M1ndr1d3rs
Mongoose
OH MY GAWD! I Have a lot of catching up to do!!!! :shock:
A Call To Arms Star Fleet question
- Thread starter HyperBunnyFreakOut
- Start date
Another thing I was interested in was if the SFU players are using terrain as again this is of massive improtance in previous editions of ACTA but I don't think is something in SFU?
using the varied Asteroid fields, planets and dust clouds correctly is anoterh tactical overlay.
using the varied Asteroid fields, planets and dust clouds correctly is anoterh tactical overlay.
We have those and use them as well as Nebulas, Pulsars, Radiation Zones, and Black Holes. Also as far as man-made terrain besides up to 8 different bases sizes we have Planetary Defence Bases (Various ground installations) , Defense Satalites, and Mine Fields.
Once all that starts migrating over there should be lots of fun for everyone.
Once all that starts migrating over there should be lots of fun for everyone.
Iain McGhee
Mongoose
Hexes in FC are 10000km across and all combat is at warp speed, outside of special scenarios.
I wouldn't quote me on this, but I think I read that as a rule of thumb they take the cube root of the distance moved to get the warp factor (not that it's required in the game). Tactical warp in the SFU universe goes up to Warp 4 (if you pay extra power to accelerate each impulse) and sublight is speed 0 (different from stopped, separate restrictions on allowed actions).
Remains to be seen whether ACTA:SF uses the same terrain rules as former ACTA versions or not. How many buckets of Triple Damage, SAP dice do you think you'd have to roll for failing to pass the check when entering an asteroid field at warp speed ? :lol:
I wouldn't quote me on this, but I think I read that as a rule of thumb they take the cube root of the distance moved to get the warp factor (not that it's required in the game). Tactical warp in the SFU universe goes up to Warp 4 (if you pay extra power to accelerate each impulse) and sublight is speed 0 (different from stopped, separate restrictions on allowed actions).
Remains to be seen whether ACTA:SF uses the same terrain rules as former ACTA versions or not. How many buckets of Triple Damage, SAP dice do you think you'd have to roll for failing to pass the check when entering an asteroid field at warp speed ? :lol:
Iron Domokun
Mongoose
Tactical combat is ~warp 3.2. Warp 4 would be 64 hexes per turn.
For your own sanity's sake, do not get hung up over scale issues. It's science fantasy (like pretty much all of Trek) not science fiction (Traveller). There are inconsistencies in the scale of the game (not ADB's fault, it's in the source material that the game is drawn from) and I suggest you simply ignore them.
For your own sanity's sake, do not get hung up over scale issues. It's science fantasy (like pretty much all of Trek) not science fiction (Traveller). There are inconsistencies in the scale of the game (not ADB's fault, it's in the source material that the game is drawn from) and I suggest you simply ignore them.
Iain McGhee
Mongoose
Yeah, it occurred to me later that I'd made a mistake 
I think I was mixing it up with another version I heard that had each set speed = 1 warp factor, although as you say it's not worth getting hung up on such things as long as the game looks right and plays right.
I think I was mixing it up with another version I heard that had each set speed = 1 warp factor, although as you say it's not worth getting hung up on such things as long as the game looks right and plays right.First turn complete.
32 ships total.
Movement took 9 minutes...
Attack phase (including Fire declaration and resolution) took 22 minutes.
Seeking Weapon portion of End of Turn phase took 12 minutes to resolve 70 attack dice of Kzinti drones and about 20 of Klingon.
2 F5 frigates and one D5W exploded during the first Attack phase. explosion damage caused minor damage to adjacent units.
1 Additional F5 and one D5 exploded during seeking weapon resolution, but nothing remained in range so no additional damage.
1 Kzinti NCA was destroyed during seeking weapon resolution. Damage threshold exceeded by 1 point, so the damaged hulk did not blow up but was instead simply removed from the map.
Turn two ongoing now.
The Klingons are hampered by a bad intial set-up and intend to spend this turn regrouping.
I think it's already a done deal, but we'll see...
