Matukai Dragons
  2053 active members
  181 are online







Message CentreRPG CentreQuestion Centre
Archives » Uglies will die in one hit?
Year 7 Day 55 17:09
Tai`to Kale

Destruction: If a station/ship/vehicle receives more damage than beyond double the maximum ionic capacitance, it is destroyed due to all systems being damaged beyond repair. 


Length: 15 m

Hull: 75
Deflector Shields: 20
Ionic Capacity: 1


Length: 15 m

Hull: 30
Deflector Shields: 10
Ionic Capacity: 1

So... these two would only take three ionic damage before blowing up. wouldn't that make them extremely worthless when combat comes out in ten or so years?

Year 7 Day 55 17:16
man a YT-2000 defend against those things. assuming that each hit would mean one dead ugly.


Year 7 Day 55 17:23
Tony Lake

two shots. Have to KO the shield first i think.

Also - Has there been any decision as to whether ionising a ship will turn it into a wreck or plain vaporise it?

Year 7 Day 55 17:46
now that i've looked at it alot of ships look easier to kill by using lasers to bust the shield and ions to blow them up instead of battering the hull. Including the TIE series, Y, X, A and B wings pinooks, cloaks etc. I have to make sure i'm flying somthing with ion cannons if there are not altered in the stat revission.


Year 7 Day 55 17:59
Tai`to Kale

It is true, everything is easier to take down via Ion damage. I already checked this, there doesn't seem to be a single ship easier to take down via hull. But these are spelially alarming cases, it wouldn't be fun to be taken down by a shot or two.

Year 7 Day 55 18:13
Let's hope no one R&Ds a lancer with ions instead of heavies.


Year 7 Day 55 18:21
Tai`to Kale

I actually had planned to join a ship production faction and tell them about this once R&D was out, so they could R&D a new line of ships with only ion weaponry.

But forget about that, i just want someone to explain me the reason behind making the Uglies have such a pronounced weakness.

Year 7 Day 55 20:15
I can't see ions destroying ships. What 'd prefer to see is that ionic of 0 results in it being totally disabled. However, an overkill on ioning something, like turning a 10 ion batteries against a small freighter, would result in some systems being damaged or destroyed due to overload. There could also be such a risk (but far smaller) when it is being disabled. It happened in one of the X-Wing books, a planetary based ion cannon (with a big power boost) fired on a capital in orbit and a bunch of systems exploded. It's the only source I remember but I like it as an aspect of gameplay.

To the actual value of ions, the revision will see a big upward change in ionic caps so that it's not easier to disable a ship than it is to destroy it.


Kids these days!
Year 7 Day 55 20:27
Tai`to Kale

The rules say it is destroyed, as in an feiry explotion of doom that would engulf the poor pilot who would then die a painful death screming as he is slowly scorched inside his pathetic little ugly ship...

Now, being damaged (as in then having 2/4 hyperdrive) seems ok, but it will not be ok to have uglies like they are now.

"look sir, the enemy is deploying an army of uglies."

"fire one ion shot to each"

"sir, all enemy ships were dissabled in one combat round!"

some uglies (like the X-ceptor) are mentioned to be on par with produced models, i don't see a horrible Ionic resistance fitting into the "as good as produced models" category.

It is good to hear all ships will have their Ionic resistance upped.

Year 7 Day 56 1:50
All ship stats are being reviewed, as I recall, so you may want to save your objections until the final version is released.



Year 7 Day 56 3:59
Please also note that Combat rules (under which the effect of weapons and damage on entities falls) aren't completely done yet.


Year 7 Day 56 6:40
Tai`to Kale

I don't need the combat rules to know ion cannons will deal more than three damage per shot, otherwise you wouldn't be able to take dow everything else.

All ship stats are being reviewed, as I recall, so you may want to save your objections until the final version is released. 

I know, but i might aswell point something that seems flawed. I never know wether such details are being overlooked. Althought khan said the ionic amounts aren't, i couldn't have known before i posted.

Year 7 Day 56 9:47
I don't think any of the people who regularly check posts in here are on the ship stats team.



Year 7 Day 58 3:32

I am, now please review DeMeer's statement he repeatedly posts in suggestions about ship stats, combat and how they interact in the hope someone actually listens to the fact theres no point complaining till you see them. Then instead of pointing out 50 things wrong now that have already been changed you can usefully point out 50 different things that are wrong then that need to be changed :p

Strangely enough the rules team, well the rest, aren't stupid. They are perfectly aware of needing to balance ionic damage with normal damage, ionic capacity with hull etc...etc...

Anything Khan say is also obviously more valid than vastly outdated rule pages.

Edited By: Ralgarrch on Year 7 Day 58 3:34

Year 7 Day 58 8:00
Tai`to Kale


basically i finished my contribution to the topic when i said: "It is good to hear all ships will have their Ionic resistance upped."

I was pleased and the problem was assured to be repaired in the future.

Ralgarrch, can you point me to that list, post, news or whatever it is? Or is it a group of separate posts running around?

Strangely enough the rules team, well the rest, aren't stupid 

You can never, seriously, things can be overlooked regardless of how sharp one is. many of the combine's players weren't aware of this which in turn meant (to me at least) that the rules time might not have noticed.

On the other hand there might have been a desition behind giving them just one ionic point and i originally wanted to know that, the why of this.

Year 7 Day 58 9:04

It's just random posts when the subject comes up.

Part of the reason there is a rules team is because things can be overlooked by single developers. There are enough members of the rules team and developers familiar with the game to catch most flaws that appear.

After things are finalised the rules are released (and "should" be done so with a sim news post) and then the public can examine them to point out anything that others previously missed. If there input was added before hand decisions would never be made and nothing would ever get done. Very rarely will anything major be wrong with the fully discussed concepts released, unless those discussions were ignored.