Gaim vs EA After Action Report

[wkehrman]

silashand and I played a Gaim vs EA game Saturday night (2/2).

silashand's fleet: Big Queen (Shrutaa), Medium Queen (Shaakak), Little Queen (Shuuka), Assault ship (Skrunnka), 2x Scouts (Stak)

wkehrman's fleet: Marathon, Delphi, 4xChronos

Result: Gaim surrendered after three turns having lost Medium Queen, Little Queen, Assault ship and one Scout. EA lost one fighter and had one Chronos Crippled/Skeleton.

Much of the success of the EA can be attributed to the hull 6 ships, of this there is no doubt. Luck covered much of the rest. I got two 6-4 (Weapons Control) crits, one each on different ships (Medium Queen and Little Queen).

Some Recrimination Phase thoughts on the game (silashand, feel free to jump in):

(1) silashand had several very bad die rolls, rolling a disproportionate number of 1's. Retiring that particular set of dice helped somewhat, but Jobu was displeased with him.

(2) my dice were incredibly good, with many crits

These two factors are considered very important in considering the lopsided victory.

We did come up with some questions and thoughts. I have subsequently added to them during some quality contemplation time in my Throne Room.

(3) Klikkitak crewed missiles: First, we assumed that, like any other missile in the game, a successful scout roll allowed a re-roll. On further review, I'm not sure the wording of the scout rule allows this--"any one weapons system on any ships attacking the target". I may be reading too much into the wording.

Second, we're still not sure how to do the crewed missile, i.e., is a breaching pod (contacting the base) or is it an attack (contacting the stem). Since then a thought has occurred which may solve this problem.

It is neither. It is a crewed missile and like any missile makes its attack regardless of where it contacts the model. It is a function of the mechanics of the game that force a pause between movement and attack and that force all movement then all attacks to take place as they do. If the Klikkitak is within range of the ship, it may attack.

Of course I might have missed something.

(4) The 6-4 Critical: This critical hit prevents firing from one random arc and, as a Vital Systems hit, cannot be repaired. That two ships with Turreted weapons received this critical during the game caused it to be lopsided. One issue silashand had with this result is that ALL weapons in the arc are offline. If there are four turreted weapons (as with the Little Queen) it should take 4 6-4 criticals to destroy all. A thought from Throne Room time was that the specific critical is a Weapons Control critical where the damage is not done to the weapons mount so much as it is done to the mechanisms between the control panel and the mount. This still feels pretty weak as defenses go.

I certainly welcome any comments, particularly on issues 3 and 4.

 

[Greg Smith]

(3) Klikkitak crewed missiles: First, we assumed that, like any other missile in the game, a successful scout roll allowed a re-roll.

I think this has been ruled as no.

Second, we're still not sure how to do the crewed missile, i.e., is a breaching pod (contacting the base) or is it an attack (contacting the stem). Since then a thought has occurred which may solve this problem.

There is no specific ruling as per stem or base. Most people I know use the base.

the sequence of actions goes like this:
Ship movement
Fighter movement, move Klikkitaks into contact
Anti-fighter
Dogfights and fighter attacks (including Klikkitaks)

(4) The 6-4 Critical: This critical hit prevents firing from one random arc and, as a Vital Systems hit, cannot be repaired. That two ships with Turreted weapons received this critical during the game caused it to be lopsided. One issue silashand had with this result is that ALL weapons in the arc are offline. If there are four turreted weapons (as with the Little Queen) it should take 4 6-4 criticals to destroy all.

All weapons in that arc are offline. It is disproptionate for the Gaim, Drazi, Whitestars, Hunters and so on.

 

[silashand]

wkehrman is correct on all counts. Assuming the answers by Greg re: the rules are correct, I still have trouble believing the Gaim are as deadly as people are claiming. Certainly if you play that the Kikkitaks have to contact the stem of a ship then there is no way they are as fearsome and unbalanced as all the fuss over them would have us believe. Yes, we've only played a limited number of games with them, but it does seem in actual game play that there appear to be for most fleets more than enough tactics available to be able to defeat the Gaim on a regular basis and the various theories proposed here that they are completely OTT do not seem to hold up under actual use. Yes, luck is a factor in any system. However, though we will continue to try different tactics and options, the "auto-win" argument to me is seeming less and less authoritative than some here would suggest except for specific fleet *configurations*, but certainly not entire fleet lists.

Others may have different mileage, obviously. But that's what we've experienced so far.

Cheers, Gary

PS. Jobu hates me (That's okay, I just hate him back ;-))

 

[dag'karlove]

wkehrman is correct on all counts. Assuming the answers by Greg re: the rules are correct, I still have trouble believing the Gaim are as deadly as people are claiming. Certainly if you play that the Kikkitaks have to contact the stem of a ship then there is no way they are as fearsome and unbalanced as all the fuss over them would have us believe. Yes, we've only played a limited number of games with them, but it does seem in actual game play that there appear to be for most fleets more than enough tactics available to be able to defeat the Gaim on a regular basis and the various theories proposed here that they are completely OTT do not seem to hold up under actual use. Yes, luck is a factor in any system. However, though we will continue to try different tactics and options, the "auto-win" argument to me is seeming less and less authoritative than some here would suggest except for specific fleet *configurations*, but certainly not entire fleet lists.

Others may have different mileage, obviously. But that's what we've experienced so far.

Cheers, Gary

PS. Jobu hates me (That's okay, I just hate him back ;-))

Blasphemy Jobu is very displeased

 

[silashand]

Blasphemy Jobu is very displeased

After the dice I had last game, Jobu can kiss my a**... ;-)

Cheers, Gary

 

[dag'karlove]

Blasphemy Jobu is very displeased

After the dice I had last game, Jobu can kiss my a**... ;-)

Cheers, Gary

Gary Your dice will always be bad now. Jobu will see to it.

 

[silashand]

Gary Your dice will always be bad now. Jobu will see to it.

My dice were bad years before I ever even heard of Jobu. I doubt p*ssing him off can make them much worse.

Cheers, Gary

 

[Da Boss]

wkehrman is correct on all counts. Assuming the answers by Greg re: the rules are correct, I still have trouble believing the Gaim are as deadly as people are claiming. Certainly if you play that the Kikkitaks have to contact the stem of a ship then there is no way they are as fearsome and unbalanced as all the fuss over them would have us believe. Yes, we've only played a limited number of games with them, but it does seem in actual game play that there appear to be for most fleets more than enough tactics available to be able to defeat the Gaim on a regular basis and the various theories proposed here that they are completely OTT do not seem to hold up under actual use. Yes, luck is a factor in any system. However, though we will continue to try different tactics and options, the "auto-win" argument to me is seeming less and less authoritative than some here would suggest except for specific fleet *configurations*, but certainly not entire fleet lists.

Others may have different mileage, obviously. But that's what we've experienced so far.

Cheers, Gary

PS. Jobu hates me (That's okay, I just hate him back ;-))

Problem can stem from mutiples of sepecific ships - eg the Shuuka Queen Ship. The Gaim are jot too bad if the people take reasonable fleet but...........

so a 5 pt raid fleet - take a War carrier and (1pt) and 8 Shuuka (4pts)

so each turn the Gaim fleet could drop 70AD of AP energy mines on one (as dynamic squadrons - 32AD on a ship at once) ship at 40" range - yes you can't score criticals but you don't need to. If its hull 5 - thats a hit on 4+. depending on the scenario there might be several rounds of this before the opponent gets in range..............Especially if the Gaim player simply cruises along the edge of the table.

 

[Triggy]

Problem can stem from mutiples of sepecific ships - eg the Shuuka Queen Ship. The Gaim are jot too bad if the people take reasonable fleet but...........

so a 5 pt raid fleet - take a War carrier and (1pt) and 8 Shuuka (4pts)

so each turn the Gaim fleet could drop 70AD of AP energy mines on one (as dynamic squadrons - 32AD on a ship at once) ship at 40" range - yes you can't score criticals but you don't need to. If its hull 5 - thats a hit on 4+. depending on the scenario there might be several rounds of this before the opponent gets in range..............Especially if the Gaim player simply cruises along the edge of the table.

