Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Mako13

Tie Defender Values?

347 posts in this topic

Wasn't sure what to do with the Tractor Beam.

Apparently, the Millenium Falcon had one at one time too, so it'll be interesting to see if that is given as an option.

In one of the postings online, I saw where it could actually be used to help the Tie-D turn tighter, while locked on to its target.

Seems to me that the roll to hit, vs. roll to evade for each side would make using it a bit more fun, and challenging.

Might need to permit the targeted fighter to drift forward, like with the Ion Cannon rule, at a speed of 1, just for fun, but prevent it from making any turns, or other maneuvers.

Also wasn't sure about the use and duration of it. 

No one would want to use it instead of an attack, unless the effects would last for several turns, in order to provide an advantage, since not being able to make an attack on the first turn of its use reduces the effectiveness considerably.  That's why I went with it not counting as an action, since presumably if you are targeting and can hit a vessel with a Tractor Beam, you should also be able to hit it with weapons at the same time.

There was mention that the Tractor Beam's effectiveness was limited in duration, which is why I suggested a couple of turns, and then also added in the flaw as well.  I think using it would suck a lot of juice out of the powerplant, so the reduction in shield output seems reasonable.

Perhaps another option would be that the Tie-D can only fly Green maneuvers while using the Tractor Beam, providing for another tactical decision point as to when to use it, making it a double-edged sword.

Neither the shielding or green maneuver restriction would be an issue in a one-on-one fight, but you probably wouldn't want to use it in a swirling dogfight, where you might be targeted by other pilots.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mako13 said:

I can say the same about Han and the Millenium Falcon, which has a pilot skill rating of 9, and the following stats, e.g. 3 1 8 5 (for a total of 13 points on defense), and the player controlling it may reroll all Attack dice, if desired, for a total cost of only 46 points.  That leaves enough points to add on missiles, or special abilities cards, which will no doubt improve its 1 point Agility rating.

For the Falcon's shields and hull rating, I can't recall where I got the values from, but doing a quick Yahoo search, they immediately pop up on multiple sites, so they seem to be pretty standard for Star Wars.  Just type in the Millenium Falcon, SBD, and RU into your favorite search browser, and you'll come up with plenty of examples.

As mentioned, I rated the Tie D as approximately 60% of the total defense of the MF (8 vs. 13 Hull and Shields points in the game), which seems to be very reasonable to me, for a heavy, space superiority fighter.

Perhaps a good test would be to pit a 50, or 50+ point Tie Defender against the Millenium Falcon, to see which comes out on top.  Seems to me they might be a decent match for one another.

Falcon vs Defender with your stats is far away from a decent match. I repeat (others mentioned above several times): the 4 defensive dices are way to hard, espacially for the falcon with only one. Also the falcon is less maneuverable and has a bigger base (means easier to hit). So defender will eat the falcon. Try it. Take your dices and role them. 3 dices (maybe 4 with missiles in the first round) against the four of the defender. Then take the 3 of the defender against one of the falcon. I have no doubt about the results ^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mako13 said:

The link to the stats for the Tie Defender was posted on the first page, but is also posted above by another person.

As you can see, it is a very formidable fighter.

While you may disagree with my methodology for the points determination formula I use, my Tie Defender stats are neither arbitrary nor subjective, since they fit within the model I posted on the FFG site here, below.  I offered an alternative formula for fighter points calculations that fits superbly with the current fighters in the game, allowing for tweaks the FFG staff and playtesters may have used for the game.

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=254&efcid=6&efidt=734236&efpag=3

With the formula provided, all of the stats for the 1st Wave of fighers can be matched, point for point, in a very simple, and straightforward fashion. 

The formula is not very complex, but I submit that is why it may be the correct one.

I am willing to concede that the Tie Defender may possibly be undervalued points wise, but only time will tell if that is true, with a bit of playtesting.

I can say the same about Han and the Millenium Falcon, which has a pilot skill rating of 9, and the following stats, e.g. 3 1 8 5 (for a total of 13 points on defense), and the player controlling it may reroll all Attack dice, if desired, for a total cost of only 46 points.  That leaves enough points to add on missiles, or special abilities cards, which will no doubt improve its 1 point Agility rating.

