That might be a workable plan, but we are well past the point of historical accuracy here, and just working on "can this ship be balanced".

Removing a couple APR (as the ship has 40 power, which given that it can essentially "hold" weapons on an attack run for 1 power) seems totally reasonable. Removing the two extra boxes on the #1 shield also seems reasonable. Given that the ship is already very tough, internally speaking (16 even split hull, 12 phasers, dual shuttle bay), I can't imagine that adding a couple extra control is probably something it needs.

By Gregory S Flusche (Vandor) on Monday, October 14, 2013 - 03:14 pm: Edit

Well a few months ago i turned the maesron into a pile of scrap with a king eagle. He fired at me cloaked i uncloaked and plastered him with plasma.
The second meeting went about the same. Now i have been told the Tournament king eagle is a weak ship. Just my thought on it is all.

By Michael Kenyon (Mikek) on Monday, October 14, 2013 - 03:33 pm: Edit

Greg,

You may want to consider the tactics there. Overrunning a loaded King Eagle is a dodgy proposition. If you're going to do it, you need to be sure that once you fire, you can get out before he can come up and smack you. You also need some kind of stick available if they do.

If it were me, I'd fly fast, crank the TGs up to 6 in EA, play with speed changes to let me hit max speed JUST as I about to start a strafing run and then shoot JUST the 4TG and forward phasers as I did an overrun. The "silly table" will mitigate that fire a lot, but you're going to get a solid hit in. Crank up the TGs as much as you can off of battery.

If the KE comes up, the second that they're on the way up, give them a TG to play with (two if you are so good as to rock it on a turn break) They then have the option to deal with the TGs (not easy) or not take the shot. You're behind it at this point and running, so the KE has to flip around as well, giving you a little time to take range. You also have the L/R and rear phasers to punish the presumed now-down #1 as it comes around which hit very well, but not for a lot.

By Michael Kenyon (Mikek) on Monday, October 14, 2013 - 03:39 pm: Edit

It takes about the vast majority of your phasers to take down the drones or plasma almost every opponent is going to be able to muster (about 50% more than what an alpha would have to use). Because of this, I've found that I spend most of my turns reloading almost all of the phaser capacitors and don't get to power all the TGs after the first pass. The wall-eyed TG arcs also give the opponent a great place to hide after they've started to be damaged.

Hmmm ... the simplest solution I can think of is to start the MAE with its batteries empty, but I imagine that's off the table.

By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Monday, October 14, 2013 - 08:05 pm: Edit

You do not need to center line a ship. You will have 3 of the 4 TG's when you are off center.

I was hoping some of the guys that played against the Maesron TC would also chime in here.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Monday, October 14, 2013 - 08:18 pm: Edit

Give them a few days. I'm sure they'll show up.

I do think the split arcs are a disadvantage of the ship--if it can't get a centerline shot, it it much less terrifying (at R5, it is doing 48 some odd damage total, which isn't totally devastating), especially if its opponent can then turn after the initial shot. But if it can get a centerline shot, it is going to do a lot of damage at R5.

By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Monday, October 14, 2013 - 08:24 pm: Edit

How many people have fought the Maesron TC in a tournament?

I emailed Robert Schirmer to see if he has the stats for the ships win/losses.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Monday, October 14, 2013 - 08:41 pm: Edit

Dunno (and I suspect that Robert isn't keeping track of that ship)? This year's World League saw it play 6 games, and lost 5 of them (although one of those was not actually played, so really, 5 games and lost 4).

It lost to LDR, TKR, GBS, and ORI. It beat a HYD (I suspect it is advantaged vs Hydran in general, and to be fair, Chris had no idea what the Maesron that was about to shoot him did until it shot him--he thought it was actually the Peladine ship with plasmas...)

So in the first tournament run, it didn't do so hot. This last weekend, it was pretty solid; Barry went, what, 4-1 before the finals, and then is so far up 1 in the finals (for a current record of 5-1). In World League, he went 1-2. I don't know how Ron did at Council, but he apparently did well enough to get into the Finals (which means he was at least 50-50, but probably better).

By Michael Kenyon (Mikek) on Monday, October 14, 2013 - 08:58 pm: Edit

Ken,

You are correct. You will have 3/4 TGs ... and 1/2 of your phasers (roughly). It's enough of a shift that it's worth every effort to get the added TG and phasers.

By David Zimdars (Zimdarsdavid) on Monday, October 14, 2013 - 09:33 pm: Edit

I have deep concerns about the Maesron playtest TCC. Comments not in any particular order.

1) 32 front shields seem unjustified when the original tournament ship rules standardized #1 shields to 30.

2) comparing wide angle phasers to regular phasers; and tachyon guns to photon torpedoes; it is true that the Maesron weapons cannot get as lucky roles and max out quite as much damage as their alpha counterparts. Some see this as some sort of disadvantage. It is not. IMHO tactically a player's greatest
concern is that your shot will do poorly or miss (see Fed). Doing extraordinarily well is either 1) usually a usual proposition you should avoid (jack-potting with the Fed at range 8); 2) something you hope for in a desperation ploy (see Fed at range 8); 3) or a pleasant surprise (rolling 8 ones with P1s at range 1, for example). Since each of these conditions represent a tactically undesirable situation to get into; it is a false comparison to somehow consider this a loss for the Maesron. Rather, being sure that you will get some damage is *huge*. To paraphrase Paul Scott; you can probably figure out a way to make the Fed win half of its games - it is hard to figure out a way to do win more than half consistently. The Maesron has a lot of possibility to figure out a way to win more than half consistently.

3) Having only 3 TG to bear on either side of centerline is not too much of disadvantage. See the archeo Tholian. It is particularly mitigated by being pretty sure to hit.

4) A range 7 shot with 3 TG and bearing phasers is better than a Kli UIM disruptor shot at the same range. If the Maesron gets a range 7 FCL shot, it is way better. Compare the Maesron dillema to the Fed. Maesron gets to range 7 FCL. The Maesron probably can be sure to bring down a shield and do a bunch of internals. The Fed fears getting nothing. The Maesron has less of this fear.

5) 40 power when it has 2 zero power weapons and the Fed gets only 38 with no zero power weapons? Note the Lyran has an ESG which requires power.

6) 4 P3 like weapons when the Fed only has 2?

7) 2 shuttle bays and drone like weapons? Fed only has one bay.

8) Consider two TM launched imp 32 and 1. Thats 24 damage points (like a scatter pack!). They take 6P1 to kill for sure; and 8P3s. Yeah, OK, you can tractor them, but it takes 4 power and you'll still need to shoot all those phasers at them. You can tractor the 2 drones from a FRAX too, but a lot easier, and kill them a lot easier.

9) Oh, and the Maesron has a zero power weapon that can be repaired - and then kill you. Nothing else like that.

10) Six control spaces; 3 bridge and 3 emer with no AUX is nice - impossible to lose 3 control in one shot.

11) Going back to the issue of the Maesron being sure to hit - makes it a master of Mizia.

12) The Maesron gets a 1-5 to hit at most ranges under passive or at cloak. This is like UIM, but UIM requires a lock on.

13) OK, it takes 2 points of power to hold 8 point TGs. So what. When does a Fed ever hold standards? The Maesron has the power to take the shot and rearm.

14) Consider the Maesron firing 2 8 pt TGs each turn; and acting like a phaser boat. It would grind the paint off pretty good.

15) turn mode C is pretty good for such a killer boat

OK, so as I said - these are concerns. I don't have the experience to say that in total they make the Maesron overpowered. They just concern me.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Monday, October 14, 2013 - 10:33 pm: Edit

To clarify, what are the missile upgrade options available to the Mæsron ship? Does it come with the standard historical warheads as standard, or is the assumption that at least one or more of the missiles onboard are enhanced?

