As many of you know, over on https://cannotgetyourshipout.blogspot.com/2021/01/15-conjecture-on-ship-points-changes.html they "rate" ships based on their opinion of them. With the regard to the Onager the latest update is:
Onager-class Testbed 96 points to 106 points (+10 points)
Turns out being able to attack from two range rulers away is pretty good and as part of the playtest team for wave 8 I'd like to officially apologize because the Onager is stupid. Onager-class Star Destroyer is on probation but likely deserves a nerf batting to a lesser degree.
Having expressed similar opinions in the past I wonder about you guys's opinions and how you would "fix" it.
Cheers
Breaking the fundamentals of the game requires a delicate touch and plentiful testing. How this guy even made it into the game in its current form baffles me no end :D
That said, the evade rule hurts it quite a bit, and most players seen to have it "figured out" so it's less NPE and more major headache now.
A points change would be a good way to nerf it. But there are more ship that could use a points change.
My recommendation would be an additional rule for ignition attacks : You cannot execute an ignition attack, if line of sight is obstructed. That would keep Romodi in line, and would make the Onager an interesting navigational (and setup) challenge.
That'll make Onager a new Avenger due to EWS and Cracken.
I mean, to be fair - I've got a decent idea as to why it made it through testing... But I'm still bound by NDA to not discuss it, or the process.
That's where I'm at as well. I know more or less why but just like you I'm NDA-bound.
Doesn't make it easy or fun, most of the time. Doubly so when the ******** gets directed literally at you
No b*tching at playtesters allowed in this thread, only at the Onager. I actually think it's really really great what was written. Even I wouldn't go so far as to blame specific playtesters, to give a general apology therefore shows character which I appreciate.
Subtract one red, one black from the Testbed's Ignition, and then it seems more fair for its cost. Can still punish ships moving slow on purpose (such as someone hugging the Contested Outpost or Fire Lanes tokens) but ships that want to engage with it have a shot.
But why punish second player for being slow? The Onager in the hands of the first player sets the game upside down.
@Darth Veggie With two less dice in its pool, though, it's a lot less likely to delete something immediately and requires multiple attacks (probably in coordination with the rest of your fleet) to make it work.
@Bertie Wooster I see your point and I agree that it takes away a bit of the problem the Onager poses to the game asymmetry. But I am simpy not sure whether it is enough. However, without proper testing all I have to offer here as justification is my speculative opinionen ;-)
I'd simply prefer a solution that modifies ignition attacks (extreme range attacks) in general, rather than changing amount of dice of such an attack.
“You cannot spend accuracy icons during ignition attacks”
This is an interesting one!
I doubt that this is enough in itself, especially with Intel Officer being so prevalent on the Testbed.
Narrowing the special weapon firing arc would help but that's unrealistic as it would require new cardboard and furthermore would likely cause bidding wars as it would make last+first with the Onager even better than it already is. All we're realistically left with is points changes and/or changing the Ignition rules.
New Evade cancelling 2 dice off the hop at extreme range is already a pretty good nerf to it. I honestly think because it was released into the wild before the Evade changes were announced that people just have a little PTSD about it. Kind of like people with Demo...or old school Riekkan.
Didn't old evade already do that?
@Bertie Wooster no...