Jump to content

Stoobert

Member
  • Content count

    725
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Stoobert last won the day on April 19

Stoobert had the most liked content!

2 Followers

About Stoobert

  • Rank
    Chronically 3rd Place

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    You Ess Eh?

Recent Profile Visitors

827 profile views
  1. Stoobert

    SRS rebalnace

    You say that like it's a it's a bad thing. :-) I think the linked-PD deterioration on a Tier 2 and 3 squad was the bad thing because these squads are already vulnerable enough as it is. PD deterioration + squadron size limits + battle log results in a "tactical rut": squads getting 'picked on' to the point of uselessness and finished off with torps just to score points. Rinse and repeat, yawn. This is an understandable tactic if you want to win but it makes for boring, predictable, inflexible and repetitive gameplay. @Bessemer Taskforce wasn't a fun game to play but it wasn't all bad and in fact had some good ideas some of which you mention. FSA 2.0 SRS are too fiddly and weird ...Taskforce made some efforts to correct that - fair enough. You have some good ideas in here. There's no shame in incorporating ideas from other games if they work. I'll be really curious to see what WC plan on doing with 'wings'.
  2. Stoobert

    Cruiser Rankings

    @alextroy I did a brief playtest on your "activation/tier/command points" (or whatever they are called) idea yesterday and the short story is it works, in my opinion, here are some thoughts: You are correct that in a small game 6 points is too much. In a 800 patrol-fleet game, 4 points would be good, and at higher point levels games 5 or 6 probably is fine. It felt unnecessary to limit the activation range to a number of inches, by the way. It felt ok, even pretty cool actually, to activate a battleship and a frigate 24" inches apart to converge on a target between them It was a little awkward to put activation markers on each and every ship but I got used to it. Activating in this way illuminates some firepower imbalance in the tiers, but that isn't the fault of the activation system. I'm excited by the flexibility of bringing and activating whatever ships i want, even a single, and still having some use for it. PD-linked-fire goes away and so does Battlelog, but I'm ok with that. If I were a model company I would be thrilled at the prospect of mix-and-match fleet building fueling increased sales. I think your idea is worthy of its own thread.
  3. Stoobert

    SRS rebalnace

    Whether intentional or not, SRS provided two game-winning tactics each which highlight Tier imbalance: 1. Bombers being the only reliable way to finish off your enemy Tier 1 when your own fleet is weakened, because AD has decreased but Tier 1 DR/CR hasn't 2. Interceptors providing persistent and neigh-invulnerable PD mountain. PD mountain benefits Tier 2 and 3 most, because we are forced to take them but they are most vulnerable to Torpedoes. PD mountain keeps your cruisers potent until Round 3 when they can do their job which is throw a lot of dice and then die. ;-) @Polaris your idea has a solid basis if I may summarize: 1) give Interceptors less PD 2) make Interceptors return to base after intercepting 3) limit interceptor PD to their own squadron 4) make escorts more useful 1. As for problem number 1, reduction of DR and CR after being damaged for all Tier 1 (not just ablative plating) is the only way to make Tier 1s less dominant in the late game, and more vulnerable to attack, and that issue related to SRS but outside the scope of SRS specifically. 2. However, I don't see this solving PD mountain in rounds 1&2. You still have plenty of PD to protect your most valuable asset and you don't need 12PD anyway to get you "over the hump" statistically speaking. Solving PD mountain just makes Tier 2 and 3 more vulnerable and less useful than they already are. I'd suggest making PD literally point-defense ...limited to a ship-by-ship basis only, yet making PD higher, meaning a single cruiser might have 4 or 5PD, and a Frigate might have 3 or 4PD. PD also includes SRS and Escort-class in base contact with that ship, no bubbles. The PD of interceptors is far far less such as 4 for a big token, but they never have to return to base. When dog-fighting Interceptors get a big bonus (TBD) which is their primary purpose.
  4. Stoobert

    Cruiser Rankings

    @alextroy what if the mold was broken just a bit more and with your proposal there was no minimum inch” activation distance or that distance was MUCH farther than now, like 12”?
  5. Stoobert

    Cruiser Rankings

    I've never understood what appears to be arbitrary squad size rules in 2.0, but I'm curious if creating a more free activate-as-you-go system like @alextroy suggests would burdensome or not. First off, I think it might be awkward to place 'has-activated tokens' next to individual ships (instead of full squads) ...but may be less annoying if WC introduces ship/unit cards. Certainly as you said this would necessitate ditching the Battle Log, but that's ok with me. The BattleLog might have been better than what came before, but it's clunky at best. Regardless of if WC is listening or not to what we do here on the forums, if someone is keen to try @alextroys 6-activate-point system and let us know how it goes, I'm very curious, and I think it's a worthy exploration. I might do so if I get a chance next weekend. If it really plays well, we could start pinging WC and asking them to consider it. alextroy: must a player activate 6 'tier points' per activation? Could they activate less if they must? e.g. 2 frigates by themselves halfway across the board, not within 6" of anyone other friendly ship? Could they activate less by choice? e.g. I have a large fleet of ships, but I choose to activate only a single frigate to "pass the activation" to my opponent and force him to move next
  6. Stoobert

    Cruiser Rankings

    Intersting ideas @alextroy that could work well. You’ve got say, 4 “command value” for each activation. But here’s a streamlined twist... If you just invert the Tier values (Dreadnoughts become Tier 4, Cruisers remain Tier 2, etc) you’ve got the “command value” and Tier in a single value. You can then activate “4 Tier points” per activation.
  7. Stoobert

    SRS rebalnace

    I think SRS need a re-do not a re-balance, but that's just me. @Commodore Jones keeping secrets about how potent Fighters are isn't helping anyone, especially Warcradle, improve the game. Please spill the beans and give specifics and examples.
  8. Stoobert

    Cruiser Rankings

    @Wolfgang Jannesen I've often wondered if squadron size was an attempt to add fluffy faction flavor, re-balance, adapt to production/mould capacity... or just an afterthought. Why some cruiser types get 4 and some only 3 (or even 2!) doesn't end up feeling balanced or making much sense (in my opinion) and it's never explained that I'm aware of, regardless. I wouldn't mind if WC re-statted all Tier 2 ships to allow a squadron size of 4. I've played 2.0 too many times to be convinced 2.0 balanced game anyway - just my 2c. @alextroy you bring up a good point about Tueton multiple arcs, if an opponent is spread out you can FF and P/S them. But if they aren't you can't. That is why FF is really hard to balance and some people love it and and others don't. At Adepticon I tend to bunch up (and others do too) not just for PD mountain, but when you bunch up into tight formations, it lessens greatly multiple arc shots to people with fixed fore. Also it's fascinating you feel CR 7 is 'barely more resilient'. My experience is the difference between CR 6, CR 7 and CR 8 is huuuuge and often means the difference between getting double-crit and not, given that most full strength units can throw ~15 dice. CR7 is that 0.8 hits per die sweet spot that takes you to the other side of the double-crit bell curve. @Hive yeah the Ladon is so-so. I see use as an accompaniment for an Oaness (that's a ton of damage!) but little else.
  9. Stoobert

    Cruiser Rankings

    @alextroy I agree that the Teuton probably isn't the worst cruiser in the game, I think that award goes to the Abraxas. For the points, even when upgraded to 5HP, the Teuton pales in comparison to the Resolute IMHO. The Hawker cruiser is middle-to-top tier due to its arc configuration, CR7 and 5HP that comes stock. I'll admit though, having given up on the Teuton myself in 2015, I haven't played with it's 4-ship squad Shield Cruiser accompaniment. With Beam upgrades, this has some potential. Have you played this way and enjoyed some success with the Teuton? @Ryjak I think that points-efficiency is part of the determination, yes, at least I've been assuming it is, as well as squad size. For 50pts nothing beats the Isonade, but if it were also 50 points and 4 ships per squad I would rather take a Hashvar if it were a pure cruiser engagement (which isn't a real thing).
  10. Stoobert

    Cruiser Rankings

    I unfortunately can’t concur with that list. In my experience (and the opinion of Sorylians I have played) the Falcata is not that good. The Hashvar, Resolute, Defiler, Brigand and Rulak are better.
  11. Stoobert

    Cruiser Rankings

    A Ba'kash rush list made of primarily Cruisers is terrifying.
  12. Stoobert

    Critical hit table

    I think you’re both right Alex and Wolfgang. If Corrosive remains as it is but is repaired after that’s a guarnteed extra HP loss, which not only OP it’s just extra record keeping. Ideally in my opinion Corrosive itself would change and become a binary condition rather than one more stat to track: Corrosive x1 x2 x3 would no longer be a thing in other words. And AlexTroy I think the solution may be that serious Effects should be harder to put on your opponent but once there they stick for a whole activation, unless countered by super effort like a TAC card
  13. Stoobert

    Critical hit table

    I’m a fan of #2 above and I’m warming to the idea that repairs happen at the end of the ship’s next activation, whichever round that may be, this or next. The difference between start of activation and end of activation is subtle and relevant for two results: Main Drive or Fire Control. Having zero chance to resolve these before your ship moves and shoots seems a bit harsh. It’s one thing to try to repair and fail but far worse to have NO opportunity to repair at all. So I do still think some kind of TAC mechanism needs to exist for occasional start-of-turn emergency repairs.
  14. Stoobert

    Cruiser Rankings

    The importance of 5HP and easily applicable and powerful multiple weapon arcs can’t be understated, these are the positive attributes I weigh vs. cost. Tied for Best: Isonade and Hashvar Runner Up: Rulak Worst: Teuton and Abraxas
  15. Stoobert

    Critical hit table

    I agree that most Effects in 2.0 are nullified too easily. I think repairs should instead happen for a ship when you activate that ship, during its command phase and before movement, rather than the end of whole round. This provides a somewhat longer lasting effect and an intersting choice for the damaged ship’s owner. However a TAC card for a beginning of round repair should still exist (for emergencies). I am against repairs happening at the end of your ships’s activation because it feels too severe, like changing too much. Thoughts?
×

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.