HARM missiles, use/point of?

[Anbar]

I am wondering as to the point of, use-of, HARM missiles, as they seem rather useless to me.

Being able to 'force' the enemy to do a 3+ check seems rather pointless given that the missile range is only 15 anyway.... a lot of the time the enemy is actually within 8 (so it beomces 2+) and exceptionally often the first targeted weapon (of which most weapons/,any weapons, ahve a range around 15) knock it down to 2+ or, with range factors, 1+, making it an even more useless weapon than most other missiles already are.


So in any furball/knife-fight in all liklihood the effect of Stealth 3+ is so often negated by other attacks/ships (etc) that it becomes completely, and literally, pointless to attempt using it (comapred to soemthing that actually does some damage{although missiles themselves are largely useless at doing that anyway})

Is there some trick to their use that I am missing or are they really just a failed concept that equipping a ship with them really is a staggering waste of time?

 

[Burger]

They are fairly useless, yes. But there are several advantages to them:

• 1 hit is enough, and they are SAP. An Apollo with HARM missiles would be a terrible waste. But an Olympus or missile Chronos could fit them into a missile rack and only lose 2AD of damage output, and would have a 75% chance of hitting against hull 6, or 88% against hull 5.
• They affect the entire target ship. If you did this on a Sharlin for example, then it would have to roll 3+ stealth on all targets, not just the one that fired the HARM missile. It might reduce the stealth to 2+ or 1+ against the Olympus that just bushwhacked it, but that Omega that is 28" away and was about to get a face full of Neutron laser, would now need a 4+ to hit.
• If you can pull it off, it's a great distraction tactic. An Olympus firing these things annoying a Sharlin would very quickly become primary target, allowing your other ships to sneak up unmolested.

Having said that... I've never seen them used... if you're going inside 15", heavy missiles are probably a better bet.

 

[Rick]

I've never actually used them either - range 30 and they'd be a lot more use, lol! Don't forget that although you have to re-arm the entire weapon system with them, if you have more than one missile system on board, only 1 need be loaded with the special missiles, the others can have a different load. I see it's potential use purely as a diversion or an annoyance to the opposing commander, lol!

 

[Anbar]

I think we might may house rules the missiles so that you can swap at will between missle types within a single arc i.e. you chose what you fire, for that arc, each turn.

(Why would you cripple your operational flexibility/options by only taking one type of missile? or not be able to swap one type of missile from one arc to another? It defies common sense - it you were so tactically strangled to only be able to take one missile type for each mission then you would not use such a weapon and replace it with something that works in any encounter {like gun/beam etc})

The chance of taking just the right missile for the right opponents in the right engagements...nah seems without military sense.

Your ship can fire missiles every turn all day long, there are no ammunition restrictions (as there are on one-shots) so in theory your ammunition storage capacity is infinite - as such any claims that you cannot carry more than one type of missile due to storage issues is nonsensical. Even if you limited it to 12 missile salvos per arc (as many scenarios are 12 turns), then i'd be happy with 6 salvoes of one type and 6 of another (or any other mix) even with the book-keeping burden.

Weapons always need to "Make sense" for me, and must pass the "If its that good why doesnt everybody use it" which has the corollary of "If its that bad why does anybody use it!"

----------

And then up the range of the HARM missile to 30".

In theory, and at range, the missile has use, as it curently stands it is rather pointless, particularly when combined with the above issue.

 

[Da Boss]

If you wanted to do that - why not do a "reload Special Action that allows you to retask the missile systems or change magazine input etc. :idea:

 

[Burger]

It defies common sense

Welcome to ACTA

There are many things that defy common sense. Ships should not have a "maximum" speed since in space objects move according to inertia... there is no friction to slow them down.

Why does staying still, or going less than half speed, need a special action?

Why can't a Sag do a barrel roll to get its other broadside to bear on the next turn?

The answer to these questions and others, is simplicity and balance.

