White Star, WS Enforcer, WS Gunship

[H]

you need to try the WS against fleets that already suffer badly from the sitting back sniping on CBD. And see if that balances out better if it still gets mauled it is in severe trouble!
and of course there is a lot of rock, paper, scissors over ALL fleets, so finding a sucessful balance point will be like nailing jelly to a tree!

 

[Da Boss]

I think against the Narn will be a interesting test as I am not sure it will change things that much?

Earth and similar fleets I think will be the best change as it should make it a good fight?

At some point the new Vree (with their extraction beams SO) will be a good test against the ISA given their low crew levels?

 

[Greg Smith]

you need to try the WS against fleets that already suffer badly from the sitting back sniping on CBD.

I would have said that was the Centauri. Keeping out of the range of the 12" guns means sitting back, only using the laser = CBD. A couple of WS could maul a Primus and barely take a shot in return.

 

[H]

however against a G'Quan it could sit outside the arc range , with both weapons!! (but then it can do that now, mmmmmm) interesting times indead.

 

[Da Boss]

Some Centauri Ships agreed - Octurion, Primus, etc but we do have the fast agile skirmish support ships to deal with WS's - Demos, Vorchan. plus battle level ship built to kill them 8)

I think the problem has been fleets without them and who also usually have shorter range guns (often boresighted)?

 

[Greg Smith]

however against a G'Quan it could sit outside the arc range , with both weapons!! (but then it can do that now, mmmmmm) interesting times indead.

Yes. The affect of the change when fighting slower, shorter ranged fleets, will be to draw the WS in, making it easier for other ships and fighters to get at the WS and give the WS a lack of firing options.

There are 4 ships that the WS will still be able to sit outside secondary weapon ranges - Abbai, Early EA, Narn, Dilgar. For everyone else, they get to shoot in return.

finding a sucessful balance point will be like nailing jelly to a tree!

All too true.

 

[Foxmeister]

I would have said that was the Centauri. Keeping out of the range of the 12" guns means sitting back, only using the laser = CBD. A couple of WS could maul a Primus and barely take a shot in return.

Yes, that's true of the Primus in isolation, however the Centauri have a plethora of ships at their disposal to help deal with that threat - I'm thinking Haven, Morgrath, Maximus, Darkner, Vorchan, Demos, and Liati here.

Regards,

Dave

 

[Greg Smith]

Yes, that's true of the Primus in isolation, however the Centauri have a plethora of ships at their disposal to help deal with that threat - I'm thinking Haven, Morgrath, Maximus, Darkner, Vorchan, Demos, and Liati here.

And most of those are good examples of why the Centauri are a sit back and snipe on CBD race. At 18" range the WS could be hit by only a few of their weapons, at 10" it can be hit by everything.

 

[Foxmeister]

Yes, that's true of the Primus in isolation, however the Centauri have a plethora of ships at their disposal to help deal with that threat - I'm thinking Haven, Morgrath, Maximus, Darkner, Vorchan, Demos, and Liati here.

And most of those are good examples of why the Centauri are a sit back and snipe on CBD race. At 18" range the WS could be hit by only a few of their weapons, at 10" it can be hit by everything.

You misunderstand the point.

All these craft are able to go *get* the WS when it sits at 18" and snipes on CBD, as they have sufficient speed and manoeuverability to get their weapons within arc and range.

Regards,

Dave

 

[Greg Smith]

Ah, I see. Most races have small, fast manueverable ships that can get to the WS whiole it swipes at bigger ships. The Centauri do excel at it though, I agree.

So is it the CDB that is the problem (the layered defences), since smaller ships are able to counter the sit back and snipe part of the problem?

 

[H]

it has been stated a few times that the multilayered defence is a problem, BUT that is overcome by briging it into a range where more guns can bear as done by the knife fight version, OR by changing how those layered defences work.

the origional fix changing CBD did not please people, as a large number of ISA players have been known to sit back and snipe, it didn't really stop that.

 

[Greg Smith]

OR by changing how those layered defences work.

I've been thinking about that.

How about:

A ship with fighters acting as interceptors cannot dodge.

The WS cannot fire its laser while on CBD. Or fire at all.

(Fluff reasons could easily be found for both of those).

Foxmeister seems to think that smaller, faster ships can counter the stand off and snipe problem.

