ACTA Campaign
- Thread starter TGT
- Start date
Lord David the Denied
Mongoose
hiffano said:
Dude, this is a wargame, not a business sim...
I think the refits table needs serious work; it's beyond absurd that advanced technology would be witheld from general deployment and only added to "experienced" ships.
nekomata fuyu
Mongoose
Someone obviously isn't a Brakiri player thenLord David the Denied said:
Locutus9956
Mongoose
It's too random at the moment, I'd like to see the random scenarios done away with and more actual strategy like having to move fleets around properly and scenarios depending on the situation for example when attacking a planet you could have the option of either conducting an assault or laying seige to it in which case the oppnent can try and run the blockade to bring in supplies or lose the planet to it surrendering and so on.
Its just too random at the moment. To an extent thats still ACTAs biggest flaw, too much rides on the roll of the dice, both in campaing and actual battles, you can say that for any wargame of course but it just seems in ACTA that at times too MUCH can hinge on one dice roll or set of rolls (big crits, big beam hits, campaign scenarios etc etc)
Its just too random at the moment. To an extent thats still ACTAs biggest flaw, too much rides on the roll of the dice, both in campaing and actual battles, you can say that for any wargame of course but it just seems in ACTA that at times too MUCH can hinge on one dice roll or set of rolls (big crits, big beam hits, campaign scenarios etc etc)
Locutus9956 said:
I agree generally with that. What I would like to see is;
1. Greater emphasis on tactics within battles (e.g. re-working some of the less fair scenarios available).
2. Greater emphasis on strategy in campaigns. This doesn't have to be business sim level (although I would find that fun) but I'd like to at least be able to make better decisions about how to engage the enemy rather than have it randomly determined. (Although if the scenarios were fairer all round this would be less of an issue.) Also positioning ships in various locations would be interesting.
3. Rules on fleet composition - up for debate this one but I'd like to see a reason for including most ships in the fleet list rather than just personal preference. Maybe scouts, carriers, command ships etc have bonuses at a strategic level in the campaign as well as on the field of battle?
4. Better co-operative / diplomatic rules - I'd like to see rules available for permitting allies and hiring mercenary forces within the campaign set. Obviously this is open to abuse but a feasible system would be very cool.
5. This is most important for me. The rule for charging Shadows and Vorlons double RR for replacements is reconsidered...surely a gross over reaction to Self Repair if ever I saw one! Honestly, I'll pay for a repair cost - it's far, far, FAR cheaper than any RR you "save" otherwise.
Lord David the Denied
Mongoose
hiffano said:
You didn't say anything about logistics or infrastructure, did you? You said commerce or diplomacy, both totally outside the scope of a tactical wargame.
nekomata fuyu
Mongoose
One more minor mod I've been looking at making to the priority level and scenario selection is actually inspired by the EC War weekend.
Instead of rolling a random scenario and priority, the attacker picks one of 5 methods of attack, and the defender picks one of 5 methods of defence. You then compare the attacker's and defender's choices on a grid, and it gives you the resulting scenario to play. Also, you don't choose how much you're modifying the priority roll by separately - that's determined by what form of attack you select instead.
I haven't sat down and worked out the grid of various attack/defence methods and resulting scenarios yet, but as some examples/ideas:
- All Out Attack/Aggressive Defence would represent the most aggressive options for the two sides, and both would modify the priority roll significantly upwards. If both of these options were selected, you would end up with an Annihilation* scenario as both side basically have the order "Kill them! Kill them all!!", and the priority modifier could easily be +6 (+3 for each option).
- The attacker using All Out Attack, and the defender selecting some kind of Sneak Attack option could result in the Ambush scenario... with the campaign's defender being the scenario's attacker! The priority modifier might be +3 from All Out Attack, and -2 from Sneak Attack, for a final modifier of +1.
- If the defender chooses to Dig In, and the Attacker chooses a Cautious Approach, the resulting scenario could be a blockade.
Instead of rolling a random scenario and priority, the attacker picks one of 5 methods of attack, and the defender picks one of 5 methods of defence. You then compare the attacker's and defender's choices on a grid, and it gives you the resulting scenario to play. Also, you don't choose how much you're modifying the priority roll by separately - that's determined by what form of attack you select instead.
I haven't sat down and worked out the grid of various attack/defence methods and resulting scenarios yet, but as some examples/ideas:
- All Out Attack/Aggressive Defence would represent the most aggressive options for the two sides, and both would modify the priority roll significantly upwards. If both of these options were selected, you would end up with an Annihilation* scenario as both side basically have the order "Kill them! Kill them all!!", and the priority modifier could easily be +6 (+3 for each option).
- The attacker using All Out Attack, and the defender selecting some kind of Sneak Attack option could result in the Ambush scenario... with the campaign's defender being the scenario's attacker! The priority modifier might be +3 from All Out Attack, and -2 from Sneak Attack, for a final modifier of +1.
- If the defender chooses to Dig In, and the Attacker chooses a Cautious Approach, the resulting scenario could be a blockade.
waterproofla
Mongoose
Lord David the Denied said:
Surely you jest! Those should not be outside the scope of a game of Babylon 5. Babylon 5 was "A place of commerce and diplomacy"!
Oh, they have forgotten the great television show. [weeps]. :lol:
Lord David the Denied
Mongoose
hiffano said:
Dude... what the hell? This is a tactical wargame. It takes no account of strategic decisions or factors. Your faction's industrial base is irrelevent in this game.
Diplomacy has sod-all to do with wargames and sod-all to do with military commanders.
