Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. i agree with you on basis of balance alone.
  3. Thats very far from true though, because there is such a thing as a dark jedi, which is a jedi thats has gone to the dark side, but that doesn't mean they don't follow or at least try to follow the jedi code. Dark jedi and sith, are not the same! There are grey jedis and grey force users, but what exactly a grey jedi or grey force user is, depends on the perception and definitions on that matter, and there happens to be that there are several different ones, which by the way does not exclude each other. Did you happen to notice, that I weren't talking about just grey jedis but also grey force users? There was a reason for that. To avoid this nonsense. I was particularly interested in getting feedback about what I suggested, not debate what a grey jedi or grey force user is. Personally, I find the whole "flip a destiny point to use the opposite point" very broken, because it's a party resource, where the choice to use the destiny point is a personal choice and could be for personal reasons, and the force point distribution spread on the dice is rigged towards rolling more dark side than light. Why? Because it may be that when you count the amount of opposite points that there are an equal amount, but not an equal amount per side, which means you're more likely to roll dark side points, which forces you into more situations where you have to choose to spend a destiny point or fail the check. This also means that if you're a dark side user, you actually get punished for it in more ways, like for instance because of the point distribution being this way, you actually need a higher force rating as a dark side user to be able to reliably get same amount of points you could roll as a light side, second, the party gets screwed over by the dark side destiny points being turned over to the GM just because one is a dark side user - to me this seems like they want people to play light side users, and punish if you ever go dark side - which is just wrong in my opinion, as people aren't always playing the heroes. Furthermore, flipping the destiny point to be able to use opposite force points from a roll, is not even central to the mechanics of morality and conflict. I can see the reason for the strain and conflict, but not the destiny point mechanic. If anything, players should've been able to use both points types of force points but if they did, they would be gaining sided conflict, respectively light and dark sided conflict. I guess you didn't notice, they actually do suffer a passive penalty which will remain in place unless they decide to become a light or dark side user specifically (meaning they pick a side and stop being grey), which is they actually have to roll a willpower or discipline check to see how many force points they can commit, which easily could be NONE. I don't see how this is broken, because it deals with the issue of the user always being able to generate usable points. And as mentioned, with it being an ability or a skill roll, the gm could assign setback, difficulty or challenge if the situation would call for it, and could even flip a destiny point to upgrade the difficulty. So, yes there most certainly is a penalty and a drawback for being grey, despite one being able to more easily draw upon both sides of the force, it's less realiable. Because even with more force rating, which under normal circumstances would make it easier to get the force points and thus succeed, wouldn't make it any easier to succeed with this, as it also relies on willpower and/or displine. Which in fact means, that you actually need to spend more xp to to be more reliable in the force, much more than the usual. This is because that the probability of success only would rise from increasing willpower and discipline. And as one after character creation can only raise attributes through dedication, it means it will be a very long and costly process. As far as I know, the probability of getting at least ONE success on an ability dice is 50%, getting two on one is 12.5%. On a proficience dice, the probability of at least one success is 66,6& as the triumph also counts as a success, getting at least two successes on one dice is 16.6%, and getting at least two successes from two dices is 66,6%. So as you can see, even when you score points thats you need, it's possible that can't even use them or that you can't quite get to do what you wanted with the force power, because of not being able to commit enough. Even with the maximum amount of dices availaible, you could still completely fail, unlikely but possible. In regards to the bonuses/penalties, they're based off those that you normally would get when at or between certain thresholds, but more centric and thematically in line with the grey force user being in balance between the two, and those bonuses and penalties aren't cumulative, but static modifications when at or between the mentioned thresholds. I'd also like to point out that what I was suggesting with the force alignment, is intended to make it more difficult to remain balanced between the two, and it could be modified so thats it's less predictable, like rolling 1d4 per sided force point used, where each respectively would pull in their direction of morality. The random nature of this would make it more difficult to predict. It could also be resolved after each session just before conflict is resolved, where one will roll a dice for each side, add the total amount of light side and dark side points spent on either side respectively, substract the two results from each other, the adjust the morality score accordingly, then resolve conflict as normal. So say one who had spent 5 light and 3 dark, rolled a 2 for light and a 9 for dark, then it would be 7 vs. 12, which would decrease the morality by 5, then on top what ever the conflict adjusts it with. Call it a struggle of balance - which is exactly what the grey jedis / force users do, struggle with internal conflict. I think this would make it more difficult to stay in balance.
  4. The whole ‘Grey Jedi’ conversation brings Dooku: Jedi Lost to mind. Didn’t work out to well for him. Anakin either. Of course, there’s Quinlan Vos, but like the others, it didn’t really go to well for him either. The more you use the dark side the more it compels you to use it. Giving into it is indeed a slippery slope. Canonically speaking, using both aspects of the force doesn’t lead to a balance, just an inevitable fall to the dark side. Anakin, and Vos to a degree, show that you can be redeemed in the force’s metaphorical eyes, but only through the complete rejection of the dark side. And, that doesn’t really reflect the idea of a ‘Grey Jedi’ that walks the line between light and dark. Not saying that a character couldn’t believe that a balance between the light and the dark is possible. Dooku tried. But, like Dooku, it won’t end particularly well; assuming they don’t want to go dark side, that is. Could be fun role-play though. But, ehh... I’m rambling a bit I fear. If you want to give it a go at your table, go for it, but it’ll introduce balance issues like the others have mentioned.
  5. Lets start with the fact I will be playing Rebels. I loosely understand how to read ship cards. I have an interest in the Hammerhead corvette, and have heard you should run them in groups of at least 3 to guarantee their title sees SOME use. on to the questions. -Some ships have different slots. Fleet command slots seem very good, are they a must have? -when I see lists, some list a ship as flagship, is there any meaning toward that? Is it for objectives? -Are hammerhead corvettes effective? Does anyone take them to competitive events? -A lot of lists on this forum seem to be imperial, are Rebels underperforming in the current meta? -How many squadrons are recommended? Mostly bombers or mostly fighters that can bomb, or pure fighter screens? -Is FFG dropping support for this game? I havent seen any product releases for a while, and the SSD has been delayed. Does armada support matches with more than two players?
  6. I’m in. Hope I get a game in against you so we can fight for the bottom. 😉
  7. Towards the beginning of second edition I made a tread arguing about putting all listbuilding information and pilot abilities in the app, and everyone lost their minds, one stated that since i want it in the app, might as well make x-wing a video game \(x_x)/
  8. I’d propose restricting squads to just one defense token. If they have two player choice as to which one to keep.
  9. Thanks for the replies! This helps me a great deal, as I'm thinking I should focus more on what is in the actual unit for points, and let the dial develop more on a 'feels right' aspect. For basic building blocks, I've been doing hp×armor + dice + unit abilities + natural skill (if applicable). Costing dice at W=3, R=2, B=1 has been coming out fairly accurately. Things like brutal and precise seem to be about 2-3 points, and unit abilities range from 3-8 depending on power and effectiveness. Still working on what a slot is worth. At a quick glance, it seems most slots are about 1 point, possibly with the exception of uniques. In the end I think it will largely come down to putting the units on the table and costing them where they feel good, and less on a statistical spreadsheet.
  10. It can be true! But you Also run out of monsters Also in Gloomhaven and put only Empty standees to the board when you run out moster figurines... So it may Also be intentional.
  11. Today
  12. Definitely not a science, and the above-suggestions are a good template. Part of the problem is that the game creators were learning about the game as they went, so in the early phases, it is likely that some units are costed too much and others not enough, but later units are often priced a bit more appropriately. Where you'll have problems: 1. Granularity: The lower the price point, the more possibility that something gets off. If a unit's real power value is 9.5, is that 9 or 10? If you had 2000 points for a game instead of 200, you'd have an easy 95, and the rest of the system could account for that granularity, but when you're forced to round, you're got to get cheap and expensive outliers. 2. At the extreme ends of abilities, it can become impossible to cost a unit successfully. This is an extension of granularity, but is slightly different. For example, imagine designing a siege that is worse than the Scion. At some point, it is just so bad that it becomes unplayable, or it gets to a price-point that is spammable in a ridiculous way. Or at the extreme end of good, you have a unit that is so powerful that it becomes an auto-include, or it effectively gets priced into a nice shelf-relic. That's where the generic template with price point comes in as a useful mediation point. 3. Will ceteris ever meet paribus? That's the Latin for "with all things being equal." We love to say that phrase so that we can eliminate variables and compare two items on supposedly equal footing. Yet all things are almost never equal. While there seems to be a basic idea behind the classes (infantry, cavalry, siege) and the races (Daqan, Uthuk, etc.), there's quite a bit of diversity going on. This comes in the dice thrown, the mix of melee/range attacks, the movement on the dial, the stats on the card. In fact, there are almost so many variables going on that I suspect the design process was more along the lines of: 2 trays of non-siege are going to be around 17-18 points, which we are then going to walk up or down based on how the dials/cards turn out. That just seems like an awful lot of variables for an algorithm to capture. The best bet will probably be to not let the algorithm act as a substitute for playtesting and thinking. It can probably get you within 2 points, but the rest has to come from good judgment.
  13. @Rabobankrider What would be the skill and difficulty to walk to the bar pick up a steak knife and throw it between the two combatants faces to hit a dart board on the wall?
  14. Accelerate to 3 and drive. Entering the City: 1eP+2eA+2eB+1eC+2eD+1eS 0 successes Well, that was... interesting
  15. Hi Fear, Yes, I found it fairly easy and the mod itself is exceptional - a lot of things are automated for you. The best way is to get a learning game - there are friendly people on the Discord happy to help (use the #gamefinder channel) I'll paste some links you might find useful below: Tabletop simulator: http://store.steampowered.com/app/286160/Tabletop_Simulator/ TTSMod Link:https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1159576143&searchtext=legion The discord: https://discord.gg/nPbhMj
  16. In fairness, it's a lot easier for Armada to do it in those campaign packs. Squadrons only require one card per unique, and one per generic type. If I want to spam out 10 TIEs with Mauler and Howlie in support, I just need three cards. One pack covers an entire fleet, no matter how the player fields a list. Xwing scenario packs like that are going to have to find a balance between enough pilot cards and upgrade cards that you'd only have to buy it once, and simple price. That's going to be almost impossible to please everyone with. That said, I would like to see it, and it's not the only Armada thing I wouldn't object to being ported over in some way.
  17. That reminds me I should recompile that data with the other responses...
  18. Bariss would have made sense if there wasn't a bullseye requirement, making her a really interesting choice as a support ship because the force point would pretty much never be dead. I could see if the named torrents were playable that she could find a home still if there were a slight points drop, as a white barrel roll out of an arc and then still having a mod for a bullseye attack is pretty sweet.
  19. With the pre-order image I'm reminded of the Fate Witches from 7th Sea, which is another gameline that started with John Wick.
  20. Turn 15 hyperpings: B1, C2, D1, D2, D3, H2, I1, L2, N1, N2, N3, O, Q, U, dsV, X1, X3, and Y1. A 474 point URASC task force confronts a 25 point Gungan Defense force over U. A 7 is rolled and the Gungan Force is annihilated. No ELE casualties. U is successfully invaded at the cost of 9 URASC ground forces. A 357 point ELE fleet appears over X3 and attacks a Gungan GR-75 Medium Transport; the transport is destroyed. No ELE casualties. X3 is under blockade. Details pending. An 11 is rolled and converted to a 4. A 500 point Gungan assault force opens fire on a 59 point ELE contingent over X1. An 11 is rolled and converted to a 4. The ELE loses 1 Gauntlet, a Gozanti-class Assault Carrier is scarred, and they are obligated to retreat. The Gungans lose an X-wing squadron. X1 is now blockaded. A bombardment destroys 3 credit production and 1 ELE GF. A lone Locust Drone is squashed over B1 by a 54 point ELE force. 15 locust drones are crushed over Q by a 329 point Wookiee fleet. No Wookiee casualties. The Merry Crew world of N1 has been blockaded by Proprietary Limited. Details pending. The Proprietary Limited worlds of N2 and N3 have been blockaded by the Merry Crew. Details pending. The Tunneling Hive assaults the GNIPian world of I1. 294 Locust Drones destroy a defending Hammerhead Torpedo Corvette with no casualties. 7 Locust Drones attack a 47 point Wookiee local militia over D2. A 3 is rolled and converted to a 10. 3 Locust Drones are smashed and the Malarian Brood must withdraw. No Wookiee casualties. 7 Locust Drones attack a 47 point Wookiee garrison over D3. An 8 is rolled and the Locusts are baited into a giant wasp trap. All Locust drones are destroyed, no Wookiee casualties. B2, C2, D1, H1 and I1 are infested by the Malarian Brood. Turn 16 is live, and will end in 48 hours. Awaiting orders from: @Bertie Wooster @idjmv @BiggsIRL @FortyInRed @LTD @Matt3412 @GhostofNobodyInParticular Orders processed: none.
  21. My feeling with this is that you establish benchmarks based on what other units cost and then, as @Xelto said, you have to apply the “art” from there as there’s simply too many variables that aren’t directly quantifiable. Of course, if you choose a benchmark that’s over/under powered, then you’re stacking one problem on top of the other. I think the community has identified which units are on the edges (or outside) of those boundaries. In the end, you simply won’t get it exactly right for everyone’s tastes. Look at the debate surrounding which units/upgrades were over/under powered...
  22. I’m expecting something along the lines of the Armada campaigns that contained new pilots. And I’m okay with that.
  23. These guys seem really neat. Not a big minor clans person, but it's a new and interesting design space. They feel like sidereals from exalted to me.
  24. "Or a prayer", the other novice adds to her companion's wishlist, perhaps just out of a habit to remind Estelia of their duties, or at least what Ariel considered as such. The dusk-skinned Sororitas would remain silent and in thought for the rest of the trip, though by no means did this mark an unusual change in behavior.
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...