Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Sebenko

Sub-Par CoA models- Current State and Potential Changes

Recommended Posts

Between Spartan's ADHD and the remaining Alliance nations needing updates first, the next CoA update is probably a while off. But the current update has had a while to settle in, so what are current opinions on our less effective choices?

 

Cleomedes Cruiser- I thought these were rather average previously, but since I got my squadron painted up, they've replaced the Plato and Fresnel as my go-to medium choice. With Primary Turrets, they're an excellent ambush predator, and with IS shield(2) + Wave Lurker, they're extremely tough for a cruiser. The good arc and faster torps give them fairly effective long range incidental firepower, and a full set of broadsides are nothing to be sneezed at. Perhaps another Theorycrafting Essay is needed.

 

Drones in general- before I go on to list almost all the CoA carriers, I want to mention drones. I know I've said this many times before, so feel free to skip if you know what's coming. The Drone Feedback rule has been an irritation in every game I've played- it's unreliable, and a few dice rolls can make or break a game. It's annoying for me or my opponent, as RNG will shaft one of us. It's a horrible implementation of a rule, especially when stacked with the carrier and drone stat nerfs.

 

Diophantus- Haven't had much chance to play with it, but it still looks rather poor to me. I have used carriers and drones in general extensively since the update, and there's no way Drone Launcher (6) is worth as much as it seems to add to the price.

 

Pericles- Another case of not much use, but I have used it a couple of times. Too squishy, and drones aren't much cop anymore.

 

Epicurus- I keep using this, despite my better judgement. The poor Epicurus simply does not justify the massive price tag placed upon it. The further removal of the Launch Turret's abilities just adds to the unfair treatment of the Epicurus.

 

Euclid- Oh dear. Oh dear oh dear. I can't remember how long mine has been half-painted on the shelf. I heard some suggestion that it should become a 'dreadnought-lite' or a proper command flyer, which sounds excellent to me. As it stands, it's comically overpriced. 300 points and it doesn't even have carrier 9 by default- and it would still be sorely overpriced even then.

 

Daedalus- Honestly, I'm beginning to doubt I'll ever be able to field this in any reasonable capacity. It's been **** since 1.1, and was acceptable for a brief, glorious moment with 1.1 Heralds of Olympus. I'd like to see it match those days- 120 points, 10 point E-turret upgrade and 20 point mine controller gen, with secondary stats resembling more of a heavy battlecruiser than the current rubbish pseudo-battleship.

 

Icarus- Still struggling to find a place for these- they're not bad, but the similarities to the Cleomedes mean I'd much rather take the squadron that doesn't take up my non-core allowance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a couple of minor changes that should be made to improve the overall fleet.

The first one is the drones. All that it needs are a simple 12 words, right at the start of the "Drone Feedback" rule: "If the drone squadron is outside of a Drone Relay's command radius"

The second one is the Epicurus. The giant hood ornament needs to have one of the following:

-reinstate the 8" launch radius it briefly had

-drones launched by the model don't get an Activation marker

-make the turret a node launcher+generator combination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That drone feedback change would be a great help to the more assault oriented carriers we have, though I still take issue with how random it is. Perhaps it should be worded as "when a drone squadron is removed from the board (ditch, destroyed, etc.) return half the squadron's starting strength to the scrapyard. The remainder are removed from the game". Alternatively, give drones DR2 CR3, with the specification that drones destroyed by reaching their CR are automatically removed from the game. Drones destroyed by DR could either be put back in the bowl o' drones automatically, or be subject to a much toned down feedback effect.

 

I think option two would justify the Epicurus' current cost. Option one would need some points reduction, while the third would depend on the type of generator. Personally, I'd love to see option two, as it would hark back to the days of 1.1, and give the Epicurus a clear role when competing with all our other carriers. I've also previously suggested some sort of rocket launcher weapon that can't be fired when the Epicurus has launched drones.

 

I will give the other models on my list some thought for improvements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Daedalus

We have to ask, what role does the Daedalus fulfil? It's not a mine-layer, dedicated models like the Ptolemy are half the price, faster and just as good at mine-laying, and come in squadrons. So it's not a mine-layer. It's not a fire support vessel, as the fire-power it brings is almost nothing for the cost. It's not a support vessel, as it has no support options.

 

I'm looking at my other half's Tsukuyomi, which has two incendiary turrets, each with 13/11/8/5. The entire turret salvo of the Daedalus, linked, is 14/11/8/5. It has literally half the turret firepower, and with a more niche. munition type. Sure, Shield (3) is nice, but the intact model has less firepower than the Tsukuyomi on half HP!

 

IMO, it needs to be more like the 1.1 Daedalus-beta. For 120 points, one can get a Hipassus, which has the same turret firepower, trades some broadside AD for torps and exchanges some toughness for a suite of support abilities, and is core in naval games. The D-B should cost the same as the Hipassus and have access to a MCG option. If a price drop is not an option, it should have Prometheus-grade Turrets instead. This gives it the ability to bring some reasonably cheap and tough firepower, or be a fairly priced gunboat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pericles

There are several aspects of the Pericles that are an issue- how fragile it is, the value of drones as they currently stand, and what the hell is going on with Fleet/Assault Carriers. Looking through various nation stats for Fleet/Assault carriers, the only consistent point is that Fleet carriers are Carrier 9 and Assault carriers are Carrier 6. There's no pattern to their DR/CR- some are 5/8, some are 7/11. Some are lightly equipped, some rival battleships. With no standard for what a Fleet Carrier gets for other nations, it's hard to say where the Pericles should stand as fits a "Fleet Carrier".

 

Personally, if there was no change in other stats, I would pay maybe 150 points for a Pericles. What I would prefer would be for drones to be made worth the purchase of such a squishy model.

 

Diophantus

I suppose it would be sensible to discuss the Diophantus alongside the Pericles, due to the aforementioned Assault/Fleet confusion. This, meanwhile, is a model where I have some clear opinions on stat changes. I don't think it's terrible in isolation, but with the Prometheus just above it as beastly brawler, and every other carrier providing better drones/point ratio. I'd like to see it statted up along the lines of a carrier HBB, rather than the current attempt at carrier DN. The Aristotle+E-turrets has a good place now (the main turret Aristotle could use a tweak, but that should be it's own fix).

 

First, CR13, and how much it adds to the cost of the model. With this, wavelurker and shields, the Diophantus must be in contention for one of the toughest models in the game versus shooting. But since it's main offense is drones, it's not got much to do with that toughness. You pay a lot for something that your opponent will most likely ignore- and unlike most DNs, it's not going to cost them all that dear to do so. Shoot down the drones and ignore. I think dropping the cost to 220pts and the CR to 11 would put it in a good place. I also think removing the Drone Launcher (9) upgrade would be a reasonable idea, as it adds further complications and muscles in on the Fleet Carrier's role. I'd also drop the SV to 75 in line with the other big carriers, and remove the Dreadnought designation, as some groups still place restrictions on DNs in anything other than large games, which ends up cutting out a large chunk of CoA large options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're making some good points Seb but I can't see any orbat changes in the foreseeable future. The CoA went from being in the top 3 nations to languishing near the bottom. A lot of the alliance nations are ahead of them now in terms of general points for performance value. I'll be honest, mine haven't been on the table for a year. It was way before the latest round of orbat changes but they did nothing to want me to pick them up soon. Everything above is just my opinion of course

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I would have preferred with the Dio was for it to have the same Assault carrier profile as it had in the Commodore edition rules, with the option to upgrade it to the current Dreadnought carrier profile.

This will help immensely with "starter box" games.

Also, with the drone rules the way they currently are, a simple change to the Pericles allowing it to Combat Launch a "reserve squadron" of drones would make it popular again (especially later in the battle) when most of the fleet's drones are unavailable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some nice dreaming there Seb :D

 

You know me. Ever the optimist.

 

 

What I would have preferred with the Dio was for it to have the same Assault carrier profile as it had in the Commodore edition rules, with the option to upgrade it to the current Dreadnought carrier profile.

This will help immensely with "starter box" games.

 

Could actually work, now that the Aristotle either costs less or has a very clear role, depending on turret loadout.

 

Also, with the drone rules the way they currently are, a simple change to the Pericles allowing it to Combat Launch a "reserve squadron" of drones would make it popular again (especially later in the battle) when most of the fleet's drones are unavailable

 

I'd prefer improvements to drones, but this could work too. Maybe the Epicurus could have a similar ability, but with a smaller squadron and rapid deployment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still sooo many holes in our list, including blatant flaws as described above.

Too many 'auto includes' and/or 'never includes'.

Why the SV is so high on our merged carriers I just don't understand. We have more high SVs than any other faction.

The Arronax is still pointless in Naval (which is the stuff it is sold with).

After 2 updates in quick succession but somehow these things which have been discussed for ages all got ignored? I don't think CoA was so OP to deserve current treatment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want a submarine (a fixed arronax would work) we have battleships and dreads that can go under water, but no fully submersible craft? We have a realm which the surface is often inaccessible due to ice, but no submersible? A highly advanced prototype submarine was stolen from.us, did we just give up and decide not to build any more?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want a submarine (a fixed arronax would work) we have battleships and dreads that can go under water, but no fully submersible craft? We have a realm which the surface is often inaccessible due to ice, but no submersible? A highly advanced prototype submarine was stolen from.us, did we just give up and decide not to build any more?

Maybe we learnt from our mistakes, eh? A non-fully submersible vessel IS less likely to get so easily stolen, heh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...either that, or they do have a submarine, but no one who has witnessed it has survived to tell anyone...

I don't know about you, but I could definately get on board with the idea of us getting a super killy invisible sub :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • 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.