Playtest - Whitestar

[l33tpenguin]

Speed based initiative would solve this

 

[Hindsight]

I'm reading all of this, and I'm having some thoughts.

1) Make the ISA Allies, instead of having the ISA take allies. Anyone can bring in some of the White Star Fleet for support. This seems practical, the Centauri kicked your dog, call in the ISA, get some support. The ISA can still be played as its own fleet, but then everyone has access to the white star, then if you want to play Narn, Earth, Minbari, or hell even Psi Corps, or any of the league worlds (so everything but Centauri, Dilgar, and Drakh) can have access to skavendans' bane, the White Star.

2) -8" Beam Range. Make the beam weapon 2 AD, and reduce it to 10", leaving the pulsars alone. This way the White Star has to come into range of all or most secondaries, and in order to do any damage at all, has to come out of hiding. I feel strongly that as methos put it the White Star should be a knife fighter, and the true issue here is our range. Cut down our range to 10" and our defenses become all we have.

3) With as long as the TTT requires a 4+ for an ISA player to get it, I'll never support it. 50% failure rate on something it should have automatically is silly. Maybe if it was CQ 7, and we failed on a one or a two, but the frequency of us failing to shoot at all reduces the strength more so than just losing one AD, and that already was too much. Make it boresight, and it'd need changes across the board.

4) Let scout effect Dodge like it effects stealth. If you're clever, and you prepare your shooting, you can shoot in a way that makes it harder to dodge. A scouted target goes to Dodge 5, and thus loses a sixth of its dodging from scouting. Make it stack endlessly, so you can disable a White Stars dodge completely, and remove it from your table.

5) Fix the G'Quan. I know I know, I'm just sayin ;-)

6) Maybe, if we're going to reduce the range of the White Star, give us a speed of 16". If we are forced to knife fight, the people who sit at 18" will cry foul, at least at 16" we have more to lose from reducers, and can get into knife fighting range more readily. Though I see myself re-evaluating jump engines, and jumping into the thick of the fight more so than just running up with the knifes out.

7) I feel very strongly that the Knife Fight White Star is the ticket to balance. The more the stats, reflect the tactics displayed in the show, the more you'll see them down your throat rather than taking pot shots, which to me, just isn't very rangerly at all. Can I get an overall yay or nay on this, and then I think the next step is to just propose a new White Star in a new thread, consolidate all the White Star discussions to there, and then we won't be thread jacking people on sixteen different topics.

Thoughts?

 

[Hindsight]

The argument that it's agile enough to aim where it likes is pure bull. Its agility is represented in the movement phase. It has naff-all to do with the shooting phase.

Careful there. You call bull and I might have to use an explanation, assuming as would seem appropriate, that you have the reasoning capacity of a crushed coke can.

The Dag'kar and the White Star are on the table. The Dag'kar won initiative, and the White Star moves in 14" to get a bore sight lock, and in response the Dag'Kar moves its measily 5 inches, being outside of the bore sight lock. The Dag'Kar can now fire. The White Star cannot.

This would work with 5 raid ships, vs. 5 raid ships, knowing range, you can just move your closer targets last, making it so the White Stars get to do nothing. That does not show agility at all.

A Speed 5 ship, moving just slightly, represents agility to you? I'd really like to see your thoughts and logic on that, more so than your usual blanket statements calling something bull, without any substance. Have you actually watched Babylon 5, or were you just attracted to the phallic tiers of the Centauri craft?

Show us on the doll where the he touched you. Was it here? Do you see the man who touched you in this court room? Could you point him out? Let the record show that accuser identified the White Star.

EDIT - Yes I know he is going to have an aneurysm when he sees this, trying to respond in six different degrees of rudeness, but if you're going to call BS, and not state any kind of reasoning, its just silly. I'm not going to be bullied by someone calling themselves a lord over the internet, and I've heard all about him from others... so... yea. I wouldn't normally grit the teeth like this lol.

