Progress on 2e

[Gargoyle117]

Kind of silly though.

"Prepare to fire"
"Captain, we have no lock on"
"Fire any way!"

How about you just say that ship cannot fire on said ship when a stealth roll is failed and not actually dump the weapons?

However you look at it, the crew, captain and targeting computer had to do the work intending to fire on that target. No matter what, I would say that the weapons should not be able to be redirected after a failed stealth roll because of that. I could accept that the weapons were never fired unless the lock was obtained though.

Maybe the stealth systems function such that they mislead the sensors rather than block them. The targeting ship could easily believe that they have locked on to their enemy, but in reality they may be locked on to a sensor ghost. In that case they would certainly fire their weapons and miss because of stealth.

It depends on the flavor text of the stealth system.

*Edit* I missed emperorpenguin's post above. I agree that slowloading weapons would become disporportionately stronger against stealth targets if they got to take a chance at breaking stealth every turn rather than every other turn. For the purposes of the game, the rule should remain that SL weapons can not be fired again the next round after they fail a stealth check. Perhaps they are also slow targeting and take some time to redirect or refocus their fire.

 

[lastbesthope]

Well for a start there are ships that don't have counters yet that will need them. Also for tyhose buying into the game at 2e, they'll want some counters perhaps so it makes sense to put a new counter pack together.

LBH

New pack, but not new art? That's fine. I just wanted to make sure my old counters will work just as well.

Well I was only hypothesising, but I see no reason that old counters would be invalid.

And on the note about not firing id you don't have a lock, there is a world of difference between a stealth system that masks your location, and one that attempts to mislead your sensors and make them get a lock on somewhere the ship isn't.

LBH

 

[emperorpenguin]

In "Points of Departure" we are told that the EA cannot even track the Minbari

But in "In The Beginning" the Prometheus cannot get more than a silhouette of the Minbari, but enough to hit with weapons fire

As with most TV there is no consistency...

 

[Tankdriver]

The debate continues.

TO put my Newb-cents in, I have to say, we have only played multiplayer games and so far it has not been kind to the Minbari. The stealth rules, even with my misunderstanding there of, and those neutron lasers made them target number one on the table. Even after I won the first three games we played, the Minbari was more likely to be targeted than I was. That meant more stealth rolls, more failures and more Minbari death. When two Vree war saucers can take down a Tigara, it is a lovely sight.

About beams and damage multiples, I think there could be a problem here. I hit a Narn ship, I cannot remember which one, with a beam shot from a white star. THe narn was hurt, but not excessively so. The triple damage was bad enough, even with just two hits, but one was a crit, a 6-crit and the end result was something like 34 damage, exactly what he had left.

 

[CZuschlag]

Tankdriver,

Those are merely my assessments of the skills that are emphasized by each fleet, and are solely my opinions. Feel free to take them for whatever value you wish ... and I'm flattered! Thank you!

 

[Obsidian]

Maybe the stealth systems function such that they mislead the sensors rather than block them. The targeting ship could easily believe that they have locked on to their enemy, but in reality they may be locked on to a sensor ghost. In that case they would certainly fire their weapons and miss because of stealth.

That is precisely how the stealth mechanic has been described several times by Mongoose. Your targetting computers a really really sure that the Sharlin is about 5 kilometers to the left of where it really is. *whoops* One can argue, and believe me many people have, that this should therefore be called "jamming" and not "stealth". Alas, "stealth" has remained...

 

[emperorpenguin]

but that wasn't how it appeared in ITB. As for changing the name "stealth" the problem is it was used in the series, so even if it was wrong (like the conflicting terms applied to the Omega) it sticks

 

[Gargoyle117]

The term may be a bit confusing, but it could stay. Just make note in the description of the Stealth trait, that it is an active form of stealth that misdirects fire or gives false target locks, rather than a passive form of stealth that prevents a lock. That should clear things up well enough.

 

[Tank]

I think many people have vastly different ideas of stealth and how it works

 

[Burger]

I like my Ronseal Stealth.
It does exactly what it says in the book.

 

[Reaverman]

To me, Stealth is "I'm not here"

where as Jamming is "I am really there" or "I am making it hard for your target acquisition"

 

[Jetbaker]

I always have found it funny that Shadow Scout has stealth yet it needs to get so close to fire it makes it easier to get through the stealth. Not to mention the fact that one would think Shadows would imply the BEST stealth or whatever you wanna call it.

 

[Burger]

I always have found it funny that Shadow Scout has stealth yet it needs to get so close to fire it makes it easier to get through the stealth.

Yes, the Shadow Scout was designed before the Armageddon stealth "fix" which gives you a +1 within 8". Shadow Scout really should have got a +1 to stealth in Armageddon.

 

[Locutus9956]

Yes but the shadow scout is a SCOUT. It can use its scouting abilities from well outside the '8" of doom' and zip in to attack when it gets the chance to do so out of nasty arcs.

It's stealth is not supposed to turn it into a hyper deadly attack ship. Personally I reckon there should be a destroyer variant of it, without stealth but slightly increased firepower and/or hitpoints as there was in B5Wars.

Yes I know 'This isnt B5Wars, it doesnt have to be anything like B5wars its a different game, blah, blah, blah'. If B5Wars did something better then why not use the idea! 90% of the ships in ACTA wouldnt even exist if it werent for B5Wars anyway and saying the usual 'B5 Wars is irrelevant' rhetoric is like someone making a Star Trek space combat game, filling it with SFB races like Hydrans, Lyrans and Kzinti and then saying 'they dont have to be anything like the SFB versions theyre both based on Star Trek but different games'. ACTA isnt based on B5, its based on B5Wars. Anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves.

Ok rant over. And I know noone had actually said anything about that before I went off there, but that was a preemtptive rant

 

[Burger]

LOL, nice rant Locutus :lol:

The Shadow Scout is a Scout yes, but when its the only choice below War level it also has to double up as a main combat vessel in most games. I agree there should be some kind of Battle choice for Shadows, a "Mature Scout" or destroyer variant would be good.

 

[emperorpenguin]

there was a beam armed scout (destroyer) in "shadow dancing" seen in the background firing at some whitestars or warbirds

 

[Hash]

there was a beam armed scout (destroyer) in "shadow dancing" seen in the background firing at some whitestars or warbirds

Really? Cool - would be awesome if that was in 2nd ed.

 

[H]

hopefully a good chance for it, given the general mention of canoninity and adding more. .

 

[emperorpenguin]

there was a beam armed scout (destroyer) in "shadow dancing" seen in the background firing at some whitestars or warbirds

Really? Cool - would be awesome if that was in 2nd ed.

actually some of the stuff I have found through marathon sessions of rewatching the series have stoked up heated debate in playtesting!

 

[Celisasu]

Personally I wish the Shadows had kept their Hunter. They have too few ships as it is and the Hunter looks like a Shadow Ship. Just argue that the black ops version you see in Crusade was a leftover Shadow ship that had been found by the EA like the big one that Sheridan killed rather than a hybrid Shadow/EA design.

Also the Shadows could use a few more ships to round out their fleet. Perhaps something small representing a swarm type vessel as described in the Darkness&Light RPG book. This could give the Shadows a valid Skirmish choice without downplaying their technological superiority. After all you still have a ship that to the Shadows is just an expendable suicide vessel built as cheaply(from a Shadow standpoint) as possible and it's equivalent most races escorts. Probably make it quite fragile but packing a nasty punch for a Skirmish ship.