Updates to Gaim list in P&P before it goes to print

[silashand]

The Skrunnka must be a typo - there's no way it should have gone back from Hull 5, there's simply no call for it as you say.

I disagree entirely. I argued against it dropping back to hull 5 when it was done. A ship with short ranged weaponry and designed to close with the enemy in order to launch an assault on said ship *should* be hull 6 regardless what else you do to it, period. Changing it to hull 5 was a mistake in the first place as the problem with the fleet before was with breaching pods. The pods were fixed, thus making any other change to the assault ship unnecessary. But they changed the Skrunnka anyway? Sorry, but that was just plain inappropriate IMO since the ship itself was hardly broken before. IYAM that was changed purely as punishment for the previous Gaim list because there is no justification in the background for it, nor was there any game-based reason to do so.

As for the Super Bomb change, I requested triple damage so that it basically got upgraded as far as known emine tech has gone like in the Narn list. Quad damage seems a bit excessive to me. The comment that not all results on the campaign charts are all that good is valid, however, as you get toward the less common results they *should* be more useful IMO. That's the benefit of using such a determination mechanism. Granted, I don't think a single ship with quad damage emines is going to be all that bad considering some other campaign refits other races have. So that one at least is probably not as bad as folks think since over the course of a campaign the odds of more than one ship getting it are pretty slim.

Cheers, Gary

 

[ATN082268]

I recently played a 5 point War Annihilation scenario using the revised FAP against the revised Gaim using the standard Brakiri and got slaughtered. A combination of using short ranged weapons against long range energy mines on a largely open battlefield pretty much doomed me. From a numerical standpoint (at least at 5 War), the Gaim are a pain to use given the number of counters used. I did like the revised FAP system as it encouraged you to take ships close to the level of the scenario.

I think some general rules could be clearer on a few things:

1. Deployment zones. I know there is minimum distance starting between the two forces but what about a maximum?

2. Dodging. It seems ships and fighters should be able to dodge exploding ships but I am not 100% sure on that based on the rules.

3. Splitting fire. Under the Beam rules it states that Beams can be split between targets within 4 inches. Under the generic rules for splitting fire, there is no distance listed. I assume there is no limit to the distance in splitting fire between targets for non-beam weapons.

Sincerely,

Andrew Norris

 

[katadder]

1: never been a maximum distance. if it says 24" apart like CTA we assume 12" deployment zones. for annihilation we assume 6" deployment zones so you could set up at the back of it.

2:yes you can dodge exploding ships.

3:with standard weapons as long as the target is in range and arc then yes there is no limit to the distance between targets when splitting.

have to ask what ships you took? couple of kalivas would have helped the range and a mine cruiser would have helped deal with fighters. brakiri are fairly well equipped for taking on Gaim imo (also have quite a good escort).

 

[silashand]

A combination of using short ranged weapons against long range energy mines on a largely open battlefield pretty much doomed me.

not squadroning your ships helps mitigate that somewhat as well since if they can only get one ship per emine it limits what they can do since they can't crit you before you get there and they can only get one or two ships. IMO the Avioki would be wonderful simply due to the massive damage sink. Bring an emine vessel of your own to thin down the Gaim fighters (or sink the pods before they get to you) and I think you'll probably do better.

From a numerical standpoint (at least at 5 War), the Gaim are a pain to use given the number of counters used.

Agreed. That's the only thing I don't like about my Gaim really is the sheer time it takes to move all my fighters! Ah well, all part and parcel...

I did like the revised FAP system as it encouraged you to take ships close to the level of the scenario.

Agreed. I never understood why folks liked the unfluffy previous list with so many little ships in large battles. I know it was abusive and sure, some folks liked that, but I always prefer to field the big ships whenever I can. More fun overall I think.

I think some general rules could be clearer on a few things:

1. Deployment zones. I know there is minimum distance starting between the two forces but what about a maximum?

I wouldn't think so. Since games are normally played on a 4x6 table I don't see the problem really. I think you probably just need to actually use a bit of terrain. Open space battlefield can get a bit boring and increase the effectiveness of some fleets while diminishing others. I'm a firm believer that most battles should happen around some kind of terrain at least (that's where support and supply lines would be in most cases I think as well).

