Rate the Drakh

[E Nicely]

The Drakh as they stand right now can be a little problematic to play. A trick fleet for sure but maybe a little too trick. I've won enough games playing them but I've probably lost some that I shouldn't have. As it stands now the whole fleet is dependent on Precise, you don't get crits you'll get chewed up. They are fun to play and their combination of abilities sets them apart from the "core" fleets.

What do you think the biggest liability of the Drakh is? What could improve to make them more balanced against other fleets? I'm on the fence, maybe an increase in neutron cannon AD across the board would solve everything, maybe an improvement in how the GEG works. For this poll I'll go with higher AD on the beams, seems like a decent quick fix.

And no matter what, I think they need their list expanded, more ships would be good. If there was a bigger fleet list with say, 3 or 4 more specialized ships, I think the weaknesses of the Drakh wouldn't be so pronounced.

What do you think?

 

[Wulf Corbett]

I'd go with GEG giving greater protection (including vs. crits, if all damage is stopped).

Wulf

 

[Celisasu]

I agree with Wulf. Let the GEG stop crits if they don't score any damage.

Perhaps fine tune the fast destroyer while they're at it so it's actually useful(Then again I say this about all crappy ships for all the races. I'll be shocked if it happens).

And for expanding the fleet I suggest a Mothership that looks like the Mothership we see in the TV series and then convert the existing Mothership into something else(a dreadnaught perhaps? Lots of firepower, reasonable crew and damage, hull 5, GEG, no raider component.)?

Probably varients for the fast destroyer, light cruiser, and heavy cruiser. I figure one varient for each of those plus a new mothership(and dreadnaught), fixed fast destroyer, and we'll have enough variety to satisfy the Drakh.

 

[CZuschlag]

I'm a Drakh player who thinks they are a little to good, and a little too specialized. I and another local player were theorizing on what we wanted to do to get them right -- he's flown with and against them several times. I came up with a quick list:

-- The Scout is just too good. Give it a T arc small AF weapon, about 6 more hits and crew and you can call it a Skrimish ship. Do so.

-- Give the Drakh a true patrol attack ship. It should be based off the scout hull. A couple more AD, some dodge, no scout or stealth. Do so.

-- Redesign the Fast Destroyer to be the ship that can maneuver with the LR's and still provide combat and anti-fighter weaponry. We think of this ship as a LR leader, and the CL as a HR leader. Do this, or employ some pseudo-maneouverability for the Patrol ships to be able to fire at fighters in any arc.

-- We, perversely enough, think the CV is just a fraction too good (bizarre, perhaps, but true -- at small Skirmish fights, the GEG 3 is real Beast!). Reduce the Neutron Cannon to 1 Die -- entend the range if you wish. Add a few damage points perhaps to enhance some survivability at higher levels, but not many at all.

-- Please, please please, do not enhance the GEG rules. Fighters already have virtually no shot vs. GEG ships except for crits -- we're already at rock-paper-scissors. Do not enhance this interaction under any circumstance, even if to solve the Beam issue. If you must change them to make them more powerful (please no!) make a GEG threshold after which they no longer function. Example: no GEG can ever, in one turn, deflect GEGx(5-10) damage. Actually, in the course of the above, you'll notice the AF weapons I was adding? Now, I want to actually reduce the GEG's capabilities. Fighters now not only can overwhelm interceptors, but also try to overwhelm the GEG system -- an interesting option!

-- If the beam problem is what you're trying to solve, add speed to the ships (especially the CL, let it get a chance for its two 45's to tell) and this will in many ways alleviate the problem by giving ships a chance at the overrun of the beam system's arc. The Fast Destroyer just needs work. Don't just base the beam problem on the Centauri stack -- we're advocating fixing that from the other side in V2!

-- If you have the GEG stop crits then the Precise on the Raiders must all go, minimum. This actually may be a good trade for the game, Drakh crit-generators are very irritating to several players.

-- I don't like the LR design. The damage is too low, generates proportionally too many crits, and is way too hard to kill. I suggest a complete re-jigger. Perhaps drop crew and hull by 2-3 each (no threshold changes) and change the weapon system to Range 8; 3AD; AP, Beam.

-- Love the DN idea, but be careful. It would have Adira-itis, so be very very careful with this ship's balance. GEG 4 plus Hull 6 should be handled with GREAT care.

 

[E Nicely]

-- Give the Drakh a true patrol attack ship. It should be based off the scout hull. A couple more AD, some dodge, no scout or stealth. Do so.

Absolutely.

-- Redesign the Fast Destroyer to be the ship that can maneuver with the LR's and still provide combat and anti-fighter weaponry. We think of this ship as a LR leader, and the CL as a HR leader. Do this, or employ some pseudo-maneouverability for the Patrol ships to be able to fire at fighters in any arc.

Yeah, redesigned fast DD or a variant or new design.

-- We, perversely enough, think the CV is just a fraction too good (bizarre, perhaps, but true -- at small Skirmish fights, the GEG 3 is real Beast!). Reduce the Neutron Cannon to 1 Die -- entend the range if you wish. Add a few damage points perhaps to enhance some survivability at higher levels, but not many at all.

I don't think I agree with you. Having a 1 AD neutron cannon on a ship that size doesn't make sense.

-- Please, please please, do not enhance the GEG rules. Fighters already have virtually no shot vs. GEG ships except for crits -- we're already at rock-paper-scissors.

Right now fighter fire is the only thing the GEG can block with half of the Drakh ships. They do no good against most PL:B or higher ships, more or less useless against big cap ships. Good fighter defense evens out since the Drakh have no fighters.

-- If the beam problem is what you're trying to solve, add speed to the ships (especially the CL, let it get a chance for its two 45's to tell) and this will in many ways alleviate the problem by giving ships a chance at the overrun of the beam system's arc. The Fast Destroyer just needs work. Don't just base the beam problem on the Centauri stack -- we're advocating fixing that from the other side in V2!

I'm not sure what you're talking about here. The way beams work will be different in 2nd edition.

-- If you have the GEG stop crits then the Precise on the Raiders must all go, minimum. This actually may be a good trade for the game, Drakh crit-generators are very irritating to several players.

Hm. That would probably drop the Raiders to PL. I don't think any one is worried about irritating players with precise weaponry. I definitely have to disagree with you on that one. The Raiders are almost too light as is right now.

-- Love the DN idea, but be careful. It would have Adira-itis, so be very very careful with this ship's balance. GEG 4 plus Hull 6 should be handled with GREAT care.

We already did that in playtest, high Hull with the GEG can be invulnerable against low PL ships. Probably not a good idea.

 

[Greg Smith]

Do they really need to be better?

The cruiser is very similar in ability to the Tinashi, which is a well-regarded battle level ship. The raiders are great and there are very few skirmish ships with precise beams. The fast destroyer is perhaps a bit weak, but very quick.

 

[E Nicely]

Do they really need to be better?

The cruiser is very similar in ability to the Tinashi, which is a well-regarded battle level ship. The raiders are great and there are very few skirmish ships with precise beams. The fast destroyer is perhaps a bit weak, but very quick.

I think they do. The Cruiser is a little lacking, it's abilities rely on a precise weapon, it's weak defensively. The GEG doesn't do much against barrages from large ships, overall interceptors are way better than the GEG. And the Tinashi has the whole huge Mimbari list to draw on for support.

 

[Greg Smith]

Now I think the GEG is better than interceptors because the GEG works against beams.

 

[E Nicely]

True, it does (maybe a greater advantage vs. other Drakh, Mimbari, or ISA) but what about massed missles or big pulse cannons? An interceptor overall will block more hits.

 

[CZuschlag]

On the CV:

We believe the point of this ship is its payload. The Huge Hangars generate the value for this ship. If you look at the breakdown, the Payload is worth the value of the ship itself. 4 Skirmish IS one battle. If the Raiders are right, the value of the Carrier has to be approximately net zero. Lots of extra VPs on the board to be possibly killed and delays the deployment of the raider payload, but it has combat capability and, later, can be an initiative sink. You do not field it, under any circumstance, in a Raid level fight or higher; this is secretly a 4-Skirmish point hull.

On GEGs and Beam Overruns:

The idea is that two All Power to Engines get you through the (usually forward-bearing) beam arcs. The Primus has range 25. You'll give the Primus 1 to two shots, total, and then you come about as fast as possible. Two CLs, each getting shot once, should get one past the Primus. You then rely on the GEG to stop the twin-array fire and stay in the sides and behind to use your cannons. If the Primus All Stops, you need to cover 25" in two moves. At speed 8, you won't get there -- 12" (APtoE)+ 12"(APtoE) is just short, and you go bang. Speed 9 and you make it. (13.5" + 13.5" and you're clear of the beam by a goodly bit). If beams work differently in 2E already, I can't speculate too much about it.

