Jump to content

Meatshield

Member
  • Content Count

    688
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Meatshield last won the day on June 9 2012

Meatshield had the most liked content!

About Meatshield

  • Rank
    Sircan

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Array

Recent Profile Visitors

665 profile views
  1. @Spartan Neil Is it possible to give a brief dot point version of some of the rules you may be reconsidering? A disclaimer stating that although you are reconsidering the "mechanic/rule" in question, it may not alter is a fair and expected addition. Some examples: Improved Thrusters, are you considering a name change and an additional line about ignoring intervening terrain to retain the "lore/theme" of Relthoza? Removing the Full Stop order for the Command Orders and allowing that to be done as a general ability? Cloaking, though I suppose the more pertinent question is what level of reconsidering being done here?
  2. Yes it is very likely any form of completely realistic large scale space engagement we could conceive of would have very little terrain. Also in regards to torpedoes every faction "realistically" would have a single any arc torpedo system because guided munitions can correct after launch and only one system would be necessary as the guidance could disperse the torps as necessary after launch against multiple targets. Firestorm however is not the above, and terrain is an inherent part of the space battle as much as your fleet, and torpedo systems having arcs is part of faction character and balance (though the Judgement having a 7-8AD single any arc torps system would be interesting to investigate).
  3. @Commodore Jones Personally I feel v2 Nukes while nice in that cinematic sense were really clunky because of the book keeping to mitigate them. I do think a better direction for v3 Nukes would have been to investigate something like +1HP damage on a Crit, so a normal (non 7) critical would do 3HP, retains that cinematic feel of devastation while not requiring clunky movement book keeping.
  4. Anarchist vs Judgement a lot is getting bandied about, looking at the fleet guide however gives actual facts/data. -Slow and unwieldy: Base Judgement, Mv6, TL2 Base Anarchist, Mv7, TL2 Upgraded Judgement, Mv6-8, TL1 Upgraded Anarchist, Mv7-8, TL2 Judgement can become TL1, Anarchist cannot, this compliments the Judgement's weapons. Anarchist more likely to be faster by an inch owing to build priorities. At worst, at absolute worst its equal with Anarchist in terms of mobility due to TL upgrade, so claiming the Judgement is slothful also defines the Anarchist as slothful. -One weapon It actually has 2, that can link for equal to best in class AD across 20" of range (16-18AD). Or fire them unlinked at Mediums, the issue is lack of Bio coherency on both, v3 is addressing double degrading. -Takes huge chunks of damage easily. Base Judgement, SH1, DR6, CR11 Base Anarchist, SH2, DR6, CR11 Upgraded Judgement, SH2, DR6, CR11 Upgraded Anarchist, SH2 or 1, DR6, CR11, Stealth at the cost of shields Statistically identical or has superior damage mitigation in its primary RB's but doesn't possess Stealth, again a wash, if the Judgement takes large chunks of damage easily the statistically identical Anarchist does to. -Worse Apollo An Apollo has guns that's it, take away the guns of both ships and what do they do? An Apollo shoots torps slightly better than a Judgement. A Judgement with no guns. Shoots torps of iffy value, lays mines, can continue to provide support with SRS utility. The Judgement costs 160pts base. The Anarchist 190pts base. Throw on +1SH, -1TL, +2 SRS. The Judgement now costs 205pts can turn sharper than the Anarchist has the same DR, CR and SH of the Anarchist and is bringing 3 Interceptors or Shuttles to the fleet. Meanwhile the Anarchist starts at 190pts, and only goes up, 205 if you use the base 3 SRS. The Judgement needs its torps adjusted, and coherency with weapons addressed. But it is not the original v2 BB that everyone hated, please stop glossing over the notable rework it gained partway through v2.
  5. Guessing the justification is because it uses tokens........ Ship models and their bases are just another form of token, denoting their position and facing, why haven't they been removed?
  6. Greater proliferation of Experienced Engineers I think would be a nice thematic nod and can easily be lumped on top of other adjustments as Mediums tend to have short life spans.
  7. @Spartan Mike Forgive my shoddy paint skills, this is a very simplified example. Lines and marking are not to scale, they're exaggerated for clarity. Key: Red Star = dangerous enemy I want reserves to hide from Brown Bolt = Asteroid/Debris/Minefield Blue Lines = Ingress trajectories using current v3 rules Light Blue lines = Overshoot distance of Blue line ingress trajectory Black Line = Ingress trajectory without perpendicular requirement (so remove that qualifier from the rules) Red lines = Section of ingress trajectory reinforcing squad could over/undershoot along owing to the ingress trajectory influencing scatter Hopefully the above explains better why I think you should remove the perpendicular restriction, make the measurement from the point on the nominated board edge to the point on the board (so it can be angled but an angled line loses perpendicular board ingress). Then the player decides whether they want to under or over shoot then roll 2D6 and the squad scatters along that line. This creates an actual purpose for the whole trajectory line setup and it allows players to setup reserve entries in ways that insulates from scattering into terrain at the cost of perpendicular distance. At present the entire ingress trajectory doesn't actually serve a function because players can bypass that by just measuring straight in X", by allowing angled trajectories they now have a purpose in regards to how the reinforcing squad scatters.
