Narn thoughts and suggestions
- Thread starter Greg Smith
- Start date
Foxmeister
Mongoose
Methos5000 said:
I do tend to agree - every race should get some degree of protection, but perhaps the Narn (and maybe a couple of others) could be a little better at it.
Regards,
Dave
Methos5000
Mongoose
Foxmeister said:
And I would be fine with that. Races that are heavy on indirect crit resistance to begin with (Shields/Dodge/Stealth mainly) should not have very high resistance (if any) but the defensesless races should have something (maybe a 6+ save for those races and the proposed 5+ for Narn).
Greg Smith
Mongoose
stepan.razin said:
Nothing as yet. P&P is a work in progress.
Well from your comment below, you don't seem to think the revised G'Quan is bad.
You are right, it hasn't been tested. A rule needs to be written before it is tested.
Either you consider the fixed G'Quan good or bad, which is it?
I suggested the rule because no-one is satisfied with the existing Narn CBD rule that we are testing. That boosts the G'Quan, this also boosts the G'Quan. That boosts the Sho'kos too much, this doesn't.
Greg Smith
Mongoose
Methos5000 said:
A lot of valid points and good ideas there.
Foxmeister
Mongoose
stepan.razin said:
Every change risks unbalancing the game - that is why you have play tests!
The current G'Quan "fix" doesn't actually do what it is supposed to do - most people agree with that and my own personal play tests confirm it for me. The Narn 4+ CBD doesn't help either, and is positively broken for certain ships (Sho'Kov, Dag'Kar etc). This seems to be the general concensus and borne out again personally for me by my own play tests.
Therefore, an alternative needs to be sought. Personally, I like this one, but I also do believe that this kind of fix needs to be applied elsewhere - not just to the Narn.
Does it need playtesting? Undoubtedly so!
I would actually be happy if CBD dropped the whole notion of being a save for HP/Crew damage and became solely a crit save. i.e. if you are on CBD, you get a chance to save against the effects of any criticals you take.
Regards,
Dave
the benefit would be that dmg points really were your dmg points, as you didn't have a random dice roll to add more. I have seen a whitestar (just an example, this is not about whitestar hate) make 30 CBD saves in a game!!! that takes it almost to g'quan lavels of dmg points anyway!
this of course as a suggestion mimics the roll to confirm crit suggestion as well, it's just the roll comes fromthe other side and is to deny rather than confirm.
but i concur that "some" other fleets should be able to have something like this. the pak already have their redundancy, and the ipsha have their crit resistance.
this of course as a suggestion mimics the roll to confirm crit suggestion as well, it's just the roll comes fromthe other side and is to deny rather than confirm.
but i concur that "some" other fleets should be able to have something like this. the pak already have their redundancy, and the ipsha have their crit resistance.
yeah theres lots of races with big ships and no active defenses, some of which have to get close at slow speeds to have any effect, at least the narn have 30" beams, the dilgar and centauri dont but their big ships dont get defenses.:
big ships without defenses:
Avioki, Kaliva, Kabrokta, Fire Raptor, Stormfalcon, Nigtfalcon, Xaak, Xonn, Z'Takk, Primus, Secundus, Octurion, Mankhat, Mankhat Py, Mishakur, Tikirt, Wahant
so thats 12 more ships outside of the narn that dont and over half of them are lumbering and quite a few dont have long range weapons.
add in the fact that at long range a lot of damage is from beams and you can add in all the EA and other interceptor fleets. also as has been stated GEG is no defense against crits unless you take the waste of time new rule for it.
so thats alot of people asking why cant they get the crit protection.
big ships without defenses:
Avioki, Kaliva, Kabrokta, Fire Raptor, Stormfalcon, Nigtfalcon, Xaak, Xonn, Z'Takk, Primus, Secundus, Octurion, Mankhat, Mankhat Py, Mishakur, Tikirt, Wahant
so thats 12 more ships outside of the narn that dont and over half of them are lumbering and quite a few dont have long range weapons.
add in the fact that at long range a lot of damage is from beams and you can add in all the EA and other interceptor fleets. also as has been stated GEG is no defense against crits unless you take the waste of time new rule for it.
so thats alot of people asking why cant they get the crit protection.
Foxmeister
Mongoose
katadder said:
Ahem - the "issue" can be solved by amending/changing the name. You've just suggested on the Laser/Pulse Array thread changing the name of the weapon to get round the "issue" of the Victory getting the abilities. There is *no* difference here whatsoever, so if it works for that, it can work equally well here too.
Regards,
Dave
apart from you then need 6 differant classes of pulse cannon from patrol upto armageddon and the same for every weapon from every ship in every race. 6 classes of ion cannon, however many classes of fusion beams etc etc. thats alot of weapons to rename instead of the 1 HPC to Laser/Pulse Array that was mentioned in the other thread.