(And are the racks Type-A or type-B?)


Also, on a side note, I wonder if there might be any similar dynamics to watch out for once the Carnivons get a tournament ship of their own worked up. I don't have a copy of C6 as of yet, but the sample CW in the preview PDF seems to present a similar dynamic: a sturdy hull with a two-turn direct-fire punch backed up with a slow-firing (yet individually-notable) drone-like support weapon. Granted, the Carnivon would add in heel nippers to the mix, but it seems to be the closest Alpha Octant empire to the Mæsrons in terms of their general tactical doctrine.

(Which is ironic given the role of the wolf-like Vulpa in the history of the Alliance, but how and ever.)

By Andy Vancil (Andy) on Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - 12:37 am: Edit

Peter Bakija wrote:

---

Quote:

Removing a couple APR (as the ship has 40 power, which given that it can essentially "hold" weapons on an attack run for 1 power) seems totally reasonable.

---

By Andy Vancil (Andy) on Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - 01:17 am: Edit

Dave Z.,

When are we going to do our Masters game?

1. I agree that the 32-box #1 is just plain wrong for a TC, and not justified.

2. PW's have their pluses and minuses. The big minus for the tournament environment is the fact that PW-3s are much less effective at killing drones.

3. While there are things you can do to take advantage of the split arcs, like saving one TG to keep some threat on the reload turn, or firing out the flank while running, I would say the split arcs are much more of a detriment for the Maesron than for the ATC disruptors. As a two-turn weapon, the TG is much more reliant on the crunch factor than disruptors, which can fire again next turn and are more flexible.

4. I should hope a TG does more damage than a disruptor. Disruptors can fire every turn.

5-7. The problem with comparing the Maesron to the Fed is that the Fed sucks. The Fed-Lyran comparison is interesting because the two ships have many similarities in terms of systems, and the Fed comes up short in power, weapons, turn mode, and shuttle bays. The only thing the Fed has is crunch.

Ask yourself: Would you trade the TM racks for ESGs? I think I would. Now compare the Maesron to the Lyran.

8. That's the best way to use TMs, but the drawback is that you can't do it again for 63 impulses. It can be rough trying to rearm TGs and not having any seekers to discourage your opponent from taking positional advantage.

The TMs create some RPS in that they are so easy to dispatch with drones, but create headaches for others with weaker drone defenses. Two things to remember when flying against them: 1. Sometimes it's best just to let them hit. Save your power and weapons, and just spend a few shield boxes. 2. Heavy weapons can fire against them without penalty. As if gatlings weren't hard enough on them, fusion beams can clean them up quite nicely. Depending on the situation, a disruptor or PC can, too.

13. I assume by "8 point TG" you mean one with 4 energy in it. (Which only does 8 at range 0-1, otherwise you need more power.) TGs are about as bad as particle cannons when it comes to holding. Now, the flexible arming cycle is definitely nice. Just be careful you don't put in too much power and find yourself out of max range.

14. Against certain opponents, the Maesron could play that game, although 3 TGs one turn, and one the next, seems much more likely.

At this point, the Maesron's biggest disadvantage is that people haven't figured out the best way to fly it yet. And its biggest advantage is that people haven't figured out how to fly against it, yet.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - 08:46 am: Edit

Gary wrote:
>>To clarify, what are the missile upgrade options available to the Mæsron ship? Does it come with the standard historical warheads as standard, or is the assumption that at least one or more of the missiles onboard are enhanced?>>

It currently has 2 Missile choices--a missile with 8 point warhead, 12 damage, 1 point of anti tractor, speed 22 and a missile with (IIRC) a 12 point warhead, 10 damage, 1 point of anti-tractor, speed 22. We have monkeyed with all sorts of different options, but in the end, simple seemed better.

