Jump to content

We're moving to Discord!

Come join in the discussion here!

You can also still find out all the latest news on TWITTER and FACEBOOK

Thank you for your continued support, and we look forward to welcoming you shortly.

The Warcradle Team

Small Mek

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Small Mek

  1. I couldn't agree more. Mines offered an out of sequence defense method that threatened squadrons. Certain factions could abuse them (which naturally should have been addressed in V3 and many solutions were proposed), but as a corvette squadron (or any other), I wouldn't be scared of a RB1 torpedo weapon, just shoot my target after it has been activated... If it's the same strength as mines today... Aaargh. Must... stop... theorystorm.... Maybe I shouldn't be so negative, so I'll do some testing, but removing interesting parts of a game isn't the same as addressing the problems they cause (in my book at least). *gathers toy spaceships and buckets of dice grumbling something about testing some s**t out*
  2. I think the negative reactions have a lot to do with the binary nature of our age (something is either divinely awesome or total ****), and I really used to like this forum, because you could find something in between. The reason of this middle ground diminishing is that in a lot of cases there’s nothing else to contribute. The negative sounds I interpret as cries for help and attention, which is understandable, as we’re not told much, and many of the things that we were given turns out to be abandoned or even not true. There are those who defend the company, which is understandable, because as you also stated, we have the models, we have the rules for them, and even the ability to tinker with them if needed. This brings me to the part that makes me worried: the silence. The vocal people you can work with. The ones that left are harder to reach. Many of the forumites who have contributed so much to the game have left, or fell silent, as there’s not much meaningful content left to contribute to. (I’m not talking about the current DW section, as they currently have meat to sink their teeth into, but they too remember what I’m writing about here, as not too long ago they were in the same position, and the line deserves the attention they are getting now) Spartan decided to do something about this when they released the survey (and it was probably just in the nick of time), there was a brief upsurge of positivity across the board, people easing into hopefulness. It was a wave Spartan could have ridden, and did so with one of their lines, but not with others that needed this almost as much (one of them has even been officially discontinued a month before, and that didn’t help much either). The “ragequitting” mood currently resides mainly in the firestorm side of the forums. There was still some discussion about tinkering with the existing rules, interesting ideas on the FSA section, but the banning of alexmann effectively killed that too. There’s nothing really left to contribute to. Adepticon showed us new things, the beginning of a new campaign, new models, even a leviathan, and there’s a lot less reaction than I expected. A lot less people who seem to these that seriously (especially in my corner of the world), and that really saddens me, but doesn’t surprise me the least. The DL and PF section is effectively mute (if you discount the queries for progress) What I’m trying to say is Spartan should value their “whiners” and “ragequitters”. They are still part of the people who still actively care about their games. Give them the transparency they beg for. Knowing that what’s exactly going on will prevent some of the unfounded negativity. A solid plan that Spartan sticks with would be a great thing for the company, but if the players don’t know the milestones (and if there are delays or not), they will take scilence as a lack of progress, and the vague hints that didn’t come true will be interpreted as broken promises and lies. We the players also have responsibilities. I’m not sure if Spartan will allow the transparency we need for them, but we should try to be patient. If we have reason to believe that nothing meaningful will happen for many many months (PF, DL, and to a lesser extent FSA...) we shouldn’t scare new players away. They are as much our future as Spartan’s. If there’s no influx of new players, there’ll be no Spartan to give us the updates we’re so desperate to get. Or Spartan can decide that all but 2 systems will go the UCS way, and if they have to choose, they will probably pick the ones that don’t attract newbies (even if the reason of that is the well-founded negativity they are responsible of). If I came to these forums and saw the last years nature of activity, I know I’d be looking for some other game after 20 minutes of browsing (and we shouldn’t forget, that there’s meaningful competition now). As far as I can see, Spartan Mike is trying to do his best to create the kind of environment that is preventing this. I know Spartan Alex also tried to do that, and we all know what happened and that everybody lost in that affair. We should help him, for him to be able to help us, maybe he’ll succeed. (Damn, this sounds cheesy ) If he doesn’t there’s not much else we can do. Maybe your playgroup is openminded enough, you can broaden your horizons by trying new rulesets with your existing models (see above point for meaningful competition ). Maybe they are fun. Maybe they are not, but you could find elements you can use in your other games. Or just let it go (until the new ruleset is here).
