ACTA:SF battle report

Discuss Mongoose miniatures game here, including Mighty Armies, Gangs of Mega-City One, and Battlefield Evolution.
Iron Domokun
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 404
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 1:58 pm

Re: ACTA:SF battle report

Postby Iron Domokun » Sun Dec 18, 2011 2:41 pm

deleted
Last edited by Iron Domokun on Sun Jan 01, 2012 4:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
Iain McGhee
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1515
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 6:45 pm
Location: Paisley, Scotland

Re: ACTA:SF battle report

Postby Iain McGhee » Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:03 pm

@Iron Domokun: Think that's right, thanks. That's what I was doing, just wasn't sure when I was reading over the chart again :)
Iapologisedon4chan
Weasel
Posts: 37
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 10:31 am

Re: ACTA:SF battle report

Postby Iapologisedon4chan » Sun Dec 18, 2011 7:07 pm

Greg Smith wrote:
Iapologisedon4chan wrote: 12) Anti-Drone rules need clarifying.
What part needs clarifying?
Do they keep firing after rolling a 1 to hit if they still have left over points of Anti-Drone? As in, do they work like Interceptors from B5 ACTA? Or do you stop rolling when a 1 comes up regardless of remaining ADD value?

Do they only fire once each turn like defensive Ph-3's or can they fire against every Drone launched against them in an entire turn?
True, but you're not facing the bulk of their firepower, which (at least in SFB/FC) is in the heavy weapons.
True, Photons and Plasma are the weapons that do the heavy lifting. But don't discount Killzoned Ph-1s. The Fed CA is probably the best proponent of this, given that if it "reverse boresights" it effectively has the same firepower in phasers firing behind itself as it does from the front.
Now, most other ships in the Fed line-up aren't QUITE that well covered, but it's still a good heavy punch in a position where you should be relatively safe from return fire.
User avatar
Greg Smith
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8849
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2003 10:58 am
Location: Kettering UK
Contact:

Re: ACTA:SF battle report

Postby Greg Smith » Sun Dec 18, 2011 7:23 pm

Iapologisedon4chan wrote: Do they keep firing after rolling a 1 to hit if they still have left over points of Anti-Drone? As in, do they work like Interceptors from B5 ACTA? Or do you stop rolling when a 1 comes up regardless of remaining ADD value?
They keep firing, as long as the ADD does not equel zero. They aren't quite like interceptors, as you only ever roll one dice per drone AD.
Do they only fire once each turn like defensive Ph-3's or can they fire against every Drone launched against them in an entire turn?
No once per turn, they work against every dice:
Roll a die for every Attack Die of drones attacking a ship with the Anti-Drone trait.
An example:
My Kzinti dreadnought (Anti-drone 3)is hit by a 6 drone salvo from an Orion Salvage cruiser.

I roll 1 dice per AD, (roll them one at a time)
5 - drone stopped
1 - drone stopped, Anti-drone drops to 2
4 - drone stopped
1 - drone stopped, Anti-drone drops to 1
1 - drone stopped, Anti-drone drops to 0
drone gets through, so I use a tractor beam!

Anti-drone is 0 - so will now not work for the rest of the game.

I hope that helps.
"Bringer of Warmth, Carrier of Carrion, Prophet of Dilgarness, Speaker of all thing Llort!"

Part-time Narn.

ACTA playtester
Victorious Grand Admiral
User avatar
Da Boss
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 7221
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 5:49 pm
Location: UK

Re: ACTA:SF battle report

Postby Da Boss » Sun Dec 18, 2011 7:34 pm

Iron Domokun wrote:
They are also the great equaliser. You may only have a frigate facing a big Klingon cruiser was boosted shields to its front, but there is still a _chance_ you could do some real damage.
It really introduces a random factor, a Fed frigate rolls two sixes and gets its overloaded photons through the shields of your cruiser, crippling the ship by sheer dumb luck rather than tactics.
Yeah had that happen to my Klingon ships - its the ACTA: SF version of the nasty criticals from B5 :twisted: Least you don't have to worry if they are firing drones at you :)
Target
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1358
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 6:46 am
Location: NZ-Invercargill

Re: ACTA:SF battle report

Postby Target » Sun Dec 18, 2011 7:50 pm

Arrgh , One battle report & i want to blow up star trek ships. Must resist the urge till after christmas
Iapologisedon4chan
Weasel
Posts: 37
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 10:31 am

Re: ACTA:SF battle report

Postby Iapologisedon4chan » Sun Dec 18, 2011 8:02 pm

No once per turn, they work against every dice:
Did you mean:

Not once per turn, but for any attack in the turn?

