Proposal: The White Star - The Knife Fight Variant
- Thread starter Hindsight
- Start date
Methos5000
Mongoose
Hindsight said:
We are still here, I was just too busy at work to post last night. I think the effective range will be just have to be determined through playtesting. Personally I think 12" works, as it has been said if you have no rear/side arcs your still gonna be at a disadvantage regardless of range. If you force 8" of range then pretty much every ship in the game will be able to shoot them, without a damage/crew increase you will see WS dropping like flies. Can every ship in the game shoot an Omega at 30" inches? How about a Sharlin at 30" are these unfair too? Is it unfair that many races can't outflank the Minbari at all or the Vree for that matter? These are all elements within the game and I don't see anyone complaining they can't shoot the Omega with their 8" guns because it just sits back and CBD at 30"
Instead of automatically criticizing the 12" range test it first see what happens, lets get some battle reports from different perspectives and judge from there. If 12" ends up being too much for most people it can always be lowered. But dropping it to 8" and then maybe adjusting Damage/crew to balance it will make it way to complicated. We are looking for a simple fix that could potentially make it into P&P (pending Matt's approval). Remember a drop to 12" will cause a change in WS tactics, you may see opportunities you didn't get before because of that.
For the record I have lost to the Narn with a WS heavy fleet, its not impossible, Varnics are nasty little buggers (more so with their super CBD) and Emines followed up by some Frazis can ruin ones day. Generally I take pure ISA forces with the occasional Brakiri ally, mainly because they are my second fleet and I already have the models but most of the fleets are represented in my group so I could take other ships if i wanted to I just have a self imposed restriction on some allies (mainly no Gaim as they patch up too many holes for the ISA).
I will apologize in advanced if some of this post doesn't make sense, I just got off work a couple hours ago and I'm very tired, but I wanted to post to let Hindsight know I agree with him......now off to bed for me.
Foxmeister
Mongoose
Methos5000 said:
Tell you what, instead of automatically criticizing the 8" range test it first see what happens, lets get some battle reports from different perspectives and judge from there. If 8" ends up being too low for most people it can always be increased.
See, works both ways!
Your argument about the 30" range on a Omega is a straw man argument I'm afraid. Any proposal to decrease the relative combat ability of the White Star *has* to be across the board or it doesn't work. A 12" range only really benefits Vree, Centauri and Brakiri opponents so to my mind it already doesn't do what it is supposed to do. Therefore, it's better to test a more general solution (i.e. 8" range).
Just my opinion of course! (And I do play ISA!)
Regards,
Dave
to me it benefits everyone as unless all whitestars move last even ships with 8" range can usually get in range of whitestars.
as has been said most ships have a longer range anyway so putting them that close for even the primary weapon on a raid ship is a little bit wrong.
think theres only one other staple raid ship with 8" range and thats the bimith. the rest around that range are usually carriers, which obviously have the added bonus of WSs having to come get them.
narn/abbai have to move 4" to get a WS in range at 12". EA and alot of the others have to move 2". fleets like centauri, vree, gaim dont have to move closer at all.
as has been said most ships have a longer range anyway so putting them that close for even the primary weapon on a raid ship is a little bit wrong.
think theres only one other staple raid ship with 8" range and thats the bimith. the rest around that range are usually carriers, which obviously have the added bonus of WSs having to come get them.
narn/abbai have to move 4" to get a WS in range at 12". EA and alot of the others have to move 2". fleets like centauri, vree, gaim dont have to move closer at all.
Foxmeister
Mongoose
katadder said:
Except that when the WS is behind you, which it will be, you won't be able to close 2", 4", 6" whatever. In fact the only ship that generally could is, of course, the White Star itself!
Regards,
Dave
or the vree/shadows.
most ships will have the problem if the WS is behind them, including the ones with 12" guns like centauri because as a rule they dont have rear firing guns.
however an omega with a WS thats sitting exactly 12" behind it can move forward and rear boresight, same with hyperion, bin'tak and anyone else with rear guns longer than 12". perhaps thats unfair on the WS then that it gets outranged by all these fleets.
most ships will have the problem if the WS is behind them, including the ones with 12" guns like centauri because as a rule they dont have rear firing guns.
however an omega with a WS thats sitting exactly 12" behind it can move forward and rear boresight, same with hyperion, bin'tak and anyone else with rear guns longer than 12". perhaps thats unfair on the WS then that it gets outranged by all these fleets.
