Narn thoughts and suggestions
- Thread starter Greg Smith
- Start date
Ripple said:
thats true of alot of people. at range your g'quans beam and e-mines outgun the dilgars really big guns as your frazis can intercept his missiles.
3.5" is hardly dancing, especially with a max range of 15". you have to APTE 1st turn and not get a shot then wait until turn 2 at better than SM spedd to even get into the xonns big gun range.
the point is the ships i mentioned will want the same crit protection as the narn if its done for the reasons you said. at least bin'taks and g'quans can come out firing 1st turn with no defences, xonns, primus and octurions dont even get that. big guns are no good if the g'quan guts you 1st turn when your big guns are not even in range.
and in the g'quan omega battle one dice beam will not take the extra 17 damage down very quickly and the omega has no defence against that.
By your reasoning we should be discussing giving everyone interceptors, because everyone will want them if some ships have them, for the very same reasons. But we're not, and we even taking them off a ship that shouldn't have had them.
G'Quan vs Omega - ummm... yes the Omega does have an answer (if not a defense)... it's called T-bolts, the ability to fight front and back, greater range on its secondaries...
I guess that covers it for me... do you have an ANSWER to your weakness. The narn do not, most other races do. It doesn't have to be a defense.
Take the Xonn... you say 3.5 isn't dancing... he only need to change the angle a tiny bit to block fire. It takes very short moves around blocking terrain.
Dilgar are outgunned at long range... but you won't stop enough before they get to medium range to cook you.
Lots of answers out there... the Narn don't have a good one on the ship everyone wants to field... so lets make a special rule that makes that happen... you vaunted 17 damage won't do shit.
Ripple
G'Quan vs Omega - ummm... yes the Omega does have an answer (if not a defense)... it's called T-bolts, the ability to fight front and back, greater range on its secondaries...
I guess that covers it for me... do you have an ANSWER to your weakness. The narn do not, most other races do. It doesn't have to be a defense.
Take the Xonn... you say 3.5 isn't dancing... he only need to change the angle a tiny bit to block fire. It takes very short moves around blocking terrain.
Dilgar are outgunned at long range... but you won't stop enough before they get to medium range to cook you.
Lots of answers out there... the Narn don't have a good one on the ship everyone wants to field... so lets make a special rule that makes that happen... you vaunted 17 damage won't do shit.
Ripple
Methos5000
Mongoose
If the Narn were the ONLY race that had big ships with no defenses then yes they should be the only ones to get this kind of resistance, but they aren't.
Like I said before give me one reason to be happy with this change if the G'Quan gets crit resistance but the Avioki doesn't. Both have higher then average Damage/Crew scores, speed 6, lumbering with no defenses, but oh wait...the G'Quan can attack a full 12" farther then the Avioki which means with their speed gets at least one turn of firing before the Avioki can even consider it. The problem with this idea is it lets the G'Quan sit back and sniper while resisting crits, while the Avioki has to charge into the fray and be utterly defenseless while doing so. I hardly consider this balanced.
And I suppose using the argument of weapons as a defense then I suppose the G'Vrahn, Bin'Tak and Ka'Bin'tak won't be getting any kind of resistance as they are loaded to the gills with weapons, right?
If you want to say that Gravitic shifter are a defense for the Brakiri then E-mines are a defense for the Narn as they can hit multiple ships and kill fighters or small ships with ease. Granted not only Narn have emines but I would hardly call the Narn defenseless if were breaking out arguments like this.
Like I said before give me one reason to be happy with this change if the G'Quan gets crit resistance but the Avioki doesn't. Both have higher then average Damage/Crew scores, speed 6, lumbering with no defenses, but oh wait...the G'Quan can attack a full 12" farther then the Avioki which means with their speed gets at least one turn of firing before the Avioki can even consider it. The problem with this idea is it lets the G'Quan sit back and sniper while resisting crits, while the Avioki has to charge into the fray and be utterly defenseless while doing so. I hardly consider this balanced.
And I suppose using the argument of weapons as a defense then I suppose the G'Vrahn, Bin'Tak and Ka'Bin'tak won't be getting any kind of resistance as they are loaded to the gills with weapons, right?
If you want to say that Gravitic shifter are a defense for the Brakiri then E-mines are a defense for the Narn as they can hit multiple ships and kill fighters or small ships with ease. Granted not only Narn have emines but I would hardly call the Narn defenseless if were breaking out arguments like this.
Cavalier1645
Mongoose
Personally I don't see a problem in giving the Narns (or any other race) interceptors, especially on their big ships.
