After seeing the thread talking about fixing the victory I figured I'd try making a title for it. Its basically engine techs but the extra move has to be straight. Also I don't know how to insert a navigate symbol on KYD. Thoughts? Mostly wondering about the points but if it needs changed feel free to tell me.
My concern is that without allowing the change in yaw, the victory is going to run off the edge if it's moving at speed 2. I'm ok with a Vic being as maneuverable as an ISD, it's still not as good at everything else.
If using JJ this gives it a move of 2,2,0 with navigate. Plus the extra move is optional so if you are going to go off the edge you don't have to use the extra move. Would you suggest making it identical to engine techs and the same cost?
It's basically Quantum Storm for more points, for obvious reasons.
This is the third or fourth time I have seen a suggestion in the past few months to improve the VSD by giving it an extra maneuver. I would rather see some battle reports where someone proxies the effect, than read a few more pages of speculation.
20 minutes ago, Captain Ordo N-11 said:If using JJ this gives it a move of 2,2,0 with navigate. Plus the extra move is optional so if you are going to go off the edge you don't have to use the extra move. Would you suggest making it identical to engine techs and the same cost?
That would be useful but uninteresting. Make it a dual purpose card for protection and speed somehow. Perhaps you may gain a defense token of your choice or gain the Engine Techs effect once per round? That idea would have to be 12+ points though to be fair to the ISD.
Defense token might be op but I added shield regen. If 2 shields is too much maybe 1, or try to work out something else defense related.
20 minutes ago, Captain Ordo N-11 said:Defense token might be op but I added shield regen. If 2 shields is too much maybe 1, or try to work out something else defense related.
The only issue I have is both (1) Auto shield refresh and "Execute a Speed 1 Maneuver" for a ship that's bigger than a Flotilla, are both kinda set around 8 Points.
12 Points for the Title is on the high side... But I think that both effects need to be equated - make it 1 shield. Then the 12 is justified as being (You're guaranteed an 8 point effect, but here's a second effect to choose instead, and the tax is half points...)
1 minute ago, Drasnighta said:The only issue I have is both (1) Auto shield refresh and "Execute a Speed 1 Maneuver" for a ship that's bigger than a Flotilla, are both kinda set around 8 Points.
12 Points for the Title is on the high side... But I think that both effects need to be equated - make it 1 shield. Then the 12 is justified as being (You're guaranteed an 8 point effect, but here's a second effect to choose instead, and the tax is half points...)
That makes sense, plus the original purpose was to address the speed.
Instead of trying to speed up the Victory why not try bring the enemy to you. With the likes of Konstantine, Admiral Titus etc. Just a thought.
I don’t even think speed is really the issue, yaw is.
12 points on a title on an already pricey ship seems a further reason to marginalise the vic further.
7 hours ago, ISD Avenger said:I don’t even think speed is really the issue, yaw is.
12 points on a title on an already pricey ship seems a further reason to marginalise the vic further.
In that case I don't think there is any problem with the Victory, if someone wants more yaw just use JJ and navigate for 2,2 movement.
Personally I don't think the Victory is that bad, you just need to work around its strengths and weaknesses. But I haven't had a chance to play it that often so I'm not sure of how that works out. I just keep seeing people complain about it and figured I'd try stuff to make it better.
This is another attempt to make the VSD an ISD. Maybe it needs a buff to Mae it viable, but not a buff that just makes it an ISD.
19 hours ago, chieftom22 said:This is another attempt to make the VSD an ISD. Maybe it needs a buff to Mae it viable, but not a buff that just makes it an ISD.
Dominator makes a VSD a speed 2 ISD. This just makes a speed 3 VSD. Now, as it is a title, and you can't take both it and Dominator, it is not making a VSD an ISD.
VSDs are still viable.
ISDs are better than VSDs.
I understand the comment, but it's not really valid. A VSD is the precursor to the ISD. They fill the same role in a fleet, the ISD just fills it better. The VSD has been a "bargain ISD" since wave 2. Giving us upgrades that allow the VSD to narrow the gap between the ISD and itself is not only logical, it is appropriate.
The original complaint with the VSD was that the VSD II was speed 2. Why?
Because the VSD II was a refit designed after the ISD, to bring the VSD more in line with the superior design of the ISD, so it could continue to fill the role of a Star Destroyer, as more ISDs were being built.
Until wave 6, the VSD saw most of it's action as carrier, a role it could fill, but rarely excell at. It is a Star Destroyer, it was designed to be the center of the line of battle.
These kids of refits are common in real world militarys as well. So why is there a knee-jerk reaction against this type of thing in Armada? Even before wave 7 the ISD really wasn't competing against the VSD for space in a fleet. The VSD was just the bargain version. After wave 7, is there really any danger of VSDs supplanting ISDs, no matter what "Fix upgrades" it gets?
6 minutes ago, cynanbloodbane said:After wave 7, is there really any danger of VSDs supplanting ISDs, no matter what "Fix upgrades" it gets?
This is the key thought everyone should take home. If SAd was Large/Medium like the other officers, they would be legit good. Instead they are totally mothballed. This is the fix you are looking for.
4 minutes ago, BrobaFett said:This is the key thought everyone should take home. If SAd was Large/Medium like the other officers, they would be legit good. Instead they are totally mothballed. This is the fix you are looking for.
Soon as Strat Ad goes medium/large, Rieekan Aces with Gallant Haven comes back.
1 minute ago, geek19 said:Soon as Strat Ad goes medium/large, Rieekan Aces with Gallant Haven comes back.
That is a moot point. Rieekan aces is broken period. FFG's balancing this entire game around that one fleet cause it's so bonkers broken powerful has been supremely detrimental to overall game health and doubly so to fleet diversity on the Imperial side as every nerf intended for Rieekan has hit the Imperial side doubly hard, since they relied on many of the same (now nerfed) mechanics with about the broken AF wombo combo's to make it still good post nerfs.
I'm feeling really salty this morning. Need more coffee haha.
56 minutes ago, cynanbloodbane said:VSD was just the bargain version. After wave 7, is there really any danger of VSDs supplanting ISDs, no matter what "Fix upgrades" it gets?
That’s the trouble. VSDs aren’t really bargain. The v1 is to slow for 50% of its front battery to see hardly any action = expensive. And the v2 is costly to begin with.
I think my point still stands.
This is a game not a military simulator. And bc its a game, I find it difficult to believe that the designers want two components of their game to be the same, or at least perform to the same capacity. That isn't fun, that isn't beneficial to the health of the game, and its not utilizing the potential of what they have.
The desire for the VSD to 'match' the ISD is just unfounded from a game design point of view.
To give another statement of my thoughts about the VSD in Armada I created this Title-card. I think the VSD is a good ship and dont needs any overhauls - so maybe you get the right message from the card :D
Maybe its still overpriced because everything on the VSD is overpriced (including the VSD itself, of course).
Regards
Jimbo
57 minutes ago, chieftom22 said:I think my point still stands.
This is a game not a military simulator. And bc its a game, I find it difficult to believe that the designers want two components of their game to be the same, or at least perform to the same capacity. That isn't fun, that isn't beneficial to the health of the game, and its not utilizing the potential of what they have.
The desire for the VSD to 'match' the ISD is just unfounded from a game design point of view.
I agree, I don’t want the VSD to match the ISD at all.
And im happy to live with the limitations of the VSD, but to do that I think the cost needs to come down a bit.