>>(And are the racks Type-A or type-B?) >>

They are whatever the generic default is. 5 missiles per rack, I think?

>>Also, on a side note, I wonder if there might be any similar dynamics to watch out for once the Carnivons get a tournament ship of their own worked up.>>

It is certainly possible. But then, there has been zero development on a Carnivon TC at this point, so let's not worry about it.

By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - 09:24 am: Edit

Andy you might be right about people have not figured out how to fly against the ship yet. I think the guys who flew the TC at Council figured out how to fly them very well.

Did I miss something about the TMs needing 63 impulses for firing? I launch TM-1 on 1.32 and TM-2 on 2.1.

If I read the rules correctly I should be able to launch another missile on 3.1, or am I mistaken?

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - 12:27 pm: Edit

Dave wrote:
>>1) 32 front shields seem unjustified when the original tournament ship rules standardized #1 shields to 30. >>

Agreed.

>>2) comparing wide angle phasers to regular phasers; and tachyon guns to photon torpedoes>>

The Wide Angle Phasers are, across the board, a little worse than regular P1s and P3s (except in one, weird band of, like, 8-12, where they are slightly better for the PW1s). The P3s only have a 50-50 chance of killing a single type I drone, which is a problem for them, although against ships with just a couple drone racks (Klingon, 2 drone Shark, Orion), their drones will likely be tied up killing the Tachyon Missiles, so the Maesron probably won't have to shot down drones (assuming the SP is dealt with via a weasel or speed to be dealt with later on the Klingon). I suspect that ships with 4 or more drone racks (Kzinti, 4 drone Shark, WAX) will probably be pretty well off against the Maesron (as they have enough drones to make the Tachyon Missiles mostly irrelevant and then still enough drones to make the phaser issues on the Maesron noticable).

The TGs are similar to photons. But they always hit, for less damage (although at R5, they do, what, 12 damage on a 1-5? Or am I misremembering and they do 10 max?). And are vastly more flexible (they are awesome at R15; they are equally devastating at R1). Their arming allows them to front load or back load the arming (i.e. 1 point of power on the run turn, and 6 points of power on the "I'm cornered and now need to stop and TAC anyway" second turn, or whatever), which gives them a huge amount of tactical flexibility.

This being said, the split arcs are a problem (they aren't a problem for the Tholian as the Tholian rarely arms more than 1 disruptor anyway, let alone all 4 of them, due to the wacky web shenanigans), in that if your opponent isn't conveniently moving for you (which in my last game vs Barry, I *totally* played directly into his best arc at the best range, due to me being bad at flying the Klingon...), your initial volley will be not as favorable. Yeah, the second gun can still come into play, but not as often as you'd probably like.

>>4) A range 7 shot with 3 TG and bearing phasers is better than a Kli UIM disruptor shot at the same range.>>

Sure, but it is also using two turn weapons. That shot is unlikely to kill someone, and then they are going to be on top of you before your guns are reloaded. Which is significant.

>>5) 40 power when it has 2 zero power weapons and the Fed gets only 38 with no zero power weapons? Note the Lyran has an ESG which requires power.>>

Yeah, I'm inclined to suggets losing the 2APR (down to 38 power) as well as the extra 2 shield boxes. In "historical" play, there are no Maesron cruisers with more than, like, 26 warp, so outside of the tournament environment, they always have not that much power. Certainly not 40 on a TC.

By Michael Kenyon (Mikek) on Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - 01:22 pm: Edit

Tossing my $0.02 in as a dyed in the wool MAE apologist.

>> 1) 32 front shields seem unjustified when the original tournament ship rules standardized #1 shields to 30.

No debate.

>> 2) comparing wide angle phasers to regular phasers; and tachyon guns to photon torpedoes; ...