If you choose long range missiles, you can fire at longer range, but you do less damage, even if you shoot at a close target... benefit, and drawback. If you choose heavy missiles then you do a shed load of damage, but you can't fire them from a distance... benefit, and drawback. If you could chop and change missile types every turn then you can simply choose the benefit you want without suffering any of the drawback. It would be incredibly broken. You could fire long range missiles in turn 1, standard missiles as you approach, and heavy missiles when you're in their face. Not to mention a splattering of anti-fighter missiles if they scramble. That is a very powerful ability and substantial rebalancing of all missile-equipped ships would be needed.

 

[Anbar]

There are many things that defy common sense. Ships should not have a "maximum" speed since in space objects move according to inertia... there is no friction to slow them down.

Why does staying still, or going less than half speed, need a special action?

Why can't a Sag do a barrel roll to get its other broadside to bear on the next turn?

The answer to these questions and others, is simplicity and balance.

They are abstraction for the sake of gaming, they do not make sense but are accepatable for that reason.

If you choose long range missiles, you can fire at longer range, but you do less damage, even if you shoot at a close target... benefit, and drawback. If you choose heavy missiles then you do a shed load of damage, but you can't fire them from a distance... benefit, and drawback. If you could chop and change missile types every turn then you can simply choose the benefit you want without suffering any of the drawback. It would be incredibly broken. You could fire long range missiles in turn 1, standard missiles as you approach, and heavy missiles when you're in their face. Not to mention a splattering of anti-fighter missiles if they scramble. That is a very powerful ability and substantial rebalancing of all missile-equipped ships would be needed.

Indeed.

The substantial re-balancing of missile ships is badly needed.

We ran a number of simulations using the EA Crusade Era Apollo and found it massively under-powered, even with the ability to swap missiles at whim we regard it as barely scraping in as a Raid level ship, it is by no means at all, a battle level ship.

Against single oponents of lower levels the Apollo lost the vast majority of its engagements, even down to loosing to solo skirmish level ships and loosing so very regularly...its best performing missiles were "always" multi-warhead as they cannot be intercepted, but the following damage was always minimal. a 2-beam AD skirmish ships regularly blew the Apollo out of the skies.

Is that balanced? No.

This is down to the poor performance of missiles, compounded by the lack of tactical flexibility provided by single-choice missile types.

In direct answer to your question: it is an abstraction that we are not comfortable with and is spoiling the enjoyment of the game for us. If this stands at odds to being happy with "other abstractions" then the answer is: yes it may do, but so what? :wink:

From a gaming perspective we never (and i do mean NEVER!) chose an Apollo of any configuration as we regard them as a total waste of a ship for that level/cost. Missile bearing ships are avoided wherever possible solely due to their terrible performance. The ships, in effect, do not exist in the game for us.

Clearly, with EA Crusade Era being very heavily influenced by missiles, this has rendered an almost entire faction as extremly unpopular to play, due to their obvious (in our minds/opinions) under-powered nature. i.e. wherever their missile capability is clearly shown to influence their level we rgard those ships as being sub-standard.

Please bear in mind that we are happy and enjoying virtually all other aspects of the game, and accept the (obvious) abstractons for what they are, but cannot accept missiles as they are.

If you wanted to do that - why not do a "reload Special Action that allows you to retask the missile systems or change magazine input etc. :idea:

That is a truly excellent suggestion! :idea:

Requires a CQ of 8 i think would be good, possibly make it change only one arc also...hmmm

If you choose long range missiles, you can fire at longer range, but you do less damage, even if you shoot at a close target... benefit, and drawback. If you choose heavy missiles then you do a shed load of damage, but you can't fire them from a distance... benefit, and drawback. If you could chop and change missile types every turn then you can simply choose the benefit you want without suffering any of the drawback. It would be incredibly broken. You could fire long range missiles in turn 1, standard missiles as you approach, and heavy missiles when you're in their face. Not to mention a splattering of anti-fighter missiles if they scramble. That is a very powerful ability and substantial rebalancing of all missile-equipped ships would be needed.

