AdmiralGrafSpee
Mongoose
Wow impressive changes. Gonna go hug my Fed DN now!
-Tim
-Tim
Gorn Fleet - Comments Welcomed
- Thread starter MongooseMatt
- Start date
Pavlov Grenadier
Mongoose
msprange said:
Hi Matt! Want to make sure I understand Seeking now:
Range 0-16" = auto hit (as they are now)
Range 16.1" - 18" = 4+ to hit
Range 18.1" and longer = 5+ to hit (since thats over half of 36").
Thanks!
Captain Jonah
Mongoose
msprange said:
I'm barely typing my reply and it changes again :lol:
Back to two range bands making it consistent with the rest of the rules. The Kzinti will howl, the Fed cheese mongers will have to put the DWDs away. The rest of us can be happy :wink: :lol:
Tim. What you do in the privacy of your home is up to you but I'm not sure the rest of us want to know about it :shock: :wink:
PG thats how i read it anyway
I posted this on the ADB board but I'll be darned if this solves the problems I saw on Sundays playest. Explain to me how a Gorn fleet having closed to 9" and firing plasma a) did any real damage since on that turn the same drone heavy fleets were chucking 4 per ship at them thus all their phasers were used for defense and the drone chucking fleet went IDF and used their Phasers freely since all they had to defend against was the plasma while still using disruptors, drones and photons and b) now that they've fired and the range is say 15" and the Gorns want to reload, how are they are going to generate any offensive fire with the same drone storm about to use all of their facing phasers in defense, which won't nearly be enough due to facing and unlimited drone targeting and oh by the way, they are still -2 on the initiative roll.
I don't think abandoning the three ship limit does anything to fix the Gorn/Romulan inability to cope with drone fleets issue. They are already dying en masse within 12" on the turn after they fire plasma since they have to reload (thus no reinforce shields and no IDF) and defend themselves with such inadequate Phaser layouts that they at best spend every other turn with zero offense (the layouts are such that post-defense, the unused phasers bear on nothing). Note that even on the turn plasmas fire, since the ADD equipped drone fleets have no other threats, neutralizing the plasma fusilade through IDF allows a Klingon, Kzinti or Fed DWD heavy fleet to simply weather the storm, counterpunch with disruptors, drones and maybe photons and then blissfully slag the now toothless Gorns or Romulans on the reload turn.
Drones are not a problem solely due to range, they are a problem because they have no downside. No reload, never run out, no risk or cost for using. Making them less effective at distance helps but as long as they are the games only risk free/trade off free weapon, every other weapon is encumbered except disruptors and those are only found on drone heavy fleets, those same fleets which also happen to have the ADD trait. Phasers for ADD lacking fleets can't be used as a first choice offensive weapon in a drone environment as they must be reserved for defense while photons or plasmas are useful only every other turn and then, at a significant defensive trade off since with only 1 SA per turn, while reloading the non-drone fleet cannot IDF or strengthen shields.
Fixing drones has to involve all ranges, not simply over 16".
I don't think abandoning the three ship limit does anything to fix the Gorn/Romulan inability to cope with drone fleets issue. They are already dying en masse within 12" on the turn after they fire plasma since they have to reload (thus no reinforce shields and no IDF) and defend themselves with such inadequate Phaser layouts that they at best spend every other turn with zero offense (the layouts are such that post-defense, the unused phasers bear on nothing). Note that even on the turn plasmas fire, since the ADD equipped drone fleets have no other threats, neutralizing the plasma fusilade through IDF allows a Klingon, Kzinti or Fed DWD heavy fleet to simply weather the storm, counterpunch with disruptors, drones and maybe photons and then blissfully slag the now toothless Gorns or Romulans on the reload turn.
Drones are not a problem solely due to range, they are a problem because they have no downside. No reload, never run out, no risk or cost for using. Making them less effective at distance helps but as long as they are the games only risk free/trade off free weapon, every other weapon is encumbered except disruptors and those are only found on drone heavy fleets, those same fleets which also happen to have the ADD trait. Phasers for ADD lacking fleets can't be used as a first choice offensive weapon in a drone environment as they must be reserved for defense while photons or plasmas are useful only every other turn and then, at a significant defensive trade off since with only 1 SA per turn, while reloading the non-drone fleet cannot IDF or strengthen shields.
