Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
JJFDVORAK

[CCL] All systems will bow to the First Order

56 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

You need to put a purple +1 on the electromagnetic fins card so that you actually have an energy capacity. (I might have been ninja'd on this, I didn't read all the comments :ph34r: )

edit: see Vector and other titles

Edited by nitrobenz
Added link for Vector title
UnitOmega likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

23 minutes ago, nitrobenz said:

You need to put a purple +1 on the electromagnetic fins card so that you actually have an energy capacity. (I might have been ninja'd on this, I didn't read all the comments :ph34r: )

edit: see Vector and other titles

Cool, I'll do that.

 

Actually if I did that, wouldn't that give the ship an energy at the start of the game? I don't really want the ship to have energy in and of itself. It gets one energy and if it doesn't use it, it looses it. 

Edited by JJFDVORAK
nitrobenz likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I updated the Boarding Party card based on suggestions and added it to the OP. I'll put it here to. What do you think?

Boarding-Party-Front-Face_1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point on starting with energy, you could just put a purple one on the card and say "place one energy on this card" in the text. I brought it up because a ship cannot have more energy on it that its capacity. Cards can also have energy capacity, but don't start charged so that might be the way to go.

JJFDVORAK likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Revision to boarding party looks good to me. I love the expanded crew card (not "this only" :)

Looking at it again Electromagnetic fins is really wordy. How about making it a dual side: first part same on both sides, second part is "slide maneuver" on one side Regen on the other, and finish both sides with "during the end step you may flip this card."

Edited by nitrobenz
JJFDVORAK likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, nitrobenz said:

Revision to boarding party looks good to me. I love the expanded crew card (not "this only" :)

Looking at it again Electromagnetic fins is really wordy. How about making it a dual side: first part same on both sides, second part is "slide maneuver" on one side Regen on the other, and finish both sides with "during the end step you may flip this card."

I actually agree with you about the wordiness. But I want the option to do both in one turn if somehow you can ever get an extra energy token. Also I hate Dual sided cards. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok so I also just redid my Captain Phasma crew card. I am going to add it to the OP. Here it is as well. 

Captain-Phasma-Front-Face_1.jpg

This card works on its own as a stress dealer, but really helps with a boarding party. That was the idea. What do you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe 2 points for Phasma crew? Consider what she does compared to similar effects, 2 points for:

- R3-A2: stress only from attack, r1-3 in arc, stacks

- Tactician: stress only from attack, r2 in arc, stacks

- Kylo's shuttle: end of combat, r1-2 no arc, unstressed target (opponent can pick a different unstressed ship in range)

- Flechette Torpedo: only from attack, r2-3 in arc with target lock, stacks but only on low hull targets

- Fletchette Cannon: only from attack, r1-3 in arc, unstressed target

I'd say Phasma crew is overall better than all of these (with the possible exception of R3-A2) because she can stress a Target before they move which means they have to act stressed (do a green) to be on the safe side. If she's higher ps then she's throwing stress at somebody at r1 after a boost/barrel roll. Either way a generic is stress out for an additional turn which is pretty awesome. 

2 points still might be a little under cost...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, nitrobenz said:

Maybe 2 points for Phasma crew? Consider what she does compared to similar effects, 2 points for:

- R3-A2: stress only from attack, r1-3 in arc, stacks

- Tactician: stress only from attack, r2 in arc, stacks

- Kylo's shuttle: end of combat, r1-2 no arc, unstressed target (opponent can pick a different unstressed ship in range)

- Flechette Torpedo: only from attack, r2-3 in arc with target lock, stacks but only on low hull targets

- Fletchette Cannon: only from attack, r1-3 in arc, unstressed target

I'd say Phasma crew is overall better than all of these (with the possible exception of R3-A2) because she can stress a Target before they move which means they have to act stressed (do a green) to be on the safe side. If she's higher ps then she's throwing stress at somebody at r1 after a boost/barrel roll. Either way a generic is stress out for an additional turn which is pretty awesome. 

2 points still might be a little under cost...

