ISA, Vorlon, Shadows overpowered?

[Marco Raimeous]

No patrol ship has 4AD of beam. 2AD would be much more balanced.

This is true, what about making it mini-beam to they can't get a runaway beam?

I suggest you use the stem contact rules from the current S&P. Also, rather than have them doing automatic damage - have them doing 1AD, Double Damage, Precise. Make this uninterceptable. This means that it will be harder to consume ships with higher hulls, and it will take a while for the swarm to get through shields.

allowing only very few to be in base contact is somewhat the counter to the automatic damage. I like the idea, but on hull 6 ships these would be useless, other option - mini-beam as well to give it a 50/50 chance of hitting?

You've dropped the damage on your destroyer. But two of these are currently better than a Destroyer. If you were using the official Destroyer, this would be about right. I suggest you drop the damage to 15, or the beam AD to 3.

What do you think about dropping the damage on the destroyer?, and the turns down to 2/45 rather than 1/90. Also the light cruiser from 2/45 to 1/45, less damage and triple damage beam?

You toned down the oher Vorlon ships, but felt the need to increase the weapons on the biggest, baddest ship-killer in the game?

this was in responce to the light cruiser having 2x 6AD,QD,B,P and the heavy having 6AD,QD,B,P and 10AD DD,B,P I thought there is no reason to take the heavy then you have the option of two lights. However it should probably stay at the normal stats.

There is no way I would take one of these instead of two heavy cruisers.

What would you change?

Thanks for the opinion, the more the better

 

[Greg Smith]

No patrol ship has 4AD of beam. 2AD would be much more balanced.

This is true, what about making it mini-beam to they can't get a runaway beam?

That would work. It'd probably need a new name though.

allowing only very few to be in base contact is somewhat the counter to the automatic damage. I like the idea, but on hull 6 ships these would be useless, other option - mini-beam as well to give it a 50/50 chance of hitting?

Add AP or Super AP. I like the idea that it would take them longer to eat away at tougher ships.

What do you think about dropping the damage on the destroyer?, and the turns down to 2/45 rather than 1/90. Also the light cruiser from 2/45 to 1/45, less damage and triple damage beam?

I do find the Vorlons very difficult to kill. That said, I think their lack of all round weaponry is a balancing factor. Reducing their damage a little bit, isn't a bad thing. Reducing their turns may render them impotent. Reducing it to a triple damage beam suddenly makes two destroyers more attractive.

With all changes, a couple of carefully designed playtest games can be essential to see how they work out.

You toned down the oher Vorlon ships, but felt the need to increase the weapons on the biggest, baddest ship-killer in the game?

this was in responce to the light cruiser having 2x 6AD,QD,B,P and the heavy having 6AD,QD,B,P and 10AD DD,B,P I thought there is no reason to take the heavy then you have the option of two lights. However it should probably stay at the normal stats.

10AD can be a lot more potent than 6AD, because you are likely to get more hits and so more crits.

What would you change?

I just noticed that you put it at Hull 6.

I'd probably keep it Hull 5 and 175 Damage. Self repair 5d6, AAF 6.
The weaponry is good compared to the existing Heavy Cruiser. Compared to yours it is a little low.

Thanks for the opinion, the more the better

No problem.

 

[Da Boss]

Some nice ideas there

Katadder had a double damage Minibeam in his EC war book can't recal what it was called.

Also in a shameless plug I expanded the Vorlon list a bit in my supplement - to add Striker (Raid), Seeker Scout (Battle) and Carrier (War) which may (or may not ) be of use / interest............

re the Swarm (reminded me of Lexx and flyng arms) - interesting idea - can the auto attack be dodged and do GEG/ Shields work? I would probably allow Precise and accurate guns to work on the swarm when attacking ?

 

[katadder]

they were light discharge guns on the EAS Titans, DD mini beams.

 

[skavendan]

LOL! That last reply is like, "LALALALA I can't hear you"....
Complaining about a fleet when you have a 50/50 win/lose ratio is just laughable.

