A New Universe for ACTA's

[Nerroth]

What Iron Domokum is trying to point out is that, in Starmada, there is already a streamlining of things like photon and plasma arming cycles.

In Starmada, photons can fire every turn in standard or proximity mode, and have the slow-loading feature when overloaded. So far as plasmas go, all five listed warhead types (R, S, G, F, D) are noted as being slow-firing when launched as seekers or fired as bolts; only the plasma-F carronade can be fired each turn.

(One of the quirks about the Starmada conversion is that bolts are not that bad in terms of accuracy; compared to how innacurate bolts are in SFB and FC.)


As has been pointed out more than one, SFB and FC are not the only places people can look at to see how a Star Fleet Universe tactical combat system can work.

 

[Iron Domokun]

With this kind of damage curve do you really want to see them take the same amount of time to load?

Rambler, I don't see why not. Fully overloaded photons is a potential 64 points of damage, plus phasers, makes around 100 points at range zero. Gorn BC has a 100-point alpha with its plasma. Of course, it takes time to overload those photons if you want to fly at a reasonable speed too, so the arming cycle for photons and plasma is about the same in that case.

Example: Starmada. Disruptors and photons can both be fired as dual-mode weapons, i.e. standard or overload. Disrs can be fired either as overloads or normal loads every turn. Photons can fire every turn as normal loads, every other turn as overloads. Plasma is ALWAYS every other turn, unless carronaded. Disruptors and photons do roughly comparable damage, the disrs being a bit more accurate and less damaging when they do hit.

So the solution is to have disruptors and photons firing every turn, and increasing the damage output of the disruptors to equal that of the photon. Plasmas fire/launch every other turn. If you wanted to steal the mechanic from Starmada, allow some weapons to fire as overloads (shorter range, but gain Multihit). Special rule that if a photon is fired as an overload it is slow loading. Or perhaps it cannot have been fired in the previous turn, requiring a bit of planning to use overloads by the Feds. Plasma always slow loading.

 

[BFalcon]

Given the number of disruptors out there, you may not want to increase the damage... also, it would just make Disruptors "Photons by another name"?

Lastly, why would ACTA want to emulate Starmada? Aren't they competing products? SFB and FC are the "parent products" from which the others are taken, which is why I refer to them, but I'm unsure about referring to another conversion...

 

[Nerroth]

When we are talking about the Starmada conversion, we are not saying "forget about A Call to Arms and go play Starmada instead; we are saying "here is an example of how the SFU has been adapted to fit a game engine with a broadly similar skill level to what we have here; it's already taken a few things in a different direction, so why wouldn't ACtA?"


Besides, I don't think there are too many people who would consider the two games to be quite so readily interchangeable; I wouldn't expect a bunch of the Starmada loyalists to jump ship any more than I would ACtAers.

The point of the two licenses is to provide options to both groups of gamers.


(Speaking of Starmada, disruptors are handled differently than photons. They have a longer range, and roll differently in terms of how they apply their damage; disruptors roll more dice to breach shields, while photons roll more dice to score hull damage.)

 

[Keeper Nilbog]

I tend to agree with the one turn Photon/Disruptor arming rate, and would also look at doing this for the Plas F (possibly with less damage) Think overloads should be handled by 'special action' (i think that SFB/FC players are actually blessed with the amount of tactical flexability the power allocation system gives, and with the move to a more generic ActA type system, may have to give up some of these options). Larger Plas (G,S,R) could then be slow loading to account for the fire and run/whether the fire (Romulan/Gorn tactics). Disruptor/Photon differences could be handled by weapon traits (say mutlihits for Photons, but possibly less die) and effective ranges (disruptors are quick firing but don't have the range of Photons - though a standard Photon and disruptor hit over the same period of time do the same damage (Photon = 8pts/2turn, Disruptor = 4pts/1turn, so 8pts/2turn).

Phaser weapons will be interesting, as ActA tends to use 90* fire arcs (front, right,left,rear) as standard, not the individual arcs of SFB/FC, so die for each system (Phaser 1-2 and 3 - though i'm sure a previous thread point mention Phaser 3 (point defence) would be turreted, or possibly could be handled by Traits/ActA:NA gatling laser type weapon). SFB/FC do use phaser as primary weapons, but i think that could be down to the tactical turn and 'heavy weapon' load time (Photons, Disruptors, Plasma). In the more strategic environment of ActA, i think these heavy weapons 'may' become the standard offensive punch of ships, with Phasers as a backup/second-line weapon (rather as in the Laser and particle beam balance in B5 - lasers were the reach out and touch weapon, Particle beam were the 'close/medium' weapon). Again the trait system will allow for weapon variences (it's very good at this.

