Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  1. But 5 guns and 9 torps will scare a frigate... into it's grave (scrapyard?). The Chironex is a definite improvement over the Storm, but being able to put a point or two on a closing cruiser group or pop a few frigates elsewhere is a useful ability. I'll grant you it's a pretty close race, but I don't know about all this 'dust' business.
  2. Hmmm... 2/4 with Elusive...? Nah, not only does it lose the original heavy bomber concept but it is still worse in every way than the Xelocian Karn for only slightly less. I guess the real question is "what are we trying to preserve with this (new and weird IMHO) concept?" The short-range, underpowered torpedoes? The fragility? The the (not) low (enough) cost? All of the above? As we preserve these negative aspects (or not), what positive aspects can we add to counterbalance them? Elusive seems to be logical. The very Aquan Maneuverable would make a small ship have 360 degree movement (in which case the MV should drop to 12"). Changing the torpedoes to guns? Lowering the price to a more reasonable 10 points for this throwaway, meant to be deployed in hordes, ship?
  3. The new Liquidator isn't that bad, the difference between 4 and 5 RB2 dice is a big one and the Directorate-standard low speed makes it just about right. Haven't playtested ARTs enough to be able to say either way, and it is too complex a rule to simulate accurately, so I'll withhold judgment on the Hostility just yet.
  4. The design for both the Web and Nidus are well-balanced and fluffy, my only concern would be someone controlling the initiative with squadrons of fighters from Nidus squadrons. For a mere 60 points, I get 3 'counts' on the initiative tree. The Web would have gotten my vote as is, but the Nidus needs a 0-1 limitation or something.
  5. Elusive makes sense as it is between normal ships (hit on 4s) and bombers (can't be fired at beyond a certain range). Changing the torps to primaries would be not a bad idea, but that should bump the price back to 15 pts.
  6. Hmmm... <rechecks figures> I distrust that program, I'll ask a friendly neighborhood stats professor I know to figure it. I am sure the chance that the first exploding 6 will subsequently roll a hit is 1 in 12. 1/6 chance of a 6 x 1/2 chance of a subsequent hit = 1/12. 1 divided by 12 is .083. .083 added to the .75 from the original set of rolling is the .83 that I quoted above. It's been a while since derivatives but this is much simpler than that.
  7. How about MV 14", Elusive, 10 pts, and PD2? It's still going to die in droves from anything with guns before it gets to range, but the lower price and Elusive will at least make opposing admirals have to work for it. There we go, entirely constructive post.
  8. Aw, and here I was looking forward to casting my vote for the Dindrenzi's new compulsory-choice Dreadnaught. Much like Max, I don't play Dindrenzi, but I've thought about it a time or two. Their new dread has 3 fixed rear torpedoes at range band 4 only, 2 HP, and costs 300 points. I think it will be fine with a little tweaking.
  9. A thought about the Snare: how about making it an Escort with SQ 1-2 and a lower speed? That would make the Disruptor attack a little more viable (only one roll kinda sucks) while still keeping it managable by tying it to a larger ship.
  10. Well really, isn't anything one could design better than what the Aquans have now?
  11. I don't know if I agree with all the shunt-based abilities that folks seem to ascribe to the Aquans. While it's a cool ability, shouldn't it go to the race with the 'design experience' in advanced shunt technology, i.e. the one with the R&D shunt cruiser? The Flight tender idea is cool too and should probably belong to the more flight-based Aquans, I just think it's more in keeping with at least a medium-size ship.
  12. Ooooh, the Snare is a neat idea, but the Limited Resources seems a bit unnecessary as little would be gained by having more than a few of these around. Rather than multiple radar dishes, how about an E-2 Hawkeye radar plane-style radome? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman_E-2_Hawkeye
  13. Moley, not that it's not a neat picture but GW is VERY protective about its intellectual property (just look at how long Starcraft II got held up by lawsuits) and the Necrons will be wanting their gate ship back. How about something more like the Star Wars Trade Federation's drone controller ship except the sphere in the middle is the shunt generator rather than a command module? All that aside, all of these are much better suggestions than my earlier rather uninspired light cruiser one.
  14. Doesn't a mine frigate trample the toes of the escort, which does almost the exact same thing?
  15. Had a thought: rather than evaluating current ship designs, could your speadsheet skillz be bent to the task of coming up with a more effective ship building rubric? While the current one is not terrible it is very easy to 'fool' by say, setting all the firepower values to odd numbers or using more guns than torpedos. There would have to be some fairly complex equations governing each statistic, or perhaps simply designate a point value for each value of each stat (whew, a lot of work). Some examples: SQ3 costs 0 points. SQ4 is 1 for Smalls, 5 for Mediums. SQ5 is 5 for Smalls, and not available to Mediums. Omnidirectional weapons (torps or turrets) cost more than single-arc weapons, but roughly the same as two sets of side-arc weapons Rather than an RB-by-RB accumulation of point cost for a weapon, choose a 'firepower arc' for each weapon and arc that costs a certain amount. A 3/5/1 Fore fixed would cost substantially less than a 3/5/1 twin side arc weapon.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.