Will P&P address PL?

[katadder]

redundantcy would work better than the save mentioned as theres already the differance between small and large ships anyway.

 

[Da Boss]

hmm I think people may not be happy with White Stars ignoring a first crit, my Liati ignoring one although I would really like my Shadow Ship to ignore the first three as well.............

Fast moving agile ships often get hard by the first crit that actually manages to hit them......ignoring that could be nasty?

maybe you have to be a big Lumbering ship to get it..................?

 

[Foxmeister]

sounds good apart from a major flaw - everyone uses the same weapons for a race no matter the ship size.
the extra heaviness of firepower from large ships is represented by the fact they have more AD. this in turn already means more likelyhood of crits due to having more dice to roll.

My "issue" with redundancy (as I understand it here at least) is that it won't stop crit fishing with swarms of smaller ships just to knock out redundancy, especially if it is pitched at low levels.

I do appreciate what you are saying with respect to ship size and weaponry, but if you just think of it as another abstraction to help simulate the relative "hardness" of the bigger ships, it does work.

Regards,

Dave

 

[Lokai]

i must have missed it somewhere, how exactly will the redundant trait work? would it be a trait that can be lost like other traits?

to keep the feel of the show that a ship CAN be blown up with one good hit i'd think that the bonus damage should be kept, but the EFFECT should have a chance not to take affect, but that could just be me....keep the post goin, it is interesting reading

 

[tschuma]

Our group have been been tossing around the idea of a Special Action that would allow you to roll a 5 or 6 to NOT take the effects of the Critical Hit. This is similar to the Close Blast doors, but you still take all the effects of the damage, and you would be able to fire all of your weapons. It would not be automatic llike CBD and you would need to pass a CQ of 8.

The first time we played this it allowed several higher point level ships to get in with some lower level ships and cause some real damage and yet not take the effect of the criticals that it received, lucky die rolls!

We thought that allowing this with Close Blast doors would make this Special Action too powerful, so we made it a new one.

This could be modified by special traits like a +1 to your die roll for certain ships if need be. we haven't tested beyong the first test. The 2 epole that are hard to convince in the group like the Special Action.

We have thought up a couple more special actions but have not yet play tested them. one I like is the ability to send over a Damamge Control party to help out on damage control rolls. Another one is linking targeting systems that would alllow 2 ships to fire at a target at the same time, this one would have a very high CQ check since it would be like making a squadron during the game.

When we have play tested them I will post the results.

tschuma

 

[l33tpenguin]

sounds good apart from a major flaw - everyone uses the same weapons for a race no matter the ship size.
the extra heaviness of firepower from large ships is represented by the fact they have more AD. this in turn already means more likelyhood of crits due to having more dice to roll.

My "issue" with redundancy (as I understand it here at least) is that it won't stop crit fishing with swarms of smaller ships just to knock out redundancy, especially if it is pitched at low levels.

I do appreciate what you are saying with respect to ship size and weaponry, but if you just think of it as another abstraction to help simulate the relative "hardness" of the bigger ships, it does work.

Regards,

Dave

Crit fishing will always be a problem with swarm fleets. They fire more shots and thus are more likely to get a crit. I actually don't have a problem with that. If you Fire a dozen shots, chances are you will have some crits in there. The idea to counter balance this is to make big ships less likely to be critted, which is what redundancy will do. Swarm fleets are made up of smaller ships, these ships wouldn't have the redundancy trait (or possibly a low value on raid ships) and you don't get swarm fleets of Battle and War ships (unless you are playing a 10 point Armageddon game...). Since the small swarm ships wont have the crit save and the large non-swarm ships will, it will balance out crits to an extent.

i must have missed it somewhere, how exactly will the redundant trait work? would it be a trait that can be lost like other traits?

to keep the feel of the show that a ship CAN be blown up with one good hit i'd think that the bonus damage should be kept, but the EFFECT should have a chance not to take affect, but that could just be me....keep the post goin, it is interesting reading

There are a couple different versions out there. What it comes down to is "larger ships have a chance to ignore critical hits"

The version in my current alternate rules is this (again, MY home rules, there are others):
Redundancy represents the ability of a ship to weather damage to critical systems. Larger ships, especially capital ships, have multiple redundant systems and control fail-safes that mitigate damage to their critical systems. When a critical hit is scored against a ship with redundancy, the attacker rolls against the redundancy score, if the result meets or exceeds the redundancy score, the hit successfully damages a critical system and the critical hit is treated as normal. If the roll scores below the redundancy score, however, the ship weathered the critical hit and no critical effect occurs. The critical hit is treated as a solid hit in regards to crew and damage loss. Each time a critical hit successfully damages a ship (exceeds the redundancy score) the redundancy score is decreased by 1. If a ship is crippled or reduced to a skeleton crew, its redundancy automatically drops to 0. The bonus from Precise is added to attempts to overcome redundancy.

