Jump to content
MacchuWA

Nym players: would you still run him if Bomblet Generator only rolled one die?

Recommended Posts

Obviously, I'm talking about those who play the standard advanced sensors, Genius, VI, Bomblet Nym. If you're currently playing Nym in some other configuration without Bomblet, more power to you, but obviously your build would be unaffected by this change.

I don't play Nym personally, but it feels like this might be a good change to diminish his OPness of both Nym and Bomblet Generator.

Regarding the card in isolation, for three points, Bomblets should not be as far ahead of seismics as they are - on average damage, a bomblet pays for itself if you drop more than one, and that's not hard to do. Dropping it down to one die would mean on average damage you'd have to drop three to be worth more than seismic, which seems about right. It means that Bomblet stops being autoinclude whee it's available and the alternative options are seismics or other reveal bombs, without rendering it irrelevant.

As far as the standard Nym combo goes, he suddenly becomes far less threatening, much more in line with where he ought to be. Your high agility aces (think Soontir, but also Inquisitor etc.) now can't catch a pair of unlucky bombs and be destroyed, now they need at least three (excluding the effects of crits I guess) and you need to be very unlucky - 5 or 6 is probably more realistic, and Nym should have died by then. Doesn't mean that Nym is completely useless - that area denial is still effective, but it's not an autowin any more - you need other damage dealing mechanisms to handle those lists as well. 

Best part is, FFG could make this change without changing the printed cards, just the rules reference card, which they've been more willing to do in the past (see Phantom nerf).

Does this seem fair? Would it open up the meta a bit more if Nym was less dominant? And are there any other, better changes that could be made (short of stripping his EPT, which I agree shouldn't have been there in the first place but, Reddit FAQ notwithstanding, history has shown FFG is unwilling to do).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I lost to DenNym the other night because I forgot about Dengar' s ability. I think Nym dropped three bombs the entire game. While the combination is strong and a pain to fly against, I don't find it OP. I do think it's one of the builds that's relatively easy to fly.

Face it, some of the suggestions made on these threads, while cloaked as fixes, are designed to make certain upgrades unplayable either by hobbling their ability or pricing them to the point of being unusable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Translator engaged:

3 hours ago, MacchuWA said:

Nym Players, will you still run him if we Nerfed him?

End Translation:

Depends on how much he is nerfed. Are we talking Whisper levels or Dengar level?

As for Bomblet generator what about TIE Punishers, oh okay no one will be flying those anyways, but there is always K-wings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I‘d prefer something like Gonk or Rey: use your action to create bombs (maybe with a maximum?) and then use them as they are now.

That would punish bad choices and reward good ones - maybe a barrel roll is more important than making one more bomb?

The downside is of course that the change is not as comfortable to implement. Yours is much easier because it‘s the reference card.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like a decent enough proposal to me. I was pretty surprised when they revealed that bomblet generator gave you infinite bombs for 3 points with no downside. If you have 2 bomb slots I don't see why you would ever consider taking any other drop-on-reveal bomb (or pair of bombs) when BG is an option. Dropping it to only 1D would bring it more in line with the other bombs with similar costs.  

Or if you didn't want to go that far with the nerf-stick, you could do the opposite of the Cluster Mine's fix and have bomblets only deal damage on Hits, but not Crits. 

Edited by Herowannabe

Share this post


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

It seems like a decent enough proposal to me. I was pretty surprised when they revealed that bomblet generator gave you infinite bombs for 3 points with no downside. If you have 2 bomb slots I don't see why you would ever consider taking any other drop-on-reveal bomb (or pair of bombs) when BG is an option. Dropping it to only 1D would bring it more in line with the other bombs with similar costs.  

Or if you didn't want to go that far with the nerf-stick, you could do the opposite of the Cluster Mine's fix and have bomblets only deal damage on Hits, but not Crits. 

You do so when you don't expect to be able to leverage more than 2 bombs, which is rare because expendable ships haven't been part of the meta in ages, it is all high power ships that can take games on their own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Stoneface said:

I lost to DenNym the other night because I forgot about Dengar' s ability. I think Nym dropped three bombs the entire game. While the combination is strong and a pain to fly against, I don't find it OP. I do think it's one of the builds that's relatively easy to fly.

Face it, some of the suggestions made on these threads, while cloaked as fixes, are designed to make certain upgrades unplayable either by hobbling their ability or pricing them to the point of being unusable.

Did your ships have more than 3 health each though?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Tbetts94 said:

Did your ships have more than 3 health each though?

Yes. I had the same total health as DenNym, 19 pts. I used a Rey-Jan Ors combo. Had I not forgotten that Finn and Rey works in defense also, I might have had a better outcome.:mellow:

I think even a Tie swarm would have a chance vs Dengar/Nym but, and it's a BIG BUT, the Imperial player would have to be an extremely good player with a bit of luck with the dice. Unfortunately I can't prove my theory. I'm not that good.

That scum build is an extremely tough nut to crack. You don't want to joust and you don't want to chase. That leaves flanking attacks and if the Scum player hugs the board edge he kills the attack-k turn-repeat option. Stand-off weapons seem to be a good option but finding the right carrier combination is difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Zazaa said:

It's perfect as it is at the moment! It has pretty unreliable damage, even with Cad Bane so, no. I would rather take one damage, instead of rolling two dice.