Yeah you're right. Originally I had it at the start of the Combat phase but then changed it to match Boarding Party team. I may have to rework it to make it slightly less good or just make her 2 points. Would that make it more balanced? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would prefer if Expanded Crew Compartment was a double crew upgrade, with the ships upgrade bar boosted to match. A teamb is at least 2 people- it doesnt make sence to stick one in a Bwing E2 or Awing Trainer, but expanding a lambada, falcon or houbds tooth  into a cheap team transport makes plenty of sense.

nitrobenz likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Rakaydos said:

I would prefer if Expanded Crew Compartment was a double crew upgrade, with the ships upgrade bar boosted to match. A teamb is at least 2 people- it doesnt make sence to stick one in a Bwing E2 or Awing Trainer, but expanding a lambada, falcon or houbds tooth  into a cheap team transport makes plenty of sense.

This is true, I guess. I just wanted the AAL to be able to take 2 teams, but not Palp. Also teams are really of limited use anyway outside of Epic. I just wanted to put two AALs (one with Phasma and 1 Boarding Party and the other with 2 Boarding Parties, on the table across from a CR90 and board the crap out of it after a few rounds of shooting. Or better yet a Ghost, because the stress of their FZ0 blasters would help with dealing damage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just updated Electromagnetic Thrust Vectoring Fins in the OP. Here'sthe new version.

Electromagnetic-Thrust-Vectoring-Fins-Fr

It is almost identical, except now instead of automatically happening at the start of the Combat phase, it happens after you perform an action. That way if you are stressed or bump or run over an obstacle, and lose your action, you can't rotate 90 degrees. Also it makes more sense now, because it could help you use Boarding Party and the delivery of troops is the reason the AAL had Electromagnetic Thrust Vectoring Fins in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, AwesomeJedi said:

Captain Phasma should say "Imperial only."

Well  she was rather obliging in lowering the shieldsfor the resistance. :P If she'd just. Said no, even if they'd killed her, odds are the whole attack on the base fails

JJFDVORAK likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AwesomeJedi said:

Captain Phasma should say "Imperial only."

Duh. My bad. I will fix it on my end, but I already submitted it, but if I make it through the first round, I'll fix it in the actual CCL. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

58 minutes ago, VanderLegion said:

Well  she was rather obliging in lowering the shieldsfor the resistance. :P If she'd just. Said no, even if they'd killed her, odds are the whole attack on the base fails

Yeah she was kind of a big joke. My original card for her was a reflection of that and only gave stress to low PS generics,(she is only scarry if you are a schmuck)but I know low PS generics aren't used as much and that would really limit the card, so I made it the current version. Still worse for generics though.:D

Edited by JJFDVORAK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Voting has gone live on the CCL Imperial entries. Here is the link to the voting announcement page. Click the link in the first post.  My entry is labeled Atmospheric Lander and is the 6th entry - right after Star Courier (I think) Anyway, I hope you like my attemp at the Atmospheric Assault Lander and will give me a positive vote. Thanks.

 

nitrobenz likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

,Well the votes are in and the total votes for the Atmospheric Assault Lander are as follows. 

IMG_20170331_151318.jpg

So I guess my expansion wasn't as great as I thought. Thank you to the 32 of you who voted for me. To the 21 who had no opinion, what could I have done to get your vote? And to the 47 who voted no, why did you? Was it that my cards sucked, that they were not well thought out or  unbalanced? Did you just not like the ship and it was nothing to do with the cards or balance? I was really hoping to get some feedback on my cards. Please let me know if you voted for me or not and how I could have gotten your vote. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/23/2017 at 9:49 PM, VanderLegion said:

Well  she was rather obliging in lowering the shieldsfor the resistance. :P If she'd just. Said no, even if they'd killed her, odds are the whole attack on the base fails

one of the many points in that movie that pissed me off.

Why. The. Hell. would she go with it? To save her neck? She would die one way or the other, either by them shooting her, being on the planet if their foolish plan happened to succeed, or her superiors learning she enabled the attack, even if it failed, and slowed their plans down?

"Do it or i'll kill you" when the objective is killing everyone anyway is such a dumb ****ing plot point. "Then kill me cause you're going to kill me anyway and you cant kill anyone else without my help"

JJFDVORAK likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, JJFDVORAK said:

,Well the votes are in and the total votes for the Atmospheric Assault Lander are as follows. 

So I guess my expansion wasn't as great as I thought. Thank you to the 32 of you who voted for me. To the 21 who had no opinion, what could I have done to get your vote? And to the 47 who voted no, why did you? Was it that my cards sucked, that they were not well thought out or  unbalanced? Did you just not like the ship and it was nothing to do with the cards or balance? I was really hoping to get some feedback on my cards. Please let me know if you voted for me or not and how I could have gotten your vote. Thanks.

