A message to Burger and the other long standing fans

[Da Boss]

Its probably worth looking at this thread which also approaches the point cost issue.

http://babylon-5-acta.forumotion.ne...s-f2/selfmade-points-system-and-rules-t41.htm

Its very difficult to get it "right" with so many variations of weapons, range, speed and defences.

that said I look foward to watching your system evolve

 

[E-Mines Hurt]

Well I will be buying CTA 3 when it arrives and I will be buying new Mongoose ships to go with it, if I like the sculpts.

CTA is only one of a long line of spacship mini games I own and have minis for.

Not to say I wouldn't like to see Bab 5 crossover rules, and I have no doubt whatsoever that this community will take care of that.

Well, you bought the game and you can do with it whatever you want. Making CTA3 ratings for B5 ships and playing with your old models is something you can do.

 

[McKickaha]

Well I will be buying CTA 3 when it arrives and I will be buying new Mongoose ships to go with it, if I like the sculpts.

CTA is only one of a long line of spacship mini games I own and have minis for.

Not to say I wouldn't like to see Bab 5 crossover rules, and I have no doubt whatsoever that this community will take care of that.

Well, you bought the game and you can do with it whatever you want. Making CTA3 ratings for B5 ships and playing with your old models is something you can do.

hmm.....................yeah!

 

[Burger]

Personaly I would not use a Hyperion as the baseline. The Hyperion has some unusual traits, that can be hard to judge the points value of. Interceptors, boresight, beam, etc... they are effective aganst some enemies but not others. How do you judge the value?

If I were to create a points system (which BTW is something I'm not really interestedin doing - I like the priority system!), I would create a new fleet called the "Vanillas". Their ships would be very plain, few traits, average ADs, few weapon traits, average everything. Assign that a value of 100 for the Raid version. Then every other ship would be adjusted based on how much better or worse it is compared to the vanilla. If you add something (such as damage points or double damage weapon) then you take something away too (eg speed orrear weapons). If you add something without taking away, the points go up.

 

[TGT]

Uhmmm there's already a rules system to bring ship design variables into a points system ....why create a hack generic version when there's already one play tested and working...
:roll:

mj12games.com/starmada/shipbuilder.xlt

 

[H]

their are quite a few around from older games, and mostly better than the starmadad one as well.

 

[Kharnacier]

their are quite a few around from older games, and mostly better than the starmadad one as well.

Hi,
Could you be more explicit ?
Thx

 

[andywatkins1963]

Thanks for the 60 points for Vorchans suggestion.

Yes i deliberately reduced the cost of the larger ships to make them more playable.

I've heard the portents and principalities rules mentioned but I think I missed out on these, are they some kind of addition to a call to arms?

If so what are there most interesting aspects, where can you get them from, I haven't seen them on the mongoose website? I am interested in the revised priority level breakdown that was implied by one of the posters.

Andy

 

[Greg Smith]

Leisure Games has a copy.

 

[Foxmeister]

I've heard the portents and principalities rules mentioned but I think I missed out on these, are they some kind of addition to a call to arms?

It's Powers and Principalities, and it was released shortly prior to the B5 licence lapsing.

For the most part, it gave a new PL breakdown, some ship fixes, and some new rules. Although you can't buy it from Mongoose anymore, some retailers still have stocks and you can sometims find it on ebay.

However, you can find much of it via the online resources linked in this forum, and various discussions thread on this forum.

Regards,

Dave

 

[andywatkins1963]

Thanks guys,

Took a little hunting around but I found a chap at the club who had bought a copy before he gave up playing a call to arms.

Had a quick look at the ship fixes and the new priority level break down which are the only parts I am interested in.

Looks to me as though i no longer need to bother with a points system, I am guessing that for a moderate size game about 2 war points will suffice, although we can use them to buy skirmish ships the "exchange rate" is so unfavourable that it looks viable to actually field Primus, G'Quan's and sharlins, which is exactly what I wanted out of the game

Likewise I have no experience of which of the ships in 2nd edition are under powered but it looks as though the key ones have been beefed up. I always seem to remember Vorchans and G'Quans were under powered when I played with 1st edition fleets. In P&P the G'quan seems beefed up and the Vorchans seem to have gained a hunting pack option which seems good.

Thanks very much to every one of you who have gone out of their way to help me get back into a call to arms.

Personally I still think it is the most fun spaceship game out there, shame about the licence.

I know nothing about a call to arms 3 but would certainly be interested, as long of course as we can convert the B5 ships to the stats of the new system (which I am guessing is close to ACTA2 anyway?)

My comment for Matt would be that whether he believes in "priority levels" or not, he needs to sell the rules and most punters aren't interested, they want points values. I would go as far as to say most players of other games systems just will not even consider buying ACTA 3 unless it has a points based system. Shame really

Thanks again everyone, you've been great. Now to dust off the old fleets and get my friends into it

Andy

 

[Greg Smith]

Many consider the hunting pack rule to be broken.

 

[andywatkins1963]

Which bit is broken?

As far as I can tell if one ship is within 12" weapons range it gives other ships 18" range. To me that just means you could arrange the other ships in a pretty formation and still have them in range? That sounds ok

also you can have 6 ships instead of 3 in a squadron? I would not use that bit 3 ships is quite enough.

Would that be ok? It doesn't sound broken if used like that

 

[Greg Smith]

The 6 ship squadron.

All weapons are incresed in range - not just those firing at the target. They only have to apply 1ad on that target.

Mongoose banned the rule from their tournaments using P&P.

Sadly, the (current) rule was added after playtesting had finished.

See these threads for more info:
http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=39422&highlight=hunting+packs

http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=39462&highlight=hunting+packs

http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=39525&highlight=hunting+packs

http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=39547&highlight=hunting+packs

http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=39464&highlight=hunting+packs

And more besides. Just put 'hunting pack' into search and you get dozens of threads.

 

[andywatkins1963]

Strange, I thought the rule said that you had to all fire at the same target ship or at least same target squadron.

there seems no sense in getting extra range to fire at a completely seperate target?

I was going to use it that hunting packs are only 3 ships as before and they must all fire at the same squadron with all their weapons to get the 50% weapons increase in range.

If they fire any weapons at other targets then those weapons fire at normal range.

That seems reasonable and not broken. It also means you can sensibly spread the Vorchans out a little bit and not have them virtually on top of each other just to make sure they are all in range. I imagine this is why the rule originated in the first place?

 

[Greg Smith]

Strange, I thought the rule said that you had to all fire at the same target ship or at least same target squadron.

There is nothing to say that target is exclusive. Or only the weapons targetted on that ship get the range increase.

 

[Greg Smith]

Ah, I had forgotten there was a pdf update. Don't appear to have a copy on my pc.

I think it went:

All the ships have to fire at same target to get 50% range bonus.
However they can opt to act as a normal 6-ship squadron instead.

 

[silashand]

Ah, I had forgotten there was a pdf update. Don't appear to have a copy on my pc.

I think it went:

All the ships have to fire at same target to get 50% range bonus.
However they can opt to act as a normal 6-ship squadron instead.

From the doc:

Centauri Hunting Packs
A Hunting Pack is a special type of Centauri squadron that is used to inflict punishing damage on their enemies by combining targeting data between ships. It may contain up to six ships, of which none may be higher than Raid level. In each turn, when the Hunting Pack is nominated to fire, it may nominate one target. Ships within the Hunting Pack may only attack this designated target. If the target can be attacked by one ship within the Hunting Pack, every other ship in the Pack will increase the range of its weapons by half.

In all other respects the Hunting Pack acts as a normal squadron.

 

[Burger]

The hunting packs are unfairly too good, even if you ignore all the range bonuses. They allow a squadron to go up to 6 ships instead of 4, which no other race (even Dilgar Pentacons) can do. So a Centauri fleet with sufficient init sinks can gain a massive advantage in having a 6-ship squadron. Then throw in the range bonuses, which as Greg has described can be gained much too easily using 1 AD, and increase range of too many weapons. Hunting packs as written are very, very broken. The PDF version wasn't really much better because you can just ignore the range bonuses and function as a 6-ship squadron. Apart from that I think P&P is the most balanced and fair version of the game!

 

[andywatkins1963]

I'll keep the range bonus against a single target, but forget the 6 ship limit.

To avoid excessive init sinks has anyone considered insisting that patrol and skirmish level ships MUST be in squadrons?