New 2d6 based Crit-table

[Scipio]

We have been fed up with almost everytime have half our fleet taken out in the first or second turn due to some random shots going into our ships that we have bought up.

To solve this (or at least make it much more rare) for our gaming group I have made a new crit-table that is 2d6-based and it is based on the current standard crit-table.

Also though swarms is not such a big problem for us because all the players is nice guys I feel that since lower PL ships have more damage than bigger ones they should also take slightly more damage when crited.
So for each modifier on the table due to size there is around 10% more increase to damage as well.
I feel that this has made it more ok for those who like to play swarmier fleets to do it without feeling cheesy.

The base damage and crew average is almost identical to the current one on Skirmish & Raid ships and is slightly decreased when going to bigger ships and slightly increased when going to Patrol.

We are currently trying it out but this far it feels like a big improvement.

Also we are using house rules for damage control. Vital crits can be repaired on CQ 11+. And you can always do the All Hands SA despite crit-effects in play.

The thoughts and reasons for it started in this thread where some of the reasons for a new crit-table can be found:
http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=522026&highlight=#522026


I thought I would put a link to it here for those who think that the current table is a bit to random and harsh towards bigger PL ships.

Download the 2d6 crit-table here:
http://www.foxtail.nu/roger/files/acta/2d6CritChart.pdf

 

[Grunvald]

Initial response "Nice"

But is the modifers at the bottom for the initial dice roll or for damage upon each individual area it doesnt say?

 

[Scipio]

Initial response "Nice"

But is the modifers at the bottom for the initial dice roll or for damage upon each individual area it doesnt say?

Yes the modifer is for the 2d6 effect roll.
I will update it to make it clear.

 

[SylvrDragon]

That is very nice. Basically the same table, with just a few good changes such as percentile based speed reduction, and a more stable rolling system. I like it!

 

[Scipio]

Thank you.

I have put a lot of effort into getting it to have the same average as the current table and I also have moved some of the effects that can be considered sever to larger ships to the less likely positions.

It changed the feel in the games for us quite a bit in a good direction and I really would appreciate to hear from others willing to try it out how it works out for them.

 

[SylvrDragon]

My group just started up a campaign, and we're testing several other things already. But I'll try to fit it into an of game or two. Oh, and considering my terribly bad luck, I love anything that lowers the randomness in game play. lol

 

[stryve]

Should the Reactor 6-8 effect read -2 Speed, All weapons lose 1 AD*, or should it have switched to a percentage like the other Speed criticals?

 

[Da Boss]

most interesting - I will put in next draft of House rules if thats OK with you?

thanks

It seems well worth trying out

 

[Scipio]

most interesting - I will put in next draft of House rules if thats OK with you?

Sure go ahead.

Any comments and tests are most appriciated.

 

[Scipio]

<The pdf is updated with new clarifications and fixes>

 

[Banichi]

I really like this idea. I'll try to get the guys to give it a go next time we play.

 

[Scipio]

I really like this idea. I'll try to get the guys to give it a go next time we play.

Great! Let me know how it works out.

 

[Davesaint]

Interesting. I will run this past my group. In the Vitals area, the Secondary Explosions should only be 1D6, 1D6.


Dave

 

[Scipio]

Interesting. I will run this past my group. In the Vitals area, the Secondary Explosions should only be 1D6, 1D6.

No actually some of the damages have been moved around and altered somewhat.
The reason for this is that the table had to keep the same average damage and crew loss as before but as the result distrubution is bell curved now it is very dependent on where the damages are placed on the table. Otherwise the result would have been that a patrol level ship would take on average 500% more damage than an armagedon ship on the Vital section for example.
So the average damage on each section are the same before but the result on each result is sometimes slightly altered to allow for this.

 

[Burger]

I think it is important for a higher roll, to be a worse crit. Especially since you have bonuses for being a low-PL ship. For example rolling a 1-7 should be worse than rolling a 1-3. But on your new chart it will often be preferable to get the lower result for the extra damage, rather than 25% speed loss with no damage. Some targets will simply not care about 25% less speed, so a lower result on your table would be preferable to a higher one. I don't think this is a good thing. Higher rolls should always be worse crits.

Personally I prefer to keep it 1d6 for simplicity, and just change the effects around.

 

[Scipio]

I think it is important for a higher roll, to be a worse crit. Especially since you have bonuses for being a low-PL ship. For example rolling a 1-7 should be worse than rolling a 1-3. But on your new chart it will often be preferable to get the lower result for the extra damage, rather than 25% speed loss with no damage. Some targets will simply not care about 25% less speed, so a lower result on your table would be preferable to a higher one. I don't think this is a good thing. Higher rolls should always be worse crits.

The main reason for this table is to mitigate the problems with big ships getting put out of commission due to some bad roll on the crit table early on and breaking the game.
I have placed the effects in he order that will make it less likly for each PL mod increase to be affected by the severe crits.
In the case of damage I feel that the effects are almost always worse than the extra damage on the biggest ships.

The most important thing is to keep the average damage for each mod-level about the same as it is on the 1d6 table.