 

[katadder]

the other redundancy mentioned was larger ships just ignore the 1st # of crits.

 

[CZuschlag]

l33tpenguin:

I assume your house rules have one additonal rule or exception type for the Dilgar's MoD, right? As published it makes little sense to them.

 

[Triggy]

The version I see as both simple and not penalising fleets that rely on crits too much is one that has a value for each ship (or PL) and the first # of crits that the ship suffers up to and including that score have the effects of the critical ignored (whilst the Damage and Crew effects happen as normal, including the Damage and Crew inflicted from the critical).

 

[l33tpenguin]

l33tpenguin:

I assume your house rules have one additonal rule or exception type for the Dilgar's MoD, right? As published it makes little sense to them.

Argh... crap. I've never played with or against the Dilgar (nor really read up on them). Guess I have some research to do when I get home. Don't have my books out here to read through

 

[katadder]

The version I see as both simple and not penalising fleets that rely on crits too much is one that has a value for each ship (or PL) and the first # of crits that the ship suffers up to and including that score have the effects of the critical ignored (whilst the Damage and Crew effects happen as normal, including the Damage and Crew inflicted from the critical).

yep, if anything probably this would be best to add. although the armour one i do like it would take more testing and balancing, and some people see it as too complicated.

 

[Triggy]

The version I see as both simple and not penalising fleets that rely on crits too much is one that has a value for each ship (or PL) and the first # of crits that the ship suffers up to and including that score have the effects of the critical ignored (whilst the Damage and Crew effects happen as normal, including the Damage and Crew inflicted from the critical).

yep, if anything probably this would be best to add. although the armour one i do like it would take more testing and balancing, and some people see it as too complicated.

As you say, both your and my suggestions work well but suffer from not being amazing easy to either balance/implement or easy to use in game.

The "simple" Redundancy is simple and it does the job. All you need to do then is balance the number at each PL...

 

[katadder]

armour is easy to use in game though, its just an extra shade on burgers damage sheets

 

[Ripple]

if you use them... harder with just paper and pencil and books (though only just a little).

My concern was always keeping it fast to do damage... trying to figure exactly when you cross the magic boundry. I also don't like CBD for the same reason in some ways... slows things down as you keep looking for when you lose SA to see if its fallen yet.

Ripple

 

[l33tpenguin]

if you use them... harder with just paper and pencil and books (though only just a little).

My concern was always keeping it fast to do damage... trying to figure exactly when you cross the magic boundry. I also don't like CBD for the same reason in some ways... slows things down as you keep looking for when you lose SA to see if its fallen yet.

Ripple

I always thought, since damage is assigned at the same time, CBD affects the entire attack. So a ship with CBD takes a dozen damage and crew, you roll a dozen dice for the damage and another dozen for the crew, see which is ignored and tick off the rest. If there is a crit in there that isn't ignored that takes out SAs, then once the damage is done, the crit is enforced and CBD is no longer in effect.

Am I wrong?

 

[Ripple]

We asked under the last edition and it was per weapon line... so it was do a weapon and check. This came up most in fighter attacks where we used to just add them up, but each weapon has to be done separately because you can lose traits, SA's or become crippled/skeleton crewed (which do the same things) between fighters. We originally didn't do it this way... but we were wrong.

The wrinkle with CBD is that you can't look at a huge pile of hits and go okay, no need to roll THAT out.

Ripple

 

[animus]

We always do CBD like l33. It just makes the game go faster. I don't how doing it by weapon system does anything other than slog down the game.

 

[AdrianH]

That was my thought, too. The reasoning is, the ship expects to be attacked and Closes Blast Doors. That's it, they're closed for the rest of this round. There isn't some idiot running round opening them because the ship just took a bad hit.

My guess is that "No SA" means the ship can't declare any more SA this turn or next, but any SA which have already been declared and taken effect remain in effect.

 

[CZuschlag]

No, that's been cleared up in a few previous posts (I'll edit this one later and demonstrate my amazing Search-fu ... natch). CBD can be stripped off in a separate weapon line, as can traits, such as Adaptive Armor, GEG, Dodge, and so forth. It happens at the same time that you check to see if a ship is Crippled, and, if necessary, remove the Interceptors before the next weapon system fires.

 

[tschuma]

I think I asked the original question about CBD several months ago. WE play it per weapon line, which is the same for Interceptors. This also works on Adaptive Armor, which is how I killed a White Star, kept hitting it until it lost the Adaptive Armor on a Crit and then hit it with a Dag'kar E-mine. the ISA player was not happy!

read my post about saving Critical Hit effects a page or 2 back.

tschuma

http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=33998&highlight=

Found the link!