I was out linning the reasons why people complain about ISA the stacked defenses are my only gripe with them.

Hardly complainning when the topic is are they overpowering!

and the failed attempts to suggest dodge is on a par with shields or interceptors

 

[katadder]

not saying its on par with it, thats why WSs only have 10 damage.

and saying they are overpowering with a 50/50 win ratio is kind of silly, sounds very balanced to me.

 

[H]

I've also told him if we did this I would just fly upto him and skin dance him as I have no intentions of playing the whiter than white empire! my win lose is around the 50/50 mark I think

Wait...
You're at a 50/50 win/Loss against the ISA and you're complaining about how Uber-Powerful they are? Suggests to me that your ISA opponent(s) should be complaining about how uber-powerful your Psi-Corps are then.

Seriously, I may really disagree with hiff about the ISA, but at least when I read his posts I don't come away with the impression of "WAAAH! WAAAH He wins sometimes! Waaah!"

I was purposely avoiding this thread, why, why did you bring me into it.

ISA. - I believe the Whitestar is too powerful, I have given my reasons time and again. the bluestar is a pain, but killeable. The WS Gunship I don't really have an issue with, some would argue it is inderpowered. the Carrier, I love it, think it is a superb ship. Pain in the ass but ok, and WS Fighters, actually not to concerned by them, apart from the regularly great recovery rolls from the carrier. Am i going to comment on the other ISA ships, the nolo tar? why? never see anyone bother with them, is it because it is too poor, or the WS/BS combo too good. the Victory, tough, but killeable, as with most Armageddon ships, of course like all ISA it repairs it's crits better than other arm ships due to the silly +1 CQ

I think.
1) WS. make it boresight - it is in the show, and it's a very maneuvreable ship, and mitigates it's often gross beam. Also means you have to target a ship instead of just sitting it somewhere and see what you can hit.
2) ISA in general, why the +1 CQ? seriously. there are not that many rangers, a lot of the crew on the ISA ships are religious cast. SO, an isa fleet may have up to say 2FAP with +1 CQ. the rest are standard?

as much as I hate ISA, they should be a very rewarding fleet to their user, and a bloody tough challenge to their opponent. I think they are a little too good as it stands, but that could be the problem with the use of CBD on whitestars more than the stats. There are ships that can't ever matchup against a whitestar fleet, there are ships that should swat them out of the sky, unfortunately I seem to have fleets that fall into catagory 1.

as for Shadows and Vorlons. I actually pity the shadows. They are ace in the show, and I think they are a tad underpowered, mostly due to the pinning rule and there godaweful figters, BUT that said, the Shadow scout is one of the ships that can blat WS out of the sky for fun.
Volrons I think are spot on. I have a 50-50 against them playing as Narn mostly, and minbari once. and as the minbari i was playing an excelent acta player and came within one dice of a solid draw!!

 

[eldiablito]

I still see all 3 fleets as fine; with some caveats.

ISA: I've seen them in the 1st ed and now in the 2nd and I don't know what all the complaints are about. I believe that the Centauri Demos is a far more brutal ship and it is a Skirmish. Although it is true that the White Star appears to be a boresight like the Drazi ships, I personally believe that this would unfairly hamper this fragile fleet (well, at least against E-mines and accurate weapons). Honestly, I WANT to leave this fleet as it is. As the major protagonist of the show, the Whitestars need to be respected; something that moving to boresights would hamper them severely.

Vorlons: This fleet can hang back and just trash enemy fleets if they cannot close fast enough. Their fighters are just amazing and the War level cruiser can toast a ship a turn (Fairly easily). What holds this fleet back is the lack of a raid choice, a slightly underpowered battle (well, compared to the skirmish and war level choices) and frighteningly good higher level ships. This says that the fleet is primarily designed for Battle and higher games. This, IMO, is not a good thing; a raid level choice and this fleet is probably good to go.

