Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ISD Avenger

Are generics too expensive?

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, The Jabbawookie said:

tenor.gif

I guess Biggs, Norra, Jan and AFFM aren’t enough...

Well that's not the x wing being powerful, that's Biggs, Norra, and Jan being powerful. 

Kinda like how tie fighters are (suposedly) underpowered but Howlrunner is not.

Any fighter can seem powerful if you give it supports. That doesn't make the base fighter powerful. 

Edited by CMDR Kastor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The one big issue I have is that the empire can't really run offensive squadrons without slone, MMJ or firesprays. Where as just about any group of rebel squadrons is at least functional on the offensive. I could see someone running a fleet of nothing but B-wings and doing fine, albeit they would need to be slow rolling. 

Share this post


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

That works? I thought that was just a joke...

I mean everyone does until they get hit by about 10 damage before the ISD II even let's off it's primary arc. 

Then it's all "Oh my gosh your dice are blah blah blah" lol

That said, I've had a decent time with multiple variants of the list, the rolls are a hair swingy, but I very rarely roll less than 6 hits when I push all of them.  They also do some serious work messing up squads. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, CMDR Kastor said:

Well that's not the x wing being powerful, that's Biggs, Norra, and Jan being powerful. 

Kinda like how tie fighters are (suposedly) underpowered but Howlrunner is not.

Any fighter can seem powerful if you give it supports. That doesn't make the base fighter powerful. 

There’s almost no point to looking at fighters without paying attention to what else is going in a wing.  It’s like saying Jendon is trash because he only hits with two black dice.  Biggs is only compatible with X-wings and YTs.  Jan is vastly better when protected by escorts, and Norra takes them to heavy bomber levels of damage: 1.65, IIRC.

If no thought is being given to synergy, game balance goes completely out the window and defeats the entire purpose.

Edited by The Jabbawookie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, The Jabbawookie said:

There’s almost no point to looking at fighters without paying attention to what else is going in a wing.  It’s like saying Jendon is trash because he only hits with two black dice.  Biggs is only compatible with X-wings and YTs.  Jan is vastly better when protected by escorts, and Norra takes them to heavy bomber levels of damage: 1.65, IIRC.

If no thought is being given to synergy, game balance goes completely out the window and defeats the entire purpose.

Okay, you misread my point there.

My point is that the value of a support aces support power shouldn't be costed into the fighters it is supporting, it should be costed into the ace. If Biggs is making x-wings super powerful (hypthetically) then Biggs should be more expensive. We shouldn't punish all of the list with x-wings without Biggs because of the lists with Biggs and x-wings.

 

edit: As a reminder I'm not defending the survey's result of x-wings being slightly underpowered, I have no strong view of the matter, it seems fine to me. I am just arguing good and bad balance logic.

Edited by CMDR Kastor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, CMDR Kastor said:

Okay, you misread my point there.

My point is that the value of a support aces support power shouldn't be costed into the fighters it is supporting, it should be costed into the ace. If Biggs is making x-wings super powerful (hypthetically) then Biggs should be more expensive. We shouldn't punish all of the list with x-wings without Biggs because of the lists with Biggs and x-wings.

 

edit: As a reminder I'm not defending the survey's result of x-wings being slightly underpowered, I have no strong view of the matter, it seems fine to me. I am just arguing good and bad balance logic.

The X-wing is built from the ground up to work with different squadrons.  This is the point of Escort, Intel and Relay.  Points you pay to help other squadrons work better, the best of which often help you work better.  You can choose not to run X-wings with Norra, Jan, Biggs, Nym, Hera or the like.  If you avoid the multitude of options they are designed to protect, which make them more cost effective, you are choosing not to run a support squadron the way it should be run.  It’s okay for a squadron to subsidize the cost of wingmates, because we have spammable squadrons like the A-wing that don’t do that.

However, let’s try a thought experiment: let’s improve the X-wing in a vacuum.  We don’t want to just incentivize more Biggs/Norra/Jan synergy, so we’ll take away Bomber and Escort, giving it a black die to compensate.  To be a mixed role fighter, though, it needs something else.  1 speed?  Or 1 hull?  Suddenly, it’s the YT-2400’s little brother.  Which is exactly what should be used instead of aceless X-wing spam already.  The role is filled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, The Jabbawookie said:

The X-wing is built from the ground up to work with different squadrons.  This is the point of Escort, Intel and Relay.  Points you pay to help other squadrons work better, the best of which often help you work better.  You can choose not to run X-wings with Norra, Jan, Biggs, Nym, Hera or the like.  If you avoid the multitude of options they are designed to protect, which make them more cost effective, you are choosing not to run a support squadron the way it should be run.  It’s okay for a squadron to subsidize the cost of wingmates, because we have spammable squadrons like the A-wing that don’t do that.

However, let’s try a thought experiment: let’s improve the X-wing in a vacuum.  We don’t want to just incentivize more Biggs/Norra/Jan synergy, so we’ll take away Bomber and Escort, giving it a black die to compensate.  To be a mixed role fighter, though, it needs something else.  1 speed?  Or 1 hull?  Suddenly, it’s the YT-2400’s little brother.  Which is exactly what should be used instead of aceless X-wing spam already.  The role is filled.

Right line of thought. Wrong vacuum. The X-wing itself has a support trait: Escort. It'll never be balanced in a total vacuum, nothing with a support trait is. Instead consider a Ace-less vacuum. In that vacuum a x-wing is still expected to defend and bomb along with it's fellow y-wings. It still needs bomer and escort. It is still the multirole fighter it needs to be.

In THAT vacuum, is the x-wing worth it's points?

If yes, all is well.

If no, then maybe a small point change is in order (again I am not advocating this)

But oh no! if we do that bigg/jan/norra deathball will be too strong! Then make Bigg/Jan/Norra more expensive.

Balance from the bottom up starting with the more basic units. In game design you maximize army diversity that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, CMDR Kastor said:

Right line of thought. Wrong vacuum. The X-wing itself has a support trait: Escort. It'll never be balanced in a total vacuum, nothing with a support trait is. Instead consider a Ace-less vacuum. In that vacuum a x-wing is still expected to defend and bomb along with it's fellow y-wings. It still needs bomer and escort. It is still the multirole fighter it needs to be.

In THAT vacuum, is the x-wing worth it's points?

If yes, all is well.

If no, then maybe a small point change is in order (again I am not advocating this)

But oh no! if we do that bigg/jan/norra deathball will be too strong! Then make Bigg/Jan/Norra more expensive.

Balance from the bottom up starting with the more basic units. In game design you maximize army diversity that way.

If Y-wings were remotely worth protecting...  Almost every generic is a worse target than an X-wing to begin with, because nothing is better at dealing with the squads shooting it.  The few exceptions (such as Lancers, E-wings, Z-95s) don’t hit the table often precisely because they’re expensive/fragile.  Now, if those squadrons didn’t have serious problems, maybe Escort would be more meaningful for them.  Whether or not aces should be the only thing worth protecting is relevant, but it says more about buffing the Rebellion’s pricier generics than making aces pricier (fill the gap, don’t cause a cascade of points changes when squadron changes spill into the ship game.)  

Regardless, I believe a four dice fighter/bomber with 5 hull and respectable speed is versatile and reasonable for 13 points, especially with the game’s current state.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, The Jabbawookie said:

If Y-wings were remotely worth protecting...  Almost every generic is a worse target than an X-wing to begin with, because nothing is better at dealing with the squads shooting it.  The few exceptions (such as Lancers, E-wings, Z-95s) don’t hit the table often precisely because they’re expensive/fragile.  Now, if those squadrons didn’t have serious problems, maybe Escort would be more meaningful for them.  Whether or not aces should be the only thing worth protecting is relevant, but it says more about buffing the Rebellion’s pricier generics than making aces pricier (fill the gap, don’t cause a cascade of points changes when squadron changes spill into the ship game.)  

Regardless, I believe a four dice fighter/bomber with 5 hull and respectable speed is versatile and reasonable for 13 points, especially with the game’s current state.

 

With this I mostly agree. I never really understand the logic of putting escort and counter on separate vessels. Surely the role of a escort is to make the squadron they are protecting dangerous to attack, without counter a escort squadron is a sacrificial lamb at best.

Bet yeah the x-wing stands on it's own pretty well, albeit a bit overshadowed at times. Only 3 out of the 16 respondents said it was underpowered for it's cost so I wouldn't consider it to be a buff target. Heck I wouldn't consider any actions until a much larger data collection was done with a wider scope covering all squadrons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, CMDR Kastor said:

Bet yeah the x-wing stands on it's own pretty well, albeit a bit overshadowed at times. Only 3 out of the 16 respondents said it was underpowered for it's cost so I wouldn't consider it to be a buff target. Heck I wouldn't consider any actions until a much larger data collection was done with a wider scope covering all squadrons.

Heck, any such actions would be doomed to a few house rulings anyway due to having no bearing on OP.  But agreed.

My point is ultimately that aces make the X-wing not only worth taking, but among the best generic squadrons in the game. The aces that do this are numerous, not auto-includes individually, and encourage a variety of different builds.  This is probably one of the healthiest interactions between aces and generics in the game, and while expanding it by improving underused generics is reasonable, it’s far from necessary *to help X-wings.*  Rather, you’d be doing it for the sake of those squadrons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, The Jabbawookie said:

Heck, any such actions would be doomed to a few house rulings anyway due to having no bearing on OP.  But agreed.

My point is ultimately that aces make the X-wing not only worth taking, but among the best generic squadrons in the game. The aces that do this are numerous, not auto-includes individually, and encourage a variety of different builds.  This is probably one of the healthiest interactions between aces and generics in the game, and while expanding it by improving underused generics is reasonable, it’s far from necessary *to help X-wings.*  Rather, you’d be doing it for the sake of those squadrons.

If that is indeed the case then very good!

My issue with your first post in this string is that you implied that the X-wing couldn't be underpowered due to the fact it had many support aces. I simply take issue with the idea that it's okay for a core option to be underpowered as long as there is a specific combo that holds it up. That sort of thinking has damaged plenty of games (cough x-wing 1.0 cough).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder why people scored the TIE Advanced so low.  IMO it fits wonderfully into most imperial squadron balls looking to survive an extra turn. Couple with Dengar to get a counter 1 on your escort. Also working as a good swarm node for any following fighters. 

Share this post


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

I wonder why people scored the TIE Advanced so low.  IMO it fits wonderfully into most imperial squadron balls looking to survive an extra turn. Couple with Dengar to get a counter 1 on your escort. Also working as a good swarm node for any following fighters. 

Mostly because when it comes to attacking both squadrons and ships, it’s as useful as a TIE Fighter at +50% cost...  

Defensively and so it’s alright, but many people will tell you defensive doesn’t win you games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sunday I stomped in 2 Xwings and 1 Ywing in a 200 pt match rebel fleet using 3TIE fighters and 1Advanced.

The third Xwing survived.

Dont know how that would have ended if we were using aces.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Drasnighta said:

Mostly because when it comes to attacking both squadrons and ships, it’s as useful as a TIE Fighter at +50% cost...  

Defensively and so it’s alright, but many people will tell you defensive doesn’t win you games.

IIRC the advanced is a black anti-ship making it much better at hitting ships, couple that with the two extra hull. This means they are much better at hitting ships.

The first TIE Fighter you throw in isn't going to be getting swarm anyway so why not take advantage of the escort while you get the swarm ball rolling? 

Also to clarify I'm not saying that the advanced is amazing I just don't see it as underpowered. It, like every imperial squadron, is a specialist. The TIE Advanced is the specialist at getting in the way, and starting the swarm IMO. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, Grathew said:

I wonder why people scored the TIE Advanced so low.  IMO it fits wonderfully into most imperial squadron balls looking to survive an extra turn. Couple with Dengar to get a counter 1 on your escort. Also working as a good swarm node for any following fighters. 

I think it's also why have a Tie Advanced in your swarm ball when for another 4pts you could have two more ties for +1 total health and +3 initial attack dice.

And for 1 more point rebels get a x-wing which is slower, but has an extra attack dice and does the same average damage vs ships (with the added bonus of crits)

Edited by CMDR Kastor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, CMDR Kastor said:

...


And for 1 more point rebels get a x-wing which is slower, but has an extra attack dice and does the same average damage vs ships (with the added bonus of crits)

This is the main thing for me, with a semi-close second of the fluff (I have only seen some of the movies and so that is mostly what fluff I am basing it on). I feel that the X-Wing is the Base Line squadron in the game, so every other is compared against it (at least for me). So for example the Y-Wing, is a better bomber, but not as good anti-squadron so I feel it is worth it points, as you make the trade off points for ability, Luke is so much better bomber (due to his ability to ignore shields) that I he is under pointed, as I can not come up with any reason to not take him over a standard X-Wing with him only costing about half again as much he is way better than 1.5 X-Wing. On the Empire side the TiE Fighter it is just faster, but much more vulnerable, less firepower, and a much worse bomber for about 60% of the cost, I see it a just a bit over costed (I think it should be about 7 points). How about Howlrunner, she starts off the same as any other TiE Fighter then you add her ability and defense tokens for double the price. I think her ability is good, but is is 8 points good? No, how about he tokens brace on a three hull fighter is barely worth anything maybe a point at most, and the scatter is worthless as I have never be able to use one in all the years I have been playing, so I see her as very over costed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
52 minutes ago, CDAT said:

Luke is so much better bomber (due to his ability to ignore shields) that I feel he is under pointed, as I can not come up with any reason to not take him over a standard X-Wing with him only costing about half again as much he is way better than 1.5 X-Wing.  On the Empire side the TiE Fighter it is just faster, but much more vulnerable, less firepower, and a much worse bomber for about 60% of the cost, I see it a just a bit over costed (I think it should be about 7 points). How about Howlrunner, she starts off the same as any other TiE Fighter then you add her ability and defense tokens for double the price. I think her ability is good, but is is 8 points good? No, how about he tokens brace on a three hull fighter is barely worth anything maybe a point at most, and the scatter is worthless as I have never be able to use one in all the years I have been playing, so I see her as very over costed. 

The ability itself is hard thing to put a number on.  The brace tokens are situational; he'll die to flak and little attacks almost as fast as a normal X-wing (not bad, but not something to pay 150% for), while truly offensive squad comps like Saber/Jendon chucking 6 then 5 dice will bury him.  He's a prime target who can't be protected.  Where he really shines over an X-wing is punishing squadless builds and to a slightly lesser degree screens (caution is required because if Ciena and Valen can take him down with them, they'll try.)  Even the bombing depends on the target; hull damage is huge against an MC30 or CR90, but most ISDs aren't going to die with a meaningful amount of shields left, and while they have them, containing is an easy call.  A huge boon to Fighter Ambush and Precision Strike, but situational.

And I don't even know what to say about Howl.  Sloane has been my main admiral since her release, both with aces and generic + Howl wings.  In both situations, she provides anywhere from 3-5 blues a turn offensively, then stacks with Dengar.  If you aren't getting a pile of blues, it's because you've forced your opponent to play very defensively or scalpel out someone who isn't Mauler.  Whether or not scatter works is binary, sure, but it's an objectively better suite than double brace, is effective against flak, and when you get lucky shuts down attacks that would've one-shotted you.  It's fair for being 80% of Luke's cost and providing the support role he doesn't.

Edited by The Jabbawookie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, The Jabbawookie said:

...

And I don't even know what to say about Howl.  Sloane has been my main admiral since her release, both with aces and generic + Howl wings.  In both situations, she provides anywhere from 3-5 blues a turn offensively, then stacks with Dengar.  If you aren't getting a pile of blues, it's because you've forced your opponent to play very defensively or scalpel out someone who isn't Mauler.  Whether or not scatter works is binary, sure, but it's an objectively better suite than double brace, is effective against flak, and when you get lucky shuts down attacks that would've one-shotted you.  It's fair for being 80% of Luke's cost and providing the support role he doesn't.

Now I do not use the TiE advanced much (or really at all anymore) so there is that, but when she hits the field she is the first one killed so you are not getting piles of blue, with as I said I have never be able to use the scatter so it has no value to me (I have been playing since the game came out about 4.5 years or so now, and not one use). I know that others talk about how great she is, but I have never seen it, she is not worth the cost of two TiE's as she really does nothing more than a standard TiE, except draw a fire and die first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, CDAT said:

Now I do not use the TiE advanced much (or really at all anymore) so there is that, but when she hits the field she is the first one killed so you are not getting piles of blue, with as I said I have never be able to use the scatter so it has no value to me (I have been playing since the game came out about 4.5 years or so now, and not one use). I know that others talk about how great she is, but I have never seen it, she is not worth the cost of two TiE's as she really does nothing more than a standard TiE, except draw a fire and die first.

It's the nature of Imperials that things are fast and unforgiving.  If you really want to get value from Howl (and again, if she's in the hateful 8 or the most durable thing you have on the field, sometimes it's okay if she gets targeted) keep her out of range.  Thanks to her ability and the speed 5 friends she loves to hang out with, she should never be getting alpha struck in the first place, especially if you brought Squall.

More interestingly, I have difficulty believing you haven't gotten a single use out of scatter, because you're saying every single time a person has rolled against your scatter ace in the last 4.5 years, they've gotten an accuracy.  Those are odds Han Solo would want to be told about. :)  Is it because:

You're exaggerating?

You never/almost never play with scatter?

You play Imps like Rebels (i.e. hoping to tank an alpha strike?)

You go the opposite direction, and put scatter aces where large pools of blues can be thrown at them?

You're cursed?

You're fighting people with loaded dice?

You're subject to a massive, elaborate prank coordinated by your entire group?

You only play against one guy with Saber Squadron, Squall, Howl, Ozzel, Flight Controllers and a 289 point bid, and he one-shots a scatter ace every game before forfeiting?

 

 

No offense intended, but it's just a mind-boggling claim.  And it's so extreme that it says nothing about scatter being remotely bad, especially with scatter aces winning the latest worlds.

Edited by The Jabbawookie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I did some rough math in the past about this in the past but now I actually compiled the numbers. So if we take the average squad to squad damage factoring in native rerolls form abilities like swarm etc. And add them all together divide by the total number of squadrons we get an average damage of 2. If we do the same thing for accuracies we get .67 accuracies on avrage but if we factor out squadrons not capable of gettin accuracies we get .75 as the avrage so we will use that.

So your average squadron will deal 2 damage and generate .75 accuracies so let put that up against howlrunner. So with two damage and generating an accuracy on 3 out of 4 attacks we can kill howlrunner in 3 attacks and that is not bad, but if the accuracy fails on even one of the 3 attacks well we will have to make a 4th attack. This means howlrunner if you don't get an accuracy she can take up to 4 attacks to kill that makes her as durable as 2 tie fighters and she gives you a cool ability that can add up to being more dice than you lost out on by taking her and not 2 generic ties.

Lets look at a 5 hull double brace ace. Here your accuracies are completely useless, unless you get two but we are stiking with overall avrages so 2 damage will be braced to one over and over again. Meaning it will take 5 attacks to kill this guy compared to 3 for his generic counterpart.

Lets look at one more exsample 4 hull scater ace so if our first 3 attacks get us that accuracy we can still kill this 4 hull in one go, but if one misses an accuracy we are back to the same place we where with our 3 hull scater ace it will take at least 4 attacks. Where agian on average a 4 hull generic squadron will take 2.

It would appear the reasioning to give most aces deffinse tokens is so they can survive 2 more attacks than their generic counterpart this makes since as its not super fun to get  character sniped. However because scater is a bit more luck baised and so can be frustrating to deal with if you're unlucky on a few rolls making one 3 hull squadron take 5 attacks to kill, its diffintly furstrating.

So what I think needs to happen is take away the randomness of the scater token. Some have said to just make it so scatter reduced the damage to 1 however this puts the scater aces at a disadvantage from the double brace aces as a 3 hull sacter ace will only be able to survive at most 3 attacks one more than a generic but double brace aces will still have a near guaranteed 2 more attacks to kill. Because of that I think that would create an imbalance in the game as imperal squadrons would diminish and reble aces would rise. This would also not address the issue of ace durability as the double brace aces are the same.

For me I dont know what the best solution is but here are a few ideas.

first "when a squadron spends a deffinse token it is discarded instead of exhausted" and "when a squadron spends the scater deffinse token reduce the damage to 1" this makes Sloane a little scary, but also nerfs her aces as well so not sure on that. This approach Makes it possible for aces to die in just as attacks as it takes to kill a generic if you get the accuracies on the turns you need them if not the aces tokens will buy them at most one turn.

Another idea "Squadron deffinse tokens do not unexust." This does not effect the durability of squadrons, but of you do get unlucky you at least softened their defense. Again sloan could make this scary.

Cap on the number of points or how many aces you can take. Not my first choice, but it is there.

Increase the cost of aces. Generics are fine where they are as ir is hard to get more than 8 squadrons activated each round so making generics cheeper wont **** as they will still be out classed by aces.

Add more upgrades that benefit generic squadrons/more hate for aces.

These are really the only ideas I have to address the issue, but its time for bed now.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/13/2019 at 5:20 PM, Darth Sanguis said:

I mean everyone does until they get hit by about 10 damage before the ISD II even let's off it's primary arc. 

Then it's all "Oh my gosh your dice are blah blah blah" lol

That said, I've had a decent time with multiple variants of the list, the rolls are a hair swingy, but I very rarely roll less than 6 hits when I push all of them.  They also do some serious work messing up squads. 

Could you share the list please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, xero989 said:

So I did some rough math in the past about this in the past but now I actually compiled the numbers. So if we take the average squad to squad damage factoring in native rerolls form abilities like swarm etc. And add them all together divide by the total number of squadrons we get an average damage of 2. If we do the same thing for accuracies we get .67 accuracies on avrage but if we factor out squadrons not capable of gettin accuracies we get .75 as the avrage so we will use that.

So your average squadron will deal 2 damage and generate .75 accuracies so let put that up against howlrunner. So with two damage and generating an accuracy on 3 out of 4 attacks we can kill howlrunner in 3 attacks and that is not bad, but if the accuracy fails on even one of the 3 attacks well we will have to make a 4th attack. This means howlrunner if you don't get an accuracy she can take up to 4 attacks to kill that makes her as durable as 2 tie fighters and she gives you a cool ability that can add up to being more dice than you lost out on by taking her and not 2 generic ties.

Lets look at a 5 hull double brace ace. Here your accuracies are completely useless, unless you get two but we are stiking with overall avrages so 2 damage will be braced to one over and over again. Meaning it will take 5 attacks to kill this guy compared to 3 for his generic counterpart.

Lets look at one more exsample 4 hull scater ace so if our first 3 attacks get us that accuracy we can still kill this 4 hull in one go, but if one misses an accuracy we are back to the same place we where with our 3 hull scater ace it will take at least 4 attacks. Where agian on average a 4 hull generic squadron will take 2.

It would appear the reasioning to give most aces deffinse tokens is so they can survive 2 more attacks than their generic counterpart this makes since as its not super fun to get  character sniped. However because scater is a bit more luck baised and so can be frustrating to deal with if you're unlucky on a few rolls making one 3 hull squadron take 5 attacks to kill, its diffintly furstrating.

So what I think needs to happen is take away the randomness of the scater token. Some have said to just make it so scatter reduced the damage to 1 however this puts the scater aces at a disadvantage from the double brace aces as a 3 hull sacter ace will only be able to survive at most 3 attacks one more than a generic but double brace aces will still have a near guaranteed 2 more attacks to kill. Because of that I think that would create an imbalance in the game as imperal squadrons would diminish and reble aces would rise. This would also not address the issue of ace durability as the double brace aces are the same.

For me I dont know what the best solution is but here are a few ideas.

first "when a squadron spends a deffinse token it is discarded instead of exhausted" and "when a squadron spends the scater deffinse token reduce the damage to 1" this makes Sloane a little scary, but also nerfs her aces as well so not sure on that. This approach Makes it possible for aces to die in just as attacks as it takes to kill a generic if you get the accuracies on the turns you need them if not the aces tokens will buy them at most one turn.

Another idea "Squadron deffinse tokens do not unexust." This does not effect the durability of squadrons, but of you do get unlucky you at least softened their defense. Again sloan could make this scary.

Cap on the number of points or how many aces you can take. Not my first choice, but it is there.

Increase the cost of aces. Generics are fine where they are as ir is hard to get more than 8 squadrons activated each round so making generics cheeper wont **** as they will still be out classed by aces.

Add more upgrades that benefit generic squadrons/more hate for aces.

These are really the only ideas I have to address the issue, but its time for bed now.

 

Always love it when someone does the maths. Yeah, pretty much as you say, howlrunner is typically twice as durable and if used in a large swarm adds more than twice her weight in dice. So her pricing is on point.

As for the scatter token. It always stuck me as weird that it's all or nothing. I think a simple "Reduce final damage taken by two" would be best. It mean it still works as intended against most attacks but can't be used by itself to negate a large amount of hits, you'd need to use both it and brace to survive that. That would help bring flotillas into line as well. Currently they are ridiculously durable for their points in certain situations.

Edited by CMDR Kastor

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...