I am also against crit protection of this kind. fighters are used for taking out engines/weapons but this way they havent a chance.
I am also against crit protection of this kind. fighters are used for taking out engines/weapons but this way they havent a chance.
I'm with katadder here, the name and traits of a weapon are to show the type, the ADs are to show how powerful or numerous it is. A more powerful weapon has higher AD therefore more chances to cause crits. But those crits caused by a chronos would be just as nasty as those caused by a warlock. Sure its like using a pistol vs a sniper rifle... sniper rifle is more likely to rip up your insides... but if your lung gets punctured then it dsoesn't matter what shot you, your lung is still punctured. Similarly, if your reactor implodes or your engines are hit, it doesn't matter whether it was a chronos or a warlock or a starfury that shot you.
Foxmeister
Mongoose
katadder said:
Immaterial - rename 1 or rename 20, the effect is the same. You can just say that an ion cannon on a Patrol ships is a "Patrol Ion Cannon" whatever. If you allow it for one, you open the flood gates for others. To simple disregard an idea because of a naming convention, but actively support another based on a similar concept is a nonsense. I know it's not your only reason for disliking it, and I respect that, but your own arguments on the Laser/Pulse Array thread render this particular objection dead in the water IMHO.
And it's reasonable that a single hit from a fighter has *twice* the chance of setting a Ka'Bin'Tak adrift than it would a White Star? Yes, it probably should have a chance of scoring a crit, but it should probably be a very low one.
The simple fact of the matter is that larger ships are much more likely to have more redundancy and the critical systems are likely to be buried far deeper in the superstructure. I'm sure you'd argue that this is what the Hull score is for, but with a spread of just 6 values (only 4 of which being in regular use) that argument doesn't hold much water.
Regards,
Dave
Methos5000
Mongoose
Foxmeister said:
Especially since even at hull 6 many smaller ships have beam/mini-beam/SAP weapons all of which make hull 6 seem less special.
Either there needs to be some kind of redundancy against crits or the crit table needs to be rewritten.
Some examples:
*-1AD should be for 1 weapon system. Smaller ships with 2 weapon arrays will be impacted more then big ships with 10 total weapon arrays.
*No DC/No SA should go away or bigger ships with more crew should be able to repair multiple crits and perform multiple SA per turn and change the wording to -1 SA or -1 DC roll(separate from the -1 to DC)
*Vitals should just be repairable (like a DC 10 check mentioned elsewhere)
Personally if the first two were used the last one may even be unnecessary. If you say Patrol - Raid get 1 DC check, battle 2, War 3 and Armageddon 4 then if the Raid and belows get a permanent -1 DC roll they are hurting but a Battle level would need a couple permanent one to knock it offline completely. Maybe even give the Armageddon ship a chance to burn all 4 DC rolls and they can repair a crit suffered that turn (the repair crew converged on one problem to fix it faster) noting that if it suffers even one -1DC roll it will be unable to use this ability. Just some ideas.
And Battle(or maybe War) and above should just get 2 SA, I mean really, you have a large crew you mean to tell me the weapon crew can't CAF while the pilots attempt an APTE or Come about? How hard is it for the captain to say.
"Gunnery officers concentrate all fire on that G'Vrahn, helmsman come about to heading x'y'z'."
It would take like 3 seconds. And given that Sheridan seemed to be able to give 5 minute speeches in the middle of battle and not be affected(man did he love to talk, not that there is anything wrong with that) I don't think 3 seconds is asking too much. And beside it might be kind of amusing seeing them succeed on the CAF but fail the Come about check. So your front heavy ship has a 4AD side gun concentrated on the G'Vrahn....thats impressive. Maybe add a difficulty to it. If it requires a roll the second action is one higher difficulty, automatic SA go first. If both are automatic first one succeeds second one requires a CQ 7 check or something.
If you concerned about abusing SA well the problem ones can be exclusive (CBD would require crew stepping away from stations to secure the ship and thus be unable to perform another SA while doing it for example) and all other would need to follow the same rules as currently (no APTE and Come about as they have conflicting requirements).
For the record katadder listed a bunch of ships that do indeed have defenses.
The Vree set... it's their special maneuver rules.
Centauri... it's called the Maximus.
Drazi... well, their maneuverable for their classes in theory... but yeah...
Dilgar... giant freaking masses of guns... and the pentacon rule to allow better placement.
Brakiri... yeah... gravitic shifter? ... reaching a bit there...
But basically, while there are definitely other defenseless big ships, only the league ships don't have some other compensation that the lack of a defense is paying for. Have to look at all the rules available to them before adding special rules with too wide a brush.
Ripple
The Vree set... it's their special maneuver rules.