Shadows: Well, I too agree, the fighters are junk, the scout has too short of range, no skirmish choice, a strong vulnerability to fighters and bombers and although the higher level ships are good, their range/power on the weapons seems a tad weak. So, my real suggestion would be to improve the fighters by making the shields useful against AF and dogfights; this would make them almost unstoppable unless they loose 2 dogfights in a single turn! Also, I would think that there should be a skirmish ship that has the same weapon as the existing scout (only as a Turret). Additionally, the scout should have a better weapon that has an increased range. Finally, the Shadow Ships (both Ancient and Young) should have another 6 inches of range. Also, to simulate the shadow scream from the show, make all fighters that come within 2 inches make a crew quality check of 8 or else find themselves unable to fire, to represent that scream we see in the shows. These Shadow Ships should be SCARY!

Then again, this is just my opinion...

 

[Burger]

I think.
1) WS. make it boresight - it is in the show, and it's a very maneuvreable ship, and mitigates it's often gross beam. Also means you have to target a ship instead of just sitting it somewhere and see what you can hit.

If there can be one of the proposed boresight fixes such as "follow that target" or whatever the latest trendy option is, then I agree. 1AD is too weak, 2AD is too good. 2AD Boresight is about right. But forcing ISA to take Blue Stars to get init sinks, is just getting cheesy. If WS changes to B then we need a follow that target SA.

2) ISA in general, why the +1 CQ? seriously. there are not that many rangers, a lot of the crew on the ISA ships are religious cast. SO, an isa fleet may have up to say 2FAP with +1 CQ. the rest are standard?

TOTALLY AGREE! The +1 CQ bonus (also fo the Vree and Psi Corps) is extremely bad. CQ checks are very delicate, they have to be just hard enough for a normal ship but not too easy for fleet with +1 CQ. The fact that some fleets have +1, means that the difficulty of CQ checks has to be that bit harder for the rest of us. For example Come About, or repair rolls, could be made 8, if it weren't for the fact that ISA could do it to easily due to their +1. If I were in charge then I'd remove the +1 CQ from ISA and give them +4 or +5 initiative due of their ranger training (that would help with the Boresighted WS too). Remove it from the Vree, and give them dynamic squadrons for their telepathy. Remove it from the Psi Corps and give them, err something else, hang on they've got enough bonuses already!!!

 

[Foxmeister]

Remove it from the Psi Corps and give them, err something else, hang on they've got enough bonuses already!!!

I'd remove the Psi Corps from the fleet lists full stop, and make the ships an option for the EA lists, perhaps as a "Clark loyal" EA sub list.

Regards,

Dave

 

[skavendan]

they've got enough bonuses already

Really?

 

[Burger]

Well I'm not looking to get into a debate about Psi Corps. My point is that fleets with a +1 CQ bonus, unfairly skew the difficulty of CQ checks for other fleets. For example I think Come About should be reduced to 8, but that would make it too easy for ISA. Change the bonus, and the CQ checks could be better balanced.

 

[AdrianH]

Shadows:
...
So, my real suggestion would be to improve the fighters by making the shields useful against AF and dogfights; this would make them almost unstoppable unless they loose 2 dogfights in a single turn!

Or at the very least, give them a decent dogfight bonus. Agility isn't the only factor in a dogfight; firepower and survivability also count, which is why almost nobody used WW1 style biplanes with two light machine-guns in WW2. So give the Shadow fighter at least +2, possibly +3 dogfight, to take account of the fact that all the fluff says it's supposed to be agile, it can take one hit and survive, and it has a powerful cannon.

Also, I would think that there should be a skirmish ship that has the same weapon as the existing scout (only as a Turret). Additionally, the scout should have a better weapon that has an increased range.

The Scout in the show had both a pulse cannon and a beam weapon. I would guess that this was split into Scout and Stalker to give the Shadows both Raid and Battle options. So give the Scout a small beam weapon, not as powerful as the one on the Stalker, maybe 2D double damage; remove the Stalker; and give the Hunter back to the Shadows as their Battle level ship, giving it pretty much the same stats as the Stalker has now.

Finally, the Shadow Ships (both Ancient and Young) should have another 6 inches of range. Also, to simulate the shadow scream from the show, make all fighters that come within 2 inches make a crew quality check of 8 or else find themselves unable to fire, to represent that scream we see in the shows. These Shadow Ships should be SCARY!

Speaking as a new Shadow recruit, I wouldn't object to having beam weapons that can match everyone else's range and a sort of anti-fighter defence. But be wary of making the Shadows too scary - it might be realistic but it might also upset play balance to the extent that they become unbeatable and nobody will want to play against them. And that would turn my new fleet into just an expensive set of ornaments...

 

[Da Boss]

re my beloved Shadows

Scout - to be honest I see nothng wrong with it - it is a very strong Raid choice with good guns and layered protection.

Where the fleet has problems is in the lack of anything else below it.

A good skirmish choice and some actual fighters would be much better additions than any wierd merging rules or stuff that could have unforesen consequences in balance..

I would not like to see the hunter as a Shadow ships - is neither sleek nor scary enough in appearance!

 

[Shadow Queen]

re my beloved Shadows

Scout - to be honest I see nothng wrong with it - it is a very strong Raid choice with good guns and layered protection.

Where the fleet has problems is in the lack of anything else below it.

A good skirmish choice and some actual fighters would be much better additions than any wierd merging rules or stuff that could have unforesen consequences in balance..

I would not like to see the hunter as a Shadow ships - is neither sleek nor scary enough in appearance!

What do you want to see as a Skirmish choice?

 

[Itkovian]

Vree vs. ISA should be a pretty good match up, in general, and they are both good players. Sorry I missed it!

Well thanks!

For what it's worth I eventually won, but the first three turns were punctuated by exploding Whitestars.

Trouble with the ISA they rely on speed and manouverability to get into a position where they can't be shot at, because a Whitestar really is dreadfully fragile if you can keep at it.

Of course the Vree are almos perfectly set up to negate this, luckily their ships are made of lettuce so my fighters were able to take out some of the smaller ships.

Good game though, swung violently to me in about turn three or four.

 

[Greg Smith]

White Stars do well against slow, unmanueverable fleets. They struggle against more agile fleets.

They are also a fleet that require a little thought - go straight at a Primus and they'll die; skirt terrain, hit the flanks and manuever into the rear, they'll work brilliantly.

 

[Triggy]

I think.
1) WS. make it boresight - it is in the show, and it's a very maneuvreable ship, and mitigates it's often gross beam. Also means you have to target a ship instead of just sitting it somewhere and see what you can hit.

If there can be one of the proposed boresight fixes such as "follow that target" or whatever the latest trendy option is, then I agree. 1AD is too weak, 2AD is too good. 2AD Boresight is about right. But forcing ISA to take Blue Stars to get init sinks, is just getting cheesy. If WS changes to B then we need a follow that target SA.

Hopefully some variant of this rule will be looked at for P&P - it's on the table anyway and we're playing about with it

 

[armbarred]

skavendan,

The Psi Corps already have an effective Fleet Carrier recovery, that is unmodifiable currently. The 4+ save is better, and I think having both is just too much.

As far as the ISA +1 CQ, I'd give it up for a higher Init gladly. Although, the mostly religious caste crew are trained to Ranger standards so I think it is a very good representative of that.

I think everyone should have access to a SA that allows a squadron to form... everyone does have awesome communications systems and all.

 

[Greg Smith]

Aren't the ISA-era White Stars crewed by rangers? It is only the pre-ISA, Army of Light ones that are crewed by religious caste.

Why they should be better than warrior caste Minbari or Earthforce is another question. They should certainly be better than drunken Centauri has-beens, though.