New Traits for Vorlons & Shadows...

Does this sound ok or just dumb ?

  • Looks ok

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Looks ok but needs tweaking

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Are you mad ?

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • The First One's are fine as they are

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
  • Poll closed .

Gungnir

Mongoose
After all the talk of weak Shadows and Vorlons I have done a bit of thinking and come up with a couple of ideas to try out :)

Two new traits, 1 for Vorlons and 1 for Shadows(though they could be applied to other races :D )

Shields X +

This ship is protected by an advanced energy shield, any hits taken are nullified on a D6 roll of X or more, precise weapons cause this roll to suffer a –1 penalty .

Energy diffusers

This ship is surrounded by an energy absorbing field. This field functions like an interceptor except it applies to all hits no matter the type of weapon.

Thus the lists could look like :

Vorlon Fighter – Shields 6+
Vorlon Transport, Destroyer – Shields 5+
Vorlon Light Cruiser – Shields 4+
Vorlon Heavy Cruiser – Shields 4+

Shadow Scout – Energy Diffusers 1
Shadow Hunter – Energy Diffusers 1
Shadow Ship – Energy Diffusers 2

I might just be crazy but were gonna playtest these and see what they come out like any comments, thoughts or playtest results appreciated :D
 

kinsha

Mongoose
The energy diffusers are a good idea.

the shields sound the same in essence as a variation of dodge/stealth.
 

Gungnir

Mongoose
the shields sound the same in essence as a variation of dodge/stealth.

Yeah they would give near enough the same effect, apart from they would be effective against all hits no matter the source ie energy mines, jump points etc
 

oreso

Mongoose
For vorlons, adaptive armour and self repairing works, they just need to be tougher i think (being constantly on CAF or something would be cool).

I would prefer the diffusers which require the player to concentrate their fire on one ship to overwhelm defences, rather than a flat save (a threshold that must be overcome in each turns firing before the damage is applied to the ship). An interceptor style system would work i guess, but its not as 'clear cut' as i would like. Up till the point you overwhelm them, the Shadows should seem invincible.

what justifications do you have btw?
 

lastbesthope

Mongoose
I mentioned this on another thread, but Alex mentioned that they want to pretty much keep within the rules thay have when adjusting things, only making up new rules when they really need to.

LBH
 

frobisher

Mongoose
I'd actually make them pretty much identical (ie use the Interceptor mechanism but affecting all weapon types). The Vorlon Shields should be "mechanically" the same as the Abbai Gravitic shields that are absorbed into their Interceptor rating.
 

Khamul

Mongoose
lastbesthope said:
I mentioned this on another thread, but Alex mentioned that they want to pretty much keep within the rules thay have when adjusting things, only making up new rules when they really need to.

LBH

Having Shadow Diffusers work as interceptors that affect all damage types works well then. Espcially considering the Shadow Cloud already has the Interceptor rule.

I somehow see it as diffusers or such, not EA interceptor turrets scattered all over a surface area that immense.
 

Tredrick

Mongoose
Khamul said:
lastbesthope said:
I mentioned this on another thread, but Alex mentioned that they want to pretty much keep within the rules thay have when adjusting things, only making up new rules when they really need to.

LBH

Having Shadow Diffusers work as interceptors that affect all damage types works well then. Espcially considering the Shadow Cloud already has the Interceptor rule.

I somehow see it as diffusers or such, not EA interceptor turrets scattered all over a surface area that immense.

I suggested something similar for the Abbai. I called it Improved Interceptors that could stop beam and mini-beam weapons.
 

B5freak

Mongoose
Well, I was going to keep these close until I had more opportunity to playtest, but the initial test for the Vorlons went very well this evening, so here's my take.

1. Get rid of the Precise rule. When you do damage to a first one, it's d6 per hit, that's it.

2. All Vorlon weapons are Twin-Linked

3. The Vorlons may fire through their Forward 180-degree arc instead of the usual forward 90.

4. The Vorlon Heavy Cruiser and Light Cruiser are Hull 6.

5. All Shadow ships have a "Damage Dissipator". The Dissipator can absorb X amount of damage a turn and is reset to zero in each End Phase. No Damage is applied to the ship until the Dissipator is filled.
  • *Shadow Cruiser - Dissipator 15
    *Shadow Hunter - Dissipator 10
    *Shadow Scout - Dissipator 5
6. All Shadow ships lose the Self-Repairing Special. (due to Dissipator rule).