Cheers, Gary

 

[Methos5000]

3) Super Bomb is now QUAD damage. Ouchie.

I fail to see why the Gaim should get "quad" anything...

I fail to see why any upgrade should increase a weapons damage by two levels for any race. From Double to Quad with no loss of Dice and actually getting better armor penetration...thats just sick. Even if this was 2 on the refit table I would say its too much. It should be Triple Damage tops.

Unless some new upgrades have snuck in that I didn't see.
Hmmm.......a Brakiri Quad Damage upgrade to Gravitic beams sounds about right. Both slow loading, both are jumping from Double to Quad damage, beams have a chance at a stream but Photon bombs hit multiple targets and it hull 5 and lower better.

But that would be overpowered yes? Then so is a Quad damage upgrade to Photon Bombs.

Lets look at some other number 4 refits.
EA- quick loading missiles. Lose slow-loading but also lose 1/2 AD
Dilgar - quick loading missiles. same as above
Minbari - Point Defense +1 AAF usefulness varies on opponent
Narn - Hanger conversion - free 1/2 patrol point. Useful but can give up VPs.
Centauri - Guardian Array - okay this one is very useful.
ISA - Point Defense +1AF - useful because its something the ISA lack
Abbai - Enhanced Shields - added more shields is always good
Brakiri - Mini Gravitic Mine - ONE ship in the fleet can get this
Drazi - Mini Solar Cannon - again ONE ship in the fleet can get this
Gaim - Super Duper fantastic and terrific emine upgrade - maybe if this was ONE ship in the fleet also it wouldn't be that bad.
pak'ma'ra - mini plasma torpedo - again ONE ship in the fleet (Im noticing a pattern here)
Vree - extreme maneuverablity - a very useful upgrade
Drakh - Stealth of +1 - ship gets a 2+ stealth if it doesnt have it not the most useful of upgrades
Psi-corp - gains a missile rack

If the upgrade was limited to one ship in the fleet due to some special technology then fine, but in a campaign it is not impossible for many ships to have this upgrade. As a Brakiri player I have had to re-roll 4 many times on the refit table because I already had a ship with that upgrade.

Many races get some descent upgrades but a quad damage area of effect weapon thats just wrong. I thought quad damage was suppose to be limited to ancients or weapons based on ancients technology (Victory Lightning cannon which has a very big negative.)

Is triple damage not good enough of an upgrade for this weapon?

 

[ATN082268]

<Snip Post>

have to ask what ships you took? couple of kalivas would have helped the range and a mine cruiser would have helped deal with fighters. brakiri are fairly well equipped for taking on Gaim imo (also have quite a good escort).

For our scenario, I didn't know what race my opponent was going to take and could not have anticipated an almost completely open battlefield. That being said, I took the following Brakiri force:

1 Takata
4 Avioki
2 Halik
6 Haltona

At least at 5 War, the Gaim can essentially screw up or destroy almost any ship (and sometimes more than one at a time) on the battlefield with multiple range 40 inch area effect weapons. Two salvos of Energy mines from a 5 war revised Gaim force could completely destroy (or at least cripple and skeleton crew) a Brakiri Brivoki. And for the most part, since Brakiri ships are slow and have relatively short ranged weapons, the Gaim would have minimal damage from return fire.

Sincerely,

Andrew Norris

 

[locarno24]

I disagree entirely. I argued against it dropping back to hull 5 when it was done. A ship with short ranged weaponry and designed to close with the enemy in order to launch an assault on said ship *should* be hull 6 regardless what else you do to it, period.

Why? Neither the Ikorta, Tantalus, Hyperion nor T'Loth - the other assault cruiser classes in the game - feel the need to be hull 6. The only one that is is the battle-priority Kabrokta, and frankly it's odd to find a battleship that's not hull 6.

1) It's not exactly fragile at hull 5
2) It's still tougher than a lot of slower, supposedly 'tough' ships (e.g. Nova dreadnought)
3) Most hull 6 ships are significantly slower
4) It's not a queen ship and hence significantly expendable.