|
Post by dragonlord on Jul 19, 2009 17:45:38 GMT -5
I've written up some trial rules for my stealth/recon light cruiser. I've drawn from various similar vessels/systems that already exist, e.g. the Necron Shroud, Cobra destroyers and Tau Messengers/tracking systems. Obviously it is quite hard to accurately cost this without playtesting so consider the points to be very much an estimate. Anyway here it is: Insidious class light cruiserLet me know what you think, in particular I welcome feedback about the take-over-an-enemy-ship ability and how it is implemented.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Jul 20, 2009 8:45:35 GMT -5
That's a very interesting taking-over rule. I rather like it; can't see anything wrong with the cruiser to be honest. Specifying it happens at a particular time (I suggest the end phase) might be a good idea.
Only thing I'm not convinced about is putting an enemy ship on a special order. You'll have to state how that works with regards to special orders expiring at the beginning of the turn and stuff. I'm not sure how well it'll work in game either - I guess only playtesting will tell.
|
|
|
Post by dragonlord on Jul 20, 2009 10:20:43 GMT -5
Specifying when the taking over happens would indeed probably be a good idea. I wasn't sure about the part allowing multiple Insidious' to work together in taking over a vessel, it might encourage mobbing of enemy ships with large(ish) groups of Insidous' whereas I don't really see them working in more than groups of two. I might change it to say 'up to a maximum of two' or just drop the cooperation rule altogether.
The putting an enemy ship on a special order thing was me thinking, 'well if you can take over a weapon system then you must also be able to take over the engines' and other such systems. That and I thought it might be amusing to be able to put an enemy ship onto all ahead full. It could also be useful to put an enemy onto burn retros if you want to stop it escaping. Unless you have two (or more) ships cooperating on taking over an enemy vessel you would only ever use the movement special orders. If you had several ships cooperating and were feeling risky you could perhaps use lock on to make it fire the controlled weapons more accurately. I was thinking that the special order would last until the end of your opponents turn, that would need to be stated of course.
I was also thinking that perhaps a weapon system that has been taken over and fired by the Zirconians in their turn should be unable to fire in the opponents turn. What do you think?
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Jul 20, 2009 14:08:44 GMT -5
I wasn't sure about the part allowing multiple Insidious' to work together in taking over a vessel, it might encourage mobbing of enemy ships with large(ish) groups of Insidous' whereas I don't really see them working in more than groups of two. I might change it to say 'up to a maximum of two' or just drop the cooperation rule altogether. Aw, no, I quite like that, actually. It makes them more sneaky. To limit the amount working together, limit the amount you can have in your army. The putting an enemy ship on a special order thing was me thinking, 'well if you can take over a weapon system then you must also be able to take over the engines' and other such systems. That and I thought it might be amusing to be able to put an enemy ship onto all ahead full. It could also be useful to put an enemy onto burn retros if you want to stop it escaping. Unless you have two (or more) ships cooperating on taking over an enemy vessel you would only ever use the movement special orders. If you had several ships cooperating and were feeling risky you could perhaps use lock on to make it fire the controlled weapons more accurately. I was thinking that the special order would last until the end of your opponents turn, that would need to be stated of course. It could certainly be useful, but quite annoying for the opponent I daresay. Although it's not all that likely to happen if the ship has reasonable Ld (so it'll work all the time against me ;D). Eh, we'll playtest it. It should be pretty amusing, at any rate. I was also thinking that perhaps a weapon system that has been taken over and fired by the Zirconians in their turn should be unable to fire in the opponents turn. What do you think? Not so good, I think. If you have enough Insidious the thing basically ends up on your side, what with having its special orders chosen by its enemies, having to fire a lot of its weapons at its own side, and being unable to fire them at the enemy. Not too good. Hijacking a gun or two is funny, but shutting them down as well would be too much of a gameplan spoiler, I believe. Also, you might want to specify that it only affects non-ordnance weapons. Because a) this plays merry hell with who controls the attack craft and b) it allows you to make a ship fire its torpedoes into the middle of nowhere and then prevent it from reloading forever by making it do other special orders... or even fly it into its own torpedoes with AAF, although that would be hilarious, I have to admit. I think Insidious should only be able to make an enemy ship use a special order once (per enemy ship, or possibly per game). Outside of that, it's a bit broken in a BFG context really, considering how much it can mess up your opponent's gameplan, and how hard it is for everyone that isn't Eldar to recover from being out of position (a move like this in the right place would really ruin an Imperial player's day, you don't want it happening all the time).