32 ships total.
Movement took 9 minutes...
Attack phase (including Fire declaration and resolution) took 22 minutes.
Seeking Weapon portion of End of Turn phase took 12 minutes to resolve 70 attack dice of Kzinti drones and about 20 of Klingon.
2 F5 frigates and one D5W exploded during the first Attack phase. explosion damage caused minor damage to adjacent units.
1 Additional F5 and one D5 exploded during seeking weapon resolution, but nothing remained in range so no additional damage.
1 Kzinti NCA was destroyed during seeking weapon resolution. Damage threshold exceeded by 1 point, so the damaged hulk did not blow up but was instead simply removed from the map.
Turn two ongoing now.
The Klingons are hampered by a bad intial set-up and intend to spend this turn regrouping.
I think it's already a done deal, but we'll see...
Turn 2:
8 minutes for movement...
15 minutes to resolve fire...
2 minutes for seeking weapons.
[24 Attack Dice of drones launched at the C8] Range great enough that they will not impact until next turn.
Final D5W detonated by 20 Attack Dice of drones launched last turn.
Klingon player moved D5W last. Ship driven deep into Kzinti formation. Explosion [9 attack Dice] potentially affected 8 Kzinti ships. A total of 7 points of damage accrued among the 8 ships... and none of it anything more than shield hits.
Turn 3 beginning now:
8 minutes for movement...
15 minutes to resolve fire...
2 minutes for seeking weapons.
[24 Attack Dice of drones launched at the C8] Range great enough that they will not impact until next turn.
Final D5W detonated by 20 Attack Dice of drones launched last turn.
Klingon player moved D5W last. Ship driven deep into Kzinti formation. Explosion [9 attack Dice] potentially affected 8 Kzinti ships. A total of 7 points of damage accrued among the 8 ships... and none of it anything more than shield hits.
Turn 3 beginning now:
It still may be a function of years of SFB / Fed Comm... but so far, the seekign weapons have not slowed down our game significantly.
Turn #1 had over 70 attack dice of drones on the board and it only took about 10 to 12 minutes to resolve.
That may seem a lot for ACTA: NA players, but it didn't seem a lot to me.
We did generate a "Drone Impact Grid" playaid that has helped tremendously.
Six hex shaped diagrams with the 8 ACTA: SF fire arcs super-imposed, and two rings.
When seeking weapons impact a ship, they are placed on teh corresponding impact grid in the proper arc... the inner ring for those that affect the ship this turn, the second ring for those that impact next turn.
This enables ships to be moved without toppling stacks of seekign weapons.. .and you know which ship mounted weapons can fire at the incoming seeking weapons.
Turn #1 had over 70 attack dice of drones on the board and it only took about 10 to 12 minutes to resolve.
That may seem a lot for ACTA: NA players, but it didn't seem a lot to me.
We did generate a "Drone Impact Grid" playaid that has helped tremendously.
Six hex shaped diagrams with the 8 ACTA: SF fire arcs super-imposed, and two rings.
When seeking weapons impact a ship, they are placed on teh corresponding impact grid in the proper arc... the inner ring for those that affect the ship this turn, the second ring for those that impact next turn.
This enables ships to be moved without toppling stacks of seekign weapons.. .and you know which ship mounted weapons can fire at the incoming seeking weapons.
Greg Smith
Mongoose
scoutdad said:
40 minutes is a long time for a turn in ACTA. Granted it was a big games, but an ACTA game with 16-20 ships per side will generally last 90 minutes.
scoutdad said:
That is a lot of clutter.
An interesting way to speed things up. Would your drone movement etc been quite as quick if you had used counters?
Why 6? Surely you need one per ship?
Here's my take:
Most of our group will have already figured out where squadrons two and three are going before the second player has finished moving Squadron #1. With the two that were playing, it was:
wait until player one has finsihed moving...
look at all your options...
decide which squadron to move...
move, slowly, carefully, and deliberately... stopping to measure range to half a dozen different ships multiple times during movement...
finally decide where you want to end up...
