Gorn Fleet - Comments Welcomed

[scoutdad]

Playtest game 1:
This game was using the “wallowing” rule and was against the Klingons.
Gorn: BCC, BC, BC, BCF, HDD
Klingon: C8, D7C, D6, E4, E4, E4, E4

Klingons have 2 Command +1 ships and a fleet bonus of +1 to the Gorn’s one ship with Command +1 and a fleet modifier of -1. With a -2 shift, the Gorn do not expect to ever win initiative in this game.

Turn 1: The Gorn rolled snake eyes for initiative. Yay!
Thanks to some fortunately placed terrain, the Gorn approach was slightly protected.
The only units in clear sight were using Take Evasive Action. Either the Gorn navigators or the ships computers were spot on today. Nearly every TEA attempt in this game succeeded.
No drones impacted for damage and three Gorn ships fired phasers long range at an E4. The reinforced shield attenuated much of the damage.

Turn 2: The Gorn won initiative! How!?!
The Klingon player nominated the damaged E4 and left it in place with a Boost Shields special action.
Due to the disparity in ship numbers, this still gave the Klingon player the advantage in numbers. The Gorn moved two ships into a convenient dust cloud, used Boost Shields and waited. Two more of the Gorn went APE and swung around a planet to catch the flank of a couple of Klingons who had moved in for a shot at the BFC in the dust cloud.
The remaining ships just jockeyed for position.
The Klingon fired everything on the C8 at the BCF 6 inches away. All four OL disruptors missed and the dust cloud effects severely attenuated the rest of the damage. Same with the D7C and D6 that fired at the BCF in the dust cloud. Very little real damage was scored from all three ships. The E4s were out of disruptor range, so they fired drones at the BCC. Between phasers and tractors, all were stopped.

The Gorn retaliated by firing three of his largest ships at the C8, through a flank shield… including a full spread of Plasma Torps from the BCC. Since he’d already fired, he had very little in the way of defenses.
The incoming fire crumpled the shields and did considerable damage, but not enough to cripple the C8.
All other ships fired at an E4 through a flanking shield. This took out the E4 nad the resulting explosion did a few points of damage to the other E4s in close proximity.

Turn 3: The Gorn won initiative again!!
As the C8 attempted to get behind terrain, the 2 BCs followed behind. The D6 and the D7C poked their noses into the dust cloud to close the range on the BCF, who moved out of the cloud and lined up on another E4. The BCC went APE moved behind the planet.
The C8 fired first (with a -1 due to critical damage) and scored some serious damage on one of the BCs.
The damaged BC fired at the C8 next and took out the shield boost and scored a few more internals.
Fire was then traded back and forth…
The E4s fired at the damaged HDD and did a bit more damage. The HDD managed to stop all the drones.
The BC fired all Plasma Torps at the C8 and finally crippled it, leaving it adrift.
The D7C and D6 in the dust cloud forgot the detrimental effects of firing out of a dust cloud and just succeeding in doing a bit more damage to the BCF.

As luck would have it, the Gorn Damage Control rolls were great, the Klingons… not so great. The E4 escalated. Three locations on the C8 escalated… enough to make it go KaBoom! The resulting explosion took out a damaged E4 and scored points on the two BCs. The exploding E4 further damaged the E4 from turn 1.

Turn 4:
The Klingons won initiative, but the admiral quickly became flustered and forgot which BC was close to crippled and which was in relatively good shape. He went after the wrong one.

At the end of this turn, the E4s were gone, the D7C was gone, and the D6 was surrounded.
No single Gorn ship was crippled, but most had significant damage applied and three had Plasma Torpedoes reloaded.

The Klingon player conceded.

Final Analysis:
Gorn still suck at drone defense.
“Wallowing”: Although no HETs were used, the final opportunity to change facing by 45 degrees greatly increased the opportunities to put Plasma Torpedoes on target.

 

[scoutdad]

Play test Game 2:
This was a “Tough” Gorn versus Federation cheese-fest.
Gorn: BCC, BC, BC, BCF, HDD
Federation: BC, NCA, DWD, DWD, DW, FFG, FFG

The Gorn were tough P / S.

This game was absolutely no fun at all for the Gorn. The Federation player was a very experienced SFB / FC player with the patience to plan a strategy and follow through with it regardless of temptations.

