Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
49 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Star Trek: Attack Wing» Forums » General

Subject: Kraxon/Galor-class - weak for its point cost? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Matt W
msg tools
mb
While creating my own Cardassian Faction cards I noticed that both the Kraxon and the Koranak have basically equivalent stats (Koranak has +1 attack but -1 shields, hull and evade are the same, both have 180 degree firing arcs). But then I noticed that the Koranak also has an extra weapon slot and Battle Stations on its Action Bar. Moreover, the Koranak can perform white bank maneuvers at speed 4, whereas the Kraxon can only go straight at speed 4. Despite all these advantages, the Koranak is the same amount of Squadron Points as the Kraxon.

When compared to the Enterprise-D, the Koranak appears more balanced for its points. Both ships have the same Action Bar, both ships have the same amount of Upgrade Slots, and both ships have similar firing arcs (the Enterprise-D has 90 degree forward and rear firing arc, the Koranak a 180 degree forward firing arc). However, the Enterprise-D has 1 more hull and 1 more shield than the Koranak, and costs 2 more Squadron Points.

Given the comparisons, it seems to me that the Kraxon is considerably weak for its point cost. With no advantage in terms of stat line or firing arc, and with disadvantages in its Action Bar, Upgrade Bar and maneuverability, there's something wrong with the Kraxon's point cost. So, what do you guys think is the best way to remedy this?

Personally, I think giving the Kraxon Battle Stations in its Action Bar would be the best solution. Although it still has less maneuverability and 1 less slot in its Upgrade Bar, it would give the ship more options in a fight in general. Considering the Cardassians are a war-oriented faction, Battle Stations makes sense for the ship as well. I don't feel that making the Koranak more points makes sense, since other ships that are 28 points have a better overall stat line (the Vor'Cha for example has +1 hull and better maneuverability). Also, adding a single slot in the Upgrade Bar wouldn't really help the Kraxon that much.

Poll
How would you balance the weakness of the Kraxon / Galor-class?
Make the Koranak/Keldon-class cost more Squadron Points
Give the Kraxon/Galor-class Battle Stations on its Action Bar
Give the Kraxon/Galor-class more slots on its Upgrade Bar
The ships are balanced as they are
      40 answers
Poll created by Thot Prad
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
The Kraxon's ship ability tends to be more useful than the Koranak's. It either makes it a magnet for fire, allowing your Koranak to get more shots off or it can transfer some hits from the Koranak to its shields for the same effect.

Also if it having BS is a crippling factor for you, you can give it Gul Dukat and the problem is solved.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Lepperd
msg tools
The named Kraxon's ability paired with Mirok and Konmel make it an extremely irritating support ship that either soaked hits very efficiently for tougher allies, or forced the enemy to focus fire on it.

This combo somewhat went out of fashion with the weyound-CS attack-cancelling shenanigans, but given that it's a bit more robust at standing up to assimilation, I can see it making something of a comeback.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jesse Catron
United States
Maryland
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
yourmonkey06 wrote:
The Kraxon's ship ability tends to be more useful than the Koranak's. It either makes it a magnet for fire, allowing your Koranak to get more shots off or it can transfer some hits from the Koranak to its shields for the same effect.

Also if it having BS is a crippling factor for you, you can give it Gul Dukat and the problem is solved.


And what about the generic Galor vs Keldon? Is that balanced too? Galor with 1 less attack, no BS, worse dial, +1 shield and Keldon has +1 attack, BS, better maneuver, extra tech slot, one less shield.

If yes, 1 shield= 1 attack + BS + Tech + spd 4 white banks
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Lepperd
msg tools
drktron wrote:
yourmonkey06 wrote:
The Kraxon's ship ability tends to be more useful than the Koranak's. It either makes it a magnet for fire, allowing your Koranak to get more shots off or it can transfer some hits from the Koranak to its shields for the same effect.

Also if it having BS is a crippling factor for you, you can give it Gul Dukat and the problem is solved.


And what about the generic Galor vs Keldon? Is that balanced too? Galor with 1 less attack, no BS, worse dial, +1 shield and Keldon has +1 attack, BS, better maneuver, extra tech slot, one less shield.

If yes, 1 shield= 1 attack + BS + Tech + spd 4 white banks


When it comes to generics, I think the Keldon is a clearly superior choice for nearly all applications. But since they're from the same faction/subfaction, I'm not seeing even the theoretical "balance" issue? You can literally just take the other one with no opportunity cost of any kind.