Then repeat with two more ships.
After that... the first player starts the whole process over.
With some of our faster guys, I think the movement would be cut to 5 minutes, fire and allocation about 10, and seeking weapons to about 5.
20 minutes for Turn #1 and then shave 10 to 15% off each sucessive turn as the number of units remaining drops.
We'll put this to the test this coming Friday. Two of the fastest members of the group will be playing the same scenario.
Besides which... if you get 24 Attack Dice of drones on the base of a single mini, coming in from 4 or 5 different arcs and they get mixed up - it's murder trying to remember which ones were where. And that is important since the various defensive weaponry has individual firing arcs.
The impact grids are laminiated and have a space to indicate the ship name.
Write the name in dry erase marker...
Pace the seeking weapons in the correct fire arc...
Continue to play...
Once the ship targetted by the seekign wepons goes away...
Ease the name and use that grid for the next.
We never had more than 5 ships on a side targetted by drones during a single turn.
This game was played by two of the slowest players in our group.Greg Smith said:
Most of our group will have already figured out where squadrons two and three are going before the second player has finished moving Squadron #1. With the two that were playing, it was:
wait until player one has finsihed moving...
look at all your options...
decide which squadron to move...
move, slowly, carefully, and deliberately... stopping to measure range to half a dozen different ships multiple times during movement...
finally decide where you want to end up...
Then repeat with two more ships.
After that... the first player starts the whole process over.
With some of our faster guys, I think the movement would be cut to 5 minutes, fire and allocation about 10, and seeking weapons to about 5.
20 minutes for Turn #1 and then shave 10 to 15% off each sucessive turn as the number of units remaining drops.
We'll put this to the test this coming Friday. Two of the fastest members of the group will be playing the same scenario.
Yes. Drone movement would have been just as fast. We simply used these grids to remove the counters from the bases of the minis. That enabled us to countinue moving the minis without having to worry about toppled markers.Greg Smith said:
Besides which... if you get 24 Attack Dice of drones on the base of a single mini, coming in from 4 or 5 different arcs and they get mixed up - it's murder trying to remember which ones were where. And that is important since the various defensive weaponry has individual firing arcs.
I had more printed up and laminated, just in case they were needed, but in practice - we've found that seekign weapon fire is typically concentrated on just a few ships each turn. After all, you're trying to overwhelm their defenses and you can't do that by shootign dribs and drabs of drones at every single unit. You shoot 15 to 20 at each at two or three targets. It's much like ants - some are bound to get through.Greg Smith said:
The impact grids are laminiated and have a space to indicate the ship name.
Write the name in dry erase marker...
Pace the seeking weapons in the correct fire arc...
Continue to play...
Once the ship targetted by the seekign wepons goes away...
Ease the name and use that grid for the next.
We never had more than 5 ships on a side targetted by drones during a single turn.
Rick
Mongoose
Surely though, you'd have to move the drones around if the ship changed direction? If a bunch of drones are moving directly towards a ships forward arc: then it changes direction, the drones would go in against a totally different arc, meaning you'd have to shuffle all the counters round.
Thanks for the update - most interesting
As Greg said 40 mins for a single turn is very long time even for a reasonable sized game - what was the total duration in the end?
20 mins just for firing was scary.........
What was your impressions of Squadrons?
Was Terrain important - it usually is?
Regaridng movement - one method we found of helping players and speeding it up was to use a proxy (a dice or counter) to measure out the movement before placing the ship.
Besides which... if you get 24 Attack Dice of drones on the base of a single mini, coming in from 4 or 5 different arcs and they get mixed up - it's murder trying to remember which ones were where. And that is important since the various defensive weaponry has individual firing arcs.
Sorry to keep harping on but the seeking wepaons remain of my biggest concern/issues with the game - Without your very inovative diagrams do you think the drones etc are playable? If not do you feel it should be part of the game rules - your template I mean?
As Greg said 40 mins for a single turn is very long time even for a reasonable sized game - what was the total duration in the end?