Each turn, the Federation player moved less than 6 inches… used Boost Power to Shields… and droned a single Gorn ship into submission. The BC / DWD / DWD 12 AD of drone combo was devastating.
Then three others picked on a second ship.
When I used IDF, the ships using this were targeted… when I boosted shields, the ships with the least amount of shielding were targeted. And as the range narrowed, photons were thrown into the mix every other turn. Then, when the Gorn began to get close enough that Plasmas were a worry, the Fed player backed away.

End result:
4 turns of pounding and the last two surviving Gorn ships turned tail and ran. The Fed fleet then went APE and focusing on one of the ships.
A single BCF managed to escape the board and it was just a few points shy of being crippled. The Fed fleet had some damage on 4 different ships, but not enough to affect their combat ability.

Not exactly a fair test of tough Gorns as most of the damage came through the forward arc, but even the few that did hit the side and were halved hurt. Large numbers of Multihit 4 Photons and Multihit d6 drones create large amounts of damage, even when halved.

 

[scoutdad]

OK. After finally getting some experience with the Gorn in ACTA, I'll try to verbalize my thoughts.

1) Tough Gorns. I know where the blurb came from that led to the "lumbering" Gorn and then suggested the follow-up "tough", but I don't agree with the ACTA definition.
The "tough" rule seems like a bit of a dodge to me. It seems to be a bad rule used to correct another, earlier bad rule. Before anyone begins to flame on, I'll be among the first to admit that 1 or 2 games does not provide accurate information and it could turn out that I'm wrong. This is just a gut feeling at this point... and it could be based solely on our groups play style.
If "Tough" is the way Matthew decides to go, I do think it should be A,P,S. This will at least provide protection for 3/4 of the ship and offer an inducement to the enemies to enter the forward arc.

2) Wallowing. I still don't like the name, but I do like the way they handled. One wouldn't think an extra turn of 45 degrees would be that big a difference, but it is. It was telling in the one game it was used in and could have changed the outcome of the other three at several key instances.
2a) Now, while I was looking for an alternative to Lumbering, I didn't bother to consider what removing Lumbering would actually accomplish.
I fell into the trap of thinking of a passel of turn score 3 and 4 ships zipping around the board and launching Plasma torps willy-nilly. When in actuality, most of the ships that would benefit most from the removal of Lumbering already have a turn score of 6... meaning they get the same effects as wallowing by only removing Lumbering... except the penalty for HETs.

3: Initiative: One of the biggest complaints I had about the games played was the -1 fleet modifier to initiative rolls. This effectively guarantees the Gorn will seldom win initiative against the Klingons, the Romulans, and the Kzinti. that hardly makes for a fun game and doesn't relate to anything in the SFU. I haven't played any other incarnation of ACTA, but from reading prior posts, I get the feeling that this was an important part of ACTA before ACTASF?

Here's a novel thought:
What if we removed lumbering from the Gorn, except the BCH and the DN of course, since most BCHs and DNs are Lumbering. This gives the Gorn turn modes almost equivalent to the Federation.
But what about HETS you may ask?
OK, part 2 of the concept. Let's give the Gorn a fleet modifier of +1 to Crew Quality Checks when attempting High Energy Turns. This still allows the Gorn to HET, but they really have to think about it.
But now the Gorn have two fleet penalties you say; -1 initiative and +1 to CQC.
Well then, here's part 3 of the idea.
Remove the -1 initiative penalty. This makes them equal to the Federation (although not as quick o use HETs) and slightly less effective than the Klingons, Romulans, and Kzinti. They are still unlikely to win initiative every single turn, but they will win some of the time.

To put in concisely, here is the new Scoutdad proposal:

Gorn fleet: +0 initiative modifier, Crew quality CHECK OF 9 for HETs, and no Lumbering (except BCH / DN)

[Edited to reflect correct CQCrequirement for HETs]

 

[McKinstry]

Based on our two playtest games Sunday, I agree with Scoutdad right down the line and his playtest experience certainly was similar to ours.

One other issue, while I agree that fixing initiative for the Gorns and rationalizing the turning is vital, unless something is done with drones, it is still rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. It will make things feel better for a while but in the end, the actions are futile.

 

[Pavlov Grenadier]

Based on our two playtest games Sunday, I agree with Scoutdad right down the line and his playtest experience certainly was similar to ours.

One other issue, while I agree that fixing initiative for the Gorns and rationalizing the turning is vital, unless something is done with drones, it is still rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. It will make things feel better for a while but in the end, the actions are futile.

LOL...nice one Mckinstry...