E: It sort of seems to me like worrying overmuch as to Banelish Heroes being weak compared to Savannah Lions, instead of just shrugging and putting Savannah Lions in your deck.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Townsend
United States
Minnesota
flag msg tools
mbmb
You will have to forgive me, as I honestly cannot remember. I have not played a Kraxon in a long while.

What are the colors of the Hard Turns on the Galor/Kraxon?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Phillips
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
designer
badge
mbmbmb
I cannot remember the last time I used a generic ship.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric B.
United States
East Lansing
Michigan
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
alepperd wrote:
drktron wrote:
yourmonkey06 wrote:
The Kraxon's ship ability tends to be more useful than the Koranak's. It either makes it a magnet for fire, allowing your Koranak to get more shots off or it can transfer some hits from the Koranak to its shields for the same effect.

Also if it having BS is a crippling factor for you, you can give it Gul Dukat and the problem is solved.


And what about the generic Galor vs Keldon? Is that balanced too? Galor with 1 less attack, no BS, worse dial, +1 shield and Keldon has +1 attack, BS, better maneuver, extra tech slot, one less shield.

If yes, 1 shield= 1 attack + BS + Tech + spd 4 white banks


When it comes to generics, I think the Keldon is a clearly superior choice for nearly all applications. But since they're from the same faction/subfaction, I'm not seeing even the theoretical "balance" issue? You can literally just take the other one with no opportunity cost of any kind.



I think the above posters are right, the only reason to run a Keldon-class is to use the Kraxon's bodyguard ability. The generic Keldon is not worth it compared to the generic Koranak, which has all of the advantages listed.

From a "balance" perspective, this could be seen as imbalanced because it's a case where two options are not similarly effective for their costs (one is a much better choice than the other).


You're using "balance" in a sense of "are the factions balanced against one another?," which let's be fair, isn't applicable to ST:AW since that's not what "faction" means in this game. You don't make a Dominion or a Federation list. You make a list, period; just a list. All "faction" means is a check for 'tax' when putting upgrades on ships. So by your logic of opportunity cost, this game will always by definition be balanced since any player could just choose any ship over any other ship for the same opportunity cost. So, even a 10/10/10/10 ship for 20pts wouldn't break that sort of "balance," given that every player could opt to use that ship over others without any opportunity cost, as you describe.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Lepperd
msg tools
RogueThirteen wrote:
So, even a 10/10/10/10 ship for 20pts wouldn't break that sort of "balance," given that every player could opt to use that ship over others without any opportunity cost, as you describe.


I see you've been peeking at my notes for what stats the 1701-E should have.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hero Guy
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
cminion wrote:
I cannot remember the last time I used a generic ship.


For me it was my last event. But then again it was a scenario in which the highest skill for captains was capped at 6 and only generic ships were allowed.

Before that? The generic Battleship, but it was a 4 player ffa with 1 ship and 60pt build.

The last time I ran a generic because I chose to? Koranak/5th Patrol/generic Patrol fleet.

So yeah...rarely ever.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Lepperd
msg tools
I'll run a generic Miranda if I just want a cheap platform with a wide arc to shoot out some photons. Generally, though, it does seem like the game was designed mostly around incentivizing players to run multiple uniques.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric B.
United States
East Lansing
Michigan
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hero_guy wrote:
cminion wrote:
I cannot remember the last time I used a generic ship.


For me it was my last event. But then again it was a scenario in which the highest skill for captains was capped at 6 and only generic ships were allowed.

Before that? The generic Battleship, but it was a 4 player ffa with 1 ship and 60pt build.

The last time I ran a generic because I chose to? Koranak/5th Patrol/generic Patrol fleet.

So yeah...rarely ever.


I've used them a lot, but it really depends on what kind of list. I think three generic Vorcha-classes is far better than three named Klingon ships, because you're maxing out attack power at minimal cost, and saving points for valuable captains/upgrades/resources. Same with the modern era Dual Sphere lists. To run two, one has to be generic, and that two points you save going generic on the other one can potentially let you squeeze one more upgrade/captain on that will be worth more than the unique's ability/shield.