|
|
|
Post by dragonlord on Jul 20, 2009 14:52:31 GMT -5
Fair enough, just making them limited in number as a whole seems reasonable, I'll probably do that with all of the light cruisers. What I might do actually is just place a block limit on light cruisers as a whole, perhaps also saying that no more than half of the light cruisers can be any one type. Hopefully once I've done the other cruisers there will be a trade off between which ones you want to take so people wouldn't have loads of Insidious' as then they couldn't have some of the others. Since Zirconian vessels get +1 on the leadership table on average the target vessel will have a -1 modifier to their leadership. So the average Imperial ship would have to roll 6/7 or less to pass (or for you probably a 5 ). There is also of course the fact that it is rather expensive for a light cruiser, as all Zirconian ships are, for the price of an Insidious (which doesn't have many guns of its own other than those it hijacks) you could buy a Slaughter or a Murder. Fair enough, I will leave that for the time being. As I aluded to above though remember that to completely control a Carnage say (assuming one broadside isn't facing anything) you would need 4 Insidiouses to be within 30cm of it, that's 680pts worth of ships to control one that costs 180pts, I wouldn't call that a bargain. Though then again you would only need 1 to take control of the Planet Killer's Armaggeddon Gun or the Blackstone Fortress's warp cannons, but I don't think it would last long within 30cm of the Planet Killer and anyone who puts a Blackstone far enough away from their main fleet that an Insidious can park on it without fear of retaliation deserves to have it used against them. I had thought of that, what I was thinking of saying was that you could use the take-over ability to launch ordnance but that the ordnance launched would be under the control of the player that owned the target. So you would be able to do silly things with torpedoes but doing anything with attack craft would be basically useless. That is a possibility, I will admit that causing an Emperor to AAF into an asteroid field or a warp rift would decidely mess up their battleplan but that isn't too likely I think. After playtesting we should be able to tell better whether a restriction on the special order rule, or getting rid of it entirely, are necessary. The screwing with the enemy's battleplan is part of how I see the Zirconian's working too. I've formed a slightly more concrete concept of what I think the Zirconians tactics should be like over the course of working on the rules again and my thought is that it should revolve around disorienting and disrupting the enemy before finishing them off with focused firepower. The diving through the enemy fleet is part of that disorientation and disruption as are the 'boarding' torpedoes and my additional critical hits idea for the pulse weapons. Zirconian ships are expensive and will almost always be outnumbered (except maybe against necrons) and while they have decent firepower probably can't (and probably shouldn't be able to) win in a conventional shoot-out. This is also one of the reasons I'm thinking of dropping the battleships entirely, they just seem too big to take part in that style of warfare. Though I suppose they could be justified as being kind of like the hammer that comes it and smashes the enemy fleet once the fancy darting and dodging of the smaller vessels has thrown their formations into disarray. Actually I quite like that idea, maybe I will keep the battleships . It also gives me a slightly easier time with the Zirconian Nova Ship, which will appear in the background, whether it ever appears in rules form or not is another matter though (As a hint, it does what it says on the tin ;D).