 

[The_Mhor]

The argument that it's agile enough to aim where it likes is pure bull. Its agility is represented in the movement phase. It has naff-all to do with the shooting phase.

Exactly, but that's the justification for a front arc.

I see it as being agile enough to aim the tip of it's nose precisely where it wants to on a target vessel. No other ship (bar the Victory destroyer, which is the next evolution of the ISA's Whitestar tech) can do this enough to justify a precise boresight beam. This also negates the need for a Whitestar specific "power fudge", which introduces a whole new nerfing mechanic purely to balance the Whitestar adding un-necessary complication to the whole thing. If the WS uses CBD it's limited to boresight. If it uses TTT to broaden it's arc it can't CBD. Whether it then requires a small adjustment in beam range to finish it off is a question requiring further testing.

Speed based initiative would solve this

Do you meaning faster vessels go earlier, so the big ships can blast them when it's their turn; or slow vessels go first meaning tiny ships will always pick them apart from outside their primary arcs?

 

[Hindsight]

Do you meaning faster vessels go earlier, so the big ships can blast them when it's their turn; or slow vessels go last meaning tiny ships will always pick them apart from outside their primary arcs?

I would assume that he means the faster ships go last. The Dag'Kar has to move before the White Star, sticking with my above example, to represent that the faster ship would find the ideal firing arcs.

This is the flaw with the Bore Sight White Star, because it requires too many other changes to be functional. TTT just doesn't work having a 50% chance to fail. Thats way too high when compared to the show, the White Star never fails to find something to shoot at.

 

[Da Boss]

Do you meaning faster vessels go earlier, so the big ships can blast them when it's their turn; or slow vessels go last meaning tiny ships will always pick them apart from outside their primary arcs?

I would assume that he means the faster ships go last. The Dag'Kar has to move before the White Star, sticking with my above example, to represent that the faster ship would find the ideal firing arcs.

This is the flaw with the Bore Sight White Star, because it requires too many other changes to be functional. TTT just doesn't work having a 50% chance to fail. Thats way too high when compared to the show, the White Star never fails to find something to shoot at.

Doesn't the White Star often fire pulsars alone not the beam, perhaps due to targeting problems (or it looked cooler on the screen)?

Although I am personally happy with F arc White Star................. :wink:

 

[Hindsight]

Do you meaning faster vessels go earlier, so the big ships can blast them when it's their turn; or slow vessels go last meaning tiny ships will always pick them apart from outside their primary arcs?

I would assume that he means the faster ships go last. The Dag'Kar has to move before the White Star, sticking with my above example, to represent that the faster ship would find the ideal firing arcs.

This is the flaw with the Bore Sight White Star, because it requires too many other changes to be functional. TTT just doesn't work having a 50% chance to fail. Thats way too high when compared to the show, the White Star never fails to find something to shoot at.

Doesn't the White Star often fire pulsars alone not the beam, perhaps due to targeting problems (or it looked cooler on the screen)?

Although I am personally happy with F arc White Star................. :wink:

Rewatching the show, as you have been, I've been watching that closely, as per these debates. The White Star seems to fire the beam in sprays, I'd say about the length of the ship at a time, maybe twice that its hard to tell with a beam, but it fires it in bursts, while the pulsars fire constantly. That is usually at a distance, and when close, the beam, like when they attacked the Vorlon outpost, seemed to be saved for key targets (ie precise) making sure its strength caused maximum damage.

Also, the beam wouldn't be the only Bore Sight weapon. My guns are mounted forward, no reason why both aren't bore sight if one is. That is where the agility makes them both F arc. I could just as easily say that as I can turn on a dime all my weapons should be T, and be justified by the show. I'd never go there though... well... no probably not ;-)

 

[l33tpenguin]

Do you meaning faster vessels go earlier, so the big ships can blast them when it's their turn; or slow vessels go last meaning tiny ships will always pick them apart from outside their primary arcs?