And having played the games with Mckinstry this week, I agree with him agreeing with Scoutdad :lol:

 

[gord314]

What about a Gorn racial trait, since the don't already have one:

Overlapping defensive fire:

Although the Gorn have not traditionally fought against fleets which use a lot of drones, war games with the federation and analysis of Klingon tactics have led the Gorn to develop strategies to deal with drones without devoting precious space on their ships to dedicated anti drone systems. Instead they take advantage of their existing wide phaser arcs to provide mutual defense for a fleet of ships.

Any Gorn ship may use its phasers to provide defensive fire against drones only (since plasma torpedoes do not allow time to react without special orders) for any other Gorn ship in the same fleet.

 

[WickedLance]

As nifty as that is? It still doesn't change the fact that a Gorn fleet simply doesn't have enough phasers to shoot down every Drone fired at it. As some previous posts illustrated: Ships that are opting to defensive fire tend to get shot first. With this racial trait, you'd basically restrict ALL Gorn phasers to strictly defensive fire.
Good thing, bad thing? Dunno.

Still doesn't solve the issue with ships just zooming past the Gorn and staying in the aft, where they definitely don't have a lot of Phasers to cover each other.

 

[TJHairball]

Still doesn't solve the issue with ships just zooming past the Gorn and staying in the aft, where they definitely don't have a lot of Phasers to cover each other.

An often-overlooked component of defensive fire from allied ships:

It's not the direction the opponent is in that matters, it's the direction to your own ship. I've noted this previously here, since it's quite important for Klingon ships working together and the formations you put them in, but it matters for anyone who uses the IDF special action.

 

[MongooseMatt]

Hi guys,

Thanks for all your efforts - I think we have a solution together now, just need to agree it with ADB.

 

[Captain Jonah]

UPDATE. Matt sneaked in while I was typing. So waiting to see what this is going to be.

First off many thanks to Scoutdad and his people for these play tests, judging by the above some of them were no fun for the Gorn players and it can feel like a wasted afternoon having your Gorn fleet smashed again and again without being able to hit back. Good job for staying with it and again my thanks for helping out.

Play test Game 2:
This game was absolutely no fun at all for the Gorn

Welcome to the World of the Gorn . That one sentence sums it up completely, all the arguments about ships, game mechanics etc come down to one thing. If it isn’t fun to play the Gorn, no one will. No sales of the miniatures, no Gorn in the Tournaments, even in home and club games they will only be used if house ruled significantly.

Welcome sir, to my world. :roll:

OK. After finally getting some experience with the Gorn in ACTA, I'll try to verbalize my thoughts.

Tough Gorn.

It seems to be a bad rule used to correct another, earlier bad rule.

I do think it should be A,P,S. This will at least provide protection for 3/4 of the ship and offer an inducement to the enemies to enter the forward arc. )

I have said the same about rules being used to correct rules that don’t work. Likewise P/S isn’t a compensation, it is too easy to get in the A arc of a lumbering ship.

2) Wallowing. I still don't like the name, but I do like the way they handled. One wouldn't think an extra turn of 45 degrees would be that big a difference, but it is.
2a) Now, while I was looking for an alternative to Lumbering, I didn't bother to consider what removing Lumbering would actually accomplish.

When in actuality, most of the ships that would benefit most from the removal of Lumbering already have a turn score of 6... meaning they get the same effects as wallowing by only removing Lumbering... except the penalty for HETs.

It is a truly horrible name, who came up with it in the first place, person should be shot for trying to stick the poor Gorn with a name like that :evil:

Still the difference is remarkable, as you say turning twice doesn’t seem like that big a change over just a single turn but once you start mixing with an enemy it is a huge change.

2a. Welcome to the Forum sub group supporting the ability of the Gorn cruisers to be allowed to turn corners, we are a small group but steadily growing in number

3: Initiative: One of the biggest complaints I had about the games played was the -1 fleet modifier to initiative rolls.

that hardly makes for a fun game and doesn't relate to anything in the SFU.

Here's a novel thought:
What if we removed lumbering from the Gorn, except the BCH and the DN of course, since most BCHs and DNs are Lumbering. This gives the Gorn turn modes almost equivalent to the Federation. But what about HETS you may ask?

OK, part 2 of the concept. Let's give the Gorn a fleet modifier of +1 to Crew Quality Checks when attempting High Energy Turns. This still allows the Gorn to HET, but they really have to think about it.