I think the main thing to remember here is that provided the 'feel' of the weapon system is right, no-one is going to mind. I generally play Gorn in SFB/FC (flying blicks with sledgehammers is a good way to describe their ships - quite like Narn, but with more scary weapons (Plasma's)). We all want this to work, but have to remember that due to the differences in the way the systems reflect combat (SFB/FC handle 'Duel' games excellently, and ActA, with due regard to the designers, sucks in a one on one game - it's designed for FLEETS). I think the stuff thats coming though is good in that it's giving us some indea on the way things maybe going, and allows us to have our say (unlike some companies). I've had SFB/FC on the backburner for the last 1-2years, though i love the game (mainly play FC now), this has pushed that interest to the fore, and i look forward to playing this game when it is released. Anything that reflexes the background, that's good for me.

 

[MarkDawg]

I have a questions about this license. I have seen it stated that you need to walk the tight rope your it will get pulled.

How much latitude do you have in making the rule set?

How about minis can you create ships that have never been seen before?

Can you crate or add to the SFU story line?

 

[Rick]

I have a questions about this license. I have seen it stated that you need to walk the tight rope your it will get pulled.

How much latitude do you have in making the rule set?

How about minis can you create ships that have never been seen before?

Can you crate or add to the SFU story line?

From what I understand, you can take the license in any direction you like, add any ships you like, but if you use as much as a single piece of info from the films or other series', you are stepping on Paramount's toes and that is a no-no.

Just checked my VAS book - it's difficult to tell, but I think Matt is going to use the advanced rules for torpedoes - place template for attack next to the target in the attack phase, but don't roll for damage until the end phase. That should give a chance for a target to move or try to counter the attack.

 

[Da Boss]

Just checked my VAS book - it's difficult to tell, but I think Matt is going to use the advanced rules for torpedoes - place template for attack next to the target in the attack phase, but don't roll for damage until the end phase. That should give a chance for a target to move or try to counter the attack.

Thats really useful info - but how do the ships move when the attack happens in the end phase and firing takes place after movement? Do you have to fire Torps first or can you wait till a ship has fired all guns and can't intercept it? or is it the end phase of the next turn?

Bit confused?

 

[Rick]

I'll go and have a look. It's not the easiest rule in the book and is sort of split between the rules and the errata.

Ok - although it mentions that a torpedo attack is made just like any other, it also mentions that certain torpedoes may hit even if the target moves beyond the torpedoes range between launch and detonation. By this, I'm guessing that the attack MUST be declared in the movement phase and the damage rolled in the end phase. Anyone want to nip over to the VAS area and ask one of them fella's for a clarification?

 

[BFalcon]

Thanks Rick - that's good to know. Not a bad mechanic, to be honest.

Maybe a compromise - leaving a counter on the map that can move x inches/cm/bananas per turn (including an immediate move the turn it's launched) and if it hasn't reached the target by the firing phase of the next turn, it's removed (before any others can be launched)? Minimum book-keeping, an excuse for minis AND gives the poor unfortunate a chance to save his hull... provided the launch wasn't too close, in which case he's gonna hurt...

:twisted:

I'm really looking forward to this.

And guys, I'm sorry, but I fail to see the point in basing anything off a conversion when doing so invariably leads to loss of the feel of the original... much better to base all your decisions off converting the "spirit, if not the letter" of the rules of the original so they fit into the rules you have and avoid the complications you wish to... to me, that's what makes a better game - borrowing from other (derivative) rules seem to either make it appear disjointed, cause more problems trying to get them to work, or unbalances the game (leading to more headaches).

I'm aware that Matt knows all this and I'm also glad he's not prone to "biggest and nastiest" syndrome like certain games companies are... so we're going to see a really nice conversion I think... for WWII, that rule is spot on... even for plasma torpedos in SFU, I think it'd work - it all depends on whether or not the target gets a chance to move and also on how much the ships (and torpedo) can move in the first place... it's kinda nice to see the Balance of Terror episode relived on the games table (where the Fed CA throws it into reverse to open the range and ends up getting less pummelled than it otherwise would have by the WB's plasma-R).

And don't forget guys - in addition to the massive damage, doesn't a plasma torp also get to move every impulse in SFB and have a much longer range than photons (photon overloads are what... 8 range?)?

I wish I had my SFB unpacked - it's somewhere in the spare room still awaiting unpacking after 3 years...

 

[Rick]

It's actually a rather good mechanic and allows a number of possibilities - had a look on the VAS topics and they mentioned a long range torpedo that, if it's target moves beyond its maximum range, it carries on going; moving another set range and attacking in the following end phase.
If this is the case, you could combine it with the SFB range effects and have it lose a proportion of its dice in each end phase after the first. This last bit is pure speculation, however.

 

[BFalcon]

Ok - although it mentions that a torpedo attack is made just like any other, it also mentions that certain torpedoes may hit even if the target moves beyond the torpedoes range between launch and detonation. By this, I'm guessing that the attack MUST be declared in the movement phase and the damage rolled in the end phase. Anyone want to nip over to the VAS area and ask one of them fella's for a clarification?

