#Dustgrave 2.8, Superheavy core change
1210 messages Β· Page 2 of 2 (latest)
"leave superheavy mounting at 2.7, add another way of preventing weapon mount or system destruction that isn't a CB" is definitely my preferred solution to ralf's issues
There's a range of them depending on how you want to approach the matter, I've pointed out power at a cost exists but that's not a standardized thing, if someone really insisted on "I need a way to keep this from happening" then my thought on the matter would be to make a Custom Paint Job, But For Guns
a 1- or 2 SP unique system
I'd drop a talent point on "1/mission if you would take system trauma, don't"
1/mission, if one of your weapons would be destroyed, destroy that system instead
Hell, I'd drop a talent point on that for the stun
that works too
like it's not that mount protection is a bad idea, to be clear
That's Antiquarian, an Interpoint talent (IIRC).
I agree
if you're going to add it, though, it shouldn't be tied to this specific core bonus that already does something very impactful
I think mount protection is in a space where on its own it is not potent enough to be a core bonus, paired with a core bonus that grants a superheavy weapon I think it's unnecessary set next to its peers
I'm surprised no one's brought up the talent that's already in Ralf content which does, in fact, protect mounts
most of us dont kkeep up with every homebrew out there tbh
ralf's content is homebrew and people here in this thread have not necessarily interacted with it
I certainly don't kepe up with all the homebrews out there
I think it's been mentioned, but I'm not familiar with Ralf's stuff that isn't, y'know, posted in NCR
So my earnest and honest recommendation to @rapid vigil is: what if you had a piece of GMS gear that was like a weapon protection system similar to Custom Paint Job, 1/mission you can destroy that system in place of a weapon.
(Heck, Ralf's stuff isn't even really posted much in Homebrew Design, so I'm mostly unfamiliar with it)
The upside of this is you could apply it even to mechs that do not have this core bonus
If someone wants to protect their smartgun, they can
I'm more wondering about it since the "Interpoint structure makes this core bonus necessary/apparently more beneficial" point's been brought up a lot, and Antiquarian is valid on Interpoint.
That's MORE build flexibility
I would be fine with this, tbh
just make it, like, not a mod, so if you want to go whole hog on tricking out your cpr or whatever you still can
You have the Superheavy Mounting core bonus which does its usual 2.7-ish thing and then for all those one-mount mechs with a bunch of SP to spare, they can spend a point on the Weapon Protection Module or whatever it's called to save their gun in an emergency
yeah I wouldn't make it a mod
I would just base it on something like Custom Paint Job, but without rolling to trigger it
1/mission, whenever you would be forced to destroy a weapon due to critical damage or other effects, you may destroy this system instead. This system can only be used once before each FULL REPAIR , and is not a valid target for system destruction.
1 SP, Unique
i like that
I think the fact that it's 1/mission and has an SP cost is more in line with what systems do than a core bonus that gives a gun blanket indestructibility, imo
It's more flexible (you can destroy your empty cyclone rather than chunk a system) but you can't lean on it forever, and if luck is against you then you may simply have to learn to play around a broken gun
it also is a 1 sp system that I think could actually kind of compete with persos for a lot of builds
even sp hungry m SH users like the sherman usually have teh sp to spare on protection for their big gun, and its universally useful to all the mechs that really do want to protect their investments
the upside as well is other mechs can take this
and it being a gms thing also means you get it at ll0, too
Someone who wants to protect their HMG or nanocarbon sword might look at this and go "hmm"
so you dont have to, as a SH user, spend your core bonus just to protect your SH gun
Meanwhile the core bonus can do what it does simply and straightforwardly, put a superheavy gun onto mechs
hydra would fucking love this actually lmao
no muss, no fuss
as would caliban
This fucks, and seeing it in Dustgrave or Solstice Rain would be big.