I would assume that he means the faster ships go last. The Dag'Kar has to move before the White Star, sticking with my above example, to represent that the faster ship would find the ideal firing arcs.

This is the flaw with the Bore Sight White Star, because it requires too many other changes to be functional. TTT just doesn't work having a 50% chance to fail. Thats way too high when compared to the show, the White Star never fails to find something to shoot at.

Speed based initiative wouldn't be JUST for the white star. It would partially solve init sinks, which would be its main goal. While you could still sink ships at the same speed, it would only be effective against other ships of similar speed. It would keep lumbering 4 speed ships from magically becoming more manuverable because they were in a fleet of two-fors. The current itteration I have as a house rule has initiative rolled and added to the speed of the ships, then movment is done in blocks of 6, so ships with a init+speed score of 1-6 move, then 7-12, etc. Players take turns moving, with whoever scored the higher base init moving second (or last, if more than 2)

 

[Greg Smith]

Speed-based initiative would be a real problem for slow boresight ships such as the Bin'tak.

 

[Hindsight]

I like it.

I have two ships, you have three. Your speeds are 5, 8, and 15.

I roll for initiative, I have a 5, you rolled a 6. All my ships are now Initiative 19 (White Stars) and your 15" ship is initiative 21. The lowest moves first, the 11, and then the 13, and then I move my two White Stars, and then because your 21 is higher, it moves last, thus having the best strategic move, which is last.

All the initiative sinks in the world won't protect you if they're all stupid slow, as would make sense, faster is better in the movement phase.

 

[l33tpenguin]

Speed-based initiative would be a real problem for slow boresight ships such as the Bin'tak.

I know, which is why my house rules also include the 'Bring to bear' special action (I posted a copy of it in the TTT thread)

Speed base initiative removes most of the init sinking problems. to fix the rest and to ensure slow bore sight ships aren't totally crippled, 'Bring to bear' enables them to follow the movement of a target. Bring to bear is an opposed CQ, thus representing the skill of the crews and can also be used against you, since the target determines the direction you turn in and you MUST turn. The target can also get out of your range if it is fast enough.

I like it.

I have two ships, you have three. Your speeds are 5, 8, and 15.

I roll for initiative, I have a 5, you rolled a 6. All my ships are now Initiative 19 (White Stars) and your 15" ship is initiative 21. The lowest moves first, the 11, and then the 13, and then I move my two White Stars, and then because your 21 is higher, it moves last, thus having the best strategic move, which is last.

All the initiative sinks in the world won't protect you if they're all stupid slow, as would make sense, faster is better in the movement phase.

If you want to look over my house rules, to include how I've done speed based initiative, PM me your e-mail and I'll send you a copy of them. I'm going to have to redo a lot after PnP comes out, though Its still a work in progress and, sadly, I don't have anywhere to host them.

It *IS* possible for say, an omega to beat out a white star, but it is hard. if the earth player rolls a perfect 12 on their init and the ISA player gets like 2... then the Omega's init+speed ends up higher than the white stars and its a bore fest for the EA player. It doesn't happen often, though, since the EA player has to beat the ISA players init by at least 8.

Oh, because Command effects init, this makes the command bonus a bit more powerful as well. a +2 or +3 can really make the difference in getting your ships in higher speed groups

 

[eldiablito]

Wow! What a heated discussion (where's my fire-proof underwear?)...

So, taking what some people said, what if the Pulsars and Neutron Lasers where shortened to 10 and 8 inches? I like it, I don't even care which weapon gets the 10 and which gets the 8, they will both force the ship to get in closer.

Also, many people hate the ISA with allies. I can understand their frustration; one of the best ships in the game gets an added bonus of taking other ships from nearly every fleet in the book!?! If we flipped this and make it so that any Narn, League, Minbari or Earth fleet could take 1 selection of White Stars instead?

I know, this was all suggested earlier, I'm just trying to say that both are REALLY GOOD ideas and, for all my worth, they get my vote too.