Wether it is on the bottom or the top should not matter just the probabilities to be affected by it.

 

[Scipio]

Personally I prefer to keep it 1d6 for simplicity, and just change the effects around.

How would this make it less likely to have a big ship get affected by sever crit-effects?

 

[Burger]

In the case of damage I feel that the effects are almost always worse than the extra damage on the biggest ships.

As an ISA and Drazi player, both of these races would much rather get your "power relays destroyed" than your "rupture". -25% speed wouldn't affect me much. But 2 damage and 1 crew, especially if double or triple damage, would be quite nasty. And if I were to receive a vital systems hit, I would be praying for a bridge hit rather than secondary explosions! There's nothing actually wrong with the way you have it, it just feels wrong, I should be praying for my opponent to roll as low as possible and he should be hoping to roll as high as possible...

The most important thing is to keep the average damage for each mod-level about the same as it is on the 1d6 table.

Wether it is on the bottom or the top should not matter just the probabilities to be affected by it.

Agreed. But it should be possible to do both, keep the average damage the same while also making the crits get progressively worse, both in terms of extra damage and effects?

With your bonuses for certain PL ships, that skews the average damage surely? Patrol ships are more likely to get catastrophic explosions than Armageddon ships therefore the average damage against patrol ships is higher using your tables than the standard 2e tables?

Personally I prefer to keep it 1d6 for simplicity, and just change the effects around.

How would this make it less likely to have a big ship get affected by sever crit-effects?

Changing the effects around (for example changing the speed effects to percentage ones like you have done) make crits less devastating to big ships. This can be done without changing to 2d6. But I guess it's just personal preference really, I prefer to keep it as 1d6 so that when I get multiple crits in the same area I can just roll them all at once.

 

[Scipio]

As an ISA and Drazi player, both of these races would much rather get your "power relays destroyed" than your "rupture". -25% speed wouldn't affect me much. But 2 damage and 1 crew, especially if double or triple damage, would be quite nasty. And if I were to receive a vital systems hit, I would be praying for a bridge hit rather than secondary explosions! There's nothing actually wrong with the way you have it, it just feels wrong, I should be praying for my opponent to roll as low as possible and he should be hoping to roll as high as possible...

Yes, the chart is designed with big ships in focus as the big problems we have with the current 1d6 chart punishes them the most.
This might mean that smaller ships like Drazi and ISA often use will pray for not lowest result on the table but the second lowest. And as the 2d6 chart is designed they have a much bigger chance to get the second lowest result than the lowest result on their raid and down ships so it should work out fine for them.

The most important thing is to keep the average damage for each mod-level about the same as it is on the 1d6 table.

Wether it is on the bottom or the top should not matter just the probabilities to be affected by it.

Agreed. But it should be possible to do both, keep the average damage the same while also making the crits get progressively worse, both in terms of extra damage and effects?

Yes this can be done but then the damage values on the different results have to be almost even. I felt that for the feel of the game the best would be to keep it as much as possible as close to where it is today.
That meant that some of the lower results must have to have higher number of damage but no or little effect as otherwise the damage would rise for smaller ships.

With your bonuses for certain PL ships, that skews the average damage surely? Patrol ships are more likely to get catastrophic explosions than Armageddon ships therefore the average damage against patrol ships is higher using your tables than the standard 2e tables?

No the avarages are about even.
However as I said in the original post I have intentionally implementet a slight creep with each level mod (about 10%) as two ships from raid for eaxample have more than half the damage of a Battle level ship and we wanted a slight nerf on the smaller ships.
This can be evened out if need but I decided that it was better to try to get the damage to differ a little bit between the levels just a little and went for that.

The best way to find out is to give it a try. For us it really have improved the feel of the game.

Changing the effects around (for example changing the speed effects to percentage ones like you have done) make crits less devastating to big ships. This can be done without changing to 2d6. But I guess it's just personal preference really, I prefer to keep it as 1d6 so that when I get multiple crits in the same area I can just roll them all at once.

Yes but for example the Loose one arc can be devestating when you get it on your war ship when playing 5 pts raid or 5 pts battle as you can loose all your weapons.
Or the classic No DC system and then immidiatly the adrift result on the one buy-up ship have devestated a lot of games that would otherwise have been fun for us.
The 2d6 chart makes this very,very much less likely to happen.

 

[Davesaint]

Interesting. I will run this past my group. In the Vitals area, the Secondary Explosions should only be 1D6, 1D6.

No actually some of the damages have been moved around and altered somewhat.
The reason for this is that the table had to keep the same average damage and crew loss as before but as the result distrubution is bell curved now it is very dependent on where the damages are placed on the table. Otherwise the result would have been that a patrol level ship would take on average 500% more damage than an armagedon ship on the Vital section for example.
So the average damage on each section are the same before but the result on each result is sometimes slightly altered to allow for this.

I am concerned with the 2d6/2d6 that too much damage will be scored with double and triple damage weapons. One of my concerns on the current chart is that too much damage is scored and that the effects are too harsh. Currently battles are won and lost on the critical chart. Any revised chart that doesn't address this isn't fixing the problem.


Dave