No. 1 Bear
Mongoose
That would be cool a Mag Cruiser with a decent amount of mag gun AD.
Playtest rules - Narn updates
- Thread starter Foxmeister
- Start date
Tzarevitch
Mongoose
Foxmeister said:
That's exactly what I said a while back. Ditch the laser and increase the mag gun. There is really no reason to have both in ACtA. That was a legacy of the way the rules worked in the AoG version. (The same is true of the Ka'Toc by the way.)
Tzarevitch
While I can agree it works for the battle - > lower priorities.
For war and above it is well pointless. The massive amount of weapon systems that the narn use limit them way too much when using this special rule. Sure it's ok if you have 1 massive gun but the narn have a multitude of weapons.
I can't help but think that the guy who came up with this was looking specifically at the G'Quan as it benefits that ship reasonably well. On Skirmish and Patrol level this CBD rule is fantastic.
BUT it brings you back to this war and armageddon level ships. Critted to oblivion floating around the board because they have so many hit points that they will just float around as adrift for a few turns.
I can not agree that the removall of the intereceptors was a good idea ok the ship was very good. BUT you need something to allow you to fire ALL your front arc while closing with the enemy and the new CBD will not do this for you.
Now if CBD halfed your AD on your attacks rather than limiting you to 1 weapon then this could be nasty. But that's intensify defensive fire and as they have no interceptors it's something else other people can take advantage of the narn can not.
I think the Narn need there own rule. Or change CBD to all weapons half AD that way it would not favor certain ships that only have 2 weapon systems on them.
For war and above it is well pointless. The massive amount of weapon systems that the narn use limit them way too much when using this special rule. Sure it's ok if you have 1 massive gun but the narn have a multitude of weapons.
I can't help but think that the guy who came up with this was looking specifically at the G'Quan as it benefits that ship reasonably well. On Skirmish and Patrol level this CBD rule is fantastic.
BUT it brings you back to this war and armageddon level ships. Critted to oblivion floating around the board because they have so many hit points that they will just float around as adrift for a few turns.
I can not agree that the removall of the intereceptors was a good idea ok the ship was very good. BUT you need something to allow you to fire ALL your front arc while closing with the enemy and the new CBD will not do this for you.
Now if CBD halfed your AD on your attacks rather than limiting you to 1 weapon then this could be nasty. But that's intensify defensive fire and as they have no interceptors it's something else other people can take advantage of the narn can not.
I think the Narn need there own rule. Or change CBD to all weapons half AD that way it would not favor certain ships that only have 2 weapon systems on them.
Foxmeister
Mongoose
I don't see an issue here. I think that the larger ships (Bin'Tak, G'Vrahn, Ka'Bin'Tak etc) should generally be escorted by smaller vessels and they can "Manoeuvre to Shield to protect them.
In addition, if you look at the larger ships, most of their FA weaponry is non-interceptable anyway, so anyway facing these vessels is going to have the same issue that you noted anyway.
With respect to the G'Vrahn, losing the interceptors just means that I'm probably going to use its onboard Frazis as interceptors anyway. I was already doing this, but using them on other ships so it doesn't make a huge difference to me.
Regards,
Dave
In addition, if you look at the larger ships, most of their FA weaponry is non-interceptable anyway, so anyway facing these vessels is going to have the same issue that you noted anyway.
With respect to the G'Vrahn, losing the interceptors just means that I'm probably going to use its onboard Frazis as interceptors anyway. I was already doing this, but using them on other ships so it doesn't make a huge difference to me.
Regards,
Dave
If you Manoeuvre to Shield to protect them then your not using CBDs and in tern that ship gets blasted to bits I can see the point about being covered by big ships but that's something you need to game and plan to do. not always a viable option and this is something that will work better for other races than the narn. ships for example that have interceptors dive in the way and the interceptors absorb the damage.
Though it's worth looking into.
Though it's worth looking into.