 

[wpngjstr]

Let me see if I have the general ideas straight (after 10 pages I'm starting to get lost):

General feeling is that WS with CBD is too powerful, due to Beam snipers (ignoring for the moment that others can do this (cough Teshlan cough))

Effectiveness of dodge varies widely with all the "anti dodge" weapons available, making the WS hard to balance (too good against fleets without them, dead meat against fleets with them)

WS perceived maneuverability is hurt by the initiative system

The fire power Nerf is seen by many as too much (ISA players) and many as good (opponents of ISA players)

Boresight is debated as being canon (ship design) and non cannon (maneuverability)

Possible alternative changes that do not single out the WS in CBD penalties:

-Shorten beam ranges to make it a knife fighter, as many of us already play them (and watch them die a lot) suggestions run about 10-12" for both weapons)

-Make it a boresight beam
(and possibly allow TTT a wider arc)

-change CBD across the board (see other threads)

-drop Precise (either just for the WS Beam or across the board)

Does that hit the major points? Any I've missed?

Edit: Ah yes, ISA and allies. Feeling that it allows for abuse by covering ISA fleet gaps, with the expansions to the ISA fleet, perhaps not as needed. Suggested alternatives include; no allies, ISA become an allies choice for other fleets, or limiting the selection of allies (certain ships or ISD ranges)

My perspectives (fwiw):

Boresight is appropriate- it's how the weapon fires, and while it is argued that they always get targets on screen, the cameras will rarely point at the ones that can't get the angle for their shots/conducting maneuvering runs etc (it's like the bathroom; you never see it unless it's a plot point)- after all, how many WS are in the fleet vs how many are on screen at one time? I agree with the idea that the maneuverability give the precise capability rather than the bigger arc in the shooting phase. The use of TTT would help cut down on CBD abuse while also representing the maneuvering into position.

Shorten the range to 10" to 12" (I'd actually favor 12-14" secondaries, and a 10" beam, since I seem to recall mention of onscreen evidence for longer range secondaries), making it a knife fighter as shown in the ,ahem, show. Since both weapons are now in range, this also cuts down on CBD abuse

Give it the SM capability the Vree have, probably as a SA, rather than the new AS&T capability. This would also reflect a knife fighting role, and demonstrate their legendary maneuverability. I would make it a maximum of 4-6" move while SM rather than 1/2 speed.

The range reduction and limited arc mean it has to maneuver closer and more carefully, making it more vulnerable to "buckets of dice" secondaries, while the SM SA capability allows it to run rings around enemy ships at close range (although it does admittedly reduce the effectiveness of the Boresight limitation) The CBD abuse (one of the main complaints should be virtually eliminated due to the alternate SAs vying for attention, and having two weapons to fire.

 

[stepan.razin]

Remove the Dodge trait, but double the hit points..

 

[Hindsight]

A lot of stuff.

I am trying to find that magical place, between all the great ideas presented, and what Mongoose is likely to take on. Switching to a speed based initiative is going to be a huge change throughout the entire game, and while I support it, without it, making the White Star bore sight just doesn't work.

So I think the next phase here, is to just lay out my compromise for the new White Star, and then we can take that apart, and modify it so we can come to some idea of what we want to suggest to the Playtest team that submits this stuff to Matt. As it stands, the White Star changes are too serious, and I feel strongly that reducing our range considerably is the way to do that. Looking at what others can do, the 8-12" range allows more guns to be brought against us, and I think the White Star will see a well needed adjustment in tactics, when now we're always getting hit, by all of our enemies "buckets of dice".

Dodge is to charicterful to take out, you see the Shadow vessel playing with the White Star, and it actively dives in order to evade the beam. Dodge is just cannon and really reflects what the White Star can do.

