Ship Suggestions/Changes - Centauri

[Everyman]

While I realize that not everyone will agree, I am going to start a thread for each race with which I have familiarity (so no Abbai or Drakh from me) with various suggestions that I have to better balance the ships. Feel free to comment, add your own suggestions, ask me to explain a suggestion or disagree in the thread.

Here are my Centauri suggested changes:

Razik Fighter: Remove the weak trait from the Light Particle Gun

Corvan: Remove Battle Lasers; Add Ion Cannons AD 4; Add Escort and Interceptors 1 traits

Demos: Reduce Ion Cannons to AD 8

Morgrath: Increase Damage to 18

Vorchan: Increase Ion Cannons to AD 10

Magnus: Increase Battle Laser to AD 3

 

[Da Boss]

As a Centauri player my views............

Razik - its a superb space superority fighter - take away weak and its better than a Sentri. Leave it as is

Corvan - not sure here - the 1st ed was too good but I do miss my all round guns............

Demos - agreed

Mograth - happy either way

Vorchan - no the Demos and Vorchan should have same Ion Cannons - 10AD is not needed here

Magnus - OK

 

[Lord David the Denied]

I'd rather see the Corvan dropped to patrol and have its stats reduced to reflect this. At skirmish you expect some teeth even though it's a scout and it just doesn't deliver the firepower as it is.

Demos, I agree with.

I agree with Da Boss on the Razik. It's fine as is.

I think the Morgrath needs more firepower, not more hitpoints. As the only DD beam in the fleet it needs more than a measley 2AD to be much use, unless you get silly rolls on your beam you're not doing the damage.

The Vorchan doesn't need any more firepower, it's sweet as a nut already.

Magnus seems ok to me as it is.

 

[Everyman]

Personally on the Razik +1 dogfight does not compensate for the loss of 2 AD, 1 Hull and the weak trait to me. Removing the weak trait would at least allow its use as an interceptor if the enemy had no fighters.

The suggested changes to the Corvan would not give it all around firepower just F arc ion cannons and the guardian arrays. Basically it would be more like the old AOG version. Clearly it was overpowered in 1st Edition but I think it got too much of the nerf stick in Second.

I could easily be convinced to agree with Da Boss on the Vorchan though.

 

[Silvereye]

Razik Fighter: Remove the weak trait from the Light Particle Gun

Agree with the others, it is fine as it is. You take it for the dogfight, not the cannons.

Corvan: Remove Battle Lasers; Add Ion Cannons AD 4; Add Escort and Interceptors 1 traits

I'd rather see the Corvan dropped to patrol and have its stats reduced to reflect this. At skirmish you expect some teeth even though it's a scout and it just doesn't deliver the firepower as it is.

I'd definitely keep the Corvan out of the Patrol slot.

Demos: Reduce Ion Cannons to AD 8

Yep.

Morgrath: Increase Damage to 18

Never used one.

Vorchan: Increase Ion Cannons to AD 10

It's good enough as it is.

Magnus: Increase Battle Laser to AD 3

I'd leave as is too, the 3AD beam would put it into the same function as the Sullust, only it has better hull and all round weaponry.

 

[Garthim]

As a Centauri player, here are my views:

Razik: Agree with everyone else, leave it as is.

Corvan: I wouldn't mind switching out the battle lasers for the ion cannons, at 2 AD instead of 4 AD and no escort and no additional interceptors

Demos: Agree 3000%, lower the ion cannons to 8AD

Morgrath: Neutral

Vorchan: Keep the ion cannnon at 8AD

Magnus: Keep as is, cause then no one would ever take a Sulust if the Magnus has 3AD for its battle laser

 

[Da Boss]

Personally on the Razik +1 dogfight does not compensate for the loss of 2 AD, 1 Hull and the weak trait to me. Removing the weak trait would at least allow its use as an interceptor if the enemy had no fighters.