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Jul 22, 2009 13:44:10 GMT -5
What I might do actually is just place a block limit on light cruisers as a whole, perhaps also saying that no more than half of the light cruisers can be any one type. Hopefully once I've done the other cruisers there will be a trade off between which ones you want to take so people wouldn't have loads of Insidious' as then they couldn't have some of the others. Seems solid. You can do it the way BFG army lists deal with grand cruisers - X light cruisers per Y cruisers. As I aluded to above though remember that to completely control a Carnage say (assuming one broadside isn't facing anything) you would need 4 Insidiouses to be within 30cm of it, that's 680pts worth of ships to control one that costs 180pts, I wouldn't call that a bargain. Though then again you would only need 1 to take control of the Planet Killer's Armaggeddon Gun or the Blackstone Fortress's warp cannons, but I don't think it would last long within 30cm of the Planet Killer and anyone who puts a Blackstone far enough away from their main fleet that an Insidious can park on it without fear of retaliation deserves to have it used against them. You're right, of course. I was thinking, actually, that maybe they should be cheaper (as they're not really going to do much). The thing that bothers me is the annoyance factor. Units that screw with your opponent are fine, as long as they're not too irritating. Otherwise they'll get lasered off the board on turn one. I had thought of that, what I was thinking of saying was that you could use the take-over ability to launch ordnance but that the ordnance launched would be under the control of the player that owned the target. So you would be able to do silly things with torpedoes but doing anything with attack craft would be basically useless. That is a possibility, I will admit that causing an Emperor to AAF into an asteroid field or a warp rift would decidely mess up their battleplan but that isn't too likely I think. After playtesting we should be able to tell better whether a restriction on the special order rule, or getting rid of it entirely, are necessary. It's true. I do quite like the idea of making them do silly things with torpedoes, though. I guess keeping the opponent's ship on random non-reload special orders isn't really worth it, given that you'll have to keep the Insidious within 30cm of it all the time, and the Zirconians will be behind them. Yeah, sending Emperors into warp rifts is just harsh. Although, since (if you implement the theme ideas we've been discussing) Zirconians do small-to-medium damage very efficiently rather than having a chance of lots of damage, they'll struggle to take down battleships, so using Insidious to mess them up becomes a viable alternative to attempting to kill the things in one turn. The screwing with the enemy's battleplan is part of how I see the Zirconian's working too. I've formed a slightly more concrete concept of what I think the Zirconians tactics should be like over the course of working on the rules again and my thought is that it should revolve around disorienting and disrupting the enemy before finishing them off with focused firepower. The diving through the enemy fleet is part of that disorientation and disruption as are the 'boarding' torpedoes and my additional critical hits idea for the pulse weapons. Zirconian ships are expensive and will almost always be outnumbered (except maybe against necrons) and while they have decent firepower probably can't (and probably shouldn't be able to) win in a conventional shoot-out. This is also one of the reasons I'm thinking of dropping the battleships entirely, they just seem too big to take part in that style of warfare. Though I suppose they could be justified as being kind of like the hammer that comes it and smashes the enemy fleet once the fancy darting and dodging of the smaller vessels has thrown their formations into disarray. Actually I quite like that idea, maybe I will keep the battleships . It also gives me a slightly easier time with the Zirconian Nova Ship, which will appear in the background, whether it ever appears in rules form or not is another matter though (As a hint, it does what it says on the tin ;D). That's good. Drop the battleships then. You know your fleet shouldn't have battleships when they move 25cm and can Come To New Heading, anyway (Exception: Void Stalker, because it's beautiful.) As to the Nova Ship, it can be the fleet's 'one big massive hammer ship', like the aforementioned Void Stalker, which is the only Eldar ship to have a) a decent number of hits, b) 45cm weapons. I think it has 5+ armour, too, although I may be misremembering that. What might be more interesting (and Zirconey) is to have the Nova Ship be a squadron of three smallish cruisers - the nova-inducing weapon system is set up by the trio aligning themselves in the right way and combining the energies of devices built into each of them.
|
|
|
Post by dragonlord on Jul 22, 2009 18:55:37 GMT -5
That's what I was thinking of probably doing, just need to decide what X and Y should be, at the moment I'm thinking no more than 1 per 2.
