Motion to Change the beam trait.

[Geekybiker]

I like the general concept of the beam trait. Rerolling for additional damage. Its unique and cool. However we've all seen what beam do to low hull ships and fighters. Especially since most beams are SAP DD as well.

The goal is to make hull 4 ships more useful and be able to expand the overall range of hull values played.

So here it is. Make beam only do 2 hits per AD max. IE you hit the first time, you only get 1 reroll. This marginally changes the performance of beams vs high hull ships. However It will dastically cut down the number hits on hull 3 or 4 ships. I regularly see SAP beams run 4-5hits on a single die vs low hulls.

Yah I know it might cause a slew of balancing issues, so maybe its more of an ACTA v2.0 thing, but I think it would be a worthwhile and simple change overall.

Other thing to think about is that this would tend to make fighters more surviveable (they tend to be big victims of high hit beams)

 

[Wulf Corbett]

No way. The entire point about Beams is that they do a load of damage with few AD. Read the fluff text - "near legendary". They're meant to work the way they do. If anything, Beams are too WEAK against high Hull values.

Wulf

 

[Gorkamecha]

My suggestion re: low hulled ships is......don't use them?

If you know your going up against a beam happy opponent, swap to the higher hulls? Or accept the fact that in most cases there is a trade off for the low hull ship (crazy guns, lower PL).

 

[Wulf Corbett]

My suggestion re: low hulled ships is......don't use them?

My suggestion?

Warbirds.

Wulf

 

[Gorkamecha]

No way. The entire point about Beams is that they do a load of damage with few AD. Read the fluff text - "near legendary". They're meant to work the way they do. If anything, Beams are too WEAK against high Hull values.

Wulf

I agree with that...in the show you rarely see a ship survive a beam hit...most (even supposedly high hull ships) get cleaved clean in two. Only Ancient ships seem to be able to shrug off beam hits.

 

[Wulf Corbett]

I agree with that...in the show you rarely see a ship survive a beam hit...most (even supposedly high hull ships) get cleaved clean in two. Only Ancient ships seem to be able to shrug off beam hits.

I'd even argue with that. Every time a Shadow is hit by a Beam, they jerk and stagger to a halt.

Wulf

 

[TenaciousB]

I think the issue isn't with the actual strength of beams - I think there are too many ships with beam weapons.

I'm in the middle of watching the entire B5 series again - u don't see that many "beam" weapons that actually slice chunks out of ships, yet there are a lot of ships in the game that have the beam weapon trait that perhaps shouldn't.

Thats just my 2p's worth - discuss.

 

[H]

well, there are about 90% more ships in ACTA than in the show, so you will see more beams. You often saw ships that had beams not using them, but heck, Beams sliced the ass off a Sharlin.. (and here we go with the hull score of a sharlin. . . ) but that proves low hull ships should get battered. the question is, in taking low hull ships, what are you doing wrong with your big ships for people to target the smaller ones?

 

[Tank]

Im not bothering to vote, as an EA player and the Olympus being one of my favourite ships I dont complain about the insta death dealt to them or my Artemi. Beams are supposed to be powerful they draw a lot of power and are supposed to do a lot of damage amd bearing in mind that this is a focused beam of energy why should they only stop at just 2 hits?

Lower hull ships are either not as expensive to build due to less armor, smaller weapons and smaller size or older hulls that are still in active service because they still adequately fulfill their role.

 

[Geekybiker]

No way. The entire point about Beams is that they do a load of damage with few AD. Read the fluff text - "near legendary". They're meant to work the way they do. If anything, Beams are too WEAK against high Hull values.

Wulf

That's fine and all, but even so the unlimited damage scheme is a problem vs hull 4 ships and fighters.

SAP DD Beam with a max number of hits is still a VERY powerful weapon. Howere is recognizes the fact that there is a limit to how much damage any given weapon can do in one hit. IE you only get so many giga joules of damage out of a given shot. (excepting criticals)

Even if you think ships are fine, the fighter side of the equation is just silly. Dodge 2+ fighters dropping like flys from a single AD of SAP beam.

 

[Geekybiker]

IBeams are supposed to be powerful they draw a lot of power and are supposed to do a lot of damage amd bearing in mind that this is a focused beam of energy why should they only stop at just 2 hits?

Because the law of conservation of enery?

You cant put an unlimited amount of energy on target, so you can't possibly do an unlimited amount of damage.

Reguardless of if the max is 2 or 3 (or whatever number) just consider that that particular laser mount hit the target with its ENTIRE beam burst.