That is precisely what a missile cruiser should do Burger, ab-so-lute-ly bang-on what it should be able to do. :wink:

It still doesnt make the Apollo bombardment cruiser a good choice for a battle level ship though...so go figure :lol:

BTW, why do your patrol level ships, including the fighters, carry troops on your website?

 

[AdrianH]

We ran a number of simulations using the EA Crusade Era Apollo and found it massively under-powered, even with the ability to swap missiles at whim we regard it as barely scraping in as a Raid level ship, it is by no means at all, a battle level ship.

Against single oponents of lower levels the Apollo lost the vast majority of its engagements, even down to loosing to solo skirmish level ships and loosing so very regularly...its best performing missiles were "always" multi-warhead as they cannot be intercepted, but the following damage was always minimal. a 2-beam AD skirmish ships regularly blew the Apollo out of the skies.

That does not prove anything. For one thing, ACTA does not handle one-on-one engagements very well. For another, the Apollo is a specialised ship and won't do well by itself anyway.

Now put that Apollo into a fleet, load it with standard or flash missiles, have something else wear down the enemy's interceptors with pulse cannons, then let the Apollo fire. Against an enemy with interceptors, I'd probably favour flash missiles for this reason. Against an enemy without interceptors, I'd take either standard or long range missiles, keep the Apollo well back, and use it as an init sink trying to score critical hits rather than basic damage. Something else, e.g a Marathon or a couple of Hyperions, can close in and do the dirty work while the Apollo provides long range support.

Basically, pick your missiles in advance depending on who you're fighting, then use the Apollo as part of a team. It is no more use by itself than other specialists such as the Delphi.

 

[Anbar]

That does not prove anything.

Lol, yeah "OK" Adrian, it proves nothing except that the ship is useless on its own and to be used effectively needs help from other ships and forces you into predictable tactical usage of it.

Other than that, and the fact that other ships at the same cost are more damaging, arent reliant on support ships and actually kill single-ships from two point levels lower I agree: it proves 'nothing at all.' :lol: :arrow:

Against an enemy with interceptors, I'd probably favour flash missiles for this reason.

I would take an Omega :roll: its got a BEAM. :lol:

Something else, e.g a Marathon or a couple of Hyperions, can close in and do the dirty work while the Apollo provides long range support.

So, in other words, you dont trust it to get close enough ot use heavy missiles and require other ships to both "cler the way" for its missiles too hit AND other ships to actually kill the enemy whilst it can only "support".

Hell, just take another Omega.... its got a BEAM! :lol: :lol: :lol:

BTW THe Delphi is a scout, it can scout without needing other ships to do its main job.

Matts suggestion is by far the best solution, along with a geneal re-classification of the levels of osme chips.

As far as we are concerned the Apollo will become a RAID level..and we'll probably still not see it used in many, if any, games...its that poorly rated by everyone.

 

[AdrianH]

That does not prove anything.

Lol, yeah "OK" Adrian, it proves nothing except that the ship is useless on its own and to be used effectively needs help from other ships and forces you into predictable tactical usage of it.

Alright, then put a Vorlon Transport against an Omega one-on-one and see what happens. Unless it gets lucky on either initiative or a "Track That Target" roll, the Omega won't be able to use its beam. Once it gets close the Transport can use its superior manoeuvrability to stay out of range of pulse cannons and out of arc of the big lasers. Since it can be beaten by a Skirmish level ship, clearly the Omega is useless. :lol:

Or maybe, as I said, it's because ACTA does not handle one-on-one duels very well.

Something else, e.g a Marathon or a couple of Hyperions, can close in and do the dirty work while the Apollo provides long range support.

So, in other words, you dont trust it to get close enough ot use heavy missiles and require other ships to both "cler the way" for its missiles too hit AND other ships to actually kill the enemy whilst it can only "support".

