Ways to fight stealth

[Lord David the Denied]

For what? Cranky Englishmen?

 

[Locutus9956]

Playtesting required of course but it seems that all the ship stats would be just fine as they are! Though the stealth on the Troligan would be worthless

Yeah thats the only issue I have, to be honest I think Id probably want to alter the stealth and hull values at least for some ships to use this rule but Im pretty happy with how it stands there.

As it stands (using my alternate stealth rule that is, not 'as it stands' with the current rule high hull low stealth ships dont really get, well, ANY benefit from stealth. So Id suggest the following. And bear in mind that the hull scores may look naff, but you wont often be actually using them in most cases!:

All ships get +1 to their stealth ratings. (Yes I know this makes the Leshath stealth 7. Id add to the Leshath the following rule though: If the Leshath uses its scout ability it takes a -1 stealth penalty. Its still potenaitally a nasty warship in that without assistance its unhitable beyond 8" like this but I personally would have no problem with this as its not all that well armed anyway, cant use its scout rule without 'decloaking' and is still quite easy to hit if you just cluse with it or use a scout of your own etc)

All stealth SHIP hulls would go down by 1. All Stealth fighter hulls stay as they are.

Exceptions to the above: The Troligan: Goes to Stealth 5 Hull 6. Basically its got to work its ass off to get any benefit from stealth. Its basically in the current rules a ship that relies mainly on its Hull anyway.

That should solve most quibbles I think

 

[David Anla Shok']

Why do you put "regards," at the end of every post? You don't sign them and obviously don't need so, so why bother? :?

Well, since you asked, I do so as a sign of respect to all I share discussion with. Even when we disagree, I enjoy the exchange of information and as we all know, email/forum exhanges can be misread, misinterpreted and generate bad feelings. I chose to express my regard for all who take the time to share their thoughts with me.
Regards,

 

[Sulfurdown]

Why do you put "regards," at the end of every post? You don't sign them and obviously don't need so, so why bother? :?

Well, since you asked, I do so as a sign of respect to all I share discussion with. Even when we disagree, I enjoy the exchange of information and as we all know, email/forum exhanges can be misread, misinterpreted and generate bad feelings. I chose to express my regard for all who take the time to share their thoughts with me.
Regards,

READ: Baiting Cranky Englishmen.
Cheers!


Edit: Troligan in an Asteroid Field (where it's hull would serve the best!) brings it to Stealth 5+. A little bit of Range or Run Silent thrown in and you've got a Stealth functioning Troligan!

 

[David Anla Shok']

READ: Baiting Cranky Englishmen.
Cheers!

Is there another kind?
Regards,

(activating stealth mode) ;>

 

[Ripple]

I like the rule, still thinking about issues...but it does come closest to ringing true to me.

Ripple

 

[Locutus9956]

Edit: Troligan in an Asteroid Field (where it's hull would serve the best!) brings it to Stealth 5+. A little bit of Range or Run Silent thrown in and you've got a Stealth functioning Troligan!

Yep with the rule as that it COULD be done, but its just not really worth it since its got lots of armour anyway

Wont be trying this out pre-tournament but after that Ill have to give this a go and see how it plays, Im really looking forward to trying this out now (and for that matter if anyone else feels like giving it a go let me know how it works!)

 

[ShopKeepJon]

OK, here I go muddying the waters...

It seems that this house rule is starting to get a bit complex (needing changes to hull, current stealth values, and only working against some weapon traits...).

Has anyone thought of just using stealth as a sort of super dodge. Allow a ship with stealth to roll a save (much like a dodge save) vs. all hits it takes.

If we're trying to keep the same probabilities as are currently in the game (more or less), then any system that substitutes for "stealth 5+" should prevent approximately 2/3 of all damage. So, Stealth 5+ would become a 3+ save (and Stealth 6+ would become a 2+ save, etc.) All current modifiers would apply "in reverse" with everything that your opponent does raising your stealth number and everything you do lowering it.

Nothing else would change. Nothing would need to be done to current ship stats. Everything that currently nullifies stealth would prevent the "stealth save." Anything that has both stealth and dodge would get to roll both. Since I think that this applies only to fighters, it shouldn't add too many rolls.

What do you all think?

ShopKeepJon

 

[Target]

I think it was too much like dodge why people haven't embraced the idea.
Others ideas from previous dicussions if i can remeber them.
failed roll
gives +2 hull
increases the bulkhead hit number eg 1-4 instead of 1
halves AD
removes weapon traits eg SAP & so on.