Fixing drones has to involve all ranges, not simply over 16".
AdmiralGrafSpee
Mongoose
Captain Jonah said:
Well then I'm pretty sure you don't want to know what's been going on with the Kirov's and DWD's then!
logical_proof
Mongoose
One way to fix plasmas would be too increase the attack dice by one each for R's, S's, G's, and F's.
Another option is to ignore the accurate trait when firing phasers against plasma, basically bringing it back to the SFU 2 phaser damage per plasma strength reduction. This would be simple and increase the power of the warhead without completely breaking the game or changing tons of ship stats.
Another option is to ignore the accurate trait when firing phasers against plasma, basically bringing it back to the SFU 2 phaser damage per plasma strength reduction. This would be simple and increase the power of the warhead without completely breaking the game or changing tons of ship stats.
...or ditch multihit on plasma and make them suitably chunky in AD terms. Yes that has a knockon effect on Energy bleed so you have to be careful how much you do it.
For me the problem with seeking weapons in ACtA was that the drone method was a perfectly good method of doing seeking weapons abstracted for ACtA, and the plasma wasalso a perfectly good abstraction but the two methods seemed to have been done separately and did not seem compatible as they used different methods to abstract. Specifically the drones maintained their extended range abstraction a number of turns firing into direct fire dice with defensive fire, but plasma not only had the energy bleed but lost their superior range for the big torps abstracted to an effective range and got no range variation. In isolation each was fine, in combination - well we can see that.
For me the problem with seeking weapons in ACtA was that the drone method was a perfectly good method of doing seeking weapons abstracted for ACtA, and the plasma wasalso a perfectly good abstraction but the two methods seemed to have been done separately and did not seem compatible as they used different methods to abstract. Specifically the drones maintained their extended range abstraction a number of turns firing into direct fire dice with defensive fire, but plasma not only had the energy bleed but lost their superior range for the big torps abstracted to an effective range and got no range variation. In isolation each was fine, in combination - well we can see that.
Keeper Nilbog
Mongoose
Tend to agree that the fix's mentioned are good, but NOT happy with the 'Drones can now all target one ship at ANY Range again 
'. that means were back to one turn kills against cruiser at 16" range, and please don't say that fleets can handle that at that range - they can't 
(couldn't before, won't now). Yes, it stops ranged drone spam, but fleet instant kill is back on the board :?
'. that means were back to one turn kills against cruiser at 16" range, and please don't say that fleets can handle that at that range - they can't (couldn't before, won't now). Yes, it stops ranged drone spam, but fleet instant kill is back on the board :?Captain Jonah
Mongoose
Likewise had a chance to give it some thought overnight.
Removing the three ship limit combined with the long range roll not to miss (its not a “to hit” roll so the natural 6 on to hit rolls doesn’t count) makes Drone fire over 18” minimal.
An all up Kzinti fleet with 24 Drones at 1000 points will get roughly 8 on target at long range. That is enough to exhaust an ADD or take a lot of Phasers. On the Gorn (the problem child of the Drone situation) most of them will take a few hits from 8 Drones that impact, 2-3 D6 on the cruiser sizes. Most everyone else will take nothing and may use up an ADD if they are unlucky.
So Gorn Aside the 5+ at over 18” reduces the Drone threat to a minor danger. Larger fleets retain the ability to cause damage if the entire fleet fires and Drone squadrons can still mass enough Drones to do something. This also depends on Scouts, giving Drones a re roll with scout sensors significantly improves the long range firepower so that needs to be considered very carefully.
However Drones are going to hurt horribly at 16”, auto hit D6 damage and no ship limit. Kzinti fleets will kill a ship or two every turn at that range with just Drones and will have Disruptors and Phasers for a third target. But they are also close enough to be losing a ship or two every turn in reply.
Re the suggestion of Drones running out on a 1.
Drones rolling a dice for every shot, under 16” auto hit, 16” to 18” 4+ hits, and 19” 5+ hits but if one OR more dice are 1s the ships Drone rating goes down BY ONE sounds good. It’s actually a damm good idea.