it basicalyl saves both of them a core bonus so now they cna take improved armament because they actualyl do want to improve their armament, and not just like, protect their only weapon
I am more than happy to let ralf have that one
I don't think kai's interested in touching solstice anymore at this point
and yea
I think having it be in the same supplement as the superheavy core would be good praxis
yeah
If he thinks that would be a good combo with a 2.7-ish version of this core bonus he is free to make use of it with my blessing
Every time I hear someone say praxis my mind floats to college education classes/tests
"here's a core bonus that lets you put a superheavy on your goblin"
"and here's something to equip on your goblin's massive SP pool to protect that superheavy"
Yeah, the mechs that are going to be most scared of running a superheavy tend to have gobbets of sp to spare, so this would work well for them. And I'm of the same opinion as Mr Bignumbers, it's nice to have a GMS system that could actually compete with personalizations for that last sp
yeah
esp since a lot of the time i end up taking personalizations for the reasons that i would take the "protect yuour gun/system" hypoetitical here
I really like the idea of that system, already wishing I could take that in my game to protect my heavy
yeah
It does seem stronger than indestructible SH, but balance wasnt really the complaint for that
it would be a once per mission thing which is think is more than fine, and a lot more versatile
I think it's sort of a balance thing, sort of a "putting this on the core bonus itself may not actually be addressing the issue at its roots" thing, myself. When I brought up power at a cost a couple days ago Ralf put it to me "what would you do then to keep someone's gun from breaking" and mulling it over, I think the reason I had brought up Power at a Cost is because it's build and circumstance agnostic
If we take it as a given that having a broken weapon sucks and feels bad, having the "weapon protection" thing be detached from the core bonus would help that issue for more mechs beyond just those who took this core bonus
and it and the core bonus being separate things lets them stand more as separate pieces on their own
You want a protected superheavy? Sure. A protected overcaliber smartgun? Also sure. You don't want to take this core bonus but your mech has a superheavy anyway? Go for it. Or you can save the SP and just take your chances
I can certainly think of more than one of my players who'd love to have something like this even outside the context of single big super heavy weapon.
having to Barrage is already compensation, so its not a buff vs. taking the existing options.
Wait, that I can't abide. It remind's me of an Anima rules discussion about knocking an opponent out.
To give a little (summarized) context to aid my argument :
A "aim head strike" in Anima has a -60 malus to hit, does full damage, is letal, and if it crits up to a threshold, you're put inconscious.
A "knock out blow" works exactly the same way, but you do half damage and have the assurance it can in no way be letal.
Their argument was "you already have a -60 penalty on your knock out attempt, so you should use the full damage instead of the halved ones to calculate if you do a crit or not in the first place".
It already having a cost is not justification to negate some of it's other costs.
In my example, it's not because the thing already had a penalty of -60 to hit that you should negate it's penalty for damage, because in this way it just becomes a regular aim head action with the free benefit of "you are 100% sure you will keep your target alive".
So, Superheavies costing a Barrage action is not in anyway a valid justification (imo) to freely alleviate the cost of 2 mounts that it takes.
Those are separate costs for separate reasons.
The cost of Barrage, as far as I can tell, is here for two things : you get around the same amount of damages as if you were firing 2 weapons, so it should cost the same kind of action as if you were firing 2 weapons. It also prevents using an Overcharge on it, so that its flat-out insane damages can't be abused.
The cost of 2 Mounts is here for another reason. From my point of view, it's because you can stack up everything on this single weapon. You put OpCal, Autostab, you consume a Lock On, have Tlaloc and other Re-rolls, only need for one Module, etc... All your damages are under a single attack roll, so you can stack all your buffs and have it all with relative safety for effect. And you should also pay for that.
And there is the issue of those Superheavies that can be Skirmished, too.
That being said, using the 2.7 version of the CB along the System that Kai proposed would be more than fine by me.
In fact, it align with a proposition I made about a Talent allowing you to field-repair destroyed weapons and systems against Repair points, but in a simpler manner for the intended purpose that I quite like.
Yeah I very much like the idea of doing it as a GMS system
keeps the actual CBs about level with eachother and also addresses the issue of weapon loss for all the "boost weapon" CBs
Now I'm imagining what it could do if you made it "non-unique"... I can see this mech with Briaeros Frame and the SH CB, which stacked all its systems full with only that single one in duplicates, and refusing to freaking die while still punching holes in you with his wreck of an SH that still function by some hellish design.
Well, let's keep it as "unique" xD
My opinion is that making it non-unique might wind up a bit of an inadvertent trap, and also lancer tends not to allow for stackable passive systems in that manner
Yeah ofc, I was just thinking on that more as a joke than anything else x)
Ralf posted something similar on interpoint earlier, which looks very nice. Hope it goes in that direction
Armament Redundancy
Unique
1SP
Whenever one or more of your weapons would be destroyed you may destroy this System instead it remains destroyed until you perform a Full Repair and can not be repaired. This system is not a valid target for System destruction.
missing a period in there, but yeah that's excellent
I guess that makes it more appealing to the aux users out there
Yeah, which many 1 mount mechs are in the first place
Honestly, I'd be tempted to make it 'weapon or system' to also work for 'Big expensive but not many systems' mechs (Like a Caliban and his Super Expensive Overshield Jets) but that works.
which I like a lot
just making it a valid target for system destruction would achieve that
My personal take is making it not valid for system destruction is part of the opportunity cost of taking it versus taking another thing
I agree, you're taking it to protect weapons, not systems
Makes it a bit more focused
also the bone of contention seems to be "weapons being destroyed feels bad," not systems
System redundancy is already easy enough anyway
and frankly, the one-mount mechs this whole debate has largely focused around have large SP pools on average
Yeah
I don't think they really need the additional system padding, what they seem to want is protection for their weapons
Being able to protect your OpCal or Autostab one mount mechs is just really nice as well as something this enables, or your Anni Hydras
more specifically, making this (or Custom Paint Job) a target for system destruction would let you "double dip" them by having them absorb system trauma painlessly in one fight, then proc for their function in another
That said, I think that "basically CPJ for guns" is a good place for a 1 point GMS system to live
and then if someone wants that protection for their up-mounted superheavy there it is
Yup
That's fair
On a related thing: More 1 SP systems is just nice for having some more lego options.
As I very often run into 'Man, got 1 SP left and not sure what to spend it on'
It's usually just persos for me π
I often run into: 'I can either remove personalizations and get a 2 SP system or just suck it up' XD
I will admit, this being (potentially, I don't want to speak for ralf, this isn't my supplement) another 1 SP GMS system is a nice side effect
Yeah, it just gives something that a lot of people would be happy with even outside of the superheavy for 1 mounters
And I think it fits well with the other added GMS stuff in Dustgrave specifically
I do hope that this wouldn't become the just become the obvious best 1 sp gms system though.
Eh, I think that prize will always go to Personalizations π
+2 HP makes you lose less structure in the first place
I'm skeptical for a variety of reasons
Strange, I'm always in the opposite problematic "Man, I really need one more SP to make everything fit, what should I dump ? Or should I just upgrade my Systems a bit more on this Hull/Engineering/Agility focused mech ?" xD
If you already have a sizable chunk of HP I'd rather take the weapon protection often enough, or just both
But really, it's not beating out persos 90% of the time.. and that's I think a very conservative estimate
For the first, personalizations exists and +2 HP is extremely efficient. Second, there are other decent licensed 1 SP systems. Third, I have a suspicion that this won't actually just seamlessly slot into every possible build
Most 2 and basically all 3 mount mechs won't really look at it much
A lot of builds already max out their SP budgets to get all the pricy toys they want, I'm not aware of there being a regular issue of having leftover SP hanging around
Will this be worthwhile for mechs that are trying to cram as many 2 and 3 SP systems into their tanks as possible? Is it worth stepping down that 3 SP system you really want to a 2 SP system somewhere else?
I'd totally get that on my Gorgon if I could. Never have enough Snick Snakers available.
like I don't think it's a bad system or I'd look pretty foolish for suggesting it, but I also think that there are a lot of compelling reasons why you might want to spend that SP on something that's more proactively useful
Oh yeah, uncle barrage builds, autoguns, snicker snackers. SUre
It's something I'd like to take on many builds without making it something I'd always go for.
I'd also totaly get that on a Death's Head build, even if I don't get the Sting.
I think even just comparing it to personalizations doesn't present a clear winner
Your gun MIGHT need protecting, but you're probably ALWAYS going to be losing some amount of HP
I'd take this over persos for a melee black witch that's hull heavy
But maybe I don't mind risking it and want another system more
yeah if you slam a lot of points in hull and/or have a tanky mech maybe this pulls ahead, if you're a fragile little goblin then hmm
There's always the option of taking both, but there's no real clear winner, which is excellent.
Or, maybe I'd get that for Roleplay more thant actual min-maxing-build-reasons.
I really hope this makes it in now, damn
Like "I fine tuned this baby myself, no way in hell am I gonna replace it with a printed copy-pasta"
I mean, for RP your options are limitless
Ablative charged blade, just parry that laserbeam π
xD
Hmm... Do y'all think custom paint job would still be a valid option compared to this? Btw I'm not trying to attack the idea, I'm just cautious cause this is coming in (from my perception) late in the development cycle.
Custom Paint Job is a Gambler's Toy. It's not bad but the effect is, by design, both powerful and inconsistent.
CPJ is a set it and forget it thing that does something else entirely
It's hard to make a direct comparison
I would take CPJ if I don't care about at least one of my mounts, or have universal compatibility or other ways that I can get HP back fairly easily
(over this one)
Armament Redundancy doesn't stop you from taking the structure, just losing your gun (if that's what the result rolls, if you get systems come up then it does nothing)
So yeah, completely different purpose
On a more fundamental level CPJ is for people who like randomness and big moments, and this new system about reducing the feelsbad moments
"I got shot with a sniper round and it lapped my structure bar like a Sega Rally Championship, but at least I kept my gun" is a different effect and expectation from "damn, thank god my lucky paint absorbed that 20 damage"
Persos is for RP and efficiency
Also a very important reason.
And because my Pilot is a bit fkd in the head.
But also this is a really valuable point not to be overlooked
(gotta say I think the name of CPJ makes it feel like, for many people, you can't paint your mech without it)
Technically you print your mech in whatever color you want. My Pilot just paint it again afterward to use some shiny colors aggressive to the eye.
what this system does is specifically seek out a very particular sort of consequence and give people who absolutely hate that consequence some protection, CPJ by contrast is a thing that creates extremely memorable moments by providing a big effect
"Is CPJ good" is frankly not a question I think can be assessed in a pure minmax optimization capacity
Or just because she likes pink. Well, no one really know her reasons. Anyway, it's "just for this live, I got others, so who cares".
Yeah, fair!
and I think it needs to be taken into consideration that not everybody plays Optimized Lancer
I mean I think it's reasonable to go "where's this stack up next to other GMS 1 pointers" and I think the answer is probably in line with them
I think CPJ and Personalizations conflict more with each other than this new system ever could
you take personalizations as just a general all-rounder or on low HP platforms, you take armament redundancy if you absolutely can't stand losing guns, you take CPJ if you like the big swingy impact
If going purely from a numbers and optimization perspective, that is
The feel of both is completely different
Naaah, I need my CPJ for my shiny pink shade as much as I need my Personnalizations to have my embedded video game console and omnihook station in my cockpit while my Technophile 3 NHP pilot my mech in my stead. Don't wanna lose on the farming events due to a mission in a rural area.
Yeah, I still definitely see people taking stuff like EVA, Expanded Compartment, and Manipulators as well. Since their effects are still gonna have their niches.
So yeah, I do think this would be an excellent addition to the game that's widely applicable without overshadowing other options.
EVA is probably the most situationally dependent
EVA is a mission dependent slot-in at best, and is redundant with other flight systems too
Expanded Compartment can save lives or offer neat RP benefits depending on your GM. It's not as immediately obvious how useful it is. Same with Manipulators, some GMs might just want you to shudder exit your mech to interact with consoles or the like. Crazy.
No, I'm absolutely not taking Manipulators because I'm an Hikikomori living in a Minotaur. Or Lich. I don't know any other Frame.
EVA is something I think is both underused and undersupported by GMs (Which sorta feed into each other). Very few GMs have a tonne of 'here is water on the map' but the ability to skim over water when everyone else is stuck wading is good when it does apply. A drake with EVA is going to be faster than an Atlas without it, when it matters.
Idk where we are rn I just want to say I really like the ablative mount system thing
Absolute insanity. My Barbarossa should be able to type.
An Atlas stuck wading in water is a dead Atlas, too
To be fair, what most mechs call 'wading' the Atlas calls 'Glug Glug Glug' π
No dodging out of that π
Just dodge 5head, dont need to jager dodge, just dont get hit
I do think that manipulators and EVA rely a lot on the GM to provide uses for them, but also it's not SUPER hard to say "I guess I should put some more water around the place"
EVA's value I think depends on 'does your GM give you mission briefings/have you fight in varied terrains'
Yeah, Eva Module, Manipulators and Expanded Compartment are the most GM-dependent systems in the game imo.
If you're going in blind or are entirely groundpounding, it won't come up much.
It's also thing you should consider taking under an appropriate Briefing and depending on the initial Sitrep too.
But if the GM goes 'This is a harbour defense' and you don't take EVA you'll likely be kicking yourself π
Kai Bioplating my precious
"Your next mission will be on a water world with no land."
"EVA ? Never heard of it."
just take spaceborne
Mechs? In the water? Don't be silly, I don't want him to rust
It might catch a water based virus that will infect its code so that the rust won't come off on reprint.
Regardless, this does assuage my reprehension on Armament Redundancy.
I think if the broad, top-down goal is to increase build diversity then having Armament Redundancy and Superheavy Mounting be two separate things will be better for that than having them be one thing
I also think having them be two separate opportunity costs for two different effects is healthier than trying to find a way for them to share the same cost
Little side-note; the Superheavy Core Bonus is, I think, the most talked about Playtest item in the game? And has spawned the addition of two new weapons and likely a new system as well now. All three of which I like and think are good additions to the game. (Though see the appropriate thread about some relatively minor stuff about the 2.7 Hurricane Cluster Projector)
Instead of changing hurricane, add even more superheavy options 
I certainly think the superheavy core bonus gives some more options to players. So, it's definitely brought a lot of good to the game.
It's not too surprising given how significantly the core bonus changes a fundamentally unchanged thing for a lot of mechs
Yeah
adding one new mech to the game just adds that one mech
I personally enjoy the 2.7 version a lot and have made a ton of different builds with it, initially to try and break it, but when that didn't work and was satisfied just a bunch of fun builds too
The additional two superheavy weapons means it's also not "CPR the core bonus" either. At least for the first 4-5 license levels.
The extra GMS superheavies have been good for letting the CB come online faster
between the three theres good variety for big weapon fans

elegant solution to everyone's concerns
I would be extremely happy if this system + the 2.7 core was how dustgrave shipped