Centauri... it's called the Maximus.
Drazi... well, their maneuverable for their classes in theory... but yeah...
Dilgar... giant freaking masses of guns... and the pentacon rule to allow better placement.
Brakiri... yeah... gravitic shifter? ... reaching a bit there...
But basically, while there are definitely other defenseless big ships, only the league ships don't have some other compensation that the lack of a defense is paying for. Have to look at all the rules available to them before adding special rules with too wide a brush.
Ripple
Had to go back and read all of Methos's post before I wanted to comment on his stuff...
I agree with a lot of what you've said in the thread. Definitely the case that all defenses aren't equal and depending on the game, they might mean nothing. So I can see where you would want to fix the crit issue more globally.
I happen to agree on that, but not sure on the solution you propose above. Specifically, the multiple special actions. This would seriously unbalance a number of ships. CAF/CBD is a bad combo for those long range snipers with their useless secondaries. So is CAF and Come About.
I feel that is likely to big a change without re balancing the lists. On the other hand the multiple DC rolls is a nice idea and I think works just fine.
Ripple
I agree with a lot of what you've said in the thread. Definitely the case that all defenses aren't equal and depending on the game, they might mean nothing. So I can see where you would want to fix the crit issue more globally.
I happen to agree on that, but not sure on the solution you propose above. Specifically, the multiple special actions. This would seriously unbalance a number of ships. CAF/CBD is a bad combo for those long range snipers with their useless secondaries. So is CAF and Come About.
I feel that is likely to big a change without re balancing the lists. On the other hand the multiple DC rolls is a nice idea and I think works just fine.
Ripple
Ripple said:
SM is ok if it actually does anything to get you out of arc. as most big vree ships can move a whole 3.5" or there abouts thats not much of a defence.
Maximus are ok if you buy down to them, me I would rather buy vorchans as maximus just get boresight 1st with a beam and then die real easy.
Dilgar masses of guns is not a defence.
Basically I think you are reaching alot in all those just to try justify something for the narn that all those players will be asking for. If you want to stretch that far to justify defences then all the big narn ships come with frazis which are just as much a defence as anything you mentioned.
Methos5000
Mongoose
Ripple said:
I'm not 100% sold on multiple SA myself, it was just an idea but one of those examples CAF/CBD I mentioned CBD being an exclusive SA as i requires crew moving away from stations to secure the ship so you could only use it and no other SA that turn. Plus most of the big ship snipers with worthless secondaries sniper with a beam so CAF wouldn't matter anyway.
As for CAF/Come about - one is a CQ 8 and one is CQ 9 if you add my idea of one higher difficulty for the second one then you would need at least 2 CQ 9 checks to pull it off, even the +1 CQ races would only have a 50/50 chance for each in a standard game so likely one of them would fail.
Like I said though just some ideas.
Maybe that's why we always end up disagreeing Katadder... I consider really big guns a defense. If the other guy never gets to shoot, he can't crit you. If the Narn had really big guns, dense would be a much more relative concept... you wouldn't have to endure fire to get you shots in.
Xonn has both the SM (and dancing around terrain that is damn well yes a defense.) and the big giant pile of guns. Not so much on the guns for the Xaak/Xill... but still hardly lightweights for their maneuver possibilities. Being able to turn to any angle prepping for a required APtE the following turn is no small thing.
Yes, a single Maximus will indeed die to a good beam shot... so buy two, a lot like the Narn have to to get their bore site on target.
And to be honest I'm not reaching to justify anything... I do think the Narn need something, and the majority seem to agree. The only real discussion anyone is having is what that thing should be.
I don't want to see folks throwing up objections based on what other races, that there isn't a general agreement on them needing stuff, might want. We can't fix the game this time around, we're limited by the scope of the project. So let's fix something on the Narn and see if it works. If it does, we could then expand it if other ships need it and there is some kind of agreement on that.
Ripple
Xonn has both the SM (and dancing around terrain that is damn well yes a defense.) and the big giant pile of guns. Not so much on the guns for the Xaak/Xill... but still hardly lightweights for their maneuver possibilities. Being able to turn to any angle prepping for a required APtE the following turn is no small thing.
Yes, a single Maximus will indeed die to a good beam shot... so buy two, a lot like the Narn have to to get their bore site on target.
And to be honest I'm not reaching to justify anything... I do think the Narn need something, and the majority seem to agree. The only real discussion anyone is having is what that thing should be.
I don't want to see folks throwing up objections based on what other races, that there isn't a general agreement on them needing stuff, might want. We can't fix the game this time around, we're limited by the scope of the project. So let's fix something on the Narn and see if it works. If it does, we could then expand it if other ships need it and there is some kind of agreement on that.
Ripple
