S&P 47 battle report... no redundancy!

[Ripple]

The new rules do help a bit, but it did not take the possibility of a catastrophic hit away. They were content with it being less common. For those who really want big ships to be 'big' and actually have to be pounded on before crippling crits occur the new table will disappoint, but they are an improvement.

> some of the issue is that we traded one controversial type of crit for new controversial ones. It will take some time to see if this shakes out as badly as some folks fear. What it does do is keep small ships somewhat scary, and some of the improvements to the large ships may make them worth their slots. In many ways this looks to become more race specific issue than a big vs small <

Ripple

 

[animus]

... :shock:

You're scaring me, Ripple. You don't make it sound like I'll be using my big ships anytime soon.

 

[Lord David the Denied]

All I'll say on this issue is, in games I've played, especially against Narn, I've found it very hard to kill large ships without getting criticals to combat-kill them. I'm not sure why people are wanting ships to just sit there pounding each other and knocking a few hits off here and there - the criticals provided tension and drama, even if it was sometimes a bit abrupt. After all, we do see ships of all sizes blown to pieces in one or two salvos on screen.

 

[MustEatBrains]

That´s how I see it, too - though it is right that, in order to enable competitive gaming which depens on skill rather than on luck, those zero speed/zero weapons crits were far too drastic, especially since even fighters had a chane to cripple something as big as a Victory in one shot. Those catastrophic explosion results are still nasty, but there´s only so high a chance to get them.

Some people critisize ACTA for being extremely "crit-heavy", but I think that those crits are merely representing the loss of systems and additonal effects of every damage - after a fashion, I guess that this makes ACTA even more realsitic.

Compared to Star Trek, the ACTA crits would represent the random Ensign flying around the bridge in a shower of sparks whenever a ship gets hit. We could do without, but it´s far more fun that way!

 

[RayB]

Hmm, I'm not so fond of the critical table as is. As it really does feel that the majority of damage caused in any game is through critical hits! (mind you, that's what happens when you use lots of precise weapons! :wink: )

This is also exaggerated by the fact a '1' is a failed hit! So 1/5 of damage caused will cause a crit, or if precise 1/3! (And then if the crit causes 3 damage or more you've equalled or beaten the conventional damage caused!)

And then you have the 'all or nothing' feel from triple damage weaponary! (You should roll on the crit table for every point of damage caused, not every hit IMO).

The speed crits were a real issue, hopefully they have been improved!

All in all, I feel the critical hit table just needs to be toned down for the damage caused!

Cheers,

RayB

 

[Triggy]

Perfectly fine result (as any result would be) - after redundancy had been overcome.

Just give the big ships some benefit for being big so there's a reason to take them. In a game built around initiative sinks, fewer ships is a detriment. The survivability of bigger ships needs to balance this.

Animus, in all of my test games it hasn't been a problem. I rarely had a big ship massively hampered by crits, at least not until it was severely damaged too. Large ships really do survive much better than 1st ed. and Bulk, although discussed, just wasn't needed.

All this is not mentioning how many Battle and War PL choices have gotten better as well to make them genuine choices anyway.

I have had big ships hampered just as much, but then I always seem to get a vital systems crit happen to my front arc weapons

no the ships are not any more survivable than 1e, but the crits cannot take every single weapon off you with one crit. and you can automatically use the all hands to deck SA to repair crits.

Sounds about right - it can happen sometimes (losing a critical arc) but is less likely and more importantly for big ships, far easier to repair. It was always going to be a balancing act and the playtesters have erred on the side of allowing certain crits to occur but remove the worst of them.

 

[Methos5000]

I guess the big thing that concerns me right now is have the weapons of the skirmish level ships of the narn been toned down given the crew and damage points upgrade (being roughly equal to a raid ship from everything I have read) If the Ka'tans and Ka'Toc still have that many AD of nasty beams AND have more damage and crew now, I fail to see how this will help against people that have to face the Narn. Infact if they have the roughly the same armament as before it seems it would encourage even more use of the skirmish Narn ships then before. Ill hold off any major opinions about it until i have the books infront of me and can see for myself, but I hope there is plenty of encouragement to take bigger narn ships now. Im tired of facing the Narn Bat Squad.

 

[katadder]

ka'toc is same armament, no one really used them before. however the ka'tan has lost a beam and has a one shot e-mine instead.

 

[Greg Smith]

I always use Ka'tocs over Ka'tans. If you can't get a boresight, that fore arc mag-gun may just get a lucky shot. In fact it was just such a lucky shot that did for Digger's tertius at Aldershot.

My record with with Ka'tocs - three tourneys, one win, one joint second, one unmentionable.

 

[Greg Smith]

Animus - just a thought, if you like ships that are somewaht immune to crits, you will like the 2e Abbai.

 

[Lord David the Denied]

ka'toc is same armament, no one really used them before. however the ka'tan has lost a beam and has a one shot e-mine instead.

So the Narn skirmish ships still have unfair numbers of AD in multiple arcs on top of their beams?

 

[Burger]

Remember beam rules have changed. If a beam used to be SAP then the new rules give it a 20% reduction in average damage. Plus they can't benefit from CAF or Scout redirection.

 

[H]

Plus the ka'toc still dies horribly if you even look at it funny.

 

[Lord David the Denied]

Remember beam rules have changed. If a beam used to be SAP then the new rules give it a 20% reduction in average damage. Plus they can't benefit from CAF or Scout redirection.

So the Narn skirmish ships still have unfair numbers of AD in multiple arcs on top of their beams?

Look again, Burger...

 

[emperorpenguin]

no need to worry, just introduce Mr Ka'Tan or Mr Ka'Toc to your nice new friends Mr Vorchan and Mr Demos! :twisted:

 

[katadder]

narn have lots of secondaries - its what they do.

 

[Lord David the Denied]

Lots of secondaries isn't the same as beardy secondaries. From what you're saying it sounds like the broken Narn skirmish ships haven't been fixed...

 

[Celisasu]

The Ka'Toc only had 6AD on it's pulse cannons, not the eight attack dice that the Ka'Tan had. 6AD at close range of a weapon with no special traits really isn't that fearsome. It's the beam that's always made the Ka'Toc(and more notably the Ka'Tan) scary. Seeing how the Ka'Tan has apparently lost one of it's beams and replaced it with a one shot E-Mine, it's not as scary once that mine is fired off. I suspect it's going to be a game where the Narn player tries to to get into position to use that E-Mine before the Ka'Tan is ripped to pieces. I think someone mentioned the Ka'Tan has had it's pulse cannons brought down to the Ka'Toc's level although I'm not 100% sure on that.

So the Mag Gun is still a beam? That's too bad. I was hoping for it to lose beam and gain Quad Damage. :lol: Feels more in flavor for what it's supposed to be. Namely a rail gun mounted nuke.

 

[animus]

Animus - just a thought, if you like ships that are somewaht immune to crits, you will like the 2e Abbai.

I'm not looking for immunity. I just want the big ships to take a bit of punishment before they get wacked. Redundancy/bulk wouldn't be that great of a tilt unless the bulk was way out of line. Just let a war ship count the first two crits as solid hits - let them live long enough to justify themselves.

 

[Da Boss]

Remember beam rules have changed. If a beam used to be SAP then the new rules give it a 20% reduction in average damage. Plus they can't benefit from CAF or Scout redirection.

So the Narn skirmish ships still have unfair numbers of AD in multiple arcs on top of their beams?

Look again, Burger...

I think he means the AD of the normal guns is less important if the beams are different - truth be told the beams actually just seem more random - either big hits or nothing. Played the Narn last night and the Narn beams from the G'Quan were most ineffective and the short range of their secondary batteries compared to my Ion and Matter cannons most useful.