But just physics aside, I think it would fix a gameplay problem and make lower hull more viable. Not just current designs, but in the future for ACTA 2.0 you could design hull 4 ships without them being "disposable" Easies to hit, sure, but not one shot kills from a beam.

 

[Tank]

Not one shot kills now, bear in mind that this is a dice game with all the foibles of chance that lie with it. I played against the Centauri this evening and altho I came away victorious I was lucky because the Centauri player wasnt rolling very well with his beams, I've seen an Artemis survive a hit from a shadow vessel, I;ve seen Olympuses survive similiar hits, remember its all about the dice/

 

[Wulf Corbett]

That's fine and all, but even so the unlimited damage scheme is a problem vs hull 4 ships and fighters.

Maybe for you.

SAP DD Beam with a max number of hits is still a VERY powerful weapon. Howere is recognizes the fact that there is a limit to how much damage any given weapon can do in one hit.

Of course there is. When the target disappears in a cloud of incandescent steam, that's your lot.

Even if you think ships are fine, the fighter side of the equation is just silly.

Not at all. Beams are not stationary 'bars' of light. Even Boresights will 'wiggle' a bit, unless the ship they're based on has impossibly stable guidance and power systems. Beams deliberately played on a ship - or Flight - will have to be Dodged not once, but as often as their constantly-updated targetting system manages to bring the Beam to bear.

Wulf

 

[Davesaint]

The problem with beams isn't the number of hits. The problem with beams comes in many varieties.

First - Most Beam weapons are DD or TD. This means that every time they hit, they hurt, especially if a critical is rolled

Second - Most beams are at least AP, and many are SAP.

Third - The only defensive systems that effect beams are stealth(rare), dodge(rare), adaptive armour(very rare) and the GEG(only damage, not crew). This means that when you do hit with your beams, you do damage things.

There really are 2 fixes that would take care of many of the issues with ACTA. First, Beams max out at AP. Second - Double and Triple damage weapons don't add their multiplier for damage and crew casualties on the critical hit chart.


Dave

 

[Geekybiker]

Not at all. Beams are not stationary 'bars' of light. Even Boresights will 'wiggle' a bit, unless the ship they're based on has impossibly stable guidance and power systems. Beams deliberately played on a ship - or Flight - will have to be Dodged not once, but as often as their constantly-updated targetting system manages to bring the Beam to bear.

Wulf

That's assuming the beam can track fast enough to hit something like a fighter. But that just brings us back to the "Anti-ship" trait arguement again.

 

[Geekybiker]

There really are 2 fixes that would take care of many of the issues with ACTA. First, Beams max out at AP. Second - Double and Triple damage weapons don't add their multiplier for damage and crew casualties on the critical hit chart.


Dave

I thought that at first too. But the trouble there is that beams are only REALLY a problem vs lower hulled ships. Maxing beams at AP would help out the low hull ships certainly, but it would make hull 6 even more valuable. (something we dont need) and doesnt really address the issue of fighters much.


Maybe since people think they should be MORE effective vs larger ships, we should have the max of 2 hits per AD and make more beams TD?

That would make them more effective vs hull 6 and less vs hull 4 than currently.

 

[H]

but surely, the point of a hull 4 ship is that it is, um, well, hull 4, and WILL suffer against beams. If it was a hull 6 ship, it would probably be moved up 2 categories or so.
this is like saying anti tank rockets are too tough versus Land rovers, should we ask our enemies to only use spud guns against them?
if used properly, a hull 4 ship shouldn;t even be targeted by beams, as the enemy should be working like hell to kill the omegas or g'quans and so on, the G'karith should not be a priority target, and when it does become one, it will die fast. as it should, it's only a support ship

 

[Wulf Corbett]

Maybe since people think they should be MORE effective vs larger ships, we should have the max of 2 hits per AD and make more beams TD?

Or maybe - radical thought here! - we should just use the rules the way they are written and admit that's the way they're supposed to work?

Wulf

 

[prelude_to_war]

I've seen beams do great amounts of damage but I've also seem them do very little damage against weak hulled ships. Sometimes they even miss. Beams are fine as is IMO.

 

[Geekybiker]

Maybe since people think they should be MORE effective vs larger ships, we should have the max of 2 hits per AD and make more beams TD?

Or maybe - radical thought here! - we should just use the rules the way they are written and admit that's the way they're supposed to work?

Wulf

Errr okay. I dont want to hear you EVER whine about an overpowered ship or anything ever again then.

Ill never understand why some people are so hostile to the idea that maybe the rules arent perfect. Not like its the bible or something.