Some suggestions for Criticals

[Foxmeister]

We all know that the crit table as is is a source of consternation for many people. Now I don't expect this to change in P&P, but I do have a couple of relatively simple suggestions that might help at least mitigate part of the problem.

I'm deliberate steering clear of anything like redundancy, or different tables for each PL as they would almost certain be seen as something best served by a 3rd edition (if at all!).

1. Speed Crits - these should be proportional. Not a new suggestion here by any means but this is a significant issue. A -4 speed crit on a WS still leaves it faster than most other ships, yet the same crit on a Ka'Bin'Tak renders it adrift. Instead of -1, -2 and -4, I favour 25%, 50% and 75%.

2. No SAs - whilst I'm not totally against No SAs on the crit table I think "All Hands on Deck" should be specifically excluded from this, unless the ship has suffered a vital crit in engineering.

3. Vital Systems - I think most vital systems crits should be repairable, but at at CQ10 and without any bonuses for "All Hands on Deck". Perhaps Engineering and Bridge hits should remain irreparable


Thoughts, comments, further suggestions?

Regards,

Dave

 

[H]

i fully concur on the speed crits, as you say -4 is a mere anoyance for some ships such as WS, Raiders, Demos etc, but the death knell for a lot of others, noteably the Narn, and um, what other fleet, the abbai i guess because of their short range guns.

 

[skavendan]

Well the -4 screws me way too offen mothership adrift :/

 

[Burger]

Agreed on all!

I don't like no SA crits at all. They remove tactical options from the game, prevent your plans/strategy, and generally ruin fun. Being unable to All Stop is particularly annoying.

 

[Methos5000]

Well I think one of the major problems with the current crit table is the permanent no DC crit. If a big ship takes a lot of crits and also gets nailed with the No DC vital its pretty much over for that ship. Doesn't affect small ships as much as they tend to be close to death anyway if they have taken a vital system hit.

Vitals should be repairable (as per your suggestion) or the Permanent No DC / No SA should go away as this just punishes ships that have high damage/crew for survivability. Who cares if I still have 50 damage/crew left on my ship if its Adrift, NO SA, Permanent NO DC and Weaponless(by weaponless I mainly refer to taking enough -AD to knock its main guns offline, secondaries for most races can be easily ignored if the ship is forever adrift). It can't do anything except drift towards the table edge (or worse a planet for instant death) and be boarded.

 

[silashand]

Agreed with all. Also, I like the version of crits they implemented in Victory at Sea where every time you get one you roll. On a 4+ it is ignored. This would go a long way to mitigating their effect in the game. I for one have always thought crits play far too important a role in ACtA since they are just random chance. Always hated it when I got a no-DC crit early on which basically screws it for the entire game.

Also, I absolutely despise the 'wait till next turn to try to fix things' idea. Not because it's unfair or anything, but it means you have to keep track of when crits happen which frankly is a pain in the behind and IMO is a detail level that doesn't actually add anything to the game. Better to simply have DC happen in the end phase and you can attempt to repair any one crit (more if you AHTD) regardless.

JMO...

Cheers, Gary

 

[SolarMacharious]

I really like the speed reduction idea, too many times those big ships just get taken out by 1) speed reduction early in game 2) front firing or any arc depending on the ship and 3)losing traits like adaptive armour or interceptors early.

However i have an issue with all hands on deck and fixing crits, mainly that lately, i have not had a game ever that has lasted more than 4 turns, and that my big ships either 1. die, 2. take a few hits, but would rather shoot all their guns than brace, and then proceed to die, or 3. close blast doors and survive to do jack squat because they have been out manouvered by the next turn.

turn 3, and 4, really there are only a few sa that i would consider because you want to fire as much as you can in up close, and you cant repair crits till the turn after, so two tuns is not really enough time to think about repairing.

Anyways my point is that there are very few instances to do all hands on deck. in one year and probably 50 - 80 games ive preformed all hands on deck mabe twice. By the time you get crits on big ships, you most likely cannot do sa anyways, or your dead, and small ships just die before they get the opportunity. I dont see the point in it.

 

[Da Boss]

Strange - I see it used reasinably often played 3pt battle last night - Centauri vs Minbari - lasted about 8 turns - and several ships in the last coupel of turns used All hands to Deck - and they were small ships - a Corvan and a Torotha - both some distance from each other as the surviving Tigara was chased by the Laiti whilst taking pot shots at the Admiral on his Balvarin.

The Torotha fixed its adrift and killed the raziks harrising it and the Corvan fixed its -1AD beam only to have it knocked out again.

The Torotha was also the last survivng Minbari ship (briefly)

 

[katadder]

Also, I absolutely despise the 'wait till next turn to try to fix things' idea. Not because it's unfair or anything, but it means you have to keep track of when crits happen which frankly is a pain in the behind and IMO is a detail level that doesn't actually add anything to the game. Better to simply have DC happen in the end phase and you can attempt to repair any one crit (more if you AHTD) regardless.

you dont have to remember when they happen. just have to remember crits for that specific turn as they are the only ones you cannot repair. And even in 5pt war I have never had that many crits I couldnt remember which ones happened that turn.

 

[silashand]

And even in 5pt war I have never had that many crits I couldnt remember which ones happened that turn.

Considering that our *starting* game size is usually around 5pt war, I actually have had that many crits happen. That's why I don't like the way it works .

Cheers, Gary

 

[Silvereye]

1. Speed Crits - these should be proportional. Not a new suggestion here by any means but this is a significant issue. A -4 speed crit on a WS still leaves it faster than most other ships, yet the same crit on a Ka'Bin'Tak renders it adrift. Instead of -1, -2 and -4, I favour 25%, 50% and 75%.

Definitely agree with this one.

2. No SAs - whilst I'm not totally against No SAs on the crit table I think "All Hands on Deck" should be specifically excluded from this, unless the ship has suffered a vital crit in engineering.

I think the No SA effect has its place, perhaps just making it apply for the following turn only (Much like a Crew - 6). I'd leave the Vitals - 1 (Bridge) hit one as needing to be repaired if you implement the following though.

3. Vital Systems - I think most vital systems crits should be repairable, but at at CQ10 and without any bonuses for "All Hands on Deck". Perhaps Engineering and Bridge hits should remain irreparable.

In two minds. I'd consider allowing them to be repaired at CQ 11 (you would therefore need to be on All Hands on Deck). However to be on AHoD you'd have to not be suffering from a No SA critical. :?

 

[Da Boss]

Of course the ISA wins out with anything like this being based on CQ checks - as well as having self repair for an extra +1........... so would usually repair vitals on a 4+...........

 

[Ripple]

I like the idea of proportional speed crits... was for this in the last revision.

I hate the No SA crits... much rather it was temporary, but then we have more things to track.

Really hate the no DC ever crit.

Ripple

 

[katadder]

yeah I like proportional speed crits but its not likely to see P&P as in some peoples eyes its a major game change.
no DC i dont really get anyway as your DC teams would be spread throughout the ship.
no SAs from the bridge being taken out I am fine with as this is right IMO. but maybe not lose SAs on reactor hits, perhaps just +s to CQ checks here.

 

[CZuschlag]

It is a major game change, and one definitely worth researching! We don't have the time to get it done here, however.

There have been many attempts over time, but proportional crits have been suggested before:

I would recommend leaving the chart as is, but changing the effects column to something like:

-1 speed
-20% speed
-50% speed
-75% speed

-2 speed, -1 AD
Ship cannot perform special action if crew loss is 50% of start score
-1 Trait*
Adrift*

-1 AD
-2 AD
-3 AD^
-1 Weapon System*

-
-1 on Damage Control this turn if ship has lost half of more of its troops, -1 Troops
Ship cannot perform special action if crew loss is 50% of start score
-2 on Damage Control 1 on Damage Control this turn if ship has lost half of more of its troops, -2 Troops

No Special Actions*
-
-2 on Damage Control Rolls*
-1 Arc*
-1 Trait*
-1 Trait*

I do keep a few absolute ("All") crits in here, the ones with the "*". I have mitigated an additional one (the "Engineering" hit). Also note that I added one crit that is specifically designed to hose Skirmish and Patrol ships (the "^"). I find that I want to keep a few of these to give Precise some of the same effects value. I also kept one of the -1 Arc criticals as it has been advertised that some ships are intentionally balanced with this crit in mind (Vree, ISA Whitestars, Vorchans). Complete removal is a balance change I'm not yet happy with.

Yes, Virginia, that -75% move crit just got nasty. Also notice --- Adrift only happens 1/3 of the time it did before! That should please the boresight boys.

Also, we need one more balance mechanic:

"For the purpose of the Mass Driver trait and Launch Shuttles and Breaching Pods, any ship with a modified move score of less than 1 inch is considered adrift for all other rules purposes." Voila!

This is only a prototype! You can go further or not .... you just want to get more of the criticals to scale absolutely. The exception is the movement criticals; you want to do those proportionally, as big ships actually have less move than small ones.

 

[Foxmeister]

It is a major game change, and one definitely worth researching! We don't have the time to get it done here, however.

Sorry but I disagree here!

Proportional crits on speed are not a major change - they are an *essential* one!

A -4 speed on a White Star means absolutely nothing so at the moment they are receiving a "bonus" when they get a speed crit because it affects them far, far, far less than a -1 AD on a weapon system. Yet the -1AD is just as fair for a WS as it is for a Ka'Bin'Tak due to the difference in "cost".

Even just addressing this one thing makes the critical table "fairer" for everyone.

I see no reason whatsoever why this should be beyond the scope of P&P.

Regards,

Dave

 

[Dave G]

I agree with proportional movement crits.

And with the No SA crit.

And with being able to repair crits at the end of the turn they are suffered.

How about this for Damage Control & Bridge hits?

Skirmish/Patrol ships have only 1 bridge position, and 1 damage control party.
Raid/Battle ships have 2 bridge positions, and 2 damage control parties.
War/Armageddon ships have 3 bridge positions, and 3 damage control parties.

Each damage control party can try and repair 1 crit per turn (but not the same one).

Each bridge/DC critical hit knocks out 1 of these.

Change "All hands on deck" to 1 extra critical can be attempted to be repaired in the next end phase.

The end result is that the bigger ships take the criticals, but are able to repair them more often than the small ones.

 

[CZuschlag]

Foxmeister,

I didn't want to get all self-referential here, but that chart was from me, about 5 months ago! I think it was the first introduction on proportional speed losses (the reduction on Special Action loss crits and arc loss crits has been a constant through for at minimum 3 years, so I can't claim any of that.) to the board.

At least, that's what I get from my search-fu. Could be wrong.

So, yes, I absolutely support such a change. In particular, it'd make my Wahants a feared sumo ship again, like it should be -- the Dilgar slow death fleet would be a real threat to non-beam armed fleets. However, I know I have to wait, because the effects of these changes are pretty dramatic.

White Stars' greatest fears are critical hits. Those crits are what give you a shot at killing them. So -- what does this do on balance? The -75% speed crits look vicious to Whitestars. On t he other hand, repairing missing arcs gives a lot of safety the was gone before. The net effect? I don't know!

Big ships live in mortal fear of the shipwide crit -- the 50/50 firers, the lose-an-arcs, the no SAs, the drifters. After we implement this change, are big ships undervalued? I don't know!

I don't know!

There is SO much work to retest this kind of change. I love the idea, don't get me wrong. But it's such a big impact, to the game as a whole and otherwise, that I can't see it sufficiently tested (at the speeds at which we are going, at least!) until mid-next year at BEST.

We're not getting enough true testing done to support this. If we had 150 or so playtest reports in already on 1.1, I would see us taking on this kind of task. But, at this speed, we ain't getting in done this year.

Sorry.

 

[skavendan]

I fail to see why it would take so much testing as a avid gamer I can predict what kind of impact this would have.

Yes it would make fast ships slower. But I thought that was the idea of the crit? not to specifically handy cap some fleets.

 

[Target]

I'd rather see the crit table get changed than all this new stuff for each race. The 1st thing we did when it came to doing house rules was remove no DC & not being able to fix vitals. It very simple. Easy to see if it helps which it does. We have been playin 3yrs that way from us. Im not really worried about the lose arc crits or no SA so much cause you can repair them.
The No DC & vitals have to change. They are the biggest funkillers of them all.