Like I have said before what naval organization in our world doesn't have pin point defenses. By same logic what space faring race wouldn't have pin point on their capital ships. According to Babylon 5 ACTA only Earth grasp the concept of pin point defenses. OK OK so the Abbai too (but who is counting minor neutral powers anyway..lol) Give interceptors (or what ever you want to call it for the other races) to other Battle+ ships, It would solve a lot of problems and not require a new rule change.
Like I have said before what naval organization in our world doesn't have pin point defenses. By same logic what space faring race wouldn't have pin point on their capital ships. According to Babylon 5 ACTA only Earth grasp the concept of pin point defenses. OK OK so the Abbai too (but who is counting minor neutral powers anyway..lol) Give interceptors (or what ever you want to call it for the other races) to other Battle+ ships, It would solve a lot of problems and not require a new rule change.
CZuschlag
Mongoose
Your defense is winning initiative; if the Avioki does, it is more likely than not that the G'Quan cannot fire its boresight beam at all. You have a FA arc beam, a major difference.
I understand what you're saying -- I fly the Dilgar, and my Wahant is in a very similar boat to the Avioki at speed 4 and with 15" main guns in the case of the Heavy Bolters instead of 18" and speed 6. It's not always fun; I get that. However, it's also the case that, when we do get there, the damage output created is very impressive, and the ship is just huge. Still is.
But, even as a Wahant flier, I'm fine with it. That's mostly because the T'Loth and G'**s were just that bad as warships. They needed this. It might not even be enough!
It's not even all-encompassing resistance; it fails 66% of the time, and you have to be on CBD to do it. That's not inconsequential; you can make a very solid argument that in the case of this fight the Enhance Range SA is more relevant --- but that only hits 50% of the time, also.
I've pushed some counters about on the table ---- hardly real playtesting, but it's better than nothing! ---- and the changes seem to be still a tiny bit short of letting 5 G'Quans match up versus 5 Omegas (the way I'm running the fight, the Aft Boresight beam is enough to send EA through), but it's a lot more fair than it used to be. I'll try it against 5 Aviokis though -- good thought!
I understand what you're saying -- I fly the Dilgar, and my Wahant is in a very similar boat to the Avioki at speed 4 and with 15" main guns in the case of the Heavy Bolters instead of 18" and speed 6. It's not always fun; I get that. However, it's also the case that, when we do get there, the damage output created is very impressive, and the ship is just huge. Still is.
But, even as a Wahant flier, I'm fine with it. That's mostly because the T'Loth and G'**s were just that bad as warships. They needed this. It might not even be enough!
It's not even all-encompassing resistance; it fails 66% of the time, and you have to be on CBD to do it. That's not inconsequential; you can make a very solid argument that in the case of this fight the Enhance Range SA is more relevant --- but that only hits 50% of the time, also.
I've pushed some counters about on the table ---- hardly real playtesting, but it's better than nothing! ---- and the changes seem to be still a tiny bit short of letting 5 G'Quans match up versus 5 Omegas (the way I'm running the fight, the Aft Boresight beam is enough to send EA through), but it's a lot more fair than it used to be. I'll try it against 5 Aviokis though -- good thought!
Greg Smith
Mongoose
Methos5000 said:
In a similar fashion, not every race has a Fleet Carrier or Scout.
Just because one race has something, doesn't mean every race should have it.
Now I tend to agree that all big ships should have some kind of defence. I was opposed to the removal of interceptors from the Primus and Octurion in 2e. I can see the Avioki would suffer in the same way as the G'Quan.
Foxmeister
Mongoose
Methos5000 said:
I don't think comparing the Avioki with the G'Quan is a totally fair comparison.
I would say you should be looking at
Avioki and G'Lan
Kaliva and G'Quan
That would be much fairer IMHO, and doesn't skew the results as much as the Avioki/G'Quan comparison.
Regards,
Dave
Methos5000
Mongoose
Foxmeister said:
Well even using those comparisions
The G'Lan Beams will still out damage the Avioki on average and still carries 2 fighters (regardless of their worth they are something the Avioki does not have). Even factoring in CBD (so the G'Lan would lose on of its beams) it will still do roughly the same average damage but gain 33% crit resistance.
The Kaliva long range weapon isn't a beam so it doesn't roll up and can be intercepted(which most races can use fighters as interceptors, Narn included, and facing a Kaliva heavy fleet you would see people doing just that) in addition the G'Quan still has the fighters advantage and comes with an E-mine.
