A New Edition of ACTA is coming...

[Lord David the Denied]

have seen this argument esculate on many forums :wink: the fleets and technologies are sooo very different (as is the sheer scale of the ships - ST ships being on the small to tiny side compared to B5 ones)

Size don't matter, it's where you stick it... :wink:

Honestly, they are different, but B5 is stated to use lasers and plasma-based pulse weapons. In Star Trek these technologies are so far in the past they joke about them. A matter/anti-matter explosive would rip something like an Omega into wreckage very easily, and with no shields to stop it, phasers and disruptors would just slice them up. Rather like the Shadows did.

 

[Foxmeister]

A matter/anti-matter explosive would rip something like an Omega into wreckage very easily, and with no shields to stop it, phasers and disruptors would just slice them up. Rather like the Shadows did.

In addition, we also know from the show that Earthforce and some of the other younger races are still using nukes, which are going to be way behind photon torps for destructive power (assuming the "science" of the two shows can be reasonably compared).

Regards,

Dave

 

[MustEatBrains]

Size don't matter, it's where you stick it... :wink:

Now, that´s just grose... :roll:

 

[Paladin]

a gaming company seeking to make a profit on a massive scale,

No. Just. . . no. . .

I really don't see much gross profiteering going on in the gaming market.

That's not exactly what I meant. It was obviously poorly worded based on the mutliple interpretations that Mongoose is attempting to "rake in mass profits". I'm not saying making a massive profit, but making a profit via mass marketting targetting a higher sales volume vs. low volume with higher prices and low costs. i.e. Walmart vs. Martha's corner grocery. e.g. Make a quarter a item and sell 4 or make a $1 a item and sell 1. You have to have the customer base willing to pay the higher premium, the right "location" and the exceptional customer service/loyalty to keep them coming back. Both ventures have risks and both have to struggle to survive and the decision to close either exists

Foxmeister - Your example doesn't work for a 2 sided game either. You are using a massive mini company with complex games with multiple factions. The point is, the overhead/level of support/player expectations/need for higher sales volume is much higher for a larger company than it is for a garage company to make a game viable. Typically in those situations you need more minis/varieties to attract more players/enlarge the number/types of models available for production. Two factions doesn't mean the game can't be "decent", which was the original context.

 

[MongooseMatt]

Two factions doesn't mean the game can't be "decent", which was the original context.

To jump in, the original context was actually Mongoose and SST

I am actually with you - I think SST is a great game, and works extremely well with just two sides (especially with the choices among the MI). However, the market wanted much more, and it wanted it quickly. The ACW analogy, that we led with when the game first appeared, did not hold.

Shame, but them's the breaks.

 

[Terrible Tim]

from IWM?

No, we have spent the past year rejigging our forge and miniatures producing processes, all in preparation for 2009. . .

What are you going to make in that forge Matt......?

 

[sidewinder]

actually the federation used quite a few fighters during the dominion war. especially in the large battles. They didnt last very long though. I'd hate to see what a federation tactical fighter would do to B5 ships though.

Well, any Star Trek ships would wipe the floor with B5, they're light-years ahead in tech. Only the First Ones would have a chance.

/geekiness

have seen this argument esculate on many forums :wink: the fleets and technologies are sooo very different (as is the sheer scale of the ships - ST ships being on the small to tiny side compared to B5 ones)

That doesnt mean that most of the races in Star Trek cant make large ships, they just choose not to. The Dominion built a ship that was a mile long, the klingon Neg'var is huge as is the romulan d'deridex. I wont even go into how big a borg cube is.
Just because an omega might be 2 to 3 times bigger then a galaxy class ship, what good is size if the enterprise simply outranges and out manuvers you.
The defiant would probably have stats similar to the whitestar except it would have far more firepower and shields. Maybe more hits and crew too, it would just depend on what level you wanted to make it. Making it raid level like a whitestar would be hard if you want to keep it anything like in the show.

 

[l33tpenguin]

Well, any Star Trek ships would wipe the floor with B5, they're light-years ahead in tech. Only the First Ones would have a chance.

/geekiness

have seen this argument esculate on many forums :wink: the fleets and technologies are sooo very different (as is the sheer scale of the ships - ST ships being on the small to tiny side compared to B5 ones)

That doesnt mean that most of the races in Star Trek cant make large ships, they just choose not to. The Dominion built a ship that was a mile long, the klingon Neg'var is huge as is the romulan d'deridex. I wont even go into how big a borg cube is.
Just because an omega might be 2 to 3 times bigger then a galaxy class ship, what good is size if the enterprise simply outranges and out manuvers you.
The defiant would probably have stats similar to the whitestar except it would have far more firepower and shields. Maybe more hits and crew too, it would just depend on what level you wanted to make it. Making it raid level like a whitestar would be hard if you want to keep it anything like in the show.

