Those pesky Minbari

How do the SFOS Minbari work out?

  • Too hard

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • About right

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Stealth really doesn't help us poor neutron laser packing, minibeam junkies and we need more damage

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • they'd be better if the vorlons were any good

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
If your able to "hold back" some fo the AD in a slow-loading weapon so that it can fire (at reduced levels) every turn, then I'd say that if some of the AD which split fire on diffent stealth ships, where some of them miss, would fall into the same category...if as previously ruled, if they don't fire due to the scanners not locking on (the gun crews of long cycle weapon time weapons ought to be smart enough for this "don't fire until you've got a solid lock!! we might not get another shot!" )
Chern
 
See, I think this is a case of showing exactly what good tactics can do when faced with a difficult opponent. After reading the comments it may be true that it 'all came down to the stealth rolls' however when you really look at any dice game, it all comes down to any roll you want to name. All you can do is maximize your chances for those rolls to succeed. Looking over your battle report you obviously used STF, Lock ons, and your fighters to reduce the stealth of the minbari or maximize your hits when you did beat the stealth. So yes stealth was important, but you made sure you had your best chances to beat that stealth roll, and it looks like you did on a reasonably common basis, (especially once you closed the distance with the enemy fleet.)

Fighting any fleet comes down to dealing with how to handle their advantages. The Minbari simply have the most blatant advantage that can be singled out and labelled 'unbalanced'. It also is an advantage that requires you to more obviously customize your own tactics and fleet in order to counter that advantage. I won't go into a discussion on what I think every other fleet's advantages are, though that would make a good thread on tactics and fleet choice.
 
Obsidian, you are correct. I killed all of the Ashinta's troops in the end phase of the turn I boarded. However, you then start working on the crew. You have to kill all the crew before the ship is considered captured.

Ahhh allright. From your description I couldn't tell if you were resolving the boarding action at the end of the turn or the damage done by your troops at the end of each turn.

Out of curiosity, does anyone else think that modifying the Crew critical hit tables to take off a troop point would be a good idea? Like only on a Hull Breach so the odds are pretty low that it will happen. Just trying to think of ways to make boarding actions more attractive. I should probably start a new thread....
 
LaranosTZ said:
So yes stealth was important, but you made sure you had your best chances to beat that stealth roll, and it looks like you did on a reasonably common basis

In order to beat Minbari, even using StF! and Scouts, I've still had to make those rolls on an unreasonably uncommon basis. (A 3+ or 4+ 5 out of 6 times). And that's with the Minbari not really trying hard to take down my Scouts or Fighters. One Morshin, and Game Over I've predicted.
Plus, my axiom for any wargame is that "I got lucky" should never be the true reason for victory or defeat - otherwise, why don't we just play craps. With the Minbari Firepower, and the way Stealth works currently, it almost always IS the prime reason.

Has anyone run the raw numbers and probabilities, comparing X FirePower and Y Stealth versus Z Armor, compared to A Firepower and B Armor?
Just glancing at the numbers instinctively, it looks like SFoS equates a Stealth roll to the difference between 5+ and 6+ armor. And that Fighters and more secondary armaments make up the difference between Boresight and Forward arc. That just doesn't seem right, in both thought and experience thus far, even given the variety of Fleet options.

-D
 
Well, let's see if I can run the numbers for you. Let's assume a that a ship has a 4+ Stealth, and a 5+ hull.

For the sake of argument, we're going to fire a 6AD weapon with no special attributes at this ship within 10".

Now, the stealth roll means there is a 50% chance of your shots going off at all, or over the course of a 10 turn game an average of 30 AD will penetrate the stealth of the ship.

Of those 30 AD, they must then penetrate the 5+ hull of the ship. This means that 1/3 of the shots will go through, so 10AD will actually strike the ship.

Since 1 out of 6 will critical, and 1 out of 6 will hull bounce you will get on average 1 critical, 1 hull bounce, and 8 standard damage against that Stealth 4, Hull 5 ship.


---------------------------------------------------------------

Firing a 6AD weapon at a 6 hull ship over 10 turns has the following results.

60 AD against a hull of 6 means that 1/6th of the shots hit the ship, again causing 10 hits.

Since we just looked at ten hits, over the course of a game a hull 6 ship will suffer 1 crit, 1 hull bounce, and 8 standard damage.

----------------------------------------------------------------

With the above example, we can conclude that a stealth of 4+ makes a 5+ hull value ship the equivilant of a 6+ hull ship as long as the ships are using standard weapons, and are within 10".


We should take this example further though and look at one of the most popular long range weapons out there, the laser cannon. For the sake of this argument we will assume the laser is again 6 AD, Super AP, Double Damage, Beam. In order to make this a bit more balanced, we will also assume that for the first 3 turns, the two ships are outside 10", then after that they are trading punches at close range. We are using the same Stealth 4+, Hull 5+ Minbari ship, and the same Hull six opposing ship.