  3. Fortunately @Spartan Mike is still here, manning the firehose, wrathfully putting out fires as they start (and where there's anything left worth saving ). Unfortunately he's working with not much more than he was given at the beginning. The magical Adepticon will probably bring something fresh for the attendees and maybe some morsels will fall off the table for the rest of us too. I hope that means that after that he and the other spartans will be able to start working on things that were left half finished. If there will be something new released, I really really hope that it will be rolled into an unified format rather than an additional download, so I'll just put here an additional suggestion, and hope that someone notices it upstairs: 4.) Update the orbats and fleet manuals with the new releases, so everything is at one place (modular battleships for DW; OSO ships for Marauders and Mercenaries; remove the "under testing" textboxes from the accompaniment rules and add the new accompaniment options to their respective entries - as far as I know everyone agrees that they work brilliantly; etc.)
  4. I'm not trying to derail the thread, but I don't think this is simple as that (also he's not here to defend himself anymore, and this was the reason of my post here ). I think he wasn't rude, but extremely bitter, as he just had a fallout with the company (or rather with Neil afaik), and he was vocal about it. I understand the need to stop the increasingly negative tone the whole community is drifting towards for a while now, but I have just hoped there's an other way. I really would have preferred Spartan Mike's approach (as censorship won't really solve issues, meaningful communication or steps taken in the right direction do). As for the lost content, I'll miss the insights of the community for the proposed battlelog, movement or the SRS changes (as those threads were lost as well), but there's not much I can do about it and life will go on. The 2.5 (3.0?) rules will be developed with a separate approach but still, even the small novels of Dr_Vector will be missed, but maybe that's just me. I'll shut up about it from now on. As for “What DOES 2017 hold”. Things have been developing in the background for a while now. Smarter people than me have condensed some things that could or should be done. The ruleset that made us invest in this game is still alive. There's less than two months until some news from adepticon will trickle down to us, so things are looking to change for the better (they always do just a bit over the horizon ). Until than there are still some relatively easy ways to show the remainder of the community that Spartan still cares. Like finalizing the changes in the fleet manuals that were marked as “under playtesting” ten months ago. They were brilliant, and gave some neglected ship profiles reasons to join the fray. Or pieces of renders to speculate on. Small things. The most important part is showing some goodwill. This recent development is reminding me of a certain other gaming company's approach, who have made a decent number of gamers abandon their product and look for other game systems (like spartan's). I honestly hope those mistakes will not be repeated here.
  5. I'm really happy that Spartan is taking steps to move the conversation to a more positive direction, and I would like to welcome Spartan Mike's crusade to win the community back. I really hope he succeeds. If I were a new player looking for information about any of Spartan's product here, I probably would have changed my mind rapidly about diving in, and this trend had to change. I'm happy, that at least there's an attempt to do just that. Go for it Mike! On the other hand though... It is kind of disheartening to see that Spartan's answer to citicism is banning the critic from their forums and removing all the content they created indiscriminately. Alex wrote a lot of things that weren't exactly positive (even though the reason was that he cared about the game), but many many more things would have been worthy of preserving. This makes me... worried.
  6. You might be right. I based my assumption on that the races that got Escort carriers (Aquan, Dindrenzi, Directorate) have the slot for them, but those that didn't (Relthoza & Sorylian with their gunships, Terran - who got a torpedo cruiser) didn't.
  7. Probably they don't (yet) have any of their own, and they are not intended to take any as allies (as with R&D Cruisers, Shunt Cruisers, Shield Cruisers, and similar "exotic" squadron types). Of course they can take them as allied accompaniments for allied squadrons
  8. Remember, (as Hive previously mentioned) the Iramon Light Cruiser is a T3 option with the potential to take a Standard cruiser upgrade (!), so it no longer has to compete fot T2 slots.
  9. I thought full stop only applies when you're unwillingly revealed, otherwise you're free to move 8" and shunt 2"-12"(~7") from the marker's position. Anyway, you still have maneuverable when revealed unwillingly (at full stop). Still. I can see the catch (As for the fore fixed, I assume you will have to bungee here as well as with the gunships).
  10. Now that the destroyers gained the ability to use Shunt Matrix (2) and Ambush (2) for +10 points... Is this as nasty as I belive or is there a catch I cannot see yet?