No reload and so the throw weight of Drones falls over the battle, do you hold back the long range fire to keep your racks loaded and ready for short range fire or wear down the enemy from range but risk reduced Drone fire at shorter ranges as your racks empty. It does leave the Drone 1 ships unloved though but that is much like the ADD 1 ships, one use and it could be gone.
Since everyone else is now ok we come to the Gorn. Due to the nature of the deal as I understand it the weapons stay as is, no fitting a few extra Phaser 3s on every Gorn ship, no replacing random Plasma Fs with D-racks.
So bring on the escorts. They exist in game; they are there to protect ships from incoming Drones and Fighters. Most races don’t need them just yet; the Gorn would seem to be the exception.
In close an escort is going to become target number 1 to Disruptors and Photons to clear it out of the way so the Drones can be used again but that means it has basically done its job by getting the Drone races in closer.
Rather than make drones less threatening and all but useless against every race other than Gorn leave the Drones able to at least be a tactical worry to the other races and bump up the Gorn escorts in the list. If you can find a few pages in the magazine maybe tuck in one or two there.
The escorts need to be able to fire ADDs or more importantly D-racks to defend ships within a small area, this could be 4” giving an escort the ability to protect two or three ships that are close together. Not allowing escorts to use D-Racks to defend others gives you a ship that is superb at protecting itself from drones but not much use otherwise.
This is a game of Fleets, having ships in the fleet that can protect the Fleet against Drones but that are themselves vulnerable to Direct fire weapons adds Drone defence at the Fleet level that individual ships cannot provide.
Please don’t use the Gorn as a reason to make sweeping changes that make Drones useless against everyone else. Yes I want the Gorn to have a fair chance against Drone users, but I also want Drone users to have a fair chance against everyone else
Lumbering going away is, to my mind anyway good. Some DNs come off well, others it makes very little difference. But why not differentiate by changing the Turn number and HET number. As has been suggested moving some of the more agile DNS to turn mode 8 gives them two turns on APE. Adding a HET modifier to some ships, DDs and FFs perhaps +1 on the roll, the less agile DNs -1, the really bad stuff -2. A ship like the Condor which actually can make HETS could have a 0 or even a +1, how scary is a DN with a bonus to HETS
This gives you ships that need to roll a 6 to HET and so will almost always fail and small stuff that can turn on the spot. By mixing and matching the Turn modes and HET numbers you can balance individual ships both existing and to come without needing to change rules or introduce new rules to cover certain ships.
This doesn’t solve the Problems where Plasma races watch the plasma salvo Phasered down while using all of their Phasers for Drone defence and then get murdered on the reload turn. Tactically you can fire Plasmas over two turns but that frees up Phasers every turn that are no longer needed against the smaller plasma fire.
Perhaps as has been suggested Drones running out of ammo and also dropping the accurate bonus, a Phaser removes a dice of Plasma on a 4+ not a 2+.
A Kzinti has a 60% odd chance of dropping a Drone rack each turn to start with, firing two Phasers for every Plasma Dice and spreading the Plasma fire across turns puts everyone else in the same position as the plasma races, fire Phasers at the enemy or at the seeking weapons.
Note we CANNOT increase the actual damage of the Plasmas. Having Cruisers destroy DNs in one shot or DDs take down cruisers with Plasmas is too powerfull.
Phasers reduce plasmas on a 4+, Drones losing ammo. Anyone got any games arranged to give them a go?
Removing the three ship limit combined with the long range roll not to miss (its not a “to hit” roll so the natural 6 on to hit rolls doesn’t count) makes Drone fire over 18” minimal.
An all up Kzinti fleet with 24 Drones at 1000 points will get roughly 8 on target at long range. That is enough to exhaust an ADD or take a lot of Phasers. On the Gorn (the problem child of the Drone situation) most of them will take a few hits from 8 Drones that impact, 2-3 D6 on the cruiser sizes. Most everyone else will take nothing and may use up an ADD if they are unlucky.
So Gorn Aside the 5+ at over 18” reduces the Drone threat to a minor danger. Larger fleets retain the ability to cause damage if the entire fleet fires and Drone squadrons can still mass enough Drones to do something. This also depends on Scouts, giving Drones a re roll with scout sensors significantly improves the long range firepower so that needs to be considered very carefully.
However Drones are going to hurt horribly at 16”, auto hit D6 damage and no ship limit. Kzinti fleets will kill a ship or two every turn at that range with just Drones and will have Disruptors and Phasers for a third target. But they are also close enough to be losing a ship or two every turn in reply.
Re the suggestion of Drones running out on a 1.
Drones rolling a dice for every shot, under 16” auto hit, 16” to 18” 4+ hits, and 19” 5+ hits but if one OR more dice are 1s the ships Drone rating goes down BY ONE sounds good. It’s actually a damm good idea.
No reload and so the throw weight of Drones falls over the battle, do you hold back the long range fire to keep your racks loaded and ready for short range fire or wear down the enemy from range but risk reduced Drone fire at shorter ranges as your racks empty. It does leave the Drone 1 ships unloved though but that is much like the ADD 1 ships, one use and it could be gone.
Since everyone else is now ok we come to the Gorn. Due to the nature of the deal as I understand it the weapons stay as is, no fitting a few extra Phaser 3s on every Gorn ship, no replacing random Plasma Fs with D-racks.
So bring on the escorts. They exist in game; they are there to protect ships from incoming Drones and Fighters. Most races don’t need them just yet; the Gorn would seem to be the exception.
In close an escort is going to become target number 1 to Disruptors and Photons to clear it out of the way so the Drones can be used again but that means it has basically done its job by getting the Drone races in closer.
Rather than make drones less threatening and all but useless against every race other than Gorn leave the Drones able to at least be a tactical worry to the other races and bump up the Gorn escorts in the list. If you can find a few pages in the magazine maybe tuck in one or two there.
The escorts need to be able to fire ADDs or more importantly D-racks to defend ships within a small area, this could be 4” giving an escort the ability to protect two or three ships that are close together. Not allowing escorts to use D-Racks to defend others gives you a ship that is superb at protecting itself from drones but not much use otherwise.
This is a game of Fleets, having ships in the fleet that can protect the Fleet against Drones but that are themselves vulnerable to Direct fire weapons adds Drone defence at the Fleet level that individual ships cannot provide.
Please don’t use the Gorn as a reason to make sweeping changes that make Drones useless against everyone else. Yes I want the Gorn to have a fair chance against Drone users, but I also want Drone users to have a fair chance against everyone else
Lumbering going away is, to my mind anyway good. Some DNs come off well, others it makes very little difference. But why not differentiate by changing the Turn number and HET number. As has been suggested moving some of the more agile DNS to turn mode 8 gives them two turns on APE. Adding a HET modifier to some ships, DDs and FFs perhaps +1 on the roll, the less agile DNs -1, the really bad stuff -2. A ship like the Condor which actually can make HETS could have a 0 or even a +1, how scary is a DN with a bonus to HETS
This gives you ships that need to roll a 6 to HET and so will almost always fail and small stuff that can turn on the spot. By mixing and matching the Turn modes and HET numbers you can balance individual ships both existing and to come without needing to change rules or introduce new rules to cover certain ships.
This doesn’t solve the Problems where Plasma races watch the plasma salvo Phasered down while using all of their Phasers for Drone defence and then get murdered on the reload turn. Tactically you can fire Plasmas over two turns but that frees up Phasers every turn that are no longer needed against the smaller plasma fire.
Perhaps as has been suggested Drones running out of ammo and also dropping the accurate bonus, a Phaser removes a dice of Plasma on a 4+ not a 2+.
A Kzinti has a 60% odd chance of dropping a Drone rack each turn to start with, firing two Phasers for every Plasma Dice and spreading the Plasma fire across turns puts everyone else in the same position as the plasma races, fire Phasers at the enemy or at the seeking weapons.
Note we CANNOT increase the actual damage of the Plasmas. Having Cruisers destroy DNs in one shot or DDs take down cruisers with Plasmas is too powerfull.
Phasers reduce plasmas on a 4+, Drones losing ammo. Anyone got any games arranged to give them a go?
Captain Jonah said:
I would keep the other limits already discussed, 3 ships, roll to hit at range, as well but all of these in combination might restore some kind of weapon balance.
Having one wepon system so dominant really bends every other mechanic. The reload races get to fire their heavy weapons maybe three times in an eight turn game and the penalty in the reload turns (no SA for IDF or reinforce shields) is potentially fatal while as it stands, drones fire eight times per eight game turn, never run the risk of failure, never use up a special action and even when they don't hit, reduce the offensive power of their opponent to nil due to defensive fire use. Even the ship selection of the fleets gets distorted as the drone capable fleets have nothing but upside in using drone count as the prime selection criteria.
