Rules Clarification: Paying Ace to Remove Paint

[auroramakhana]

Originally Posted by HeatDeath

You never unbutton a hatch in combat, no matter how annoying the ewok on the roof is being, even if you're actually the director doing a secret cameo.

The fate of the Death Star, and even the Emperor himself, can depend on it.

In my most recent game, I attempted to use paint. Even though it was only one game, I painted the opponent to death and never received a single bonus to my defense as a result.
To be honest, it's far too simple to get rid of. Unless they have no ace to pay, I only have a one in six probability of it sticking for their attack. It's the only paint here on the market that's easier to remove than to apply as a grenade.
Now, if we broaden the law to state that an attack can be directed at anything for the purpose of removing paint, it becomes even easier to remove.
I'll be putting all of my cards on the table.

[Magesmiley]

I and a couple of my cohorts who've tried paint have also been significantly underwhelmed by it.

I think that part of it is simply that by the time it's your turn to fire weapons, quite often everyone else who is gunning for you has already fired, and you already know whether or not you still need the ace token. So it doesn't help whomever fired the paint.

I *think* that what I'd rather see for paint is that the penalty applies period when you attack from that side. But, that after you resolve an attack where paint applies that you get to roll a die for free (no ace token) to determine if the paint is removed.

I think this might help resolve the ineffective paint complaints - it would definitely apply to one attack and might apply to others.

Another option would be to resolve the paint removal die for free before an attack from the painted side, but make it a less effective die (probably green). Doing this also points a way to implement paint-resistant windows/coating (granting a better die vs paint).

[43Supporter]

Well, no one ever used paint in OG CW, so....

[Spencer]

Why would an OG CW player use paint? It doesn't damage anything, can be totally defeated by no-paint windows, and doesn't last as long as a smoke screen for hiding nasty things like mines, spikes, oil slicks and ice patches.
We aren't Oddball from "Kelly's Heroes", using paint rounds to scare the enemy. If I pull the trigger, I want something that makes a bang or a boom on the target, not a splat.
Loaded with acid rounds, though...that might make things interesting, ruining a no-paint's electrostatic layer and etching the glass permanently so that the obscuration is permanent until the window is replaced...not to mention applying lingering damage to the rest of the vehicle...hmm...

[43Supporter]

Originally Posted by Spencer

Why would an OG CW player use paint? It doesn't damage anything, can be totally defeated by no-paint windows, and doesn't last as long as a smoke screen for hiding nasty things like mines, spikes, oil slicks and ice patches.

Exactly -- about the only use for paint is temporarily screwing up someone's to-hits, and that for only four turns.

[Spencer]

How would you feel about acid loads, though?
Acid Loads: 5x the cost of normal paint loads. Acid loads do not obscure like paint on contact with a vehicle; instead, they etch exposed surfaces, causing 1 point of damage to all exposed armor and components. Additionally, they impose a permanent -1 to HC for vehicles without no-paint windshields due to obscuration, and a -1 to hit to vehicles without IR targeting. If hit repeatedly, these effects are cumulative up to -3.
If a vehicle with a no-paint or tinted windshield is hit, the acid ruins the properties of the windshield. Note that a no-paint windshield does not suffer any other ill effects on the first hit, but any protective properties are destroyed.
Acid loads cannot be mounted in a paint sprayer.
Now, that might make me mount a paint gun. How about you?

[Aleph]

None of that really translates to 6E though. HC is no longer a stat, and there's no definition for an 'exposed' component.

Originally Posted by Spencer

How would you feel about acid loads, though?
Acid Loads: 5x the cost of normal paint loads. Acid loads do not obscure like paint on contact with a vehicle; instead, they etch exposed surfaces, causing 1 point of damage to all exposed armor and components. Additionally, they impose a permanent -1 to HC for vehicles without no-paint windshields due to obscuration, and a -1 to hit to vehicles without IR targeting. If hit repeatedly, these effects are cumulative up to -3.
If a vehicle with a no-paint or tinted windshield is hit, the acid ruins the properties of the windshield. Note that a no-paint windshield does not suffer any other ill effects on the first hit, but any protective properties are destroyed.
Acid loads cannot be mounted in a paint sprayer.
Now, that might make me mount a paint gun. How about you?

[ianargent]

Paint grenades do damage; rather a lot for a sidearm (Min/exp/max: 1/2.17/4, tied with the bug zapper for best raw damage, plus it can roll 2 wrenches, for paint AND shred in the same attack, the bug zapper can only roll 1 wrench at low odds). Paint grenades are on par for damage with 2 BP shred weapons (compare to the Standard Machine Gun - which only slightly outperforms the Paint Grenades. (The explanation for why is left as an exercise for the reader)

Paint Grenades have a .5 Expected Value for wrench results (the green die is simply the best die to roll in an attack when you get to score on wrenches and stars), and between the possible 2 wrenches (low odds), and being able to attack twice with them (better odds of shred) if you don't something better to have both crew shoot at, tossing a pair of paint grenades is a pretty decent option.

The paint effect is a rider - I'm taking paint grenades for their damage output first; that they cost the target an Ace token is a bonus.

(PS: I went through some effort to exhaustively break down each weapon statistically for max/expected/min results, both for raw damage and for wrench effects, and it did not surprise me that the points values curve matched very precisely the expected damage (+effect) curve)

[Spencer]

Originally Posted by Aleph

None of that really translates to 6E though. HC is no longer a stat, and there's no definition for an 'exposed' component.

A pity, in my humble opinion. However, regarding the acid rounds I proposed, I admit to digressing to a classic rules question, for which I apologize.

[Yenaldlooshi]

Originally Posted by Magesmiley

I and a couple of my cohorts who've tried paint have also been significantly underwhelmed by it.

I think that part of it is simply that by the time it's your turn to fire weapons, quite often everyone else who is gunning for you has already fired, and you already know whether or not you still need the ace token. So it doesn't help whomever fired the paint.

I *think* that what I'd rather see for paint is that the penalty applies period when you attack from that side. But, that after you resolve an attack where paint applies that you get to roll a die for free (no ace token) to determine if the paint is removed.

I think this might help resolve the ineffective paint complaints - it would definitely apply to one attack and might apply to others.

Another option would be to resolve the paint removal die for free before an attack from the painted side, but make it a less effective die (probably green). Doing this also points a way to implement paint-resistant windows/coating (granting a better die vs paint).

If I get paint on a target, I should at least get one effect (that is more than just taking away an ace token) from that one success, so I second your first idea about you get to roll only AFTER your attack (whether it takes ace or not). I am meh about the second option.