OK, thanks Rick - appreciated. That gives the target a CHANCE, but not enough to run for it completely... nice

Edit: response to Rick (we keep crossing posts)...

Yes, sounds like a perfect (or as close to as we're likely to see) mechanic for the plasmas... it sounds like you could vary the speed and endurance for each type too - only difference is you may not have the seeking mechanic in VAS, but that's hardly a problem to put in - just merely allow a single or two 45 degree turn(s) each game-turn and you're pretty much there.

Could even build in a rule allowing one ship to cause (with the other ship's cooperation) the torpedo to hit another ship (presumably one with reinforced and larger shields) by delicate maneuvering - although that might be going a little complicated.

If anything, I think the longer turn might actually help the game rather than hinder - too often in SFB we saw highly complex maneuvers taking place in a turn that was supposed to only take a few seconds, wasn't it? Having a more flowing battle may well bode well for larger fleet battles...

 

[MarkDawg]

So you guys are speculating what the rules will be? Or do have an alpha/beta version? If so I would like a link please.

 

[Rick]

So you guys are speculating what the rules will be? Or do have an alpha/beta version? If so I would like a link please.

So would I MarkDawg - so far it's 90% speculation and 10% filling in what Matt's NOT saying! Basically we're all filling in the time until we get more info on what's in the rulebook, so expect at least another 4 months of this, lol!

 

[Jean]

MarkDawg, about the license.

We can create completely new ships -- we do it all the time. So far, they have to be approved for SFB, the "parent" game.

The outcome of the combat must mirror what happens in SFB.

SVC must approve any creations/additions to the SFU history. That is to keep the history consistent and realistic.

The history is told via stories in Captain's Log and other books, the scenarios, and through articles such as the "history" articles that appear in different books.

 

[godsgopher]

Right now the only people who would know anything about the game would be Matt and the playtesters, assuming there are any at his point? and frankly while I suspect Matt will tease us endlessly with little comments and such on his blog. The playtesters wont say anything for fear the Orion syndicate will send them on a space walk without a helmet.

 

[Greg Smith]

Right now the only people who would know anything about the game would be Matt and the playtesters, assuming there are any at his point?

There are. I am one of them. There is also katadder, Triggy (I think), Clanger, and at least one guy on the FC forum (along with the guys we play with). I am sure there are plenty of others.

The playtesters wont say anything for fear the Orion syndicate will send them on a space walk without a helmet.

Yep. And also because things change. For example drones have been done in three different ways in three different iterations of the rules.

 

[firekite]

no i have not seperate a boom/saucer ben2 and i have been playing sfb since the designer edition (about 1979).

 

[locarno24]

Sounding very good.

Love the fact that exploding console syndrome is actually enshrined in the game rules!

Wondered if Victory At Sea torpedo rules might make an appearance - I've played a couple of games of VAS and I do like the torp mechanics; getting to place the torpedo marker is a great psychological weapon at times, and a straight read-across of the rules allows for longer ranged torpedo strikes (just use the Long Lance rules).

Hull score = target score makes sense (again, much like Victory at Sea) - provided a bigger ship has enough shields to tank the additional fire it takes, you essentially remove the need for a dodge rule for smaller ships. The big concern (as ever with ACTA, I guess) will be criticals - lots of hits means more chance of criticals.

The new Noble Armada system means less chance of 'spontaneous kaboom' criticals, but being able to generate them without punching through shields first can be...unpleasant.

On the other hand, I suspect that there are significantly less shield-piercing weapons (can't really think of any offhand). This means that 'exploding consoles' pretty much replaces the crit-fishing ability of Noble Armada torpedoes, rockets and heat blasters.

One good thing is that it serves to increase big ships in importance (always good as A Call To Arms has a long-fought tendancy towards swarminess):

If multiple small ships shoot at a big ship, big ship takes several small blocks of damage which all come off shields.

If one big ship shoots at big ship, big ship takes one big whack of damage which triggers one or more 'exploding consoles', knocking it about even if the shields are still up.

As a result, you need big ships to fight big ships in a slugging match (whilst small ships rely on staying out of arc, range, whatever, and scragging a ship with phaser fire once its shields are compromised - will be interested to see what 'killshot' does!)

 

[Iron Domokun]

"Significantly less shield-piercing weapons"

Well, in the SFU you have to batter through the shield before doing any damage to the enemy, pretty much... maybe all weapons will have the burn-out property or something, but the ships will have thick shields.

About the only weapons I can think of that are particularly effective vs shields are the Seltorian shield cracker and the Hydran Hellbore, and neither of those are TV empires so you won't see them in the first few releases I'm betting.

I'll be curious to see how AcTA handles Tholian web.