Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
14 Posts

Star Trek: Attack Wing» Forums » Variants

Subject: cloak variant rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
So, it appears to me that Klingons and Romulans hav a disadvantage with no battlestations, and cloak no longer really offsets that. Would adding and automatic conversion on battlestations to evades while cloak offset this, maybe just for the Romulans given their poor action economy and they traditionally have better cloaking technology, as the Klingons just got it from the Romulans early on. Although I would just make the variant rule across the board I think. Is this too OP?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Trueflight Silverwing
United States
Waverly
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Not being able to be target locked seems like it is still a pretty good advantage.
2 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Typheron Joyzxqk
Scotland
Bathgate
Scotland
flag msg tools
Ordo Xenos | T.I.U.F.
badge
Set Phasers tae Malkey!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ender02 wrote:
Not being able to be target locked seems like it is still a pretty good advantage.

Im going to agree with that, it is a big advantage.

Also both factions have the ability to add Battle stations or their equivalent to their ships. The romulans have Admiral Mendak and the klingons have Kerla at range 1 (1 battle station conversion to evade), Alexander (battlestations per hit).

There are also the OP bits such as Indy Romulan Flagship which gives you battlestation on your action bar.




2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Justin Hare
msg tools
Romulans have a single, but excellent way to access battlestations and have an actual function permacloak mechanics. Add in their recent excellent expansions and they are sitting fine.

Klingons have 2 ways to get a battlestations and one convert for defense. DefConOne, Alexander, Kerla. They do not have an effective permacloak mechanic. So I would not actually claim that being unable to be target locked is a virtue Klingons have. With 5 defense that isn't really modified - which also doesn't work outside of combat - they have no effective defense.


I honestly would not mind that mechanic if applied to all cloaking. Our casual play fix was to make cloak work outside of combat. Then we reduced the bonus dice from cloak (to +3) and then to reduce the number of attack dice. (-1 at range1, -2 at 2, -3 at 3). It threw the balance for TOS games out of whack, but made sensor echo useful even against Borg. The idea was that attack dice are far more easily modified than defense, so being attacked by one less was better than rolling one more.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven Redfearn
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Klingons also have Drex and Ngaren for offensive BS conversion.

When I first started playing, I thought cloak removed an established TL. Maybe now it should?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jesse Catron
United States
Maryland
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
SMDMadCow wrote:
Klingons also have Drex and Ngaren for offensive BS conversion.

When I first started playing, I thought cloak removed an established TL. Maybe now it should?

I'm not sure making TL worse is the best way to make cloaking better.


I like the OPs idea. While there are cards to convert BS to make cloak better, you still have to pay for them and the cloak mechanic itself still remains weak (unless you're in a TOS only environment).

Here's another idea that may or may not be overpowered:

No defense dice bonus for cloak but instead the attacker reduces their attack dice by half (round up). 3 Attack become 2, 6 Attack becomes 3. This de-emphasizes mega powered attacks and incentivizes multiple attacks or using more smaller ships.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
MY thought is that only ships that can fire and stay cloaked really benefit in the long term from the Target Lock rule. Otherwise, cloak ships can often be target locked because they also have to fire. I have had one OP where I could not get in position to fire and the other person relied heavily on Voyager's torpedoes that the cloak saved me. Otherwise, the no Target Lock is not as big as advantage because you eventually have to drop cloak to fire. Also the BS conversation seems thematic because it increases difficulty to hit . I can see where it may be too overpowered though.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boardgame Geek
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Cloaking is a bit of a weird thing because it doesn't scale based on the amount of attack dice being thrown.

When using "Enterprise/TOS" erra ships Cloaking seems powerful since most ships are throwing 4 or less attack dice making it pretty balanced.

With "TNG/Voyager/Movies Beyond" erra ships there are ships that roll more attack dice than a cloaked defender and add in some upgrades for more dice or more dice quality and Cloaking becomes underpowered fairly quickly.



So if we're trying to improve cloaking versus the bigger ships and not make it impossible for the smaller ships to hit the same cloaked ship then I think we should look at some kind of comparison between the larger attackers amount of attack dice versus the cloakers defense dice rolled.


How about something simple like:

While cloaked, compare the amount of defense dice the defenders ship rolls versus the amount of attack dice the attackers ship rolls; for each 2 attack dice the attacker rolls more than the defender (rounded down) add 1 defense dice to the defenders defense dice pool.


So basically it gives the cloaker a small buff against the larger or heavily upgraded ships while keeping things the same against smaller ships AND a cloaked ship with extra defense upgrades won't make this balance change skewed because it is a dice count which prevents things from getting too crazy.


My 2 cents anyway. arrrh
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dr Vulcan
United States
flag msg tools
I agree, I always thought that cloak should scale somehow... I have never found a good solution that I liked to make it scale however
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven Redfearn
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Why not defense equal to incoming attack dice plus agility?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Larry DeStefano
United States
Bloomingburg
New York
flag msg tools
MaximumDT wrote:
Cloaking is a bit of a weird thing because it doesn't scale based on the amount of attack dice being thrown.

When using "Enterprise/TOS" erra ships Cloaking seems powerful since most ships are throwing 4 or less attack dice making it pretty balanced.

With "TNG/Voyager/Movies Beyond" erra ships there are ships that roll more attack dice than a cloaked defender and add in some upgrades for more dice or more dice quality and Cloaking becomes underpowered fairly quickly.



So if we're trying to improve cloaking versus the bigger ships and not make it impossible for the smaller ships to hit the same cloaked ship then I think we should look at some kind of comparison between the larger attackers amount of attack dice versus the cloakers defense dice rolled.


How about something simple like:

While cloaked, compare the amount of defense dice the defenders ship rolls versus the amount of attack dice the attackers ship rolls; for each 2 attack dice the attacker rolls more than the defender (rounded down) add 1 defense dice to the defenders defense dice pool.


So basically it gives the cloaker a small buff against the larger or heavily upgraded ships while keeping things the same against smaller ships AND a cloaked ship with extra defense upgrades won't make this balance change skewed because it is a dice count which prevents things from getting too crazy.


My 2 cents anyway. arrrh

I agree as power creep came in the cloakers fell off unless your a big ship like the reman warbird. Use the cloak to evade TL use cloak to get some extra evades then switch to shields after you get a volley or 2 into you.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
SMDMadCow wrote:
Why not defense equal to incoming attack dice plus agility?

I guess it comes down to quality vs quantity. My battlestation idea was because almost all attacks have a way to easily improve quality with either target lock or BS and many ships come with 5 or 6 attacks pretty easily. So throwing 6 defense vs 6 attack, you are most likely to lose the majority of the time because there are more hits than evade and the attack can modify their dice and you cannot. I usually chose to go federation with defense crew because I can at least get BS and don't have to drop shields. Granted that costs points, I have not found away even with more points to get the cloak to be as effective, with the exception of maybe Chang's bird of prey with the new timed torpedoes, and the Reman warbird.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Griffin
United States
Marietta
Georgia
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I would start slow and try to "scale" the cloak to a 5 dice attacker. Start by letting them convert 1 BS to an Evade and go from there.

If you give them too much, you'll make them invincible again. And people don't like having something and then getting it taken away. Start slow and work your way upward till the Klingons seem to have a 50 50 chance.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
My other thought to go to scale is let the defender use the attacker's modifiers (not additional dice based on say crew) but TL reroll and BS since the attack modifiers occur before defense dice the attacker cannot decide what to use based on defenders roll. You could even apply this rule only when there are equal or more attack dice being thrown vs defense dice (for cloaked ships). The attacker always has the advantage because he decides what is used and what is not (plus more hits than evades on dice). However, it stops the crazy modified attack rolls that will likely always achieve a lot of hits cutting thorough an unmodified cloak roll. But if you are lucky and roll 5 hits on 5 dice with no modifiers then the cloak has to respond with a lucky roll or be hit hard.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls