Only for the XSD to have a minor power management issue, that merely causes it to spectacularly explode when the superlaser is destroyed....

46 minutes ago, Cap116 said:

Only for the XSD to have a minor power management issue, that merely causes it to spectacularly explode when the superlaser is destroyed....

I mean, that's what happens when your superlaser is directly connected to your solar reactor.

Made some revisions, still havent pared it down as far as some of the folks have recommended, so it is likely still undercosted for the rebels.

It lost a front shield, speed 4, an ion upgrade, and the side-arc black dice...everthing else remained the same.

43 minutes ago, Cap116 said:

It lost a front shield, speed 4, an ion upgrade, and the side-arc black dice...everthing else remained the same.

We're moving in the right direction here. But it still needs to be paired down a bit, or increase the cost. Let's compare this to a VSD-II.
Cost: Less
Speed: Faster
Maneuverability: Better
Shields: More
Defense tokens: More
Command value: Less
Anti Squadron: More and better

Squadron value: Same
Engineering value: Same
Upgrade slots: Same number

Hull: Less
Front Arc Dice: Worse
Side Arc Dice: Marginally Worse but it's less noticeable without a turbolaser upgrade slot.

Those are the facts. Everything from here on out can be tossed out the window since it's just like, my opinion man. 😋

I feel that this MC-45 is missing an identity. Is it a carrier? Possibly, but a squadron value of 3 doesn't really convey that. It's got decent offensive capabilities, but it doesn't really mesh with other rebel ships. Why does this cruiser have a better forward arc than the MC80 (non-winged) that it looks very similar to? I think the front arc needs to be dropped to 1 blue/1 red and the side arcs need another blue (maybe a red, but probably blue). The rear arc should have a red replaced with a blue, or double blue to maximize the ion cannon upgrade.

Of course all that is only really moving things around. Do you really want a 70 point ship to compete with the MC30c Scout (69) and the AFII B (72)? The rebels are missing something in that 85-90 point range, so why not aim to fill that niche? This ship might not need many other changes if it were costed at 88. Although it still does outperform the VSDII in most categories. 2 front shields, 1 rear shield, 1 evade (esp with the new evade rules), 3 command and 2 blue anti-squad would seal the deal at 88. Maybe there's some wiggle room in there, but I'm more about keeping the status-quo and not even getting close to power-creep.

The mc45 is built to be a similar cost and performance to the Acclamator and Muni

41 minutes ago, Cap116 said:

The mc45 is built to be a similar cost and performance to the Acclamator and Muni

It's much more balanced now.

Medium size?

What are the arcs like?

8 hours ago, thestag said:

We're moving in the right direction here. But it still needs to be paired down a bit, or increase the cost. Let's compare this to a VSD-II.

Isn’t the VSD II generally considered to be over-costed now as well?

8 hours ago, thestag said:

We're moving in the right direction here. But it still needs to be paired down a bit, or increase the cost. Let's compare this to a VSD-II.
Cost: Less
Speed: Faster
Maneuverability: Better
Shields: More
Defense tokens: More
Command value: Less
Anti Squadron: More and better

Squadron value: Same
Engineering value: Same
Upgrade slots: Same number

Hull: Less
Front Arc Dice: Worse
Side Arc Dice: Marginally Worse but it's less noticeable without a turbolaser upgrade slot.

Those are the facts. Everything from here on out can be tossed out the window since it's just like, my opinion man. 😋

I feel that this MC-45 is missing an identity. Is it a carrier? Possibly, but a squadron value of 3 doesn't really convey that. It's got decent offensive capabilities, but it doesn't really mesh with other rebel ships. Why does this cruiser have a better forward arc than the MC80 (non-winged) that it looks very similar to? I think the front arc needs to be dropped to 1 blue/1 red and the side arcs need another blue (maybe a red, but probably blue). The rear arc should have a red replaced with a blue, or double blue to maximize the ion cannon upgrade.

Of course all that is only really moving things around. Do you really want a 70 point ship to compete with the MC30c Scout (69) and the AFII B (72)? The rebels are missing something in that 85-90 point range, so why not aim to fill that niche? This ship might not need many other changes if it were costed at 88. Although it still does outperform the VSDII in most categories. 2 front shields, 1 rear shield, 1 evade (esp with the new evade rules), 3 command and 2 blue anti-squad would seal the deal at 88. Maybe there's some wiggle room in there, but I'm more about keeping the status-quo and not even getting close to power-creep.

Compare it to the AFMk2B. Why take it over this?

Boosted Comms plus Expanded Hangar Bay plus Flight Controllers gives you an 85pt fast, maneuverable heavy carrier with lots of shields that's Command 2.

Who would ever run an MC80 carrier or an assault frigate carrier again?

My gut feeling is that the niche for this ship design is already filled.

Maybe if you want it to be a carrier design drop Salvo and a point of engineering? That way it's more like the WW2 fleet carriers.

1 hour ago, flatpackhamster said:

Compare it to the AFMk2B. Why take it over this?