But for some ships, unique is the only way to go. The Ent-D and Voyager are incredible ships, for instance, but their generic versions are border-line unplayable in a competitive setting.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Little
United States
Kissimmee
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
RogueThirteen wrote:
I think the above posters are right, the only reason to run a Keldon-class is to use the Kraxon's bodyguard ability. The generic Keldon is not worth it compared to the generic Koranak, which has all of the advantages listed..


You've got all the names mixed up!

The Kraxon's Generic is a Cardassian Galor Class.

The Koranak's Generic is a Cardassian Keldon Class.

I totally agree with you though, I love flying a Kraxon with 2 Generic Keldons.

Unfortunately in the ranking of which ships to buy and which ones to skip I'd rank the Kraxon a skip because the ship itself is only OK in comparison to the Keldon, and the cards the come with it are all sub-par or completely worthless.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Phillips
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
designer
badge
mbmbmb
RogueThirteen wrote:
Hero_guy wrote:
cminion wrote:
I cannot remember the last time I used a generic ship.


For me it was my last event. But then again it was a scenario in which the highest skill for captains was capped at 6 and only generic ships were allowed.

Before that? The generic Battleship, but it was a 4 player ffa with 1 ship and 60pt build.

The last time I ran a generic because I chose to? Koranak/5th Patrol/generic Patrol fleet.

So yeah...rarely ever.


I've used them a lot, but it really depends on what kind of list. I think three generic Vorcha-classes is far better than three named Klingon ships, because you're maxing out attack power at minimal cost, and saving points for valuable captains/upgrades/resources. Same with the modern era Dual Sphere lists. To run two, one has to be generic, and that two points you save going generic on the other one can potentially let you squeeze one more upgrade/captain on that will be worth more than the unique's ability/shield.

But for some ships, unique is the only way to go. The Ent-D and Voyager are incredible ships, for instance, but their generic versions are border-line unplayable in a competitive setting.



Ah yes the Vorcha.. I am a fed player primarily so rarely field a generic.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jesse Catron
United States
Maryland
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Okay so the best way to reconcile the differences between these disparate generic ships is to either not play any generics or just choose the ship that is obviously better every time.

The fervent ability of the apologists to never admit that two similarly costed ships have unequal effectiveness is admirable. I salute your unwavering commitment to the infallibility of Attack Wing.


Also, I find it amusing that the Galor's lack of BS vs. the Keldon is dismissed as a non-issue while the argument was that the Battleship's BS action is a large part of why its "balanced" vs the Sphere.



4 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric B.
United States
East Lansing
Michigan
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
drktron wrote:

Also, I find it amusing that the Galor's lack of BS vs. the Keldon is dismissed as a non-issue while the argument was that the Battleship's BS action is a large part of why its "balanced" vs the Sphere.



That brought me great amusement as well.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hero Guy
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
drktron wrote:
Okay so the best way to reconcile the differences between these disparate generic ships is to either not play any generics or just choose the ship that is obviously better every time.

The fervent ability of the apologists to never admit that two similarly costed ships have unequal effectiveness is admirable. I salute your unwavering commitment to the infallibility of Attack Wing.


Also, I find it amusing that the Galor's lack of BS vs. the Keldon is dismissed as a non-issue while the argument was that the Battleship's BS action is a large part of why its "balanced" vs the Sphere.



The only thing I would say to that is, the issue has been around since day 1 of this game. It seems, to me, not that people are saying that its a non issue because playing the better ship resolves the issue, but rather, the only real practical solution to the effectiveness issue is to play the better ship. That's not to say that you shouldn't play the worse ship, only that there is no 'fix' for this. Only that one would always logically choose the better value.

At this point in the game, I'm not sure there is a solution that can be implemented that won't drastically alter the worth (both in fleet points and in effectiveness per point spent) of every ship released.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rob Tsuk
United States
Cupertino
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
RogueThirteen wrote:
drktron wrote:

Also, I find it amusing that the Galor's lack of BS vs. the Keldon is dismissed as a non-issue while the argument was that the Battleship's BS action is a large part of why its "balanced" vs the Sphere.



That brought me great amusement as well.


If you are amused by the fact that different people express different opinions on a subject you will never lack for amusement.

Here's some more fodder for your amusement, since I am among what y'all refer to as an apologist. I think the Kraxon is weak for its point cost. I certainly would never fly it.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
O B
United States
Mountainview
California
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
drktron wrote:
The fervent ability of the apologists to never admit that two similarly costed ships have unequal effectiveness is admirable. I salute your unwavering commitment to the infallibility of Attack Wing.