I always liked a kinda combo from +2 hull idea & bulkhead idea since hull is meant to include ECM, Armour as well, it's just that Minbari ECM is way better.
If you need a to hit hull 7 then you hit on a 6 but bulkhead roll goes to 1-2, Hull 8 1-3 & so on. Precise still gives you +1. Weak weapons might need to change a little instead of -1 to hit just add it to the bulkhead roll eg to hit hull 5 you need 5+ but bulkhead on 1-2, Anti Precise for lack of a better word.
6's would still crit not matter what the bulkhead number was.
EDIT : Forgot about beams since they have changed- maybe they only hit 5+ or 6's

 

[Ripple]

I always like the idea of weak just boosting the bulkhead from a 1 to a 1 or 2 rather than being the anti-s/ap.

Ripple

 

[Locutus9956]

Not really: Theres been alot of discussion but the house rule itself hasnt got any more complex. It still basically boils down to using stealth as an alternate target number unless the hull value is an easier shot, if thats the case you fire as normal. If stealth were changed, as with any other change to stealth youd pretty much have to tweak the minbari list at least since its currently balanced for stealth as it stands:

As far as the other ideas go:

Anything that starts out with 'failed roll gives....' I consider frankly pointless. The whole reason I want stealth to change is precicely because having it depend in any way on a random roll is annoying and unecessary. Does adaptive armour depend on a random dice roll to see whether or not it works? No. Does sheilds? Why should stealth it should make a target harder to hit, plain and simple.

I DO like the 1/2s attack dice but then that basically grants the same degree of stealth to everyhting and would require signifigant rebalancing (and also takes away modifiers like scouts and range)

 

[Locutus9956]

It seems that this house rule is starting to get a bit complex (needing changes to hull, current stealth values, and only working against some weapon traits...).

Has anyone thought of just using stealth as a sort of super dodge. Allow a ship with stealth to roll a save (much like a dodge save) vs. all hits it takes.

If we're trying to keep the same probabilities as are currently in the game (more or less), then any system that substitutes for "stealth 5+" should prevent approximately 2/3 of all damage. So, Stealth 5+ would become a 3+ save (and Stealth 6+ would become a 2+ save, etc.) All current modifiers would apply "in reverse" with everything that your opponent does raising your stealth number and everything you do lowering it.

Nothing else would change. Nothing would need to be done to current ship stats. Everything that currently nullifies stealth would prevent the "stealth save." Anything that has both stealth and dodge would get to roll both. Since I think that this applies only to fighters, it shouldn't add too many rolls.

What do you all think?

ShopKeepJon

Changes to current stealth and hull values would frankly be a minor tweak that would be needed for realistically any change to stealth. The traits thing is also pretty simple too in my eyes! basically no traits can modify the stealth target number. And precice doesnt work as your firing without a precice lock... thats it. All other 'trait' issues have only been discussed theyre not specifically ruled on by the house rule it does that as a byproduct without having to think about it! The basic rule is still that one small paragraph I put in a quote box a couple of pages back, it hasnt changed at all since then, the only alteration has been the suggestion of changing a few values of stealth/hull to balance things better.

As for the 'stealth save' idea, it's been suggested before several times and the problem I have with that is simple:

1) Its too similar to dodge. Nothing wrong with that as such but its just boring having two completely differenent rules working basically the same way. Especially when theyre representing completely different concepts.

2) It STILL makes stealth random and dice dependant. Its less 'all or nothing' but it still comes back to the main point I've been haring on about for ages now which is that stealth should be a fixed effect, a potent defence that doesnt depend on the luck of the dice to work or not, but that can be countered with the right tactics.

 

[Lord David the Denied]

Want better stealth? Use to-hit and to-damage rolls like in VaS. I've said it before and I'll say it again. It represents the plethora of missed shots we see on screen and it's fairer on players facing stealthy fleets.

 

[Locutus9956]

Want better stealth? Use to-hit and to-damage rolls like in VaS. I've said it before and I'll say it again. It represents the plethora of missed shots we see on screen and it's fairer on players facing stealthy fleets.

Yep that would be ideal but would require a redesing of the entire fleets. Thinking about it it the seperate hull and armour rating of VaS is essentially what Im suggesting here in a roundabout way anyway, just only for stealth ships

 

[Lord David the Denied]

2nd ed was the time to do this, but Matt wouldn't countenance it, and he still won't. I just point out the obviousness of the ideal solution in the hopes that one day, sanity will reign and Swindon and we'll have to-hit and to-damage rolls for ACtA.