For instance: A Fed DWG fires it's 4 drones at a D5, the D5 responds with his ADD.

First roll is a 5
Second roll is a 4
Third roll is a 1
Fourth roll is a 2

All of the drones destroyed. But ADD is reduced to 1. However later on in the turn, a CA fires it's one dice of drones at the D5. The D5 can still use his ADD to defend against this attack even though he has already used them to defend himself against the DWG.
User avatar
scoutdad
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 777
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 3:23 pm
Location: Middle Tennessee
Contact:

Re: ACTA:SF battle report

Postby scoutdad » Sun Dec 18, 2011 8:06 pm

All of the drones destroyed. But ADD is reduced to 1. However later on in the turn, a CA fires it's one dice of drones at the D5. The D5 can still use his ADD to defend against this attack even though he has already used them to defend himself against the DWG.
Yes, as long as the vessel in question has the anti-drone trait (and is above 0) it may continue to fire in defensive fire mode.
User avatar
Democratus
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 363
Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 1:27 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: ACTA:SF battle report

Postby Democratus » Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:07 pm

Iapologisedon4chan wrote:7) TRACTOR BEAMS KILL A DRONE ON A 5+. DON'T FORGET THIS.
So glad to see that the old adage, "Use your tractors, dammit!" is still in effect.
Myrm
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 847
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2004 7:09 am
Location: Cambridge, UK

Re: ACTA:SF battle report

Postby Myrm » Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:16 pm

Iron Domokun wrote:In the SFU, a single frigate should have no chance to do much to a big ship, unless it can get on the fat guy's six and stay there for a while.
Well the leaky shields rule in SFB let this sort of thing happen, though by a slightly different method - and it was always popular, with my group at least.
billclo
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1362
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 11:43 pm
Location: Hanover PA

Re: ACTA:SF battle report

Postby billclo » Thu Dec 29, 2011 4:28 pm

deleted
Last edited by billclo on Fri Dec 30, 2011 7:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Iain McGhee
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1515
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 6:45 pm
Location: Paisley, Scotland

Re: ACTA:SF battle report

Postby Iain McGhee » Thu Dec 29, 2011 6:11 pm

It's factored in by giving them higher ADD ratings (D5 has ADD 2, D7 ADD 1). G-racks in FC have fixed loads of 2 drones/4 ADD so they get ADD 1 per rack in ACTA. From that, I'd gather that high-capacity racks just get increased ADD ratings.
billclo
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1362
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 11:43 pm
Location: Hanover PA

Re: ACTA:SF battle report

Postby billclo » Thu Dec 29, 2011 6:35 pm

deleted
Last edited by billclo on Fri Dec 30, 2011 7:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Nerroth
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1163
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 10:14 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: ACTA:SF battle report

Postby Nerroth » Thu Dec 29, 2011 7:17 pm

Bear in mind that ADDs all have the same number of shots in Federation Commander.

(And, again, the D5 does not have limited Aegis in FC either.)


This point seems to be getting lost a lot in the feedback here and elsewhere, but it is worth bearing in mind that (apparently) FC, not SFB, is the primary basis for conversion; just as it was for the Star Fleet Universe port into Starmada.
The above post is 100% unofficial.
Iain McGhee
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1515
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 6:45 pm
Location: Paisley, Scotland

Re: ACTA:SF battle report

Postby Iain McGhee » Thu Dec 29, 2011 9:00 pm

I forgot the D5 had twin racks.