Foxmeister
Mongoose
Thinking about it, since the G'Vrahn is losing the Command trait (at least thus far in the playtest), wouldn't it make sense to up the Command to +2 on the Bin'Tak? It would fit the fluff text better - currently if a Bin'Tak and G'Tal were in the same fleet, your best Command is on the G'Tal.
Regards,
Dave
Regards,
Dave
Lord David the Denied
Mongoose
The G'Tal is a dedicated command cruiser. The Bin'Tak is a dreadnought. I'd say no to increasing the Bin'Tak's command bonus.
Apparently (as staed in other threads) they are only making a "number of changes to too good / too bad ships" - so this small change is unlikely to go in. For instance it was stated that a change in the Octurion to having 24" range beams would likely better balance it but would not go in...........................
Also I would tend to agree with LDTD.
Also I would tend to agree with LDTD.
Lord David the Denied
Mongoose
Joy. Balance changes that just aren't important enough to justify a couple of lines of text. For pity's sake, who's writing this book? :roll:
Da Boss said:Apparently (as staed in other threads) they are only making a "number of changes to too good / too bad ships" - so this small change is unlikely to go in. For instance it was stated that a change in the Octurion to having 24" range beams would likely better balance it but would not go in...........................
Also I would tend to agree with LDTD.
What do you say about the shadow omega then that's a balanced ship is it?
Not up to me :wink: - IMHO however I think it is a weak War level shipb and needs some adjusting - I thought it was being discussed on the Psi Corps thread - perhaps give it shields and / or longer range beam..............?
so back to discussing our inferiors.....I mean the Narn ...........
so back to discussing our inferiors.....I mean the Narn ...........
Lone Gunman
Mongoose
Some thoughts about the Narn changes:
Special order too good. Easy to pull of an 4+ save. Makes many smaller vessels even better.
G'Vrahn: A bit down tuning was needed, but not that much. Now one will rather play 4 Var'Nic or Dag'Kar. The G'Vrahn is now on par with the Bin'Tak, meaning it is crap. It was one of the few ships which was good or even better than swarms of smaller ones. And now it is gone due to over compensation. Not good!
Special order too good. Easy to pull of an 4+ save. Makes many smaller vessels even better.
G'Vrahn: A bit down tuning was needed, but not that much. Now one will rather play 4 Var'Nic or Dag'Kar. The G'Vrahn is now on par with the Bin'Tak, meaning it is crap. It was one of the few ships which was good or even better than swarms of smaller ones. And now it is gone due to over compensation. Not good!
Foxmeister
Mongoose
Lone Gunman said:
I disagree - I don't think it was nerfed too badly at all. It could have been far worse! IMHO, Interceptors aren't really all that anyway, and you can gain the same effect using the Frazis (which is about all they are good for anyway!).
Regards,
Dave
Foxmeister
Mongoose
Lord David the Denied said:
Fluff text:
Definition of Flagship: A ship that carries a fleet or squadron commander and bears the commander's flag.
If anything, I would say it fits far better that the G'Tal gets Command 1 and the Bin'Tak Command 2.
Regards,
Dave
Foxmeister
Mongoose
Da Boss said:
I'm sure everyone is in agreement that this would be a wasted opportunity not to make these very simple fixes. 2 pages in P&P could make these little tweaks, or alternatively just a simple errata PDF could do the same for very little effort!
Regards,
Dave
CZuschlag
Mongoose
No one locally fielded any War ships except the G'Vrahn, or when you knew the other side was going to do it, too. Simply said, it wasn't worth it; the swarm was always better.
So, the War ship gets improved (yay!). That's correct.
However, if the G'Vrahn was balanced before, after the boost to all War-priority ships on the chart, it has to be overpowered now. Therefore, the rebalance.