7. The Shadow Hunter has the following modifications:
  • *Hull 6
    *Loses Fighter Dispersal Tube
    *Gains the Precise trait on its Molecular Slicer Beam
    *Gains a Phasing Pulse Cannon with Range 8", Arc T, 6AD, and A-F, Super AP, DD
8. The Shadow Cruiser now has 6AD and a Fore Fire Arc on its Molecular Slicer Beam. I looked at the difference between upping the AD and going with 5AD at twin-linked and the twin-linked option was so brutal it was just wrong. The 6AD give you more reliable damage without putting it over the top. For the change in Arc, the Shadow's maneuverability should more than compensate and on review the ships in the show did indeed only fire from the fore (spikey bits to the front) arc.

9. Shadows may always start a game with all but one of their ships in Hyperspace regardless of the Scenario's special rules.

10. The Shadow Jump Point Disruptor does not work against Jump Gates (to fix the problem of Shadows auto-winning the Flee to the Jump Gate scenario).
 

lastbesthope

Mongoose
B5freak said:
3. The Vorlons may fire through their Forward 180-degree arc instead of the usual forward 90.

This is the only suggestion I have any problem with, and only because it is outside the current ruleset, there is currnetly no 180 degree fire arc.

I don't necessarily agrre with the rest of the changes, but this is the only one not workable within the current ruleset.

LBH
 

B5freak

Mongoose
Just think of it as halfway between Boresight and Turret. :D

Seriously though, it solves a lot of problems simultaneously without forcing drastic changes to the feel of the fleet, weapon loads, Speed, Turn, or Crew Quality. As simple solutions go, it just feels right. Besides, does a 180-degree fire arc really constitute a new rule?

You should appreciate the first playtest I did of that fleet. I took it against a fleet of 10 White Stars. Despite the White Stars' considerably better maneuverability, the Vorlons were able to establish a defensive formation and give as good as they took. As would be expected in such a battle, the White Stars swarmed all over the Vorlons, losing a White Star or two a turn, as damage slowly built up on the Vorlon ships. By the time we had to call it, around half of the White Stars were either destroyed or Crippled while one Vorlon Destroyer was dead, one Destroyer was two points away from being dead, the two Light Cruisers were 1/2 to 2/3's dead, and the Heavy Cruiser was relatively untouched but outside the main scrum while it tried to get turned around.

Tonight I had an opportunity to play a test game using the new Shadows against Narn. The only modification from the aforementioned changes was the reduction of the Hunter's Beam to 3AD and we implemented the idea mentioned elsewhere about making Boresights Twin-Linked. I don't normally like to change too many variables at once, but since we had the Boresights on the table we figured we'd give it a try.

I took one Cruiser, two Hunters, and two Scouts. The Narn player took 2 G'Quan, 2 Ka'toc (right nasty little Skirmisher that is), 2 T'Loth, 2 G'Sten, 1 Thentus, and 1 Sho'Kar.

Everything in this game just seemed to fall together perfectly. Implementing the "Shadows can always start with all but one ship in Hyperspace", mixed with the reduction of the Cruiser's fire arc from Turret to Fore, gave the Cruiser a great alpha strike capability while keeping it under control in subsequent turns. The supermaneuverability made lining up shots pretty easy, but you had to actually think about who you were going to attack that turn when you moved. The Hunters also finally felt like a real Battle choice.

The Boresight twin-linking rule also seemed to bring the Narn together as a fleet. They still had to line up the shots, but when they did, they knew the damage inflicted was going to be worth the effort. Someone on one of the threads once said that they'd never had a problem lining up boresights. Well, I'd imagine that's true for most of us. The real problem was making those shots count, and twin-linking the boresights sure seems to have taken care of that.

In the end, we had one Hunter at half damage, two T'Loth, and a Ka'Toc on the board.

LBH, I know you don't want to add a new rule (I'm honestly loathe to do it myself), so I can guess what your thoughts are on the Damage Disspators, but keep in mind that they're the equivalent of Self-Repair X. The only exception is that, whereas Vorlons will just keep repairing every turn whether they take damage or not, the Shadows only get the benefit of their Dissipators if someone actually shoots at them. From a theme standpoint, the Shadows really made you feel like you needed to "keep pouring it on Mr. Lenir" in order to kill them.

Ah well, I'm going to keep up the playtesting, if only because I'm having a blast doing it. And, who knows, someone may actually take a liking to one of these hair-brained ideas and make it official.
 

Balance

Mongoose
B5freak said:
Seriously though, it solves a lot of problems simultaneously without forcing drastic changes to the feel of the fleet, weapon loads, Speed, Turn, or Crew Quality. As simple solutions go, it just feels right. Besides, does a 180-degree fire arc really constitute a new rule?

Depends on who is reading it, and I think there's valid concern about new rules being the first steps on a "slippery slope." I think there's interest in avoiding the game becoming a warhammer-style setup where every unit has unique special rules with unforeseen interactions.

