ACTA Tournaments - Ditch 5pt Raid and try something new...

What level and how many FAPs do you want in tournaments?

  • 1 FAP, ARMAGEDDON OR WAR - Read 1st post for arguement

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 5 FAP, RAID - Classic is still best

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • MIXED - 5pt Skirmish to 5pt Battle

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • OTHER - Please post and explain

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

Burger

Cosmic Mongoose
Reaverman said:
Burger said:
Reaverman said:
It would also mean that fleets that are stronger in skirmish, are not going to take anything but Skirmish. Since who is going to take the other PL's, where you are going to be weaker.
How's that different to the status quo?

Because if you can only split it one per PL, the Narn Players are not going to divide the points over Raid, or Battle. The one Armageddon PL, will be split over skirmish.
Ah yeah, see what you mean, same point Hash made about Raiders. If you can't take 6 Raid points and re-split one of them, the only sensible choice for them would be 6 Battlewagons. You wouldn't be able to take 5 BW's and 2 Strike Carriers.
 

Hash

Mongoose
I have clarified my query in rulemasters (with diagrams!) so am hoping it makes it easier to answer...even if I dont actually like the answer!
 

Burger

Cosmic Mongoose
I can't think of any good reason why it should not be allowed. It adds variety, without adding any overpowering. In fact a selection which "skips" PL's in re-splits has less overall power than one which does not.
 

tneva82

Mongoose
Burger said:
I can't think of any good reason why it should not be allowed. It adds variety, without adding any overpowering. In fact a selection which "skips" PL's in re-splits has less overall power than one which does not.

As long as they avoid free ships syndrome that existed with SFOS splitting...

Ie split ships in certain ways, you can get free ship.
 

Burger

Cosmic Mongoose
tneva82 said:
Burger said:
I can't think of any good reason why it should not be allowed. It adds variety, without adding any overpowering. In fact a selection which "skips" PL's in re-splits has less overall power than one which does not.

As long as they avoid free ships syndrome that existed with SFOS splitting...

Ie split ships in certain ways, you can get free ship.
The Armageddon rules do give you the free ship syndrone, yes. The way of splitting that we are inquiring about, actually gives you the same number but less powerful ships than "standard".
 

Triggy

Mongoose
The biggest problem with "free ship syndrome" was not that you were getting a "free ship" (you only ever got a good deal at best, never an unfairly generous one), the problem was that there was only one way to get this "free ship".

Now with Armageddon all splits are constant so it's not a one off and it's a mechanism to encourage taking a greater variety of ships within a single fleet.
 

Hash

Mongoose
Nidalap said:
Hi Hash mate. When you come up to I.D for the torny We have a few ideas that should keep everyone happy. What we can do is have a natter and come up with something for the next torny after this one. that will give us all time to playtest and iron out any problems.
What do you think?

Cheers,
Barry

Sadly, due to personal (family) reasons, I will no longer be able to make the tourney on the 7th - am sure Reaverman, Burger, Tank and Adam will still be up for it though. Sorry folks - quite frustrating for me is this is the 2nd tourney I will have intended to go to at ID Gaming but have had to drop out off at short notice...enjoy yourselves at any rate and please take lots of pics ;)

Slight tangent aside - the good news is that the official ruling is that that you can do the various splits people have discussed on this thread (see the rulesmasters query) so the 1 Armageddon FAP method should remain quite viable for all races.
 

katadder

Mongoose
one thing i would like to see in tourneys is people not fleeing a patrol ship to stop their opponent get 20 poins or whatever. the 20 points should be given if you destroy or force off the table all an opponents ships. this will actually force people to fight instead of fleeing one ship if its looking bad.
 

Burger

Cosmic Mongoose
katadder said:
one thing i would like to see in tourneys is people not fleeing a patrol ship to stop their opponent get 20 poins or whatever. the 20 points should be given if you destroy or force off the table all an opponents ships. this will actually force people to fight instead of fleeing one ship if its looking bad.
But that is the whole point of a "tactical withdrawl"... why should you be forced to fight a losing battle, rather than retreat?

Surely it is wiser to retreat, and a commander doing so should be given his 3 points credit for doing so. A dumb commander who stays with his 1 Haven to fight 2 G'Quan, should get nothing.

Aux craft, on the other hand... getting 1 flight of furies off the table should not make it 17/3!
 

katadder

Mongoose
tactical retreat should be hyperspace retreat then, sorry but if i'm chasing your ship and it gets off the edge of the table that wouldnt make it safe in theory unless its some huge barrier. if people want a tactical retreat thats how it should be, hyperspace as thats the only way to actually escape.
 

Burger

Cosmic Mongoose
In Annihilation, yes you are assumed to round up and destroy the runners, and you do get 20 points even if the enemy makes a tactical withdrawl. In Call To Arms or Space Superiority, your remaining ships are required to stay and guard the space/objective rather than go off chasing lone escapees. So the 1 Patrol ship would make it home, either by jumping out, running to a jump gate or calling for help from home.
 

Reaverman

Mongoose
katadder said:
tactical retreat should be hyperspace retreat then, sorry but if i'm chasing your ship and it gets off the edge of the table that wouldnt make it safe in theory unless its some huge barrier. if people want a tactical retreat thats how it should be, hyperspace as thats the only way to actually escape.

Thats also why you can only escape of your side of the board, and not anywhere. That secure side of the board, could have another fleet in support.
 

Burger

Cosmic Mongoose
Reaverman said:
katadder said:
tactical retreat should be hyperspace retreat then, sorry but if i'm chasing your ship and it gets off the edge of the table that wouldnt make it safe in theory unless its some huge barrier. if people want a tactical retreat thats how it should be, hyperspace as thats the only way to actually escape.

Thats also why you can only escape of your side of the board, and not anywhere. That secure side of the board, could have another fleet in support.
Only Space Superiority has edge ownership, I believe? The others allow you to withdraw from any edge.
 

Ripple

Mongoose
Sometimes fleeing is all a ship can do, whether off the table edge or into hyperspace should not really matter.

I have plunged into an asteriod field to by me the last turn I needed alive to win with my Vorlon HC. I did not run off the table, I did not send a patrol hull off to hide, but I bet it would have annoyed you just the same because I went for the win instead of just fighting a battle I could only lose militarily.

Tournaments and scenarios have many ways to win, space superiority you almost have to run your patrol hulls off into the boonies to get some easy 5 vp squares and not give up the vps for the ship.

Off topic does anyone know if you can open a jump point in an asteriod field? We figured that is how I would have gotten away but it occured to me there may be some rule against sucking debris into hyperspace. A no littering ordincance.

Ripple
 

Burger

Cosmic Mongoose
Ripple said:
Off topic does anyone know if you can open a jump point in an asteriod field? We figured that is how I would have gotten away but it occured to me there may be some rule against sucking debris into hyperspace. A no littering ordincance.
No rules against it AFAIK...
 

katadder

Mongoose
wish i had known about that in the anihilation game in the last tourney. in the final game my opponent fled his last corvan, i could have had 20 points, which wouldnt have made much differance to me but a narn would have come 3rd instead of another centauri.
 

Hash

Mongoose
DOH!

As I recall, two Centauri and a Narn came tied third but one of the Centauri players won 3rd place award due to higher admiralship points...I know because I was the other Centauri player!

Still, I think the Narn player had higher admiralship points than me too :(
 

Burger

Cosmic Mongoose
Hash you cheater!!!

You already knew the rules after ganking me, I stayed and fought to the last cos I knew I'd get 0 points anyway...
 
Top