20 mins just for firing was scary.........
What was your impressions of Squadrons?
Was Terrain important - it usually is?
Regaridng movement - one method we found of helping players and speeding it up was to use a proxy (a dice or counter) to measure out the movement before placing the ship.
Besides which... if you get 24 Attack Dice of drones on the base of a single mini, coming in from 4 or 5 different arcs and they get mixed up - it's murder trying to remember which ones were where. And that is important since the various defensive weaponry has individual firing arcs.
Sorry to keep harping on but the seeking wepaons remain of my biggest concern/issues with the game - Without your very inovative diagrams do you think the drones etc are playable? If not do you feel it should be part of the game rules - your template I mean?
Greg Smith
Mongoose
scoutdad said:
That is the point I have been trying to get across. Dealing with seeking weapons, as the rules are written, is indeed 'murder'. We found them a pain with a just fraction of the ones you used.
You have overcome that with your ingenious template.
OK. Here's a question for y'all.
Since I've never played any other incarnations of ACTA - I do not have a basis of comparision. All I can do is compare and contrast to SFB / Fed Comm. Compared to those, we're talking light years faster.
Now the question(s):
How many weapon systems / fire arcs does the typical NA vessel have?
How many seeking weapons does the typical NA vessel have?
How are seeking weapons handled in NA?
Final question: Are there any ACTA: NA players in the middle TN area? If so, I'd like to hook up and try a game or two to see how the system is expected to work by the current crop of ACTA players.
I know the existing SFU crowd is going to love the new system (even if nothing else changes) just for the speed increase already built in the system. What I wantto do now is find out what ACTA: NA players expect and see it it's possible to get there, too.
Since I've never played any other incarnations of ACTA - I do not have a basis of comparision. All I can do is compare and contrast to SFB / Fed Comm. Compared to those, we're talking light years faster.
Now the question(s):
How many weapon systems / fire arcs does the typical NA vessel have?
How many seeking weapons does the typical NA vessel have?
How are seeking weapons handled in NA?
Final question: Are there any ACTA: NA players in the middle TN area? If so, I'd like to hook up and try a game or two to see how the system is expected to work by the current crop of ACTA players.
I know the existing SFU crowd is going to love the new system (even if nothing else changes) just for the speed increase already built in the system. What I wantto do now is find out what ACTA: NA players expect and see it it's possible to get there, too.
Thanks for the update - most interesting
you're most welcome.
What was the total duration in the end?
20 mins just for firing was scary.........
I think the total duration for all three turns ended up being just over 2 hours... but as I said earlier, that's with two of the slower players.
What was your impressions of Squadrons?
Mixed.
I thought htey were going to be big, bad, scary heaps of ship-exploders; but they weren't. It certainly helped being able to move ships in groups of three... even with slow players.
And being able to fire threee ships at a single target before it responded was a guarenteed cripple for all but the largest units and certain death and destruction for the smaller vessels.
Was Terrain important - it usually is?
I hate to admit it, but we've not used terrain yet. That is our next addition to the mix (this coming weekend). I can see it providing a whole new level of tactical thinking...
Regarding movement - one method we found of helping players and speeding it up was to use a proxy (a dice or counter) to measure out the movement before placing the ship.
I like this idea and intend to steal it fro you. Thanks.
Sorry to keep harping on but the seeking wepaons remain of my biggest concern/issues with the game - Without your very inovative diagrams do you think the drones etc are playable?
Of course they are... it's just a matter of what everyone is willig to accept as playable. :wink:
The SFB / Fed Comm players are going to think; "Wow. This is so much faster!"
The ACTA: NA players are going to think; "Wow! What the frak happened? This is takign forever!"
We just need to fnd a solution that pleases both.
Unfortunately, seeking weapons (and large numbers of them) have been part and parcel of the SFU for 30 years. That's too much history to sweep under the rug. If you do away with seekign weapons, you do away with 1/2 of the SFU empires. If you make them just another direct fire weapon... they lose their flavor. The current rules are a good start - I think they just need some tweaks.
We brainstormed a few ideas after yesterdays session and will brainstorm more after Friday evenings session.
Perhaps then, we'll make a few of those thoughts public.
If not do you feel it should be part of the game rules - your template I mean?
Hey, whatever works. It was a simple idea that anyone could have come up with. I'd be happy to email it to Matthew. I think it would make a great thing to add to the book, even if everyone doesn't use it. At least it'd be there for those that did want to use it.
you're most welcome.
What was the total duration in the end?
20 mins just for firing was scary.........
I think the total duration for all three turns ended up being just over 2 hours... but as I said earlier, that's with two of the slower players.
What was your impressions of Squadrons?
Mixed.
I thought htey were going to be big, bad, scary heaps of ship-exploders; but they weren't. It certainly helped being able to move ships in groups of three... even with slow players.
And being able to fire threee ships at a single target before it responded was a guarenteed cripple for all but the largest units and certain death and destruction for the smaller vessels.
Was Terrain important - it usually is?
I hate to admit it, but we've not used terrain yet. That is our next addition to the mix (this coming weekend). I can see it providing a whole new level of tactical thinking...
Regarding movement - one method we found of helping players and speeding it up was to use a proxy (a dice or counter) to measure out the movement before placing the ship.
I like this idea and intend to steal it fro you. Thanks.
Sorry to keep harping on but the seeking wepaons remain of my biggest concern/issues with the game - Without your very inovative diagrams do you think the drones etc are playable?
Of course they are... it's just a matter of what everyone is willig to accept as playable. :wink:
The SFB / Fed Comm players are going to think; "Wow. This is so much faster!"
The ACTA: NA players are going to think; "Wow! What the frak happened? This is takign forever!"
We just need to fnd a solution that pleases both.
Unfortunately, seeking weapons (and large numbers of them) have been part and parcel of the SFU for 30 years. That's too much history to sweep under the rug. If you do away with seekign weapons, you do away with 1/2 of the SFU empires. If you make them just another direct fire weapon... they lose their flavor. The current rules are a good start - I think they just need some tweaks.
We brainstormed a few ideas after yesterdays session and will brainstorm more after Friday evenings session.
Perhaps then, we'll make a few of those thoughts public.
If not do you feel it should be part of the game rules - your template I mean?
Hey, whatever works. It was a simple idea that anyone could have come up with. I'd be happy to email it to Matthew. I think it would make a great thing to add to the book, even if everyone doesn't use it. At least it'd be there for those that did want to use it.
Rick
Mongoose
In ACTA:NA there are no seeking weapons at all as such - missiles and rockets are treated as a direct-fire weapon (as are missiles in ACTA:B5) - ACTA:SF and VAS would be the only rules systems to have multi-turn seeking weapons. As to weapons, ACTA:NA is more of a broadside - orientated game, with most weapon systems firing out of the side arcs. Frigates have a single weapon system to either side (3-4 AD each) and a turret (1-2 AD), Destroyers add another turret and a couple more AD each side, Cruisers add a few more AD in the turrets and extra weapons to the sides (each with a couple more AD). Even up to Dreadnaught level, there are few forward-firing weapon systems.
What you've got to remember is that the ACTA family of rules are fast and fun; generally few ACTA players would like a game where moving stacks of seeking weapons slowed the game down. If you saw the big fleet combats on Babylon 5, with clouds of fighters swarming around the big ships, ACTA:B5 recreates this with fighter flights instead of individual fighters - 30 fighters swarming over a ship would be 5 or 6 flights and you've just cut the counters down to a fraction without sacrificing playability!
What you've got to remember is that the ACTA family of rules are fast and fun; generally few ACTA players would like a game where moving stacks of seeking weapons slowed the game down. If you saw the big fleet combats on Babylon 5, with clouds of fighters swarming around the big ships, ACTA:B5 recreates this with fighter flights instead of individual fighters - 30 fighters swarming over a ship would be 5 or 6 flights and you've just cut the counters down to a fraction without sacrificing playability!
