Progress on 2e

[emperorpenguin]

Perhaps you'd prefer to be told something like this:
"2e won't be used to change or update the rules or stats at all but just to combine all the existing rules into a single book.

No I'd prefer to be told 2e will be 2e when it is released, but for now lets just stick to discussing 1e. Except for this thread of course, which is about 2e. In other threads, I don't really give 2 hoots about 2e, whatever may or may not be in it is completely inconsequential to the game as it stands today.

well I will point out that in the Rutarian thread you were the first one to make reference to 2nd ed Burger..... :wink:

 

[Pauly_D]

2e is about making sure all the races are balanced against each other and all rules are as they should be so that the only other books that need come out after is new fleet books (possibly Hyach and there may be other new races)

Sarcasm is a wonderful thing, even if it doesn't always make it across the void of the internet...

i knew you were being sarcastic but i was just pointing out what we are trying to achieve

 

[Burger]

well I will point out that in the Rutarian thread you were the first one to make reference to 2nd ed Burger..... :wink:

Yes I am quite proud that I got in there first on that occasion :lol:

 

[katadder]

alot of the it will be fixed in 2e posts are because something has been brought up that we have already fixed so that you gys know this is fixed etc.

 

[Reaverman]

alot of the it will be fixed in 2e posts are because something has been brought up that we have already fixed so that you gys know this is fixed etc.

Is that fixed as in 'Neutered'?

 

[Drahazar]

I agree with CZuschlag I think that is a good way to keep this organized instead of the whineing about this or that. I sure the way CZuschlag put things in order will keep it organized and make it easier for the people at mongoose to take those ideas and put them into practice. Of course im just a new guy to the world of mongoose and the first game of theres ill be learning is B5 cause the Show is the heat. I could go on about how i hate/love GW. But I think Mongoose seems to be going in a good direction and if they can pull off a main rule book and then have just maybe sinerio books or new fleet books it should be fine. GW has the main rule book and then Army books and it seems to work fine. I would put input on ships and the game mechanics but my stuff has not arrived so I don't know jack just been reading threads for a week and a half trying to learn some of the game.

 

[Hash]

I agree with CZuschlag

Ditto - in fact a design concept for each fleet would be most welcome and noting the concerns, in the logical manner he suggested, is a useful sanity check for any new ship design.

 

[Ripple]

While I tend to like things not quite as formal as Zuschlag's suggestion, the basic idea and format is really useful.

Also agree with Hash, a sort of quide for where a fleet is supposed to go would be nice.

Ripple

 

[Da Boss]

Yes I stand suitably chastised!

all sounds a good idea!

 

[Triggy]

Sounds reasonable in principle, particularly on new ships/races. With me offering an analysis of every ship as we go along, there shouldn't be any major imbalances even if one or two are a little bit better or worse...but that's precisely what playtesting is there to discover. The mathematical approach simply saves an awful lot of time reaching a good point to playtest from.

 

[katadder]

this isnt a game of just maths though, tactics, manouvering, luck all come into it. whose to say what weapons are pointing at the enemy all the time, and maths cannot decide fleet compositions, or inittiative rolls. i mean yes you can average how many hits a weapon will get and average how many crits but that doesnt tell you the crit, and after all your maths was responsible for an attempt at a 12AD beam on the command omega.

 

[Triggy]

and after all your maths was responsible for an attempt at a 12AD beam on the command omega.

Which was balanced, it just wasn't what was wanted on the ship

Anyway, as I said, it's a starting point to ensure no obvious blunders are made - something that has happened in the past and we all don't want to see happen in the future!

 

[Ripple]

I tend to be a bit hard on the math guys fairly often myself, but more because I think they use the wrong approach. I don't want the average, I want to know the probable and the achievable, preferably over a fleet.

But if you look at the process CZuschlag laid out the math is only one step, lots of oppurtunity there for more creative human input. I think Stealth could have used more of this when it was originally designed...a lot of folks still dislike the all or nothing approach, the feel that a few rolls are more important than manuever, fleet selection, etc. Mathmatically it works out fine, ships are suitably fragile etc...but it feels like you should walk up and throw two hand fulls of dice and see if you get over half the stealth roles. If not concede. (More so prior to Arm. of course...and some bad feeling linger...but still can be that way much more often than I like, fight Vree at skirmish when they field all Stealth 5)

Ripple

 

[Hash]

I tend to be a bit hard on the math guys fairly often myself, but more because I think they use the wrong approach. I don't want the average, I want to know the probable and the achievable, preferably over a fleet.

But if you look at the process CZuschlag laid out the math is only one step, lots of oppurtunity there for more creative human input. I think Stealth could have used more of this when it was originally designed...a lot of folks still dislike the all or nothing approach, the feel that a few rolls are more important than manuever, fleet selection, etc. Mathmatically it works out fine, ships are suitably fragile etc...but it feels like you should walk up and throw two hand fulls of dice and see if you get over half the stealth roles. If not concede. (More so prior to Arm. of course...and some bad feeling linger...but still can be that way much more often than I like, fight Vree at skirmish when they field all Stealth 5)

Ripple

I agree generally that there is a problem with *frustrating* mechanics. If I lose a game then I would prefer it to be because I was outplayed not because I missed one roll that meant I did nothing else. Basically any mechanic that shuts something down or prevents you from doing anything else because of a single die roll, even if it's "balanced" in the long term, is just NOT FUN! Trust me, sitting there and not rolling dice while you're opponent keeps rolling damage is not a cool game mechanic

 

[Target]

Unless you are Minbari. We had a 4 (Narn,Centauri,Drazi,Minbari) way 4 Battle pt game where we all jumped in. The Minbari had a lot fun in the first round where we couldn't shoot back. My Octurion failed all 5 stealth rolls at a Sharlin, Near the end of the game there was BinTak, Octurion, Primus, 2 Warbirds vs a Sharlin. End of the game just a Sharlin.

 

[Tankdriver]

That seems a bit of an extreme example. So far my luck has been good against the Minbari, but I have not played that much and it could be an exception to the rule. I like the way the stealth rules are written, but I think the larger ships should have lower stealrh values. Hull 5 Stealth 5 just seems a bit much, though Stealth 4 Hull 6 for a Sharlin would not be much better.
Remember, there has to be a reason the minbari rolled through the Earth Alliance Fleet.

 

[H]

yup, the earth alliance were not the most popular fleet in space, so they didn't have to be all that good ;-)

 

[Burger]

If I lose a game then I would prefer it to be because I was outplayed not because I missed one roll that meant I did nothing else.

But Hash I thought your main strategy was "roll high"

 

[Tankdriver]

Strategy, what is this Strategy you speak of?

 

[Burger]

Its what you claim to have when you win, but "wouldn't have made a difference with dice like those" when you lose.