The comparison breaks down, badly. They do hit a LOT more frequently. From a damage perspective, the absolute best a MAE can do is to even the output of a Fed, but must consistently be at R1 to do that. In order to do that, I had to pop "fed arming" power into the weapon, but unlike the fed, once it's in there my power curve doesn't get any better. The only real chance to pull this off is we end an arming turn at R1 or if end at very close range and the MAE's opponent plots a slow start. If you let me end on a second turn break at R1 more than once, you probably deserve what you get in my opinion.

The Maesron does consistantly hit, but apart from the TGs, the hits don't hurt that bad at all. With the TGs, your largely guaranteed your damage, but between the walleye arcs (allowing your opponent the chance to spread the damage) and the persistent speed vs range conundrum flying it, it's not easy.

>> 3) Having only 3 TG to bear on either side of centerline is not too much of disadvantage. See the archeo Tholian. It is particularly mitigated by being pretty sure to hit.

So, let's continue that comparison. The ATC can shot every turn, the MAE cannot. The ATC can take advantage of opportunity shots on bad shields, well the MAE's opponent can swap shields while the ship is reloading to limit penetration. The disruptor hits pretty dang well in real-life combat ranges in a tourney and not appreciably worse than a MAE. It does do less damage, but twice as often. Notably, the ATC has 8P1 in awesome arcs to back that up with, which is alot different then 8PW1 in walleye arcs.

>> 4) A range 7 shot with 3 TG and bearing phasers is better than a Kli UIM disruptor shot at the same range.

Agreed with Andy here, it's the twice as often that the Kli is shooting. Even P2 are better than a PW1 at close ranges.

>> 5) 40 power when it has 2 zero power weapons and the Fed gets only 38 with no zero power weapons? Note the Lyran has an ESG which requires power.

I do agree that the Fed needs a standoff weapon. The best it has is its 8P1. Also agree with andy on that.

>> 6) 4 P3 like weapons when the Fed only has 2?

The Fed 2 P3 are about as effective (and in better arcs) than the MAE 2PW3.

>> 7) 2 shuttle bays and drone like weapons? Fed only has one bay.

The 2 bay is a (minor) issue. I assure you, after the first strike, the MAE has a some power problems and carrying SS are not generally the #1 needed use of power.

>> 8) Consider two TM launched imp 32 and 1. Thats 24 damage points (like a scatter pack!). They take 6P1 to kill for sure; and 8P3s. Yeah, OK, you can tractor them, but it takes 4 power and you'll still need to shoot all those phasers at them. You can tractor the 2 drones from a FRAX too, but a lot easier, and kill them a lot easier.

Compare this up against the KZI. If you play it right, you can launch 20s then 32s and get 8 drones landing at the same time on the same shield over a turn break. Would you rather have to face 8 drones or 2 TMs every other turn. Least we think this a ZIN only trick, you can still pull this off to a slightly lesser extent in the ORI, WAX, & WBS at 6 drones (only because of control limits) with 5 hexes separation. You need at least 6P1 to kill them for sure, 8P1 for the Kzinti blast.

>> 9) Oh, and the Maesron has a zero power weapon that can be repaired - and then kill you. Nothing else like that.

Well, if the "nothing else like that" was an arguement, then by that standard all new TCs would pretty much be banned. On the actual point though, let's look at the actual effect.
1.16 TM rack is destroyed. Presume that it'd fired once (you did fire it, right?)
After loosing one with the damage, that leaves three missiles in the dead rack.
2.x Start repairing it ... Presume the other rack fires.
3.x Still repairing it ... No cover or standoff at all here.
4.x The empty rack is now repaired and I can ... oh ••••. This is the turn that the other rack was going to fire....
5.1 You can complete the "devastating" attack of launching two TMs.
7.1 Next time you can launch two TMs.

>> 10) Six control spaces; 3 bridge and 3 emer with no AUX is nice - impossible to lose 3 control in one shot.

Agreed. To this point, I've never had loss of control cost me a game (or even affect me in a major fashion). Does this regularly happen?

>> 11) Going back to the issue of the Maesron being sure to hit - makes it a master of Mizia.

The PW1s are great for Mizia. I'll admit it. They 2 damage from R12 like it's no one's business. They do 3 damage from R4 like it's no one's business also. If your opponent is not giving you anything else to shoot at, you do get this advantage. It probably will improve their RPS vs. Fed and ATC/THO.

>> 12) The Maesron gets a 1-5 to hit at most ranges under passive or at cloak. This is like UIM, but UIM requires a lock on.

The vast majority of your regular firepower (TMs, PWs) does require AFC, so if you want to take out 2/3 of your armament to get 1 extra point in the TG, that's an option. Against cloak, if you're firing from more than R2 (where UIM stops being an issue), I'm questioning the reasoning ... Apart from pot-shooting when you're going to loose the disruptor anyway. Just not buying this one ... As pointed out PFC has it's own limits.

>> 13) OK, it takes 2 points of power to hold 8 point TGs. So what. When does a Fed ever hold standards? The Maesron has the power to take the shot and rearm.

(Presuming you mean 4 point TGs.) So, this is somewhat of a spurious argumemt. When a Fed arms a std. they have a (sucky) shot to R30, and an overload to R8. When the MAE loads at the listed 4pt. level, they completely have cut out the long-shot (down to R16) and if you want to match a Fed's overload, you've got a R1 shot which holds for what it takes a Fed to arm it. At which point, the comparison broke down because it costs the Fed 1 point to hold a standard and half as much as the MAE to hold it's full-overload. At the maximum range of the listed 4 point torp, you've got the exact same cost, nearly the same chance to hit (1-5 vs 1-4) and do nearly the same damage as a disruptor fired over two turns. You hit slightly better, he gets twice as many shots in the same time. Seems fair to me...

>> 14) Consider the Maesron firing 2 8 pt TGs each turn; and acting like a phaser boat. It would grind the paint off pretty good.

Absolutely. You'll crack the paint on a single shield in turn 3 if you keep it at R16 (and that's a viable way to fly the boat) if they keep giving you the same shield. To get the 8pt TGs for 4 points of power, you have to be at R1. For 5 points, you can get it to R6 and that's usually where I end up loading them to (often the last bit off battery). They are REALLY effective here. What ship are you going to fly against where you're willing to get to R6 multiple turns in a row to do 16 points of damage, however? Plasma boat? Fusion boat? Disruptor ship?

>> 15) turn mode C is pretty good for such a killer boat

It doesn't suck, but it also spends a lot of time running away and without a moderate turn mode that's very difficult. It's at the bottom of the walleye ships I can think of however, for terms of turn mode.

By Andrew J Koch (Droid) on Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - 04:14 pm: Edit

Barry and I are scheduled for Saturday evening his Maesron v my AUX. I will show you guys just how bad the Maesron really is.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - 04:28 pm: Edit

Mike wrote:
>>When the MAE loads at the listed 4pt. level, they completely have cut out the long-shot (down to R16) and if you want to match a Fed's overload, you've got a R1 shot which holds for what it takes a Fed to arm it. At which point, the comparison broke down because it costs the Fed 1 point to hold a standard and half as much as the MAE to hold it's full-overload.>>

On the TG arming front, one of the things that makes it a extra effective is the front loading/back loading aspect of arming it. One can easily, say, put 5 points into each of 4xTG on Turn 1 (leaving, currently, 20 power for movement and shuttles--you could easily turn on your ship, hold a weasel or something, and move a 15-16 plot for 15 power allowing you to jump to speed 31 on impulse 6 or so of T2) and corner dodge. On T2, you put 1 point into each TG (giving you 6 point TGs, which is 10 damage at R5), leaving you 36 power for movement, turning on your ship, and shuttles (turn on your ship, hold the shuttle, put, like, 26 into speed, and you still have 5 power left over in addition to your batteries...). I mean, yeah, after that first shot, things become harder. But on the first exchange, the ship is oozing power.

By Ken Kazinski (Kjkazinski) on Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - 05:06 pm: Edit

Mike wrote:
>> The empty rack is now repaired

Mike the rack is not empty. As I read the rules the remaining missiles are still in the rack and able to be fired.

(OFD1.131) If a tachyon rack is destroyed, one missile within the rack (not all of them) is also destroyed; it does not explode. Other missiles therein are not affected and can be launched immediately after the rack is repaired.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - 05:09 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

It currently has 2 Missile choices--a missile with 8 point warhead, 12 damage, 1 point of anti tractor, speed 22 and a missile with (IIRC) a 12 point warhead, 10 damage, 1 point of anti-tractor, speed 22. We have monkeyed with all sorts of different options, but in the end, simple seemed better.

---

---

Quote:

They are whatever the generic default is. 5 missiles per rack, I think?

---

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - 05:21 pm: Edit

Gary wrote:
>>Would it be fair to assume that any other TM-operating empires would get the same options, as and when (or if) they were to get their own playtest TCs later on?>>

That remains to be seen. Currently, there are no other playtest Omega TCs that are armed with TMs. I suspect that as the TM loadouts are something that can be monkeyed with for balance without changing the rules or the SSDs, what loadouts ships with TMs get will be very subject to game balance issues.

>>The historical Mæsron CA comes with type-A racks, that hold three missiles apiece, but with no reloads. Type-B racks (which are used on TM-armed Auroran ships) have five missiles with no reloads. There are a few other variants listed in (OFD1.12), but most of those have yet to be featured on an Omega SSD. >>

I think the current TC has 5 loads in each rack, so B's I guess. Also something that could be monkeyed with for balance without changing rules or SSDs, so likely something that might change at any moment. As it stands, the TMs are mostly not really an issue, balance wise, but they might get tweaked.

>>Also, when it comes to using the Mæsron ship, how often would the TGs be armed at a higher level during energy allocation and positioned accordingly, as opposed to arming low and using the "pseudo-overload" via reserve power to boost the arming level on the impulse of firing?>>

Probably not that often, given how the tournament works. It isn't at all impossible, say, for the Maesron to be holding 6 energy TGs (max range of 5), and then get shot in the face at R8 and see it's opponent run away. But it is unlikely that the Maesron will ever get totally hosed by the range limit, unless it is holding the heaviest of guns (that take the most to hold or arm, and thus slow down the ship as well).

By Michael Kenyon (Mikek) on Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - 08:02 pm: Edit

Ken,

Sorry for the confusion, that's an editing problem on my part. If you'll note, the timing is still accurate, I just failed to correct myself in the post. Assuming you went 2 1/2 turns without taking your other one drone hit, the second rack will be ready to fire at the same point that the first one is back on line meaning that you're drone rate doesn't actually improve off of it being destroyed till the next round when you get the one additional TM back.

Alone, TMs aren't at all scary at all. I'm more scared by 3 drones than a TM, despite the need for the same effort to eradicate them. In waves, they're frightening. Two of them is enough to make a ship take action, which is the equivalent of a Klingon or Kzinti building up a drone wave.

Peter,

You plan works brilliantly turn 1-2 when you're at range 35 from each other, assuming that you volunteer NOT to take the 4 point default load and start loading from scratch.

Now let's take it from the turn 3 perspective. Now, it all depends on who your enemy is.

If you're fighting a D&D ship, you probably took a shot in turn one and don't have 40 power left. Are you going to try to go toe to toe in the reload round or run away while putting 20 into weapons? Ummm ... that's not going to work.

If you're facing big plasma, assuming that they they have 1-2 balls to go in turn 3, are you going to plot a move < 16 when you know that you're entire phaser suite can take down about 1/3 of an S? They're principal defense against plasma is in WWs and those have their own slew of problems.

