Game Balance - Hopes and fears for 2nd Edition

[cordas]

Even if it's 'only' within your arc and range, it means you can reduce stealth on ships far in excess of normal scout range, and you can do it without a CQ check, and without the scout trait.

ARGH We ONLY have hints of what is going to be in 2e. Stop making assumptions that these hints are the only things that are going to change.

Matt has also hinted in this thread and in other threads that all the ships are going to be re-balanced, he has also hinted that how stealth works is going to be completely different to the way it works currently, he has also hinted that scout is going to do things differently to how they currently do things, he has also hinted that scout ships are going to be able to give friendly ships better stealth, he has also hinted that there is going to be a seperate tactical battle going on over stealth, he has also hinted lots of other things are going to change.

So how about stop guessing what all these hints mean and wait until we get some rules we can play with and actually know what we are talking about.

 

[H]

so you are saying we can't play "guess that hint?"

 

[Lord David the Denied]

to hit, to damage. Unless you intend a complete copy of VAS?
hey, suggest a beam mechanism if you want, I don't mind the 4 hits approach (although if it works on minibeams too that might be a bit much) but you may have a groundbreaking idea that we thinik is great !

I was pretty much suggesting lifting it from VaS, but I could have a go at statting a few ships for this method and testing it out...

 

[Alexb83]

*wistful sigh* If only Tricia would come and whisper in my ear...

Anyways, yes, I am glad that people have pounced on the Troligan. I play Minbari, so would have a vested interest in getting my hands on such a powerful ship. But even I can appreciate that it's just too much, and so I've said as much.

As I type, TGT and I are bouncing ideas for alternatives back and forth (more along the lines of a Battle level Troligan) which would make more sense based on the fluff as written, and tone down the uberness. Less beams, more converters.

As for rules - I thought that all I had put back so far is constructive criticism. Take it as you will - the fighter hull/dodge mechanic is just wrong, IMO. It gives fighters the benefit of dodge twice over.
The /further/ stealth reduction is out of whack with established rules, and makes no common sense. It simply encourages people to take long range, high AD ships, shoot and pray, and it further restricts what the Minbari can do tactically (from S&P - matt, the only way for a Minbari player to deny people stealth bonuses is to run out of weapons and scout range - and Minbari range is shorter than other peoples!)
Bumping up stealth across the board only to bump up stealth penalties is false economy.

 

[Alexb83]

Even if it's 'only' within your arc and range, it means you can reduce stealth on ships far in excess of normal scout range, and you can do it without a CQ check, and without the scout trait.

ARGH We ONLY have hints of what is going to be in 2e. Stop making assumptions that these hints are the only things that are going to change.

Matt has also hinted in this thread and in other threads that all the ships are going to be re-balanced, he has also hinted that how stealth works is going to be completely different to the way it works currently, he has also hinted that scout is going to do things differently to how they currently do things, he has also hinted that scout ships are going to be able to give friendly ships better stealth, he has also hinted that there is going to be a seperate tactical battle going on over stealth, he has also hinted lots of other things are going to change.

So how about stop guessing what all these hints mean and wait until we get some rules we can play with and actually know what we are talking about.

Frankly? Because by then it'll be too late.

 

[cordas]

so you are saying we can't play "guess that hint?"

Play guess the hint all you want, but just stop thinking that the hint is the only thing that will change. Read some of the comments here about the hinted changes to Stealth, and you will see some people slating the change because of how it would work with the current rules. When the reality is that its not going to work with the current rules; as they have also been hinted at being changed (even if it hasn't been said how they are changing).

 

[H]

whatabout if I hint at the hint that ewill be changed while hinting at 1st ed rules ;-)
I don't care about stealth, whatever it is, I will still roll a 1 9 times out of ten!

 

[cordas]

Frankly? Because by then it'll be too late.

Well its more than a bit premature now.... Would you buy a Wedding Suit for your baby as soon as you find out your about to become a parent... or would you wait at least to find out if the baby is going to be a boy or a girl.

Personally I hope that MGP will put up a set of the new stealth rules in S&P in the next couple of months and let us all have a play with it.... Or include me and my friends in the 2e playtest , so we can all have a go at it. Until the rules come out its too early to start nitpicking. Yes once they have gone to print it will be too late, but by the same measure before you have actually seen the rules its too early.....

 

[cordas]

whatabout if I hint at the hint that ewill be changed while hinting at 1st ed rules ;-)
I don't care about stealth, whatever it is, I will still roll a 1 9 times out of ten!

:evil: Tell me about it..... in a recent game of BF: Evo I had the worst gunners possible in my type 99s whilst my opponents shadows where able to shoot out the eye in needles.....

 

[emperorpenguin]

Also, hits should happen /after/ dodges, not before them. You don't dodge what's already hit you.

and in Warhammer you roll armour saves AFTER you are wounded not before as logic dictates.....
It doesn't really matter does it?

