Proposal: The White Star - The Knife Fight Variant

[Hindsight]

1 major point you need to remember - hes asking you to test things, things he publishes for you to test. he is not asking you to make up your own stuff and test it.

now as I said I like the knife fighter WS, however this isnt something matt asked you to test so dont get all sulky and give up the whole testing because you're testing something else entirely off track. matt doesnt have to pay attention to it as its not what he wanted from everyone.

I have tested the current WS rule....I think it sucks as it is punishing the wrong type of ISA player(it punishes the knife fighter players not the snipers) hence my new proposal (see my post above)

It does virtually the same thing...no stat change to the ship at all while making a change in the way the WS works.

Indeed, and Katadder, I'm sorry, but I imagine that Matt would take issue with the words you chose. You're saying that our efforts at honing the balance of his proposed change, is not welcome or asked for. Well, what he gave us was fail, so we talked about why the White Star was unbalanced, and what would resolve that. We're putting time into this, to give him the result he is seeking, whether he wrote the change, or not. I wrote the Knife Fighter White Star based on the overall feel of the previous thread on the ship.

I do not take credit for it, it was a group effort.

The Poll was created to address what people felt the changes were that needed to happen to bring the White Star back into balance, and that only represented what the overall community felt.

I'm going to pretend you didn't say what you said, as losing all respect for you after returning home from a happy constructive day of league play, just doesn't feel right. I'm going to pretend you said something encouraging, and not disparaging.

Please Note - I can sulk whenever I please. The White Star proposed Nerf is too harsh, as it punishes those who play the White Stars up close and personal, non-sniping. There was overwhelming response that the issue was with sniping, cbd abusing White Stars, and that tactic went against the established fluff. This is not something I said, by myself, "Ok this is how the White Star should be." This is from a few weeks of collaboration and discussion, and whether it was what Matt gave us to test or not, it is what 80% of the polled individuals agreed with.

This game can not afford to scoff at its player base. This game can not afford to so blatantly discard the players input, and the fact that you do not directly represent Mongoose is the only thing keeping me from throwing an absolute fit that you'd say what you said.

now as I said I like the knife fighter WS, however this isnt something matt asked you to test so dont get all sulky and give up the whole testing because you're testing something else entirely off track. matt doesnt have to pay attention to it as its not what he wanted from everyone.

Would you like to try that again, rethinking your choice of words, keeping in mind that you're the closest thing to a Mongoose rep that we get given how little Matt actually posts with us? Discussion is fluid, the discussion of many moved in a certain direction, based on the overwhelming response that these threads have generated. That is no one persons doing, and that in itself should represent how much of the community feels this change is an important one, both for making this game feel like the Babylon 5 we saw on TV, and for keeping such an iconic ship something those of us who have purchased it still want to play with.

Lose your players, and you lose any chance of new people coming on board. It takes two to play, and as this game is attempting to generate an up swing in popularity, telling us not to expect to be heard, when the response is what it has been, is a really, really, bad message to potential new players.

If this was just me, coming up with a design, like I did for the Blue Star, and that is ignored (as it was) totally cool! That was not the case with this White Star option, and Matt discarding it before even looking at these threads and talking with us, doesn't sit well with me at all.

 

[katadder]

you dont know matt looks at these threads. he does read them, he just doesnt always post, I see him on the boards quite a lot.
also we the playtesters are funneling these ideas upto him. I told you all in an earlier post I liked this idea and had passed it onto matt.
you are not honing the balance of his curent rules, you are making up something completely differant.
I agree the current WS nerf is over the top, I dont like it either and I do prefer the knifefight one and passed it up the chain. discussion can move in any direction but this has moved away from what was asked to be tested into new waters. and you ask for feedback so I ask or other playtesters ask direct and pass on what we get. this idea is something that wont be implemented unfortnately.

I'm not looking to do any more testing until we get some word from Matt.