But now the Gorn have two fleet penalties you say; -1 initiative and +1 to CQC.
Well then, here's part 3 of the idea.

Remove the -1 initiative penalty. This makes them equal to the Federation (although not as quick o use HETs) and slightly less effective than the Klingons, Romulans, and Kzinti. They are still unlikely to win initiative every single turn, but they will win some of the time.

To put in concisely, here is the new Scoutdad proposal:

Gorn fleet: +0 initiative modifier, +1 to Crew Quality Checks for HETs, and no Lumbering (except BCH / DN)

It is always good to see a person reach enlightenment. To see a persons eyes open and to see them realise that there is more out there than they have realised. Welcome Tony, you have begun to see a new world, a place where the Gorn are treated fairly and not crippled unjustly.

A number of people are saying they have now played a few games and are seeing a pattern, they are also saying but this may well be just Gut Instinct and they haven’t played enough games to be sure. Funny thing here, a lot of experienced gamers are playing a few games and all getting the same gut feeling. Now maybe we all share the same gut, or maybe now that people are playing even a few games the fact that there is a problem is becoming more apparent.

Now to repeat yet again a much repeated question. Why should the Gorn have a Penalty to HETS or to Initiative, what are these penalties compensating for exactly.

I tend not to HET much, if you need to HET you are in trouble anyway, a HET penalty compensating for launching two shuttles a turn, since shuttles don’t do much and we cannot launch two SSs at once its not a massive bonus.
Still I can live with a penalty to HETs, it doesn’t crop up that often and if it keeps the “Gorns are too awesome to be allowed to play without handicapping them” crowd of my back I can live with it.

The Gorn ships are built to project firepower in every direction. They can fire Plasma Fs backwards and have the same Phaser firepower in every arc front or back (the double saucer ones anyway). This gives the turn mode 6 cruisers the ability to fire something in every direction. The flip side of this is that it is harder to focus that firepower, with SH/PH Phasers and plasma Fs on many of the ships you can end up not firing everything on one target because it isn’t centre lined. Without being able to turn the chance of getting lined up on a target becomes very small indeed.

Gorn ships have better shields and slightly better plasmas across the board in comparison to the Romulan’s who have better Phasers and better turn modes. Gorn/Rom battles are hardly one sided.

There are two problems at present. Both relating to game mechanics that are very different to SFB/FC. Gorn movement and Drone defence.

I am happy to see a lot of people coming to the conclusion that there is a problem and trying to solve it.

Much as I like having a neat racial like tough, I don’t think it’s enough if you still have lumbering. Taking half hull damage from an enemy that you simply cannot engage really only means you take twice as long to die.

Re Gord314s idea. If the Gorn have developed this tactic against Drones why would it not work against Plasmas as well.

At present just about all Gorn Phasers are reserved for Drone defence anyway since you never know where the Drones are going to land and the last few Drone ships can spread some Drone love across multiple ships to wear down shields of prevent any of them firing Phasers.

Yes a racial special like that would help a little in that the Gorn (and the Rom who could also make the same claim) could use those Phaser-3s and A/S or A/P Phaser ones to help each other out.

In terms of Drones I am swinging back to allowing any ship to fire at any Drone that has been fired from over 18” away. I was talking about this before but thought the 3 ship limit would do it.

Ships with even Drone 1 can fire them from within 18” as they do now so it changes nothing on the small forces, what it does do is kill off the Drone heavy fleets that stand off since 6 Kzinti ships at 36” can throw 24 Drones, my 6 Gorn ships have enough Phasers to stop most of that as long as they haven’t spread out and have no terrain between them.

I want to use escorts as well but can see that a Drone heavy fleet would get close enough to use heavy weapons to nuke an escort and then run out past 24” again.

I don’t want to cripple the Drone fleets but it was telling in the play testing above that given a choice of ships the Feds, knowing they were to fight Gorn went straight for the DWDs.

 

[scoutdad]

@Capt. Jonah: Funny. Never thought of myself as a clique member before... :wink:
Overall, it was a bad day for the Gorn.
I haven't been pummeled so hard since the early playtesting of Federation Commander. My Gorn Destroyer took a lucky hit to the Plasma Torpedo during turn 1...
That led to a suggestion to allow a player to take a frame damage point rather than losethe last box of any given type. At least that way, you are still in the fight.

I'm waiting with baited breath to see the new tweaks before posting anything further.

