and downward until you're out of ships to move.

You still work in initiative order, but essentially you and your opponent also have to move downward in the priority level order as well, meaning the war ships must be moved before you can move the battle-priority ships, and so on down the list.

It represents that those larger ships are (generally) less maneuverable and reduces the effect initiative sinks have by forcing players to move the big ships: Sort of creates the dynamic of the big cruisers duking it out with each other, while the smaller ships swarm around them.

Initiative sinks still matter, because if you have more lower priority ships, you'll have an easier time lining up boresights and the like on other enemy vessels, particularly the faster ones.

The big problem that instantly stops this working is that many big ships become next to worthless as they can never line up their boresight or even a front arc at close range. If you made it:

All Patrol PL ships move as per normal
Once both players have done this, all Skirmish PL ships move as normal
Once both players have done this, all Raid PL ships move as normal
Et cetera

then this could possibly work.

The point about Drazi ships gaining advantage from "Follow That Ship" is true but probably not to a huge degree as they will already take initiative sinks/one or two ships from other races. This rule would simply encourage them to take larger ships, just the same as any other race.

Ripple - I see the element of simplicity in your wording and it can be done as soon as an enemy moves (with no more paperwork than boresighting currently requires). Of all the suggestions this is my favourite and is probably worthy of some playtesting

 

[GhostRecon]

Essentially, yes.

People were saying its silly that initiative sinks help ships line up boresights - something I tend to agree with.

Compare that to what happens -now-.

You move a skirmish, I move a raid, you move a skirmish, I move a raid, you move a skirmish, I move a raid, you move a skirmish, I have to move a battle or war, you move a skirmish, the battle or war, another skirmish, a battle or war.

Suddenly, I have -no- ships that can lineup on your main cruisers, the generally slow and heavy capital ships my cap-ships are made to engage while because you brought 22 skirmish ships your capital ship can suddenly attack mine while mine are suddenly so impotent as to be incapable of targeting you at all. All because you brought more smaller, manuverable ships than me.

What I propose is still very powerful for initiative sinks; because a player -has- to move a higher priority ship, it becomes much harder to lock up smaller ships, which emphasizes their maneuverability.

 

[Greg Smith]

It does, but it makes boresights on larger ships completely impossible to line up.

You have made smaller ships more manueverable and reactive, but created a big, big problem for the EA, Narn, Brakiri and Drazi.

Your idea works only if you can solve the boresight problem (which is what the whole thread is about ).

 

[GhostRecon]

I thought it did, in theory at the least...

Because you have to move the higher priority ships first, they have a chance to line up, comparative to how it is now, where you can hide your higher priority ships in your initiative order and move your lower priority ships first... So, if you have more low priority ships then your enemy, you deny him the opportunity to line up a boresight, and you can line yours up easier.

However, if you both have to move those high-priority ships first, you both have a more equal chance to line up boresights on those big ships; just because I have more skirmish or raid level ships than you does not somehow magically determine my War and Battle level ships with boresights can lock onto you better/easier. Instead, it'd make the high level priority cap-ships more likely to target each other and duke it out.

Yes, it makes smaller ships more maneuverable, but that is part of the point as well. Smaller ships, by their very nature, should and would be harder to hit.

I always saw Boresights on bigger ships as being designed to target other ships of equal size/tonnage; however, in the way the system works now, that massive boresight laser cannon is only useful if... I have more escort ships than you do?

Another solution I saw is a sort of "overwatch" fire where you can "rake" a target with the beam weapon if they move across the boresight path of the ship...

 

[Ripple]

The only issue is that you can still manipulate it, a big reason I want the fix to be attached to the ship rather than to list building/initiative order. The boresight problem is with the SHIP, not the fleet. The solution needs to be the same.

Example is now I buy even more small ships or all ships at the same level so I can move the ones that are beyond boresight. I gain tremendous advantage by buying the all skirmish fleet vs the other guys battle raid 2 skirmish fleet. His fleet is restricted in what moves when, I'm not. You've changed the terms of the argument but not the character.

The mistake, and one made by the designers as well, is assuming that folks are taking forces from a variety of pl levels. Always assume folks will try to circumvent your rule, because that is how you beat most game systems. If there is not something pushing you toward taking something, folks won't just for fluff reasons. Not in a competitive environment.

Ripple

 

[GhostRecon]

Ah... perhaps a choice to use a raking fire option, then? Halve the attack dice or raise the 4+ to 5+, but you can change the boresighted weapon to a "Fore" arc?