Easter weekend coming so I can get in maybe just one game.
Since the current proposed official mechanic actually makes things worse at 16" and under by removing the three ship limit, I don't see what there is to test on that change except the ranged fire bit and that is clearly OK, just insufficient.
Just from a mechanical standpoint. On the over 16" drone fire, does the offensive player roll first to determine what locks on in the first place or does the defender have to choose and roll his defensive fire and then the attacker rolls to hit?
Iain McGhee
Mongoose
Yeah, I'm playing today or tomorrow. I'll switch to Gorn vs Kzinti, add your suggestions to Matt's proposed changes and write it up. I think his 16" autohit might still be too good, I'd be happier with 12" and 24" max range for FC type standard drones (and that's coming from a past and future Kzinti player).
I think the Kzinti might be hurt too much without the ability to reload their drone racks (racial or drone specialist ship ability only ?), most of them are relatively weak offensively without them. Dunno, maybe not allowing reloads until you've lost all drone AD from a single weapons system might limit their ability to sustain a drone barrage enough ?
I think the Kzinti might be hurt too much without the ability to reload their drone racks (racial or drone specialist ship ability only ?), most of them are relatively weak offensively without them. Dunno, maybe not allowing reloads until you've lost all drone AD from a single weapons system might limit their ability to sustain a drone barrage enough ?
I think the running out is inherantly balanced if the mechanic is the same as with ADD. If an ADD can run out and not be reloadable, then the same should apply to drones or at least they aren't reloadable until all the way to zero which would seem appropriate for ADD as well.
I think you are rather over stating that. How is someone phasering down all your plasma? I keep hearing how drones overwhelm phasers, so how come plasma isn't, you carry a darn sight more plasma than drone ships have drones. At range <=8 Cruisers are looking at 4AD of drones vs 12 AD of plasma, at range 9-12 4AD vs 8AD. A single plasma ship should overwhelm the targets defenses, where as it can take 3 drone ships to do the same to it, the drone ship doesn't even get to use its tractors.
Why use an entires fleets phasers in defense? Presumably only a few ships are being targeted by drones I assume, so you won't be likely using all phasers in defense (and neither will the enemy barring awesome luck on IDF). Indeed it may be worth while not even shooting drones and just piling the hurt on the enemy.
Neither should you plan to split your plasma fire over 2 turns, unless it is 'spare' and not worth using at the moment. Plasma is all about the BIG strike that utterly overwhelms the enemy, don't squander that advantage by dribbling it out.
At the point of all hell breaking loose 3 Kzinti cruisers vs 3 gorn criusers are dishing out what?
Kzinti:
12AD disrupters (an average 8 hits)
12AD drones
Gorns:
36AD plasma
Phasers could be used offensivley or defensively on either side. Kzinti are not phaser 1 heavy, about the same as what the Gorns have bearing. I'm more or less ignoring SAs, as they are going to be very variable.
12 AD dice of drones at a gorn ship, stops say 6AD of them. That leaves ~21 damage. Disrupters put in another 16 for a total ~37 damage. That's quite survivable (if you boosted shields it may not even be shields down).
In return 36 AD of plasma, the Kzinti stops say 6 dice (being generous), that still leaves ~105 damage. Massive over kill as a cruiser goes Kaboom (hope he kept his ships spread out). Even if they all IDF and take out some 18AD the ship is still dead.
You could split 18 dice to 2 ships, each stop 6AD and take ~42 damage each. Or just use 2 cruisers (24AD and 12 AD kept back) that would still usually kill a cruiser this turn, whilst retaining some punch next turn to keep the other guy honest if it can't be usefully used on another ship. Your overkill means you don't even worry hugely about not getting that second side Plasma F in arc, you shoould still have 30AD of plasma.
Obvioulsy Kzinti might do better with overloads, or Gorns survive even better with IDF. Boost shields again helps the Gorn, Evasive or high speed seeker dodge could help etc etc.
