New critical table

[Burger]

It has been a common complaint in our games lately, that a couple of rolls on the critical table is what decides the victor rather than strategy or planning or tactics. Also some of the results on the crit table make for very un-fun games. So I have come up with a new criticals table, maybe we'll play a few games using it to see if the game is more fun.

Here it is: http://chburger.brinkster.net/armageddon/CritTableSR.asp


Here is a summary of the changes:

Engines
1-2 is frustrating, it is the most common critical and does virtually nothing. I have added 1 damage to make it a bit more "critical". Yes I know I'm supposed to be toning down the crit table, so sue me
6 is pretty debilitating to many ships, but I wanted to keep at least one speed 0 crit in there, so the effect stays. The damage is decreased because the effect is so nasty.

Reactor
4-5 has its crew loss reduced.
6 has damage and crew loss reduced, and no longer does speed 0.

Weapons
The most un-fun criticals since firing weapons is the whole fun part of ACTA.
1-3 changed to random weapon misses 1 turn, does 1 damage instead of 1 crew.
4 changed to random arc misses 1 turn, kills 1 crew.
5 changed to random weapons system offline, reduced crew loss.
6 changed to random arc offline, reduced damage and crew loss.
"Misses 1 turn" means that if it has not yet fired this turn, it will miss the current turn's firing. If it has already fired, it will miss next turn. If weapon is slow-loading and is currently reloading, it will miss an extra turn.

Crew
6 toned down a bit.

Vitals
2 toned down damage and crew loss.
3 changed to random weapons system offline, damage and crew loss toned down.
5 toned down damage and crew loss.
6 toned down but still pretty nasty.

 

[H]

haven't they already said there are new crit tables for second ed?

 

[Burger]

Yes, but I don't care, I'm talking about 1e.

NO MORE 2e COMMENTS HERE PLEASE!!!

 

[CZuschlag]

Burger,

How much does this degrade the Dilgar's Masters of Destruction privilege? A substantial amount of their (often heavy) firepower comes from MoD effects, and that's based off the sizes of the damage and crew loss in the table itself, not necessarily the effects.

It's a downtune for both precise and MoD races; are you planning on giving anything back to these? You could, of course, maintain balance by changing many 0:1 and 1:0 criticals to 2:0 or 0:2 .... you'd need to do it in many places, but it would end up evening out (net/net).

Current averages, if I remember right (not doing math) is 1.6 damage and 2.1 crew per critical. If you maintain that, you'll at least keep the raw firepower numbers accurate.

 

[Burger]

It doesn't downgrade MoD because everyone else's criticals are downgraded by the same factor. We don't have any regular Dilgar players though so I guess we can ignore it This new table was meant for a house rule I thought I'd share, rather than "change teh game!!111oneone11!"

It does mean precise weapons do less damage, but IMO thats a good thing. Criticals are currently just too good, and the game is decided on them too often.

 

[Chernobyl]

which is why ancients have a leg up. no crits.

I don't think the ship-to-ship crit table needs any change. to bring back an old argument, I'd like to see the return of precise and a separate crit table for fighters attacking ships, that doesn't have as many big crits.

Chern

 

[Da Boss]

I do recall with fond memories my Shadow Cruiser being destroyed in one hit by a Starfury - good game a great ending......

 

[Ripple]

I do like much of what was changed. I disagree on the choice of which speed 0 to keep, I would have kept the less common one as it is game ending for many ships. (and frankly for just about any ship if you remember to board.)

The balance issue referred to above by CZuschlag pre-supposes that ships receiving extra critical effects are balanced under the current system. If criticals are out of balance to start with, then ships that depend on them are likely out of balance as well. This would have a much larger effect on the abbai in most games we play than on the Dilgar or the ISA, which while crit dependent also have substantial basic damage. (course that may just be cause we have issues getting the abbai to range eight alive.)

Would love to see how much damage actually comes from MoD/Precise specifically in a few games. I can figure the expected out comes, but would really like to see some tabletop data, just to see how much is 'feel' and how much is actual effect.

Ripple

 

[Chernobyl]

actually an equitable solution would be to even out the crits entirely.
say there's no "+ damage, + crew table"
each time a hit scores a crit, call it an extra solid hit, and apply the effects normally. (speed loss, weapon AD, etc)
only changes would be the crew hits, which would need to be added in, and things like secondary explosions, items where the effects are only bonus damage and crew loss.

