Author Topic: Balance Question / Point Value Inquiry (Read 3168 times)

theletterv · « **on:** 12 January 2016, 11:21:55 »

I'm new to this game, but am loving it.

I've been using Master Unit List as my primary resource for Alpha Strike point values.

However, recently, I've been noticing some wild inconsistency with some of the units and I'm just looking for some logical sense as to why.

For both of these items, what justifies the increase in damage, but little to no difference in point values?

http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3327/turkina-b
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3329/turkina-d

http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2082/mars-assault-vehicle-standard
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2080/mars-assault-vehicle-atm

Tai Dai Cultist · « **Reply #1 on:** 12 January 2016, 11:58:17 »

Damage is represented in the PV skewing towards the medium range. 12/8/4 is only worth 6 more PV than 7/7/5. I haven't run the turkinas through the conversion process, but the extra point of differential is likely coming from the higher OV value.

Something to keep in mind is that an impressive short range damage value isn't as important as a solid medium range value. Especially on a unit that's so slow that anyone who wants to stay out of short range will likely be able to do so.

And welcome to Alpha Strike. Always glad to see new blood :)

Scotty · « **Reply #2 on:** 12 January 2016, 14:08:53 »

TDC is absolutely correct. Each point of short or long range damage is weighted as 1 PV (before offensive modifiers like C3 or NOVA), while each medium range point of damage is 2 PV. The first point of OV is 1 PV, each after that is 0.5. Without anything to offset the fractional increase, is rounds to an additional point.

And keep in mind you are talking about a difference greater than 10%.

theletterv · « **Reply #3 on:** 12 January 2016, 15:42:52 »

As a newb then, I guess I'm having trouble understanding the tactical benefit of choosing the B over the D if the D, for a bargain of 7 points is considerably more powerful?

The mechanics & calculations make sense, I'm just wondering if it's logically represented on the table.

Would someone legitimately play both versions and say - Wow, that D isn't worth the 7 extra points?

To me, the D seems like a no brainer in comparison.

Tai Dai Cultist · « **Reply #4 on:** 12 January 2016, 15:57:39 »

The difference is all in the PV. If you can afford 67 points, then by all means go for the D. OTOH the B is as good in most ways, and saves 7 points that can go towards other units or skill upgrades. Alpha Strike is more about using units in concert with one another than having an assembly of the most powerful units available.

As an arcane distinction, there is another advantage to the B configuration... it's legal in a Clan Invasion era game set before 3061. Of course that only matters if the game specifies a year.

MidfieldMarauder · « **Reply #5 on:** 12 January 2016, 15:59:24 »

That's the thing I've found with Alpha Strike.

One variant/configuration per unit often stands out as a clear choice for "best" pick in Alpha Strike, where as in BattleTech, there are better load out or gear reasons to take different configs. Because Alpha Strike condenses BattleTech into far less stats, you'll find some homogenization and some good reasons to not even consider certain variants.

It's probably safe to say that this "problem" only exists because BattleTech came first.

iamfanboy · « **Reply #6 on:** 12 January 2016, 16:03:34 »

The D IS counted as worth more, so it's paying for those extra points of damage; specifically +5 PV for more Short, +2 PV for more Medium, and -1 PV for less Long. So, uh, +7 PV?

Remember that Short range is only 6", and that the Turkina is slow; in all likelihood it may get to use that extra Short range once or twice a game, whereas Medium range is where the majority of a game's shooting takes place. It's also not terribly difficult to stay out of Short range of such a slow unit, so the extra PV would go to waste if they knew you had a Turkina-D.

It's not like, say, the Fire Moth H where that massive Short 5 damage also comes with a blistering 26" movement, after all.

It's the same reason that Armor is worth more than Structure: Medium range damage gives more value than Short range damage, so it has to be worth more.

As far as whether it's worth the upgrade... The B costs 12 points per Skill upgrade, the D costs 13, so not a huge difference; but if I was going to reach for another Turkina for massive damage it'd be the E. I think 10 Medium might be a record-breaking amount of damage for a BM unit.

Frankly, if I had a Turkina, I'd probably have the E on one side and the C on another. The C only costs 11 for Skill upgrading, and a 6/5/3 with OV2 is a reasonable damage statline. The Prime/A are also frightening snipers; very few units at all deal over 3 damage at Long range.

Scotty · « **Reply #7 on:** 12 January 2016, 16:17:14 »

The Turkina is a terrifying unit in general, honestly.

theletterv · « **Reply #8 on:** 12 January 2016, 16:41:50 »

Thank you all for your responsiveness.

I agree the Turkina is just plain scary. :)

I'm going to play a few variations of it and see how it compares from game to game.
I'm also not ignoring the collaborative approach of army composition and will take that into consideration with certain builds.

I just wanted to make sure that within our "new to the game group," if someone calls a "double digit damage," shenanigans, I can back it up with mechanics, balance & facts, which you all have provided :)

Thanks again.

JadedFalcon · « **Reply #9 on:** 13 January 2016, 19:05:47 »

Context can make a difference, too. I most cases, I would also take the Turkina B. But if I was playing the defender in a hold the line style scenario, where I could use terrain make sure the enemy had to pass close by my goalies? Then the Turkina D becomes much more tempting. As you play more, you'll get a better feel for advantages and disadvantages of units.

And welcome to the game.

Frantic Pryde · « **Reply #10 on:** 13 January 2016, 22:24:28 »

I don't know about the rest of you, but I often find my self desperately scrambling to shave 5-10 points off my list all the time! This usually leads to things like choosing Turkina B over Turkina D so that my Cougar F an have it's skill 3 pilot :)

iamfanboy · « **Reply #11 on:** 14 January 2016, 01:26:04 »

Quote from: MidfieldMarauder on 12 January 2016, 15:59:24

One variant/configuration per unit often stands out as a clear choice for "best" pick in Alpha Strike, where as in BattleTech, there are better load out or gear reasons to take different configs.

Most units have at least two picks for me, sometimes three or more: The highest damage variant, the cheapest variant, the electronic warfare variant (never underestimate the value of ECM against C3), the best C3 variant, and some other oddities - I never knew the Thunder had an Arrow-IV variant until I realized that I needed artillery for all my opfors.

Tai Dai Cultist · « **Reply #12 on:** 14 January 2016, 01:33:37 »

In addition, the benchmarks for skill increases/decreases can come into consideration. 67PV vs 66PV isn't the same thing as 68PV vs 67PV. They're both 1PV apart, but 67 and 66 both cost 12 more PV to go to skill 3, whereas 68 will cost 13.

NeonKnight · « **Reply #13 on:** 15 January 2016, 19:41:54 »

Dont have my books with me (on phone), but one has ENE (so no ammo explosion) while the other has CASE which indicates it will take some extra damage from AMMO EXPLOSION criticals. Again, no book to see if tge ENE gives extra damage on a critical.

Scotty · « **Reply #14 on:** 15 January 2016, 20:22:10 »

Neither CASE, CASEII, nor ENE cost PV at all, not even fractionally.

GoldBishop · « **Reply #15 on:** 15 January 2016, 20:51:50 »

Quote from: NeonKnight on 15 January 2016, 19:41:54

Dont have my books with me (on phone), but one has ENE (so no ammo explosion) while the other has CASE which indicates it will take some extra damage from AMMO EXPLOSION criticals. Again, no book to see if tge ENE gives extra damage on a critical.

"CASE" = deal 1 point of Structure, Roll another crit
"ENE, CASEII" = ignore "Ammo" critical rolls; consider the roll as "No Critical"

NeonKnight · « **Reply #16 on:** 15 January 2016, 20:55:36 »

Quote from: GoldBishop on 15 January 2016, 20:51:50

"CASE" = deal 1 point of Structure, Roll another crit
"ENE, CASEII" = ignore "Ammo" critical rolls; consider the roll as "No Critical"

Yeah that is what I remembered. Never did a conversion though so if there is no point benefit (and in all honesty there should be) so I was not sure if that could account for a cost diffrence.

GoldBishop · « **Reply #17 on:** 15 January 2016, 21:09:44 »

No problem. Like Scotty said, it's not a factor in PV. It WILL matter if you don't have one of those specials and the crit comes up ;)

NeonKnight · « **Reply #18 on:** 15 January 2016, 21:15:02 »

Quote from: GoldBishop on 15 January 2016, 21:09:44

No problem. Like Scotty said, it's not a factor in PV. It WILL matter if you don't have one of those specials and the crit comes up ;)

Yep and that alone would make me favor the lower damage one.

Scotty · « **Reply #19 on:** 15 January 2016, 22:54:04 »

Quote from: NeonKnight on 15 January 2016, 21:15:02

Yep and that alone would make me favor the lower damage one.

It only happens on a roll of 2 on 2d6 for critical hits, of which you will take a maximum of five unless you get pinned down by infantry. More likely you will only take one or two, and the difference is one point of damage.

ENE also has the really unfortunate distinction from CASEII of dealing half damage (round down, minimum one) to units with the RFA special.