Next turn, you have an initiative sink, you may not be shooting much at him, or if you diod have plama left over you keep him guessing. You may still not have lost a ship by the end of the turn as his firepower is now even less as he is a ship down.
Bigger fleets obvioulsy ramp up the amount of drones you face, it also ramps up the amount of plasma you spit out.
That's not to say drones are not an issue, if the drone heavy force can keep the range at 12-16 then the Gorns gets worn down, before getting into good plasma range. However, the drop in effective drone range makes that quite a it harder, given a 12" move and 8" optimal range.
On the one hand you are saying that you are watching yor plasma getting phasered down and not doing sufficient damage to prevent getting murdered the following turn, then you are saying that a cruiser will kill a dreadnaught with any sort of damage increase!
Currently a DN can phaser down close to all of a single cruisers plasma (dependents somewhat on who DN we are talking about), even if it didn't use any phasers it will likely only just about drop the shield (and not even that if it was boosted, or the klingons front). The plasma damage boost needed to allow a cruiser to drop a DN that wasn't even trying to defend itself is significant, about double what they currently do.
Captain Jonah
Mongoose
To be honest making the auto hit bit 12" then having a band from 13 to 18 at 4+ and then 19" plus at 5+ doesn't impact the Plasma races much, who fires Plasmas above 12" anyway? It still needs to be an “All Seeking Weapons” rule though to cover everything and keep it simple.
With a reload the Kzinti and every Drone ship will need to reload once in a battle on average if they cannot reload till they hit 0 and will still be getting attacks every round. A drone ship that holds its Drones till it is inside the 16" (or 12") range has what amounts to a plasma S in firepower in a turret, then once it loses ammo it has a G, then an F.
Such a Reload will mean that the Feds will be reloading as will the Klingon’s for those ships with Drone 1 or ADD1. I’m really not sure about making Drones use ammo then giving them a reload, yes its harsh on the Drone one ships but it does rather negate the whole point of limiting Drone heavy fleets by ammo.
Unless Drones become Reload exactly as the special Rule as in you fire them then need to reload them, bring them back to a level field with the plasmas. That gives the Drone races the same Heavy throw weight once every other turn. The Feds will be reloading anyway for the Photons, it forces the Klingon’s and Kzinti to use an SA other than Boost, IDF or APE.
The fleet of them will crush one or two of your ships in a turn inside the auto hit range but then they are reloading as you are and you have free Phasers. Still a lot of tactics to tie up Phasers Defensively and it doesn’t stop the problem of a Drone ship anywhere within the zone hitting you with 4 Drones if you do fire all Phasers. Though here the Gorn all rounds can actually help since you can furball, fire Phasers at a ship that has fired already and keep the remaining arcs ready for defence, its not much I’ll admit.
Keeping the three ship limit reduces Drones above 18" to a minor threat that will use up a few Phasers that may or may not have a target in range. a 12 AD drone attack will land 4 Drones on the ship, so that’s 2 phaser-1s, the phaser-3 and the tractors. Ok that’s me safe then.
Inside the auto hit bracket you are back to these three ships kill that DD, these three ships blow down the shield on that cruiser which we had before. Without the three ship limit you have an entire fleet that can fire at one target till it is dead then switch to the next.
We could just ban Drones :lol: :wink:
McKinstry I would think you fire defensively only at the Drones that will hit, the others having long since lost track and wandered off somewhere.
StoryElf its not me who reported the First quote, I was responding to an earlier post, sorry I wasn’t clear I was following through on someone else’s problem.
The second comment was me responding to the suggestion about increasing the size of Plasma warheads. I haven’t seen anyone Phaser down an entire plasma storm but the solution to it happening cannot be to increase the AD of the plasmas, that makes the problem worse the other way in that when the plasma’s are not phasered down they kill anything they hit.
I’m not a rabid Kzinti player, I don’t want to one shot every enemy ship at max range.
:lol:
With a reload the Kzinti and every Drone ship will need to reload once in a battle on average if they cannot reload till they hit 0 and will still be getting attacks every round. A drone ship that holds its Drones till it is inside the 16" (or 12") range has what amounts to a plasma S in firepower in a turret, then once it loses ammo it has a G, then an F.
Such a Reload will mean that the Feds will be reloading as will the Klingon’s for those ships with Drone 1 or ADD1. I’m really not sure about making Drones use ammo then giving them a reload, yes its harsh on the Drone one ships but it does rather negate the whole point of limiting Drone heavy fleets by ammo.