Chern

 

[cordas]

Engines
1-2 is frustrating, it is the most common critical and does virtually nothing. I have added 1 damage to make it a bit more "critical". Yes I know I'm supposed to be toning down the crit table, so sue me
6 is pretty debilitating to many ships, but I wanted to keep at least one speed 0 crit in there, so the effect stays. The damage is decreased because the effect is so nasty.

Sounds good, I agree 1-2 needs to be a little harsher on crew / damage, its the fast ships (that tend to have low crew and damage) that laugh this off (or are often rather greatfull of the crit as it slows them down and makes turning easier)

Reactor
4-5 has its crew loss reduced.
6 has damage and crew loss reduced, and no longer does speed 0.

6 on a reactor hit needs to do more than just NO SA, maybe a speed -4.

Weapons
The most un-fun criticals since firing weapons is the whole fun part of ACTA.
1-3 changed to random weapon misses 1 turn, does 1 damage instead of 1 crew.
4 changed to random arc misses 1 turn, kills 1 crew.
5 changed to random weapons system offline, reduced crew loss.
6 changed to random arc offline, reduced damage and crew loss.
"Misses 1 turn" means that if it has not yet fired this turn, it will miss the current turn's firing. If it has already fired, it will miss next turn. If weapon is slow-loading and is currently reloading, it will miss an extra turn.

Sorry but I disagree with this, these just aren't harsh enough. make 1-3, be 1-2 =1, 3 = 4, 4 =5, 5=6, and 6 Fire control damaged each weapon system can only fire on a 4+ might be a bit better.

Crew
6 toned down a bit.

Argh NOOO!!! Crew crits need to actually do something.... Currently they are entirely pointless unless you have a TD weapon, or are hitting a really light ship. Give some of them effects....
1-4 same.
5 helm hit - ship looses 1 turn (to min 1)
6 Damage control hit - +1 difficulty to DC rolls

Vitals
2 toned down damage and crew loss.
3 changed to random weapons system offline, damage and crew loss toned down.
5 toned down damage and crew loss.
6 toned down but still pretty nasty.

Sounds good to me.

Well these are my suggestions, I agree with some crits being tonned down, but at the same time feel very strongly that the crew crit really needs to do something.

 

[sidewinder]

I actually thought it would be nice if the type of weapon had something to do with weither you could get a crit or not. Kinda like non AP weapons can only crit weapons and engines, ap can do a little more and only SAP weapons can cause vital crits. So weak weapons wouldnt be able to crit at all. You see the big beam weapons go completley through ships but you dont see pulse cannons do that, they just impact the hull. And while pulse type weaponry can kill ships its proably more from just damage then getting a lucky hit with them.

 

[cordas]

I actually thought it would be nice if the type of weapon had something to do with weither you could get a crit or not. Kinda like non AP weapons can only crit weapons and engines, ap can do a little more and only SAP weapons can cause vital crits. So weak weapons wouldnt be able to crit at all. You see the big beam weapons go completley through ships but you dont see pulse cannons do that, they just impact the hull. And while pulse type weaponry can kill ships its proably more from just damage then getting a lucky hit with them.

Its an idea, but it would be easier to have some form of imprecise specail rule.... maybe make it -1 on roles on the critcal table, and super imprecise where they are also -1 on the crit damage table.

 

[Ripple]

Ugh...no....don't make the crits even more unbalancing by limiting who can even get on the table. You already have a mechanic for why big beams are devestating you don't need to make them the only reliable crit machines as well.

Ripple

 

[CZuschlag]

I can get behind an idea where the secondary effects are more limited, the damage on the crit table is more smoothed-out, but the average damage and crew stay the same -- I have no issue with that....

I can consider toning down the damage and crew and the effects, but a won't like it at all, not even a touch, as is messes with what are perceived balances (I thought the consensus was that the Minbari are balanced and right now .... removing Precise really downgrades their firepower further).... (Ripple and I disagree here)

But changing access to what weapons can get to the good crits ... no way. Some races (Abbai, I'm looking at you here!) need general access to good crits, it's how the Quad Arrays get rough. Without that, some races become uber, and other become zero fun to play against. I don't like this (at least, with current firepower and balance) one bit. (Here, Ripple, I wholeheartedly agree).