I costed it fairly conservatively (that is erred on the more expensive side) so bringing the cost down would not be unreasonable, how much cheaper were you thinking? I know what you mean about the annoyance factor, the only real way to tell whether the Insidious would be irritating or not is to playtest it though.
Indeed, though the Emperor would already have had to be pointing in the direction of the warp rift at the time, and thus been vulnerable to the 'put a single blast marker on it so it can't turn' tactic. I still haven't worked out a pleasing way to implement the efficiently doing small to medium damage idea with high damage being unlikely. The lances hitting on a 3+ idea is one that I might use. I'm not particularly keen on giving the weapons batteries a re-roll to hit since it is likely that the Zirconians are already a bit more time consuming to use than some races so I'd rather not increase that if possible. An idea that just occured to me though would be to do the same thing as with the lances, give the weapons batteries a +1 to hit, so they would hit armour 6 on a 5+ and armour 5 on a 4+. What do you think? The range increases are also an idea I might use. Obviously if I go with the increased hitting rate I'll drop the firepower on all the weapons. As you say though, if/when I do implement this things like the Insidious will become more necessary for taking out the larger vessels.
I've been thinking a little more about the battleships and I think they will remain a part of the background at least, but I also think they should only really appear in larger fleet engagements, whether I leave them in the rules or remove them I haven't yet decided. Admittedly even as it is it would be a bit of a squeeze to get a battleship into a 1500pt fleet while fulfilling the requirements, and you wouldn't be able to take any of the light cruisers when I've done them, which hopefully you would want. What I could do I suppose is to say that as well as the requirements already there you can't use a battleship in a fleet less than 2000pts. What I might do to the battleships as well is drop their speed back to 20cm and up the range on all their guns to 75cm, better enabling them to fulfil the 'stand off and pulverize things that the rest of the fleet have been confusing' role. Anyway I'll continue to think about them. I also realised that while I haven't said that the battleships can't come to new heading in practice they can't as a battleship needs to move 15cm before it can turn, which would mean a battleship would need to move 30cm in order to turn twice, which would be obscene even for the Zirconians! On that note the Necron tombship is in the same boat, it is technically allowed to come to new heading, but with a speed of 20cm it wouldn't do much for it, it can still do the fancy Necron all ahead full d6*10cm and make a turn for every 20cm thing though. Actually now that I've remembered that a limited special 'all ahead full and flip' for the Zirconians seems more reasonable, huzzah for the Necrons and their making anything less cheesy seem fine! ;D
The Void Stalker only has 4+ armour. The only problem with the three ships idea is that it sounds a bit too much like the way the blackstone fortresses work, though I suppose a single mega-ship is just like the planet killer, d**n chaos and their having stolen all the superweapon ideas! Besides which the nova-ship already exists in my head, it's an 8-wing version of the standard Zirconian design but with the tapered end of the central body extended out into a massive cannon, and possibly the whole central body being hollow. The nova-gun fires backwards, it also draws in feeder beams, slightly star-wars superlaser style from the tips of the wings (so no rear pointing weapons battery on this one), basically the nova-gun draws from the same power source as the engines, it also pretty much shuts down the entire ship when it fires and causes it to shoot forwards a bit because of the recoil. The ship even has a name, it is, or translates as, the Vengeful Sorrow, it would also if it ever exists in rules form need a special rule to represent the fact that the Zirconians don't like it and in a way think it is haunted.
Edit: I can't believe that the forum 'naughty word checker' even stars out d*mn. I'm surprised we haven't noticed before though, in a game like 40k the word d*mned and d*mnation come up fairly often.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Jul 23, 2009 10:02:52 GMT -5
I have to keep nerfing that word filter, it's rather annoying. ;D It should now let 'damn' through. That's what I was thinking of probably doing, just need to decide what X and Y should be, at the moment I'm thinking no more than 1 per 2. Yeah, or 2 per 3, something along those lines. I costed it fairly conservatively (that is erred on the more expensive side) so bringing the cost down would not be unreasonable, how much cheaper were you thinking? 160? 150? An idea that just occured to me though would be to do the same thing as with the lances, give the weapons batteries a +1 to hit, so they would hit armour 6 on a 5+ and armour 5 on a 4+. What do you think? The range increases are also an idea I might use. Obviously if I go with the increased hitting rate I'll drop the firepower on all the weapons. Definitely - that's a great idea. Do it. What I might do to the battleships as well is drop their speed back to 20cm and up the range on all their guns to 75cm, better enabling them to fulfil the 'stand off and pulverize things that the rest of the fleet have been confusing' role. Anyway I'll continue to think about them. Yeah, that sounds alright. They might end up being isolated and easily destroyed, though. Actually now that I've remembered that a limited special 'all ahead full and flip' for the Zirconians seems more reasonable, huzzah for the Necrons and their making anything less cheesy seem fine! ;D There's always someone more evil than an anti-hero... ;D The nova-gun fires backwards Cue evil cackle. Fly through the enemy and strafe them with your guns, then just when they think the worst is over - BOOM!
|
|
|
Post by dragonlord on Jul 23, 2009 16:52:56 GMT -5
I would be quite happy to put the Insidious as 160 or 150.
That is a problem, I will put the battleships on hiatus until I think of a good idea.
I hadn't actually thought of that but yes that would be quite a shock to the enemy.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Aug 6, 2009 8:42:38 GMT -5
This thread's been quiet awhile... have you been working on this lately good sir? We should try out VASSAL's capacity for playtesting.
|
|
|
Post by dragonlord on Aug 6, 2009 15:34:00 GMT -5
Rules-wise no I haven't really done anything since my last post on here, I still need to update the rules with my suggested alterations for the pulse weapons actually. I shall do that now while I remember. I've been working on the fluff more recently, which is now approaching a form I would consider releasable for feedback, I've done a bit of general background about the War in Heaven period and done write-ups for 3 out of the 7 core systems with the other 4 having basic outlines of what they'll be like. We should indeed utilise Vassal to do a bit of playtesting, I'll PM you my MSN so we can find each other easily.
I've now updated the rules, the new version can be found in the first post. I've changed the pulse weapons to reduce the armour of the target they are firing by 1 (to a minimum of 4+). I've also changed the column shift rules, they now get a general left column shift, but do not get the left shift for short range. I've done away with the blast marker effects entirely now I felt there were too many special rules for one weapon otherwise and it didn't add much. I've recosted the pulse weapons appropriately and dropped the strength of most ships weapons by a point or two at least with some ships increasing in cost as well. I've made a minor edit to the laser cannons, a Necron vessel on BFI now gets a 4+ save against a roll-to-hit of 6 from a laser cannon (which is better for cruisers and escorts, same for tombships). I've left the hit rate of the laser cannons as is for the time being, though it can still be increased to 3+ later if this seems desirable. I've put the Insidious into the main fleet list, dropped its points to 150 and stated that in order to put a controlled ship onto a special order the Insidious needs to make a leadership check (so it is slightly more difficult to do). If we decide that the special order part of the ability needs nerfing a bit but not removing entirely then we can also say that this counts as the Insidious' special order usage for this turn. I've left out controlled weapon systems not being able to fire after being used by the Insidious as well for the time being. I've also set the restriction on light cruisers as 1 per every 2 larger vessels (so cruisers, grand cruisers or battleships) for the moment. The battleships have been dropped back to 20cm speed, but all main weapon ranges upgraded to 75cm with the aft weapons increased to 45cm. They have also been given exclusive access to the suggested rule for the pulse weapon batteries of counting over 45cm as long range rather than over 30cm. The points cost have been increased accordingly and needless to say they are now obscenely expensive. It is quite possible they are now somewhat overcosted, but that is something that can be sorted with playtesting and I always prefer to overcost things than undercost them. I haven't done anything about further restricting their use as with the points costs now it is actually impossible to get one into a 1500 point fleet while fulfilling the conditions.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Aug 7, 2009 12:12:31 GMT -5
All sounds sensible. You can cheapen the ships over time, I daresay; points finetuning can be done once you've got the playstyle nailed down.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Aug 18, 2009 9:11:01 GMT -5
Based on our conversation yesterday I thought I'd have a go at writing down some stuff myself. I hope you don't mind me doing this; hopefully it'll be of use at some point. Special rulesI'd remove the structural integrity field rule, as we forgot about it anyway. Also, here's an interesting suggestion that'd help with sniping: Corkscrew. When a Zirconian ship uses Burn Retros, it may move directly sideways (to the left or right) instead of forwards. WeaponsZirconians have no attack craft or torpedoes, instead possessing these: - Pulse batteries. Weapons batteries that ignore the 15cm range bonus, count long range as over-45cm, and gain a global left column shift. Low firepower, good-to-awesome range. Essentially more precise, snipey weapons batteries. - Laser cannons. Lances that bypass shields on a 6 to hit. - Phase lances. Lances that can shoot through multiple targets. Roll to hit one target, and if any hits are caused, draw a line from the firing ship's base-stem out to the weapon's maximum range so that it crosses the target ship's base. Any other ship whose base the line crosses is attacked (friendly or enemy!), in order of proximity to the firer. Reduce the Strength of the weapon by 1 each time a target is attacked (other than the original). I'm not sure whether there should be a minimum of 1 or whether the lance should diminish to zero and stop; as it is, two or three phase lances can knock down the shields on most of a fleet and do solid damage to a couple of targets, not to mention put Blast markers on everybody, slowing them. These weapons basically play the role of torpedoes; they're lower-strength, but more precise and snipery, and dependable (no need to reload ordnance, can't be blocked by other ordnance or blast markers, etc). They get low Strengths, and good-to-long range. I think it might be a decent idea to give them a minimum range, too - something not-too-harsh, like 15cm. - Dark batteries. Using technology similar to Eldar d-cannons, dark batteries project wormholes onto the target. Dark batteries are very short-ranged (15-30cm) but have reasonable Firepower, and more importantly, bypass shields. They're affected by blast markers as normal, because of targeting disruption and the fact that too much matter between gun and target nixes the shot (for the same reason, they can't just shoot into the engines, they have to target the outside of the enemy's hull; Zirconian d-cannon and warp/webway technology is nowhere near Eldar level, I'd guess). Dark batteries replace bomber waves as a way to cause massive damage up close when necessary. They're basically a way to fight back if the enemy fleet catches up with you, or something to strafe them with as you fly through. 30cm dark batteries are uncommon - maybe on a dedicated cruiser with not much else to fire, and on battleships. Also, their firepower doesn't need to be *too* high, partially because the ship's other weapons are by no means nullified by being this close, and partially because of the shield ignoring factor. - Vixen web cannons. ('Vixen' being just a name, rather than some odd descriptor!) These are basically Zirconian super-turrets, and have a range of 15 to 30cm. A ship with a Vixen web cannon adds 1 to the turret value of any friendly ship within range, including itself. The Vixen doesn't concentrate force enough to harm ships, but can be used to attack ordnance. It still hits on 6s, but rolls lots of dice. It can alternately be used to remove Blast markers - remove one marker within range & fire arc per two points of Strength. Vixen web cannons will generally have Strengths of 4 to 8. Background-wise, the web cannon fires spreading networks of energy bullets, forcing attack craft to dodge danmaku-style through a mass of shots. Areas of space covered in dispersed debris can be blanketed by the shooting, a hail of small explosions scattering gas, plasma and bits of hull alike. Vixens replace fighters. They aren't the be-all and end-all of ordnance defence, but a couple of them in a fleet can render your ships effectively immune to bombers (try doing serious damage when you're rolling D6-4 attacks) and, when the enemy runs out of ordnance or there isn't any in the vicinity, have a useful second utility that can clear spare markers out of the way. Vixens and dark batteries combine almost-too-nicely - shoot at an enemy ship, clear the Blast markers off it so that they don't impede your dark batteries, and then keep right on damaging it - so I'd suggest keeping them separate, except on one dedicated support cruiser (presumably the one with the 30cm dark batteries... mwahaharr). This will presumably all need playtesting, but as you know I'm happy to help with that. Another thing I think could be done to the Zirconians is to make them less tough. They're fast, long-ranged and precise; effectively the fleet that Chaos want to be. I think a nice way to counterbalance their offensive capacity, manoeuvrability, reliability and current horrendous points cost would be to make them a bit more killable. Not to Eldar extents, but I think giving them 6 hits would do the job nicely - keeping the armour and shields/turrets as they are, I think. In the end, this should also cheapen them a little (and it suits their look; there's even less body to the average Zirconian ship than there is to an Eldar one, integrity fields aside). The Insidious would probably drop to 4 under this system. Speaking of the Insidious, I think removing its 30cm-closing rule would go a good way to fixing it, as we agreed during yesterday's Vassal session. I'd also suggest changing its armament. Instead of 3 pulse batteries to the front and 4 to the broadside, how about 5 L/F/R? A single L/F/R battery is more... I dunno... 'escort-y'. The Insidious always struck me as a slightly larger, sneakier escort rather than a small cruiser - it's a Shroud rather than a Dauntless, by no means a ship of the line. One LFR weapon allows it to take effective pot-shots while it's at a distance, but disadvantages it in close-up fighting. By the way, if you scroll up you'll discover that the +1 to hit on batteries was your idea... so there ;D So, to concrete-ise all this here's a Thedra made up as a typical Zircon ship-of-the-line (like the Lunar, a mainstay ship) built using all these ideas: Cruiser/6, speed 30cm, turns 45, shields/turrets 2/2, armour 5+ - Broadside Pulse Battery: 45cm, fpr 3, L/R - Prow Pulse Battery: 60cm, fpr 2, L/F/R* - Broadside Laser Cannons: 45cm, str 2, L/R - Prow Phase Lance: 45cm, str 2, F *It's more snipery. Well, that's me done. Phew. What do you think of all this?
|
|
|
Post by dragonlord on Aug 18, 2009 16:48:06 GMT -5
Thought I might as well write up a little summary of my responses to this in todays conversation.
Removing the structural integrity rule seems reasonable. Not entirely sure about the corkscrew idea, but I'll have a think about it.
I'm entirely happy with switching the pulse weapons back to more like what they were before.
The phase lances as we discussed I like. If they're being used as a general torpedo replacement rather than just on one special ship I think having it go to zero rather than to a minimum of 1 is better. I might have the special sniper light cruiser go to a minimum of 1 instead of to zero we'll see. (The sniper light cruiser has been written up, I'll upload the current rules for it when I do the edits for everything else)
The dark batteries I'm not sure about, but I did have the idea of a low strength (prob ~4) weapons battery that causes hit and runs rather than hits, this would probably only be on one limited ship type.
The web cannons I shall definitely be using a variant of on my anti-ordnance light cruiser, I'm not sure about the blast marker removing feature, but the rest is spot on.
Dropping the number of hits on the Zirconian ships is certainly a possibility.
Changing the Insidious weapons battery to a single L/F/R weapon seems like a sensible idea.
Your example Thedra seems reasonable, I'm not sure how useful the str2 60cm weapons battery would be, but I'm certainly considering putting some 60cm range weapons on the cruisers.
|
|
|
Post by dragonlord on Aug 27, 2009 14:41:00 GMT -5
I've finished updating the rules (link in the first post).
I've switched the pulse weapons back to more like what they were before, no left shift for close range, long range as over 45cm and a global left shift.