 

[Lord David the Denied]

Regardless of that, standing off and sniping isn't what's seen on screen. Therefore the knife fight White Star is the way to go.

 

[lastbesthope]

Regardless of that, standing off and sniping isn't what's seen on screen.

Not in general no, but that doesn't preclude long range attacks, for example, the sniping shot at the bomb intended to destroy B4 (Yes i know that opens a whole kettle of fish about the relative ranges of INL and MP on the WS) but the point stands.

LBH
Lack of evidence is not evidence of lack

 

[Lord David the Denied]

One occurance can be ignored as a statistical anomaly.

LD
I can do it too.

 

[Foxmeister]

Foxmeister seems to think that smaller, faster ships can counter the stand off and snipe problem.

If you have them! Not every fleet does, and not in the numbers that the Centauri do. The Centauri in particular excel at it at almost every priority level, so they have an embarrassment of riches when it comes to taking on the ISA.

Regards,

Dave

 

[SylvrDragon]

To be frank I support Hiff's idea on the allies, let's see some limits on a mechanic that allows them to bypass most of their weaknesses. People cry about the League being able to do that, why should the ISA get to?

Which encourages the ISA to use fighters of their own to screen their ships - like everyone else has to.

Unless facing Narn or Gaim, obviously. Then it's a waste of time.

Where do I even begin here....First off, what fighters? Do you mean the White Star fighters that are only available in relatively small numbers from a Battle level vessel and a War level vessel? Or do you mean the Nials that are in even smaller in number? Fighter screens for the ISA are out of the question, unless they take allies. Fighters are a MAJOR problem for the ISA, and they're only viable solution is allies and you want to limit that? I know every fleet should have a weakness, but being as vulnerable to fighters as you seem to want them to be is almost silly.

Testing it certainly needed. Which is one of the reasons I've taken up the ISA. I'm participating in a local campaign which starts tomorrow. The campaign will consist of ISA, EA (Third Age), Minbari, Psi-Corps and League (Drazi w/some Gaim). I think the above fleets will provide good tests for the new ISA, given that my rolling doesn't do me in. lol

Oh, and Greg. Why should a ship using fighter interceptors not be able to dodge? That makes zero sense. The fighters are the ones purposely placing themselves between the ship and the incoming fire, not the ship. The ship just does it's own thing, while the fighters act as an independent shield. Besides, that'd just make the fighters never used as interceptors...not that they're even used that way by ships with dodge anyways. No way I'd sacrifice what precious few fighters I have as interceptors. White Stars are already naked enough against fighters as is. lol

 

[lastbesthope]

One occurance can be ignored as a statistical anomaly.

LD
I can do it too.

Depends on the level of significance you're testing to and the distribution you're assuming in the variables :lol:

 

[Lord David the Denied]

Where do I even begin here....First off, what fighters? Do you mean the White Star fighters that are only available in relatively small numbers from a Battle level vessel and a War level vessel? Or do you mean the Nials that are in even smaller in number? Fighter screens for the ISA are out of the question, unless they take allies. Fighters are a MAJOR problem for the ISA, and they're only viable solution is allies and you want to limit that? I know every fleet should have a weakness, but being as vulnerable to fighters as you seem to want them to be is almost silly.

Testing it certainly needed. Which is one of the reasons I've taken up the ISA. I'm participating in a local campaign which starts tomorrow. The campaign will consist of ISA, EA (Third Age), Minbari, Psi-Corps and League (Drazi w/some Gaim). I think the above fleets will provide good tests for the new ISA, given that my rolling doesn't do me in. lol

Let's give them a decent carrier, then. Or, wait, you could take fighter wings, like the Vree had to until very recently and the Vorlons and Shadows have to at lower levels.

You know, though, fighters are a major problem for the Centauri, too. We get one nice carrier at raid, a couple of flights on the battle choices and reasonable numbers on the war and armageddon choices, otherwise we just don't have them. A fighter-heavy race like EA can really do a number om us with their fighters and we don't have the AF to stop them. We don't get allies to counter that apparently intentional weakness, though.

 

[Zeru]

Having a Raid level option to counter fighters is much better then having a War level option of countering fighters, even with allies the ISA are basically in the same boat as the Centauri as far as access to fighters.

That said, I feel the ISA have far more problems against fighters then the Centauri do in most cases.