Use the right missile for the right job. Against some enemies, the Apollo can sit back, act as an init sink, and use standard or flash missiles to score critical hits. Against enemies which can close quickly, it may be worth using the heavy missiles, especially in the aft battery.

And remember that not all enemies have interceptors...

BTW THe Delphi is a scout, it can scout without needing other ships to do its main job.

But without those other ships, the scouting is useless.

As far as we are concerned the Apollo will become a RAID level..and we'll probably still not see it used in many, if any, games...its that poorly rated by everyone.

I would be interested to try two Chronoses and two Apollos against your choice of 3 Raid points' worth of ships. Once you've seen an Apollo used properly, you may want to put it back up to Battle level.

 

[tneva82]

As far as we are concerned the Apollo will become a RAID level..and we'll probably still not see it used in many, if any, games...its that poorly rated by everyone.

I would be interested to try two Chronoses and two Apollos against your choice of 3 Raid points' worth of ships. Once you've seen an Apollo used properly, you may want to put it back up to Battle level.

Time for Vassal duel mayhap?-)

Just have it on time when I can spectate it please

 

[Burger]

The substantial re-balancing of missile ships is badly needed.

Umm, well since B5 ACTA is long out of print... good luck with that

You could house rule it if you wanted but I think the vast majority of remaining players will disagree with you, so getting your house rule to be widely played will be an uphill struggle. But if your group are happy to do that then by all means, go ahead.

As Adrian said it's a FLEET game, you can't compare ships 1 vs 1. If you want that, play B5 Wars! Just try playing a Shadow Scout (yes just 1) against a Warlock, a Bin'Tak or even a Vorlon Light Cruiser. and watch what happens. Are all of those War level ships wayyyy underpowered because they get totally beasted by a raid level ship every time? No...

That is precisely what a missile cruiser should do Burger, ab-so-lute-ly bang-on what it should be able to do. :wink:

Well, that's not how it works. So you have 3 choices: (1) like it or (2) lump it or (3) house rule it

BTW, why do your patrol level ships, including the fighters, carry troops on your website?

Which ship(s) specifically are you seeing an error on? And which type of sheet are you looking at?

 

[Zarash]

I would be up for a vassel game at some time that would be great. I did not think anyone played on it.

 

[Anbar]

Once you've seen an Apollo used properly, you may want to put it back up to Battle level.

Yeah, been there, done that: somebody who said the same thingas you, played 3 games and he got wiped out in all of them having not damaged much beyond he paintwork on the opposition. :roll:

oh, and his ego. :lol:

You could house rule it if you wanted but I think the vast majority of remaining players will disagree with you, so getting your house rule to be widely played will be an uphill struggle. But if your group are happy to do that then by all means, go ahead.

woo there Tiger... Why on earth would we want anybody else to use these rules?

We just wanted to know if we were missing anything substantially obvious to account for the imbalance and the answer is clearly "no we're not".

Beyond that couldnt give a monkies: we have, literally, zero interest, or intention, of playing anybody outside of our own group. Which is why things are called "house rules".

Really happy for folks who disagree with our conclusions and game results, but we have seen all we need to, including the above mentioned "expert" being repeatedly thrashed into abject embarassment...so, "end-of-story" for us.

Thanks for the feeback though..the "I can prove it" "You dont know how to play" bits are a bit "internet-weird" and passive-agressive though.

Which ship(s) specifically are you seeing an error on? And which type of sheet are you looking at?

in your "Other" category you ahve Narm and Brakiri with troops on them in Patrol level

 

[Anbar]

Gamed Response:

2 players took up the "challenge" of playing Apollo's as raid ships:

1) 2 x Apollo, 2 x Chronos (3 'raid' under house pointing)
2) 1 x Dagkar, 1 x Varnik, 2 x Katan (3 raid)

Use the right missile for the right job. Against some enemies, the Apollo can sit back, act as an init sink, and use standard or flash missiles to score critical hits. Against enemies which can close quickly, it may be worth using the heavy missiles, especially in the aft battery.

