A merging of b5wars and acta?

[Reaverman]

Gotta say I agree with the table bumping comment - its happened to me on more than a few occassions.

Hey its happened between us Reaverman and Burger - remember when we had to check the photo on a mythbust to check which direction a ship was pointing? A few degrees here of there is no problem in a friendly but in a tourney can make a big difference!

How about the 10 Sagg battle vs Vorlons? One of the saggs was slightly out of an arc even though Burger swore he lined it up to do so the turn before...not saying EITHER of you were cheating at all but it is quite possible the table was nudged ever so slightly...

To be honest I'm not even really talking about cheating here - I agree with your point that a cheat will cheat no matter the ruleset - but accidental bumping does happen and a few degree / fraction of an inch can make the difference between shooting and not-shooting and hence winning or losing.

When I played the game with another mate who usually doesn't like wargames, he enjoyed the game but commented he would probably prefer it as a computer game (to make the things like measuring, turning etc easily observable)...I tend to agree with him to be honest although do very much like minis as well

That MASSIVE tangent aside...what else is (arguably) good about B5Wars that people would like to see in ACTA?

TBH I don't think much of the "warm-up" between shots idea or the massively detailed ship component hit list ("oh no you've shot my hydroponics bay!" - I ALREADY think the game take too long to play at 5pt raid (I would prefer games to be an hour max but then I know most people disagree with that.)

Hash,

when has hex's have had anything to do with time.

 

[Jal]

GOF read all the posts, then wanders off to play the original Full Thrust Variant B5 game, still the best.

 

[Silvereye]

With the Hex arcs, you will probably get a better idea of where they are and whats in them by looking at the old Fleet Action templates.

 

[Xorrandor]

When I played the game with another mate who usually doesn't like wargames, he enjoyed the game but commented he would probably prefer it as a computer game (to make the things like measuring, turning etc easily observable)...I tend to agree with him to be honest although do very much like minis as well

That MASSIVE tangent aside...what else is (arguably) good about B5Wars that people would like to see in ACTA?

TBH I don't think much of the "warm-up" between shots idea or the massively detailed ship component hit list ("oh no you've shot my hydroponics bay!" - I ALREADY think the game take too long to play at 5pt raid (I would prefer games to be an hour max but then I know most people disagree with that.)

Well, if you already think the game takes too long to play, we probably aren't interested in the same games, really. IMHO, it's not what is good about B5W that should go into ACtA, but what is good about ACtA that should go into B5W. Having to learn new rules for new weapons and equipment for every race in the game got old quickly. I much prefer the ACtA method of defining characteristics that get combined to define weapon systems. I would probably keep ACtA's lack of power allocation, and drastically simplify EW. But I like the Newtonian (sorta) movement of B5W, as well as the increased detail on damage.

I realize I'm talking about a completely different game here, one based on ship duels rather than fleet actions. That's not what ACtA is today, but it would be the reason to make a B5W:ACtA hybrid.

 

[Locutus9956]

What Id really love to see is basically B5Wars, but lose power allocation completely.

Simplify EW to the point where you have basically defensive and offensive EW and thats it, pdEW and ELINT etc just got ludicrously complex and time consuming at times). Keep the lock on method though, that was nice

As for weapons, keep em as they were tbh, in B5Wars for the most part weapons WERE defined by traits and types, there were very few actually racially specific weapon TYPES. Some races tended to favour certain weapons but thats all really. And they werent THAT complicated to learn anyway.

Id suggest losing the whole thrusters channeling thrust in B5Wars tbh as that just made maneuvering take longer, keep thrusters on the ship diagram and have certain thrusters NECESSARY for certain maneuvers as losing thrusters and going spinning off was all part of the fun, just lose the requirements to channel x thrust points through x thruster, if you have the thrusters on the ship and enough thrust on the engines go ahead imho. Keeps things flowing nicely without spending hours working out exactly where every point of thrust has to go

 

[frobisher]

BTW-Try and explain how a ship with a Boresight weapon, can target something on the forward oblique, when its cant move the ship into a Hex that leads directly to the Target. In otherwords, how does it target somethiong that thats say 20 degrees from the 0 line?

Erm, that's in arc for the Boresight equivalent in B5 Wars which is a 60 degree cone.

Any system, including ACtA, has limitations and compromises built into it (witness the arc of the White Star's laser...).

 

[Tank]

Boresight Arc was actually the straight line in front of the ship, 1 hex wide

 

[Locutus9956]

yes technically but can you name me a weapon in B5Wars that actually USED said arc?

