Weak weapons, and Hull 6 ships

[Reaverman]

Hi, I've noticed that attacking a Hull 6 ship with a weak weapon, has the same odds of hitting a Hull 5 ship. In other words, a 6AD weak weapon, on average will get one hit for both Hulls. Surely a Hull 6 ship, would be more resilient?

So would it not be more prudent, to half the AD of weak weapons against Hull 6 weapons. So the above weapon, would roll 3AD and not 6AD?

 

[Soulmage]

Or just make weak weapons that do damage reroll the dice looking for a 4+ on the second roll.

 

[Reaverman]

Or just make weak weapons that do damage reroll the dice looking for a 4+ on the second roll.

well you could, but thats doing the same as halving the AD, also all damage rolls following the same pattern. You would also have to make another exception to the Ancients, which would be fiddly. I think this method is a lot more simple, and easy to integrate into the existing system.

 

[Locutus9956]

ah the old GW 7+ rule. And yet there really is no reason we SHOULDNT use it. Would screw the Narns rather severly though

 

[Reaverman]

ah the old GW 7+ rule. And yet there really is no reason we SHOULDNT use it. Would screw the Narns rather severly though

Hey its a Narn player who suggested it, I'm just pointing out a flaw in the rules. If every point on the dice is incrementally halved, as you go up the Hull values. Then a weak weapon, stops being weak after hull 5.

 

[Lord David the Denied]

I favour the 7+ rule personally. That way, by a set of freak occurences, a weak weapon with 8AD could - somehow - do 8 damage to a hull 6 ship. Such a performance would be immortalised in song for eternity...

 

[LordClinto]

you could just rule that weak weapons can't damage a hull 6 ship

(it's a little extreme admiditly)

Like a .22 caliber rifle trying to damage a tank.

 

[animus]

Weak weapons should be able to hit hull 6, but I think they should then suffer on the damage side against Hull 6, -1 on the damage roll, for example. (Has this already been suggested?)

What's the 7+ rule, btw

 

[Reaverman]

What's the 7+ rule, btw

Dunno

 

[B5freak]

I agree with Animus' suggestion. Apply a -1 to the Damage roll. That way Weak weapons can hit a Hull 6 ship, but they can't do a Critical Hit and 1/3 of the hits will be Bulkhead Hits.

7+ - Means that if your target number is greater than a 6 (i.e. Weak against Hull 6), you need to roll a 6 and then re-roll every 6 at a target number of 4+ in order to hit.

 

[animus]

7+ - Means that if your target number is greater than a 6 (i.e. Weak against Hull 6), you need to roll a 6 and then re-roll every 6 at a target number of 4+ in order to hit.

This comes from GW? I'm unfamiliar with this.

 

[Shadow Queen]

Like a .22 caliber rifle trying to damage a tank.


Well a GW Bolt Gun could do damage a GW tank on a roll of 6.... Bring back Blood Bowl

 

[Davesaint]

No, No, No..........Weak weapons are penalized enough already. So they have the same chance to hit a hull 5 as they do a hull 6, BFD. What you fail to take into count is they have a worse chance than any other weapon at hitting Hulls 1-5. Why to they need to be penalized any more.

Lets see if we can make the kotha stink any more than it already does. 1 AD weak, lets make it not able to do criticals and have a bulkhead hit on a one or a 2.


Dave

 

[B5freak]

Animus,

I think it started with GW a long time ago, but I'm pretty sure that rule hasn't been in the last couple of versions.

Dave,

I don't think the suggestion was intended as a hit against any one fleet, just an attempt to add consistency. So the Kotha sucks. Fix the Kotha.

 

[animus]

Kotha?

 

[Davesaint]

Animus,

I think it started with GW a long time ago, but I'm pretty sure that rule hasn't been in the last couple of versions.

Dave,

I don't think the suggestion was intended as a hit against any one fleet, just an attempt to add consistency. So the Kotha sucks. Fix the Kotha.

B5Freak,

What you have to understand is how significant of a change this is to ships accross the board. The weak trait does impose a significant penalty to a given weapon.