And remember that not all enemies have interceptors...

Turn 6 result = 2 dead apollos, 1 dead Chronos v 1 x katan, 1 x Varnik

Comfortable win for the Narn tbh, Apollos using "advised" standard missiles and flash, fired 2 arcs every turn bar 1st turn (flanks out of range). Chronos tried to keep the enemy busy whilst Apollo's "sat back". Narns pretty much danced around the Apollo's at will, with ehavy missiles on the flanks they could have gotten in heavier single attacks but would have missed firing those until round 4 due to range...which saw only 1 Apollo left anyway :roll:

Obviously Narn are pretty low on the "Interceptors" ratings. They chose to use their fighters as interceptors, all of which were lost by turn 3 though (rolled 1s).


Apollo 1 caused 4 points of damage total.
Apollo 2 caused 29 points of damage total.

The Narn Dag'kar caused 31 points of damage with its SL energy mines
Dag'kar failed to score any damage at all with its missiles.
Varnik caused 47 damage via beam and 1 point via its missiles (only had 1 "big" roll though which caused 24 damage to kill the second Apollo on turn 6).
KaTans filled the rest.

1 Chronos did its job well, the other was unlucky with damage/too-hit rolls.

Players used no criticals to 'normalise results'...which was a good job as the Narn player might have won in turn 3 otherwise, he kept rolling 6s for damage!

There was no overall obvious discrepency in rolls other than the above, EA player had pretty average dice, Narn had a mix of good and bad with the exception of the turn 6 beam strike which was icing on the cake.

------------

Watching the game it was hard to see how EA could have done anything else than they did, they had to close to >=20 to use the flash missiles. aft heavies fired once (missed). forward batteries fired every turn, 2 arcs firing every turn bar the 1st.

First Apollo was dead on Turn 3 and it went downhill rapidly from there.

With 2 Hyperions it would have been a decent fight.
With 2 Omegas or 2 Marathons the outcome would never have been in doubt.

The outcome was so definitive they didnt feel the need to run the scenario again "as-is". :|

After much discussion it was concluded that the Apollo's would be 'OK' at Raid level IF they had free choice of missiles during missions (probably using Matts suggestion of special order). With the fixed missiles they were deemed inflexible that, even at Raid, they would be secondary choices.

With the ability to swap missiles they would have made the above game difficult for the Narn and they will try that.

I wont submit the exact comments regarding the Apollo's performance in this game though, but it involved donkeys... :lol: :shock:

 

[AdrianH]

Returning to the original topic, it's occurred to me that not only is the HARM warhead next to useless for reasons already mentioned, it can actually be worse than useless. The rule is that if a ship is hit with a HARM and fails its CQ 10 check, it treats all targets as having stealth 3+. Then it takes aim at your Delphi which, until then, had stealth 5+.

But if you want to have some fun with rules definitions, there may yet be a use for HARM. The ship treats all targets - not ships - as having stealth 3+. The rule for energy mines says "You don't need to target an enemy ship, a piece of empty space will do". That piece of empty space is therefore a target, which means the ship which was hit by HARM now needs to roll against stealth 3+ to use an energy mine, and the best target for a HARM is a Dag'Kar. :lol:

Here is a video of HARM in action.

 

[Anbar]

I missed something very obvious about this missile, that being the "Until the end of the NEXT turn".

With regards to the rules being a bit daft though:

We would like to add house rules for HARM to sort out the inconsistencies with things like targets for e-mines and ships that have stealth higher than 3+ innately.... silly missile that improves the enemy's chances of detecting you.

So something like:

all targets are 3+ stealth, other than those already with higher stealth already which get +1 stealth (for that affected ship only)

reduced/added too as normal by range

reduced by hits as per normal.