 

[frobisher]

Id suggest losing the whole thrusters channeling thrust in B5Wars tbh as that just made maneuvering take longer, keep thrusters on the ship diagram and have certain thrusters NECESSARY for certain maneuvers as losing thrusters and going spinning off was all part of the fun, just lose the requirements to channel x thrust points through x thruster, if you have the thrusters on the ship and enough thrust on the engines go ahead imho. Keeps things flowing nicely without spending hours working out exactly where every point of thrust has to go

Whilst I'd disagree for me that it was a problem, I can see where you're coming from on that. Just require that there'a thruster pointing the right way, and they you need only worry about the division of thrust. I'd also rationalise the thruster assignments for some manoeuvres as well.

i.e.

To Pivot, you must have two thrusters in opposition
To Turn you just need the opposite side thruster

The other thing I think would need to be tailed back would be the criticals which could be a real pain to track (particularly thruster criticals, though with the change above, these would have to be elminiated anyway...).

I'd keep ELINT and CCEW in the game though - they are way too useful to exclude, and in the case of CCEW it keeps those pesky fighters off of you...

 

[frobisher]

yes technically but can you name me a weapon in B5Wars that actually USED said arc?

Vorlon Planet Cracker Beam...

But that's not the Boresight arc - it's something altogether narrower.

 

[Locutus9956]

ok thats not really the same though, that was just' anything in the row of hexes in front of you dies'

 

[Tank]

Im sure the Omega Hvy laser was boresighted but as I haven't checked my B5W for ages not gonna swear my life to it.

 

[Locutus9956]

nope it wasnt, it had a pretty narrow arc but it DID have an arc nonetheless

The thing with the omega was that it's port and starboard wepons (icluding both lasers and pulse cannons) overlapped along the 'boresight' so it was at its most effective if you centerlined your opponent and could then give them a resounding smackdown

 

[Tank]

I thought the Omegas P&S guns were mostly P beams, I seem to remember that whenever we played Omega vs Omega it always ended in P beam death!

 

[philogara]

Im sure the Omega Hvy laser was boresighted but as I haven't checked my B5W for ages not gonna swear my life to it.

The rear firing ones did I believe, but not the fore. Mind you it changed between 1st and 2nd Ed..

 

[Locutus9956]

I thought the Omegas P&S guns were mostly P beams, I seem to remember that whenever we played Omega vs Omega it always ended in P beam death!

Sorry I was a little vague there when I siad 'port and staboard weapons' I meant those on that side of the ship not arc (the two forward lasers are mounted either side of the front of the shipe with a forward and a bit to the side arc each I seem to recall (could be wrong though there)

 

[Xorrandor]

A house rule a friend of mine used for boresites on hex maps, in Renegade Legion: Interceptor: You may declare that you are bore-sighting a given hex when you move your ship. You must be facing that hex as closely as possible given the hex map.

Generally makes winning initiative very important. But it works to within the resolution of the game, so I like it. I never played Interceptor against the guy to try it out, though.

 

[frobisher]

Im sure the Omega Hvy laser was boresighted but as I haven't checked my B5W for ages not gonna swear my life to it.

They effectively were. Those on the left had a 60 degree arc offset to the left, similarly those on the right, but the combined arc-of fire-of-death was the hex line extending forward.

Anyone who ended up there on an Omega got everything they deserved...

 

[lastbesthope]

I dislike quantised movement in wargaming, makes the game too rigid and open to causing annoyance or possible exploitation of the limits

LBH

 

[Xorrandor]

I dislike quantised movement in wargaming, makes the game too rigid and open to causing annoyance or possible exploitation of the limits

Lesser of 2 evils IMO:
Hexes- rigid, weird overlap in firing arcs
Free-form- easier to "fudge", much harder to do Newtonian or simultaneous movement (not impossible, just harder. Yes, I've seen Full Thrust...), harder to do hidden information (mines, stealth ships)

There are ways to reduce all of these effects, if you want to. Allowing pre-measuring, for example, is about the only way I want to play free-form any more; not only am I lousy at estimating distance, I got sick of opponents always managing to exactly hit range brackets every time. (It's bad enough that they always hit the "outside 16 inches, inside 18 inches" or whatever range. Often those are actually legit. The really annoying ones are when they hit the "outside 16 inches, inside 16 inches a turn later" ones.) Similarly, the firing arcs in Fleet Action, or the range brackets in Attack Vector, mitigate against the weaknesses of hex maps.