Personally I'd take 2 x Stuteeka, 1 x Skrunnka and 4 x Shuuka but either way, it's these three ships (and particularly multiples thereof) that are the biggest issue in terms of balance. Take a mixed fleet or one with none/few of them and you'll get good balanced games, such as the one above (lucky/unlucky dice not withstanding).

 

[silashand]

Problem can stem from mutiples of sepecific ships - eg the Shuuka Queen Ship. The Gaim are jot too bad if the people take reasonable fleet but...........

Which again is why I contend that all the hate vs the emines is not the actual problem. Limiting the Queens to be more in line with the background, i.e. like a carrier battlegroup that has the main ship(s) and a cast of supporting vessels for protection would I believe solve the problem quite easily and still maintain the feel of the fleet as designed. If the main issue is being able to combine so much firepower then reducing the firepower itself is absolutely not the problem, it's the combinations. Sure, folks may not like turreted emines, but as I discovered three times in our game, elimitating a fire arc when all you have is turrets effectively takes the ship out of the game. I know other fleets have this problem too, but as I think about it, it's a decent balancer all things considered (even if I hate it). The more I play the Gaim, the less I think the emines are the root of the problem which is twofold: specific ship combinations and quantity of missiles/breaching pods that can attack at once. Fix the root and you fix the fleet. Other changes are IMO superfluous and ultimately inappropriate on a variety of levels.

Cheers, Gary

 

[wkehrman]

David Anla'Shok has several different fleets from several different species. It's our intent to throw these different fleets at the Gaim. One lopsided win to one particular fleet does not a trend make. Some things I keep in the back of my mind:

1) I had a fair amount of luck. My dice tend to run hot and cold. That same night, I played David using the same fleet vs. Minbari and lost the Marathon, and had two Chronos crippled to the loss of four Nials. I couldn't lock on to any of the Minbari.

2) I tend not to squadron my ships, especially against E-mines. I try to keep them 7-8" apart so that only one ship gets attacked. Are there fleets which depend upon squadrons?

3) I tend to close rapidly with the enemy, lots of "All Power to Engines" SA.

4) I used a lot of Hull 6 ships. Harder to hit, simple as that. Most fleets don't have Hull 6 ships.

As I said, we're going to play other races too. We'll be logging a bit of playing time, and that's not nothin'.

 

[wkehrman]

There is no specific ruling as per stem or base. Most people I know use the base.

We've actually been playing the stem, so the base expands the numbers a little. Having said that, silashand will need to rebase his fighters since they are on BFG (Epic?) stands now. 40+ stands of fighters is a lot of *bleepin'* stands so he's using different bases and thinning out the fighters he does have. I can't complain really as I use different size bases...but mine are larger!

 

[silashand]

We've actually been playing the stem, so the base expands the numbers a little. Having said that, silashand will need to rebase his fighters since they are on BFG (Epic?) stands now.

Not necessarily. Since base sizes aren't specified, it would depend on how the opponent based their ships as to how many could get into contact. Players can minimize by basing their ships on smaller ones and those who happen to put theirs on larger bases would be at a disadvantage. Personally, I *really* wish they'd just come up with standardized base sizes as I think it could help solve some of these problems.

For instance, while your Marathon may be on the normal 50mm base provided with the ship, David Anla'Shok's (or anyone else's) may be on a larger base to improve stability. That means in two separate games vs the exact same fleet the Gaim would be able to get different numbers of missiles in contact with the same ship type which is a bit ridiculous IYAM. IMO there are only two possible solutions that will work in lieu of standard base sizes provided by Mongoose:

1) allow a a discrete number of crewed missiles to contact a ship during any one attack. This may need to be modified based on the level of the ship since in general, higher level ships are larger and thus would be larger targets. Under the existing base conventions, this is probably the easiest and fairest to both Gaim players and their opponents.

2) enforce the stem contact rule which by default limits them to a max of 3-4 except in the case of blatantly abusive custom bases.

In reality, this is a Mongoose problem. Until they specify how to adjudicate it, there really is *no* specified "right" answer. Just because people play it to the base doesn't mean they should be doing so since according to the rules everything *except* breaching pods uses the stem. Nowhere in the rules does it equate crewed missiles with the pods and IMO the missiles would need an explicit exception to those rules in order to use the base contact idea because that's the convention used with the Breaching Pods. Any other interpretation is inconsistent with the way the rest of the rules are written.