Boosted Comms plus Expanded Hangar Bay plus Flight Controllers gives you an 85pt fast, maneuverable heavy carrier with lots of shields that's Command 2.

Who would ever run an MC80 carrier or an assault frigate carrier again?

My gut feeling is that the niche for this ship design is already filled.

I shouldn't have been writing so late last night (nor so early this morning). But I;m was stuck in a cabin surrounded by snow while my in-laws were watching news programs I don't agree with on the political spectrum. I apologize. I started that post trying to get that thing to be a carrier, then I trailed off and here we are. 2020 strikes again, or something.

3 hours ago, Green Knight said:

It's much more balanced now.

Medium size?

What are the arcs like?

Medium base, here are the arcs.

2 hours ago, flatpackhamster said:

Compare it to the AFMk2B. Why take it over this?

Boosted Comms plus Expanded Hangar Bay plus Flight Controllers gives you an 85pt fast, maneuverable heavy carrier with lots of shields that's Command 2.

Who would ever run an MC80 carrier or an assault frigate carrier again?

My gut feeling is that the niche for this ship design is already filled.

Compared to the new meds (Acc and Muni) the VSD and AFmk2 are both over costed. This ship is priced off of the Acc and Muni.

7 hours ago, Cap116 said:

Compared to the new meds (Acc and Muni) the VSD and AFmk2 are both over costed. This ship is priced off of the Acc and Muni.

When you're getting exactly what you want, it should be overcosted.

Are the VSD or AfMk2 really the exact match of what people want in a medium ship?

I think both are jack-of-all trades and have the flexibility to do any job tasked to them (assuming they have some upgrades added to assist with the intended role), but are priced too high.

I do realize that this ship effectively power creeps the AfMk2 out of existence, but alternatively, the Mk2 probably deserves to have its price adjusted downward.

If this ship cost the same 81 points as the Mk2A, or had a price increase to match the 72pts of the Mk2B, which one would you expect to perform better?

Also, we have made significant progress on filling up page 395,

Only 4 (and some more posts here) more to go to get to 400...

I think our goal should be 401. That's a prime number.

Or 10,000 replies. That would also be good. One hundred hundreds! The true victory of decimalisation.

I wonder if we will ever get a campaign intended for all 4 factions or will the campaigns remain era specific?

I'm mostly seeing if I can hit 27000 likes

We can get you there Dras

3 hours ago, Cap116 said:

Are the VSD or AfMk2 really the exact match of what people want in a medium ship?

I think both are jack-of-all trades and have the flexibility to do any job tasked to them (assuming they have some upgrades added to assist with the intended role), but are priced too high.

I do realize that this ship effectively power creeps the AfMk2 out of existence, but alternatively, the Mk2 probably deserves to have its price adjusted downward.

If this ship cost the same 81 points as the Mk2A, or had a price increase to match the 72pts of the Mk2B, which one would you expect to perform better?

Personally I find the Mk2B perfectly fine for it's cost. The Mk2 A and the VSD2 are horrendously over costed. If I would change anything about the MC45, it would be reducing the anti squadron firepower.

5 hours ago, Cap116 said:

Are the VSD or AfMk2 really the exact match of what people want in a medium ship?

I think both are jack-of-all trades and have the flexibility to do any job tasked to them (assuming they have some upgrades added to assist with the intended role), but are priced too high.

I do realize that this ship effectively power creeps the AfMk2 out of existence, but alternatively, the Mk2 probably deserves to have its price adjusted downward.

If this ship cost the same 81 points as the Mk2A, or had a price increase to match the 72pts of the Mk2B, which one would you expect to perform better?

It's not that they're exact matches of what people want. But they are there are they aren't going away and if you create a ship that's "like an AFMk2B but cheaper and easier to command" nobody will use the assault frigate.

There is definitely space for a medium-base rebel ship, they're crying out for one. But you're re-inventing the wheel. The rebels have no shortage of useful carriers in all three size classes where they have ships. Why not go for a medium base ship with Squadron 1 and more firepower? Double ion looks very interesting, an offensive retrofit for DCaps, good shields but middling (3) engineering and stick with the defence tokens that you've picked.

50 minutes ago, flatpackhamster said:

It's not that they're exact matches of what people want. But they are there are they aren't going away and if you create a ship that's "like an AFMk2B but cheaper and easier to command" nobody will use the assault frigate.

There is definitely space for a medium-base rebel ship, they're crying out for one. But you're re-inventing the wheel. The rebels have no shortage of useful carriers in all three size classes where they have ships. Why not go for a medium base ship with Squadron 1 and more firepower? Double ion looks very interesting, an offensive retrofit for DCaps, good shields but middling (3) engineering and stick with the defence tokens that you've picked.

A medium brawler would be competing with the MC75 too tbh. I am not sure double ion would put out enough damage to be worth it.

5 hours ago, Drasnighta said:

I'm mostly seeing if I can hit 27000 likes