RE: [FT] FB2 Balancing Corrections Proposed

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alan and Carmel Brain [SMTP:aebrain@dynamite.com.au]
> Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 9:51 AM
> To:	gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
> Subject:	Re: [FT] FB2 Balancing Corrections Proposed
> 
> I've been giving Brendan Pratt's reactions to FB2 some thought, and
> I think he has a point.
> 
> Basically, he has shown ways that both Phalons and SuVasku can
> get into short range (12") either with little damage or giving as good
> or better than they get. And has shown that the firepower they can
> generate at 12" is unbalancing.
> 
[Bri] I am not sure that this is the case. Remember, if the SV 
are using all of thier power to close, they have none left over 
for weapons or defense. If they put power to weapons or defense, 
they have to reduce speed. A Phalon under vapor shroud faces a 
similar problem, it cannot fire, but is vulnerable to P-Torps 
and Salvo Missiles. If they configure all of thier pulsers for 
close, their opponents will keep thier distance and hit from 
long range.

> Now any solution that we come up with must not change either
> in any significant way, except to remove the grossossity, as in
> other ways they're well balanced. It's also important to make
> very few changes in FB2, the best would be only a few characters
> (not words or paragraphs).
> 
> So I propose the following:
> 
> SV Spicules take power from the D pool not the A pool ( as discussed )
> 
> SV Stingers take an additional 1 pt of power per die. So instead of
> 1-2-4-8 etc it's 1+1, 2+1, 4+1, 8+1 etc. This weakens them
insignificantly
> at long ranges ( 33 vs 32 PP) but halves their FP at Point Blank
range, so
> the big fellas do 15 dice instead of 30. This is still comparable with
> most
> SDs. But no longer can a SV fleet sit at the edge of the board and
> just overkill anything by making 1 move (1 turn of max move at 36"
then
> hit the opponent with 3x his Firepower)
> 
[Bri] This is a MAJOR crimp in smaller SV ships. Take a 
Fo'Sath'Ann. If it moves at what would be a normal thrust for 
a Human frigate (6), this takes 3 power points leaving 3 If it 
put 1 into D for the spicule and 2 into A for the Stinger you 
get the equivilent of MD6, 1 PDS, 1 Class-1 Beam. 
Now look at the Tacoma (same mass), convert 1 Class-2 to armor 
and 1 Class-1 for the extra hull box. You end up with MD6, 
1 PDS, 1 Class-2 Beam, and 1 Class-1 Beam. That is the Human 
craft gets an extra Class-2 Beam for 1 point cost more than 
the SV.

> Phalons do 1-2-4 instead of 1-2-6 dice with their pulsers. Again, this
> makes
> no change except at absolute point-blank range. The estimable OO at
one
> stage
> had 1-2-4 but changed it as the result of mathematical analysis. I
think
> the
> original should stand as the result of playtesting.
> 
[Bri] The big trade off for Pulsers set to close range and 
Class-1 Beams is the PDS ability. Pulsers set at close range 
still only get 1 die vs fighters in PDS mode.
Weapon		Mass	  vs Ships	vs Fighters/Missiles
 3 Pulser (C6A)   12	    18 dice	     3 die  (6 arc)
 4 Pulser (C3A)   12	    24 dice	     4 die  (3 arc)
 6 Pulser (C1A)   12	    36 dice	     6 dice (1 arc)
12 Class-1	  12	    12 dice	    12 dice (6 arc)
With your changes:
Weapon		Mass	  vs Ships	vs Fighters/Missiles
 3 Pulser (C6A)   12	    12 dice	     3 die  (6 arc)
 4 Pulser (C3A)   12	    16 dice	     4 die  (3 arc)
 6 Pulser (C1A)   12	    24 dice	     6 dice (1 arc)
12 Class-1	  12	    12 dice	    12 dice (6 arc)
And for every pulser set at close, that is one less to worry 
about at long range. Conversely, if it is set at long, it
greatly reduces the close firepower.
   
> I expect that in Vector, there are fewer firing opportunities at this
> short
> range,
> so the balance is not greatly disturbed. In cinematic, where the
problem
> is,
> there is still no change except at under 12" for the Phalons, and not
that
> much
> for the SuVasku. (Yes, in vector there are still lots of 12" ranges,
but
> tend to
> be individual ships not 90% of a fleet in one turn. In Vector Range is
> difficult
> to control, but relative bearing easy. In cinematic, it's the reverse.
But
> I
> digress.)
> 
> What it means is that the Phalons still have an advantage at short
range,
> but
> not an outrageous one. The SuVasku OTOH must make more use of their
> special powers of movement, they can no longer just close to one
opponent
> and shred it with one salvo. Instead they must go for weak areas, and
make
> more
> use of their pod launchers at short range.
> 
> I'd like to see how this goes in playtesting. To those who see no
problem,
> it
> should make little difference. If you don't have a Phalon fleet armed
with
> nothing
> but C-class Pulsers, it will make little or no difference. If your
SuVasku
> use
> their movement powers to zap behind an enemy to avoid counterfire
rather
> than just materialise next to their opponents En Masse and vape them
> before
> they can return fire, then again there will be little effect. (eg at
36"
> it
> costs
> 5PP vs 4 PP per die).
> To those who see a big problem with Phalons armed with nothing but S
range
> pulsers, and shortrange-single-salvo-shredding-SSuVasku it will reduce
the
> firepower by 1/3 and 1/2 respectively.
> 
> Finally, it needs 2 characters changed ( 'D' instead of 'A', '4'
instead
> of
> '6'),
>  8 characters added ("+1 per die") and a table and some examples
amended
> accordingly. Which IMHO is below the threshold of pain for errata in
> anyone's
> book (pun intentional).
---------- End Original Message ------------

My comments marked by [Bri]
-----
Brian Bell
bkb@beol.net
http://members.xoom.com/rlyehable/ft/	   
-----