|
Post by captainquirk on Aug 8, 2011 12:43:47 GMT -5
Just read the AAR. Sounds pretty devastating. Not clear though from the report whether you applied armour penetration? This is something I sought clarification about - grapeshot is a one point weapon, and shouldn't have been quite so effective against any heavily armoured capital ships: www.steeldreadnought.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=cb&action=display&thread=565Having said that though, it seems like you had enough of it flying around that at least some of it would probably penetrate armour...
|
|
|
Post by captainquirk on Jul 21, 2011 16:30:12 GMT -5
Thanks for clarifying.
|
|
|
Post by captainquirk on Jul 21, 2011 13:12:17 GMT -5
Just wondering... is it possible to attack the bombardment projectiles from railguns? Basically, can cluster missiles, grapeshot, or anything else be used to "shoot down" the incoming stuff?
|
|
|
Post by captainquirk on Jul 4, 2011 9:51:12 GMT -5
I do own MvM but haven't played it yet, so others can tell you much more about that game.
There are some significantly different assumptions in the core background and the MvM one. MvM doesn't use shields..
Personally we have agreed to import the MvM battlecarrier ship role and to allow gunboats. Don't see any particular problem in having fighters with different ratings. For myself I'd prefer to build something roughly battlestar-like using the core rules than to try to play a ship designed without shields in the core rules environment.
I'd imagine that a shielded ship operating in the MvM world would be rather more powerful... effectively it could probabaly take twice the hits.
|
|
|
Post by captainquirk on Jun 30, 2011 13:02:44 GMT -5
Hmm... thinking about it, although it would involve keeping records for that armour facing, the rest of the weapon could be really simple, couldn't it? Nanites eat one level of armour from a single relevant facing per turn off that facing. If armour is gone then they eat one hull point per turn.
It does damage, but I don't think that makes it an overbearing weapon.
|
|
|
Post by captainquirk on Jun 30, 2011 12:33:27 GMT -5
That would take a bit more record keeping, wouldn't it? Core rules don't differentiate regarding armour facings? But yes, that would make a nanite "splodge bomb" quite a nasty device without it being an overpowering superweapon.
Also wondering whether using ion weapons could be a counter to them. Either a ship carrying ion weapons which is attacked by nanites could "fire at itself" by routing the ion charge to the hull... each hit killing a nanite horde just like it disables a fire control.
Or possibly another ship could fire at the nanite horde and disable them in a similar manner.
|
|
|
Post by captainquirk on Jun 29, 2011 14:59:27 GMT -5
Just wondering about the possibility of some sort of nano-weapon or some other sort of insidious damage dealer. Maybe something like the grapeshot weapon, basically just a cloud of initially unguided nanos. Unable to penetrate shielding, and if they do land on an unshielded ship they only do 1 point of damage.... on the first turn. Thereafter, they start eating into the hull every turn...
Haven't figured out the entire way this would work - perhaps using an increasing penetration value with each passing turn? Damage inflicted could just increase by 1 point per passing turn also. Would involve a bit of book-keeping (which could be handled by using tokens), but it could be an interestingly different weapon system form those already in the core rules.
|
|
|
Post by captainquirk on Jun 19, 2011 16:21:55 GMT -5
Waiting to see how it copes with stuff like engine struts, which are always a bit fragile on Trek ships. All resins tend to have pitting and air bubbles as part of the manufacturing process, so there's likely to be more preparation and more modelling skill needed than with a white metal casting.
There have been a few problems reported with the recent GW switch to its "Finecast" resin. Including allegedly models melting under strong sunlight!
|
|
|
Post by captainquirk on Apr 27, 2011 16:04:49 GMT -5
Wondered if there are any other CB players in the London UK area who fancy a friendly game or two?
|
|
|
Post by captainquirk on Mar 27, 2011 12:37:35 GMT -5
I'm not sure the re-roll is needed.
With this approach it's perfectly possible to have an anti-fighter CL that will score a good ratio of hits anyway.
|
|
|
Post by captainquirk on Mar 25, 2011 15:43:06 GMT -5
Maybe the FCs could be used to target a hex, so one FC could control fire for several autocannon at the same fighter group?
|
|
|
Post by captainquirk on Mar 23, 2011 2:07:45 GMT -5
LOL. Thank you :-)
|
|
|
Post by captainquirk on Mar 20, 2011 11:49:56 GMT -5
Excellent. Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by captainquirk on Mar 20, 2011 4:16:39 GMT -5
Just want to check I'm getting this right!
If a ship takes a non-penetrating hit from a weapon which would only inflict one point of damage after penetrating armour, does the damage get rounded down to zero?
Meaning that grapeshot, laser gatlings really have to penetrate armour to inflict any actual damage, and therefore won't harm a heavily armoured target?
Thanks
|
|
|
Post by captainquirk on Mar 16, 2011 19:08:40 GMT -5
OK, points taken, and thanks to everyone who has commented. It probably will settle down a bit when I've played more games, that's true.
However, fastgits comment about suggestions around what could be modified is a nice idea and it would help with the learning curve. And since I'm not the first or only person to ask about this, it seems like it's a learning curve for other people too, which I think means it would be useful to address in some way, even if only with a paragraph or so of things to consider when developing factions.
What pretty much IS my sticking point right now is indeed what can I modify without it being overpowering or stupidly unbalanced. The discussion here has given me a bit more understanding about it though.
|
|
|
Post by captainquirk on Mar 16, 2011 14:00:20 GMT -5
I'm actually finding this the only hard part of assimilating the CB rules. I must have a stunted imagination or something!
Point taken about development priorities. But I have absolutely no objection to you selling me a list of sample faction benefits! I'd be perfectly willing to buy that as part of a product. Maybe as part of a campaign pack?
Though I'm also happy to be inspired by any that people share too.
Maybe thinking these up gets easier with practice, hope so!
|
|
|
Post by captainquirk on Mar 16, 2011 2:19:18 GMT -5
This is very eloquent at describing what I was trying to say too. A small catalogue of workable potential faction benefits would be very useful.
Toaster's suggestion for my Star Viking faction seemed to work OK when I tried them last week. I'd already given them 22 points in tech, so the benefit worked well for that part, gave me the ship weaponry I wanted, and the limitations were liveable too.
But as Kealios says, all the "by the book" factions break the rules for factions. So for any play that isn't with a usual gaming mate it is more difficult to play a pick-up game without possibly offending someone or having key features of one's own fleet arbitrarily deactivated. A couple of pages of reasonably relatively balanced faction benefits would help.
|
|
|
Post by captainquirk on Mar 11, 2011 23:20:10 GMT -5
May I also please canvas for ideas for a faction originating from a high gravity world?
|
|
|
Post by captainquirk on Mar 10, 2011 17:54:51 GMT -5
So perhaps + 1 or +2 to tech total (asuming a limited tech campaign) but they are not allowed the defender role and each fleet must be at least 50% RDF. Robert That would make sense. Sounds pretty good. Thank you
|
|
|
Post by captainquirk on Mar 10, 2011 12:52:34 GMT -5
I've posted my ideas on the threads with my ships (FT and Clone Wars) but perhaps if you can give us some idea of the background your thinking of, it might be easier to suggest suitable ideas. Here's one; Impulsive, +1 to initiative but if you tie the rolls or win by less than 3 you must choose aggresive. Robert Well, was partly just looking for ideas and options that wouldn't unbalance the game. For example, if I was looking at creating a Minbari fleet, would a faction benefit that opponents suffered a -1 target them be too much? So, partly kind of looking for toolbox ideas. Though I am building a fleet at the moment based on GZG's ScanFed ships. Somewhat Viking in concept... fast and savage raiders... Comparitively high tech (in the same way that the Danes had pretty good organisation and equipment in comparison with who they raided). Just really not sure what the faction benefit should be. Any ideas welcome
|
|