Note that I don't mind rebasing my fighters if necessary, but I really don't think doing so will actually fix the problem due to the non-standard base sizes allowed.

Cheers, Gary

 

[David Anla Shok']

We've actually been playing the stem, so the base expands the numbers a little. Having said that, silashand will need to rebase his fighters since they are on BFG (Epic?) stands now.

Not necessarily. Since base sizes aren't specified, it would depend on how the opponent based their ships as to how many could get into contact. Players can minimize by basing their ships on smaller ones and those who happen to put theirs on larger bases would be at a disadvantage. Personally, I *really* wish they'd just come up with standardized base sizes as I think it could help solve some of these problems.

For instance, while your Marathon may be on the normal 50mm base provided with the ship, David Anla'Shok's (or anyone else's) may be on a larger base to improve stability. That means in two separate games vs the exact same fleet the Gaim would be able to get different numbers of missiles in contact with the same ship type which is a bit ridiculous IYAM. IMO there are only two possible solutions that will work in lieu of standard base sizes provided by Mongoose:

1) allow a a discrete number of crewed missiles to contact a ship during any one attack. This may need to be modified based on the level of the ship since in general, higher level ships are larger and thus would be larger targets. Under the existing base conventions, this is probably the easiest and fairest to both Gaim players and their opponents.

2) enforce the stem contact rule which by default limits them to a max of 3-4 except in the case of blatantly abusive custom bases.

In reality, this is a Mongoose problem. Until they specify how to adjudicate it, there really is *no* specified "right" answer. Just because people play it to the base doesn't mean they should be doing so since according to the rules everything *except* breaching pods uses the stem. Nowhere in the rules does it equate crewed missiles with the pods and IMO the missiles would need an explicit exception to those rules in order to use the base contact idea because that's the convention used with the Breaching Pods. Any other interpretation is inconsistent with the way the rest of the rules are written.

Note that I don't mind rebasing my fighters if necessary, but I really don't think doing so will actually fix the problem due to the non-standard base sizes allowed.

Cheers, Gary

I have rebased most of my ships, downsizeing them so that I may store them more efficiently. I have eight fleets. YOU may not mind rebasing your fighters, I sure as hell do
Anyone want to donate to the Naughty Dice Crusher?

 

[wkehrman]

Just did some tinkering with this. The short version: you can get 8 Mongoose fighter bases in contact with a 50mm base and this number appears to increase/decrease as the diameter of the ship base increases/decreases by 10mm. The limiting factor is the width of the fighter base which is about 30mm.

Fighters can pile onto a ship base or counter but may not stack on each other (p. 29). Breaching pods come in contact with the base of the ship (p. 42)

We know the Klikkitaks cannot stack on one another. With the Mongoose fighter base I can only get three bases at a time in contact with the stem. A rectangular base can get four in contact. This is independent of the size of the ship. With your BFG bases, you can get four at a time in contact.

It makes sense that a larger ship would be susceptible to a larger number of Klikkitaks per turn. A Chronos on its 25cm base can take 5 Mongoose fighter bases while a Marathon on a 50cm can take 8. A Marathon is about 2.5 times the size of a Chronos.

Just thinking out loud.

 

[Da Boss]

I would prefer a set number of flights in contact (6) regardless - as often PL has no relation to size of the ship - Explorer (Raid) vs White Star (raid).

re emines - I agree to a certain extent that they are not all the problem - the extreme range, coupled with dynamic squadrons and on turrets is however too much.

Prefer the Gaim to be PL / Range restricted - ie Skirmish 20", Raid+ 30"
with also possibly change to F arc / or put them into different arcs

may need some extra S/R guns to compensate but maybe not.............

 

[silashand]

It makes sense that a larger ship would be susceptible to a larger number of Klikkitaks per turn. A Chronos on its 25cm base can take 5 Mongoose fighter bases while a Marathon on a 50cm can take 8. A Marathon is about 2.5 times the size of a Chronos.