I feel like we wasted our time here, as our efforts were discarded without review. At this time, I oppose the 1AD when doing anything else of the White Star as proposed in P&P. That takes the White Star out of the top 10 and into the bottom 10. More so because you can't fire both weapons, and little to do with CBD, but that is just me personally fighting up close, and rarely rarely using CBD anyway.

When we have some word from Matt, I'll continue to contribute, but as it stands, given what katadder said, I have lost faith in this process.

that is a quote from you. you say you feel your time was wasted without review. this idea I would say has been reviewed as it has been passed onto matt and he does read the boards. its something I have been told wont be happening.

as I have said before dont give up coming up with new stuff, it gives us and matt new ideas that can be used as the basis of other ideas (just look at current troligan as a forum induced idea), however dont assume your off track (as it is off track) ideas are part of the standard playtest.
they can give ideas that may effect said playtest but are not what has been put forward for you to test.

 

[katadder]

you dont know matt looks at these threads. he does read them, he just doesnt always post, I see him on the boards quite a lot.
also we the playtesters are funneling these ideas upto him. I told you all in an earlier post I liked this idea and had passed it onto matt.
you are not honing the balance of his curent rules, you are making up something completely differant.
I agree the current WS nerf is over the top, I dont like it either and I do prefer the knifefight one and passed it up the chain. discussion can move in any direction but this has moved away from what was asked to be tested into new waters. and you ask for feedback so I ask or other playtesters ask direct and pass on what we get. this idea is something that wont be implemented unfortnately.

I'm not looking to do any more testing until we get some word from Matt.

I feel like we wasted our time here, as our efforts were discarded without review. At this time, I oppose the 1AD when doing anything else of the White Star as proposed in P&P. That takes the White Star out of the top 10 and into the bottom 10. More so because you can't fire both weapons, and little to do with CBD, but that is just me personally fighting up close, and rarely rarely using CBD anyway.

When we have some word from Matt, I'll continue to contribute, but as it stands, given what katadder said, I have lost faith in this process.

.

that is a quote from you. you say you feel your time was wasted without review. this idea I would say has been reviewed as it has been passed onto matt and he does read the boards. its something I have been told wont be happening.

as I have said before dont give up coming up with new stuff, it gives us and matt new ideas that can be used as the basis of other ideas (just look at current troligan as a forum induced idea), however dont assume your off track (as it is off track) ideas are part of the standard playtest.
they can give ideas that may effect said playtest but are not what has been put forward for you to test

we have plenty of games with examples of the knifefight WS. lets get some games of examples of matts WS showing how it either does or doesnt work, thats one thing missing. yes we can look at it and say its crap but we need games we need playtesting.

 

[Methos5000]

you dont know matt looks at these threads. he does read them, he just doesnt always post, I see him on the boards quite a lot.
also we the playtesters are funneling these ideas upto him. I told you all in an earlier post I liked this idea and had passed it onto matt.
you are not honing the balance of his curent rules, you are making up something completely differant.
I agree the current WS nerf is over the top, I dont like it either and I do prefer the knifefight one and passed it up the chain. discussion can move in any direction but this has moved away from what was asked to be tested into new waters. and you ask for feedback so I ask or other playtesters ask direct and pass on what we get. this idea is something that wont be implemented unfortnately.

I'm not looking to do any more testing until we get some word from Matt.

I feel like we wasted our time here, as our efforts were discarded without review. At this time, I oppose the 1AD when doing anything else of the White Star as proposed in P&P. That takes the White Star out of the top 10 and into the bottom 10. More so because you can't fire both weapons, and little to do with CBD, but that is just me personally fighting up close, and rarely rarely using CBD anyway.

When we have some word from Matt, I'll continue to contribute, but as it stands, given what katadder said, I have lost faith in this process.