Its all a matter of opinion and which one you like more. Both sides could be argued either way about which is better, there have been endless discussion across the internet about B5 vs ST. Its all Blah blah blah, IMO. ST fans say ST will win, B5 fans say B5 will win. Tech manuals state X vs Y, etc. Dispite ST being more advanced, B5 weaponry has been shown to be more powerful in terms of sheer power output (tech manual vs tech manual stats).

The only thing you can do as a game maker is put them on par with one another and let them duke it out fairly. A Galexy class Star ship gets stuck at Battle Level and as such is on par with an Omega, or whatever have you.

Its already done like that. Based on the level of power seen in B5 alone, NOTHING short of a ship with a telepath, or another first one race was on par with the shadows, but we play with the shadow ship is 'on par' with a minbari WC. The same ships we see Shadow vessels cutting to shreds.

 

[sidewinder]

As far as the game goes, yes, you have to pick a point where they meet up. I was making Trek ships to use in B5 and I had the excelsior at battle level. I dont go by the tech manual. Even they guys that wrote the TNG tech manual said it was flawed and way under powered. Its better to go with what we see on screen. Granted, you get a lot of variation depending on which episodes you watch, but you can do an average.

 

[inq101]

There's no reason beyond our expectation to keep the settings compatible. The B5 license is being dropped. That means they don't need to keep looking back and can use this as a fresh start.

p.s. Trek would kick B5's ass because Trek ignores physics when it becomes inconvenient and B5 tries to work out ways around the problem.

Tom

 

[sidewinder]

There's no reason beyond our expectation to keep the settings compatible. The B5 license is being dropped. That means they don't need to keep looking back and can use this as a fresh start.

p.s. Trek would kick B5's ass because Trek ignores physics when it becomes inconvenient and B5 tries to work out ways around the problem.

Tom

If anything I'd say its trek that makes up ways to get around physics problems, they dont just ingore them. B5 doesnt really say anything about physics at all, other then they use hyperspace to go faster then light and certain ships use gravitic drives to account for their high acceleration and lask of enertia when turning.

 

[Jhary]

There's no reason beyond our expectation to keep the settings compatible. The B5 license is being dropped. That means they don't need to keep looking back and can use this as a fresh start.

p.s. Trek would kick B5's ass because Trek ignores physics when it becomes inconvenient and B5 tries to work out ways around the problem.

Tom

Sorry but its the other way. B5 they ignor the problems as long as they can´t kill it.

 

[Qapla]

Well I would love to finally see TNG+ Star Treks space battles. I had started working on a Trek mod for ACTA a lil over a year ago, but since joining the Army that has been put on the back burner. Perhaps you and me should get together sometime Katadder.

I have an idea for the license that surprisingly has not been suggested yet.
Halo.

In the games you get small snippets of space battles but if you go into the books there are quite a few good ones. The license should be open with WK kicking the bucket. Right now the only downside would be lack of options. You would have the Covenant, UNSC and possibly Brutes, Elites, Flood and Forerunners. Also the fact the the UNSC almost always gets wiped buy the Covenant is a problem, but in the later books Cortana has made some discoveries that could change this.

All in all Trek would make me happy as long as we got decent minis of the ships. To some sort of scale would prolly be asking to much though.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Target]

The Mass effect universe suits the ACTA rules quite well & it has serveral races with there own styles.

 

[Hindsight]

I don't want to depart Babylon 5, but feel that this is the right choice.

How often have we argued about the mechanics of the White Star? How often have we argued about canon vs. gameplay?

I'd much prefer them come out with something fresh, or maybe something a little less done to death, as really, Babylon 5 is whats keeping ACTA from being balanced and fun.

 

[Da Boss]

arguments are likely to continue no matter what the licence

White Star - well there is the Defiant or a universes equivalent so likely to be the same sort of discussions!? :wink:

be interesting to see what changes are made (and how easy it is to make a B5 mod)

 

[Hindsight]

Can Matt maybe at least tell us if it will be an existing license, or something unique?

 

[Lone Gunman]

I only carcely had access to the internet recently and now what do I read? A 3rd ed. of ActA? From the last 4 pages I conclude the following:

- B5 dropped in favour of another unknown setting(licence costs from WB?)
- inclusion of a point system
- new models
- weakening of criticals
- a system to design custom races and ships

sounds good so far (I wonder how long it will take for a B5 mod) but I will wait until the final release. If its as balanced as 2nd ed should be... :wink:

 

[njrobin]

i welcome a new edition, even if it does come with a bolt-on theme or setting. ACtA as is can easily be used for many settings just look at the ones that already exist, i personally have copies of star trek, star wars, battlestar galactica, stargate, and farscape mods.

I feel a new inhouse setting may be too risky as the market for these kind of products is not large, but conversly dropping a large amount of money on a license may be a mistake.

i dont envy mongoose....

i like:
points system
design system included for easy modding

i doubt:
new or any! models.

i dislike:
weakening of crits as this would slow the game down.
loss of b5 license ;-(

 

[Tolwyn]

The B5 licenze is an economic matter WB might be responsible for.

I greatly appreciate it if the criticals are weakened, they are one of the factors who can brake otherwise enjoyable games.