Incidentally, adding a few extra rules for EW/ECM would do the same job as a to-hit roll modified by stealth among other factors, but it'd be more work. Might be more realistic to the show, but it'd be creeping towards B5W and away from what ACtA is.

 

[Burger]

New rules that keep at least most of the ship stats the same would be far preferable IMO. The suggestion does seem fine except for cases where the stealth score is lower than the hull. So maybe just give those ships a stealth boost? Troligan to Stealth 5+, Neshatan to 5+.

 

[Locutus9956]

New rules that keep at least most of the ship stats the same would be far preferable IMO. The suggestion does seem fine except for cases where the stealth score is lower than the hull. So maybe just give those ships a stealth boost? Troligan to Stealth 5+, Neshatan to 5+.

Well like I said, even without modifying hull, I think a flat +1 to stealth across the board might do it actually (and imo would work better for alot of other ships too)

Actually might try it like that (and yes I know that still leaves the Troligan with somewhat lower stealth than hull and Neshatan with slightly lower stealth than hull but again, I dont have any problem with that.

In fact as I look at it, it would work pretty well:

Out of ALL stealth ships, the only two which would have lower stealth than hull would be the Neshatan (which would be equal at long range) and the Troligan (which would only get benefit from its stealth if it REALLY worked at it (and if it proved really naff we could always just bump the Troligan up to 5). Thats it though, just increase all stealth values by 1 and the rule should work with the fleet lists as they are I reckon.

 

[Target]

Anything that starts out with 'failed roll gives....' I consider frankly pointless. The whole reason I want stealth to change is precicely because having it depend in any way on a random roll is annoying and unecessary. Does adaptive armour depend on a random dice roll to see whether or not it works? No. Does sheilds? Why should stealth it should make a target harder to hit, plain and simple.

Interceptors are fairly random.
The failed roll gives ideas are lot less random than no shooting anything at all which makes the game not fun.
I don't mind the random roll just not all or nothing part.
I can see your point though but have only skimmed through your suggestion so can't really comment on it.

 

[Locutus9956]

The current 'concice' version of the suggested alternate stealth idea:

1. Work out modified Stealth Score.
2. If modified Stealth score is = or > Hull, your firing against stealth all weapons need this number to hit and dont benefit from precice. Beams still CONTINUE to hit on 4+ but dont get benefit of precice.
3. If Hull > modified stealth, stealth is 'beaten' and you are firing against hull. Work out target number as though stealth didn't exist. All such attacks benefit from precice etc normally.

Fighters in base contact, and other effects that ignore stealth (such as Emines, Jump point shockwaves, Exploding ships, Ramming and so on) roll as per 3.

All current stealth values (in the 2nd Ed Fleet list) are increased by 1 point.

The key point is that when firing 'at stealth' you need to actually roll that number to hit since your basically blind firing and dont get any benefit from amour piercing, super armour piercing, mini beam etc (but similarly dont suffer any particular problems from weak weapons)

 

[Sulfurdown]

New rules that keep at least most of the ship stats the same would be far preferable IMO. The suggestion does seem fine except for cases where the stealth score is lower than the hull. So maybe just give those ships a stealth boost? Troligan to Stealth 5+, Neshatan to 5+.

Well like I said, even without modifying hull, I think a flat +1 to stealth across the board might do it actually (and imo would work better for alot of other ships too)

I'm a little leery of bulk boosting all the stealth scores, especially a boost of the Troligan from 3+ to 5+. All it takes is an Asteroid field and your opponent has to jump through lots of hoops to have a prayer of a single hit and that would be drastically mitigated by the high hull or high stealth. Even more so the Leshath at 7+ which means you've got only two ways to attempt to reduce the stealth and at the same time it can cut the entirety of an opponent's stealth. It would make a fleet of Leshath very very deadly (not saying the B word). That 6+/7+ tipping point would need to be watched very carefully and balanced with all the ways to boost stealth and all the ways to reduce stealth (especially since at least one of the ways to reduce stealth requires you to be able to target it to begin with).
EDIT: The big reason I'd watch a stealth boost carefully is because as I understand your stealth modification - a modified Stealth of 7+ will mean the ship cannot be targeted. That is in keeping with the standard Stealth score but if it's all boosted then it's that much more likely that you're going to end up in a battle where the Minbari are cruising around and annihilating the opponent and the opponent is only able to score 1 in 10 hits. Also would be careful about how far you lower hull values since there still are automatic counters for Stealth like Fighter-Base-Contact and energy mines. Little increments and lots of testing.