You are quite right, however, as I mentioned before it is possible to put *smaller* bases on larger ships, thus reducing the number in contact even if in reality the number should be larger. That's the problem with using the base when there are no standard sizes specified, i.e. you can have two different players with identical ships, but have two different results when calculating how many can come into contact. As noted before I think just setting a specific number that can contact at one time is probably easiest and fairest given the current rules. Using the stem as we have been is consistent, but not necessarily the best solution as folks have mentioned since at only 3-4 per ship they can be largely negated by decent anti-fighter. The problem is this - rules should *never* be inconsistently applied in any game system unless there is a very good reason why. More importantly, if that is the case that reason needs to be explicitly and clearly spelled out. Inconsistencies in the rules are what makes games frustrating and sometimes not un-fun to play.

Until Mongoose comes out and addresses this there really is no perfect solution since nothing we decide is official, though admittedly we could just use it as a house rule until then. I think the best we can do is play some more games trying different options and then report all the results here. Once we find one that works we can just settle on one for our club games so as to keep them fun for everyone.

Re emines: I don't mind PL restricted range for the emines as has been mentioned, i.e. 20" for skirmish, 30" for raid, etc. I do think they should retain the turreted nature since as we found out it's quite possible to knock out the ship's entire weapons capability without killing it, thus effectively removing it from the game. To me the Gaim's focus is on fighters and thus how to protect themselves from enemy fighters. Turreted emines are very much in line with that philosophy IMO. Combine that by restricting the queen combinations as I mentioned earlier would bring the Gaim down to more fun levels, though they may as you said need additional standard weaponry to compensate them somewhat.

Cheers, Gary

 

[Ripple]

Having a race be balanced weapon wise by vulnerability to a specific critical effect is not a good idea. It reduces all games to basic luck. Did I get the necessary crit or not?

We didn't see your test game, but you've glossed over the issues with the e-mines...

they bypass dodge - the drazi just became extinct, as likely did the whitestar fleet, and whole ship classes in other races

they bypass stealth - why does anyone fear the Minbari?

the bypass interceptors - there goes the primary EA defense.

they negate fighters - there goes the primary defense vs the fighters.

If you couldn't concentrate them easily folks could weather the storm long enough to make a difference, but the turret makes them too strong as the whole fleet fires until a target is dead, then moves to next, wash rinse repeat.

The tactics folks are talking about do work... run away, wave of fighters, wave of pods, bomb til the cows come home.

Ripple

 

[silashand]

Emines are meant to have those abilities. IMO all the hate directed toward them is simply due to the fact that certain ships no longer work as well as they do against everyone else.

1) The Drazi have a number of other problems and aren't the best example of why emines are unbalanced. As to whole ship classes being ineffective against the emines, so what? That's the nature of the game (no pun intended ;-)). Some ships will *always* fare poorly against certain weapons, ships or combinations thereof. This latter is no case at all for the idea that the Gaim emines are unbalanced.

2) The Minbari are fast and have more than enough weaponry to tear a big hole in the Gaim ships. See the other threads proposing actual tactics which apparently actually *work* in spite of all the suggestions to the contrary.

3) As you may or may not have noticed, this is a batrep against *EA*, and the Gaim lost handily. Hull 6 ships work considerably well vs the Gaim and the EA have plenty at all levels. Considering that the emines are *not* triple damage like the Narn and are only AP, they did very little damage to the EA fleet even considering the criticals that were inflicted to their own vessels. This is one fleet I don't think has *any* problem with the Gaim if they are played correctly.

4) As I noted before, the Gaim focus on fighter tactics *and* fighter defense/removal. I don't see this as a negative in any context.

Also, I did not say the only balancer was the critical result, I said it was *one*, and an effective one at that. No, you cannot rely on getting that at the right time, but over the course of a few games you can rely on getting it *some* times which combined with other aspects of the fleet means it factors in quite nicely.

I see hardly anyone commenting on the slowness of the Gaim fleet. In the games I've played so far it is almost impossible to get the Queens out of range/arc of many of the heavier weaponry out there, particularly the big boresight weapons some races carry. Hull 6 or not, the big beams are quite effective at trashing the Gaim and gaining double VPs for the Queens.