The suggested changes to the Corvan would not give it all around firepower just F arc ion cannons and the guardian arrays. Basically it would be more like the old AOG version. Clearly it was overpowered in 1st Edition but I think it got too much of the nerf stick in Second.

I could easily be convinced to agree with Da Boss on the Vorchan though.

It does seem odd to give a Scout Guardian Arrays - does that not give away its position?

re the Razik - its a dedicated dogfighter - if you don't want that you use a Sentri

 

[Triggy]

Only changes I'd make:

Octurion - 24" range on the Battle Lasers.
Demos - 6 or 7AD on the Ion Cannon.

There are a couple of other very small points but generally I'm not unhappy with the Centauri.

 

[Da Boss]

Only changes I'd make:

Octurion - 24" range on the Battle Lasers.
Demos - 6 or 7AD on the Ion Cannon.

There are a couple of other very small points but generally I'm not unhappy with the Centauri.

so both changes in P+P he says hopefully..........

 

[Banichi]

I like the new centauri, but I do think the demos wouldn't suffer from having its ion cannons knocked back to 8.

Actually the only humbug I had with the 1st to 2nd ed change was that I used dargans alot as fighter carrying raid level ships. Not that I don't like the sneaky stealth dargan.

 

[Triggy]

Only changes I'd make:

Octurion - 24" range on the Battle Lasers.
Demos - 6 or 7AD on the Ion Cannon.

There are a couple of other very small points but generally I'm not unhappy with the Centauri.

so both changes in P+P he says hopefully..........

Certainly the Demos will get something (currently debating and playtesting anywhere from 6-8AD) although the Octurion is a bit more debatable as P&P will generally be leaving the smaller changes to ships. Hopefully though

 

[Enalut]

I know this is more radical than what has been talked about to dayte But I would like to see the Octarian Changed:

Interceptors 2
Carrier 2

Weapons

Forward
Battle Laser 6AD 18" range B/P
Heavy Ion Cannan 15 AD 15" range AP/TL/DD
Plasma Accelerators: 4 AD 12" SAP DD

P & S
Heavy Iaon Cannan 10 AD 15" range AP/TL/DD
Plasma Accelerators: 4 AD 12" SAP DD

Aft
Heavy Iaon Cannan 8 AD 15" range AP/TL/DD
Plasma Accelerators: 4 AD 12" SAP DD

Basiacally the idea is to leave it a bruiser designed to mix it up in teh freay but give it better punch agaisnt ships its own class, without totally unbalencing it.

 

[emperorpenguin]

Personally on the Razik +1 dogfight does not compensate for the loss of 2 AD, 1 Hull and the weak trait to me. Removing the weak trait would at least allow its use as an interceptor if the enemy had no fighters.

The suggested changes to the Corvan would not give it all around firepower just F arc ion cannons and the guardian arrays. Basically it would be more like the old AOG version. Clearly it was overpowered in 1st Edition but I think it got too much of the nerf stick in Second..

Don't know if you played 1st edition but the Sentri was a bit like the Loch Ness Monster back then. Plenty of people swore they'd seen them but they were a near mythical beast, Raziks were the default choice. Giving "weak" to the Razik was done so as to make Sentris more attractive and it worked. Choose Raziks for dogfights, Sentris for multi-role.

The main reason the Corvan has battle lasers now is the model. If you look at every Centauri ship with ion cannons they all have clearly defined turrets, the Corvan only has two small ports which are 99% identical to the battle laser openings on the Octurion. I wanted Guardian arrays myself but in the end play balance suggested the Maximus alone should get that upgrade.

 

[Everyman]

As a Centauri player, here are my views:

Magnus: Keep as is, cause then no one would ever take a Sulust if the Magnus has 3AD for its battle laser

I have to disagree here as the Sulust still would have 1 AD more on the lasers, 6 inches more range on them, 6 more damage and crew and interceptors 2 while the Magnus has its 1 better Hull and 4 AD side firing weapons. As it stands now there is little reason to take a Magnus over the Sulust but upping its laser AD by one might make it a viable choice again.

 

[Everyman]

The main reason the Corvan has battle lasers now is the model. If you look at every Centauri ship with ion cannons they all have clearly defined turrets, the Corvan only has two small ports which are 99% identical to the battle laser openings on the Octurion. I wanted Guardian arrays myself but in the end play balance suggested the Maximus alone should get that upgrade.

Well we all know that if every ship was based on how the model looked we would see a number of changes to the game as it stands now but clearly if they wanted to give it the Battle Lasers they could have gone with the standard range of 18.

The flavor text on this ship also makes the Stealth of 4 seem weak. Maybe leave the weapons alone and up it to Stealth 5 as this would still be less than the Minbari but on par with the Vree skirmish level scout (although the Vree still has better weapons).

 

[emperorpenguin]

Well we all know that if every ship was based on how the model looked we would see a number of changes to the game as it stands now but clearly if they wanted to give it the Battle Lasers they could have gone with the standard range of 18. ).

possibly yes but when we were revisiting the Centauri for 2nd ed a big driving force was staying true to the model given how incredibly detailed the Centauri models are (in direct contrast to say the Narn)

 

[Lord David the Denied]

I know this is more radical than what has been talked about to dayte But I would like to see the Octarian Changed:

Interceptors 2
Carrier 2

Weapons

Forward
Battle Laser 6AD 18" range B/P
Heavy Ion Cannan 15 AD 15" range AP/TL/DD
Plasma Accelerators: 4 AD 12" SAP DD

P & S
Heavy Iaon Cannan 10 AD 15" range AP/TL/DD
Plasma Accelerators: 4 AD 12" SAP DD

Aft
Heavy Iaon Cannan 8 AD 15" range AP/TL/DD
Plasma Accelerators: 4 AD 12" SAP DD

Basiacally the idea is to leave it a bruiser designed to mix it up in teh freay but give it better punch agaisnt ships its own class, without totally unbalencing it.

I like what you're trying to do, but it doesn't fit the character of the fleet. What the Octurion really needs is to lose the matter cannons and get plasma accelerators up front and swap the ion cannons for heavy ion cannons in every arc. It doesn't need carrier, although interceptors 2 would be nice.

On a more general note, I rarely use the Demos anyway but with only 6 dice on the ion cannon I wouldn't use it ever. It'd be inferior to the Vorchan. Just upping the range on the Octurion isn't really a solution to the problems I've highlighted (dozesn of times) with the ship. Maybe Mongoose will address them in P&P rather than handing us a band-aid quick-fix?

 

[Ripple]

I really don't understand folks thoughts on the Demos/Vorchan debate. It seems to me the main weapons are almost equal. (I give the edge to the Demos due to precise, damage over two turns is almost the same but you get an extra crit effect out of the demos.)

So your saying the 2AD a turn is equal to an interceptor system. I can't understand that... interceptors are too important against secondary fire, and 2AD barely add one hit a turn even given the traits.

Add in the effect of CBD leverage and target choices with the extra range, and the Demos is much better. You have to lose more than 2 AD to get parity for these ships.

Ripple

 

[Lord David the Denied]

The Demos' torpedoes are not ship-killers. The odd critical effect (and twice as likely isn't the same as guaranteed, remember) doesn't give you the stopping power to kill anything but ships of the Demos' own weight class.

The Vorchan and Demos are meant to be the main attacking arm of the fleet, but the Demos isn't capable of destroying large ships even in packs in my experience. I don't understand why people are so afraid of precise weapons. Precise and DD, yes, that's a bit scary, but precise alone isn't a big problem unless you get unlucky.

 

[Burger]

but precise alone isn't a big problem unless you get unlucky.

Given the nature of the critical table, you don't have to be all that unlucky. In fact more times than not you'll get a debilitating crit (4-4, 4-6, 6-4, 1-6, trait loss, AD reduction to uselessness, etc etc) long before your large ship is destroyed.