For the Falcon's shields and hull rating, I can't recall where I got the values from, but doing a quick Yahoo search, they immediately pop up on multiple sites, so they seem to be pretty standard for Star Wars.  Just type in the Millenium Falcon, SBD, and RU into your favorite search browser, and you'll come up with plenty of examples.

As mentioned, I rated the Tie D as approximately 60% of the total defense of the MF (8 vs. 13 Hull and Shields points in the game), which seems to be very reasonable to me, for a heavy, space superiority fighter.

Perhaps a good test would be to pit a 50, or 50+ point Tie Defender against the Millenium Falcon, to see which comes out on top.  Seems to me they might be a decent match for one another.

Not sure what Missile Boats are like in the Star Wars universe, but that might be a good matchup as well, but possibly even more conjectural, since we have no indication on how the FFG staff will go with that.

 * Just to be clear, your source for stats on the TIE/D is the Star Wars wiki?

 * Your version of the TIE/D is likely undercosted because the formula probably doesn't apply. The proposed Agility lies outside the space in which ShadowJak's regression has been demonstrated; in statistical terms, you're extrapolating to units other than those sampled without justification, which is a big no-no.

 * All the upgrades from the Millennium Falcon's booster have been spoiled, and none of them improve its agility. It will always roll 1 defense die, unless modified by range or obstructions.

 * As Ruskal notes, matching the Falcon against your starfighter wouldn't be a contest. It would be a long slog, but the Falcon would hit about 35% of the time, and the TIE/D would hit about 75% of the time. On average, the TIE would do about three times as much damage on each attack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, Mako13, you said:

"While you may disagree with my methodology for the points determination formula I use, my Tie Defender stats are neither arbitrary nor subjective, since they fit within the model I posted on the FFG site here, below.  I offered an alternative formula for fighter points calculations that fits superbly with the current fighters in the game, allowing for tweaks the FFG staff and playtesters may have used for the game."

So, here's  your relevant part of your "methodology:"

"The follow system, which is very similar to yours, seems to work well for the two Tie models, and the X-Wing.  It also works for the Y-Wing, but only with a bit more substantial tweaking.  Still, given that the values for even the Y-Wing are consistent, I think it might be valid, or close as well.

The formula is as follows:

2 Points for each fighter hull

Then, 1 Point each for each of the following: Attack Value; Defense Value (Agility); Hull Value

5 Points for each Shield (seemed a bit high to me at first, but works.  I didn't try increasing the Hull values and reducing the Shield values)

1 Point each for the Pilots' Skill Rating Value, e.g. Skill of 2 = 2, Skill of 4 = 4, Skill of 9 = 9, etc.

Using the above values, we get to within one point each for the Tie, Tie Advanced, and X-Wing values given in the game, so I think that works fairly well.  With the following minor modifiers, it works spot on:

+1 Cost Point for the Academy Tie Fighter Pilot (presumably, as already mentioned, a minor tweak to keep 9 x Tie fighters from being built in a 100 Point force, so the max is 8 x Tie Figther pilots, with a points cost of 12 each, instead of the 11 points calculated using the formula).

-1 Cost Point for Tie Advanced and X-Wing fighters, if their Pilot Skill rating is 4 or less.  Presumably, since they have no special abilities.

For the Y-Wing, as mentioned, the above formula doesn't fit the standard.  However, since it is the only Agility 1 (Defense Rating) spacefighter in the game thus far, I submit that a major tweak was made to it, that still fits with the original formula.

After running the numbers, I believe that is the case.  Use the standard formula listed above, for a base value, but then make a major adjustment, due to its lack of Agility, and also due to its slower speed (unless using a Red maneuver), by subtracting 8 from the final points total.  Depending upon the pilot chosen, this results in either a 25% reduction in capability for the best rated pilot, and a 33% reduction for the worst pilot.  If this formula is followed, the point values for the Y-Wings match exactly with those in the game for the rated pilots (e.g. 8 points less than the calculated value, for all of the pilot variants of the Y-Wing)."

OK, so in summary you created, yes, an "arbitratry and subjective" points system. Why do I say this? Your system only accounts for 3 of 4 ships in the current game. Then by your own anaylsis you have to adjust the points values of most of the ships in this system, which is not inclusive of a quarter of the game.

Yes, there are "tweaks" or exceptions to the rule, even in the regression model posted by the infamous ShadowJak (which is I believe his preferred title). But your system is all exceptions and no rule.

Again, go ahead and play with this model on the table. I honestly want to hear how it does. But I can't see anyone else wanting to play with or against a ship with this set of stats unless they are the kind of person who used to play nintendo only with the Game Genie plugged in.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My take on the Tie D simply from a logical understanding of the game mechanics puts it as follows

 

3 Attack:  Roughly the firepower of an x-wing or b-wing, yes it is more, but 4 dice is too much really

3 Defend:  Maneuverable as an A-wing or Interceptor, that is cooking no matter how you slice it and I'm not sure it deserves it

3 Hull:  It isn't really heavy armor but it isn't an A-wing either

3 Sheild:  Above average shields for a fighter.

 

‘Squad Points’ = 2 + ‘Pilot Skill’ + (‘Weapon’ – 2) x 8 + (‘Agility’ – 2) x 8 + (‘Hull’ – 3) x 4.25 + ‘Shields’ x 4.5

 

Considering a Jendon skill 6 pilot that puts us at 38-39 pts which seems fair.

Considering a Yorr skill 4 pilot that puts us at 34-35 pts which seems fair.

 

Onyx 1 and 2 in a squad should be a force to be reckonned with and with 74 pts to the pair before upgrades I think you can make the case for this design.

JCDisaray and Chris Maes like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That seems much closer to reasonable, although I still think it's bringing up the power creep a bit.  My issue with the expanded universe is demonstrated by the XJ-Xwing.  It's like the x-wing, only it's faster, tougher, more maneuverable, has more shields, more guns and more torpedoes.

 

I hugely appreciate that the developers at ffg have stuck solidly with the time frame represented by the trilogy and have not tried to incorporate the seemingly impossible technological advances that took place after several thousand years of relative technological stagnation throughout the republic era.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having spent much longer than I should on Wookiepedia looking at ship stats, the ship I really want to compare it to is the TIE Advanced.  It obviously has more firepower, and while the numbers say it has basically double the firepower of a standard TIE Fighter, I think 3 is about right, given the game's scale itself.
For agility, it has more powerful engines than a regular TIE, and is faster, but it's not noticeably more agile than the TIE Interceptor, so 3 again seems right, not to mention the copious discussion about how broken 4 agility is in the current system.
For Hull and Shields, I'm inclined to go with 4 Hull and 2 Shields.  The Defender Hull was made with a similar allow as the bomber, just not as hard, and I can't find anything to support the shields being more powerful than Vader's TIE Advanced, which was after all the test platform for most of the Defender technology.

That being said, here's where I would slot it:
3 Attack

3 Agility

4 Hull

2 Shields

Actions:  Interceptor + TL, which already makes this an incredibly powerful craft.  SO looking forward to Targetting Computers with the Aces release.

Upgrades:  EPT, Missile, Ion Cannons

 

Ship cost for rookie pilots:  I don't know.  I imagine you'd need to playtest to see where it really fit, but I would put it in the low 40s.  High enough that you can't run 3, but maybe two of these guys decked out.

 

Also, +1 on power creep, this ship was even in the old PC game the definition of broken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really, sticking within the existing mechanics, this should feel just as broken as giving Fel TL, shields, missiles, and a turret.  Oh, the shenanigans I could pull with that setup....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think where the TIE Defender should really excel is in the speed and pilot skill department. Historically it sucked in the maneuverability department, but it could outrun nearly anything the Rebels threw at it (think of it like an ME-262).

 

My own take on it is such:

 

Attack: 3

Agility: 3

Hull: 3

Shields: 2

 

Pilot skill: 5 - 9

 

Action bar: Focus, Evade, Barrel Roll, Target Lock

 

Maneuver dial: 2BL, 2TL, 2F(g), 2BR, 2TR, 3TL, 3BL(g), 3F(g), 3BR(g), 3TL, 4(g), 5(g), 5K®

 

Upgrade bar: EPT, Cannon, Sensor, Missile

 

Additionally, I'd include this as a Modification card:

 

Tractor Beam (5)

 

Defender's agility is reduced by 1.

 

This would be an awesome card because it means Wedge is no longer the focus of Imperial attacks if you're a Rebel, and Wedge can still be useful because his skill is native to his card and he is an extremely highly skilled pilot (and I'm pretty sure it would stack on Wedge anyway). And on the other hand, Imperial ships can now share the same ability as Wedge. The cost may actually be a bit low for this card; I would have to play it to see.

Edited by Millennium Falsehood

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think where the TIE Defender should really excel is in the speed and pilot skill department. Historically it sucked in the maneuverability department, but it could outrun nearly anything the Rebels threw at it (think of it like an ME-262).

 

My own take on it is such:

 

Attack: 3

Agility: 3

Hull: 3

Shields: 2

 

Pilot skill: 5 - 9

 

Action bar: Focus, Evade, Barrel Roll, Target Lock

 

Maneuver dial: 2BL, 2TL, 2F(g), 2BR, 2TR, 3TL, 3BL(g), 3F(g), 3BR(g), 3TL, 4(g), 5(g), 5K®

 

Upgrade bar: EPT, Cannon, Sensor, Missile

 

Additionally, I'd include this as a Modification card:

 

Tractor Beam (5)

 

Defender's agility is reduced by 1.

 

This would be an awesome card because it means Wedge is no longer the focus of Imperial attacks if you're a Rebel, and Wedge can still be useful because his skill is native to his card and he is an extremely highly skilled pilot (and I'm pretty sure it would stack on Wedge anyway). And on the other hand, Imperial ships can now share the same ability as Wedge. The cost may actually be a bit low for this card; I would have to play it to see.

 

Personally I think 3/3/3/2 is where the Avenger should sit.  But with a Manuever dial similar to the Tie Interceptor but just a little worse.  The defender can then rein in stats at 3/3/3/3 but with a maneuver dial closer to the X-wing with a much higher cost.

JCDisaray likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My take on the Tie D simply from a logical understanding of the game mechanics puts it as follows

 

3 Attack:  Roughly the firepower of an x-wing or b-wing, yes it is more, but 4 dice is too much really

3 Defend:  Maneuverable as an A-wing or Interceptor, that is cooking no matter how you slice it and I'm not sure it deserves it

3 Hull:  It isn't really heavy armor but it isn't an A-wing either

3 Sheild:  Above average shields for a fighter.

 

‘Squad Points’ = 2 + ‘Pilot Skill’ + (‘Weapon’ – 2) x 8 + (‘Agility’ – 2) x 8 + (‘Hull’ – 3) x 4.25 + ‘Shields’ x 4.5

 

Considering a Jendon skill 6 pilot that puts us at 38-39 pts which seems fair.

Considering a Yorr skill 4 pilot that puts us at 34-35 pts which seems fair.

 

Onyx 1 and 2 in a squad should be a force to be reckonned with and with 74 pts to the pair before upgrades I think you can make the case for this design.

I think you got the stats right, based on my research; not sure about the points however.

 

Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TIE/Avenger is really just the production version of Vader's TIE/Advanced X-1. The only real difference, statwise, that I see would be increased firepower (Attack value 3). Maybe give it a maneuver dial similar to TIE/IN.

Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think a tractor beam should reduce the number of evade dice but rather limit the number of evade dice. In this way low evade ships are not penalised but high evade ships are. This would be different to other things out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But shouldn't low-evade ships have a worse time against a tractor beam than a high-evade ship? Low-evade ships presumably have to push their engines to the limit in order to maneuver at all. I would think a tractor beam would give a low-evade ship's pilot a very bad day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the no modifying evade dice against it. It's a mechanic the we already see in the game and doesn't break anything right out (well, kinda hoses imperials) as you're losing your own target lock/ focus to do it. Still should cost a bit and be limited to range 1 maybe 2.

Mechanically for the defender I like someone's post a few months ago about purple attack dice and black defense dice. One extra hit/evade instead of a focus. Changes the math a little without making something Exponetionally better. The Star Trek system did these as a special give away THAT WE DON'T WANT for our game but the mechanic is nice for making a ship superior in one way without too much power creep.

Imagine rolling 2 red + 1 purple with your defender. It even feels more iconic and special.

The only way I can see 4 evade dice is if the survivability goes down too. I bought a shapeways Givinex fanblade fighter and some of the conversions have it at crazy maneuverable and 4 agility with 2 power/sheild/hull. Might still be too much but at 1-2 black evade dice, again, it would feel special and iconic. If I ever get to play it I'll let ya know how it felt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the 3/3/3/2 stats, I don't think those are unreasonable.

 

You wouldn't think Tractor Beam would have a movement effect instead, like the Ion Cannons?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3/3/3/2 stats i could see being feasible.. an interceptor with shields depending on the actions and upgrades slots. More expensive point wise of course but nothing that would break the bank per say. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3/3/3/2 stats i could see being feasible.. an interceptor with shields depending on the actions and upgrades slots. More expensive point wise of course but nothing that would break the bank per say. 

 

I'd put that at 28-29 for a PS 2 pilot.  It depends whether or not the Avenger is released.  If it is, the Defender should probably be 3/3/3/3 just to differentiate it, but that pushes it up to 32-33 points, (not necessarily a bad thing.

 

I thought of having tractor beam cause stress, but I like the Agility modifier better.

 

Tractor Beam Projector

Weapon Upgrade Card

 

Action [Target Lock]: Spend your target lock to perform this action.  Select an enemy ship in your firing arc and Range 1.  Large Ships may select enemy ships outside their firing arc.  Decrease that ship's Agility by 1 (to a minimum of 0) until the end of the Combat Phase.

Point Cost: 6

 

You have to set it up with the target lock, and not use that lock for your attack, but Agility -1 against ALL your attacks is pretty powerful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering one of the reasons the Empire didn't field more of them was that they were WAY too expensive, having them >30 pts seems legitimate.

 

That tractor beam upgrade is better than what I came up with. :) I can imagine a Defender+Tractor Beam with Colonel Jendon + STS-321 giving a Rebel player a VERY bad day, plus you'd have about 25-30 points to spend on something else.

Edited by Millennium Falsehood

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason I suggested it hindering high evade ships is for the mechanistic reason that across the board reduction just tends to beat up on the low agility ships all the time it would be nice for it too only hurt the high ones for a change. If ihad to argue "physics" then how about lower agility ships are bigger and heavier and therefore more powerfull engines so you would have to put in more energy to have the same effect.

But mainly because I prefer it is a little different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that is what you want, why not make it more straightforward.

 

Tractor Beam.  Secondary Weapon (Cannon), Range 1.  Cost: 5

Attack [Target Lock] : Spend your Target Lock to reduce the defenders agility to 1 until the end of the turn.  You may immediately make a primary weapon attack against this same target.

Edited by KineticOperator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that is what you want, why not make it more straightforward.

 

Tractor Beam.  Secondary Weapon (Cannon), Range 1.  Cost: 5

Attack [Target Lock] : Spend your Target Lock to reduce the defenders agility to 1 until the end of the turn.  You may immediately make a primary weapon attack against this same target.

 

Hm... I'm not convinced by this, because essentially, if you use any 'weapon' on any 'ship', it should always suffer a given 'ill consequence'.

 

By your ruling, some ships are rendered immune to tractor beam effects, and that doesn't feels right. All ships should experience a difference between being hit by a tractor beam or not being hit.

 

For example, something like "reduce the defende'rs agility value by 2 (to a minimum of 0) until the end of the turn/combat phase" would sound more appropiate.

 

Also, if your are going to treat 'tractor beam' as an aimed weapon, then the defender should a have a chance to avoid it by using its defense roll or evade tokens.

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