------------------------------------------------------------------

First firing at the minbari:

For the first two turns the ship has an effective stealth of 5+, this is a bit harder to 'guage', but over the first three turn we can assume 1/3 of the shots will go through. So from 18 dice it becomes 6.

For the next 7 turns the effective stealth of the ship is 4+, so over that length of time you will get either 24 or 18 AD, (since there are an odd number of turns, one turn is in question, but we will look at both results.)

This means over 10 turns either 30, or 24 dice will have the chance to fire at the ship, (overall this is a loss of one barrage from the 3 turns of 5+ stealth.)

This is where it gets complex. Since we are using a Super AP Beam weapon the effective hull from the initial hits of the weapon is a 3+.

30 Becomes: 20

24 Becomes: 16

Then 4+

20 Becomes : 10

16 Becomes: 8

Then 5+

10 Becomes : 3

8 Become : 2

Then 6+

Both become Zero.

So either 33 or 26 will do damage to the ship. This means that in this case the beam means you're doing more damage then hits.

Again, 1 in 6 bounce off the hull (but still cause damage) and 1 out of 6 will cause a critical. Again, we're using a double damage weapon.

So: 33 Becomes 5 Bounces 5 Criticals, 1 up in the air and 22 standard damage for an overall 59 damage, 54 crew, 1 unknown, and 5 unresolved criticals.

26 Becomes 4 bounces, 4 criticals, 1 up in the air, 15 standard damage. Overall causing 42 damage 38 crew and 4 unresolved criticals.


Whew! Now that that is over, let's look at the hull 6+ Ship

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

This one is easy:

60 AD over 10 turns using Super AP. There is no question of stealth, so all have the chance to strike the ship.

60 target 4+ = 30 hit

30 target 5+ = 10 hit

10 Target 6+ = 2 hit

2 Target 6+ = 0 Hits

Against a hull 6 ship, 42 double damage weapons will strike the target, this means that on average 7 will bounce, 7 will crit, and 28 will cause standard damage.

Using a double damage weapons this means the hull 6 vessel will take 77 damage, 70 crew and will have 7 unresolved criticals.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In this case we see that the stealthed vessel has an obvious advantage over the hull 6 vessel in damage potential using the above example. This obviously doesn't encapsulate all potentials, and our first example does assume that the ships start within 10". If they did not you would again see that the stealthed vessel takes less damage then the hull 6 vessel.


The Minbari have approximately 1/3 less damage/crew then similar ships of the same priority of other races. Given our above numbers, I draw the conclusion that it means that overall the Minbari are now balanced compared to the other races. I'd like to hear other opinions on the issue as well, again given the above numbers.



Also please note that when decimal points were involved I rounded to the nearest standard number unless it was impossible to round, (ie, exactly 50/50 or 1/3 1/3 1/3.)
 
Rorschach said:
Has anyone run the raw numbers and probabilities, comparing X FirePower and Y Stealth versus Z Armor, compared to A Firepower and B Armor?
The maths is reasonably straight forward for just rolling to hit. For beam weapons, you get to roll an extra dice for each hit but the target number increases each time meaning you roll fewer dice. Thus you will tend towards an average value. The number below assume the normal range 4-6 but modified by +2 since Neutron lasers have Super AP. I have also taken the "Double damage" stat into consideration but not the effect of any criticals.

This is the damage the Minbari are likely to cause to an opponent with the Sharlin's neutron lasers.

Armour 4, 6AD = 22 points of damage on average.
Armour 5, 6AD = 15 points of damage on average.
Armour 5, 6AD = 8 points of damage on average.

I will be back tomorrow to work out what the EA might do in return. ;)
 
Good analysis LaranosTZ, but I think I spot a wrinkle. Boresights. The thing your analysis fails to take into account (mostly becasue you never intended it to do so) is that many of the ships with Laser Cannons have them mounted as boresight weapons. This is especially true in the classic EA vs. Minbari scenario where the EA ships are overly burdened with these types of weapons. Due to this limitation, the EA player finds himself without a target on many of the turns and thus the overall throw weight of AD over ten turns is likely reduced by 1/4 to 1/2. If you re-ran the numbers assuming that the ship firing on the Minbari only got to fire 5 or 7 times instead of 10, you start to see why people are complaining. It just seems grossly unfair.

Now compare this situation to that of the Centauri. Unlike the EA, they don't have this annoying boresight problem and many players have said that the Centauri just don't have quite as hard a time facing off against the Minbari.