Personally, I think my biggest issue with it (I don't remember if I voted against or no opinion) was the lack of primary weapon.  So far EVERY non-epic ship in the game has a primary weapon, and only one has even gotten down to 1 die, which the designers themselves have said they'd change if they were creating it now instead of back in the day.  The single die attack severely limits the HWK, and I don't especially like the idea of another ship that it's even worse.

JJFDVORAK likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

 

16 minutes ago, Vineheart01 said:

one of the many points in that movie that pissed me off.

Why. The. Hell. would she go with it? To save her neck? She would die one way or the other, either by them shooting her, being on the planet if their foolish plan happened to succeed, or her superiors learning she enabled the attack, even if it failed, and slowed their plans down?

"Do it or i'll kill you" when the objective is killing everyone anyway is such a dumb ****ing plot point. "Then kill me cause you're going to kill me anyway and you cant kill anyone else without my help"

Yeah, Phasma is one of many, many problems with TFA.  I really don't like that movie much at all. It really feels like a blatant remake of 4 and 6. I wonder if disdain for Episode 7 led people to not vote for my expansion?

Edited by JJFDVORAK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, VanderLegion said:

Personally, I think my biggest issue with it (I don't remember if I voted against or no opinion) was the lack of primary weapon.  So far EVERY non-epic ship in the game has a primary weapon, and only one has even gotten down to 1 die, which the designers themselves have said they'd change if they were creating it now instead of back in the day.  The single die attack severely limits the HWK, and I don't especially like the idea of another ship that it's even worse.

Oh, I guess I didn't make it clear that the title

Landing-Zone-Cover-Fire-Front-Face.jpg

was basically stapled to the card and therefore you would be able to buy a turret for cheap(because of the limit to the firing arc) and that is why there was no primary. The AAL doesn't have guns, just a turret for clearing a landing zone. I thought it was a clever way to force you to buy a turret option that was really only 270 degrees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, JJFDVORAK said:

Oh, I guess I didn't make it clear that the title

Landing-Zone-Cover-Fire-Front-Face.jpg

was basically stapled to the card and therefore you would be able to buy a turret for cheap(because of the limit to the firing arc) and that is why there was no primary. The AAL doesn't have guns, just a turret for clearing a landing zone. I thought it was a clever way to force you to buy a turret option that was really only 270 degrees.

I get that the title was intended to be an auto include.  But turrets are auto includes on the hwk too and it still suffers for only having a 1 attack primary.  Turrets don't work at all ranges for one thing.  Or some have requirements to fire, so you'er usless if you don't have a focus for blaster turret or TL for synced turret when it comes out.  Or the old damage deck could discard your turret and make you extra useless, etc.  I understand the flavor of it, I just...don't really want another ship with a useless primary.

JJFDVORAK likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, VanderLegion said:

I get that the title was intended to be an auto include.  But turrets are auto includes on the hwk too and it still suffers for only having a 1 attack primary.  Turrets don't work at all ranges for one thing.  Or some have requirements to fire, so you'er usless if you don't have a focus for blaster turret or TL for synced turret when it comes out.  Or the old damage deck could discard your turret and make you extra useless, etc.  I understand the flavor of it, I just...don't really want another ship with a useless primary.

Fair enough. But with that logic, is anything under 3 really worth it? I don't know about you, but when I'm squad building, if there are two ships that are relatively equal but one has a 2 dice primary and the other has a 3 dice primary, I'm taking the 3 every time. Especially in today's (maybe yesterday's - post nerf) meta of token stacking, 2 dice can rarely get the job done anyway. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, JJFDVORAK said:

Fair enough. But with that logic, is anything under 3 really worth it? I don't know about you, but when I'm squad building, if there are two ships that are relatively equal but one has a 2 dice primary and the other has a 3 dice primary, I'm taking the 3 every time. Especially in today's (maybe yesterday's - post nerf) meta of token stacking, 2 dice can rarely get the job done anyway. 

With the nerfs to x7 and palp I think 2 attack is totally viable again.  I've been practicing a tie swarm again (partly because we're doing a RO/ANH tournament next month, but I'm playing against whatever, not just stuff for that tournament).  And I've been running plenty of 2 attack ships outside of that.  A single 2-die attack might not do a lot to a high agility target, but if you have multiple you can do just fine.

JJFDVORAK likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0