.

that is a quote from you. you say you feel your time was wasted without review. this idea I would say has been reviewed as it has been passed onto matt and he does read the boards. its something I have been told wont be happening.

as I have said before dont give up coming up with new stuff, it gives us and matt new ideas that can be used as the basis of other ideas (just look at current troligan as a forum induced idea), however dont assume your off track (as it is off track) ideas are part of the standard playtest.
they can give ideas that may effect said playtest but are not what has been put forward for you to test

we have plenty of games with examples of the knifefight WS. lets get some games of examples of matts WS showing how it either does or doesnt work, thats one thing missing. yes we can look at it and say its crap but we need games we need playtesting.

Like I mentioned before I did do a couple playtest games with the current nerf, my final opinion of it was it over the top (as you agree) and its encourging the wrong type of play, I never have a reason to fire the pulsars now I may as well just sit at 18" and fire the beam.

So we discussed better options and were told to forget about it and test only the material in the playtest rules. Why? Many people (yourself included) think this current nerf is too much, why is it so unreasonable to discuss alternatives?

The reason being given (doesn't want a major change) is weak in my opinion, How many ships stats are being adjusted in P&P? Was one more too much?

Despite that, I did list an alternative (Rapid Recharge Weapon Capacitors), which I don't think anyone has read yet, but regardless, in my opinion, its a much better alternative then the current nerf that promotes sniping.

I haven't had a chance to test it yet but I'm usually in close firing both guns anyway so I'm pretty sure it will work out okay.

But I'm done testing the current nerf....its busted, its punishing the wrong type of players and if I get in close 50% of the time I won't be firing the beam at all as the 1AD will miss all it does is encourage me to sit back at 18".....no thanks.

 

[katadder]

I am not saying dont test alternatives and never have said this. as it brings up good ideas alot of the time.

all I am saying is dont sulk about how much time you spent testing something when told that isnt going to be used and was never offical testing material.

make up whatever you like and test whatever you like, just dont throw the teddys out the cot when told it wont be made official.

 

[Da Boss]

last night we played the new version and found exactly that - it def encourages you to stay back and beam - and punishes you if you close and fight - now it may be thats how ship is wanted to act?

If so it works.

If not it needs to be re-thought. :?:

Has Matt said how he feels the White Star should act in the game as its his game and has first and final say?

 

[skavendan]

But I'm done testing the current nerf....its busted, its punishing the wrong type of players and if I get in close 50% of the time I won't be firing the beam at all as the 1AD will miss all it does is encourage me to sit back at 18".....no thanks.

Well thats right. All those snipers who leech around @ 18" being rather un-whitestar like will still do the exact same as they are now.

And the vast majority say they just use gunships instead so unless you make this new energy rule apply to gunships where going to see very little change in the ISA

 

[katadder]

Has Matt said how he feels the White Star should act in the game as its his game and has first and final say?

well from speaking to him he still likes the original WS from very 1st version :? . he hasnt told us a playstyle.

 

[Da Boss]

Has Matt said how he feels the White Star should act in the game as its his game and has first and final say?

well from speaking to him he still likes the original WS from very 1st version :? . he hasnt told us a playstyle.

ahhh the 3+ dodge one :shock: Oh dear.......

 

[H]

Has Matt said how he feels the White Star should act in the game as its his game and has first and final say?

well from speaking to him he still likes the original WS from very 1st version :? . he hasnt told us a playstyle.

ahhh the 3+ dodge one :shock: Oh dear.......

I always got the impression matt was an ISA player when that version came out!

 

[katadder]

Has Matt said how he feels the White Star should act in the game as its his game and has first and final say?

well from speaking to him he still likes the original WS from very 1st version :? . he hasnt told us a playstyle.

ahhh the 3+ dodge one :shock: Oh dear.......

nope the very original where AA doesnt save crew etc etc. ask LBH about it

 

[Methos5000]

I am not saying dont test alternatives and never have said this. as it brings up good ideas alot of the time.

all I am saying is dont sulk about how much time you spent testing something when told that isnt going to be used and was never offical testing material.

make up whatever you like and test whatever you like, just dont throw the teddys out the cot when told it wont be made official.