Again, as is proving the case in our test games, proper use of tactics would seem to be quite effective, something that we in our group are trying to discover rather than sit back and play armchair admiral. Experience playing the game against other fleets matters only somewhat and compared to actual gameplay evidence against the Gaim I would say it matters very little in the majority of situations considering they have more to their fleet than just fighters and emines (a fact some here seem to not realize). Your comments about "there goes X ability/fleet/etx..." would indicate to me that you have no actual playtime against the Gaim. Heresay is not evidence. If you have specific results you'd like to post from your own games, please post them. If not, then I daresay your *opinion* is not nearly as authoritative as hard facts.

I would prefer a set number of flights in contact (6) regardless - as often PL has no relation to size of the ship - Explorer (Raid) vs White Star (raid).

Played a game vs the Narn last night and we tried David Anla'Shok's idea about all fighters in range of the stem when it came time to move could count as getting into contact. It made the suicide fighters more effective, but even so I still only managed to get about 5-6 in range at any time and even then only managed to knock out one ship. Being a "one-shot" weapon so to speak is extremely limiting and if it doesn't work out then you've basically blown your one ace in the hole and you're screwed. I can imagine if I could get more in contact it would have been different, but those results may come later in further games. I am thinking people are overestimating the damage they can cause to larger ships and those who close blast doors and/or combine AF fire which are looking to probably be more common tactics to be used against the Gaim. More results to come.

re emines - I agree to a certain extent that they are not all the problem - the extreme range, coupled with dynamic squadrons and on turrets is however too much.

Dynamic squadrons would be fine, but as I noted elsewhere, I think limiting the Queens in some fashion is probably the most appropriate and effective solution to the min-max ability of the skirmish Queen. Besides fitting the background better, it would go a long way to mitigating the mass number of emines that can be combined. Forcing Queen ships to actually have "battlegroups" would do wonders for balancing the fleet IMO. From a purely background perspective I cannot say that having a fleet of mostly Queens is at all appropriate.

Prefer the Gaim to be PL / Range restricted - ie Skirmish 20", Raid+ 30" with also possibly change to F arc / or put them into different arcs

may need some extra S/R guns to compensate but maybe not.............

I think due to their slowness keeping them on turrets is more appropriate personally, though I am not against limiting their ranges as you suggest. If you split them, then I think they would definitely need something else for point defense to compensate, probably just add in a few gatling lasers like on the Sataaka gunship (maybe 2AD per arc or something at 12" range). There may be other solutions, but this would keep in theme with the existing weapons available in the fleet.

Cheers, Gary

 

[GhostRecon]

Unfortunately, as has been pointed out, the Gaim fleet the EA faced was hardly one optimized to maximize on the strengths of the Gaim's Navy. Try fielding that same fleet against 10 Skirmish Queens and seeing how you do.

With a -balanced- fleet selection as featured in this particular battle report, the Gaim are relatively balanced. However, this is assuming a player is willing to take sub-optimal ships and overall fleet selection choices.

For example, why would a Gaim player ever get a Shrutaa Queen Ship short of having artificial fleet ship size restrictions placed on him? For every Shrutaa, you can get four Shuukas which carry more of everything, from Fighters, to Boarding Pods, to Troops, to E-mine firepower. And you don't lose the + CQ when you lose a Shuuka like you would with a Shrutaa.

The Shaakak Queen Cruiser isn't even much of a comparison, having only the same number of Fighters, less boarding pods, and shorter-ranged E-mines to boot.

Worse. Why -ever- field a Stak Scout? You certainly don't need to bypass stealth. The boarding pods, Fighters, and E-mines all ignore that. Getting re-rolls has virtually no benefit for the Gaim fleet, the vast majority of their weapons are E-mines and Beams, on their capital ships, and Fighters get no benefit whatsoever. Stak Scouts are a incredibly poor choice in a Gaim Navy. What's the point?

Try it again against a fleet like 10 Shuuka Light Queen Cruisers, or 4 Shuuka Light Queen Cruisers with a mix of 3 Stuteekas/Shrunnkas, or in general, an optimized Gaim fleet.