Foxmeister
Mongoose
katadder said:
All of those vessels can do this at the moment with the WS at range 18", so I fail to see your point here because the 12" range makes no difference to this scenario?
Regards,
Dave
l33tpenguin
Mongoose
I skipped pages 2-4. Don't hate! Anyway, this is going to end up as long as the other thread 
Cutting the White Stars weapons back is probably the perfect solution. Honestly, We are never given the impression that the White Star has amazing range on its weapons. Its always going down the throat of an Enemy
I like the idea of 12 on the pulsars and 10 on the beam, as it makes the white star have to move just that little bit closer to use its nasty beam. Also, in WWOE, weren't the pulsars fired at longer range? I do think 8 is too short.
Even for the races that don't have 10-12 inch secondaries, the decrees in the effective fire arc is going to make defense against the white star a lot easier. If you put a ship or two behind your fleet, roughly 10-12 inches, then the ISA player is going to have to take an extra turn just to get all the way on your backside. That should be enough time to bring one or two ships about to handle them with overlapping arcs. If the white stars go wide to come in behind its going to take longer. taking 6-8 inches off will REALLY keep them from being able to skirt around the outside of a fleet and leave less leeway for them to totally avoid arcs, especially if you deploy your fleet staggered with enough overlapping fire.
Cutting the White Stars weapons back is probably the perfect solution. Honestly, We are never given the impression that the White Star has amazing range on its weapons. Its always going down the throat of an Enemy
I like the idea of 12 on the pulsars and 10 on the beam, as it makes the white star have to move just that little bit closer to use its nasty beam. Also, in WWOE, weren't the pulsars fired at longer range? I do think 8 is too short.
Even for the races that don't have 10-12 inch secondaries, the decrees in the effective fire arc is going to make defense against the white star a lot easier. If you put a ship or two behind your fleet, roughly 10-12 inches, then the ISA player is going to have to take an extra turn just to get all the way on your backside. That should be enough time to bring one or two ships about to handle them with overlapping arcs. If the white stars go wide to come in behind its going to take longer. taking 6-8 inches off will REALLY keep them from being able to skirt around the outside of a fleet and leave less leeway for them to totally avoid arcs, especially if you deploy your fleet staggered with enough overlapping fire.
The issue with the twelve is that once they do the over fly you have to move away from the threat, so the range eight races can't turn around to deal with them. They go forward and turn but fail to get side guns in range.
It hasn't changed the damage dynamic vs most races. The whitestar has lost fire flexibility as a fleet, but will just take a bit longer to destroy the helpless enemy. Goes back to folks talking about the fact that they had their secondaries in range, but couldn't hurt the ship. It can't snipe from range but can still snipe just the same.
Durability vs firepower... the thinking here seems to be CBD won't be used because you have two weapons you'll want to use. I don't buy that will happen against some races. Four dice interceptable vs an Omega... bah... beam only please.
Anyway... I like it... but don't see it as that much different. You'll have less reason to fire from the front and take the big hit... instead you'll power past and not start firing until your behind.
Ripple
It hasn't changed the damage dynamic vs most races. The whitestar has lost fire flexibility as a fleet, but will just take a bit longer to destroy the helpless enemy. Goes back to folks talking about the fact that they had their secondaries in range, but couldn't hurt the ship. It can't snipe from range but can still snipe just the same.
Durability vs firepower... the thinking here seems to be CBD won't be used because you have two weapons you'll want to use. I don't buy that will happen against some races. Four dice interceptable vs an Omega... bah... beam only please.
Anyway... I like it... but don't see it as that much different. You'll have less reason to fire from the front and take the big hit... instead you'll power past and not start firing until your behind.
Ripple
I did finally get to sleep at about 8am. I have a Stye in my left eye, I am just getting over a cold, and I just started this new job, so I am a wreck right now, not sleeping, not eating, and generally feeling like crap.
Still type 105 WPM so that is probably why the posts tend to run on. What does concise mean? As most of the people I tend to post for post with are in the UK, yea, I only get that chat line thing going at 3am my time, which I guess is mid day for ya'll.
I think 12" is the sweet spot, and for many reasons mentioned above. I think that given that we don't move like a fighter, we still have to move 25% turn 90, then move 1 and turn 90. We can't turn on a dime, we can't just follow you perfectly, we still have to be smart about our movement, and this reduces our effective movement options, and without initiative sinks, the enemy can just move the important targets last.