Regardlesss in the end they are probably very close match ups. So how is giving the Narn ships a 33% resistance(even if they have to use CBD) balanced? CBD is no brainer SA for the Narn anyway as they have such 'horrible' secondaries.
As far as winning intiative being a defense for the Brakiri the Narn are +2 over the Brakiri in intiative. That means more then half the time the Narn will win.
I agree that just because one race has something not everyone should have it but in this case the Narn big ships are not the only ones that suffer from this problem.
Foxmeister
Mongoose
Methos5000 said:
However, it can be scout redirected, whereas a beam cannot, hits on less than a 4+ for anything below hull 6, very decent range, triple damage, and isn't boresight. Compared to the G'Quans beam it comes out *very* well indeed.
Methos5000 said:
Well, being on CBD means you are not performing another SA - which for a lumbering boresight ship is actually a significant disadvantage since you will often want to Come About, or perhaps TTT.
However, I personally believe that all large ships should get some degree of crit resistance anyway. Assuming you were going to use the CBD mechanism, I'd perhaps give the Narn (and maybe some others) the 5+ save and the rest a 6+ save when on CBD.
Regards,
Dave
Methos5000
Mongoose
And I don't really have a problem with the Narn being better at it, I just don't think it should be Narn only and every one else too bad. Even a 6+ standard would be better then nothing.
Tzarevitch
Mongoose
Methos5000 said:
Not that I am trying to get into this particular argument but you can argue that shifters are defensive since you can effectively reposition the attacking ship. E-mines are defenses only under the "best defense is a good offense" rule.
Tzarevitch
Tzarevitch
Mongoose
Greg Smith said:
Maybe it is just me, but if you agree that the secondaries are too short, why not just fix them and scrap the special action? With all of the special actions being added to the Narn to correct "deficiencies" how are they supposed to use them all without being 4-headed octopi?
A special action is proposed to address the boresight handicap. A special action is proposed to address the lack of defenses, and another is now proposed to address the lack of range. I am not intending this to be a nasty post but this whole approach really needs to be rethought. What is boils down to is if you take a G'Quan you have to roll to see if your ship gets to not suck as much each turn. You are proposing fixes to admitted problems but the fixes are all conditional ones when the problems are constant. Just fix the ship.
As you proposed, increase the light pulse to 10" , light ion to 12" on T'Loths, and all battle-level ships and higher. Increase the beam by +1 on the G'Quans as originally proposed. In my opinion, the e-mine on the G'Quan and the Bin'Tak should be slow-loading. That is all they need. I play Narn and I disagree that they "need" an active defense.
The biggest problem with the Narn fleet is their battle level ship sucks bad. It leaves a huge hole in any fleet planning. The problem isn't defense, it is the fact the ship has little effective offense. Its main weapon is double handicapped by being low damage AND boresight. Its secondary weapon is one-shot and can't crit. Its tertiaries are also shorter than nearly any ship it will likely fight and too short for effective defense. Add lumbering and low speed and you have a recipe for sucking hard.
Frankly, I don't see why the G'Quan has to be a super brick. There was nothing in the show to ever indicate it was. It WAS however a hard hitter in the show and that was specifically mentioned, whereas in the game it hits like a little girl in its weight class. THAT is what needs fixing. I certainly won't turn down additional defenses if offered, but the Narn don't NEED them and they don't really need additional special actions to clutter up gameplay. What they need is weaponry that works as advertised.
Tzarevitch
Methos5000
Mongoose
Tzarevitch said:Methos5000 said:
Not that I am trying to get into this particular argument but you can argue that shifters are defensive since you can effectively reposition the attacking ship. E-mines are defenses only under the "best defense is a good offense" rule.
Tzarevitch
But the best defense is a good offense was the argument some were using. And Emines can be a good defense because it forces people to split there ships apart and not form squadrons, this makes it harder for fleets to concentrate fire on one target. Sometimes emines don't even have to be used to completely disrupt your enemies movements. If they constantly try to stay more then 6" apart from each other they are not controlling the battle field well. Thats a pretty good defense.
But that said I agree the Narn big ships have a problem defensively. I am just saying so do other big ships and I'm against a purely Narn only defense. If this is introduced in the game as an overall crit resistance(even if only for big ships) I am fine with the Narn being a little better at it. It does give them something they need but then the other big slow lumbering ships get something they need too.
Foxmeister
Mongoose
Methos5000 said:
Of course, the difference is that the Brakiri have Gravitic Shifters *and* E-Mines!!!
Regards,
Dave
stepan.razin
Mongoose
Since most real modern navies on Earth do embrace a concept of point defenses, I am too at a loss of words as to why an advanced fantasy race like the Narns cannot do the same.