I understand what your saying, any sulking on my part is because I have already tested the current nerf didn't like, tried something new and was told to test the official stuff before coming up with new ideas.

Even the ISA haters hate this one as they know they will just sit at 18" now. If both ISA players and haters agree on this doesn't that mean something is wrong with it?

Which is why my new proposal (which was buried back a page due to rapid posting) basically reverses the effects of the nerf. It only has a 1AD beam if it doesn't fire the pulsars, encouraging players to get in closer to take full advantage of their firepower but puts them at risk (well more risk then many are putting them in now anyway). They can still sit at 18" and fire if they want to but they will be doing it at 1AD.

Repost of my proposal:

Rapid Recharge Weapon Capacitors:
Whitestars were designed to shoot pass the enemy and swing back around for another attack run almost instantly. To facilitate this Rapid Charge Capacitors were designed to help carry this out. The downside to these is it relys on both weapon systems firing to properly control power flow to the capacitors. If the Molecular Pulsars are not being fired this turn the Improved Neutron Laser can only fire 1AD of beam as the power flow was not properly regulated to the capacitors. If they Pulsars are unable to target anything they count as being unable to fire.

See with this you dont even need the stipulation of a 1AD beam when CBD is used. While on CBD if they fire the pulsars they aren't firing the beam anyway and if they fire the beam the cant fire the pulsars and thus fall under the restriction.

It will definatly eliminate snipers....unless they really like sitting at 18" and firing a 1AD beam and it pretty much forces WS to close in to 10" if they want full firepower.

It punishes the people who snipe not the people who knife fight.

What do you think? It basically the opposite of what happens with the current rule but actually makes more sense in my opinion.

 

[Jetbaker]

dear god I hope we never see the day again when a Whitestar gets a 3+ Dodge. the bluestar is hard to kill enough already

 

[Methos5000]

well from speaking to him he still likes the original WS from very 1st version :? . he hasnt told us a playstyle.

ahhh the 3+ dodge one :shock: Oh dear.......

nope the very original where AA doesnt save crew etc etc. ask LBH about it

Didn't that one also only have like 8 crew?

 

[Da Boss]

well from speaking to him he still likes the original WS from very 1st version :? . he hasnt told us a playstyle.

ahhh the 3+ dodge one :shock: Oh dear.......

nope the very original where AA doesnt save crew etc etc. ask LBH about it

I'll ask Greg - was that when a 6,6 was death - I fondly remeber a lone heroric starfury doing that to my Shadow Cruiser 8)

 

[katadder]

I am not saying dont test alternatives and never have said this. as it brings up good ideas alot of the time.

all I am saying is dont sulk about how much time you spent testing something when told that isnt going to be used and was never offical testing material.

make up whatever you like and test whatever you like, just dont throw the teddys out the cot when told it wont be made official.

I understand what your saying, any sulking on my part is because I have already tested the current nerf didn't like, tried something new and was told to test the official stuff before coming up with new ideas.

well is an idea to test official stuff 1st but as i said come with new ideas as an when. I tend to put them to matt anyway like i did with the knifefight WS.
problem is although you may have tested the WS and know its broken we havent got many games to show for it on here, cant actually recall any apart from dabosses but then he uses his new avenger variant in that. which is why I put in bold the play part of playtesting.
not so sure on your idea as it nerfs WSs as well but maybe, prefer knifefights to that.

 

[H]

and a 6-5 eradicated your entire crew. I remember it well. bintak, brand nerw, freshly painted, 1st mission,, 1st shot, 6-5, no crew left. . . i nearly cried

 

[skavendan]

My games where posted on here with it's reduced range knive fighter version though I didn't see much of a difference ISA won still by at least 2 raid points every game.

 

[Methos5000]

not so sure on your idea as it nerfs WSs as well but maybe, prefer knifefights to that.