So it's even simpler:1 ADD per rack (although I suppose that could be increased if there's special circumstances like the starbase mentioned earlier, or handled in some other manner).
billclo
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1362
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 11:43 pm
Location: Hanover PA

Re: ACTA:SF battle report

Postby billclo » Fri Dec 30, 2011 12:27 am

deleted
Stumonster
Stoat
Posts: 93
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 8:21 pm
Location: USA

Re: ACTA:SF battle report

Postby Stumonster » Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:12 am

Our second playing of ACTA: SF we decided to add advanced rules. (Our first was just a simple 1 on 1 with basic rules.) My 12 year old son played the Romulans, and I played the Federation. I thought I would post a hasty battle report: (sorry for any typo's bad grammar, etc.)

Image

Forces:
Romulans: 2 King Eagle Cruisers @ 175 each
Federation: 2 Constitution Heavy Cruisers @ 180 each.

Scenario:
Last man standing: Last player with a non-crippled ship on the map wins.

Setup:
Head to head @ 36 inches range. Romulans elect to start the game cloaked.

The Action:

First two turns the fleets closed. The Federation was using the Take Evasive Action! SA anticipating the Romulan's coming out of cloak. On the third turn, the Romulans seemed to be beyond the Federation ships by just a few inches, but what the Federation player forgot to account for was that the decloaking Romulans could move 6 inches in ANY DIRECTION! The Romulans decloaked at about 2 inches range from both Federation ships. (It should be noted the Romulans had initiative for the first 8 or so turns, and the Federation for most of the turns after that. Really streaky initiative roll throughout.)

Image

After the Federation crews checked their shorts, they settled down trying not to die under the assault of the Romulan plasma torps. The first Federation Cruiser dodged only 1 of the 3 torps, and shot about 4 dice of damage from the large Type-R torpedo, but still it ended up with no shields and more than 1/2 of its damage gone. Criticals were scored on the weapons at level 2 and dilithium at 1. One phaser - 1 was damaged. The Federation ship was out of arc, and so it could not fire back with anything but its drones, which rolled well and scored 6 hits on the Romulan's shield. Just when things were looking bad for the Federation, the second cruiser evaded all 3 Romulan torpedoes from the second King Eagle!!! Freed from trying to shoot down plasma torpedoes, it shot back and with some leaks in the shield basically gutted the Romulan's hull and most of its shields. The Romulans then cloaked and reloaded torpedoes. The one Federation ship reloaded its photon tubes as well.

The Federation ships took pot shots at the cloaked Romulans and scored a few lucky hits to the shields and the hull. (A question on this later.) Like knights on horseback, the four ships lined up for another head on pass and the Romulans again decloaked: this time about 4 inches from the Federation ships. Since the Romulans had initiative, they fired at the previously damaged Federation cruiser. The ship never had a chance. Taken to -10 hull and a roll of 4, it exploded instantly when the Type-R hit it. The attacking Romulan ship had to weather 16 dice of damage rolls. It suffered some shield hits and 3 hits that rolled 6 and penetrated to the hull. The now lone Federation cruiser took revenge by landing Photon torpedoes, phasers and drones on the Romulan ship that had previously been heavily damaged. It destroyed, but there was no explosion. The Romulan again cloaked.

A classic game of cat and mouse began: only this mouse was armed with a sledge hammer! The Federation ship kept the initiative, so the Romulan bided its time looking for an opening. The Federation ship, with only 4 shield boxes left, cautiously circled the Romulan, trying to keep the range open and sniping with phasers the whole time. Finally, the Romulan grabbed the initiative and decloaked. With the range at a little over 8 inches, the Romulan phasers took down the Federation shields. The Federation cruiser shot down both plasma F torpedoes with phaser-3's, as they were only at 1 AD due to range. The R plasma was fired on with phaser-1's and due to range, it did only 2 AD damage. The roll was still 10 hits!!. The Federation ship took 3 of them on the weapons, making the ship have to roll 4+ to even fire, and also took 1 hit to the dilithium chamber. The Federation ship rolled, and managed to fire back only the drones. These hits took down the rest of the Romulan's shields. The Romulan lost initiative, and so tried to escape by cloaking. The Federation ship managed to fire 2 photons, 2 phasers, and the drone. One photon and two phasers were not defeated by the stealth of the cloaking ship, and the Romulan ship was destroyed.