  11. Also the last thing I want is an "autoinclude" profile. Even a subpar squadron is better than that, as at least that doesn't make the game boring for both players. My reasoning was based on comparing it to other available (and opposing) ships of the same cost and/or role. I kind of agree with that even if we already do (the league has excellent options in this field). Even then, I was trying to evaluate the profile in a role that was seemingly intended to fulfill.
  12. And it competes with the heavy cruiser in points on a really brittle profile with one arc and still less overall combined AD). A true glass cannon. (Glass gunship).
  13. I'd literally never take the shunt matrix option, over stealth. These ships need stealth to not fold in the first turn (and maybe last for two more). If I'd consider anything, it'd be sometrhing defensive - elusive target, additional HP/DR/CR (maybe even reinforced (fore) or retractable plating as there's plating on the models that looks it could probably be retractable, but I'm unsure if it'd be worth it if it removes the only direct weapon arc). Probably it would be more appealing with option 1 but my problem with the Iramon is that it currently has no role it would be good in, it's only saving grace is it's cost, and I'd rather have something that does things for more points, then something that keeps consistently doing nothing for relatively cheap (also it competes with the Nidus in points, and that's usually wouldn't be a tough decision for me). I keep thinking about if it had the same loadout lower movement and and MN4 (maybe even only MN3), then I could see it as a dedicated T3/T2 hunter, without seriously threatening T1s and would really consider taking it. It still wouldn't make it better at minelaying then aquan ships, it is fluffy (if I remember correctly, Relthoza used to have mines all over the place in the previous version), and it's a unique role in the fleet. Edit: adding my thoughts on the other ships: The light frigate is almost in a perfect place for what it wants to do. If I wanted to do something with it, is up it's torpedoes to 4 in RB 3 too, as from T2-T3 with most fleets there will be only so many targets that can be shot on in RB4 even from the table corner, and I haven't been taking the 4x4 tables in patrol fleet levels into account. I have been testing the gunship, and to add something concrete as a suggestion: up points to (70-)75 change AD to 7/7/7/- (as I think an even AD would be one of the cornerstones in the design of this ship) give an option of pack hunters for (at least)10 pts If stealth is an option in a single hardpoint slot, there is no real need for any other hardpoint to list for this profile, it really really (really) needs it.
  14. Indeed I am For me it makes sense from the rules perspective. (I don't think it would have made a considerable difference in this case though, the crit rates were met by a large margin... near double crits)
  15. Ok guys, second round in testing the Virulence. We tried to follow the guidelines Balor has left over at the Dindrenzi thread, so we switched sides, and my (less experienced) buddy got to command the Relthoza, and I opposed him (while still giving him advice, where I thought it would be necessary). Instead of taking aquans though (as they are really on the top of the pecking order, and comparing them with any other fleet might distort the results), I took my RSN+Ba’Kash Zenian fleet to get hopefully more useful results. At least so we hoped. I also try to leave here as much (or more) data as I think it is necessary to evaluate the gunships, and if there’s more detail than that... I’ll let the devs sort it out (and prepare for a lot of scrolling down) The Relthoza fleet (1200 pts) was a bit lighter than last time: 1 Nexus battleship with 2 frigate escort 1 Hive carrier (no escorts or shunt matrix) 3 Huntsman heavy cruiser 3 Virulence gunship 4 Widow frigate 4 Widow frigate (reserved) 2 allied Directorate Nemesis Destroyer The Destroyers were my idea, as they are my go to unit to fulfill the role, that I feel the virulence might aim for in relthoza fleets, so they’ll share the focus as a counterpart. The RSN took: 1 Spectre battleship with a Cerberus Heavy cruiser escort 3 Spook cruisers 4 Bulwark frigates (reserved) 4 Bulwark frigates (reserved) 3 Ba’Kash Sharnak cruiser with weapon shielding 3 Ba’Kash Varnak heavy cruiser with weapon shielding Nothing special here, but I kept an eye on two units in particular: the Sharnaks and the Spooks being similar in points. The table was really similar to last time(asteroids, debris fields and gas clouds), but this time here’s the pic of the deployment (sorry about the quality though). Both fleets deployed extremely defensively (using terrain) except the RSN BB, what intended to be a bait, the Relthoza didn’t take. T1 Nothing really happened here, the Zenian boys kept hugging terrain and every squadron in gas clouds failed every disorder check (except the spooks because elite crew is good for this). So in the beginning the eyes were on the Virulence and the Nemesis destroyers being long range support. The Nemesis destroyers were deployed in a gas cloud, and were camping happily failing disorder checks and not caring about it. They were one of the two units, that managed to do something in turn one: plink a Ba’Kash heavy cruiser (9AD), while spreading AD4 mines around their comfy little gas cloud (the other was the carrier hitting a Ba’Kash cruiser with it’s 7AD torps). They enjoyed an interceptor cover, in practically a difficult target stealth systems combo, and a reinforced fore, so nobody even tried to touch them. The Virulences deployed on a flank to be able to operate individually from the rest of the fleet, taking shots to anything that presents an acceptable target. This plan was largely foiled by the Sharnaks deploying directly in front of them (behind a debris field). He tried to check, If he could hit the Spectre’s Heavy cruiser accompaniment, and while the squadron could get in range, the terrain, the 1”TL and the 7” MV and the Fore (fixed) arc didn’t make it possible to line up all 3 of the shots unimpeded without using battle shunt. Using battle shunt wouldn’t have been better, as the terrain possibly would have blocked the shots anyway, and the Sharnaks would have got into the stealth bubble without breaking sweat. Instead they moved minimum distance, stayed cloaked, tried to shoot their guns az the sharnaks (3AD - firing stealthed through debris field with no result; 8AD torps – PD got it without a problem) In the end phase the Nemesis destroyers passed their disorder check, but no other squadron did. T2 No reserves came in. And seemingly nothing kept happening on other parts of the board, except everything moved into position for the seemingly inevitable T3 bloodbath. The „focus group” was quite busy though. The Nemesis destroyers were really happy to make their disorder checks, pooped a 6 AD mine (now effectively sealing the flank from shunting frigates) moved up a bit, and linked 13 AD of beams to crit the Spectre’s heavy cruiser escort (killing a crew and leaving a hazard marker) The virulences were taken by surprise, as all 3 of the Sharnaks managed to move within 16”, (though only barely), so scatter coherence effect kicked in, but they were still cloaked, so their effect was limited by that. Still, 8AD of scatter did crit one, (killing a crew and leaving a hazard marker) 10 AD of torps on the same got neutralized by PD, and 6AD of beams did a hit on an other. Ideally as an answer to this atrocity they would have jumped over the cruisers at this point to shoot them in their vulnerable arc, but the mine the Ba'Kash left behind made this a less than tempting option. So they moved within 10” and unleashed everything on the damaged cruiser: 10 AD of beams almost duoblecrit it (-d3CP -> -2CP), but the 12AD torp was reduced to a simple hit by the PD, leaving the cruiser at 1 HP, which was an unfortunate turn of events for the Virulences. T3 Unfortunately with taking notes and photos 3 turns seems to be the limit we can manage in one night (next time I probably shouldn’t write down every AD and every result in every firing arc), but it turned out, this was enough to witness everything we were curious about (spoilers). Eyes were on the initiative roll (neither of us bought the Intel Gathered TAC card), and the superior Fleet Tactics Bonus won the RSN the initiative (also the double ones the Relthoza managed to roll really helped). Every reserve came in and they arranged themselves in a mexican standoff on the opposite flank (from the virulences). The Sharnaks closed their retractable plating, and (as expected) casually left a 10AD mine in between the Virulences, and got in position to attempt to maneuver between the Relthoza mines next turn. The side beams (7AD) managed to put a hit in the Relthoza Heavy cruisers rear arc, and 9 AD worth of torpedoes aimed at a frigate got shot down by the interceptors. On the other parts of the table the frigate standoff started to resolve, everyone got their first battlelog, the Relthoza big boys jumped the Spectre, (which got away surprisingly well with only a hit and a crit from ungodly amounts of ammunition and srs thrown at it (I’ve never seen PD shoot down this many bombers ever). One Nemesis was Critted by a Bulwark (10 AD) (they also failed their disorder check). They made a 360° circle pooping 2x4AD mines in the midst of the bunched up and weakened bulwarks, They shot the Spectre’s heavy cruiser escort for 9 and 7 AD, and scored 2 hits (leaving it at 1 HP), plus shot 2x4AD of torpedoes to the Bulwarks, failing to do anything. The (still) disordered Ba’Kash heavy cruisers didn’t find a better target within their reach, so they shot at them, triple critting (sooo many