This doesn't make it a whole new ship, this encourages in your face Knife Fighting play style, and reduces the overall power of the White Star so that it is still a functional choice on the table. The proposed P&P change IMO was too much, and doesn't address that White Stars aren't long range snipers, but should instead be played as dogfighters, knife fighters, and generally shoved down the throats of your foe.
Is it enough? Ya'll seem to think so, by the voting, so I hope this is what the Fab 5 needed, to get a change pushed through.
Cheers.
Still type 105 WPM so that is probably why the posts tend to run on. What does concise mean? As most of the people I tend to post for post with are in the UK, yea, I only get that chat line thing going at 3am my time, which I guess is mid day for ya'll.
I think 12" is the sweet spot, and for many reasons mentioned above. I think that given that we don't move like a fighter, we still have to move 25% turn 90, then move 1 and turn 90. We can't turn on a dime, we can't just follow you perfectly, we still have to be smart about our movement, and this reduces our effective movement options, and without initiative sinks, the enemy can just move the important targets last.
This doesn't make it a whole new ship, this encourages in your face Knife Fighting play style, and reduces the overall power of the White Star so that it is still a functional choice on the table. The proposed P&P change IMO was too much, and doesn't address that White Stars aren't long range snipers, but should instead be played as dogfighters, knife fighters, and generally shoved down the throats of your foe.
Is it enough? Ya'll seem to think so, by the voting, so I hope this is what the Fab 5 needed, to get a change pushed through.
Cheers.
Foxmeister said:Tell you what, instead of automatically criticizing the 8" range test it first see what happens, lets get some battle reports from different perspectives and judge from there. If 8" ends up being too low for most people it can always be increased.
See, works both ways!
Your argument about the 30" range on a Omega is a straw man argument I'm afraid. Any proposal to decrease the relative combat ability of the White Star *has* to be across the board or it doesn't work. A 12" range only really benefits Vree, Centauri and Brakiri opponents so to my mind it already doesn't do what it is supposed to do. Therefore, it's better to test a more general solution (i.e. 8" range).
It also helps EA (which I play), the Minbari and Vorlons and Shadows don't need help, 12" range helps the raiders and the Psi Corps, the Drakh, the Pak'Ma'Ra, the Drazi aren't going to be much helped no matter what you do to the WS, the Gaim don't need help, and you already mentioned the Brakiri.
It won't help the Abbai or the Narn.
The Narn already have plenty of ability to kill the WS, and the Abbai, well, they now have that energy mine mine and improved shields, so I think they've been helped.
Yea I shed no tears for the races that can E Mine us, ignoring our main defense, Dodge. So many new E Mine weapons... and that big Earth nuke thing? Ugh.
So the White Star gets changed... what else is getting an update in this edition? We need more than just our babies nerfed, it needs to be a balance bat across the board, and it worries me how close we are to release.
No new league. No address to the Swarms. No critical hit protection for larger ships. Not good... no no... not good.
So the White Star gets changed... what else is getting an update in this edition? We need more than just our babies nerfed, it needs to be a balance bat across the board, and it worries me how close we are to release.
No new league. No address to the Swarms. No critical hit protection for larger ships. Not good... no no... not good.
l33tpenguin
Mongoose
Hindsight said:
Sadly, we aren't likely to see a crit save without a new edition. Swarms were, in part, helped with the FAP change. It does cut down on them some. The crit save is the other side of the coin for swarms, as it gives large ships a compensation in regards to crits, which swarms weather better.
I personally don't like seeing the proliferation of E-mines or e-mine like systems. For EA I would much rather see an offensive interceptor mode SA (I play EA). I think the beefing up of the Narn and Abbai in PnP will justify their weakness to the White Star and dropping the WS to 8inch isn't necessary.
I'd much rather see the TTT SA dropped for the 'Bring to Bear' -save a turn to use after your target moves- SA. Its a boost for bore sights, can be used by anyone and is reflective of how things really work in a real time environment. As for the 'telegraphing' of information to your opponent... well, doesn't that happen when you lock your weapons onto him and target him? He knows your intentions... It would also better help against swarms, since it is more difficult to sink against.
I agree with l33t on a lot here...