The now almost crippled Federation survivor turned and headed back toward the nearest fleet base.

A close victory for the Federation, which blundered badly early, and only good evasion rolls kept the Romulans for trouncing the Federation!

We kept the damaged ship's control sheet. We are going to use it in another scenario where one or two Klingon or Romulan ships will try and kill it from under the protection of one or two Federation ships that have responded to the damaged ship's cries for assistance. Will probably allow some random repair rolls to see the final state of the ship for the next scenario.

Bottom line: We had a great time! Rules held up well, and the ships seemed closely matched as the point values would lead one to expect. Playing time was about 1.5 hours.

Now, the question: When firing at a cloaked ship, an attacker rolls a 4, 5, and 6 with phasers. The way we handled it was to have the Romulan ship roll the Stealth +2 roll for the natural 6 separately. If it failed, then the damaged was rolled as an internal hit. Then, all non-natural 6's were rolled for, with any 1's hitting the shield. Is that correct, or should all of the hits just go to the shields if a stealth roll is missed? We think what we did was correct, but wanted to see if that was actually the case.
Iain McGhee
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1515
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 6:45 pm
Location: Paisley, Scotland

Re: ACTA:SF battle report

Postby Iain McGhee » Wed Jan 04, 2012 6:54 am

Enjoyed the report, thanks. Inspired me to take my Sparrowhawks out for a spin next battle.

Re. Cloaks: You make the Stealth rolls versus hits caused rather than versus successful dice rolls (which wouldn't have mattered in your example unless you were within the phaser's Kill Zone, but it's important to note the distinction for multihit weapons), but other than that you handled that correctly. I just use two colours of dice for shield/hull hits when rolling Stealth saves.
User avatar
Greg Smith
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8849
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2003 10:58 am
Location: Kettering UK
Contact:

Re: ACTA:SF battle report

Postby Greg Smith » Wed Jan 04, 2012 11:23 am

Stumonster wrote: Now, the question: When firing at a cloaked ship, an attacker rolls a 4, 5, and 6 with phasers. The way we handled it was to have the Romulan ship roll the Stealth +2 roll for the natural 6 separately. If it failed, then the damaged was rolled as an internal hit. Then, all non-natural 6's were rolled for, with any 1's hitting the shield. Is that correct, or should all of the hits just go to the shields if a stealth roll is missed? We think what we did was correct, but wanted to see if that was actually the case.
You were correct. 6's still go through shields if they aren't stealthed away. Roll them separately. Or use different colour dice.
"Bringer of Warmth, Carrier of Carrion, Prophet of Dilgarness, Speaker of all thing Llort!"

Part-time Narn.

ACTA playtester
Victorious Grand Admiral
User avatar
Greg Smith
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8849
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2003 10:58 am
Location: Kettering UK
Contact:

Re: ACTA:SF battle report

Postby Greg Smith » Wed Jan 04, 2012 11:24 am

Greg Smith wrote:
Stumonster wrote: Now, the question: When firing at a cloaked ship, an attacker rolls a 4, 5, and 6 with phasers. The way we handled it was to have the Romulan ship roll the Stealth +2 roll for the natural 6 separately. If it failed, then the damaged was rolled as an internal hit. Then, all non-natural 6's were rolled for, with any 1's hitting the shield. Is that correct, or should all of the hits just go to the shields if a stealth roll is missed? We think what we did was correct, but wanted to see if that was actually the case.
You were correct. 6's still go through shields if they aren't stealthed away. Roll them separately. Or use different colour dice.
Nice battle report, it was pretty tense at the end there.
"Bringer of Warmth, Carrier of Carrion, Prophet of Dilgarness, Speaker of all thing Llort!"

Part-time Narn.

ACTA playtester
Victorious Grand Admiral

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 75 guests