sixes) the already injured with the first scatter weapon hit (3x8AD and 3x8 torps were aimed on it), and scoring a single hit on the intact with their beams (3x4AD). The Virulences did what they could (taking the 10AD mines and the resulting 3 Crits as gracefully as they could destroying one, leaving one at 1 HP+security at disarray and one at 2 HP and -2CP, also it left me pondering, why didn't I assault them), and they limped in a nearby gas cloud charging their FSD (we also noticed later, that they would have detonated an other mine too, but we didn’t notice it, as it was too late at that point). The game was at an interesting position at this point, with the things looking slightly better for the Relthoza, but the RSN wasn’t completely hopeless at this point (with 3 effective T2 squadrons circling in). The virulences fared better than I expected them, but If I compare them to the nemesis, they did a little bit better at their role for cheaper (they gave a battlelog up though). They made me dedicate a squad for dealing with them (costing exactly the same), and they didn’t manage to deal with that which (I think) was caused by their restricted arcs. They were really neutered early on with proper terrain usage, and dealt with later with multi arc weaponry, so their weaknesses were moderately easy to exploit. Not every unit could have done it though, and they soaked up every stray torpedo and potshot that was thrown to them, which is really good, but one turn of dedicated attention made them fold. I don’t know, if with a more bold tactic they would have handled the threat of the Sharnaks better (not trying to stay in stealth, but charging and trying to take the enemy from behind). To be perfectly honest, I was planning to use the bulwarks to shunt in and handle both of the Virulence and the Nemesis squadron, and Use the Sharnaks only as a threat, and go for the heavy cruisers with them. The Directorate destroyers however built their nest so well, that it made it really hard to proceed with that plan, and the Virulences gave an excellent opportunity for the Sharnaks, while not forcing them to deviate from their planned course. In summary: they fared ok, but they could still use something to solidify the squad. When compared to the smaller nemesis squadron, they both folded by the dedicated attention of a medium squad, but the utility of the nemesis did much more on the field (for less points), because the focused nature of the virulence. My opponent was considering to use them as he did the nemesis destroyers (parking them in a gas cloud, making them an even harder nut to crack), but after he has seen what constantly being disordered would mean to them, he didn’t attempt it, and I don’t really blame him. So far their role/style feels really distinguishable and different from the Bane, and at this point I’m not really afraid of it making it irrelevant, and this is why I’m beginning to like the Fore (fixed) arc. It’s more fun and different this way I still feel, that it could shine if it got some increase in both price, and firepower, making their really narrow focused (both in role and firing arc) feel, that you gain something that stands out for the lack of utility (that also really stands out) you lose. I still think that the 5-10 point pack hunters upgrade (without sacrificing the stealth systems) would really offset many of the weaknesses without pushing this ship into the „OP” region. 7AD across the board (with the proper price tag attached to it of course) is still on the table for me, as it could create interesting opportunities (that are still not no brainer) for not linking, and would really be interesting in a mixed light cruiser squadron. Edit: managed to attach some pics
  16. So. Yesterday I managed to bribe my buddy to test the new ships (he asked for my firstborn, but fortunately settled for a beer). He doesn’t have too much FSA experience, so he borrowed my aquans and made me help him to beat myself up. He’s like that you know I finally settled for a „monster mash” list with the new gunships integrated for support and distraction. I brought: BB with 2 frigates BB with 1 frigate 3 Heavy Cruiser 3 Gunship 2 Frigates (Widows) 2 Frigates (Widows, regrouped at the beginning) 3 Ba’Kash cruiser He settled for BB Heavy carrier (DT with 2 sulis) 2 Gunships 4 Cruisers (DT) 4 Frigates 6 Corvettes (reserved) I’ll try to get some pics uploaded later, but the table had ~25% terrain coverage, with asteroids, debris fields, the odd gas cloud, and one planetoid. We settled for Border clash for simplicity’s sake, and deployed centrally with Virulances on one flank opposed by the Shivas, T1s in the center, Sharnaks and Storms on the other flank. I tried to take some notes, but I don’t wanna drag this out long, so I’ll concentrate on the Virulances. Turn one, they waited until the Shivas move, shot at them with their main guns (10AD, the Ba’Kash cruisers were handled by the Storms), but sent their torpedoes for the frigates (and failed properly at both, DT and Stealth really helps) dropped cloak, and they managed to score a hit (12AD vs 2 shields) too. Good. (My 8 torpedoes did nothing though, 5 PD and 2 shields did stop them without breaking a sweat) The big boys were playing it safe for the time being, so nothing interesting there. T2 The virulances tried to bungee-chord backwards to maintain stealth, (move forward max (to the 20-22 distance interval, and then jumped backwards) maintained coherency, but one of them jumped too much, so it was left out of the beaming goodness. So 9AD for the aquan gunship, and it managed to reduce a hit to nothing with the two shields. The torpedoes again did score a hit (but not a crit... damn DT) this time to the approaching aquan frigates. In retaliation The Shivas closed in easily covering the stealth barrier for two of the Virulances, and unleashed the main guns (13AD) and the torpedoes (9AD) on one, and one of the side guns (9AD) on the other. The main guns easily critted the closest, the side guns barely, but still also critted the second (all it really takes is 3 sixes...), knocking the second ones PD offline, so it didn’t contribute any PD to the first, and the third was out of it’s command distance. So the torpedoes had an easy ride and promptly destroyed the first. On the other flank, the Storms were beginning to get the upper hand on the Sharnaks, and the T1-s were getting ready to the bloodbath, with a few HP knocked off here and there, but generally still intact. T3 To add insult to injury, the aquan frigates managed to get a side shot (8AD) in while murderizing the Widows on their other side, knocking an other HP off, so I decided it was time for them to make an exit with dignity. Cloaked, jumped back as far as I could, and started up the FSD. Unfortunately it was not to be, as a parting gift their pals the shivas (now not so intact thanks to my heavy cruisers) sent them 9AD worth of torpedoes), and after the rerolls there were still 2 sixes in the pool, so I bid farewell to the second one too. At the end of this turn, the Sharnaks and the virulances were in process of escaping (it didn’t look good for the Ba’kash), but the Aquan T1s were in quite in a bad shape, as were the Widows. The Relthoza big boys were in the process of unleashing the goodness, the snappers were still in reserves, so to be honest, it still could have gone either way. Sadly we had to call it at this point, but the purpose was served, the new toy of the Relthoza was put to a test. So. The good: There is not much that cannot be shot at in turn one, is they can find line of sight. The Fixed arc is not that restrictive, if there is space to shunt backwards, or you risk to shunt forwards (as if I recall correctly the orientation can be selected during the battleshunt) The ships are really painfully hard to get a hold of if they are benefiting from stealth and DT. The models will be awesome (if they arrive, but sadly I still have to wait until the new planetfall stuff comes in) The torpedoes might be better up close, and while there the hull is still relatively fragile, getting in knife fight range is something I would maybe try late in game, if the squad is relatively unhurt. ( But then again I probably could do well late game with any relatively unhurt squad with or without torpedoes.) The Bad: Relatively easily neutered: I think the idea is, that the squadron is worth 200 points, because it consistently pours out that 12AD and maybe some (corrosive) torpedoes. The reality was, that it wasn’t that hard to close that 20” distance. If after that T2 strike by the aquan gunships everyone could have left them alone, they would have still pumped out 7-8AD worth of beams (depending on if I would have cloaked the crippled ship), that reliably plinks a cruiser a turn, and 6AD worth of torpedoes which are... not so impressive, even if corrosive, even in the endgame. Better alternatives: So. They effectively have one arc they are useful in, and the maximum amount of AD they have in that arc pales in comparison with the counterparts other fleets can bring for the same points (or even the ones Relthoza can ally in to be honest...). The Ba’Kash cruisers were torn apart, but they did so much more for me in this game for cheaper (or for the same price if I took with weapon shielding), Weapon arcs: I get it, that the point would be to focus on one ship, crit it (or try to knock down PD with targeted strikes), and further soften it with torpedoes. But (at least in this game) I didn’t find this terribly effective, at least not with these AD values. Somehow its mediocre AD, single arc weapon systems with no other utility to contribute didn’t cut it this time. And I don’t really mean it wasn’t cost effective, as it probably was (it could have at least partially held up a same costed squadron of gunships for maybe two turns, if one of the squad wasn’t destroyed so early thanks to multi-arc aquan weapon systems, but there you have it. Aquans... ), but still, it didn’t feel like it could really cut it in the role I feel it is intended for it. Of course I might be completely wrong about it though Possible improvements/solutions I have thought about (and are not sure about at all) : There (not being a game designer) I struggle. If I wanted to use it as I think it was intended to be used (see above), The problems I see are the following: Lowering the points: I don’t think points are problematic. Rather the „bang for your buck”... Also it would also contest the Bane’s at or near its point level The Beam AD gets increased in one rangeband: Only RB1: The more... „lackluster” AD in other arcs it may turn into a primarily knife-fighter, trying to jump to rear arcs, where the Fore (fixed) arc and the lower Shunt Matrix value might restrict them, resulting in a wide variety of situations where it performs too good or too bad, while the long range support role would be probably less prominent... Only RB2: It would probably contest the Bane’s role. But would maybe discourage the enemy from closing in a bit... Only RB3: Rewards static play on an extremely mobile platform All rangebands: While it would be a better ship for it’s intended role. It might still contest the bane’s role, but the higher cost, the different role and the corrosive weapon option could still leave a place for it, provided this improvement comes with a small price increase (not quite heavy cruiser level price, as this ship can be too fragile for that). Pack hunters (as an upgrade as stealth systems is really necessary for survival maybe if the hardpoint limit is raised... it could provide interesting combinations with pack hunters and higher shunt values, but that could get realllly expensive, on this now flimsy hull) could also be a solution for this, as it solves most of this ship's problems, while raising the points cost, but it’s not been seen on a Relthoza ship before, so I’m not sure it will happen (even though I like this one the most). Adding utility: Mines: Mines on a shunting ship can be bonkers... Systems network: I don’t think these will be stealthed most of the time, but could be useful for escorting/babysitting frigates. This got really long, so thanks for everyone that is still with me. I’ll try to get more games in to further test these hatchlings, but so far I could have been more impressed to be honest.
  17. Just two more questions, (to see if I understand you correctly): On the light cruiser you get mobility and great toughness for the points you pay, so you can... have an insignificant impact exactly where and when when you want it for a bargain price (but also a T2 slot)? Am I right to assume that the Iramon is designed to be an objective sitter and/or simply an activation which the opponent won’t likely bother as it doesn’t seem to do too much to him? If so they are excellent ships for Recover Resources, Hold the Waypoints, and the defender side of Capture the Station and Ambush (provided the players know what scenario and side they play before the fleet selection). My second question is that if the (typical) Relthoza fleet has the need and/or the resources for this kind of unit in missions other than these? If you have the points in situations excluding the above missions would you take a squad of Iramon or a squad of Frigates?
  18. I have a few questions to better understand these new options... Do you think the mixed squadron is workable? Does the gunship add enough toughness (or firepower? ) to justify the additional cost? More importantly how would you use the new ships? Would you try to use the gunships as destroyers (use the shunt matrix to try to stay away where stealth is effective), or would you try to close in and use the beam coherency effect in RB1 (maybe in the vulnerable arc)? If (and this is a big if ) spartan decided to up the firepower on the Virulence from the lighter side of a destroyer to the lighter side of a gunship, would it make Banes obsolete, or does corrosive, better boarding better arcs, better shunt matrix (and maybe wings) still leave them a place in fleets to be able to be an option worth considering (on their own, not just as carrier escorts)? What would you target with the light cruisers? Mop up damaged T2? Jump over the enemy and try to get in rear shots? Are they a better choice for these than standard cruisers considering the 42%(!) discount for the loss of 2 potential firing arcs, the loss of AD(~38%, 38% and 17%) and mines? (Forgive me if my numbers are off, and please correct me!) Will the small frigates be able to stay in their optimal range all game (considering the AD drop is quite significant from 48" at 14AD to 36" at 10 AD? Would they be better in reserves, or deployed (behind blocking terrain probably)?
  19. Gunship: Pros: Long range firepower is a really nice addition, and this ship looks like it's designed to be able to stay at long range for a reasonable amount of time. Cons: It would be hard to compare the gunships to other gunships, as the whole squad puts out as much AD as one Directorate gunship, and they pale in comparison of firepower, but the points do show... on individual ships. On squadron level the point for damage is... Let's say damage probably isn't their intended role (they behave more like destroyers should)... They want to stay out of the fight, and pour their firepower on the enemy, but were I the enemy I'd just... Ignore them... They are able to crit a cruiser or plink a T1 (and remember, they don't get corrosive on the beam weapons) if they themselves are not too damaged. But... So can any other T2, potentially one turn later (while it is true, that Cruisers are more fragile up close), and they bring more utility to the table (with mines and wings... sadly I'm not really experienced with Venoms, I just don't really see their place in my fleets, so they guard the inside of my drawers mostly). My fear is something like this: they won't disrupt too hardly anything, they will be just ignored, while taking up a T2 slot, that could have been Heavy cruisers, Ba'Kash Cruisers (they *do* disrupt things. they have the target marker on their heads while they are able to take punishment and even return it). And a lower price doesn't makes up for not fulfilling their (intended) role. With these AD levels if they lose a few HP (to stray torpedoes) they are significantly less of a threat, or if they lose a ship, they might as well go home. If they are out of coherency (shunt matrix does that sometimes), they aren't really useful anymore. If they have to shunt, they are easily missing with their fore (fixed) beams (probably this is the reason why the Bane's weaponry is fore, not fore (fixed)). If I want to disrupt, I would like them to be scary. 12 AD is... average-ish, and that doesn't scare (or disrupt), maybe inconveniences. As flamebeast said 7/7/7/- doesn't do much more - still crits a T2 or plinks a T1, but it dances around the edge of "Will it be a crit on that T1? Mayyyybe a double crit on the T2? I better deal with it." zone. So it has to be assigned resources, to weaken the foe elsewhere. The 6/8/7/- would be a double edged sword though, it would make the gunship try to get inside the territory which would be much more dangerous for it (difficult target only goes so far with a DR4 and no shields), but it would be much more interesting on the tabletop. They may get more expensive in the process, but they fulfill their purpose. On the other hand, if their price will compare to the heavy cruisers... Probably I'd still find them appealing with the proper AD levels. The other obvious comparison would be the shunt cruiser, which is a cheaper rear arc hopper, with better arcs, more AD in the ideal rangeband, wings, corrosive options. It also disrupts. As for the upgrades: I don't really see why would I ever take anything other than stealth systems, without it the ship is really fragile, and to even pay for not having it is not really a thing I'll be looking for. As it stands, I'm not a fan of the gunship to be honest. This ship just doesn't do enough gun. But gentleman! Please do correct me if I'm wrong, i'd really be happy to be wrong on this one! Light Cruisers: I'll really have to try these. They are really budget, and that can be a real advantage in some fleets (mainly in the fleet construction phase), but I'm not yet sure what would I want to *do* with these once they are on the field... Probably plink mediums with corrosive? (And would I want to do that? Why would I want to do that? I'm quite unsure, but I'll find out soon!) Upgrades: probably a little bit similar to the gunship, but as this ship wants to be closer, it is not necessarily that Light Frigate: Pros: With these arcs it is really easy to reliably hit two ships in one activation if the enemy gets close, but I really wouldn't want that, would I? Those torpedoes are nice far from the threat range of the nasties Cons: Fragility for the price maybe (or too expensive compared to the other frigates)? I don't think they want to be near anything really, so with torpedoes are the main threat to these guys they should be ok. On the other hand systems network probably won't help you there, and you still pay for it... Another one I'd like to try soon Edit: grammar (too late for me to write coherently, sorry about that)
  20. Thank you Beth! It's great to have a heads up, now we don't have to mine google cache after the... event
  21. I know it's a bit off topic, but can you tell us if the old content will be moved over to the new website, or should we grab our copies of the hidden gems, like the article of the Preditor Leviathan or the Supermax-89?
  22. Isn't it possible that the new terran ship is included in the (if I recall it correctly kind of confirmed) Dramos box? So new Terran and Dindrenzi stuff is bound to arrive soon, but I wholeheartedly support all spidery love
  23. I thought their strength have been reversed... (Fore torps were-/7/6/5 and changed to -/10/9/8 ; S/P torps were -/10/9/8 and changed to -/7/6/5). Probably I have downloaded an outdated version previously. Thank you for the correction!
  24. Anybody noticed any change in the new (25.01.2015) Orbat apart from the addition of the Windsor and the changes on the Ruler's torpedoes (Fore torps buffed to -/10/9/8; S/P torps nerfed to -/7/6/5)?
  • 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.