|
|
Post by bubbacleese on Feb 29, 2012 11:38:05 GMT -5
...how deep is the water in the deep end??? Our group wants to experiment with fighters doing more that either 1 or 2 points of damage per interceptor/strike fighter. So this weekend we are trying this out. Leaving everything as it is but simply increasing the fighter to ship damage numbers. Say Interceptors increase from 1 to 2, and Strike Fighters increasing from 2 to 4 or 5. This way some of our players (me and others) will not simply ignore the fighters as some many bugs while we shoot down the opponents carriers. I am a defensive player by nature, so maximum or almost maximum armor and shields is a normal build for me, as such I realized the Interceptors and Strike Fighters only help bring down the shields a little bit thus there was no real need for Flak Batteries or P Def. Missiles can be a problem with my design I do realize, but a high Armor helps. I promise to take my camera with me Saturday so we will have some pictures this time.  Has anyone experimented with increasing the Interceptors/Strike Fighters vs Ship attack values? |
|
|
|
Post by TheDreadnought on Feb 29, 2012 13:46:21 GMT -5
I predict that will make for some REALLY lethal fighters. But it will be fun to see what mahem it causes!
Some other people have tried just increasing fighter range to 2 to allow more fighters to attack a single shield facing. If this doesn't work out, that may be something you can try instead.
I think you should definitely give the high damage fighters a try though. . . if for no other reason than to throw the disappointed fighter jock from last time a bone. lol
|
|
|
|
Post by bubbacleese on Feb 29, 2012 17:06:16 GMT -5
Looks like I've already gotten three players to help test on Saturday. I had not considered the range 2 idea, interesting. Here is a third idea.
Range 1 - Interceptors 2 points of damage
Range 1 - Strike Fighters 3 points of damage
Range 2 - Interceptors 1 point of damage
Range 2 - Strike Fighters 2 points of damage
OK, range two, you are either on the same hex row or you are on a hex spine and thus giving the defender the choice of which shield to hit. Two squadrons on the hex row ensures two squadrons hitting the same shield. Two more on the next shield now you have two squadrons on each of two adjacent shields, then add one more squadron on the empty hex directly between the two squadrons at range two and the defender must choose which of the two (getting hammered) shields to put the fifth squadron. In that case sheild one will have two squadrons and shield two will have three squadrons...nice!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by captainquirk on Feb 29, 2012 17:32:23 GMT -5
I predict that will make for some REALLY lethal fighters. But it will be fun to see what mahem it causes! Some other people have tried just increasing fighter range to 2 to allow more fighters to attack a single shield facing. If this doesn't work out, that may be something you can try instead. I think you should definitely give the high damage fighters a try though. . . if for no other reason than to throw the disappointed fighter jock from last time a bone. lol So has anyone tried increasing the range of flak batteries? Or does the two hex extended range mean that gatlings are the only way of nailing any fighters which stay our there at two hexes? (sorry, not entirely a thread hijack, I hope) |
|
|
|
Post by TheDreadnought on Feb 29, 2012 17:44:04 GMT -5
I think having different damage by range while good on paper is probably over-thinking the problem a bit and adds more complication than it adds play value. I'd stick to a fixed damage at whatever range.
Yeah I would extend the range of flak batteries, but not the number of hexes affected.
|
|
|
|
Post by warchariot on Feb 29, 2012 19:52:17 GMT -5
...how deep is the water in the deep end??? Our group wants to experiment with fighters doing more that either 1 or 2 points of damage per interceptor/strike fighter. So this weekend we are trying this out. Leaving everything as it is but simply increasing the fighter to ship damage numbers. Say Interceptors increase from 1 to 2, and Strike Fighters increasing from 2 to 4 or 5. This way some of our players (me and others) will not simply ignore the fighters as some many bugs while we shoot down the opponents carriers. I am a defensive player by nature, so maximum or almost maximum armor and shields is a normal build for me, as such I realized the Interceptors and Strike Fighters only help bring down the shields a little bit thus there was no real need for Flak Batteries or P Def. Missiles can be a problem with my design I do realize, but a high Armor helps. I promise to take my camera with me Saturday so we will have some pictures this time. Has anyone experimented with increasing the Interceptors/Strike Fighters vs Ship attack values? Ignore fighters? Not enough damage? If you play MvM I think you'll find the number of fighters will do more damage than most guns. The special fighter rules also can do in a ship. We have 100+ fighter groups on the board during a normal game, sometimes that many on the Cyborg side alone. With swams of them, small ships disappear and large ships can become useless quickly. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by bubbacleese on Feb 29, 2012 21:00:52 GMT -5
I agree the MvM rules allow fighters to be a major factor, but we are very happy with everything about CB, and we would miss the shield and shield regeneration greatly. I believe that one aspect of CB creates a tactical feature that is unmatched elsewhere. Truly the only complaint with CB my group has is the lack of fighter power. Tweaking up the damage points on Strike Fighters should be just the fix we need. ;D
The more I think about it the more I'm agreeing with simply increasing the attack points and not the attack range on fighters in CB.
|
|
kashre
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 110
|
Post by kashre on Mar 1, 2012 2:39:59 GMT -5
We have been using range 2 on fighters (for anti-shipping strikes only). If a fighter is on the spine of the hex it defaults to the rearmost shield... meaning max 2 squadrons on the front shield, 3 on the side shields, and 4 on the aft shield. We have never really used flak on any of our ships, but I would do it as dread suggested. In my opinion it is a much more balanced version of fighters which keeps interceptors more or less useless against any but the smallest starship but makes strike fighters effective enough that you don't just ignore them. I would expect doing this in a non-shield environment to be a bit OP, but we always use shields on our ships. Discussion here: www.steeldreadnought.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=cbhr&action=display&thread=795AAR Here: www.steeldreadnought.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=aar&action=display&thread=856 |
|
|
|
Post by bubbacleese on Mar 15, 2012 14:58:26 GMT -5
News from the upgrade the Strike Fighter shield and hull damage front. We have experimented with several ideas and the one that looks to be working well for us is allowing the Strike Fighter to do the same amount of damage to whichever is the target, Shield or Hull. The amount of damage is two times the hull size of the target ship. Our very loose scientific reasoning behind this is simply the bigger the ship the harder it is to defend against the little bitty thin rapier like attacks which come from Strike Fighters. These attacks being able to find holes in the defense...I said it was loose science.  Working along with this is a chart I am still modifying but it goes something like this. As we have been playing we have notice that 1000 point BB has a fairly easy time against 1000 points of DD's or CL's or CA's...thus I saw a need to work a political idea into the game. Just as our current wet Navies will not put a carrier or battleship out in dangerous water somewhere by itself we should not either. So I'm working up a grid to ensure some min/max'er doesn't put just BB's and BC's onto the game board. The grid simply states if you are bringing this many class(x) ships then you must also bring this slightly larger number of class(x-1) ships. I'm working it into a spreadsheet where you can drop down the "Flag" or biggest class and the number of these ships and the rest of the classes will fill in both the Minimum number column and the Maximum number column. Hope this makes sense. We are looking to point up 500, 1000, 1500, and 2000 point fleets on paper just to compare, and then this Saturday play the 500 and maybe the 1500 point with one player purposely bringing a Fighter force and the other player NOT bringing a Fighter force. |
|
|
|
Post by TheDreadnought on Mar 16, 2012 9:29:01 GMT -5
Can you explain more about how the fighter damage works? Not sure I'm getting it.
|
|
|
|
Post by bubbacleese on Mar 20, 2012 9:31:29 GMT -5
OK, we play tested three games last Saturday, then we played a game with very balanced fleets using what we learned in the previously played play testing. The only change we are making is the damage done by Strike Fighters vs Escort or Capital ships. Each Strike Fighter will do 2x the targets Hull Size in damage when shooting the targets shields. Each Strike Fighter will do 1x the targets Hull Size in damage when shooting the targets hull. So the biggest Hull Size in the game is 5 for tonnage 810 - 1000. The smallest Hull Size in the game is 1 for tonnage 40 - 84. Example 1: A poor 810 ton BB has been picked upon for several turns and just cannot get its shields fully recharged each turn. So a flight of 6 Strike Fighters will be hitting shield #3 which is only at 23 points this turn. Flak Batteries roll like crap and did not get any of the fighters, nor did the P Def. So now the Strike Fighters attack - it will be six 10 point hits to the shield which is starting at 23 points. 23 - 10 = 13 13 - 10 = 3 3 - 10 = Punch Through - Hull damage of this "weapon" is 5 (1x targets Hull Size), 1/2 round down is 2. So 2 points of Hull damage, no chance of Crit. We are using the fighters just like a ships weapon. So the first three Strike Fighters bring the shield down and do half hull damage. No shield for the next three which each will roll to penetrate the Armor, this example well say the armor is 8, the Strike Fighters roll hot (10, 9, and 3.) So two penetrate and one does not. Hull damage is 5 + 5 + (5/2 round down) is 2 = 12 points of Hull damage to add to the 2 from the 3rd fighter which was only partially blocked by the shield. So 14 hull damage and two 1D10 crits. Example 2: A little bitty DD gets attacked. Flak Batteries do better and get 2 of the Strike Fighters, P Def miss. So Four Strike Fighters attack shield #5 which is at full charge of 4. Hull Size is 1 so shield damage is 2 points each, the first two Strike Fighters take the shield down, the second two Strike Fighters do 1xHull Size or 1 point each to the hull as both have rolled over the DD's armor value and thus there will be two Crit rolls as well. Yes, we changed from same damage to either Shield or Hull to 2xVsShield and 1xVsHull. Our non-Play test game, the 4th game that day, had several mistakes by each side as we were tired after so many hours. My big error just makes me laugh and laugh, I landed seven damaged squadrons back onto my carrier to regroup into three or four six fighter squadrons, which makes sense until you notice that the carrier only had one hull point left. And yep, next turn pop went the carrier with all of my fighters!  The game was very close and either side could have won the day. We are very happy with our adjusted fighter rules, especially the sliding damage amount being based upon the targets Hull Size. Please let me know what you think. |
|
|
|
Post by TheDreadnought on Mar 20, 2012 10:56:57 GMT -5
Wow. . . those are incredibly powerful fighters!! Definitely nothing I could ever have put into the core rules. I wonder if you're find capital ships become a bad investment under that approach. You'll have to keep us posted.
But. . . if they're working for you guys, I'm all about it.
That's hilarious about your carrier. ROFL!
|
|
|
|
Post by bubbacleese on Mar 20, 2012 12:54:49 GMT -5
Yes, the Strike Fighter has a big bite now, but we have several players who wanted to go the fighter route instead of cruisers and battleships. Flak Batteries are now standard equipment, if you are smart as well as a few rounds of grape or a few squadrons of interceptors. We'll keep you posted. |
|
|
|
Post by captainquirk on Mar 20, 2012 13:24:19 GMT -5
So did you extend the range as well? Or just the damage effects that you've described?
|
|
|
|
Post by bubbacleese on Mar 21, 2012 6:29:48 GMT -5
Just the damage, we never tried the extended range. After a couple of play tests we saw we were able to make the Strike Fighter have the effects of a medium/big ships gun but still be very fragile. The sliding scale of damage based upon the target ships hull size kept the modified Strike Fighter from being too dangerous.
|
|
|
|
Post by captainquirk on Mar 21, 2012 6:44:18 GMT -5
So how about interceptors versus ships, are they still as per rulebook?
|
|
|
|
Post by bubbacleese on Mar 21, 2012 10:53:03 GMT -5
Yes, interceptors are still as per the rulebook. We felt their job was to be simply interceptors and thus be mostly ineffective against escort and capital ships. So the only change from the core rulebook is damage done by Strike Fighters when they attack Escort or Capital ships. We have made the Strike Fighter work just like any weapon on the weapons chart. | Weapon Type | ATT | PEN | S Dam | H Dam | | Strike Fighter | Auto | D10 | 2xTarget Hull Size | 1xTarget Hull Size |
|
|
|
|
Post by bubbacleese on May 7, 2012 16:29:20 GMT -5
It has been a while since I brought you guys up to date with our one change to the Core rules. That being changing the Strike Fighter damage to Shields be equal to 1 * <target ship size> per Strike Fighter and damage to Hull to be equal to 2 * <target ship size> per Strike Fighter.
We found the players who wanted WWII like damage to be happy with the amount of damage a Strike Fighter can put out. However, if you know about this rule and thus you have some Flak Batteries, Grape Shot and some Interceptors you can keep the damage within reason. So I'll say our slight change has been very balanced and well received.
I will start a new thread with a new problem we are facing..."Too many bits and pieces on the game board."
|
|
unclejoe
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 199
|
Post by unclejoe on Aug 1, 2012 11:58:54 GMT -5
Wow, and I thought we were considered on the 'extreme' side when we kept StrikeFighter damage at 3 lol.
At 2, as many have noted, Strikefighters are nothing but a nuisance. They generally did not feel worth the tonnage/cost to bring to the table.
At 3, they feel pretty balanced to us. You can base a strategy on fighters, but you arent required to. You should probably consider some sort of plan to defend against them, but you dont have to field them yourself in order to win
At >3, I would imagine that fighters become the focal point (much like WW2 or Cold War naval engagements). Other ships can be important and can function if protected, but the fighters will be instrument of decision.
|
|
