Term Explanations

[katadder]

thats why with the trial rules you need a scout on the table as well as to pass a CQ check. the scout tells you where the enemy is and then you need the CQ check to get dead on target.

 

[No. 1 Bear]

i personally believe that the jump point bombing tactic is a very cheesy and annoying thing for the recieving player to do. From where i stand it should either be removed to keep the game mechanics simple. Or alternitavley you should tone it down to about 3AD DD. Another thing i hate about this rule is that you can just close it down and make another one. Why? your i hyperspace and you create an opening into realspace you should be forced to come through and not sit around and wait. You open one you come through. Moreover it is just a cheesy rule that many people dislike as it has been seen so just remove it. Simple.

 

[Reaverman]

see you bring up dual drive.

Derrrrr...that's going to be a bit of a no brainer

 

[katadder]

you still dont know what it does, if it will still be in etc.
if you go by my idea for a ship having to come through a JP it opens then even if it allowed quicker recharge or whatever the 2nd jump would only be for leaving the table.

 

[H]

Now then, I hear your argument about a ship "must" come throught it's own jump point, and I accept it would make people more thoughtful about JP bombing, but opening up a dummy jump point is a valid tactic to split an enemy fleet to cover both. You are potentially, removing one jump point tactic, to cover the "perceived" shortcomings of another.

 

[No. 1 Bear]

I do understand that the tactic is a valid one dummy JP's away from where you are actually coming in. However if you can still do it with a low level ship thats pretty much only going to be used as an initiative sink. I understand that removing the dummy point to stop another cheesy one is a bit silly. This truly does need testing and refining or siply removing.

 

[katadder]

Now then, I hear your argument about a ship "must" come throught it's own jump point, and I accept it would make people more thoughtful about JP bombing, but opening up a dummy jump point is a valid tactic to split an enemy fleet to cover both. You are potentially, removing one jump point tactic, to cover the "perceived" shortcomings of another.

yes i know its a valid tactic, but if everyone wants things to be closer to the show this wouldnt happen.
if you use your jump engines you tend to go through that jump point, not through someone elses.
if you want to dummy someone use smaller ships to open your jump points. or perhaps just have it so that in move phase say ship activeates jump engines, not which one. as long as a ship comes through every jump point thats fine. that way you could have a sharlin and a torotha open JPs but the opponent not know which one.

 

[tneva82]

it`s a bit of a cheesy tactic i think and i would limit it`s use to a pre-plotted position on the map that you have to drawn the enemy into.... just my 2 pence.

And what stops ship on space simply transmitting co-ordinates? Garibaldi did it in Endgame. Ship computers could do that <1 second without any problems.

It's not like ships in hyperspace are in transmission limbo...

(oh btw to earlier comment: Jump point in jupiter was explosive because of all the hydrogon or whatever the explosive substance was. Explosive gas+energy=boom!)

 

[H]

Now then, I hear your argument about a ship "must" come throught it's own jump point, and I accept it would make people more thoughtful about JP bombing, but opening up a dummy jump point is a valid tactic to split an enemy fleet to cover both. You are potentially, removing one jump point tactic, to cover the "perceived" shortcomings of another.

yes i know its a valid tactic, but if everyone wants things to be closer to the show this wouldnt happen.
if you use your jump engines you tend to go through that jump point, not through someone elses.
if you want to dummy someone use smaller ships to open your jump points. or perhaps just have it so that in move phase say ship activeates jump engines, not which one. as long as a ship comes through every jump point thats fine. that way you could have a sharlin and a torotha open JPs but the opponent not know which one.

please don't use the "closer to the show argument", it makes me hulk up about my G'Quans beams ;-)

 

[katadder]

true about that. but it is common sense, you dont open a JP then use someone elses. the only decoys used in show was on sheridens march on earth, and he used actual ships, not just opening JPs to get the enemy to move.

 

[Reaverman]

Now then, I hear your argument about a ship "must" come throught it's own jump point, and I accept it would make people more thoughtful about JP bombing, but opening up a dummy jump point is a valid tactic to split an enemy fleet to cover both. You are potentially, removing one jump point tactic, to cover the "perceived" shortcomings of another.

yes i know its a valid tactic, but if everyone wants things to be closer to the show this wouldnt happen.
if you use your jump engines you tend to go through that jump point, not through someone elses.
if you want to dummy someone use smaller ships to open your jump points. or perhaps just have it so that in move phase say ship activeates jump engines, not which one. as long as a ship comes through every jump point thats fine. that way you could have a sharlin and a torotha open JPs but the opponent not know which one.

please don't use the "closer to the show argument", it makes me hulk up about my G'Quans beams ;-)

IMHO Katadder seems to have done nothing to prove himself, and more to why the JP bombing issue is going to be abused. People 'Dummying', will use that techique to also JP Bomb. Then deploy in the their blatantly obvious JP, where they are out of harms way. Again, that ship gets the chance of deliverying some hefty damage, with little worry about harming itself.

It seems that the Canon Maxim is an easy excuse when its needed to be used, but suddenly forgotten when it's not wanted. With G'Quan Beams, being a prime example (as Hiff mentioned). It's a good job JMS has not passed away, if he did, he'd have been doing endless somersults in his coffin!

 

[Burger]

just have it so that in move phase say ship activeates jump engines, not which one. as long as a ship comes through every jump point thats fine. that way you could have a sharlin and a torotha open JPs but the opponent not know which one.

I don't think that is within the rules. At lest, 1e. When you activate a ship in the movement phase you have to say which one you are activating!

 

[katadder]

just have it so that in move phase say ship activeates jump engines, not which one. as long as a ship comes through every jump point thats fine. that way you could have a sharlin and a torotha open JPs but the opponent not know which one.

I don't think that is within the rules. At lest, 1e. When you activate a ship in the movement phase you have to say which one you are activating!

I know its not, but whats to say that you couldnt do that with ships in hyperspace? as long as you dont open more JPs than you have jump engines and as long as something comes out each JP eventually. as has been said by others you cant detect whats coming through a JP so this would be an option if we went with the any ship opening a JP has to use it rather than use somebody elses.

 

[Burger]

I know its not, but whats to say that you couldnt do that with ships in hyperspace?

Err, the rules.
When you activate a ship in the movement phase you have to declare which one. Whether it is in hyperspace or realspace is irrelevant.

 

[emperorpenguin]

please don't use the "closer to the show argument", it makes me hulk up about my G'Quans beams ;-)

such things get pointed out repeatedly but the powers that be choose not to implement all suggestions

 

[katadder]

but the rules could be changed to represent ships in hyperspace, after all JPs are all the same so it doesnt matter which one opens it and your opponent doesnt have to know.

 

[Reaverman]

but the rules could be changed to represent ships in hyperspace, after all JPs are all the same so it doesnt matter which one opens it and your opponent doesnt have to know.

So you are saying that the Turn sequence is going to be non-linear?

 

[Burger]

Schrodinger's jump point?

 

[Reaverman]

Schrodinger's jump point?

What, a JP appears and spews out a multitude of dead kats

 

[katadder]

but the rules could be changed to represent ships in hyperspace, after all JPs are all the same so it doesnt matter which one opens it and your opponent doesnt have to know.

So you are saying that the Turn sequence is going to be non-linear?

why would it be non linear? you have 3 ships in hyperspace with JPs. now you name which ship opens the JP. why would it change things if you say a ship opens a JP from hyperspace. still nominating a ship, just not named one. so you could nominate all 3 in turn without naming them.