If you're going against a crunch-monkey, if they're at all armed, are you going to take the slow boat while you're rearming? Most of them have substantial phaser power for the off-turns where the Maesron is impressive, but really only on the centerline and not as bad as any of the opponents.

The only place where I've seen where I can reasonably take the slow boat in the reload round is one where both sides blarfed at the same time and now we're both going to lick wounds for a round two. In that case, it's not a bad plan at all. The only thing that stops the opponent from flipping around on you when they see the speed plot though is the TMs.

Gary,

They are B racks. I believe (no evidence) that the choice was made because the tournament has historically shied away from doing anything that involves reloads. Why that's the case, don't know, but definitely is.

Peter,

I disagree with you _slightly_ about getting hosed by the range limit. The problem is that if you're holding 6s, you're doing 16 of the 40 power, presume needing another 5-6 for phaser reloads that means that you're going less than 20. If your opponent sees that, they're going to do everything in their power to stay out of the range that you can do damage in.

Once you get into that option, the best solution I've found is to drop a TG over the turn break and throw the power into speed to get you over the hump and let the others hit. That either means that you're dropping most/all of them (and starting to reload them) or dropping 1-2 and leaving them idle for a turn, which puts you significantly down firepower-wise in order to get the shot with the other two.

Personal experience here, but you're better off arming low and cranking it either at the time of fire or over a turn break where you've got them already in range then you are loading up in the hopes of them letting you into close range. I've lead more than one Fed on a merry chase around the tourney arena and it's the same tactic for anyone playing against the MAE, just if the Fed's weapons cost twice as much to hold or did half as much damage for the same hold cost.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - 09:26 pm: Edit

Mike wrote:
>>You plan works brilliantly turn 1-2 when you're at range 35 from each other, assuming that you volunteer NOT to take the 4 point default load and start loading from scratch. >>

Oh, heh--I think that assuming you start with empty guns is a vastly better plan than starting with the 4 default power you can have. If you start with 4 per gun, you hold for 2, put 2 in each gun (up to 6), and then on T2, you have to hold each for 3. Which is spending 16 power on turn 1 for the TGs and then 12 power on turn 2 for the TGs. If you start with them empty, you can put 5 in each gun for 20 on T1 and then 1 in each gun on T2 for a total of 4 when you want to engage. Which seems amazingly better.

>>Now let's take it from the turn 3 perspective. Now, it all depends on who your enemy is.>>

Oh, sure. But again, the advantage is the flexibility. If you need to run like crazy on N+1, you put 1 into each gun, and then when you are cornered on N+2, you stop, TAC, and fill up the guns with whatever energy seems reasonable--just like a Fed, but with more room to wiggle (as the Fed can't start arming with 1 power each).

>>If you're fighting a D&D ship, you probably took a shot in turn one and don't have 40 power left. Are you going to try to go toe to toe in the reload round or run away while putting 20 into weapons? Ummm ... that's not going to work.>>

No, no. You are going to run with 1 power in each gun and then plant and finish loads on the turn after that.

>>I disagree with you _slightly_ about getting hosed by the range limit. The problem is that if you're holding 6s, you're doing 16 of the 40 power, presume needing another 5-6 for phaser reloads that means that you're going less than 20.>>

Holding 6's is 12 power if you have to hold them. Or 4 power if you paid 5 per gun on the previous turn. But yeah. You *can* get hosed by over loading, but it is easy enough to work with 5 pointers that reach to 8 and then top them all off to 6 with batteries if you get to R5.

By Michael Kenyon (Mikek) on Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - 10:30 pm: Edit

Oh, I agree with you. The Maesron has a lot of downsides (and upsides). The best of it's upsides is it's flexibility in those situations.

To be clear, you can get one great, turn if you heavy load on the first turn of arming. However, if you DO and you don't end up firing, you're stuck with both a short range shot AND a costly holding value for the next turn.