Just to give you an idea of how many units will be changed...
All Centauri fighters
Kotha
Brivoki
All Brakiri Gravitic Bolts - Which are on all ships
All Civilian Ships
All EA AF Weapons - On just about everything but the Tethys
Every Narn Ship except the G'sten and varrients, the Ka'toc and varrients, The Dagkar, Tloth, Trann, Gvrann, KaBintak
Most of the Raiders

That's a ton of units to "fix"


Dave

 

[B5freak]

Animus,

Kotha is the Abbai fighter.

Dave,

I do understand the scope of what would be impacted, but I view the fleet lists and the rules as separate entities. The rules alteration makes sense in view of the overall rules set. I fully admit that it would cause balance issues with certain ships/fleets. However, since the current MGP fleets are already in dire need of a complete overhaul due to imbalance issues, I find it hard to justify ignoring a potentially good rules change for the sake of preserving a bad fleet list.

 

[Davesaint]

Animus,

Kotha is the Abbai fighter.

Dave,

I do understand the scope of what would be impacted, but I view the fleet lists and the rules as separate entities. The rules alteration makes sense in view of the overall rules set. I fully admit that it would cause balance issues with certain ships/fleets. However, since the current MGP fleets are already in dire need of a complete overhaul due to imbalance issues, I find it hard to justify ignoring a potentially good rules change for the sake of preserving a bad fleet list.

I don't think that this is necessarily a good rule change. I find it hard to make a trait weaker when other traits are so much more powerful. Frankly if there was not an SAP trait, I would be ok with this. But there is, so I a firmly against it. I really have a hard time bringing in some of the concepts from GW, as there are a tremendous amount of balance issues in 40k and Fantasy. I did not play BF Gothic, but my understanding was there are many issues there as well. Frankly if the game moves too much in the GW direction, I will prob. stop playing it. I have the same issues with FOW. Too much like 40k.


Dave

 

[Reaverman]

Animus,

Kotha is the Abbai fighter.

Dave,

I do understand the scope of what would be impacted, but I view the fleet lists and the rules as separate entities. The rules alteration makes sense in view of the overall rules set. I fully admit that it would cause balance issues with certain ships/fleets. However, since the current MGP fleets are already in dire need of a complete overhaul due to imbalance issues, I find it hard to justify ignoring a potentially good rules change for the sake of preserving a bad fleet list.

I don't think that this is necessarily a good rule change. I find it hard to make a trait weaker when other traits are so much more powerful. Frankly if there was not an SAP trait, I would be ok with this. But there is, so I a firmly against it. I really have a hard time bringing in some of the concepts from GW, as there are a tremendous amount of balance issues in 40k and Fantasy. I did not play BF Gothic, but my understanding was there are many issues there as well. Frankly if the game moves too much in the GW direction, I will prob. stop playing it. I have the same issues with FOW. Too much like 40k.


Dave

Hang on, who said make the game like GW. I made the suggestion off the top off my head, I've not played a GW game in like 8 years

 

[Davesaint]

Animus,

Kotha is the Abbai fighter.

Dave,

I do understand the scope of what would be impacted, but I view the fleet lists and the rules as separate entities. The rules alteration makes sense in view of the overall rules set. I fully admit that it would cause balance issues with certain ships/fleets. However, since the current MGP fleets are already in dire need of a complete overhaul due to imbalance issues, I find it hard to justify ignoring a potentially good rules change for the sake of preserving a bad fleet list.

I don't think that this is necessarily a good rule change. I find it hard to make a trait weaker when other traits are so much more powerful. Frankly if there was not an SAP trait, I would be ok with this. But there is, so I a firmly against it. I really have a hard time bringing in some of the concepts from GW, as there are a tremendous amount of balance issues in 40k and Fantasy. I did not play BF Gothic, but my understanding was there are many issues there as well. Frankly if the game moves too much in the GW direction, I will prob. stop playing it. I have the same issues with FOW. Too much like 40k.


Dave

Hang on, who said make the game like GW. I made the suggestion off the top off my head, I've not played a GW game in like 8 years

Reverman -

The statement was made to make the weak weapons function similar to the 7+ hit in 40k.


Dave