We need notice some inconsistencies with drones in these games. It has not been as prevalent in previous games as most empires seem a bit better equippedto handle them. Nothing re this was posted here as any fixes need to affect all drones / empires, not just Gorn.

I submitted a detailed analysis to the PTBds along with several observations and a couple of possibilities to look at. Once they hafve given us their take - I'll add additional commentary.

 

[archon96]

Thanks for the play by play scout dad, did youre opponent use all of his shuttles or just a few.

 

[scoutdad]

Thanks for the play by play scout dad, did youre opponent use all of his shuttles or just a few.

Didn't use all of them, but there were a lot.
Unfortunately, Launch Suicide shuttle is a special action and if you're reloading Torps, you can't use that one too.

Besides, in a 4 or 5 turn game, it's a little hard to get 6 suicide shuttles launched from your BC. Especially if you fire torps and then reload them. :wink:

 

[storeylf]

Much as I like having a neat racial like tough, I don’t think it’s enough if you still have lumbering. Taking half hull damage from an enemy that you simply cannot engage really only means you take twice as long to die.

Whilst I can't disgaree with the strict statement, I disagree with what you are getting at, on two accounts.

Any game like this has the same mechanic in action, how much damage do you output and how much damage do you take. Generally, the longer you survive the more damage you output. If you are dying then you are not outputting the same damage as you are taking (assuming equal ships otherwise). If you reduce the damage you take then you may now be outdamaging the other guy and hence win. Tank and Spank if you will, if tough allows you to tank the other guy long enough then your firepower will win, or at least not be just a case of take twice as ling to die.

E.g. If I take 30 to kill and am taking 10 a turn I take 3 turns to kill, If I am outputting 6 a turn against a similar ship I am dead before killing him. If I now take half damage though I kill the enemy in 5 turns but he needed 6 to kill me.

Most Gorns have all round phasers, no matter where the other guy is you can fire several phasers at him, and usually a plasma F. You can output damage at a fairly constant rate, its not like you are never outputting any damage (in that case as you say you clearly just take longer to die).

Drones may be an issue, but that is not a problem with Gorns per se, that (as scoutdad indicated) is a problem with drones generally that really needs sorting out. Although being tougher will mitigate drones to an extent as well and may allow offensive phaser use (how much depends on what the implementation is of course).

The other reason I disagree is that being able to tank opens up tactics that can mitigate lumbering e.g. Weave or Double line. Both require that you give the other guy the chance to only engage half your force to start with. If you are not sufficiently robust you are defeated one group at a time. However, if you can tank the other guy for a turn or 2 then the tactics become more viable.

How tough do you have to be, no idea, and tough could be done in several ways. But being tougher is not neccesarily just meaning you take longer to lose.

 

[WickedLance]

I am aware of the IDF being based on the ship being shot rather than the ship shooting. What I'm saying is that Gorn Ships don't have enough phasers, I feel, to shoot down 12 AD of Drones going at one target and still have enough to defend themselves at the same time.

As an example:

X1 O X2

The X's are gorn ships protecting the O, another gorn ship. Say they get that IDF. Average, say 3 Phaser 1's in each side arc (smaller ships you see.) You have 2 ships devoting Side Arc Phasers to protecting that ship. Now what if a ship shoots O and then X2 uses phaser's to protect O....Then The other two enemy ships decides to shoot X2 in the arc that just exhausted those Phasers?

I'm not saying its a perfect example. There is some tactical placement with this and positioning.

The other thing, again, is that the enemy ships just zoom past the lumbering Gorn ships and stay in the rear so a gorn ship can't bring the full weight of fire to bear, and the Gorn phasers are then strictly reserved for anti-drone IDF duty which leaves the Gorn Ships with no offensive capability, basically.

 

[WickedLance]

So posted on the Board linked to in OP by Stevecole:

Matthew's proposed fixes (everything below this point is from him, not my analysis of it).
===============================================
1. Delete Lumbering. From the entire rulebook.

2. Change the Seeking trait to read;

Seeking: Seeking weapons must travel across space to their target but will doggedly pursue it until they impact and explode with deadly effect. A weapon with this trait will automatically hit a target within 16", without rolling any Attack Dice. At greater ranges, it will require normal Attack Dice rolls, with a -1 penalty at ranges of more than 24"

With the damage spread around the entire target ship, no rolls are made to see if the weapon penetrates Shields.

