Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
TopHatGorilla

How might carriers work in X-Wing

Recommended Posts

Sure, they can do what they want, but would it be a good idea for them to do so? I'm not - in general - a naysayer (and I wasn't during the 3rd faction debate), but I just don't see them finding much use in having a carrier function in this game.

 

But I think it would be cool if they did, provided they do so well.

 

Likewise. I think a gozanti that could launch 4 TIEs during a fame would be totally COOL. I just don't see a game design/mechanical REASON to do so.

 

To play the other side of the argument for a moment, isn't the coolness itself a good reason to do so?

 

I've been on both sides of this question in the past, but here's how it goes for me at the moment.

I agree with Forgottenlore that there's very little reason for a ship in this game to deploy fighters. That's already happening, at least for the Empire, but it's happening off-screen. ("No--it's a short-range fighter.") And it definitely should be happening off-screen, because you don't wait until your enemy is already on top of you before you get your fighters in the air.

 

But if you accept arguendo that FFG will introduce the Gozanti at some point, they have the following set of choices:

  1. Introduce a mini-carrier that can't carry fighters.
  2. Introduce a mini-carrier that can carry fighters (i.e., includes them in the sculpt) but can't deploy them.
  3. Introduce a mini-carrier that can both carry and deploy fighters.

#3 seems like the most palatable of those choices, so I find it at least plausible that they'll do it. Also, it would be pretty cool.

Edited by Vorpal Sword

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Likewise. I think a gozanti that could launch 4 TIEs during a fame would be totally COOL. I just don't see a game design/mechanical REASON to do so.

 

To play the other side of the argument for a moment, isn't the coolness itself a good reason to do so?

No, it isn't. Not if you want a successful, long term, sustainable game. You add new stuff to a game in order to enhance the game play and add meaningful decisions for the players to make, not GEE WIZ, FLASH BANG, COOL AWESOME STUFF reasons. Games Workshop is a good example of what happens when you add stuff to a game just for the cool factor without regard for what role the addition will actually play in the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now. I do think that adding carrier-esque support abilities would work to represent a ship that has dedicated fighter support. The actual launching, docking, rearming and such happens off camera, but the carrier would still be supporting its fighters with command and control like abilities would work.

I am thinking about how in Armada, the principle thing that carriers seem to do for fighters is enhance their ability to act, not launch and dock them.

If there was an easy way to link specific ships to the carrier, that would be nice. "These 4 TIEs belong to the gozanti and are effected by its special abilities, but these TIEs aren't." Don't know how you would do that mechanically, but it would help convey the idea that THIS ship launched THESE fighters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

isn't the coolness itself a good reason to do so?

If they make one for Epic, seems too big for standard, even if it isn't that big...

 

I think it's obvious that this would be for Epic.

 

I agree with Forgottenlore that there's very little reason for a ship in this game to deploy fighters. That's already happening, at least for the Empire, but it's happening off-screen. ("No--it's a short-range fighter.") And it definitely should be happening off-screen, because you don't wait until your enemy is already on top of you before you get your fighters in the air.

 

But if you accept arguendo that FFG will introduce the Gozanti at some point, they have the following set of choices:

  1. Introduce a mini-carrier that can't carry fighters.
  2. Introduce a mini-carrier that can carry fighters (i.e., includes them in the sculpt) but can't deploy them.
  3. Introduce a mini-carrier that can both carry and deploy fighters.

#3 seems like the most palatable of those choices, so I find it at least plausible that they'll do it. Also, it would be pretty cool.

 

Yes, of those three, #3 seems the most palatable indeed. It also seems that with Rebels, there's more than enough excuse to make it happen.

 

No, it isn't. Not if you want a successful, long term, sustainable game. You add new stuff to a game in order to enhance the game play and add meaningful decisions for the players to make, not GEE WIZ, FLASH BANG, COOL AWESOME STUFF reasons. Games Workshop is a good example of what happens when you add stuff to a game just for the cool factor without regard for what role the addition will actually play in the game.

 

But here it is - I think it's presumed that we're talking about epic, and I think that in epic FFG can afford to make the game a little less balanced.

 

I also think that FFG should keep the bottom line in mind. It seems to me that the CR-90 and the GR-75 have been commercially successful, even if I think that FLGSs probably were a little optimistic, and as a result have too many of their shelves. (That's just a personal observation though, your local scene may be different.) There is a certain level of collectorness about this game, and I think they could sell quite a few Gozantis just based on the collector logic.

 

I do here you about the GEE WIZ argument, but c'mon, live a little. I think they could introduce it in an intelligent way. I'm just doubtful that they will, because I think that they won't see it being used all that much in the game because it seems to make so little tactical sense on the face of it, and by the time they could wrap their production strategy around SW: Rebels, the initial crush that we're having will be over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said before (in another thread, I think), the one thing that makes me think they might add an actual carrier mechanic is the fact that the Ghost could also make use of it with its little baby fighter. Two ships from opposite sides of the hot new "get all the licensees to push it" property could make use of a gimmicky mechanic that a lot of customers would like to see regardless of its actual usefulness. Sounds like a compelling business argument to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This quest for bigger, "cooler" ships is stepping out of the basic concept of the dogfighting game that is X-Wing. I agree that the Gozanti cruiser is a cool looking ship, but to keep the game balanced, the "upcoming" Imperial huge ship is going to have to be able to go toe-to-toe with a CR90 on fairly even terms. I don't know enough about the Gozanti to comment on it, but that's my take on it.

I don't see FFG adding ships just because of a "cool" factor. They've got to be playable and not overpowered. They've got to be vulnerable enough that starfighters can still take them out during the course of a game. GW fell into this trap years ago when they introduced certain "super"-character figures that made a mockery out of the regular troops, and suddenly one army was instantly superior to the rest. End result, introduce another super-character to another army to balance it out. Didn't work. The game devolved into character vs character battles, and became far removed from the skirmish game it started out as.

The carrier game mechanic is an interesting proposition, although I see it as time consuming for the scope of the game that we currently have. It could possibly be used in a dedicated scenario of some sort, but I think carriers belong in Armada, not X-Wing. If we keep adding huge ships to X-Wing, we're just playing Armada with bigger models.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Likewise. I think a gozanti that could launch 4 TIEs during a fame would be totally COOL. I just don't see a game design/mechanical REASON to do so.

 

To play the other side of the argument for a moment, isn't the coolness itself a good reason to do so?

 

 

It's more that using the carrier would be entirely disadvantageous: undocked TIEs can move faster and they can shoot, docked TIEs are twelve points of nothing each until they undock. It's the equivalent of leaving half your list flying up and down your end of the board out of action until mid-game.

 

I've yet to see a mechanic suggestion that would give you any reason to leave your TIEs docked to it. The whole reason for docking TIEs to a Gozanti is so the pilots can stretch their legs, eat and sleep. Plus the Gozanti has something the TIEs don't: a hyperdrive.

Gozanti Cruiser is perfect for an Imperial huge, but I doubt it'll have TIE docking.

 

This quest for bigger, "cooler" ships is stepping out of the basic concept of the dogfighting game that is X-Wing. I agree that the Gozanti cruiser is a cool looking ship, but to keep the game balanced, the "upcoming" Imperial huge ship is going to have to be able to go toe-to-toe with a CR90 on fairly even terms. I don't know enough about the Gozanti to comment on it, but that's my take on it.

Unless it's the Rebel Transport bracket and there's an even bigger Imperial huge for the CR-90 bracket. Given FFG dug the Vigil out of obscurity to stick in Age of Rebellion (a corvette that exists pretty much to be a corvette-sized ISD), it's not a bad bet.

 

 

All that being said, wouldn't be surprised if FFG leaves perfectly peg sized slots in the Gozanti docking tubes...

Edited by TIE Pilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember when riptides turned up in the tau codex and it was clear they hadn't thought it through it was added because it was cool, what we got was a unit open to abuse when used in multiples.

I'd much prefer we got ships that added new aspects to the game or changed the meta than getting it because it's cool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's more that using the carrier would be entirely disadvantageous: undocked TIEs can move faster and they can shoot, docked TIEs are twelve points of nothing each until they undock. It's the equivalent of leaving half your list flying up and down your end of the board out of action until mid-game.

I've yet to see a mechanic suggestion that would give you any reason to leave your TIEs docked to it.

That all depends on how the mechanic is implemented. Someone in this thread has mentioned a couple times his idea of the TIEs being able to maneuver the turn they undock, allowing them to get a huge speed burst on one turn by combining the carrier's movement with the fighters movement to get 15 bases of movement for the TIEs in one turn.

But that is the challenge of implementing the mechanic, finding a way to make it useful. It would be simplicity itself to come up with mechanics for docking and launching, they would just be pointless things to do. This whole thread is about speculating how such a mechanic might be made useful (I don't think it can be).

Edited by Forgottenlore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do here you about the GEE WIZ argument, but c'mon, live a little. I think they could introduce it in an intelligent way. I'm just doubtful that they will, because I think that they won't see it being used all that much in the game because it seems to make so little tactical sense on the face of it, and by the time they could wrap their production strategy around SW: Rebels, the initial crush that we're having will be over.

I can imaging someone having said the same about the GR75 transport. 

 

The carrier version of the CR90, Farstar.

commissioned__the_far_star_by_colourbran

 

500px-FarStar.jpg

Edited by gabe69velasquez

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see the argument that having the ties docked in the Gonzati offers no tactical benefit and that all un docking would take to long during the course of a dog fight and therefore is best left "off screen"  That being said, in Rebels, I noticed that the only time you see the Ties undock is during a dog fight.  The Rebels attack a Gonzati and the fighters scramble very quickly and are pretty much in the fight right away.  So I think that we will see the Gonzati as the Imperial equivalent of the Rebel transport in epic play and I think that we will see an undocking mechanic.  I doubt we will see a docking mechanic outside of scenario play as that would take to long, be to difficult during a dog fight, but who knows.  Additionally I think that one of the previous posters on this thread put it best as to why you would leave your fighters docked.  You would receive the protection of your carriers shields.  That is a bid deal to unshielded ships.  Also if you did give them some kind of speed boost to help them get through the range 3-5 band that could be beneficial too.  I think it will happen.  Only time will tell for sure.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's more that using the carrier would be entirely disadvantageous: undocked TIEs can move faster and they can shoot, docked TIEs are twelve points of nothing each until they undock. It's the equivalent of leaving half your list flying up and down your end of the board out of action until mid-game.

 

I've yet to see a mechanic suggestion that would give you any reason to leave your TIEs docked to it. The whole reason for docking TIEs to a Gozanti is so the pilots can stretch their legs, eat and sleep. Plus the Gozanti has something the TIEs don't: a hyperdrive.

Gozanti Cruiser is perfect for an Imperial huge, but I doubt it'll have TIE docking.

Reading your criticism gave me ideas as to how it could work. You might not want to leave your TIEs docked on the ship long, for the reasons you mentioned, but being able to re-dock could have it's advantages.

1) You could spend 6 points instead of 12 for a pilot without a ship, and then be able to swap out any face up pilot damage cards (8/33) if a ship you did pay in full for docked. Maybe even the face down damage cards if the carrier has the ability to let you look at them. It's a bit of a gamble but so are a lot of other mechanics in the game. Maybe the only good reason for a carrier is damage card related but others have already made the repair droids argument. I know one of the criticisms of this idea would be that TIE fighter only have three hull, but on the other hand they are agile and if being able to repair a ship with a droid is worth the points, then any reasonably similar repairing should be also.

2) There are already several ships in the game that can boost one and boost two, so being able to have the docked fighters move after the carrier is like a boost after the set up and after any docking action. Maybe only one or two also.

3) ships that have payloads like the TIE advanced, TIE bomber, or TIE defender could be reload while docked, whether that's realistic or not is another matter, but game mechanics aren't always 100% respecting of the realistic, in sci-fi especially.

4) Docking would have to be an action, one that isn't lost when touching the bases, but rather has the requirement of touching bases.

#) still pondering this...

Edited by gabe69velasquez

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Working on a concept to use a split base like the one above. There are 2 influence zones one to separate above from below and one for docking.

Star_Destroyer_Base.png

as for launching it counts as sore of like an action (docking action) so during the action step (but not taking any action slots) I thought of having a ship placed anywhere in the docking influence zone facing any direction and immediately executing either a 1 straight or a 1 bank. In order to dock the ship simply have to be at the docking influence zone and use their action as a docking action (so no stress tokens).

 

While docked I have considered a number of actions inside the docking bay from 

Recharging shields

re-equipping discarded secondary weapons (such as concussion missiles).

Repairing (Ship) damage

or replacing pilot cards that have pilot critical damage.

Edited by Marinealver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What if the ship had an ability like the a-wing refit? You could get a 2 point discount from tie fighters you deploy. No variants, though, just the basic tie fighter.

Either that, or force it to deploy with 4 academy pilots (discounted, of course) but work them into the gozanti cost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought of another couple of advantage to the Docking system I mentioned.

 

Since your fighters are protected by the Gozanti's shields, you could get in much closer to the rebel's CR90 or GR75 without them taking any damage or having their formation broken up by any obstacles along the way. At 2 Epic points each, two Gozanti's could Deploy a 8 TIE swarm, in formation, where ever it needs to be. 

 

Another thing you could do, but I'm not sure if you'd want to, is keep them docked until you feel the need to add fresh reinforcements, or a group of end-game ships into the battle.

 

Also, keep in mind, they don't have to be TIE fighters. There's no reason you couldn't have TIE Advanced, Bombers, Defenders, Interceptors, or Phantoms assigned to the Gozanti.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but to keep the game balanced, the "upcoming" Imperial huge ship is going to have to be able to go toe-to-toe with a CR90 on fairly even terms.

I'm assuming the Gozanti would be more on par in size and abilities with the GR-75.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

for the most part, I agree that a carrier mechanic does not work, even in an epic game. Just for discussion fodder though, what if a carrier could "launch" reinforcements through the expediture of energy? Not ships already in your list, but additional fighters? Academy pilots, say. Or perhaps you can purchased docked ships at a points discount, but have to spend energy to undock them? This would make the gozanti or other carrier a high prioritiy target. If the gozanti can add up to 4 academy ties by spending energy, you want to kill it before that happens. I could see this more as a scenario than a regular rule. Just thinking out loud really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...