ACTA SF

Agreed - when scoutdad starts using the terrain rules I think he'll see a marked difference in game play - it should get more tactical and challenging.
 
Jean,

Thank you very much for the picture posting links - that was sooooo much easier than digging through the other forums. :D

Very glad the 'textured' underside on the Romulan has survived and in general lovely designs (with the possible exception of the under-slung sensor dishes on the Friagtes - what looks fine on the big ships always makes me go 'Gah!' on those)

I notice the much discussed and maligned Command Variant has been banished back to the ether along with the Dreadnought - which is a shame because while it might have needed a little bit of tweaking I though the overall effect was great...never mind.


************

On the Points value front I think its all really mad guesswork until terrain and multiple ship classes start mixing it up - I remember thinking certain ships in ACTA: B5 were badly 'costed' for until you realised how some of the units worked together. Sure, CA's vs D7's should be a pretty close match up - but from the reports it probably was all players being equal!
 
Husklar - <EDIT: REMOVED BY AUTHOR. See Jeans post below for better explanation of ADBs liscens>.

That said do not fear the CC design is being tweaked to be released as a CB Heavy Command Cruiser. The Lexington class Command Cruiser is not apparently different enough from a Connie for Mongoose to make a mini for so it may be a special limited run unit in the feature.

Unfortunatly the Dreadnought proposal while a completely awesome design had copy write infringement written all over it. I look foreward to seeing what they produce next.
 
huskarl: I think the original CC design is destined to be tweaked and released as a CB (Heavy Command Cruiser vaiant). That should explain the external defferences between the Heavy Cruiser and that design more more readily thn the minor changes from CA to CC.
[edit]
Looks like al types fasterthan I do. :wink:

And yes, all things being equal - I think the values for the D7 / Fed CA are closer than some of the playtesting indicates.
 
Rambler said:
What people need to realise is that ADB does not have a licence from Paramount to produce a star ship combat game. Wizkids has that license. What ADB has had for over 30 years is a license to use Franz Joseph's Star Fleet Technical Manual. Paramount did Sue ADB for copyright infringement and Paramount offered a settlement deal after they nearly bankrupted ADB. The short of the deal is Paramount will license ADB (at a ridiculous low fee which ADB can keep for as long as ADB wants without renegotiating it.) to use elements of Star Trek that they already had used. This agreement dose not cover any other star trek eras. So we can not start TNGafing minis that are 30 years old. We can tweak the designs as long as we do not violate the Paramount deal.

Much of that statement seemed new to me, so I asked SVC about it. Here is his response:

So much about this statement is false. Allow me to give you the truth.
1. We do have a contract with Paramount, and have had it since 1987. It never expires.
2. Yes, we also have a license from Franz Joseph which we got in 1979. The games we published prior to 1987 were within that license.
3. Paramount has never sued ADB. They made a deal with us in 1987 giving us more territory to use in exchange for the checks we write them every quarter.

Jean adds: Please, this sort of rumor can be very damaging to a company. Don't spread it, please.
 
Regarding the last BGM playtest session with the Federation vs. Klingons. I was the Klingons in one of the tests and my inexperienced but by no means incompitant son was playing the Federation.

He is still young, but is very enthusiastic. He split his forces, but that was good for him as it gave him a larger Photon blanket to fire from. I used my superior manuverability and initative, even though I was not aware of the 90 degree turn capability, to stay out of most photon arcs and even when I was in it, 3 of his 4 missed.

I am a fairly experienced SFB/FedCom/F&E player and know what Klingons have to do against the Photon. I applied it and it worked well.
 
MarkDawg, as soon as I get new pictures I will try to get them up. If they happen today, it may be Monday before I can as I'll be out of town this weekend dealing with business tied to my father's death. I will try to keep you guys up with pictures though.

If you cannot wait, the BBS (http://www.starfleetgames.com/discus/messages/27411/27403.html?1315491792) and our page on FB (http://www.facebook.com/pages/Amarillo-Design-Bureau-Inc/231728653279?ref=mf) have pictures already up. I have tried to indicate how "finished" the rendering is.

Jean
 
Guys, the SF rulebook just went up on preorder!!!

£21.99!!!

BTW - full marks to the Mongoose/ADB artist... I got curious and blew up the preview of the front cover and they got the right name with the right class and NCC number by the look of it... :)

(Constitution class, NCC 1709 - USS Valiant, for those who are curious).
 
BFalcon said:
BTW - full marks to the Mongoose/ADB artist... I got curious and blew up the preview of the front cover and they got the right name with the right class and NCC number by the look of it... :)

(Constitution class, NCC 1709 - USS Valiant, for those who are curious).

We have spent a lot of time getting those details right :)
 
I'd love to get the artist's name so that the person can be properly credited on our art gallery. :) It is a lovely cover.
 
Cover art for A Call to Arms: Star Fleet. Art by James Gammell.

ctasfrulebook_1.jpg


:) Just practicing for doing the same for the minis/renderings.

Jean
 
Iron Domokun said:
Oh my gosh, Jean's doing "nerd porn"! :mrgreen:

:shock: Oh dear! Do you think I should take it down???? I shouldn't like to cause anyone to have palpitations!

Jean
(who is quietly giggling)
 
Stop that giggling, this is serious.

People can be breaking out in hot flushes because of you releasing that picture. :shock:

Though to be picky it does look like the Disruptors are firing from the sides of the boom not the drive housings. That is the sort of thing that drives the nerd herd to distraction and argument :lol:

Picture comment: See you silly klingons, this is what happens when you build your bridge at the end of a long thin vulnerable boom rather than being sensible like us feds and putting in on the outside at the top of a ruddy great saucer :p
 
Back
Top