  8. See Relthoza thread, though that may make it worse.
  9. I'm sorry this is thematic/narrative and mechanically disjointed, inconsistent and just ignores the whole underpinning of the unique tech of Relthoza and Kedorians. Firstly, the thematic/narrative: Relthoza and Kedorian had an advanced Shunt technology that allowed them to make micro shunts, called in game terms a "Shunt Matrix", this was a representation of their advanced tech and specialization in this field. It wasn't a bunch of fancy vectored thruster cones. It was short range Fold Space jumps, a very distinct and different approach to combat maneuvers. It is a core part of the identity and helped give foundation to the faction. Now it's just being yanked out from under them. A lot of these changes seem completely insensitive to narrative and lore, an area Firestorm is already weak in, this is just degrading it further. Please stop undermining this. Secondly mechanical, version 2 Shunt Matrix allowed Relthoza and Kedorian ships to be behind a piece of terrain such as an asteroid belt and move through it as a shunt without suffering the negative effects, a unique option and choice distinct to them. Thrusters completely removes this option as it removes the exceptions This is a degradation of the mechanical identity of Relthoza and Kedorians. Again this is repeated and consistent alteration of rules while completely disrespecting the source and the players that invest into the factions. Please consider the following alteration: Edit: shorter name for alternative MAR
  10. Rename Marker-Light Precision to Chorus of Dramos Or Black Rain Insert an additional qualifier that the squadron must not have benefited from any Command Order during the movement segment of it's activation (rapid and sudden maneuvers/velocity changes ruin precision targeting). Cost 3 Replace Mastery of Wings with Arcbolt Mastery Nominate one friendly Dindrenzi/RSN Large or Massive model. At the beginning of it's activation the nominated model may elect to replace the Kinetic WAR and take the Corrosive WAR instead for the remainder of the turn. The option to select the Corrosive WAR remains for the duration of the game. Cost 2 or 3
  11. Focused Shield Harmonics, rename to Cyclic Shielding. One Terran/Hawker squadron. For the remainder of this game turn Direct attacks made against any model in this squadron do not benefit from any Weapon Assigned Rule that is a coherence effect. This Order has no benefit on any model that doesn't have active Shield Systems. Reduce cost to 1 or 2. Wiggle room options: Expand to Indirect? Cover an additional squad/ship by paying another point? (Assumption of cost 2, which is probably too steep, but cost 3 for 2 squads may be palatable) Redundant Emitter Arrays (or something) One Terran/Hawker squadron. For the remainder of the Game all models within the squadron with an active Shield System do not suffer the -1 penalty to their SH value in the other arcs when electing to Sector Shield an arc. Cost 1 or 2 (strictly weaker than Harmonics) Honour the Charter Nominate one Terran/Hawker squadron. All models within the squadron may remove a single Disorder marker per ship at the beginning of the End Phase. This effect remains for the duration of the game. Cost 2 or 3 Replace Inspired Command with Do You Remember Dramos? All Terran/Hawker vessels within 16" of the Admiral's vessel that make an attack benefiting from the Nuclear Munitions WAR immediately apply the required amount Disorder Markers if the attack causes at least 1HP of damage instead for the duration of the turn. Cost 3 or 4
  12. So the Terran +2 SH order, can I ask if the balance implications have been considered. I don't want to see a number of Terran ships artificially SH capped because of the possibility of an order that boosts them. The order should be nerfed/removed, not the actual ships that may possibly be benefiting.
  13. Never used to be a relation between Saurians and Overseers. Saurians were essentially exiled/banished from the Sorylian Collective a long time ago (Schism IIRC?). The Terrans made peaceful first contact with them, somewhere along the way the Terrans got Shield tech from them, though the Terrans then started experimenting with shields in their own way. When Terrans first encountered Sorylians they noticed similarities between them and the Saurians and attempted first contact using Saurian language/messaging/protocol/something? Because of this it caused a brief conflict that was resolved peacefully. Well that was the v2 lore.
  14. I am feeling a better system would be an inherently small Command Point pool that refreshes at the very beginning of your turn. Force tactics can be used to determine refresh number, so Dindrenzi refresh 3, Sorylians 1. Admiral's ship could add another 1 to this. Possibly also MARs like Ops centre though saturation is a concern. Then you could customise by faction for the starting pool, so the Sorylians who refresh slowly start with a bigger pool than what Dindrenzi do. This would also act as a limiter on spamming certain game duration orders being purchased in large quantities.
×
×
  • 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.