 

[cordas]

Also, hits should happen /after/ dodges, not before them. You don't dodge what's already hit you.

and in Warhammer you roll armour saves AFTER you are wounded not before as logic dictates.....
It doesn't really matter does it?

Logic has nothing to do with it, its just a game mechanic that allows us to simulate combat.

The same applies to the whole storm in a tea cup over what "hull score" means, Hull score is just a game mechanic that says how hard it is to target lock / hit / damage a ship or fighter. The fluff given for the mechanic could probably do with some tiding up as it doesn't make it clear what the "hull score" actually is, as has been pointed out in this forum.

 

[emperorpenguin]

Don't mistake me, Matt, I'm not assuming everything you're doing is rubbish. It's just this new beam mechanic I don't like much, at this point. Maybe it'll grow on me..

I said (along with some playtesters) the same thing when we first tested the new beam rules.
I first off thought it was too similar to lances/pulsar lances in BFG and as I was rolling 2s and 3s versus hull 4 and 5 ships and cursing how those would have been hits before............

But it did grow on me and it acheived its purpose which was great

 

[emperorpenguin]

Also, hits should happen /after/ dodges, not before them. You don't dodge what's already hit you.

and in Warhammer you roll armour saves AFTER you are wounded not before as logic dictates.....
It doesn't really matter does it?

Logic has nothing to do with it, its just a game mechanic that allows us to simulate combat.

The same applies to the whole storm in a tea cup over what "hull score" means, Hull score is just a game mechanic that says how hard it is to target lock / hit / damage a ship or fighter. The fluff given for the mechanic could probably do with some tiding up as it doesn't make it clear what the "hull score" actually is, as has been pointed out in this forum.

Cordas, that was my point! :lol: he is saying logically you dodge before rolling to hit

 

[Alexb83]

Sigh... Stealth is the ability of a ship to avoid being targetted.

I think the fact that 'Super armour piercing' and 'armour piercing' weapons effectively decrease the hull score is a clear indication that it represents hull toughness (at least, it should). If size and 'evasiveness' is an issue, surely honking great Ka'bin'taks should have lower hull scores, since they're so big and easy to hit? Attempting to balance signature vs. hull toughness in one value doesn't work - that's why we have 2 in the system, they're just being misused IMO.

Conversely, 'dodge' is just what it says on the tin - the ability of the ship to evade being hit.

If you want to make fighters small and evasive, the best way to balance is to give them better dodge, weaker hull. You get hit (less likely) and you'll die (more likely).
Conversely warships dont get to dodge (although I would say that some like the Torotha, Corvan etc. maybe deserve small dodge scores) but have higher hull values.

 

[Alexb83]

and in Warhammer you roll armour saves AFTER you are wounded not before as logic dictates.....
It doesn't really matter does it?

Logic has nothing to do with it, its just a game mechanic that allows us to simulate combat.

The same applies to the whole storm in a tea cup over what "hull score" means, Hull score is just a game mechanic that says how hard it is to target lock / hit / damage a ship or fighter. The fluff given for the mechanic could probably do with some tiding up as it doesn't make it clear what the "hull score" actually is, as has been pointed out in this forum.

Cordas, that was my point! :lol: he is saying logically you dodge before rolling to hit

Yes - ship declares it's firing 6 AD at a fighter. It rolls to dodge those shots as they're fired. Any that aren't dodged then have to roll to penetrate the (appropriately lowered) hull.
It actually even eliminates dice rolls

 

[Burger]

Yes - ship declares it's firing 6 AD at a fighter. It rolls to dodge those shots as they're fired. Any that aren't dodged then have to roll to penetrate the (appropriately lowered) hull.
It actually even eliminates dice rolls

It doesn't eliminate dice rolls... you're rolling more dodge dice and less attack dice.

The odds of shooting down the fighters are totally even, both ways round. It makes no difference.

 

[Lord David the Denied]

With my suggestion you could eliminate the dodge trait completely... :wink:

 

[cordas]

Yes - ship declares it's firing 6 AD at a fighter. It rolls to dodge those shots as they're fired. Any that aren't dodged then have to roll to penetrate the (appropriately lowered) hull.
It actually even eliminates dice rolls

Yup, but its really just somantics, and maybe rolling a couple less dice. Well untill you come to Twin Linked weapons.... then what would you do? Re-roll all successfull dodges? I don't see why not.... I can see what you are saying and agree that it makes more common sense, but its not going to alter the outcome of the game either way... the saved dice rolling isn't going to make any significant difference to how long it takes to play the game. I personally feel this falls under the catagory of if it ain't broke don't fix it.

 

[cordas]

With my suggestion you could eliminate the dodge trait completely... :wink:

My suggestion to those who find the current rules to complicated, or tedious is to go and play BattleShips :lol: 8) :twisted:

Although I would complain that the numbers and letters should be swapped round :twisted:

 

[Lord David the Denied]

It's not like ACtA is very complicated, really. A few extra dice rolls in a turn aren't a problem to my mind if they add more depth. ACtA might be a fleet game but individual ships are important and need as much detail as practically possible...