Redundancy/Armour - Which Version?

[Greg Smith]

We should have some time this weekend but were looking at doing the WS first... is this a higher priority?

Ripple

To my mind, the Ws is actually going into P&P so is a highre priority.

 

[Foxmeister]

Well the original proposal was for Redundancy being at the following levels (if the player can pick which criticals to use it on):

Battle PL = 1
War PL = 2
Armageddon PL = 4

This isn't a fix for all imbalances, it's simply an attempt to get the bigger ships seen more. Raid PL ships don't really need the boost as although they ain't perfectly balanced with Skirmish and Patrol ships, they aren't far off either.

Does anybody actually care to playtest this?

I'm all for having something over nothing, and if it is players choice, you can get away with redundancy at lower levels.

One question though - is the intention for players choice that the crit be fully rolled out to see what the complete effect is? i.e. if the crit involves a random trait loss or loss of an arc, should the actual trait/arc to be lost be determined before the player gets to choose to ignore it or not?

Regards,

Dave

 

[eldiablito]

Well the original proposal was for Redundancy being at the following levels (if the player can pick which criticals to use it on):

Battle PL = 1
War PL = 2
Armageddon PL = 4

This isn't a fix for all imbalances, it's simply an attempt to get the bigger ships seen more. Raid PL ships don't really need the boost as although they ain't perfectly balanced with Skirmish and Patrol ships, they aren't far off either.

Does anybody actually care to playtest this?

Perfect! As I don't really have a problem with Raid ships... The real issue comes up when you field Battle and higher... Let us play test this idea; perhaps when we see how the idea alters the current game flow, we may need to tweak it around a little for some Raid ships or specific races/hull designs.

 

[Ripple]

it's horribly meta-gamey... but I'd love it to be something as simple as 1 redundancy for every step above the level of the fight, but it would at least battle level and above works fairly well.

Ripple

 

[Triggy]

it's horribly meta-gamey... but I'd love it to be something as simple as 1 redundancy for every step above the level of the fight, but it would at least battle level and above works fairly well.

Ripple

Agreed it's slightly meta-gamey but having it exist at different amounts depending on the PL of the fight is completely metagamey (and unnecessary IMO)

Well the original proposal was for Redundancy being at the following levels (if the player can pick which criticals to use it on):

Battle PL = 1
War PL = 2
Armageddon PL = 4

This isn't a fix for all imbalances, it's simply an attempt to get the bigger ships seen more. Raid PL ships don't really need the boost as although they ain't perfectly balanced with Skirmish and Patrol ships, they aren't far off either.

Does anybody actually care to playtest this?

I'm all for having something over nothing, and if it is players choice, you can get away with redundancy at lower levels.

One question though - is the intention for players choice that the crit be fully rolled out to see what the complete effect is? i.e. if the crit involves a random trait loss or loss of an arc, should the actual trait/arc to be lost be determined before the player gets to choose to ignore it or not?

Regards,

Dave

The intention is that all crits for a weapon system are fully resolved before choosing which one(s) are cancelled by redundancy.

Greg - I agree the White Star is a much greater priority. Redundancy probably won't see it for P&P (if it gets a lot of playtesting the odds are much greater though) but the White Star has just recently been getting a lot of good playtesting and any issues (maybe like the Liati) should be resolved.

This doesn't stop you playtesting redundancy if you wish though

 

[Greg Smith]

Greg - I agree the White Star is a much greater priority. Redundancy probably won't see it for P&P (if it gets a lot of playtesting the odds are much greater though) but the White Star has just recently been getting a lot of good playtesting and any issues (maybe like the Liati) should be resolved.

With only a few weeks to go before P&P is finalised, I don't think there will be big changes to P&P.

This doesn't stop you playtesting redundancy if you wish though

Absolutely.

 

[Foxmeister]

With only a few weeks to go before P&P is finalised, I don't think there will be big changes to P&P.

I was going to post that I'd rather wait and have P&P include more, but in light of Matts announcement that Mongoose won't be renewing the B5 licence when it expires in 2009 I can fully understand the need to get it out of the door as quickly as possible!

Regards,

Dave