I'm starting to think that this is what it all boils down to. People like to play the classic duels. EA vs. Minbari, Centauri vs. Narn, Shadows vs. Vorlons, etc; They also like to play with the big expensive ships like the Warlock and Sharlin. The trouble is that in an EA vs. Minbari fight, playing at a higher level just plays to the Minbari strengths while emphasizing the EA's weaknesses. If the fight moved down into the Raid and Skirmish levels, the Minbari player finds themselves with limited selections while the EA player can just flood the field with ships. I for one would not want to be the Minbari commander in a 5 Point Skirmish game. I don't have much to choose from, and at that level my ships go *pop* pretty quick.
 
Alright, let me take a hack at this......

Assume 4AD Heavy Laser on Hull 6+ with no Stealth vs 4AD Heavy Laser on Hull 5+ with Stealth 4+. Again, lets ignore the whole "over 10" thing for the moment".

Laranos covered this pretty well. Doublechecking his #'s, there's a potential of 4.5 hits (I know, no real fractions, but we're looking at the big picture) per turn against the 5+ hull (ignoring Stealth for the moment), and 2.77 hits per turn against the 6+.

Over 10 turns, that's 45 hits against the 5+ and lets call it 28 against the 6+.

Factoring in Stealth and average rolling, our numbers go to 22.5 hits against the 5+ and 28 against the 6+.

Ok, factoring in the damage table:

Against the 5+, 3.75 Hull hits, 3.75 Crits, and 15 regular hits. Total (rounding up for the 3.75) with double damage that gives us 38 Dam/Crew plus 4 Crits.

Against the 6+, that's 4.67 Hull hits, 4.67 Crits, and 18.66 regular hits. Total (rounding up for the 4.76 and 18.66) with double damage that gives us 48 Dam/Crew plus 5 Crits.

Comparing Hull points on a Tinashi vs the average of Hulls on the Omega and G'Quon, we get 38 Hull to 47.5 hull, almost the exact same ratio! Huray for math!

But wait, there's more!

Now lets add Precise into the mix.

Our 6+ hull doesn't have Precise, so the 5+ hull will still take 38 Dam/Crew plus 4 Crits.

Meanwhile, because of Precise, our 6+ hull will be taking damage with every hit, so that's 19 regular hits and (about) 9 Crits. The total is now 56 Dam/Crew and 9 Crits.

Looking at the Critical tables, lets say an "average" Crit causes 2 Dam/Crew. Doubling, that's 4 Dam/Crew per crit so we get

5+ takes total of 46 Dam/Crew
6+ takes total of 74 Dam/Crew

That means our 5+ Hull, Stealth 4+, Super AP, Beam, Double Damage, Precise ship is able to do 150% of the damage needed to kill it's opponent.

The 6+ Hull, Super AP, Beam ship meanwhile is dishing out 120%.

Still look balanced? Lets saddle our poor 6+ with Boresight and make it virtually impossible for him to win Initiative. Now how's it look? :shock:

Despite all of this, I'm somewhat distrustful of the numbers. This is a fleet to fleet game and balance can only truely be judged through careful playtesting.
 
Thanks for all the numbers, guys! Maybe we are seeing that, over the whole fleet list, things look better. But with the emphasis in Battle games on the Sharlin and Tinashi, those two break the bank. And again, we haven't begun with the boresight impact on the stats - I know from experience it's crippling though.

Maybe I'll use your set-up to run the #'s again - this time for 6AD (Sharlin) vs. 6AD (Warlock). Something else to factor is how quickly one ship can kill another (reducing firing turns). And also, we need to factor in Concentrate Firepower - which the Sharlin can easily do and which EA essentially cannot do because of Boresight.

Playtesting wise, still not seeing any balance on this issue, and we're doing about 2-3 games a week round here. To the Official Playtesters, I say again, "What are we missing?" :)
 
Well, as I said I was just looking at pure numbers, since after all, pure numbers really don't lie too much. ;)

If we really wanted to we could run a turn by turn analysis of two ships of any given class as they approached each other, but that would be very cumbersome.

This also why fleet tactics and strategy come into play. Yes EA do have a lot of boresite weapons, but they also tend to run a lot more ships in their fleet then an average minbari player. So an EA player may not get to target the exact same ship every turn, but you can focus fire on whatever ship sticks their nose out first. I guess that's a tactical question EA players will have to deal with; do you try and maneuver to keep hitting the same ship every turn, even if it prevents 'ideal' firing solutions or do you simply point your nose at whatever targets of opportunity present themselves?

