It is currently Thu May 24, 2018 9:47 am


Dreadnoughts

Tell the world your Dropfleet related trials and tribulations!
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

Gauntlet

  • Posts: 316
  • Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 6:43 pm
  • Location: Salem, MA, USA

Re: Dreadnoughts

PostThu Apr 05, 2018 5:07 pm

Agreed.

And while Dave might like Mayhem, I know he also appreciates a little "attachment" and "immersement" in these games... and that is the 40K Orc effect's greatest victim. I'm not going to lovingly imagine naming my ships (or at least, I feel a little disenchanted with doing so) when in basically every game I know they'll be destroyed in one, sometimes two rounds of shooting.

Ships definitely need a bit of a boost in survivability, or rather Cruisers do. I don't think Frigates are in a bad space survival wise, it's just annoying that we bother with a crippling chart for them. Standard Frigates shouldn't roll on the chart, and instead, should just have their HP reduced. Standard Frigates becoming 3 HP instead of 4, and those beefy PHR ones get 4 instead of 5. No Chart, and overall I believe the same level of survival. That being said, if I'm wrong, I'm wrong, I haven't done the maths.

The Crippling Chart could easily have HP reductions of 0-2 instead of 0-3. No results of "Roll again" and be reduced from its current number of possible outcomes to something like 6-10. You could add in a new rule that any Crippled ship gets reduced armor automatically in addition. So certainly being crippled is a big deal and it hurts, but it isn't "well that ship is basically dead and should suicide now".
Offline

Intruder313

  • Posts: 53
  • Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 9:36 pm

Re: Dreadnoughts

PostThu Apr 05, 2018 5:32 pm

I don't really want to see Cruisers or Frigates get tougher because right now there's too much emphasis on scoring via Drops: beyond matching Dropspam with more Dropspam, killing the enemy ships is the only way to counter this. Even then it's not efficient to spend points on firepower vs drops.

My best ever game was a flat draw with a few, crucial ground combats and a tonne of epic space destruction!
Offline

Brutoni

  • Posts: 115
  • Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2016 10:17 pm

Re: Dreadnoughts

PostThu Apr 05, 2018 8:18 pm

Intruder313 wrote:I don't really want to see Cruisers or Frigates get tougher because right now there's too much emphasis on scoring via Drops: beyond matching Dropspam with more Dropspam, killing the enemy ships is the only way to counter this. Even then it's not efficient to spend points on firepower vs drops.

My best ever game was a flat draw with a few, crucial ground combats and a tonne of epic space destruction!



Ah but I would argue that Dropspam is not a result of lethality but a result of atmosphere rules, the importance of ground over critical locations AND the signature disadvantages with a troopship. Lethality simply makes all that worse.

In general Anti-atmosphere vessels would help with this. Especially ones that can dish the pain out. Hopefully the new Destroyers.

I think the rules are fantastic and the intent very original. Nor do we want to upset balance too brutally. Perhaps an interesting change would be to 1st make criticals simply double damage but still allow saves. This also has the effect of making certain systems far more attractive. The particle lances for example now become one of the few weapons able to outright ignore armour... and on a critical they do double damage ignoring armour. Those 2+ particle frigates now seem very optimal against certain opponents.
Offline
User avatar

BlackLegion

  • Posts: 800
  • Joined: Wed May 14, 2014 10:33 pm
  • Location: Leipzig, Germany

Re: Dreadnoughts

PostSat Apr 07, 2018 6:11 pm

BTT:

What do you think would be the difference of dreadnoughts to battleships? 25 hull? 30?
Offline
User avatar

Lordprinceps

  • Posts: 374
  • Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2016 6:25 pm
  • Location: Dallas, Texas

Re: Dreadnoughts

PostSat Apr 07, 2018 7:02 pm

BlackLegion wrote:BTT:

What do you think would be the difference of dreadnoughts to battleships? 25 hull? 30?


Probably something like 24 hull for UCM and Scourge (possibly Shaltari, too), and 30 for PHR.
Really, if there's a rework to armor changes coming along, I'd set the base stats of the superheavies to something like this:
Sig, Hull, Armor

UCM Battleship: 9", 18, 2+
Scourge: 11", 18, 3+
PHR: 9", 22, 2+
Shaltari: 4"/20", 17, 4+/4+

UCM Dreadnought: 12", 24, 2+
Scourge: 14", 24, 2+
PHR: 12", 30, 2+
Shaltari: 6"/28", 23, 3+/4+
Offline

Intruder313

  • Posts: 53
  • Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 9:36 pm

Re: Dreadnoughts

PostSat Apr 07, 2018 11:00 pm

Lordprinceps wrote:
BlackLegion wrote:BTT:

What do you think would be the difference of dreadnoughts to battleships? 25 hull? 30?


Probably something like 24 hull for UCM and Scourge (possibly Shaltari, too), and 30 for PHR.
Really, if there's a rework to armor changes coming along, I'd set the base stats of the superheavies to something like this:
Sig, Hull, Armor

UCM Battleship: 9", 18, 2+
Scourge: 11", 18, 3+
PHR: 9", 22, 2+
Shaltari: 4"/20", 17, 4+/4+

UCM Dreadnought: 12", 24, 2+
Scourge: 14", 24, 2+
PHR: 12", 30, 2+
Shaltari: 6"/28", 23, 3+/4+


That's about where I would tag the values too, including hoping BB Sigs get reduced :)
Previous

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests