[Experimental Rule] Fixing 2.5 Entropy Generators

[Ruckdog]

CDR-G raised an interesting point in the FAQ thread regarding the fact that Entropy Generators need some help. I agree with him; in their current iteration, Entropy Generators result in a single Corrosion marker getting placed on the target model.

Here's the problem, though: The new Entropy jenny is essentially replacing the old Calcification jenny, and is often up against options that are far more effective for the price. A great case in point is the PE Emperor BB; you can either get a Shield (3) or an Entropy jenny, both for the same points cost (+10 pts). Hmmm...three shield dice vs. a 50% chance to put a single corrosion marker on a target...I know which one I'd choose!

So, what to do? Well, here are a few possible changes based on what CDR-G mentioned:

1. Change the effect to a -1 to CR and DR for the rest of the turn.
2. If successful the attacker rolls a die. A result of 1-3  = 1 Corrosion marker, 4-5 = 2 Corrosion markers, 6 = 3 Corrosion markers

To that, I would also add the following options:

3. Drop the points cost of Entropy generators in the ORBATs
4. Change the generator effect back to the Shredded Defences critical effect

Note: The Prussians, Kingdom of Denmark, and League of Italian States are the factions currently with access to the Entropy generator.

What do you all think?

[Merlin]

I think I prefer the -1DR/CR option as it is the closest to the v1 UPG fluff.

For those that don't know the Ultrasonic Pulverizer Generator (UPG for short) was a weapon created by a Danish scientist, but used by both the Prussians and Danish militaries that shot out a sort of Jelly that would violently vibrate whatever it touched, making armour plating sag and buckle as it integrity basically vanished, and if it hit a person they would vibrate into a gooey mess.

The generator had one of those properties, but not the other which was a shame as I was the one who made the suggestion that got the generator to be usable in v1 (I suggested the 1 gives no result, 2-3 gave chaos and disarray, 45 gave shredded defenses and 6 was hard pounding. Although my suggestion was the 6 result should have been the old fusion leak result that lowered the DR and CR of the model)

So my thoughts in this are that the Prussian and Danish Entropy Generators should have both Hard Pounding and/or reductions in DR and CR to fit the old fluff.
While the Italians I think should keep the basic entropy generator. According to some people with Italians, the generator mixed with the Node Launcher is actually quite powerful.


That's my thoughts anyway.

[Asuo]

The Calcification Generator  was used as a way to assist in boarding, buy the reducing the enemy's ability to defend you greatly increased you ability to successfully board the enemy.

This was particularly nasty when you considered the nations that had access to them, the Prussians and KoD had tesla weaponry that could be used to reduce the numbers of defenders, while the Italians were all elite crews, this enabled the nations to excel in boarding.

When Spartan started changing the generators  there was a move to make the nations have variants of the generators, this is why the Calcification Generator appeared to be nerfed, the idea was that the nations would gain improved versions, this was never finished though.

So how do i see the issue, at the moment the Prussians and KoD have to give up a lot for it and for the italians its still kind of nasty if they only had more access to it.

What would i like to do well i'd like to give the nations more character, i'd like to take them away from the Prussians and KoD and instead give them a Tesla Storm Generator, a improved version of the Tesla generator that would be avalible to only them. I'd give the Italians more access to the Entrophy Generator, make it a form of weapon, you could concentrate the generators on a ship and do massive damage without firing on it directly.

[RuleBritannia]

What would the Tesla Storm gen do?

[Asuo]

I was thinking the Tesla storm could do a AoE Tesla strike.

I do think people seem to miss that the Tesla generator can still cause a shredded defence on a 3+ flowed by a 1,and if you have the enemy staked you get two rolls on the crit table.

[CDR-G]

The old Calcification Generator was a great fit with the Italians. LoIS has Excellent but small crews for boarding. It gave them a reasonable boarding threat. Something they lacked. It should be standard on the BC (and the otherwise unremarkable Pilum) and a 15-20 point add-on to the BB.
If you want to go with not changing the name but adjust the capabilities by nation, The LoIS should get one that helps with boarding.
Perhaps something that detracts from anti boarding fire, like a  target ship hits on black sixes fro anti-boarding fire and CQB.
Though the -1 to DR/CR sounds like the description for the entropy generator they gave. Perhaps on a 3-5 you get -1 on DR/CR, on a 6 -1 to DR/CR and no auxiliary fire for the rest of the turn- BUT- it goes away. No repair roll.

[Ruckdog]

Though the -1 to DR/CR sounds like the description for the entropy generator they gave. Perhaps on a 3-5 you get -1 on DR/CR, on a 6 -1 to DR/CR and no auxiliary fire for the rest of the turn- BUT- it goes away. No repair roll.

This doesn't sound like a terrible way to go, though I do see a few issues:

-It doesn't strike me as powerful as the old calcification generator was, which means we will need to do some other tweaks (points mainly) to adjust. The reason I think it's not as powerful is that it requires a player to use it early in a turn; if you use it late in a turn, you will have a very small window to take advantage of the effect.
-If we go this route, it will introduce a somewhat new mechanic to the game; there are no other generator/crit effects (that I can remember) where the effect just dissapates in the end phase without a roll. The closest thing to this mechanic is Disorder resolution.
-How will we track if a ship has been affected by an entropy generator in this way? A new token?

I think a lot of these concerns could be alleviated by just making this an effect that needs a repair roll like normal in the end phase, but it seems you would prefer to not go that direction. I'm curious as to your reasoning .

I was thinking the Tesla storm could do a AoE Tesla strike.

Interesting...what form would the strike be in? Would it be the overload mode that is used now (just able to affect more targets thanks to the AoE) or would it be an attack with an AD value? Also, do you envision the Tesla Storm generator taking the place of a normal Tesla generator, or be in addition to it? That is, can a model have both a Tesla and a Tesla Storm generator on it?

I do think people seem to miss that the Tesla generator can still cause a shredded defence on a 3+ flowed by a 1,and if you have the enemy staked you get two rolls on the crit table.

That's a decent point; you are looking at about a 11% chance base, boosted to 20% with a lighting rod lodged in the target. Not bad odds at all, though still well short of the 66% chance the Calcification generator had. Also, a Tesla generator only reaches out to 8," where as the Calcification generator could reach 12". Are these things you would look to address with the Tesla Storm jenny?

[Asuo]

The Tesla Storm Generator would indeed give a Surge effect but it would be against each model under the AoE, if your giving up a big turret then it needs to be worth it.

As the focused crit table caused a shredded defences on a roll of a 1 its quite possible to still cause the effect.

[Covertwalrus]

 A few of these issues have come up in the FB discussion group working on tidying up the 2.5 rules "The People's Front Of Antarctica".

 The idea of focused effects on targets has come up for several generators; A given number of corrosion markers for each of the different types of generators, and more power for the Entropy Generator; Limitations to internal generators compared to exposed versions; A hard look at Mimic and Iceberg Generators in operation; And making a balance of power for the Guardian and Shield Generators.

 Nothing set in stone at present but work in progress

[Asuo]

 A few of these issues have come up in the FB discussion group working on tidying up the 2.5 rules "The People's Front Of Antarctica".

 The idea of focused effects on targets has come up for several generators; A given number of corrosion markers for each of the different types of generators, and more power for the Entropy Generator; Limitations to internal generators compared to exposed versions; A hard look at Mimic and Iceberg Generators in operation; And making a balance of power for the Guardian and Shield Generators.

 Nothing set in stone at present but work in progress

Hey look Mah we got a mention...

On a more serious not though, work is on going and thinga are being looked into, balancing the generators is a complicated task and we need to get it right, obviously the calcification genny is a bit of a bug bear as the Prussians give up a turrent on a battleship to get it, we need to compensate the ship accordingly.

[Covertwalrus]

On a more serious not though, work is on going and thinga are being looked into, balancing the generators is a complicated task and we need to get it right, obviously the calcification genny is a bit of a bug bear as the Prussians give up a turrent on a battleship to get it, we need to compensate the ship accordingly.

 It's been a while since I've heard any mention of this around the place.

 I think the idea of indicidual faction specific forms of the Entrpy Generator is a splenddi idea still: However, on the KISS principle, let's make the changes subtle.
 For example, the Italians could use one with 8" range, operating as a field of effect upon all ships in range ( Makes their boarding a lot simpler), while the Danish version works like a projector and can target a ship at long range with in effect an "attack of fail" causing a breakdown in system as they undergo corrosion from rapid aging, and some posible Lethal effect. ( Not that I don't love the cocnept of "pulverising jelly" but it seems a little OTT ) Perahsp an FSA Entropy Generator might have a Piercing Critical effect upon a ship within range? Blazing Sun Entropy might be even more fire suddenyl erupting ( though that's just a Fury Generator in effect which one coudl argue is a type of entropy  ).

[Ruckdog]

Ha, yeah the generator tweaking discussion has kind of fallen by the wayside. In fact, it seems like a lot of the efforts to do some work on the 2.5 rules have kind of stalled out, so it's good to get going on it again.

If I'm understanding your idea correctly, you are basically looking at the different factions having different ways to deliver the same effect, right? I...kind of like that idea, actually. The way the generators are named will be an important point; we would want to differentiate them somehow (Entropy Field for the Italians, say, and Entropy Beam for the Danish, perhaps). Otherwise, I can see players getting a bit confused and getting streams crossed.