I wouldn't say it's unreliable, its a 75% chance of at least 1 damage that you get no defense dice against and Cad Bane only increases that to I believe 93% chance of at least 1 damage with cad bane and a 56% chance of 2 damage with Cad Bane

I would be fine with allowing unmodified green dice against bombs (more maneuverable ships would have an easier chance to avoid mines than something like a Lambda)  or 1 die to represent a pilot reaction to the bomb 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Lobokai said:

I like this idea. But letting green dice work against bombs in some way could mean just a short rules edit and done. 

This for me.  Allow defence rolls against Bomb damage.  Makes sense that nimble ships can react quick enough to avoid a detonation (see Jedi Starfighter in Attack of the Clones), while big, heavy ships just have to tank the damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, FTS Gecko said:

This for me.  Allow defence rolls against Bomb damage.  Makes sense that nimble ships can react quick enough to avoid a detonation (see Jedi Starfighter in Attack of the Clones), while big, heavy ships just have to tank the damage.

I feel that Proton Bombs would need some kind of a buff as part of this, but perhaps the buff could straight up be that they're the exception - being effectively an autoblaster-style autocrit in a world of evadable damage could do wonders.

Then again, after spending so long trying to get bombs to be relevant, it does seem a shame to have them thrown under the bus so quickly again...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bombs should not roll any dice, ever. It goes completely and utterly against the whole point of bombs

yes, this includes CMs, proxies and bombletts. It's ******* absurd that a bomblett can either delete a TIE off the table or do some damage or do utter jack and ****, all based on a single die roll. That kind of game swinging potential is bollocks and should not exist.

allowing green dice v bombs is similarly *** backwards and even MORE swingy, to the point where it can make them utterly worthless based entirely on how lucky the defending player is. Bombs are not like PWTs or even arced primaries, they're a lot more limited in range AND they are limited in use (apart from infinite bombletts)

at most, evade tokens should be allowed to cancel damage from none-attack sources. Having defensive options v bombs is great, adding more dice doesn't solve the problem at all it just causes more headaches

Share this post


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

I feel that Proton Bombs would need some kind of a buff as part of this, but perhaps the buff could straight up be that they're the exception - being effectively an autoblaster-style autocrit in a world of evadable damage could do wonders.

Then again, after spending so long trying to get bombs to be relevant, it does seem a shame to have them thrown under the bus so quickly again...

I do like Proton Bombs - delivering a face up damage - through shields - is a great effect, but it can also instagib pilots like Corran or the Inquisitor if they're unlucky enough to get caught by it's effect.

I don't think allowing a defence roll would be "throwing bombs under the bus"; they remain effective sources of damage against low agility/high health targets, Sabine/Cad Bane can still be used but it does however give a limited buff to low health/high agility ships which - let's face it - are the ships which have been killed off in the majority of cases by the bomb-heavy meta.

As the fickly one will tell you, when it comes to dice rolls damage > defence anyway, but allowing high agility ships at least an opportunity to escape unscathed is better than them just being Sabine fodder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gundog8324 said:

I wouldn't say it's unreliable, its a 75% chance of at least 1 damage that you get no defense dice against and Cad Bane only increases that to I believe 93% chance of at least 1 damage with cad bane and a 56% chance of 2 damage with Cad Bane

I would be fine with allowing unmodified green dice against bombs (more maneuverable ships would have an easier chance to avoid mines than something like a Lambda)  or 1 die to represent a pilot reaction to the bomb 

 

Well people are playing with very fine line between them being useful or useless. I would say that they are good at the moment, because I would hate to see them dying once again. Bomblet generator could have been 4p, instead of 3p.

Anyway, only negative thing is the cost of the Bomblet really, it has made all other bombs pretty expensive. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, eagletsi111 said:

Bomblet should be a dual card, that you flip when you deploy a bomb and flip it back at the end of next turn.   Then , so you cannot drop bombs two turns in a row.    that's the simplest fix

Whilst I agree that, IF a change was justified, dual card treatment could very well be the best mechanism for what they were trying to achieve... 

... but it's not actually the "simplest" (having errata turn a single-sided card into dual would be one of the most significant variations on a existing printed card) ... 

... The original posters suggestion of making changes via the reference card is probably the simplest - whether that be reducing the dice rolled or the symbols that generate an effect (that reverse-Clusters also has merit). 

 

I personally don't believe a change is required. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To answer the OP: absolutely they would, because infinite bombs are a fundamentally broken concept. I reckon you could go a step further and make it only do damage on hit results and it would still be one of the most played upgrades in the game. Sabine can still trigger off it, and really, it's a free chance at damage every round for as long as your ship lives, for 3 points. Why would you not play it?

As a side note, I also cannot believe there are people here who think the card is even close to balanced in its current form. A single Bomblet token is arguably better than a Seismic Charge*, you get as many of them as you like, with no penalty for getting a drop wrong, and you get all of that for 3 points. It's up there as one of the most blatantly broken upgrades ever made, and it's really a question of when and how it will be nerfed, rather than if it will be nerfed.

