Kind Request To "Powers That Be" About Playtest
- Thread starter Grunvald
- Start date
Oops sorry, what I meant to say was, change the AD to an inverse bilinear function of the distance from the target and apply a Lorentz function to the damage mutliplier, that will make it perfectly balanced!!!
Seriously - why all the complicated fixes and conditions and exceptions, when 2AD DD would achieve exactly what is required, somewhere in between 1AD TD and 2AD TD?
Ooooh it must be TD for the fluff it is a powerful beam... I say BS to that, ADs can represent that it is a powerful beam just as well as damage multiplier.
Seriously - why all the complicated fixes and conditions and exceptions, when 2AD DD would achieve exactly what is required, somewhere in between 1AD TD and 2AD TD?
Ooooh it must be TD for the fluff it is a powerful beam... I say BS to that, ADs can represent that it is a powerful beam just as well as damage multiplier.
Methos5000
Mongoose
Well many wanted a shorter ranged Whitestar (10"-12" beam) but we apparently aren't going to get that. Besides for now it seems any changes to the Whitestar will have be done through a special rule for the ISA, stat changes seem to be out of the question for the moment (at least that seemed to be the reason for the Knife fighter WS being shot down...to big of a change for P&P).
So we are stuck with coming up with a special rule nerf for it since most seem to agree the current one will just make the situation worse.
So we are stuck with coming up with a special rule nerf for it since most seem to agree the current one will just make the situation worse.
Bendigeidfran
Mongoose
technically, inverse bilinear *transformation*... But I'd agree with the application of the Lorentz function.Burger said:
l33tpenguin
Mongoose
Beam 10, pulsars 12 
That's my vote.
And the firing on manual was just a terrible line. Even today the majority of munitions aren't delivered manually. We give a computer a target and it hits it. Why? Because it can do it better, faster. This isn't going to change.
That's my vote.
And the firing on manual was just a terrible line. Even today the majority of munitions aren't delivered manually. We give a computer a target and it hits it. Why? Because it can do it better, faster. This isn't going to change.
Triggy said:
good to hear the first
on the second - I played against ISA with PSi Corps (report on the forum) and whilst it is true had a made up ship - it was notable that someone who had never used them before decided by mid game that the only real way to play them was to sit at 18" as he was penalised for going in close.
Now if thats what is wanted it works - if not...............
Since when did this become a post about the ISA???
And if we really want to get into the discussion of is it worth playtesting what about the 2 new vorlond ships, the frigat and dreadnought (cough dreadzero).
OK they get 2 new ship but are either of them worth playtesting???
2 Light cruisers far better than a dread.....
Frigate... ok could give you that one but what point does it have, apart from fillikng that raid hole in the vorlons!!!!!
And if we really want to get into the discussion of is it worth playtesting what about the 2 new vorlond ships, the frigat and dreadnought (cough dreadzero).
OK they get 2 new ship but are either of them worth playtesting???
2 Light cruisers far better than a dread.....
Frigate... ok could give you that one but what point does it have, apart from fillikng that raid hole in the vorlons!!!!!
Yeah, the firing on manual is a bad line.skavendan said:
But the relevant part is that they are out of range of their target. They are racing in at full speed, trying to get into range... and it is the pulsars that fire first, not the beam. Hence pulsars range is longer than beam range.
OK, we want to nerf the White Star to make it fight at close range, but we're not allowed to change stats, even though some other ships do have stat changes. So reducing the beam's range isn't an option. Try this:
Beam weapons only do their full damage if they stay on target long enough. This is easy enough with a stable platform, but not so easy with the fast, rapidly manouevring White Star. Require a CQ 9 check to get full damage at ranges over 8", otherwise the beam is only 1D, or maybe even just a mini-beam. Maybe have a -1 penalty at longer range, e.g. 16". Add a +1 bonus if the White Star voluntarily gives up the Dodge trait this turn as it flies straighter in order to get a good shot. (I just made up the numbers off-hand - replace them with what you think suitable.)
Beam weapons only do their full damage if they stay on target long enough. This is easy enough with a stable platform, but not so easy with the fast, rapidly manouevring White Star. Require a CQ 9 check to get full damage at ranges over 8", otherwise the beam is only 1D, or maybe even just a mini-beam. Maybe have a -1 penalty at longer range, e.g. 16". Add a +1 bonus if the White Star voluntarily gives up the Dodge trait this turn as it flies straighter in order to get a good shot. (I just made up the numbers off-hand - replace them with what you think suitable.)
Foxmeister
Mongoose
Why not just drop Precise from the beam, and add it to the pulse cannons.
That should actually encourage getting in close with the pulse cannons, especially on the larger ships where you really want to be getting the crits.
Regards,
Dave
That should actually encourage getting in close with the pulse cannons, especially on the larger ships where you really want to be getting the crits.
Regards,
Dave
Foxmeister
Mongoose
AdrianH said:Or just half the range of the beam.
We already know that isn't going to happen.
Regards,
Dave
Because they don't want to change the stats, which probably also means changing TD to DD, re-assigning Precise, or other tweaks to the stats aren't going to happen either. 
Besides, reducing the effectiveness of the beam won't solve the basic problem, which is that the White Star will prefer to sit out of range of the enemy's guns and poke at it with the beam, rather than close in, do some extra damage with the pulsars, and get damaged in return. Turning the beam into a mini-beam unless the White Star gives up the ability to dodge means it can still do that but it will do a lot less damage to the enemy ship, and will be a sitting target for anything else that manages to take a shot at it.
Besides, reducing the effectiveness of the beam won't solve the basic problem, which is that the White Star will prefer to sit out of range of the enemy's guns and poke at it with the beam, rather than close in, do some extra damage with the pulsars, and get damaged in return. Turning the beam into a mini-beam unless the White Star gives up the ability to dodge means it can still do that but it will do a lot less damage to the enemy ship, and will be a sitting target for anything else that manages to take a shot at it.
Foxmeister
Mongoose
AdrianH said:Because they don't want to change the stats, which probably also means changing TD to DD, re-assigning Precise, or other tweaks to the stats aren't going to happen either.
No, the PTB have never said they aren't prepared to change the stats - just that the "Knife fight" variant is too much of a change (for some reason!). Plenty of other ships are seeing stats change, so there is no "embargo" on it per se.
I disagree. Getting crits is absolutely vital against the larger ships - with the current beam being precise, there is no real reason to use the pulse cannons, but if the pulse cannons were precise there is a whole lot more incentive to get in close.
Personally, as an ISA player, I've never felt the need to use the pulse cannons and risk taking damage, but I know I would if it was my path to "critical" success!
Regards,
Dave