Still, The consensus seems to be that the Shadows need something, so this kind of change may make sense.

As a newbie, I do like the idea of keeping the Vorlons and Shadows 'packaged' together. They're appropriate enemies and I'd prefer to keep their rules similar whenever it fits the canon source material.
 

Matt

Mongoose
9. Shadows may always start a game with all but one of their ships in Hyperspace regardless of the Scenario's special rules.

dont like that one

oter then that i think you have a lot off good ideas

the first ones for sure needs tweaking :)
 

B5freak

Mongoose
Balance Wrote:
Depends on who is reading it, and I think there's valid concern about new rules being the first steps on a "slippery slope." I think there's interest in avoiding the game becoming a warhammer-style setup where every unit has unique special rules with unforeseen interactions.

I quite agree. Orks & Eldar anyone? My thought process is this, if Mongoose has already set the precedent of making the First One fleets very different from all the others (different damage, Fighters must be purchased separately, Special Action restrictions, etc), why not take the few extra steps to give these fleets a feeling of uniqueness worthy of the First Ones. I certainly wouldn't advocate doing this sort of thing to any of the younger races' fleets.
 

Howarth

Mongoose
YOU COMPLETE AND UTTER PANSY

Why did you tone them down?
Eh got no balls have you?

Well I fart in your general direction
Your mother was a hamster
And your father smelt of elderberry's

Now go away and put the proper stats in or I shall taunt you a second time
 

B5freak

Mongoose
Matt wrote:
Quote:
9. Shadows may always start a game with all but one of their ships in Hyperspace regardless of the Scenario's special rules.


dont like that one

I fully admit that this one needs additional playtesting, but one of the chief complaints about the Shadows has been their lack of survivability. Upping the Hull on the Hunter and implementing the Diffusors has definitely helped, but the Shadows are still very vulnerable to a closing engagement. Without the ability to "alpha strike", I think people would still find the Shadow's survivability somewhat lacking.

As I said, let me playtest it some more, against a variety of fleets. I'd also encourage anyone who's interested to do the same and post the results.

Here's the latest on the Shadows, consolidated into one set:
Cruiser - All Turret arcs changed to Fore. Slicer Beam now 6 AD. Loses Self-Repairing but gains Damage Dissipator 15.

Hunter - Hull is 6. Slicer Beam now has Precise but is reduced to 3 AD. Replace Fighter launcher with a turreted version of the Scouts pulse cannon (same range, AD, specials). Craft changed to None. Loses Self-Repairing but gains Damage Dissipator 10.

Scout - Loses Self-Repairing but gains Damage Dissipator 5.

I've also created some alternate fleet lists to make playtesting easier. Got to http://www.geocities.com/stephan1313/B5/B5.htm and click on the First Ones link.

Please note that there are some stats for other First One ships in there that I'm working on for a Coriana 6 mega-battle. These are based largely on the old AoG source material and are really only intended to be used in this one scenario (and I'm nowhere near finished tweaking them).
 

Gungnir

Mongoose
YOU COMPLETE AND UTTER PANSY

Why did you tone them down?
Eh got no balls have you?

Well I fart in your general direction
Your mother was a hamster
And your father smelt of elderberry's

Now go away and put the proper stats in or I shall taunt you a second time

Well if you insist :D

Vorlon Heavy Cruiser - Shields 3+
Get rid of the discharge gun but up the lightning cannon to 10AD and increase hull to 150

Shadow Ship - Energy Diffuser 3, diffusers only goes down to 5+, add adaptive armour and increase Slicer AD to 8

Does that look better for you Howarth ? :lol:
 

deathlynx

Mongoose
B5Freak...you might try playing with all of the rules except the jump in?
Try playing a couple of the scenarios where you can't hold your fleet in reserve to find out if it does need some help given the other changes...

Keep in mind sometimes one or two changes are good while too many make what you are trying to change either too powerful or completely neutered...
 

B5freak

Mongoose
Deathlynx wrote:
B5Freak...you might try playing with all of the rules except the jump in?
Try playing a couple of the scenarios where you can't hold your fleet in reserve to find out if it does need some help given the other changes...

Keep in mind sometimes one or two changes are good while too many make what you are trying to change either too powerful or completely neutered...

Thanks. Yes, that was my intent. I wanted to run a jump-in against a fleet that isn't very maneuverable and therefore wouldn't be able to react quickly and the Narn seemed to fit that need. Next should be a non-jump-in vs my friend's beam-heavy Centauri. If the Shadows can make it across the board with enough to make it a hard fight for both sides all the way to the end, then I think we will have justification for re-thinking the jump-in rule.
 
Top