This sorts out the Gorn's agility, makes Dreadnoughts more attractive across the board, and resolves all drone issues (we remove the '3 ship limit' rule we currently have in the errata) without affecting plasma torps, in two easy strokes. I would be happy with a -2 penalty on drones above 24", but that may be going too far.
===============================================
===============================================
SVC ANALYSIS

1. I am a little worried about dreadnoughts being monsters, but dreadnoughts ARE monsters. I am willing to let the players say if they agree to that or fear dreadnoughts.

2. The seeking weapon fix seems workable. I'm sure there were other workable fixes but I'm ok with this one and Matthew likes it, so let's rock.

3. I still want to talk about racial initiative bonuses. Matthew didn't mention them in his email to me.
==========================================
==========================================
Please test the above and report back.
------------


I like these proposed changes!

 

[OgreMkV]

I'll try to test this them out this Thursday night.

 

[billclo]

I'm not sure that removing Lumbering is all that much help frankly. The Fed DN benefits as it's Turn 6, but the Rom Condor, Gorn DN, Kzin BCH and DN are all Turn 9 and can't make more than one 45 degree turn anyways.

The only way I can see it benefiting those ships is if one house-ruled that straight line movement from the last turn counted towards the current turn distance required. And even that will be somewhat tricky to arrange. 2 x 45 degree turns in a turn require that the ship have moved straight 6" from the last turn, which unless it carried over 3" from the previous turn, it can't make it anyways.

2 ways to resolve that:
1) Change the Turn 9 ships to Turn 8, so at least they can go all power to engines to get in a second turn.
2) Change those ships to Turn 6. Else I don't see them getting that much use.

 

[MongooseMatt]

Once small change to the Seeking proposed;

Seeking: Seeking weapons must travel across space to their target but will doggedly pursue it until they impact and explode with deadly effect. A weapon with this trait will automatically hit a target within 16", without rolling any Attack Dice. With the damage spread around the entire target ship, no rolls are made to see if the weapon penetrates Shields.

Basically, just leave the -1 penalty to the 'long range' rule.

By doing this, we also remove the 'three ship' limit currently on drones. With a 5+ to hit at ranges above 18", I am quite comfortable with drone fleets picking on one ship again. They are going to need a lot of firepower or a lot of luck to get through a cruiser's defences, even if the cruiser is not doing anything particularly dfefensive, like boosting shields.

 

[Captain Jonah]

Ok let’s see.

No more Lumbering Cruisers, no more lumbering BCH, No more Lumbering DN. 8) :lol:

Makes DNs a bit more playable, they are still turn mode 9 so even with APE they only turn once but you can always HET them now :shock:

This does mean the fast DNs will be able to turn twice as they race across the board at 21" :twisted:

Seeking weapons. Auto hit inside 16" but plasma stuff can move 12" and fire 8" so well in range and Photons at 15" are almost in range anyway. Its three range bands but I guess the War hammer players can cope with that if we use small words and explain it slowly :lol:

I presume the "Damage spread around the shields" bit is just to explain the NO YOU DO NOT go through shields on a natural 6 with seeking weapons.

With the damage spread around the entire target ship, no rolls are made to see if the weapon penetrates Shields.

To be clearer this should probably say something like "Seeking weapons do not go through shields on a natural 6" since it implies there is a separate roll to go through shields and already has people on the ADB board asking does it mean it ignores the Klink front arc shield rule. :roll:

Ok so we are back to 24 Drones on that ship there again but at over 24" that becomes 8 Drones on target and 16 wandering off lost which is better than the current 12 incoming. At 17 - 24" its 12 drones so much as it is now but that takes the entire fleet rather than being able to do it to two targets.

Keep it at -1 for the 24"+ as its consistent with other long range fire, -2 means 1 in 6 hit which will have the Kzinti howling at how cruel you are. They will probably be complaining anyway about people having yet another chance to survive facing a Drone heavy fleet without being murdered horribly at long range.

I guess the acid test is to look at the Fed fleets in the tournaments and see how many DWDs turn up.

Something I mentioned on the ADB board, does a scout lock give a reroll for a single weapon system. It will be asked and it will make Drones scary again if it does due to the whole more than half that 24 Drone salvo hitting at 36" due to a reroll again thing.

I will see if I can come up with ways to break it but overall I have to say I am moderately happy with this. Well perhaps even slightly excited, maybe even satisfied. Ok pleased but that’s all I will admit to

Good job Matt and SVC. Once again thank you for listening and putting in the time to sort out these problems.

I may even buy you a Doughnut or two. :wink: