Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Babaganoosh

Scavenger Crane not realistic - is that a problem for anyone else?

Recommended Posts

I see... what is the deal with the turret and HLC on the card then?  other than hotshot blaster what is disposable turret and cannon?  Hot shot blaster is a disposable 1 shot turret but it is a scum upgrade that takes up the same card as the crane.

 

I get the missile ammo being picked up but what possible use is there for a turret and HLC?  There are no one time use turrets and HLCs to start with.......

Edited by Tokyogriz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Just think of the Scavenger Crane as having a really awesome magnet/tractor beam with a remote activation and syncing setup for your ship, alongside a power source for whatever you just picked up. Why?

It's awesome! It doesn't need to make sense because ultimately, it's a cool idea for a game mechanic. I mean a lot of things in gaming have made me scratch my head over the realism of it all for a while. Take Halo's MA5 series of Combat Rifles, for instance.

 

Why do they have huge ass flashlights where a Grenade Launcher should CLEARLY be? Well the answer is simple: That'd be overpowered and totally unfun. So it gets a harmless flashlight instead! Something else can fill that grenade launcher role as its own individual weapon.

Same thing applies.

 

To say nothing of a universe with FTL travel but we still use gunpowder-based assault rifles...

 

Anyway, I'm probably spoiled by FFG's good work so far of staying relatively faithful, as much as possible anyway, to the star wars universe's sense of realism. 

You know, for what it's worth the UNSC used that stuff because it was ridiculously easy to produce en masse and they were way, way more focused on spreading far and wide via colony than they were re-arming the entire UNSC. Granted, had they pursued energy weaponry they probably would have had some pretty solid stuff.

But ultimately what they had worked fine against the Covenant. It wasn't the ground game against them that they were losing, it was being glassed from Orbit that really did the UNSC in.

Well that and it's a great way to telegraph the differences between the two thematically. I think you underestimate for how long we're going to continue using ballistics reliant on a chemical reaction. I'm honestly surprised Star Wars lacks such weapons at large.

 

Can think of a lot of situations where I'd rather have an M-14 over an E-11. Of course, that is once again a matter of theme/fluff. But the same thought process applies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What are you guys talking about? The discarded weapon has to be on the ship that's using the Scavenger Crane.

 

edit: babbaganoush beat me to it.

I understand completely how the upgrade works, I was trying to introduce some brevity. You are thinking too hard and taking this upgrade too literal. It jury rigs explosive crap out of blown up ships. Be thankful that it can't be used on debris fields. It could be more than just a crane, it might have an explosive matter converter attached, who knows.

 

 

You mean "levity", jerk. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see this as a minor boost for scum missile carriers, that can't equip extra munitions because they lack a torp slot.

(...)

 

Is it thematic to have crazy stuff like this going on in star wars? Absolutely.

...

....

That was a beautiful spoiler prevention arrangement, nicely done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is to pre empt future cards that can discard said upgrades. Watch this space as the Outrider loses their HLC lol.

Boba Fett and the old damage deck can both cause you to discard turret and cannons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boba/Old Deck can discard weapons. But i wouldnt be surprised if there was something in the future that specifically attacked weapons.

 

Overloader Missiles

4pts

Missile -- Range 2-3 -- 3die attack

Attack: Focus - Spend your focus and discard this card. If this attack hits, cancel all dice and discard one Turret, Cannon, Torpedo, or Missile upgrade on the defender.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've got mirror matches with identical pilots on both sides, munitions that hit as hard as overripe bananas, weird upgrade combinations that break the laws of physics in a make-believe universe with talking monkeys and space wizards - yet this seems unrealistic to you?

 

Well, colour me perplexed. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not arguing that TIE intereptor model with TIE bomber stats is a good or justifiable idea; I'm saying that it makes about as much sense as salvaging a Proton Torpedo from the wreck of a TIE fighter.

The point you're either missing or ignoring... Is that a Tie Interceptor with a bomber dial and stats is a bad idea, so fluff doesn't factor into it at all. Where as the scavenger crane is a very cool idea and so the value of the upgrade in terms of what it adds to the game trumps the fluff.

Theme is important but must take a backseat to mechanics and gameplay.

So when designing something, a developer must consider how much it adds to the game, then how well it fits in the lore, ideally both of those things are positive. But sometimes what something adds to the game is positive enough that the fact it doesn't fit within the lore isn't reason enough not to add it.

That's why your interceptor with a HWK dial isn't a valid argument, because the reason why that's a bad idea has much less to do with lore and much more to do with it simply being a bad idea from the gameplay stance.

Also depending on what you consider a valid source for lore, it could be argued that interceptors, bombers and fighters are all equally maneuverable since we don't see any real evidence on the screen that bombers are slower and less maneuverable than other ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm not arguing that TIE intereptor model with TIE bomber stats is a good or justifiable idea; I'm saying that it makes about as much sense as salvaging a Proton Torpedo from the wreck of a TIE fighter.

The point you're either missing or ignoring... Is that a Tie Interceptor with a bomber dial and stats is a bad idea, so fluff doesn't factor into it at all. Where as the scavenger crane is a very cool idea and so the value of the upgrade in terms of what it adds to the game trumps the fluff.

Theme is important but must take a backseat to mechanics and gameplay.

So when designing something, a developer must consider how much it adds to the game, then how well it fits in the lore, ideally both of those things are positive. But sometimes what something adds to the game is positive enough that the fact it doesn't fit within the lore isn't reason enough not to add it.

That's why your interceptor with a HWK dial isn't a valid argument, because the reason why that's a bad idea has much less to do with lore and much more to do with it simply being a bad idea from the gameplay stance.

Also depending on what you consider a valid source for lore, it could be argued that interceptors, bombers and fighters are all equally maneuverable since we don't see any real evidence on the screen that bombers are slower and less maneuverable than other ships.

 

 

I think we basically agree, actually.  

 

Anyway, I've said multiple times that those examples are meant to illustrate how a break from the in-universe realism / lore could be unsettling; and I fail to see how switching the TIE Interceptor and TIE Bomber's skins has any impact on gameplay - that is an entirely fluffy change.  All that I'm proposing in that example is that you change the ship names and the models you use for those ships, nothing else.  No gameplay changes at all, and it would still be a stupid idea - on purely fluffy grounds.  What I'm trying to say is that fluff/lore/realism IS a factor that shouldn't be ignored.  Thankfully, in the vast majority of cases, FFG makes a very good effort to be faithful; this card is an exception that proves the rule, really.  

 

Does game balance matter more than a strict adherence to fluff? Yes, of course it does, especially in a competitive game environment.  All I'm saying is that this card is silly and breaks the suspension of disbelief in a very cavalier way, and that in the final calculation, fluff does matter - it affects how enjoyable the game is.  This card accomplishes a pretty minimal in-game effect, and the fluff justifications for its function are comical.  The worst part is that if you wanted to make a more reasonable card that accomplishes a very similar effect it wouldn't be hard to come up with one.  Here's an example:

 

Salvaged Parts:

Illicit (or Mod)

Action: Flip over a [missile, torpedo, turret, cannon, or modification] that you had previously discarded, then discard this card.

1 point

 

Not perfect, but much easier to justify than scooping up an APT from the still-hot scrap of a TIE fighter that just exploded nearby.  

 

I'd say it's clear that different people have different standards for the level of faithfulness to the fluff or in-universe realism for their games.  I prefer games that take pains to be as faithful as possible, and take the time to make sure that gameplay isn't negatively impacted by that.  A good example might be the computer game TIE Fighter, which was incredibly fun but also relatively faithful and a reasonable with regard to the 'realism'of the star wars universe.  Compare that to the Rogue Squadron games, where you can do stuff like pick up power-ups by flying over them in the middle of a dogfight.  TIE fighter was more of a simulator, Rogue Squadron was more of an arcade game.  I always saw X-wing miniatures as closer to a simulator game in the attitude it takes towards realism.

Edited by Babaganoosh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In terms of gameplay, yeah sure, whatever.  REgenning your upgrades is interesting.  But I'm purely talking about thematics here.  And don't tell me the theme of the game doesn't matter - this game's star wars skin is at least half the reason that so many people play it.

For me at least, the Star Wars theme was the very reason, the sole reason I got into this game. The theme is the only reason I have purchased as much as I have. So yes, theme matters to me.

 

I agree, again this is me, with Babaganoosh that when an upgrade can't be rationalized simply, easily and cleanly without jumping though hoops takes away from the game. I know this is fiction with wizards in space using glowing swords. I get it. But there is still a theme. So when I look at something and go 'huh?', that isn't good. Some abilities, upgrades, conditions, I could just do without in general.

 

 

So yes, even in a fictional universe it should make sense. Seldom has this not been the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty sure several spacebound games have had some kind of repair arm mechanic that kinda made no sense logically.

 

FTL has two such arms. One does make sense, it gets you more scrap which is used as currency. Obviously it means it grabs it more efficiently rather than whatever normal way you get the junk. The other is a repair arm, which uses the scrap to patch your hull....?

 

Nobody questioned it though. Because its just a fun mechanic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I totally agree with the OP. Scavenger Crane makes no sense thematically. Also it makes no sense in "time of gameplay". By that I mean an entire game of Xwing is like, what, a minute or two real time? So now because we have a crane, we can create and rearm weapons from scrap in the span of a turn? What is that like 5 seconds? This is way to fast even for Star Wars(space wizards not withstanding) It took R2 a couple minutes just to reactivate the hyperdrive on the Falcon and all the parts were there. Remember the major backlash when people originally wanted the Gonzati to be able to allow ships to "re-dock" so they could repair or re-arm, because that was no feasible in the time the game plays in? Now we can create weapons out of scrap and no one cares because"gameplay>>>>fluff". I agree with that, to an extent, but some gameplay mechanics are unnecessary and of the two(re-docking or creating weapons from scrap) I'd much rather allow re-docking. So that is a major issue to me. But I can get over all that. The main issue I have with this upgrade is that it is an illicit slot. So now I can put a crane on a Z95? It should have been a Scum only, Large ship and Quadjumper only modification. That would make so much more sense. Also it should have been an action that gives you a weapons disabled token as well. That way it would take at least two turns to use( so like 20 seconds real time)

Edited by JJFDVORAK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main issue I have with this upgrade is that it is an illicit slot. So now I can put a crane on a Z95? It should have been a Scum only, Large ship and Quadjumper only modification. That would make so much more sense. Also it should have been an action that gives you a weapons disabled token as well. That way it would take at least two turns to use( so like 20 seconds real time)

 

Now you've created an upgrade that is only really worth taking on high PS ships large ships that will usually fire before they receive their Weapon Disabled tokens. 

 

It would have been kind of cool if Quadjumpers could take "Large Ship Only" upgrades though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Suspension of disbelief is a funny thing.

Taken literally, there's a TON of things that just make no sense in X-wing. Maneuvers for starters. Why can't you fly sideways? Why is K-turning somehow difficult when firing any thruster should turn you around? How do you even barrel roll in space? X-wings move like WWI biplanes (with good reason). Why do HLCs have a maximum range? And so on.

It's funny that we accept the big stuff and get hung up on the little stuff. Magic space wizard-monks are cool, midichlorians are ridiculous precisely because they attempt to explain something that was suspension of disbelief. We want consistency in the framework of big things we suspend our disbelief on.

Anyway, the scavenger crane might make sense if you have a YV666 with a crew of droids or jawas working to strip ships and jury rig weapons. In most cases the scavenger crane might be explained by scavenging power sources for your cannon or whatnot. That's probably the easiest to explain in a combat situation, you've stolen a TIE's power core or some batteries you can jury-rig to your weapon systems.

Edited by The Inquisitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's why your interceptor with a HWK dial isn't a valid argument, because the reason why that's a bad idea has much less to do with lore and much more to do with it simply being a bad idea from the gameplay stance.

 

An upgrade that allowed you to take a 4 point discount on an Interceptor but forced you to use the HWK-290 dial might be a better example (for the record, I'd fly the **** out of a 14 point ship with a 3/3/3/0 stat-line with the HWK dial and the Interceptor action bar). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've got mirror matches with identical pilots on both sides, munitions that hit as hard as overripe bananas, weird upgrade combinations that break the laws of physics in a make-believe universe with talking monkeys and space wizards - yet this seems unrealistic to you?

 

Well, colour me perplexed. :P

 

Let me add 3 pictures to make it even more fun ^_°

n5ql7S6.png

3iSqQKg.png

rMYbvrL.jpg

People should feel lucky that uses the stats of your ordinance instead of just freaking annihilating enemy ***** with slingshotting wreaks onto them. :D

Edited by SEApocalypse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main issue I have with this upgrade is that it is an illicit slot. So now I can put a crane on a Z95? It should have been a Scum only, Large ship and Quadjumper only modification. That would make so much more sense. Also it should have been an action that gives you a weapons disabled token as well. That way it would take at least two turns to use( so like 20 seconds real time)

 

Now you've created an upgrade that is only really worth taking on high PS ships large ships that will usually fire before they receive their Weapon Disabled tokens. 

 

It would have been kind of cool if Quadjumpers could take "Large Ship Only" upgrades though.

Usually actions happen before shooting so if it was an action that caused the crane effect and gave you a weapons disabled token, it should effect all PS the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The main issue I have with this upgrade is that it is an illicit slot. So now I can put a crane on a Z95? It should have been a Scum only, Large ship and Quadjumper only modification. That would make so much more sense. Also it should have been an action that gives you a weapons disabled token as well. That way it would take at least two turns to use( so like 20 seconds real time)

 

Now you've created an upgrade that is only really worth taking on high PS ships large ships that will usually fire before they receive their Weapon Disabled tokens. 

 

It would have been kind of cool if Quadjumpers could take "Large Ship Only" upgrades though.

Usually actions happen before shooting so if it was an action that caused the crane effect and gave you a weapons disabled token, it should effect all PS the same.

 

 

I didn't catch the bit about it being an action. I was thinking it would still trigger like the current card only deal a weapons disabled token when you recover your discarded upgrade.

 

Giving up an action and an attack makes it a really bad card for two points.

Edited by WWHSD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are you guys talking about? The discarded weapon has to be on the ship that's using the Scavenger Crane.

edit: babbaganoush beat me to it.

I understand completely how the upgrade works, I was trying to introduce some brevity. You are thinking too hard and taking this upgrade too literal. It jury rigs explosive crap out of blown up ships. Be thankful that it can't be used on debris fields. It could be more than just a crane, it might have an explosive matter converter attached, who knows.

You mean "levity", jerk.

Haha, I have a phone autocorrect moment and this princess gets all princessy Edited by Archangelspiv

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...