Testing Redundancy on Vassal

[Triggy]

I just want a reason to take an Omega over a Hyperion/Nova, Olympus/Oracle and two Hermes.

Ripple

Exactly.

I hope Mongoose is watching this and will incorporate something like this in 2nd Ed. There is a real problem and I think this could fix it.

I like the idea too as a concept but if there are simpler ways of doing the same thing (encouraging big ships to be chosen) then they need to be looked at too. Of all the criticals it strikes me that the speed 0 crits are quite bad, so too are the big damage crits but it's the all weapons destroyed crit that is the one that hampers big ships in particular (with their multiple arcs). Especially in combination with not being able to have a good chance of repairing it. Even a 6-6 crit can be "absorbed" to some degree by a War/Armageddon ship. Small ships taking bad crits often wouldn't survive long enough anyway and that's half the point.

 

[Triggy]

I know what it does! ;-)
however, you only get 3.6 hits? are you using tanks dice!

the raiders can't fire back, they just launched. . .

It doesn't suck, but it is Overated by most players.

and really, we need to spend less time on these boards!

He's correct, it's 3.555555556 hits per turn.

 

[Triggy]

I know what it does! ;-)
however, you only get 3.6 hits? are you using tanks dice!

the raiders can't fire back, they just launched. . .

It doesn't suck, but it is Overated by most players.

and really, we need to spend less time on these boards!

He's right, it's 3.555555555 hits per turn!

 

[Epaminondas]

Well, in a campaign, despite smaller ships being more effective in a battle; larger ships cost less per priority level to replace.

Losing your entire fleet (if one battle) costs 20pts.
If you took a raid, skirmish and two patrol, that would 35 points.

Omega, with 48 damage and interceptors, is significantly more survivable then the lower ships- better chance to jump out before being crippled.

==

Odd really; the hyperion is about twice as effective as an omega pound for pound; 3/4 the cost; half the priority level.

 

[Arcadia]

What if ships with GEG and Adaptive Armor get -1 Redundancy.

Arcadia.

 

[H]

the thing is, GEG, adaptive armour are all factored into a ships abilities anyway, hence why you have weaker hulls on drakh ships meaning you hit them easier.
People seem to be viewing geg as overpowered and unbalancing, where in actual fact, it is probably worse off. the redundancy rules should apply equally to all ships. My drakh destroyer still has hull 4, whether it has redundancy or not meaning it is liable to be hit more, meaning their is an increased chance of criticals anyway. the GEG does not in any way shape or form stop a critical or any associated damage.

 

[animus]

What if ships with GEG and Adaptive Armor get -1 Redundancy.

Arcadia.

I think these qualities are used for racial differences. I don't think it's needed for the Bulk (Redundancy) rule. Again, we just need to see how this rule will effect the current system.

First test the rule, then tweak it. It hasn't been tested enough.

 

[locarno24]

I personally don't mind the idea of it being a trait rather than a priority based thing.

Even within a fleet list there exist ships which should be more vulnerable to systems damage - we're always told that the Nova is built with massive redundancy to take punishment, whilst the Hyperion is not.

It also allows you to stop interactions between the rules like ancients damage control and/or GEGs. They are balanced as is, and shouldn't be unfaily penalised (e.g. stealth and criticals are independant, so minbari shouldn't be taking any penalties) but if you add something that makes them proportionally mroe durable they should get less of it.