Idear for swarm fleet "problem"
- Thread starter Grimbart_Kriegsaxt
- Start date
Responding back a page plus now... busy night on this thread...
My point was that you were doing something similar to shield but shield had already thought out all of what we're discussing. That was all...
different dice, interaction with SA's, interaction with other traits, racial rules... We were discussing re-inventing the wheel.
Basic idea is nice, just need to keep the game going smoothly somehow as well. It seems very easy until you start dealing with exactly what Greg talked about. Some one else above said all the specifics can be worked out in play testing... they already have been... hence why shields work the way they do.
You wouldn't want to be dealing with situation like burger was dealing with, roll the number of dice dice you think the armor can absorb, then one die at a time from then on to make sure 'glancing hits' or bulkheads or whatever don't happen.
Redundancy is smoother, as are shields (and I don't like shields).
Ripple
My point was that you were doing something similar to shield but shield had already thought out all of what we're discussing. That was all...
different dice, interaction with SA's, interaction with other traits, racial rules... We were discussing re-inventing the wheel.
Basic idea is nice, just need to keep the game going smoothly somehow as well. It seems very easy until you start dealing with exactly what Greg talked about. Some one else above said all the specifics can be worked out in play testing... they already have been... hence why shields work the way they do.
You wouldn't want to be dealing with situation like burger was dealing with, roll the number of dice dice you think the armor can absorb, then one die at a time from then on to make sure 'glancing hits' or bulkheads or whatever don't happen.
Redundancy is smoother, as are shields (and I don't like shields).
Ripple
Grimbart_Kriegsaxt
Mongoose
@Ripple
I didnt read back alot just your last post ^^
Everyone to theyr own i guess ^^ but i will try out my idea anyway and post my conclusions here. If it is really not working or to complicated i will let you know.. but it is possible that we have a different view at the whole "complicated" stuff, since i think its totally easy and ok for a game to make a small calculation that everyone can do without calculator.
So i think i will now stop defending my idea and start testing and post the results of each test here.
First test is going to be a single Victory with and without armour against various swarm fleets.
I think we will be starting the armour value at about 35%. But i will say more once this first test is done.
I didnt read back alot just your last post ^^
Everyone to theyr own i guess ^^ but i will try out my idea anyway and post my conclusions here. If it is really not working or to complicated i will let you know.. but it is possible that we have a different view at the whole "complicated" stuff, since i think its totally easy and ok for a game to make a small calculation that everyone can do without calculator.
So i think i will now stop defending my idea and start testing and post the results of each test here.
First test is going to be a single Victory with and without armour against various swarm fleets.
I think we will be starting the armour value at about 35%. But i will say more once this first test is done.
Good luck with the test, like I said above, not against the idea, just think you'll end up looking like shields if you don't want to do lots of single die rolls.
At least as far as interactions with various systems go, similar to the a lot of folks just rolled all fighters as a big hand full of dice before, until we started pointing out how that didn't work with criticals (after each fighter was a chance of losing intercepetors due to crippling, SAs, damage table rolls under one ruling, now trait loss.) Lots of wheels spinning...
Do record how each interaction comes up and how you address it. We might be able to give some feedback on things for you.
Ripple
At least as far as interactions with various systems go, similar to the a lot of folks just rolled all fighters as a big hand full of dice before, until we started pointing out how that didn't work with criticals (after each fighter was a chance of losing intercepetors due to crippling, SAs, damage table rolls under one ruling, now trait loss.) Lots of wheels spinning...
Do record how each interaction comes up and how you address it. We might be able to give some feedback on things for you.
Ripple
Burger
Our group is playing a round table style of mini campaign. I have purposed that we try the 0/0/1/2/4/6 version for the last 6 sets of games. With 9 different races, this should give us some good results and maybe we could get Mongoose to address the concern over Critical Hits. We should be done in the next 5-6 week, 1 game a week a this time, and 1 guy in Africa for woork will slow us down a little!
Thanks
Our group is playing a round table style of mini campaign. I have purposed that we try the 0/0/1/2/4/6 version for the last 6 sets of games. With 9 different races, this should give us some good results and maybe we could get Mongoose to address the concern over Critical Hits. We should be done in the next 5-6 week, 1 game a week a this time, and 1 guy in Africa for woork will slow us down a little!
Thanks
Both "redundancy and armor' do the same thing! Give bigger ships
more survivability. The end result is the same; there will be NO
point in taking a smaller ship. The bigger the ship, the more it will
dominate the game.
Soon the complaint will be 'big ships rule', and rules will be created
to mandate the player to take small ships.
Why bother, if you want armor, play FT.
Why try to solve this problem by creating a larger problem?
more survivability. The end result is the same; there will be NO
point in taking a smaller ship. The bigger the ship, the more it will
dominate the game.
Soon the complaint will be 'big ships rule', and rules will be created
to mandate the player to take small ships.
Why bother, if you want armor, play FT.
Why try to solve this problem by creating a larger problem?
Balance is a very delicate thing. At the moment, swarms of small ships will rule over a big ship any day. That is unbalanced. It should be corrected. It is not a case of "if it ain't broken don't fix it" - because it is broken. It needs to be fixed.JTL109 said:
These fixes need playtesting - that is what people do to create balance, and make sure the changes do not overpower the big ships. The redundancy is not a massive advantage to big ships as you make out. It just ignores the first crit on a Raid ship, the first 2 on a Battle ship, etc. That is per game, not per turn or per attack. Have you seen how many crits a fleet of 10 Ka'Tocs will score against a War level ship such as an Octurion, in one turn? 3 ADs of beam each, thats 30 in total. Average of 30 hits, thats 5 crits. So the Octurion would lose all of its Redundancy in one turn, and take one crit. Next turn, it would take the full amount of damage and crits. Turn 3 it would probably blow up...
It doesn't offer a massive advantage, just goes a little way to restoring balance and making big ships a bit more feasible.
Im presuming this armour thing is going to be like this.
Haven't read this subject for a while so don't bite my head off if i've got the wrong end of the handle..
G'Quan
Hits 55/40/13 Crew 70/19
The 40 is the time when crits can dealt.
It doesn't seem too complicated to keep track of, It's just another threshhold.
Haven't read this subject for a while so don't bite my head off if i've got the wrong end of the handle..
G'Quan
Hits 55/40/13 Crew 70/19
The 40 is the time when crits can dealt.
It doesn't seem too complicated to keep track of, It's just another threshhold.
Prophaniti
Mongoose
My thought on the swarm problem was to reduce the number of smaller ships. I'm just throwing it out there as an idea. Something along the lines of one level below priority 2 ships, 2 levels down 3 ships, 3->4 ships etc. Have buying up ratios the same. Might need some work on exact numbers.
This encourages you to take ships close to the priority level, while still allowing some flexibility in fleet selections.
I am new to this game, so it's the concept rather than the details I'm putting forward.
This encourages you to take ships close to the priority level, while still allowing some flexibility in fleet selections.
I am new to this game, so it's the concept rather than the details I'm putting forward.
See my post near the bottom of the previous page. It doesn't seem too complicated and isn't hard to keep track of. But in practice it is an absolute nightmare of dice rolling and keeping track of hits, how many were done initially, how many have been rolled, how many left... slows the game down considerably.Target said:
Yup, it seems clear but the details are difficult to pin down. Same way I expect shields started out.
Prophaniti - its been suggested a number of times, and really almost has to be part of the answer down the line. It's very unlikely to happen as Mongoose already dropped the ball twice on getting a FAP system out this edition, and they think just slapping a limit on the number of ships per fleet is the solution. If it wasn't for bore sight and the fact that some fleets suffer a lot at higher levels with frankly crap ships for fluff reasons, it might actually work the way they think.
Ripple
Prophaniti - its been suggested a number of times, and really almost has to be part of the answer down the line. It's very unlikely to happen as Mongoose already dropped the ball twice on getting a FAP system out this edition, and they think just slapping a limit on the number of ships per fleet is the solution. If it wasn't for bore sight and the fact that some fleets suffer a lot at higher levels with frankly crap ships for fluff reasons, it might actually work the way they think.
Ripple
Yeah, its immesurably more complicated though because shields block hits. There are no bulkheads, close blast doors, Pak bonuses, etc, to worry about.Ripple said:
Prophaniti - yes, the Armageddon splits were much better than 2e. One of the specific aims of 2e was to reduce the effectiveness of swarms, but in fact the opposite was true. Swarms are more effective in 2e than they ever were in 1e, one of the main reasons being the FAP splitting which seemed to be made up after the books were released. Even the playtesters didn't know how FAPs were going to be split in 2e until after release of the FAP splitting PDF file.
I know, it's what I've been saying too... I just didn't do a nice example. I kept pointing at shields and saying 'there is a reason this idea ends up looking like this' as the idea is the same. Damage points that are still taken but can't cause crits.... then you have to deal with partial hits that exceed that, bulkheads, etc. Shields already did all that work, just drop the regen and your ready to go.
The only difference between changing a few damage/crew boxes to that style of shield and armor is fewer unanswered questions and you'd be adding a trait that could be lost after its already been burned out.
Ripple
The only difference between changing a few damage/crew boxes to that style of shield and armor is fewer unanswered questions and you'd be adding a trait that could be lost after its already been burned out.
Ripple
what you could do is if a single weapon causes enough damage to get through the armour then any crits within that hit count as crits. takes away the having to keep track of dice etc. simplifies it and basically means you have cracked the armour with tht hit so can cause the crits.
would mean armour isnt as good as shields but then when is it ever - shields stop the hits getting to a ship, armour is part of it so the impacts can transfer when its nearly out.
would mean armour isnt as good as shields but then when is it ever - shields stop the hits getting to a ship, armour is part of it so the impacts can transfer when its nearly out.
Prophaniti
Mongoose
If the Armageddon splits were better, could someone please post them? I've only got 2e, so am entirely lacking this list.
Certainly worth having around for reference.
Certainly worth having around for reference.