I like the idea of White Stars as allies, I'd say more than just "a white star" but maybe, 2 FP for every 5 may be ISA reinforcements. If taken they start out in hyperspace as well, and come in on a roll of 3+, then 2+, then 1+, etc. Similar to how reinforcements are handled in the 5th Edition of Warhammer 40,000. But again, if we do that, if we shoot for that, I see it being too ambitious of a change that effects many army lists, instead of just this one ship getting its due update, so that the whining can stop.

My White Stars die readily when I play them up close, and it was suggested to me that I hang back, so I wonder if we'd need some kind of damage upgrade if we're then forced to fight close, as a lot of fire will be coming onto the White Stars, and even after Dodge and AA, we're still going down to all that fire.

I need to reflect on this, and come up with the standards as I feel we've agreed upon here. I think we can present it in a way that is easy enough of a change, without taking the whole game back to the drawing board for over one vessel. Table some of these ideas until after this is released, and focus them towards 3rd ed.

 

[Foxmeister]

I like it.

I have two ships, you have three. Your speeds are 5, 8, and 15.

I roll for initiative, I have a 5, you rolled a 6. All my ships are now Initiative 19 (White Stars) and your 15" ship is initiative 21. The lowest moves first, the 11, and then the 13, and then I move my two White Stars, and then because your 21 is higher, it moves last, thus having the best strategic move, which is last.

All the initiative sinks in the world won't protect you if they're all stupid slow, as would make sense, faster is better in the movement phase.

Horribly busted I'm afraid. A slow boresight reliant fleet (e.g. Narn) would never get to target anything and might as well not play. Even if the boresight issue was fixed some other way, you could still end up with entire fleets that would have to move before a single ISA ship needed to.

What is being proposed here would require a *completely* different game.

Regards,

Dave

 

[Hindsight]

I think we can present it in a way that is easy enough of a change, without taking the whole game back to the drawing board for one vessel. Table some of these ideas until after this is released, and focus them towards 3rd ed.

See above. I agree.

 

[wpngjstr]

A lot of stuff.

Nicely summarized

 

[Taran]

I like it.

I have two ships, you have three. Your speeds are 5, 8, and 15.

I roll for initiative, I have a 5, you rolled a 6. All my ships are now Initiative 19 (White Stars) and your 15" ship is initiative 21. The lowest moves first, the 11, and then the 13, and then I move my two White Stars, and then because your 21 is higher, it moves last, thus having the best strategic move, which is last.

All the initiative sinks in the world won't protect you if they're all stupid slow, as would make sense, faster is better in the movement phase.

Horribly busted I'm afraid. A slow boresight reliant fleet (e.g. Narn) would never get to target anything and might as well not play. Even if the boresight issue was fixed some other way, you could still end up with entire fleets that would have to move before a single ISA ship needed to.

What is being proposed here would require a *completely* different game.

Regards,

Dave

You might want to try reading the actual suggestion rather than just an incomplete synopsis of it before complaining about a suggestion you neither know anything about nor understand.

The Speed-Based initiative plus shortened range on the beam, PLUS boresight on Both weapons makes a lot of sense for the WS and does not appear to be likely to harm any other fleets, so long as you bring in the Bring to Bear as well (or just make TTT easier to achieve or maybe just an opposed CQ rather than a 9 CQ).



I really can't say as how I appreciate having my ships' main weapon knocked to 1AD (it's a BEAM, 1AD is a waste) every time I do anything other than just fire the one weapon. SA? 1AD beam. Fire secondaries, 1AD beam.
I thought we'd had it out about the uselessness of a 1AD beam (any Narns want to speak up about their Mag Guns?)...

 

[Foxmeister]

You might want to try reading the actual suggestion rather than just an incomplete synopsis of it before complaining about a suggestion you neither know anything about nor understand.

I do know and I do understand the basis of speed based initiative, it's been discussed before at length and it's still a *bad* solution for ACTA as a game. I really don't think that breaking the entire system is worthwhile to fix one ship but that's just my opinion of course.

However, thank you for your comments and your opinions, I shall bear them in mind for future reference....


Regards,

Dave