Jump to content



Photo

Ion effect?


  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#1 Sanguinary Priest

Sanguinary Priest

    Member

  • Members
  • 190 posts

Posted 21 August 2012 - 06:05 AM

From a reading of the ion turret card, I didn't see a restriction on losing shields to have the ion token work.  In essence you could fire on an otherwise undamaged ship (like another Y-wing) and still leave it with 5 hull and 2 shields and yet its stunned/drifting.  I just wanted to make sure that this is the actual reading of the rules as it frankly seems counterintuitive to be able to stun a ship with its shields still up.  Maybe that's just left over from the old TIE fighter games…



#2 KristoffStark

KristoffStark

    Member

  • Members
  • 529 posts

Posted 21 August 2012 - 06:34 AM

Sanguinary Priest said:

From a reading of the ion turret card, I didn't see a restriction on losing shields to have the ion token work.  In essence you could fire on an otherwise undamaged ship (like another Y-wing) and still leave it with 5 hull and 2 shields and yet its stunned/drifting.  I just wanted to make sure that this is the actual reading of the rules as it frankly seems counterintuitive to be able to stun a ship with its shields still up.  Maybe that's just left over from the old TIE fighter games…

Consider the ion cannon fired at the Star Destroyers from Hoth in The Empire Strikes Back.  Those blasts disabled those ISDs seemingly without needing to penetrate shields.



#3 Aahzmandius_Karrde

Aahzmandius_Karrde

    Member

  • Members
  • 274 posts

Posted 21 August 2012 - 07:22 AM

Sanguinary Priest said:

In essence you could fire on an otherwise undamaged ship (like another Y-wing) and still leave it with 5 hull and 2 shields and yet its stunned/drifting. 

That's mostly true.  You actually deal one damage to the hull even through the shields.  It seems powerful, but you're sacrificing a few things.  1) range, it's restricted to range 1-2.  2) close range modifier, since it's not a primary weapon you don't get the +1 die for being in range 1. 3) other hits, it doesn't matter how many hits you roll, even if it's 3 criticals, the ship only takes 1 normal damage then does a 1 straight next turn.


Welcome to the FFG Star Wars RPG Index 


#4 dbmeboy

dbmeboy

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,302 posts

Posted 21 August 2012 - 07:49 AM

 I'm not sure that's quite true. The card says to deal 1 damage, it doesn't say anything about ignoring the shields.



#5 Aahzmandius_Karrde

Aahzmandius_Karrde

    Member

  • Members
  • 274 posts

Posted 21 August 2012 - 08:02 AM

dbmeboy said:

 

 I'm not sure that's quite true. The card says to deal 1 damage, it doesn't say anything about ignoring the shields.

 

 

You're right.  I've read that card a dozen times, not sure why it was sticking in my head that it read "deal 1 damage card" instead of "suffer 1 damage".  "Suffer" is the key word there because that's the rule on page 16, "Suffering Damage", that tells you to reduce shields before dealing damage cards.


Welcome to the FFG Star Wars RPG Index 


#6 dbmeboy

dbmeboy

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,302 posts

Posted 21 August 2012 - 08:10 AM

 Which makes it slightly less useful, but the firing arc still is huge when fighting more maneuverable fighters. Combine with R2-D2 to soak up a ton of damage while flying around slowly and recharging shields.



#7 Sanguinary Priest

Sanguinary Priest

    Member

  • Members
  • 190 posts

Posted 21 August 2012 - 08:12 AM

dbmeboy said:

 

 I'm not sure that's quite true. The card says to deal 1 damage, it doesn't say anything about ignoring the shields

 

 

It doesn't need to as it simply says deal one damage and add an ion token with no other qualifiers.   Read as is, you simply ignore anything else and add the ion token (even against larger ships like the Mill Falc which will presumably have more shields and hull).  I do realize there are other limiting factors to its power as Karrde said but it just seems a bit wierd that the ion effect goes on despite the shields.  It gets even wierder if the larger upcoming ships are affected by this as well with a single shot. 



