The Valen Tell me what you think

[OnlyTheShadowKnows]

Okay, cool idea for the ship. A few things. Drop the HP like everyone says. The ship is unique but also was destroyed very quickly, so it should have a lower hull and lower HPs. Turrents should be made F, A, S, P. That is way too many turrents, why have four turents if you only need one. Command 2 should be dropped to a 1. I have seen ships that should have a 2 have a 1.

Other than that its a cool ship!

Would love to see a model.

 

[katadder]

katadder Actualy I was thinking that the emphily the first ship shown in the show could be a battle class

i would have thought that as more of a raid ship to replace or give alternative to the whitestars. then valen at battle and the sharlin variant at war that is already there.
its a shame these 2 cannon ships didnt get in although it was asked for.

 

[Ulkesh]

Took a brief glance at the stats of it in the RPG book Legends of the Rangers and it makes use of Neutron Lasers and Fusion Cannons though heavy number of weapons in the front then everywhere else. Also yeah I think it should remain atmospheric capable since it did land in Minbar.

Anyway considering how it was destroyed and all; I think it should be a nasty ship on the defensive but if caught by surprise or a retailitory strike comes then the Valen is as good as dead... just my thought on it.

 

[Locutus9956]

First off the Valen is a product of earth and minbari, second there is no way that after having the Adaptive Armour you would build a ship and not use that again.

Well theres LOADS of reasons you can justify this with frankly:

1) The armour is difficult to integrate with a specific system on the ship

2) The armour is really fecking expensive and to save construction casts they rushed out the ship with lots of guns but left out the adaptive armour.

3) The adaptive armour system is too power intensive? Lots of guns and things need power, perhaps the ships reactors simply cant cope with adaptive armour as well.

Im sure theres others people could come up with but just because a technology is available doesnt mean every ship in the fleet has to be fitted with it! ISA also have access to afterburner technology but they dont put that on every single ship either!

 

[SuperFlyMonkey]

How about these stats for the Valen as seen in legend of the rangers and in the Legend of the Rangers Book for the B5 RPG.
Let me know what you think.

Class/PL: Valen / War

Speed: 10 In service: 2262

Turns: 1/90 Craft: 1Nial Flight

Hull: 5 Special Rules: Atmospheric, Flight Computer, Advanced Jump
Engine, Unique, Anti-Fighter 6, Interceptors 6,
Adaptive Armour, Command +2

Damage: 100/20 Crew: 90/15

Weapons AD Range Arc Special

Improved Neutron Laser 6 30 F Beam,Precise,Triple Damage

Neutrinon Blaster 8 18 T Double Damage,Super AP, Twin-Linked

Neutrinon Blaster 8 18 T Double Damage,Super AP, Twin-Linked

Neutrinon Blaster 8 18 T Double Damage,Super AP, Twin-Linked

Neutrinon Blaster 8 18 T Double Damage,Super AP, Twin-Linked

Fusion Cannon 4 12 F Mini Beam,Twin-Linked

Drop the damage down to 60/14 and the crew to mabye 75/18, and for the weapons just maybe work the neutrino Blasters from 8 AD to 6 and seperate them into seperate arks leaving port and starboard with 8-10 AD Then turn the Fusion cannon into the turret, y'know since BOTH EA and Mimbari had say in its design It would make since that the port and starboard blasters would have a higher concentration of fire(if you remember how the sides looked like armored walls). But if you want to keep them turreted then probably drop them down to 6 a pop and give them AP instead of Super AP. oh and I think she would have at least 2 troops, somebody has to protect all the passengers they would take onboard.

 

[Centauri_Admiral]

Right, well first off I think its a good idea to add another ship to the ISA arsenal, and having a go at levelling stats is something I think most of us have had a pop at. Remember that most people will either over-power an idea, or under-power it, and as I'm sure some of the playtester on this forum will attest to, balancing out rules takes lots of time, playtesting and tweaking.

Don't be disheartened if it seems like your brilliant idea has been shot down; keep tweaking it and playtest it if you a serious about wanting to use it in games.

I think enough people have already brought up the PL, type of weapons, number of AD to weapons, hull, etc etc etc.

The big thing that strikes me, is the atmospheric, and lets all remember that the ability to drop through an atmosphere and overpower gravity with its engines, and then land safely, is not the same as an elegant hull that was designed to use an atmospheric setting, for instance whitestars, some most fighters, and a handfull of other ships have visible wing profiles in someform that would help them to succesfully navigate in an atmosphere and use that to a tactical advantage.
A flying brick, while it may be able to land on a planet and take off again, in NONE battle conditions might I add, certainly would not be able to zip about inside an atmosphere taking on other fighters, or flying close enough to the ground to preciesly target troops running about.

I would certainly follow the advice of the other guys, tone it down a couple of notches, rework some of the details, and loose the atmospheric trait.

What you've also got to think about is game mechanics, imagine playing the planetary assault scenario, jumping that SOB in and wacking it straight into an atmosphere. In game terms you have SOOOOO many dice to roll against your opponents troops, you'll strip him of em in one turn, that isn't balanced.

I don't remember seeing the Valen swoop through the skies and obliterate an entire planets garrison by itself.

Oh and one other thing, the ship itself looks cool, the idea is okay [I personally hate using unique vessels; try a little originality please] but lets be honest, the film sucked and most of the ideas within it sucked . . . big style. I was incredibly disappointed.