Unless Drones become Reload exactly as the special Rule as in you fire them then need to reload them, bring them back to a level field with the plasmas. That gives the Drone races the same Heavy throw weight once every other turn. The Feds will be reloading anyway for the Photons, it forces the Klingon’s and Kzinti to use an SA other than Boost, IDF or APE.
The fleet of them will crush one or two of your ships in a turn inside the auto hit range but then they are reloading as you are and you have free Phasers. Still a lot of tactics to tie up Phasers Defensively and it doesn’t stop the problem of a Drone ship anywhere within the zone hitting you with 4 Drones if you do fire all Phasers. Though here the Gorn all rounds can actually help since you can furball, fire Phasers at a ship that has fired already and keep the remaining arcs ready for defence, its not much I’ll admit.
Keeping the three ship limit reduces Drones above 18" to a minor threat that will use up a few Phasers that may or may not have a target in range. a 12 AD drone attack will land 4 Drones on the ship, so that’s 2 phaser-1s, the phaser-3 and the tractors. Ok that’s me safe then.
Inside the auto hit bracket you are back to these three ships kill that DD, these three ships blow down the shield on that cruiser which we had before. Without the three ship limit you have an entire fleet that can fire at one target till it is dead then switch to the next.
We could just ban Drones :lol: :wink:
McKinstry I would think you fire defensively only at the Drones that will hit, the others having long since lost track and wandered off somewhere.
StoryElf its not me who reported the First quote, I was responding to an earlier post, sorry I wasn’t clear I was following through on someone else’s problem.
The second comment was me responding to the suggestion about increasing the size of Plasma warheads. I haven’t seen anyone Phaser down an entire plasma storm but the solution to it happening cannot be to increase the AD of the plasmas, that makes the problem worse the other way in that when the plasma’s are not phasered down they kill anything they hit.
I’m not a rabid Kzinti player, I don’t want to one shot every enemy ship at max range.
:lol:
IDF from the drone heavy fleet doesn't stop plasma's cold but it does make them target multiple ships on one target. With the Gorn, plasma fire is mostly going to occur over 8" and under 12" (thanks to -2 initiative and poor turning)thus energy bleed takes 1AD leaving R's with 6, S's with 3, G's with 2 and F's with 1. Most Gorns won't be centerlined as between the -2 initiative and the clunky turning (even without lumbering) compared to Klink/Kzinti thus all their F bearing and just one side (PH or SH) will be firing. Both sides going IDF during an 8-12" exchange will likely use IDF, again because the Gorns have that all around layout, some of their post/starboard layout won't bear at all and the 12 AD of drones will exhaust any ship based defense in the second wave with the third wave either hitting unscathed or phasered down by an IDF ship which then is in trouble defending itself against the next threesome. Gorn return plasma fire is basically 6 from an R(if present), 2x2 from G's and 2x1 from F's with the G's maybe at 3 each if they are S class for a total incoming of 12 AD also, assuming they bear. The Klingon/Kzinti with more front bearing phasers are free to use them all in IDF (all that pass) while still administering dirsruptor damage whereas the Gorns will be as occupied as IDF rolls allow in shooting down drones.
All of this is minor as it is reasonable that in a firing round for both sides, the damage should be more or less even (except when Klingon double shields are involved) but the real slaughter is in the subsequent reload turn when the Gorn are unable to IDF or reinforce shields and the Gorn (and to a lesser extent Romulan) phaser layout makes it impossible to handle three waves of two, much less three of four while at the same time taking phaser and disruptor damage while unable to return fire having used all bearing phasers in defense.
All of this is minor as it is reasonable that in a firing round for both sides, the damage should be more or less even (except when Klingon double shields are involved) but the real slaughter is in the subsequent reload turn when the Gorn are unable to IDF or reinforce shields and the Gorn (and to a lesser extent Romulan) phaser layout makes it impossible to handle three waves of two, much less three of four while at the same time taking phaser and disruptor damage while unable to return fire having used all bearing phasers in defense.
Greg Smith
Mongoose
Just a quick question with regards to the new seeking rules - I assume defensive fire is used after the drones roll to hit.