On Precise:

I understand why so many cannons have precise now. The GEG does stop the damage, but the Drakh will suffer a lot of crits -- lots of dice trying to roll 6's that higher hull would stop. Those crits, as designed still go through. How is that balanced? The designers for this race decided what is good for the goose is good for the gander and upped the number of criticals on both sides. This is move to defuse this. I have already suggested changes to the LR to eliminate the need for Precise, something similar could exist for the HR.

On GEGs:

Perhaps it's because I see a lot of League, but my Drakh deflect a lot of damage, even Rbax's Gravitic Bolter Brakiri. The Narn and Earthforce effect is often similar. The effect against Vree is particularly compelling. The Dodge + GEG interaction makes the LR more of a GEG 2 ship; potent for skirmish. Yes, the HRs are very fragile though --- they need to be treated like fine china, or, perhaps more accurately, Vorchans. But, their yield can be substantial.

 

[Triggy]

Nice arguments but I'd have liked to have seen the option on the poll for keeping things the same (that's how I'd vote). As it stands I think the Drakh are one of the better fleets for balance and style.

 

[Wing Commander]

The RPG Guide to Drakh is a great sourcebook, introducing some of the additional ship types out of this Mongoose publication into the ACTA fleet lists would be a major step in the right direction.
I'm thinking here that the shieldships, think of a very mobile shuttle with a large GEG, designed to "Maneuver to Shield" the Motherships and carriers would make a big difference. Tweaking the aforementioned Carriers to make them better would help but I 'd say overall that they aren't greatly broken, nothing that making the GEG similar to Interceptors wouldn't fix. E.g. GEG 2: simply take away the first 2 attack dice which hit, be they single, double, etc. This means that they never roll to get crits in the first place and if they get through then they can get a crit or not.

 

[thePirv]

I'd like to see slightly more damage/crew on a few of the ships, especially the Light Cruiser. I'm fed up of light cruisers geting mangled by a Primus. Every game i've faced off against the Centauri, i lose a light cruiser every turn for each Primus my opponent has. I usually lose 2 light cruisers before either can get a shot off.
Yes, the Cruiser can match the Primus for range, but unless you get lucky with some crit rolls, that primus will still be battering you for a few more turns, mnimum.

 

[Goldritter]

(...) E.g. GEG 2: simply take away the first 2 attack dice which hit, be they single, double, etc. This means that they never roll to get crits in the first place and if they get through then they can get a crit or not.

So all Weaponsystem with 2 or lower dice are worthless (even 4 or lower are) with these rule.
The fighters became real useless and with a GEG of 1 or 2 even some Raid Ships have big Problems to fight against a LR or HR.

I think the GEG is good as it is.

I´ve fought only once against the Drakh and that was the Szenario in the Drakh book.
And there the Drakh destroy the Victory and it´s fighters and don´t loose a singel ship. And I´ve rolled good but the Fighters doesn´t make one Damage and the mass of LR and the Cruiser are too much for the (SFOS) Victory.

 

[Triggy]

I'd like to see slightly more damage/crew on a few of the ships, especially the Light Cruiser. I'm fed up of light cruisers geting mangled by a Primus. Every game i've faced off against the Centauri, i lose a light cruiser every turn for each Primus my opponent has. I usually lose 2 light cruisers before either can get a shot off.
Yes, the Cruiser can match the Primus for range, but unless you get lucky with some crit rolls, that primus will still be battering you for a few more turns, mnimum.

:shock:
The Drakh Light Cruiser is one of the better ships in the entire game! It's not supposed to sit in front of Centauri beams though!

 

[Locutus9956]

I think this poll really needs a 'nothing theyre fine as they are' option and a 'what? Better? theyre too good already!' option. As I suspect quite a few people would vote for these.

I personally have played both with and against the drakh only a little but they struck me as pretty well balanced for the most part, GEGs wont win you the game and if you rely on them to survive you will die horribly but the drakh have such nasty weaponry and fast maneuverable ships that they more than make up for this.

I would suggest that it smacks a little of munchkinism and gamer arrogance (and I know Im guilty of it too at times ) to suggest that a fleet is underpowered because you've lost a few games 'you shouldn't have' (especially if you've won your fair share of them too)

 

[Wulf Corbett]

I would suggest that it smacks a little of munchkinism and gamer arrogance (and I know Im guilty of it too at times ) to suggest that a fleet is underpowered because you've lost a few games 'you shouldn't have' (especially if you've won your fair share of them too)

That's why I believe a minimum of change and improvement is the best way to go. If just a few more people can successfully play Drakh, there won't be the stigma of failure against them. As is, they are perfectly playable, but need work to be easily understood. Just like the Minbari used to be.

Wulf

 

[Wing Commander]

Goldritter, you're saying you've no actual experience of using the Drakh in several games against several fleets but you are basing your declaration on using them once?
Don't mean to come across like I'm flaming you here but try walking a mile in the Drakhs' shoes before making broad statements. I've used them against a broad range of opponents and varying fleets with (barring good/bad luck) fairly similar results by and large.
Also, my idea makes GEG still puts them on a par with Interceptors with the differences being;
1. Interceptors can, if you roll well, potentially block a lot more incoming firepower but can be overwhelmed.
2. GEG's apply against every attack but can still be overwhelmed. As only a few ships have GEG 2 or even GEG 3 this would be fairly easy for most ships, including low cost ships to achieve.
- perhaps what we need is for somebody to sit down and "run the numbers" on many of these ships. E.g. Ship X fires at Ship Y with an average set of dice rolls accomplishes A and B. Ship Y fires back, with an average set of dice rolls and accomplishes C & D. If the ships are on a parity, given that they are all at the same level, etc, then a given ship should win as often as it loses against ships of the same level.... if any 1 ship accomplishes more then there is something that needs addressing. To put it in plain English. All Battle levels ships are being sold to us (rules wise) as being equal. All things being equal (e.g. no lucky dice rollers) then they should all achieve much the same success rate.

 

[Triggy]

- perhaps what we need is for somebody to sit down and "run the numbers" on many of these ships. E.g. Ship X fires at Ship Y with an average set of dice rolls accomplishes A and B. Ship Y fires back, with an average set of dice rolls and accomplishes C & D. If the ships are on a parity, given that they are all at the same level, etc, then a given ship should win as often as it loses against ships of the same level.... if any 1 ship accomplishes more then there is something that needs addressing. To put it in plain English. All Battle levels ships are being sold to us (rules wise) as being equal. All things being equal (e.g. no lucky dice rollers) then they should all achieve much the same success rate.

Been there, done that - check out my fleet analysis threads. You may disagree with my conclusions but at least I've "run the numbers". If you have any comments they'd be welcomed. BTW, I've refined the process now to be a single formula for any ship and if the number is high or low then that is an indication of its strength. I get mostly the same results but after taking speed, manoevrability, jump points, command, weapon range, un-interceptable weapons, etc. into the equation I have a couple of changes I'd like to make...

 

[E Nicely]

I personally have played both with and against the drakh only a little but they struck me as pretty well balanced for the most part, GEGs wont win you the game and if you rely on them to survive you will die horribly but the drakh have such nasty weaponry and fast maneuverable ships that they more than make up for this.

I would suggest that it smacks a little of munchkinism and gamer arrogance (and I know Im guilty of it too at times ) to suggest that a fleet is underpowered because you've lost a few games 'you shouldn't have' (especially if you've won your fair share of them too)

Since you're admittedly a munchkin I guess you would know. It smacks of gamer arrogance when someone makes a personal judgement like you just did.

Drakh manuverability isn't that good. Their smaller ships move ok, the larger ones are a long way from being exceptional. On half of the Drakh fleet the weaponry is no where near "nasty" unless tou think a 2 or 3 AD beam is nasty. The GEG needs work, maybe if you play some more games with them you'll see that it really makes no difference in high PL games. It works against fighters and small ships. I never suggested that the GEG should win games either. But since it's something that's figured into PLs and other characteristics it should be effective across the board or other Drakh characteristics need to bump up just a little if GEGs going to stay ineffectual against high PL ships. But let me guess, I'm being a munchkin by thinking about a fleets capabilities vs. things like PL and survivability against other ships.

There's a reason I put this poll up, not just because I wanted stimulating conversation about the Drakh. If enough people say "they're good as is" I'll go with the consensus. It was probably just me being arrogant when I didn't think to put that option on the poll.

triggyNice arguments but I'd have liked to have seen the option on the poll for keeping things the same (that's how I'd vote). As it stands I think the Drakh are one of the better fleets for balance and style.

I simply didn't think of it at the time. And yeah the Drakh definitely have their own style.