Seriously, we have had a total of two individual ship balance polls after 2nd Edition about balance. The other ones were about the Shadow Stalker, the Demos, and the Huge Hangars ships:
---------------------------
The Drakh Huge Hangars ships (Ma'Cu and Amu, mainly):
....are too weak; they provide cheap way to get a lot of extra VPs 2% [ 1 ]
....are too weak; they don't have Battle-level firepower even with the Raiders (like the Milani) 2% [ 1 ]
....are somewhat too weak, but not worth fixing (like the Ochliavita) 6% [ 3 ]
....are balanced well (like the Hyperion) 14% [ 7 ]
....are somewhat strong, but aren't that bad (like the Targrath) 23% [ 11 ]
....are overpowered; with the raiders there's too many guns (like the Demos) 4% [ 2 ]
....are overpowered; you're getting something for nothing 10% [ 5 ]
....I haven't played against often enough to make an opinion. 36% [ 17 ]
---------------------------------
(previous poll results)
What do you think of the Demos
It is a totally sick skirmish level ship! 22% [ 16 ]
It is a little too good compared to the Vorchan 51% [ 37 ]
It is fine as it is. 26% [ 19 ]
It is too fragile and only has front guns. 0% [ 0 ]
-------------------------------
Would you/How would you fix the G'Vrahn?
Leave it, it's tough but not broken 52% [ 38 ]
It's a tad ott, change it's e-mines to one shot 23% [ 17 ]
drop it to one turn, and remove some forward weapons 16% [ 12 ]
up it to armagedon level with some upgrades 4% [ 3 ]
something completely different, mentioned below 2% [ 2 ]
---------------------------------
It probably means that it had to be fixed. And they did get altered. The Au lost a point of Hull and there's more to come in a Huge Hangars rejigger (possibly). The Demos is losing 4 AD. It's also the G'Vrahn's turn.
It probably means that it had to be fixed. And so it is.
So, the War ship gets improved (yay!). That's correct.
However, if the G'Vrahn was balanced before, after the boost to all War-priority ships on the chart, it has to be overpowered now. Therefore, the rebalance.
Seriously, we have had a total of two individual ship balance polls after 2nd Edition about balance. The other ones were about the Shadow Stalker, the Demos, and the Huge Hangars ships:
---------------------------
The Drakh Huge Hangars ships (Ma'Cu and Amu, mainly):
....are too weak; they provide cheap way to get a lot of extra VPs 2% [ 1 ]
....are too weak; they don't have Battle-level firepower even with the Raiders (like the Milani) 2% [ 1 ]
....are somewhat too weak, but not worth fixing (like the Ochliavita) 6% [ 3 ]
....are balanced well (like the Hyperion) 14% [ 7 ]
....are somewhat strong, but aren't that bad (like the Targrath) 23% [ 11 ]
....are overpowered; with the raiders there's too many guns (like the Demos) 4% [ 2 ]
....are overpowered; you're getting something for nothing 10% [ 5 ]
....I haven't played against often enough to make an opinion. 36% [ 17 ]
---------------------------------
(previous poll results)
What do you think of the Demos
It is a totally sick skirmish level ship! 22% [ 16 ]
It is a little too good compared to the Vorchan 51% [ 37 ]
It is fine as it is. 26% [ 19 ]
It is too fragile and only has front guns. 0% [ 0 ]
-------------------------------
Would you/How would you fix the G'Vrahn?
Leave it, it's tough but not broken 52% [ 38 ]
It's a tad ott, change it's e-mines to one shot 23% [ 17 ]
drop it to one turn, and remove some forward weapons 16% [ 12 ]
up it to armagedon level with some upgrades 4% [ 3 ]
something completely different, mentioned below 2% [ 2 ]
---------------------------------
It probably means that it had to be fixed. And they did get altered. The Au lost a point of Hull and there's more to come in a Huge Hangars rejigger (possibly). The Demos is losing 4 AD. It's also the G'Vrahn's turn.
It probably means that it had to be fixed. And so it is.