#8 Sanguinary Priest

Sanguinary Priest

    Member

  • Members
  • 190 posts

Posted 21 August 2012 - 08:14 AM

Aahzmandius_Karrde said:

 

dbmeboy said:

 

 I'm not sure that's quite true. The card says to deal 1 damage, it doesn't say anything about ignoring the shields.

 

 

You're right.  I've read that card a dozen times, not sure why it was sticking in my head that it read "deal 1 damage card" instead of "suffer 1 damage".  "Suffer" is the key word there because that's the rule on page 16, "Suffering Damage", that tells you to reduce shields before dealing damage cards.

 

 

 

It doesn't make a difference.  Pg.13, #7.  Suffering/dealing damage happens whether you add a card or remove a shield.  You can still have all your hull and multiple shields and get the ion token.  You simply deal one damage and add the ion effect.



#9 dbmeboy

dbmeboy

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,302 posts

Posted 21 August 2012 - 08:15 AM

 I meant that it doesn't deal hull damage to a target that still has shields, as the previous post had suggested.



#10 VerdatPagan

VerdatPagan

    Member

  • Members
  • 12 posts

Posted 21 August 2012 - 08:52 AM

If it makes you feel better, I remember the effects being described often in TEU books, specifically and often in Zahn's Heir to the Empire series, due to the Katana fleet playing  large role. Even then it was stated that ion cannons/weapons ignore shields and disable the ships. Just think of the one damage being suffered as some of the electronics going kaplowie.



#11 DavicusPrime

DavicusPrime

    Member

  • Members
  • 206 posts

Posted 23 August 2012 - 04:42 AM

In the old D6 WEG RPG Ion Cannons always ignored shields.  It worked sort of like an EMP weapon.  It fries electronics but does little physical damage.  And from the movies, either the ground based cannon in Empire was powerful enough to punch right through the destroyer's shields or it bypassed them. 

From reading the card, I was wondering about how the damage was handled in X-Wing. It doesn't say it ignores shields, just that if it hit at all the target takes one damage and a stun token.  If the hit is taken on any existing shields, that at least gives shielded ships something of a defense, but the stun effect would be universally applied to all targets.

The part that surprised me the most is that the target still gets to fire.  I would have assumed that the weapon systems would be fried too.  Perhaps that turned out as too powerful in play-testing.

My take on how the Ion cannon is meant to be used:

Defensive Deterrent - Keeps opponents from getting into and/or staying in optimal range.  An attack 2 TIE is going to have trouble getting multiple hits on you from range band 3 forcing it to enter your Ion cannon's effective range regardless of angle of attack.  The Y-Wing can then zap them and hopefully escape and/or set the attacker up for a counter attack by it's wingmen.

Offensive De-fang - Spearhead your attack run with a Y-Wing to neutralize a potent enemy ship, ionizing it thus allowing your fellows an easier time maneuvering in and taking it down the next turn with your X's.  Hitting someone like Vader with an ion cannon would greatly diminish his effectiveness (no double actions or maneuvers the next round).

-DavicusPrime



#12 Stunami

Stunami

    Member

  • Members
  • 21 posts

Posted 23 August 2012 - 05:13 AM

The Ion Cannon is really great, but it doesn't prevent all that much.  Affected ships can still make agility rolls, attacks, and actions as normal, you just dictate what their movement is next turn in exchange for any excess damage rolled.  That may not sound like much (especially given how long ships were down and out when hit by Ions in other games,) but realize that knowing that ship will only be going 1 up next round is huge, as it allows you to plan a turn where you can garauntee a target's placement, and plan accordingly.



#13 DavicusPrime

DavicusPrime

    Member

  • Members
  • 206 posts

Posted 23 August 2012 - 06:56 AM

I didn't realize the target still got to perform actions.  It makes the usefulness seem a bit weaker than i was hoping.  Still good, especially for keeping TIEs from getting away, but it doesn't really shutdown the ship's capabilities.

-DavicusPrime



#14 Budgernaut

Budgernaut

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,442 posts

Posted 23 August 2012 - 07:06 AM

DavicusPrime said:

I didn't realize the target still got to perform actions.  It makes the usefulness seem a bit weaker than i was hoping.  Still good, especially for keeping TIEs from getting away, but it doesn't really shutdown the ship's capabilities.

-DavicusPrime

Especially when you consider that the action they take could be a barrel roll that takes them out of your firing arc. Gotta compensate for that when positioning your fighter.


"There is a fine line between neutral and amoral. In fact, there may be no line there at all."

--Count Dooku


#15 Manchu

Manchu

    Member

  • Members
  • 219 posts

Posted 23 August 2012 - 07:33 AM

 Wouldn't it be kind of hard to barrel roll out of an arc unless the X-Wing was at Range 1?



#16 DavicusPrime

DavicusPrime

    Member

  • Members
  • 206 posts

Posted 23 August 2012 - 08:12 AM

Manchu said:

Wouldn't it be kind of hard to barrel roll out of an arc unless the X-Wing was at Range 1?

Exactly.  A barrel roll will only really be useful if you only need to get a 1" nudge to get someone into the edge of your firing arc or to get outside of an arc you're barely in.  Odds are it won't save you, but when you need it, its nice to have.

-DavicusPrime



#17 Manchu

Manchu

    Member

  • Members
  • 219 posts

Posted 23 August 2012 - 08:24 AM

Well, your point stands nonetheless.  As Stunami mentioned, knowing an enemy fighter will do 1" does give you something to work with -- but if that enemy ship is a TIE, you know that you shouldn't zoom into Range 1 to get the extra attack dice lest he barrel roll out.  In other words, you'd see the difference between a green and a veteran player in a move like that if the opponent was good.  And an ace player would know how to zoom into Range 1 such that his target couldn't barrel roll out.  Man, I am loving this game without even having played it!



#18 R2D2

R2D2

    Member

  • Members
  • 123 posts

Posted 23 August 2012 - 09:45 PM

it seems a bit ridiculous that a ship with a stunned/fried  engine (or however you expain the forced 1 straight move) could perform a barrel roll, which is a rather more complex manouvre than say, listing slightly to the left… surely the barrel roll neccesitates the ability to steer left and right, which would suggest that its only the up/down which has stopped working (assuming actual space movement). If this sticks to the standard plane based movements (which the rules seem to suggest) then its impossible to be able to barrel roll if you cant turn left or right…



#19 DavicusPrime

DavicusPrime

    Member

  • Members
  • 206 posts

Posted 24 August 2012 - 03:12 AM

1) I agree, but I don't think a ship hit by an Ion Cannon should be able to take any actions or fire by the fluff of what Ion Cannons are supposed to do. 

2) Star Wars tech has ships with a primary drive engine(s) and various lateral thrusters in stategic points of the hull to provide maneuverability.  It's one of the justifications for things like X-wings having wings.  If in X-Wing the only real effect of an Ion cannon hit is a temporary shut down of the primary engines, then the maneuver thrusters wouldn't be effected and the thing could still potentially perform a barrel roll.  Silly, but I suspect that it's less complicated to just allow all actions than to give Ion Cannon victims a special list of allowable actions.

I suspect that in testing a successful Ion Cannon hit that completely shutdown the target unbalanced things too much so they nerfed it.

-DavicusPrime



#20 R2D2

R2D2

    Member

  • Members
  • 123 posts

Posted 24 August 2012 - 03:34 AM

DavicusPrime said:

 

2) Star Wars tech has ships with a primary drive engine(s) and various lateral thrusters in stategic points of the hull to provide maneuverability.  It's one of the justifications for things like X-wings having wings.  If in X-Wing the only real effect of an Ion cannon hit is a temporary shut down of the primary engines, then the maneuver thrusters wouldn't be effected and the thing could still potentially perform a barrel roll.

 

Wait…what?

So the thrust on an x-wing comes from the four thrust engines on the back of the wings, and additional small thrusters are on the hull for added manouvrability…. so how could an xwing do a barrel roll? the small thrusters would have to be in the flat sides of the wings to allow that, no? or angled oddly along the curve of the hull to create spin? how could it move sideways whilst doing a barrel roll? wouldnt it stay in place? 

Why would having wings help this, when there is no air resistance anyway? 

I always thought the wings were just to allows a greater spread for the laser cannons… plus obviously they look totally sweet…






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS