Jump to content
Sailion

Pocket Battleships discussion

Recommended Posts

+1 for 10/8/7/6 on the main guns. I much perfer the longer range turrets than the close up brawler turrets. I never manage to get that thing into RB1 and without the lance it's kinda %^&* in the other ranges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Tourbillion, Vauban, Bastille , Magenta and Charlemagne all have the same turret scultp, and it may well turn up on other models in the future.  It has to be balanced.

 

 Besides,  haven't people consistently complained about the French firepower becoming useless after a few points of damage? Having such a low, flat profile means this problem gets worse, not better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The same turret already have two differents stats, what is a bit disturbing... merging the two in a single profil with max stat would be fair i think, resulting in a 12/8/6/5. Good at point blank, standard for RB2, and a little upgrade for long (RB3 & 4) without reaching FSA or COA !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is it pushing it compared to the other fleets out there? They have options for the Shield upgrade after all, which makes them much better brawlers than we are at RB1. On the MkII, if you buy the Heat Lance, your aft turret will be quite subpar in combat as well.

I like where my BS numbers are at because it gives us something unique and meaningful while not conflicting with the existent models that already have 10/8/6/4. In short, it gives us something new while improving its current status.

If you find RB1 13AD to be too much, I strongly advocate keeping the 6 at RB3. This will strengthen the cause for the MkI and II BB to fill in a hole in our battlegroup and allow them a force at ranges otherwise alien to the French fleet. It would also give them a solid argument to keep both turrets over the Heat Lance configuration, which is why I pushed for RB1 13AD in the first place :) I can see it being 170 as well, the price is very negotiable.

I only said the RB1 was pushing it. The RB3 is fine. My main reason for disagreeing is the nations with strong turrets should have a standard of 12AD. 13AD is a EoBS trade mark for having strongest turrets in the game. Just like 15AD in the new war gyro and land large. It's their trade mark and it's not a RoF trade mark. Ours is the heat lance. Now maybe like everyone says. Up the other RB but keep RB1 at 10 or maybe even go for 11. But our ordinance turret guns are definitely not on par with FSA or EoBS guns in terms of the big boys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You miss one problem- factions with weaker turrets have 3 or 4 of them. We have..two. Ever. Except on the damn vauban where they can't link more than 2 anyway. So they'll either be forever relegated to "can i swap them for heatlances plz" status, or they need to be fairly hefty. In fact, can I just swap the turrets for heatlances on everything :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Though experiment for people....

 

 Existing turret is 12/8/5/4

 

 What if you abolish that 4AD in RB4, and spread the AD across the other range bands? You get something like...

12/ 10/ 7/ -

 

How about making it even more focussed, so now we go to.

15/14/-/-

( there are well known historical links between the Tsars and the French. Here we seem to be using their gunnery technology :D )

 

Or the final step,

 29/-/-/-

 

 OK, the last one is clearly over the top, but the middle two are both clearly better than the existing profile.

 

The problem with French AD isn't generally a shortage of them, it's that they're too spread aboutt over different weapon systems,  arcs,  range bands etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 2nd one is probably the most realistic. 12/10/7 is fair enough at least outwardly, as long as the magenta gets some sort of ret-arm or something extra. The problem with the french is that both the AD is fairly low/spread, but that they also rely on hand-activated clouds which mean the already mediocre AD drops like a rock on Large ships fast if you lose initiative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem with French AD isn't generally a shortage of them, it's that they're too spread aboutt over different weapon systems,  arcs,  range bands etc.

 

Would be cool if the Heat Lance added some kind of temporary vulnerability to increased AD damage.  That would make other firing options more attractive while not necessarily having them jump to crazy levels or re-designing them completely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Though experiment for people....

 

 Existing turret is 12/8/5/4

 

 What if you abolish that 4AD in RB4, and spread the AD across the other range bands? You get something like...

12/ 10/ 7/ -

 

How about making it even more focussed, so now we go to.

15/14/-/-

( there are well known historical links between the Tsars and the French. Here we seem to be using their gunnery technology :D )

 

Or the final step,

 29/-/-/-

 

 OK, the last one is clearly over the top, but the middle two are both clearly better than the existing profile.

 

The problem with French AD isn't generally a shortage of them, it's that they're too spread aboutt over different weapon systems,  arcs,  range bands etc.

Not really convince by any of the above.

 

We have the heat lance for the focus AD. If you focus the Main turret in that way you end up with a short range  main weapon which offer no alternative to the heat lance.

 

Why not go 11/9/7/5 you end up with a good amount of AD short range, a descent but not overwhelming amount of AD mid range & long range & the gun will suffer a bit less from the HP lose.

 

Another solution would be to apply sustaine fire 2 to all double barrel guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would be cool if the Heat Lance added some kind of temporary vulnerability to increased AD damage.  That would make other firing options more attractive while not necessarily having them jump to crazy levels or re-designing them completely.

What if the Lances gave you a Fusion Leak effect for the next attack this activation if you score a critical? After all, if the Heat Lance turns the metal soft and plastic you aren't going to have as much trouble punching thru with armor piercing shells.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What if the Lances gave you a Fusion Leak effect for the next attack this activation if you score a critical? After all, if the Heat Lance turns the metal soft and plastic you aren't going to have as much trouble punching thru with armor piercing shells.

Your assuming that the sea doesn't instantly cool and harden the metal. On land games I can see that happening unless in lake or river. But on the ocean, one wave and the metal hardens. Granted not as good since the alloy has been screwed up. Enough to be armor again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your assuming that the sea doesn't instantly cool and harden the metal. On land games I can see that happening unless in lake or river. But on the ocean, one wave and the metal hardens. Granted not as good since the alloy has been screwed up. Enough to be armor again.

Heat lances also bring the water around the target to near boiling as a side effect, just saying (storm of steel).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Heat Lance/Lancette is more than fine the way it is. I see no need to add more effects to it.

 

As for the gunnery: I also like the idea of sustained fire for some turrets.

 

Apart from that: I would like the French character to stay intact. Yes, we lack long range weapons, but that's the price we pay for all the technological shenanigans we can pull. I don't see the need to give the French more RB4 weapons. It's not our thing. Just because for some reason the RC had to get more RB3 firepower than we can muster doesn't mean that we have to get the same stuff. We'll find other ways to kick them in the balls.

 

With this in mind I would try making sure that the French turrets are a threat in RB 2 and still are when you arrive there. I know, we have the heat lance for RB 2 but against many smalls or against EoTBS I'd prefer a decent turret which can split fire over several smalls or actually be a threat to ships with low DR but high CR. If the turrets were a viable option in this case, one could actually plan which weapon to use instead of going "Ok, the Heat Lance is not really good against them, but the turret is even worse."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Against typical Gunships, battle cruisers. large airships, landships  and  carriers, you're looking at a DR5, CR(7 or 8) stat line.

 Our lances are rolling 10 dice, and our lancettes 5 here.  15 from a 3x DR attack is good, but that's the main attack of a unit that will cost 200-250 pts, it should be!

 

It's not worth going overboard on lance weapons, as you're simply better off using normal turrets against most targets.  Yes you lose Redoubtable and Incendiary, but:

You get the same dice or more most of the time,

Longer range.

More flexibility- if you need to engage a cruiser, heat weapons are rolling a might 4 or 8 dice, whereas your normal turrets are rolling far more dice.

 

Heat weapons are not meant to be the only weapon in the fleet, and an over-reliance on them will cripple you. They're dedicated to hunting large, tough targets, and there's  only a certain number of those.

Of course units which bring both a heat weapon and good normal gunnery get the best of both worlds- Touon, Charlemagne, Couronne, Bastille.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mostly agree, but one thing Pok already mentioned still applies: It's hard to get more than one turret on target. And with the numbers of one turret, you are outgunned most of the times. With the 12/8/5/4 spread, two turrets are capable, but one turret won't do much but scratching frigates if you are lucky. That's why the Magenta MKI kind of works as a flanking unit, but an MK II with Heat Lance mostly loses the firepower of the rear turret completely - once damaged it doesn't do anything at all.

 

I think that the MKII could simply do with a refocus - if you had the option to replace the rear turret with, I don't know, a generator which boosts the hear lance (+1D3 AD or an additional Raging Fire token or something balanced, just writing what comes to my mind) you would have something like a heavy gunship. If need be, loose the torps and make it kind of a big Toulon with some kind of synergy effect. Maybe the new field gens are an option. This way, it'd be more distinct from the MKI and have a more clearly defined role. I find that French ships are not exactly the "Jack of all Trades" kind of ships, but rather specialized to do something quite well at the cost of versatility. Maybe with the exceptions of Lyons, who can engage anything, and Marseilles who can engage a bathtub full of Jello and nothing else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I've had a tiny epiphany. Firestorm took a small clue from Dystopian when designing the 2.0 Terrans..why not do the reverse?

How? Well, the basic idea in DW is that the closer you get, the easier it is to hit and the more power the shells retain. So all gunnery weapons follow the RB1>Rb2>Rb3>Rb4 pattern. In Firestorm, it's assumed in RB1 enemy countermeasures and such kick in, and it's harder to aim so it's Rb1<Rb2>Rb3>Rb4 almost universally (destroyers, that is long-range cruisers in that game, buckle the trend with Rb3 being the best). In the new edition, we've seen the Terrans move to a "close-range brawler" theme in firestorm, and as the only race in the game so far, they have better RB1 than RB2.

 

Sooooo...how does this come into play with the French?

Well, our staple weapon is the Heatlance. it's best at Rb1 and 2 (in fact, it's ONLY useful up to Rb2...). However french hulls are in general not very tough. So it occured to me- sure, the heatlance is good at RB1 and 2, but it's equally good at both! There is NO reason to close in to Rb1 except that the other weapons demand it.

Now, I'm not suggesting something so drastic as to have ALL weapons better at Rb2 than Rb1, but...what if the French command, aware of their hulls relative frailty (they do lack extra dr or cr or hp...and their only defense is literally smokes and mirrors) make their main guns designed for optimum use in Rb2? The turrets are small and compact, with the guns relatively long-barreled..They don't pack as much punch as the tribarrels of the brits or the ginormous howitzers on the american ships, but instead, they can retain their accuracy at mid-range better. Thus, 10/12/7 instead of 12/10/7 onthe duble-barreled turrets maybe? With the single barrel cruiser guns also switching to Rb2? The broadsides have incredibly stumpy guns instead, so no extra range, but they could instead be the "close in guns" for when enemy gets too close. This way you have high damage output at 8-16" range, and decent one at 0-8" range. That's just a wild guess of course, not playtested.

 

Also, bout smokes. Again, I've no idea in which direction DW 2.0 will go, but Firestorm brought back the hit modifiers (some MARs still have arbitrary numbers, but they can be modified now too). Sooo...cloud gen. It literally hides the ship in a smoke screen. Now, the simple fact is, the closer an object is, the easier it is to hit it. IF modifiers will be back, why not make the thing gradual? -1to hit at RB1, -2 at Rb2 and onward?Or would that be too good?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're rather wandering into the area of  general version 2 discussion here....so...

 

That idea is hopelessly unbalanced

That idea is already in V2

That idea is worth looking at

That idea is not needed because of XYZ

 

Apply a mixture of the above!

 

 

However, it's worth noting that the primary gunnery penalty of 5s in RB 1 means a  (P)12/8/ delivers an average of 7.2 and 6.4 hits at range bands 1 and 2 respectively.

 

A (P) 12/10 delivers 7.2 and 8.0 hits at range bands 1 and 2 respectively.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

How about making it even more focussed, so now we go to.

15/14/-/-

( there are well known historical links between the Tsars and the French. Here we seem to be using their gunnery technology :D )

 

 

 

Just a quick thought: I'd prefer something a bit more oriented towards RB2/RB3, simply because in RB1/RB2 I already have the Heat Lances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I presume it means RB1 and 2 mixup? Any particular reason?

 

No, no, that was a list of generic responses, as we had been drifting towards general V2 discussion  for a while. I wasn't intending any of them in particular to apply to any particular suggestion. Sorry, that could have been clearer.

Share this post


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

×
×
  • 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.