* Depending on how you feel about accepting a chance for no damage in exchange for an equal chance for 2 damage and a 23% chance for critical damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Allowing green dice against bombs is a bad idea.  The entire point of bombs is that they ignore normal defenses.  Keep in mind that Bomblet was being developed most likely during the height of Palp Aces.  Normal rationally sized guns were basically pointless against palp aces, so something needed to be done.

What SHOULD have happened was that Palp and high agility arc dodging aces should have been brought down a peg (Palp was nerfed, but the actual ships weren't).  The Palp nerf isn't what killed Palp Aces, Asajj's ability and advanced slamming bombing Kwings are.  It's very likely that both Asajj and Sabine were added to the card pool to suppress and scare Palp Aces.  Bomblet and Nym were likely further counters created, but they went too far.  

They just substituted one miserable to play against monster (Palp aces) for a different miserable to play against monster (Bombet Nym/Miranda).

If you allow green dice rolls against bombs, you may as well just ban bombs.  They wouldn't be very useful against the ships they were apparently designed to be used against, and you don't need them to handle the other ships in the game.

The problem is that they made bombs too powerful.  The correct answer is to scale back the power of bombs, not to make some ships much better against bombs with their agility rolls.  Roll back Cluster Mines to not include crits.  Erratta Bomblet to be 1 dice, or only take hits on hits and ignore crits.  Limit Sabine to once per game (she'd still be super good) or limit her use to maneuver bombs.  And even roll back action bombs to not immediately detonate when they overlap a ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Rinehart said:

Allowing green dice against bombs is a bad idea.  The entire point of bombs is that they ignore normal defenses.  Keep in mind that Bomblet was being developed most likely during the height of Palp Aces.  Normal rationally sized guns were basically pointless against palp aces, so something needed to be done.

What SHOULD have happened was that Palp and high agility arc dodging aces should have been brought down a peg (Palp was nerfed, but the actual ships weren't).  The Palp nerf isn't what killed Palp Aces, Asajj's ability and advanced slamming bombing Kwings are.  It's very likely that both Asajj and Sabine were added to the card pool to suppress and scare Palp Aces.  Bomblet and Nym were likely further counters created, but they went too far.  

They just substituted one miserable to play against monster (Palp aces) for a different miserable to play against monster (Bombet Nym/Miranda).

If you allow green dice rolls against bombs, you may as well just ban bombs.  They wouldn't be very useful against the ships they were apparently designed to be used against, and you don't need them to handle the other ships in the game.

The problem is that they made bombs too powerful.  The correct answer is to scale back the power of bombs, not to make some ships much better against bombs with their agility rolls.  Roll back Cluster Mines to not include crits.  Erratta Bomblet to be 1 dice, or only take hits on hits and ignore crits.  Limit Sabine to once per game (she'd still be super good) or limit her use to maneuver bombs.  And even roll back action bombs to not immediately detonate when they overlap a ship.

Totally agree.
Autothrusting arcdodging super aces were strong against turrets, jousters, swarms, ... Bombs were re-designed to be their counter.
The only problem is that they overdid it.

Letting ships roll green dice to avoid bomb damage is making those aces again strong against their predators, and making bombs strong against the most pure jousters (that don't really need any more predators).

FFG needs to tone down bombs, while involving the least amount of ink changes, by

  • Altering the reference cards that are the ones that describe the effect of every bomb.
  • Altering the bomb rules in the manual.
  • Altering Sabine, the main cause of bomb unbalance in the rebel faction (change her to "One ship at range 1 rolls a an attack die and suffers the damage rolled", effectively debuffing her damage contribution by 50%).
  • Altering Bomblet Generator, somehow, because at the moment it's an autoinclude on any ship that can carry two bombs. It makes all other bombs worthless in comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As dumb as the idea infinite bombs is, I think Bomblets by themselves are pretty low on the list of problems with balance right now. They arent that bad when they are not used together with turrets.

FFG could just stop printing do everything ships like the Jumpmaster, Scrugg, and K-Wing.....

One, two, and even three trick ponies are fine. Its when they give us ships with decent primary attacks, k turns/sloops/talons, bombs, missiles/torps, and access to TLT that things get bananas.....

This is what I would do:

Scrugg: You cannot equip both a Turret and Bomb at the same time.

K-Wing: You cannot equip both a Turret and Bomb at the same time. 

Jumpmasters: Primary attacks can only be used with the forward arc unless Punishing One is equipped. If you equip a Torpedo primary attacks can only be made from the ships forward arc.

TLT: Unique ( One Per Squad Only )

In the end Bomber Nym/Miranda would still be good in the hands of a player who can keep things in Arc. Turret Nym/Miranda would still be super dangerous the couple times a game it throws missiles. 

TLT would still exist and keep aggressors, hwks, y wings etc useful but  reasonable. 

Or....all of the above is crazy talk! I have no idea how to balance a game this complicated to be honest.... 

 

 

Edited by Boom Owl

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.


×
×
  • Create New...