A question about fleet composition and cheese

I tend to agree with most of the latter sentiments in this thread. A rarity limit I think would acutally be a good thing for encouraging more variety and more interesting fleets (though I found the the Armageddon point splits tended to do that a bit anyway and apparently theyre coming back soon :D)

To Katadder's suggestion of foricing you to take ships of a certain PL, sorry but I agree with Burger, that's the worst idea I've heard for quite some time. In principle it could actually work but only if all fleets had equal strenght ships across all PLS, and they clearly dont! Some fleets lack ships of some PL's entirely and many others only have very weak (or at least very SPECIALISED choices at a given level.

However I do think that rarity CAN be helpful to a limited extent with balancing some particular types of ship, in particular I'm refering to the 'glass hammer' type ships. As a prime example look at the Saggitarius.

On it's own its a useful support ship and whilst well armed it doesnt really pack much of a whatck than any other ship of it's level. It CAN get alot of crits and with the right missile load can be very dangerous of course but it's not THAT deadly. And furthermore it's actually rather fragile and so the obvious it becomes one of those dangerous ships thats really easy to get rid of and tends to get shot immediately. Now look at what happens if you field 10 of them though, that decent firepower multiplies to the point where it can alpha strike half your opponetns fleet away and beacuse that firepower is spread around so much your opponent has virtually no chance of removing much of it quickly to lower the incoming fire on the next few turns. Now this is a general issue with swarms anyway to be honest and fair enough, superior numbers IS an advantage and rightly so but with ships of this type it becomes utterly dominating.

Most recent tourneys have got round this by limiting fleets to 2 Saggs maximum and that seems to work just fine. Now my point is that limiting the numbers available CAN be a balancing factor for certain types of ship. I personally dont think the Saggitarius is, in it's self, broken, however fielding a spam fleet of them ABSOLUTELY is. The same applies to any fragile, artillery style ship, like the Dag Kar, Vree Bombardment Saucers etc etc.
 
I think the main aspect of ships and therefore what makes a fleet cheesey (I certainly come close to it when I use Tinashi's in sqds)
is the power of what most types call an alpha strike
reliance on a big overwhelming show of force which an oppo has very little chance of standing upto or reducing

what is the real kicker is when they're also survivable..Demos on CBD
Minbo's on CBD and/or stealth

2e Gaim were the worst offenders...
now with blue stars i find ISA to be border line cheese although emines and the liati mitigates this fleet from cheese to just curdled milk

I think a tourney or even an ACTA 3e rule of max 3 choices of the same ship would be a good idea
 
Agreed the present lists would penalise fleets - the Wallsal tournament I did not click until after that the shadow player had to use a Stalker..............

One could argue that the fleet lists should all be able to cope with this - but at present they can't.........
 
Da Boss said:
the shadow player had to use a Stalker..............
He could have used 4 scouts at Raid... I probably would have!! Though aat Battle yeah a stalker.... no other choice unless you go for just 2 scouts...
 
easy to make fleet exceptions goes into the fleet book for lots of other things...
sometimes one rule doesn't fit all but you need to take the blinkers off and see the bigger picture where its generally a good and grand thing!
 
Keep in mind that you don't want to force people to field ships, because they may not be able to get them anymore (due to model production's shutdown -- hopefully temporary!). Ultimate Warzone made this mistake. They suddenly changed force compositions and what individual models were. They were all playable, but sometimes you needed more figurines to field a now-legal squad (some squads went from 3-5 + 1 sergeant to 8-12 and a sergeant!).

Well, no one with an old Warzone army had the models.

And it ws hard to get the models.

So, no one played.

Doh!

Let's not pull that stunt.
 
I think the PL system as is, is a bit too strange. Its not really logical, it lacks any real sense. Even if you gave a rough point score to each ship say 32 for armageddon, 16 for war, 8 for battle, 4 for raid, 3 for skirmish, and 2 for patrol. The system would allow alot more diversity and freedom to choose what you want to do. However the problem with the above is that 3 causes a pain. However no less than the whole FAP system does.

under this swarming would be less likely too as under the current FAP system you'd be able in a 5pt raid game (standard) get a possible 20 patrol or 40 twofers. Under the system above you'd be able to get a max of 10 patrol ships and 20 twofers.

Just a thought.
 
What about the fleet spread ie levels of ships or requirements of ships be part of each fleets fluff. ie like a force organization chart for each fleet. Plenty of other wargames do that and you could even have options for say an EA strike fleet in contrast to a system patrol fleet or war fleet or a Dilgar planetary bombardment fleet vs an interception fleet etc. It could possibly enrich then fluff of the game.

With cheese however my suggestion would be something along the lines of modifying criticals to not be influenced by double damages etc. I think it makes fluff sense too since a lot of the time you are talking about a hull breach or reactor failure etc which would be the same irrespective o the size of the weapon which caused the failure. I think that would deal with the lower PL level ships trashing the big ones with crits tied to a DD beam etc.

I also think some tweaking with the stats on a couple of ships could help too.
 
Tweaking the point system WOULD solve balance issues. If Cheesy ship were made slightly more expensive it would balance it out just as much as altering its stats would.

A possible fix to the swarm fleet problem, rather than making 'rare' ships would be to classify each ship and limit how many of certain classes can be fielded. This is also realistic as a real life fleet would NEVER be composed entirely of certain single classes (i.e. long range bombardment). Ships that form the backbone of a fleet would be exempt from classification as they are used to fill a large number of rolls (Hyperions, Omegas, White Stars, etc) Certain races (Shadows, Vorlons), wouldn't have classifications, mainly because their fleet lists are too small. Only 1/5 of a fleet (rounded up) may be composed of each individual classification of ship.

Some examples could be:
Command- Obvious command vessels (not all vessels with the command trait, though), The Command Omega or ISA Sharlin varient (I forget the name), for example.
Bombardment- Ships designed with long range strike capability in mind
Carrier- Carriers and fleet carriers
Scout- Ships with the scout trait

I actually think those 4 cover all the main groups apart from ships that
 
Keep in mind... the Sag fleet was over the top because it picked on two things acta does not deal with well. Excessive crit output and range/ease of arc. The Vree are borderline on this issue right now and the gaim ran headlong into this same wall. If you can easily focus A FLEETs firepower on a number of ships at once, you end up being able to fire too efficiently.

ie you fire one ship and see if it crits out your target, if it does next ship moves on to another target, if not keep firing until you do. Compared to the short ranged/limited arc/boresighted fleets that have to commit ships to fire on targets during movement and will waste most of their firepower if a crit comes up aces.

Just saying, it's not mission... it's flexibility that breaks fleets/ships... and any attempt to limit ships has to take that into account.

Ripple
 
I've always thought that a B5 Wars style rarity system would be worth adding to ACTA to limit fleets to something "realistic", or at least make you pay more FAPs if you want a swarm of Demos or whatever. The force composition system that BF:E uses would be straitforward enough, although in campaigns any limitations on your choice of fleet for a particular battle might be problematical once you start losing ships or have to fight multiple battles in a turn. Personally, in solo battles and campaigns I pick fleets based on the RPGs Fact Books descriptions (esp. for League races) or at least in the same ratios.
 
Back
Top