It discourages sitting at 18" and sniping and encourages getting in close to fire both weapons, wasn't that what we were trying to do anyway?

This is basically saying if you want your WS to be effective you have to get to 10"

Besides we already know the knife fighter is a no go now, I would prefer mine over the currently proposed nerf because at least it attempts to encourage getting in close.....instead of doing the exact opposite.

It sounds to me like Matt want something that limits it firepower to bring it down a couple notches, well my new idea makes no stat change to the current WS while changing the tactics involved in using one (Which the other one attempted to do but in the end will only encourage more of the same sniper like behavior.)

I think if you make WS get within 10" to combat effectively you will probably reduce many of the complaints.

To be honest I don't think it really needed a change, I think CBD(in general not just for WS) and their allies selection needed a change but since my WS fighting style already put them in harms way the change seemed unnecessary to me. But I can understand how they can be abused so I'm not opposed to a change, I'm just opposed to a change that makes me feel like one of my weapon systems are always useless, if I want full beam power I can't fire my Pulsars? Well if thats the case I may as well sit back and shoot from 18".

I was actually looking forward to a knife fighter WS also as it would also prevent sniping but unfortunately it sounds like that will not be the case (at least not until 3rd Ed. I suppose).

I understand the lack of visible playtesting I didn't take notes when I played using the current rules but I remember losing an Enforcer, 3 White stars and 3 bluestars and my opponent lost....an Omelos. I even killed that Omelos on turn one of firing (6-6 from a WS) after that...nothing. I damaged his ships but not enough to kill them. The WSs only survived long because I was rolling good dodges but didn't give enough return fire in exchange. The Enforcer died quickly (can't really see myself using it at a 5+ dodge, at 4+ it would have probably lasted twice as long....shows how many 4's I was rolling.)

For the Enforcer I would rather give up some firepower or scout or something and get back the 4+ dodge as the ship died rapidly to enemy fighters, AA doesn't mean much when your opponents fighters have 1AD weapon systems.

 

[Hindsight]

I sent the following to Katadder after my previous post.

I want to bring up something, and that is Track That Target. In the Testing Notes for Track That Target, it says that Matt does not agree with the change, but it is what we asked for. Obviously before my time, but that is the example Matt set down. What I am asking, in my post to you on the White Star thread, is that you not tell us what direction we decide to take a discussion, as like I said, it is fluid, and when you say "well you shouldn't have been testing that anyway" it says that the direction the community went, is not acknowledged, and especially not appreciated.

Once play testing is open to all, you have to accept the direction that testing takes something, and it is just as valid in its living motion of thought and discussion that as far as the players are concerned, it is on par with anything Matt puts out to us.

I'm in a place at my local league, where they are so disenfranchised with Mongoose, that many will probably straight up ignore P&P. As a group I was able to rally them to test things, but this is the only active group for ACTA in all of the San Francisco Bay area, a base of tens of thousands of gamers, and I should know, I work for Games Workshop, I organize for other games very similar to this.

When a community, where it is the only outlet to play, loses faith in the publisher, it is just a bad sign. You don't get input from those people, and you don't get sales when these little supplements are released, and without that this game is stagnant, and not going anywhere.

So please, remember that you are the closest thing to a rep of Mongoose, if even just because you have Matts ear, than in any official capacity.

I stand by what I said before, and I stand by what I said here. The play test documents are based on what the overall community asks for. We're asking for the Knife Fight variant. There are plenty of examples of where the community went in a direction that Matt did not agree with, and it took, because he respects our efforts, and our requests.

When he comes on here, and gives us some reasoning as to how he wants the White Star to behave, and why he feels a simple reduction in range changes everything, then I will again put some effort forward.

What you are telling us, is that what we have come up with, is out of the scope of what P&P is for, and that Matt has shot it down. I know Matt is at some con right now, but I'd imagine the way you worded it, on his behalf, is not how he'd want you to have worded it, as it really is a slap to the face for all our efforts.