House Rules compilation

[Burger]

Ignoring the fluff... why should a Sharlin get less of a boost than a Juyaca or a Corumai or a Mankhat? All are excellent ships, and pretty well balanced. If Sharlin is given less of a boost, it falls behind.

IMHO because it has an active defence (Stealth) that stops it being hit. To score a crit you have to first score a hit, and a Sharlin will normally suffer less hits due to Stealth so it already has some kind of in-built crit protection. The same is true of Dodge and Shields, and to a lesser extent Interceptors.

So it should be based on the number of active defenses, irrelevant to the starting damage?
Maybe numbers as Da Boss has posted, subtracting 1 for each Stealth, Shields, Dodge trait? Subtract half for interceptors...??

Getting too complicated for my liking. I like simple. Numbers as DB posted works for me. :lol:

 

[Da Boss]

I am usually putting in a short Just Why! each suggestion is / has been made as well, so I may put in a note to say that this is a basic fix that can be enhanced with either Foxmeisters formula or something similar...............

for instance I have given several options on the White Star - the 2AD DD Beam and a "knifefight" version.......

I have got to tidy it up and put some nice pics in as well..................

 

[H]

but surely the starting damage is set in relation to the active defence systems, so they are already considered, hence why a sharlin has less dmg than an octurion

 

[Da Boss]

yes probably - each ship should have a individual value I guess but I think Fox said in caculating most came out similar to the values above?

the numbers are not that different - a Octurion is 10pts more damage than a Sharlin and almost same thresholds...........the Dilgar Mankhat is very low damage wise compared to both...........

 

[mollari_uk]

I agree with Burger's crowd*

The effect of Damage, Stealth, Dodge, AA etc have already been worked into the "balance" of the ships. Hence any addition should be equal to all ships of a PL so that they all remain equal within their PL.


*Apologies to members of said group for making Burger the leader :lol:

 

[Da Boss]

Presently I am officially part of "Gregs Crew"

 

[H]

and I'm a lone voice in the North West

 

[Foxmeister]

The effect of Damage, Stealth, Dodge, AA etc have already been worked into the "balance" of the ships. Hence any addition should be equal to all ships of a PL so that they all remain equal within their PL.

If you believe that you'll believe anything )), however introducing any new factors will ultimately change balance. It is ships with no active defences thats suffer disproportionately more than those with them.

Giving a WS Gunship the same redundancy as a G'Quan is just plain wrong IMHO.

Regards,

Dave

 

[Foxmeister]

yes probably - each ship should have a individual value I guess but I think Fox said in caculating most came out similar to the values above?

Yes, the vast majority did, and of those that didn't they're probably the ones you'd want to have more/less.

Regards,

Dave

 

[katadder]

The effect of Damage, Stealth, Dodge, AA etc have already been worked into the "balance" of the ships. Hence any addition should be equal to all ships of a PL so that they all remain equal within their PL.

If you believe that you'll believe anything )), however introducing any new factors will ultimately change balance. It is ships with no active defences thats suffer disproportionately more than those with them.

Giving a WS Gunship the same redundancy as a G'Quan is just plain wrong IMHO.

Regards,

Dave

why?
a WS gunship has 20 damage compared to a g'quans 60. I see no problem with them both having the same redundancy as they are both battle level.
I'm with burger and his crew on this that active defences are already in the balance - thats why a WS gunship has 20 damage not 60, its why a sharlin has a 33% threshold and damage equal to a battle ship.

 

[Da Boss]

its why a sharlin has a 33% threshold and damage equal to a battle ship.

hmm, not sure a Sharlin is that weak - it has average- low damage points with several ships lower or about equal to it in Damage points

Mankhat 54 (but much lower threshold, no defences)
Mishakur 64 (as above)
the Octurion has a bit more damage - nearly the same crippled threshold and higher skeleton crewed threshold (with no lfight computer or defences)

lets no mention the pitifulness that is the Fireraptor....... :roll:

I'll put in the thresholds as above and give the option of a more detailed method for the reasons above - as I said I am putting explanations in as well

 

[Foxmeister]

I'm with burger and his crew on this that active defences are already in the balance - thats why a WS gunship has 20 damage not 60, its why a sharlin has a 33% threshold and damage equal to a battle ship.

A WS Gunship will suffer less hits than a G'Quan whilst it can use Dodge and therefore suffer will suffer less crits in the first place. In this particular comparison, a WS Gunship will also repair crit effects far more easily than a G'Quan, but that's a different argument anyway.

By the time you factor Dodge and AA into the Gunship by any half reasonable measure, it is already "bigger" than a G'Quan, and this just makes the disparity worse.

Essentially, being a large ship with loads of HPs as your "defence" is an *absolute* waste of time in this game.

Regards,

Dave

 

[Foxmeister]

thats why a WS gunship has 20 damage not 60, its why a sharlin has a 33% threshold and damage equal to a battle ship.

And the Veshatan? Please explain that one, as it has more HPs than a rule book G'Quan, similar threshold, and Stealth.

How was that particular ship balanced with the others?

Regards,

Dave

 

[katadder]

I'm with burger and his crew on this that active defences are already in the balance - thats why a WS gunship has 20 damage not 60, its why a sharlin has a 33% threshold and damage equal to a battle ship.

A WS Gunship will suffer less hits than a G'Quan whilst it can use Dodge and therefore suffer will suffer less crits in the first place. In this particular comparison, a WS Gunship will also repair crit effects far more easily than a G'Quan, but that's a different argument anyway.

By the time you factor Dodge and AA into the Gunship by any half reasonable measure, it is already "bigger" than a G'Quan, and this just makes the disparity worse.

Essentially, being a large ship with loads of HPs as your "defence" is an *absolute* waste of time in this game.

Regards,

Dave

i wouldnt say even factoring in AA and Dodge that the WS gunship is bigger, probably about equivalent damage (about 60) and thats assuming you dont have weapons that just plain ignore the dodge (e-mines). its also hull 5 compared to the g'quans hull 6. has only foreward guns compared to the g'quans 5 arcs and therefore can lose all weapons to a single crit.

veshetan is an oddity but again is only hull 5 and has no fighters plus stealth 4 is a bit of a waste of time mainly -scout, someone else attacked including with e-mine and suddenly its 2+ to see or auto if get within 8".

 

[AdrianH]

thats why a WS gunship has 20 damage not 60, its why a sharlin has a 33% threshold and damage equal to a battle ship.

And the Veshatan? Please explain that one, as it has more HPs than a rule book G'Quan, similar threshold, and Stealth.

Only Stealth 4+, while most of the rest of the Minbari fleet has Stealth 5+. Hull 5, same as most of the rest of the Minbari fleet. Not many weapons on sides and rear, and only one 45 degree turn to try to stop enemies getting there. Compare it to the Tinashi, which only has 38 damage but does have Stealth 5+, so it can't survive as many hits but won't take as many hits. The Tinashi has two 45 degree turns, and any enemy which does get into its side or rear arcs will face more mini-beams than from a Veshatan, all twin-linked. So the only thing about the Veshatan which needs to be explained is why anyone would want one.

 

[Foxmeister]

thats assuming you dont have weapons that just plain ignore the dodge (e-mines).

Erhh, come on, that's weak! Yes, e-mines ignore Dodge - so does accurate, but the *vast* majority of weapon systems are neither.

its also hull 5 compared to the g'quans hull 6.

Beams, mini-beams, and the abundance of AP/SAP and TL weapons render this difference largely immaterial.

has only foreward guns compared to the g'quans 5 arcs and therefore can lose all weapons to a single crit.

G'Quan, 5 arcs? Technically yes, but we all know that once you've fired your e-mine you're down to one *usable* arc since you are never going to get those 8" guns in range - they just might as well not be there except to serve as "redundancy" for random arc crits.

In fact, Boresight is only half an arc really, because if it is *far* more reliant on order of movement that F-arc. And to top it all, even if the WS Gunship gets hit with a weapons crit (which it is less likely to suffer in the first place due to Dodge!), it has a far easier time repairing it.

veshetan is an oddity but again is only hull 5 and has no fighters plus stealth 4 is a bit of a waste of time mainly

At range Stealth 4 becomes Stealth 5 so it's not a bad defence at all IMHO (far, far less a waste of time than a G'Quans secondaries! ) Yes, again, there are counters for stealth but none of them a full proof - I've taken Minbari ships down to 2+ Stealth and then failed to get a lock on more occasions than I care to remember.

Regards,

Dave

 

[katadder]

And to top it all, even if the WS Gunship gets hit with a weapons crit (which it is less likely to suffer in the first place due to Dodge!), it has a far easier time repairing it.

unless its the vital one, then as you say the g'quan has 4 soaks for this and you hope it would be one of those.

I do find it amusing the amount of people who say the g'quans secondaries are worthless though, I get to use them a fair amount. but then perhaps thats because I am used to playing abbai too whose furthest range is 15" and mostly have to rely on 8" guns.

At range Stealth 4 becomes Stealth 5 so it's not a bad defence at all IMHO (far, far less a waste of time than a G'Quans secondaries! ) Yes, again, there are counters for stealth but none of them a full proof - I've taken Minbari ships down to 2+ Stealth and then failed to get a lock on more occasions than I care to remember.

so for one turn maybe you get stealth 5, down to 4+ for scout, 3+ for being hit. a veshetan certainly cannot stay at range enough to keep that stealth.

 

[Foxmeister]

down to 4+ for scout

*IF* you have a scout
and
*IF* is within 36"
and
*IF* you've successfully made your Scout roll to spot it

3+ for being hit.

*IF* you've already successfully broken stealth (or used a weapon that ignores stealth)
and
*IF* you've scored a hit

That's a fair few *ifs* for you to be presenting it as a foregone conclusion! It could equally well still be a 5+ Stealth and that's a more likely conclusion than getting it down to 3+.

Even if you do get it down to 3+, it still stands a 1 in 3 chance of being missed completely.

So, IMHO, Stealth 4+ is far from worthless.

Regards,

Dave

 

[Triggy]

Stealth is still useful because an average fleet only takes one (or sometimes two scouts) and even then the Veshatan may not be the priority target if it stays at range and of course, before you get another ship hitting, you have to hit it in the first place...

I'm not really saying stealth is brilliant either, it effectively works at about -1 or -2 what it starts at (about -1.4/-1.5 on average) overall in a 5 FAP game on a "normal" Minbari ship trying to stay at moderate range.

 

[Foxmeister]

unless its the vital one, then as you say the g'quan has 4 soaks for this and you hope it would be one of those.

Which reminds me of something I wanted to add to this thread!

Back to proposed house rules!

1. Vital crits should be repairable, though perhaps at CQ10
2. "No SA" crit effect should not apply to "All hands on deck"
3. Permanent "No DC" should be dropped entirely, or reduced to a DC -ve modifier.

Regards,

Dave