Here's another good laugh:

I freely concur that similarly costed ships have unequal effectiveness - I just don't think it's a problem.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Evan
United States
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
drktron wrote:
The fervent ability of the apologists to never admit that two similarly costed ships have unequal effectiveness is admirable. I salute your unwavering commitment to the infallibility of Attack Wing.


Show me the post where anyone claimed that the generic Galor is as good as the generic Keldon and maybe that would justify turning this thread into yet another staging area for your stale, abusive, bullshit partisan posturing.


Personally I think that the Keldon trading bank 1s for bank 4s is more of a liability than a strength, though one that's thoroughly outweighed by the BS icon. Does that mean it's imbalanced? Maybe? If so, it's an "if I'm already running one of each named ship, I'll get more from a second Keldon than a second Galor" imbalance, which is right up there with "Sar is better than Evek on an all-battleship fleet" 'imbalance'. I'm not losing any sleep over it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jonathan M D Thomas
United States
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I've understood why the Breen didn't get BS, but since day 1, the Galor without BS never made sense.

Even without BS, they are not bad ships and I've used my 3 with success.

One of the stronger builds I saw a ehile back was the 'counter Kraxon' with GenKhan and counter attack on Kraxon flanked by 2 klingons, one with Donatra.

The Kraxon's ability is quite strong when built around with either counter attack or Mirok/Konmel.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Lepperd
msg tools
adorablerocket wrote:
I freely concur that similarly costed ships have unequal effectiveness - I just don't think it's a problem.


This is kind of what I was trying to get at whenever this argument comes up.

Any constructed game more than the most basic of complexity is going to have some solutions that are more optimal than others for similar resource expenditures. Especially so when it has an evolving metagame and relatively brisk release schedule, as well as some design constraints based on the theme and source material.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jesse Catron
United States
Maryland
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
rtsuk wrote:

If you are amused by the fact that different people express different opinions on a subject you will never lack for amusement.

Here's some more fodder for your amusement, since I am among what y'all refer to as an apologist. I think the Kraxon is weak for its point cost. I certainly would never fly it.


I believe your position on balancing is atypical but consistent. If I'm not wrong, you have always maintained that STAW isn't balanced for equal points having equal effectiveness, that its not possible to do so, and that STAW wasn't designed with equal effectiveness in mind. That's a much different position than those who say everything is balanced or equally effective for its cost as the designers intended and those who think its not balanced just don't know what their doing.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jesse Catron
United States
Maryland
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
adorablerocket wrote:
drktron wrote:
The fervent ability of the apologists to never admit that two similarly costed ships have unequal effectiveness is admirable. I salute your unwavering commitment to the infallibility of Attack Wing.


Here's another good laugh:

I freely concur that similarly costed ships have unequal effectiveness - I just don't think it's a problem.


Thanks for a reasonable answer. My statement should have specified that "some of the apologists" instead of lumping everyone together.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jesse Catron
United States
Maryland
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
kobold47 wrote:
drktron wrote:
The fervent ability of the apologists to never admit that two similarly costed ships have unequal effectiveness is admirable. I salute your unwavering commitment to the infallibility of Attack Wing.


Show me the post where anyone claimed that the generic Galor is as good as the generic Keldon and maybe that would justify turning this thread into yet another staging area for your stale, abusive, bullshit partisan posturing.


Personally I think that the Keldon trading bank 1s for bank 4s is more of a liability than a strength, though one that's thoroughly outweighed by the BS icon. Does that mean it's imbalanced? Maybe? If so, it's an "if I'm already running one of each named ship, I'll get more from a second Keldon than a second Galor" imbalance, which is right up there with "Sar is better than Evek on an all-battleship fleet" 'imbalance'. I'm not losing any sleep over it.


Seems I struck a nerve. I'm not certain how a thread discussing whether a certain ship is undercosted and underpowered or not is the wrong forum thread to state my opinion on the balance/effectiveness of ships and the varying opinions on such. If I brought this up in a thread about the new Vulcan ship or the Arena OP you'd have a point. Is my statement a bit hyperbolic? Sure. Abusive? really? I'm not trying to shout down anyone. Partisan? each side of a debate is partisan. I'm not sure of the problem there. Your opinion is at least as partisan as mine.
Whether its bullshit or not is up to each reader to decide.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.