OOC Chat

[SWSF Hale]

We won't be having any conversation regarding specs. Hoppus and I have gone to great lengths to restore balance to the Force for GCW. The reason why MC80s/90s in GCWII are so overpowered is precisely to compete against ISDs. In GCWIII, the New Republic will have many more options and capacity for additional units to offset the ISD's overwhelming power.

Let's focus our conversation on Tractor Beams, please. At least that's something we can hope to come to 100% concurrence on. =) I hope.

[SWSF Eidolon]

Does anyone have any old warbooks? I seem to forget quite a few details regarding Tractor Beams that may come in handy right about now. No need to re-invent the same wheel that Walker or Dravin made.

I can send you some GR ones I found when I get home from work later on.  You have to save them to an external device to be able to open for some reason though.  I think because they're so old .hlps, newer Windows doesn't know wtf to do with it.

Actually I think they are on this site somewhere. . . but I'll send them anyways so you don't have to dig.

[SWSF Hale]

Vista doesn't like HelpFiles.

[SWSF Hoppus]

LOTF rules were= 150m each TB, if you enter HS while under tractor lock you took 1pt damage to hull for every meter held, but you could break the lock by entering hyperspace.

Old rules wont help too much as we have the unique issue of the UCR effect.

I think this is the simplest way to handle this.

Tractor beams reduce UCR to 1, but any ship held by tractor beams can attack the ship(s) holding it with 100% accuracy.

So if an ISD locks a corvette, it has a UCR of 1 when defending and attacking any targets in range, but against the ISD it has 100% hit accuracy. The rule can be written pretty concise and is easy to grasp in terms of concept, I think.

[Ramano]

Jesus christ, we are all over the board on this one. We got to formulate something together for what everyone is looking for. From what I can see everyone is in agreement except for symantics. Literally, it sounds like we are simply fighting over the wording of the same thing, lmao. So here, let me see if I can toss out a little format here to try and conglomerate some of this. Simply answer yes or no, my answers will be in (x).

Stop movement all together: yes/no (no)
Stop movement partially: yes/no (no)
Stop movement but no effect to maneuver: yes/no (no)
Stop partial movement but no effect to maneuver: yes/no (no)
Allow breakable: yes/no (no)
Cause damage: yes/no (no)
Reduce partial UCR: yes/no (no)
Reduce all UCR to 1: yes/no (yes)
Activate modifers on attacker post: yes/no (yes)
Limit TBs to disabled/friendly units only: yes/no (yes)
Install a super complex rule set to deal with just TBs: yes/no (absolutely no)

Anything else I didnt cover, feel free to add it.

[SWSF Eidolon]

My support:

Tractors = X amt of power (length) control per beam weapon, compound to lock larger vessels (as is)
Tractor Lock = UCR 1 for any unit locked (as is)
Can Tractor Lock any Active opposing unit with UCR diff of 1 max*
Can Tractor Lock any friendly or any disabled unit
Dmg between Tractoree and Tractorer is 100% both ways


*Prevents Active Enemy fighters from being tractor captured instead of attacked.  As I'm reading the standing rules, it seems like the door is left open to tractor capturing active opposing fighters.  It says if you have complete tractor control you may physically control a unit, move up to 1 space, drag in to HS etc.  This would all seem to insinuate the ability to draw in to Hangar Bays in the case of fighters (provided you've got room to store them)?  Sounds crappy for game play if that's possible imo.  Granted I haven't seen it happen, so maybe it's not possible and I'm just not seeing where it's noted yet.


This retains some of the Aggressive use for Tractors to satisfy Dem's opposition, incorporates some light concepts of physics and dynamics of large/small hi/lo mass and thrust of vessels, and also closes some open doors for potential abuse.

[Ramano]

"Dmg between Tractoree and Tractorer is 100% both ways"

That has already been discussed and was decided it can not be allowed as I will use it to kill ships. Same reason we dont allow ramming.

Edit: And uhh no... I was unaware we could tractor lock fighters... ?

[Ramano]

Guys, we need a rulings thread to transfer all the game rulings into as needing to search through 119 pages every time I gotta find something is getting a tad rediculous.

[SWSF Hoppus]

all will be taken care of in the future rule book/site modifications.

[SWSF Hoppus]

HEY EVERYONE.

FRIDAY IS MY LAST DAY HERE. Two week vacation to Chicago to visit family and see my nephew for the first time ever (18 months old)!

[SWSF Eidolon]

Enjoy your visit back to the homeland man!    Safe journeys and happy reunions!

[SWSF Hale]

Have fun Greg!

FYI, FRIDAY IS ALSO THE BEGINNING OF THE SIM-WIDE PAUSE FOR 2 WEEKS. Combat/Mission actions will be paused. Non-combat SL actions can be made. CONSTRUCTIONS WILL CONTINUE THROUGH THE PAUSE...... THAT DAMN DEATH STAR WILL FINISH ON SCHEDULE! (Which means in case anybody is wondering, May 14th will effectively be the Date of the Apocalypse for GCW:II if Episode III aint up by then!)

[Dementat]

I'm not going to offer an opinion on tractor beams as it seems I am in the extreme minority. I'll just hold my breath and suck it up... much like most elections.

[SWSF Hale]

My final opinion on Tractor Beams: keep it simple or keep it out.

Speed Points = 0, effects are instant. UCR Modified accordingly between Attacker/Defender.

Dun.

[SWSF Hoppus]

Iwould prefer they are only good for disabled units, just becaus the tb doesnt fit in with the usual pattern of fire and return fire.