Ordnance in all forms is gone entirely, torpedoes replaced by phase lances and attack craft replaced by razor-web cannons as a defensive counter-ordnance measure. Replacing the torpedoes with the phase lances I'm completely happy with and I rather like the phase lances. While I think the razor-web cannons are a decent alternative to ordnance I'm not sure if it entirely fits with the Zirconian background to be completely ordnance less, given that I imagine Zirconian ground forces as a little like the droid armies from star wars. On the topic of the razor-web cannons I'm not entirely sure whether it should be one fleet defence turret per 2 points of strength or one per 4.
I have as suggested removed the structural integrity field special rule. I haven't put in dark batteries or any equivalent as yet, I might still either create an additional light cruiser class or give the Raptor a special hit-and-run causing weapon though depending on what we decide based on what I've got thus far.
I've left the number of hits as they are for the time being but dropping them isn't a big deal if we think that would be a good idea.
I've switched most of the forward weapons on the ships to L/F/R though I have left the light cruisers with seperate broadsides and forward weapons for the time being as converting back to the old pulse weapons rules increased the firepower to values that didn't seem reasonable to put as a single L/F/R battery.
I've split the old Insidious class into two seperate classes, one with the stealth and recon special rules and the other with the take-over rule, so hopefully both will be less overpowered. Most of the classes have decreased in points (one of the battleships has dropped back below the 500 barrier now) which is also good. I'm considering dropping either the Guardian or Hydra class as it doesn't seem necessary to have both. The Zirconians are also now very strongly directed towards the circle at a distance and barrage tactical style, the diving through tactic is unlikely to be seen with these rules. This is not necessarily a problem but is something to bear in mind and something we may want to alter to bring back the diving through tactic. If the Zirconians stay fixed on this style I might drop the battleship back down to 60cm, which would drop their points further.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Sept 11, 2009 9:44:14 GMT -5
I do like this new ruleset, it seems solid and has a more unique theme. The array of light cruisers is a welcome addition. A couple of suggestions:
- I think (depending on playtesting, I suppose) the phase lances might need to go up by a point of Strength, especially as they don't ignore shields.
- Razorweb cannons affecting one ship per two points of strength is fine.
- The light cruisers are nicely done, each one adds a different useful ability to the fleet. I like their names, too.
|
|
|
Post by dragonlord on Sept 15, 2009 16:42:41 GMT -5
Glad you like the light cruisers. The point about the strength of the phase lances had occured to me, I calculated that the arrays on the cruisers should cause about the same number of hits on the primary target as a strength 6 torpedo salvo but then as you say the phase lances don't bypass shields and at the low strengths don't have the same capability for causing damage to further ships as torpedoes.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Sept 16, 2009 4:28:38 GMT -5
Yeah, and on top of that, while you are rolling on 4+'s it's not that much of a change. Torpedoes hit on 5's most of the time, so three torpedo attacks are mathematically equivalent to two lance attacks. Phase lances do have the advantage of not being destructible by ordnance or turrets, allowing you to knock shields down with other shooting (as you would anyway) and then blast the enemy ship in the face with no recompense, so I wouldn't recommend actually using 2/3rds of a torpedo salvo strength, but a +1 shouldn't hurt too badly.
|
|
|
Post by dragonlord on Sept 19, 2009 18:52:39 GMT -5
I've finished (up to a point at least) the new version of the Zirconian background. I may well continue to add to it over time but it is in a suitable condition to be released now I think. Do feel free to make comments, particularly about the core worlds as I am aware that I was running out of ideas on a few of them. Edit: I've realised I forgot a few things in the technology section, so don't pay too much attention to that bit.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Sept 21, 2009 9:11:56 GMT -5
I had a read, and was impressed. You've done this well. There's enough variety between the worlds, and it's all rather interesting. It's quite a unique backstory, and the social and genetic divergence is something I probably wouldn't have thought of myself (of course, it's exactly what would happen in this case). I particularly liked the one world which had come to believe the ancients were the bad guys, although I think it would take some time before its people came to fully support the Zirconians' take on things, particularly to the extent of shunning the conspiracy theorists. If I do have any complaints, it's that your writing style is a bit hard to read - you need to put in a lot more commas! The actual content, though, is great stuff.
|
|