PTB have decided Narn dont get interceptors, whatever, we only had one ship with it before and now that system is broken, we were probably seeing how many narns we could get jumping into the corridor and running down it while being shot at when someone tripped over the extension cord and unplugged it and we cant get anymore techs from the ISA to come out and fix it anytime soon
in anycase whether or not the gquan has interceptors or not so that it can survive to bring its massive and massive amounts of secondaries to bear is a moot point since the secondaries dont do anything. they might as well be shooting fireworks.
okay we are all agreed that 8 inch on a speed 6 lumbering ship will never get range on the smaller faster agile ships, which means some times you will get into a slug fest with larger slower ships (read hull 6), at which point horray your secondaries come online, it might take 2 turns as they have to wake up, or come back from getting coffee, so you bring your 10 TL and 6 attack dice online shoot in every direction, because why not and then tally the results to find you have rolled a massive 4 hits, which isnt even enough to go crit shopping with.
at which point your depressed narns go back to what they do best, jumping into corridors and running down them well being shot at
if your going to give me a brick, make it out of something heavy so I can hurt whoever I throw it at
in anycase whether or not the gquan has interceptors or not so that it can survive to bring its massive and massive amounts of secondaries to bear is a moot point since the secondaries dont do anything. they might as well be shooting fireworks.
okay we are all agreed that 8 inch on a speed 6 lumbering ship will never get range on the smaller faster agile ships, which means some times you will get into a slug fest with larger slower ships (read hull 6), at which point horray your secondaries come online, it might take 2 turns as they have to wake up, or come back from getting coffee, so you bring your 10 TL and 6 attack dice online shoot in every direction, because why not and then tally the results to find you have rolled a massive 4 hits, which isnt even enough to go crit shopping with.
at which point your depressed narns go back to what they do best, jumping into corridors and running down them well being shot at
if your going to give me a brick, make it out of something heavy so I can hurt whoever I throw it at
Tzarevitch
Mongoose
Ike said:
Well said. That is probably the best summary of the Narn problems that I have seen so far.
Tzarevitch
Foxmeister
Mongoose
This morning, I purchased the PDF of the G'Quan ship plans for the B5 RPG. The quote above came from the introduction, and made me chuckle because fear is generally the last thing you see in your opponents eyes when you drop a G'Quan on the table!
However, as I read on, it did become clear to me that the authors of that book were mostly drawing comparisons between the Hyperion and the G'Quan, and that the Omega was a far "heavier" beast.
This got me thinking that perhaps the real issue with the G'Quan is that is probably should've always been a Raid level ship rather than Battle.
With that idea in mind, here's my take on a potential Raid level G'Quan.
Code:
Raid level G'Quan
Speed: 7
Turn: 1/45
Hull: 6
Damage: 40/9
Crew: 50/13
Troops: 4
Craft: 1 Frazi Flight
Special Rules: Jump Engine
Heavy Laser Cannon 20 B 4 Beam, DD
Energy Mine 30 F 4 AP, Energy Mine, O/S, TD
Light Ion Cannon 8 F 4 TL
Light Ion Cannon 8 A 4 TL
Light Ion Cannon 8 P 4 TL
Light Ion Cannon 8 S 4 TL
Light Pulse Cannon 8 F 4
Light Pulse Cannon 8 A 4
Light Pulse Cannon 8 P 4
Light Pulse Cannon 8 S 4Note I'm not saying this is "balanced" - it's just an idea of what it could potentially look like, but my gut feeling is that it would need to look something like this in order to make it a viable choice over a Var'Nic.
Essentially what has happened here is:
Speed up 1
Hits down 15 (25 from P&P version)
Crew down 20 (30 from P&P version)
Lose Lumbering
Lose Anti-Fighter
Lose 1 Frazi flight
Lose 10" range from HLC
Lose AD from e-mine
Lose AD from all secondaries
Why increase speed? It's supposed to be a cruiser, and cruisers are not generally slow!
Why lose Lumbering? Again, a quote from the deck plans:
Similar changes could be made to the G'Tal and G'Lan to bring them down to Raid - perhaps Command +1 for G'Tal in exchange for the e-mine, and just a 3AD Mag gun for the G'Lan.
This would leave a hole at Battle level in the Narn fleet, but that could be filled by downrated G'Quonth and Bin'Tak, leaving the G'Vrahn at War.
Note that this is purely a thought experiment and it's not something I'd seriously advocate at present.
Regards,
Dave