I do wish we had some form of crit save (and I play abbai/drazi, we live and die on our ability to make crits work for us as our single damage won't do it.) It is one of two big differences in swarm fleets... initiative and crit resilience.
I also like your Bring to Bear (long time pusher of Follow That Target which was similar). The first rendition of TTT did serve the drazi better, as it let them operate a bit more easily, but BtB would feel more realistic.
I disagree on the assessment of which races benefit a bit, as I don't think the raiders really will do well against it, nor the Psi Corp.
And while I agree that the spread of E-mines has been a real problem for the game, creating a much stronger rock paper scissors effect, I don't agree that we should have no sympathy for races that have some access to them. Don't want them to be have to take ships do we?
I wish we looked at fleet builds as much as we look at race. EA can be a number of different fleet types, we should try to strive to keep more than one or two viable.
Abbai dropping mines aren't great answers to a lot of things... and will feel overpowered in some fights. I just hope we don't create even more lopsided fights with this like Drazi vs ISA...
Ripple
- and sorry to hear you feeling under the weather there man of many many posts.
I do wish we had some form of crit save (and I play abbai/drazi, we live and die on our ability to make crits work for us as our single damage won't do it.) It is one of two big differences in swarm fleets... initiative and crit resilience.
I also like your Bring to Bear (long time pusher of Follow That Target which was similar). The first rendition of TTT did serve the drazi better, as it let them operate a bit more easily, but BtB would feel more realistic.
I disagree on the assessment of which races benefit a bit, as I don't think the raiders really will do well against it, nor the Psi Corp.
And while I agree that the spread of E-mines has been a real problem for the game, creating a much stronger rock paper scissors effect, I don't agree that we should have no sympathy for races that have some access to them. Don't want them to be have to take ships do we?
I wish we looked at fleet builds as much as we look at race. EA can be a number of different fleet types, we should try to strive to keep more than one or two viable.
Abbai dropping mines aren't great answers to a lot of things... and will feel overpowered in some fights. I just hope we don't create even more lopsided fights with this like Drazi vs ISA...
Ripple
- and sorry to hear you feeling under the weather there man of many many posts.
nekomata fuyu
Mongoose
Personally I'm all for going straight to 8" range along with a boost in AD. It would fit with the comparison made between the Victory's and White Star's firepower, whilst meaning that the WS has to get up close an personal to use it. The WS will still have a good advantage though in that it will still have the manouverability to keep attacking the enemy's weakest arc, so I think it should work.
l33tpenguin
Mongoose
nekomata fuyu said:
The thought of more TD beam AD on a raid level ship makes me :shock:
nekomata fuyu
Mongoose
I'm willing to consider it if the max range on the ship is 8". That said, I would beware the the temptation to go overboard with additional AD - 8" is less problematic for White Stars than on other ships.
To be honest, you could probably combine some of the ideas. If we want a WS that gets in close and fires the pulsars more often than the laser, you could push both down to 8", and make the laser boresight. Up the number of AD some to compensate, and you'll have a ship that acts like as described - getting in close, mainly using the pulsars, and also firing the laser when it gets the chance (which lets face it, will still be a lot of the time).
To be honest, you could probably combine some of the ideas. If we want a WS that gets in close and fires the pulsars more often than the laser, you could push both down to 8", and make the laser boresight. Up the number of AD some to compensate, and you'll have a ship that acts like as described - getting in close, mainly using the pulsars, and also firing the laser when it gets the chance (which lets face it, will still be a lot of the time).
I'm another one that favors 10" beam and 12" secondaries. Sniping with secondaries is less of a problem, and a 10" should be reasonably close for secondary engagement, while being far enough away that WSs can survive to shoot (and while the 8" issue has been raised, mutually supporting ship maneuvering goes a long way to handle that)
Regarding the comment that the change should benefit all other fleets equally simply doesn't work; all fleets are different, any change will help some more than others. Dropping to 10 (or even 12) inches is a major change, but not as radical as 8" and so the one I'd test first.
I'd also be happy with a boresight beam as well, but not too fussed on that one either way
Regarding the comment that the change should benefit all other fleets equally simply doesn't work; all fleets are different, any change will help some more than others. Dropping to 10 (or even 12) inches is a major change, but not as radical as 8" and so the one I'd test first.
I'd also be happy with a boresight beam as well, but not too fussed on that one either way
