Federation Commander

Just played a game using speed 40 plasma to try and see if it fixes the plasma balance issue. We agreed that plasma moves twice very sub-impulse 4. I played Kzinti and my opponent played Gorn using tournament rules and map.

I had NCC + 2 BC. He had CS + CM + CL.

Turn 1:

I plotted 24 and my opponent plotted 16. He EM'd at start to give me less of a target. I launch my drones on impulse 6 at the CM. He drops EM on impulse 7 to be able to shoot the drones, not wanting to face 20 of them on turn 2. We're at range 4 on a shield boundary with the CL a couple hexes back. He let me get to this range because he figured that with speed 40 plasma, he'll hurt me immensely even if I run away.

His fire takes out 11 out of 12 drones. Due to being on a shield boundary, I only do about 25 internals to his CS with my 3 ships. However I targetted weapons and got lucky with virtually every volley landing on the weapons row. He has just 1 PH1 and the PL-R left. I get even more luck with a H&R raid that takes out the PL-R. He is forced to launch it as a S because he didn't load it as an R since he wasn't sure if he was going to launch this turn. The CS and CM launches all plasma at my NCC (3 PL-S and 4 PL-F).

Turn 2:

Both sides plot speed 24. He repairs his PL-R. My NCC HETs and runs away. Due to speed 40, the plasma hits on impulse 4 on the 4 shield. After defensive fire, the plasma do 60 pts of damage, or 36 internals.

Elsewhere, I have a choice of running away from his CL which was the only ship able to fire plasma this turn. I decide to face him with my 2 BC since I thought it was pointless to run away from Spd 40 plasma. We end the impulse at range 0. I didn't count out the number of boxes and calculate expected damage, or the game would've ended right here. I fire 2 dis, 4 ph-1, and 4 PH-3 per ship and aim 4 PH-3 each at the CM that was 1 hex behind. I bring him down to about 5 total boxes. If I had been counting, I would've forgone the PH-3 shots behind me and used the power to shoot an additional disrupter per ship and blown up the CL. Instead, his CL + CM direct fire does 12 internals through the 1 and 4 shields and he is able to launch 100 pts of plasma to blow up the BC. My drones from the doomed BC blow him up as well. Further drones are launched at his CM which chase him near a corner.

Turn 3. I plot 16 and he plots 24. He HETs away from the drones to outrun them. My NCC takes a shot and almost blows down a shield and gets a burnthrough on the CM. However while running out the drones, he's forced to get near my BC. I HET and manage to tractor the CM and the drones blow him up. He concedes the game since all he had left was a CS with almost no weapons vs 1 completely undamaged ship and 1 that was still full of fight.

All in all, speed 40 made the game a lot more competitive than it would've been otherwise. It landed 60 pts of damage to the NCC and definitely influenced my BC moves on turn 2. The Kzinti still won handily, but a lot of it was the fact that I stripped his CS of most of its weapons on turn 1 and got lucky with the H&R raid on his PL-R. Also, Kzinti are pretty brutal vs a race like Gorns with very little in the way of drone defense.

We'll try and play Gorn vs Klingon next and see if that changes the result.

I am interested to hear how these work out.

Are you playing with a closed map or a location map?

Kzinti is a very tough opponent for Gorn (the extra drones and ph-3's make a huge difference vs. an anchor attempt as well as soaking up the Gorn's phasers).

The Klingon battle will be interesting as the drones are less of a factor (usually, of course, depending on ship selection).

duxvolantis wrote:Are you playing with a closed map or a location map?

Tournament rules. So a closed 42X30 map and up to 450 pts per side.

Have you adjusted the point values of each plasma ship to account for the faster torpedoes, perhaps based on the sabot refit costs in SFB? There's already a premium for fast drones in FC.

(Actually, I'd argue that sabot rules ought to require the use of fast drones, since they operate in the same era.)

Speed 40 plasma is fun, but broken it forces your opponent to stay at really long range or feel some serious wrath. The ships would need to cost dramatically more to be fair. I still think revisiting the bolt table and giving a 1-5 hit chance on bolts within range 1-3 and a 1-6 chance within range 0 would go a long way to alleviate the plasma problem.

Nerroth wrote:Have you adjusted the point values of each plasma ship to account for the faster torpedoes, perhaps based on the sabot refit costs in SFB? There's already a premium for fast drones in FC.

(Actually, I'd argue that sabot rules ought to require the use of fast drones, since they operate in the same era.)

No, we thought that plasma was too underpowered under the current rules. So we kept point costs the same and gave faster plasma for free.

I am concerned that if plasma was changed to 40, Gorn/Roms might be fixed but ISC would become way too powerful. The ISC are powerful enough as is.

Sabot plasma in SFB is available from Y180 onwards; which, in FC, would directly overlap with the onset of speed-32 drones. Plus, there is a cost for each unit (including ISC ships, for whom sabot is also available) which get the upgrade.

For my part, if sabot plasma were to be on the table for FC (and that may be a big if) I'd rather try to start with the SFB sabot guidelines and work from there.

A few points:

1) Whatever happened at 2010 Origins seems to have pretty much convinced Steve that no "fix" is needed.

2) I agree Speed 40's extra movement would happen where mojo put it.

3) Worrying about any point cost or energy cost for speed 40 plasma is premature.

4) Worrying about making all plasma speed 40 or implementing a "sabot refit" is premature.

Again, I cannot stress enough that trying to nail down the specifics of a change that probably isn't going to happen is utterly pointless. Worry about showing that the change is needed and presenting proof of that. Only then does the actual mechanics of the change need to be considered.

First question that would come to mind about 40 spd plasma --

How does the extra speed affect the Warhead strength --

Personally (as an exercise in thought), would drop the warhead by 5 to start with and take more from it as it moved --

The whole point of speed 40 plasma is to extend its reach. As a result, the plasma damage chart would not change. Like I said, mojo implemented it correctly.

As for the bolt suggestion, 1-5 to hit at 1-3 is way, way too good. Try asking for 1-5 to hit as ranges 0-1. Still a very long shot, but at least not an instant rejection.

mjwest wrote:Worry about showing that the change is needed and presenting proof of that.

I don't know whether speed 40 is the right fix, but the fact that the Kzinti had a fairly comfortable win even when speed 40 plasma was in play seems to be a good indication that speed 32 plasma under current rules wouldn't have been remotely competitive, at least in this particular matchup.

mojo jojo wrote:

mjwest wrote:Worry about showing that the change is needed and presenting proof of that.

.... wouldn't have been remotely competitive,....

That's the rub, what level of play is it broken at, competitve or the average majority.

mjwest wrote:A few points:
1) Whatever happened at 2010 Origins seems to have pretty much convinced Steve that no "fix" is needed.

Too bad 'whatever happened' couldn't have been better communicated to everyone else that wasn't at Origins. It seems like the conversation would be better served by focusing on the arguments that convinced Steve to leave it as is.

Monty

storeylf wrote:That's the rub, what level of play is it broken at, competitve or the average majority.

What do you define as the "average majority"? I'm pretty sure that the average player can beat a Gorn force with a similar size Kzinti force the vast majority of time.

Even if it's not the case, players do get better over time. An average player who has played for 5 years is going to be a lot better than the same player who has played for 6 months. I think you have to balance for at least a reasonably high level of play so that people don't outgrow plasma after a year or two of experience.

mjwest wrote:A few points:

1) Whatever happened at 2010 Origins seems to have pretty much convinced Steve that no "fix" is needed.

If anyone who reads this knows what was said to convince Steve that no "fix" was needed, I would really be interested in hearing it. It might help me to improve my own plasma tactics.