In one game recently I played a war scenario against an opponent, I was EA, he was Minbari. He went with 2 Neshatan, 2 Troligan, 2 Morshin and 3 Tigara. I went with 6 Hyperions, 4 Omega and 4 Olympus. Since I made sure that I had outnumbered him so badly; by the time he was finished moving his entire fleet, I still had half my fleet to go. I usually picked one or two ships in the first 3 or 4 he moved, then had three quarters of my fleet boresite one of those ships. I also went Kamikaze with my Olympus ships since they make such a nice boom when they blow in the middle of an enemy fleet. By the end of the game I had no olympus' left, 2 Omegas, and all my hyperions and I had wiped out the Minbari to the ship.
 
playing at lower priority level will vastly change your tactics - you've got less of the uber ranged weapons (20-30") and the ships are generally faster, both of which will put you into more of a game of maneauver. Try not to always play "ok, heres our 6-point battle game" or whatever - mix it up some. It may be easier to play with the larger ships, but I've found that the real challenges so to speak are with the raid and lower vessels.

I am usually playing earth alliance, and if you take a balanced fleet, I usually don't find problems getting targets for my boresights...usually you'll leave your big important ships for later movement ensuring that you'll get one on someone. what's important is to have enough activations to get you there...and keep those small ships alive long enough for it to matter.

as I've said before, in some cases boresighting can be an advantage, when a particular weapons critical comes up. (boresights count as a different arc then fwd or aft.)

Chernobyl
 
Chernobyl said:
I am usually playing earth alliance, and if you take a balanced fleet, I usually don't find problems getting targets for my boresights...usually you'll leave your big important ships for later movement ensuring that you'll get one on someone. what's important is to have enough activations to get you there...and keep those small ships alive long enough for it to matter.
There is but one rule of boresighting, and that rule is...

Outnumber Thy Opponent

Wulf (Extra)
 
B5freak said:
LBH,

I asked because previous posters had mentioned using Shadow fighters in that manner and no one had called them on it. I thought it a bit odd, but could see the arguement that since Aux craft are already limited to very specific SA's, the general restrictions on first one "vessels" didn't apply to their Aux craft.

Aux craft are Aux craft even if they are First Ones

Obsidian said:
There's a ruling (out there somewhere, have to go look it up) that states slow-loading weapons don't count as having fired if they fail the Stealth roll.

You're going to have to find this one for me as I don't believe you are correct.

To my knowledge, such a ruling is wrong, and wishful thinking on the part of power gamers. If you fail the stealth roll, the weapons have fired and missed.

LBH
 
That may be an official ruling but to be honest it makes no sense at all.
A captain of a ship is not going to fire his weapons off at a target he cannot see particularly with weapons such as missles and the big gun on the Victory.Many forms of modern missle will not fire unless they have a lock on the target.What your effectively saying is they are firing at an area of empty space.I have no problem with the idea that if a stealth role is failed,those weapons allocated have failed to lock and would be unable to retrain on new targets during the move,but to insist that they have still fired is a bit silly particulalry in the case of missiles which although they dont appeat in the game,would have some sort of ammo limitation.
 
That may be an official ruling but to be honest it makes no sense at all.
A captain of a ship is not going to fire his weapons off at a target he cannot see particularly with weapons such as missles and the big gun on the Victory.Many forms of modern missle will not fire unless they have a lock on the target.What your effectively saying is they are firing at an area of empty space.I have no problem with the idea that if a stealth role is failed,those weapons allocated have failed to lock and would be unable to retrain on new targets during the move,but to insist that they have still fired is a bit silly particulalry in the case of missiles which although they dont appeat in the game,would have some sort of ammo limitation.

I'm going to cross my fingers and hope this doesn't devolve back into the "Great Stealth Debate", but the rules and descriptions are quite clear. It isn't that the weapons don't achieve lock. It is that they achieve lock and fire upon entirely the wrong area of space.
 
Precicely. You are NOT firing on a target you cant see, and the computers may even think they have a lock. Minbari stealth systems are not just a fancy paint job, they represent active jamming, and all sorts of defensive electronic warfare. The targeting sensors tell the guns and missiles that that Sharlin is over there, when it is in fact a bit to the left or whatever.

But as it was said a little way, up I would have thought we'd moved on from stealth to what is in my opinion the real issue (if any) with SFOS Minbari, namely their newfound toughness and firepower (personally I think the other races ships have been beefed up enough correspondingly that its still fair but thats just my oppinion). And boresights are not the crippling disabilty so many people make them out to be, I play EA as well as Minbari and have never found myself lacking in targets (and certainly not vs Minbari. So what if I lose initiative loads? I outnumber them about 4 to 1 in most games!).
 
I remember that in one of the RS was standing about the Nova that they changed the stats because some players where just park theire Novas on the field and fire. now we have minbarys who coud do the same and i get as answer they are canon.

Sorry but i loked the last days some of the TV show and it look like it was hard to get an lokk on but if you hit a minbary its destroyed even when a smaller vessel attacks a huge Warship.
Like some said Eggshells with ECM-Cloak.
Was it not sheridan who said he destroyed two Minbary dreadnoutghs by flying true them and only the paint of his hyperon was scratcht?
That sound for me that Minabarys shoud have less damage then the others.
 
Back
Top