Armageddon and the old Tourney list

[H]

so then, I recall being told that the tourney list helped address some problems, then of course said list is superceeded by the armageddon book. now look at the ship changes in the tourney list, and see how many made it to armageddon. . . yup, we now are back to the old stupidly bad Avioki, the G'Quan puts out the same beam power as a centauri or narn Skirmnish ship, and a number of other ships still had issues that needed adressing.
So now we aren't supposed to use the tourney list, and only ancients and EA got anything worth mentioning from Armegeddon for their existing Fleet list. ok, I Know, I Know, EA get the loving, one thing I loved B5 for was that the "home" fleet was not the best, it had issues and could get a kicking, but I just see the warhammer 40k Marines favouritism taking over. EA players will now scream that their fleet got split into 3 era's... technically, people should have been using In service dates anyway, so all fleets kind of have an Era. I'm sure I will receive some negative comments, but i feel hugely dissapointed with armegeddon.

 

[JayRaider]

I agree with you 100%.
Its a load of spoo. :evil:

 

[Slightly Norse John]

I think EA got kicked much harder by the changes in Armageddon than most people realise yet.
The Saggy is dead wrong- that much, true; but what else is there in the fleet along with it? Hyperions (who should not have double damage lasers before 2245), Olympii, Artemises, erm...
Ther closest they now have to a top line heavy warship is the Marathon. The Shadow Omega's barely had its stats changed, the Warlock is not worth it's new PL- superb at War, not enough for Armageddon- and the Nemesis isn't worth it, period.
There's very little missile firepower in the Crusade era EA- it's Hermes, Apollo. They're extrmely short of light, nimble warships- none of the individual EA fleets, changes and all, are as capable as the SFoS list.
I do not mourn the demise of the Tournament list. I genuinely don't think of myself as a powergamer, but, well, krieg ist krieg. I try to pick the best from my fleet list, I expect my opponent to do the same, then I expect both of us to do our legitimate best to win. I'm happy to see the SFoS fleet lists back unchallenged, because it always felt like a strained, artificial attempt at balance.
Individual ships were an improvement, and my copy of SFoS is liberally daubed with pencilled errata, like the Avioki. And no, there's no Centauri skirmisher with 3AD range 30" double super AP beam. Don't start giving me design ideas.

 

[TenaciousB]

Hiff, again you are 100% spot on.

Mngoose should have just put more effort into V2 instead of releasing Armageddon.

 

[Lord David the Denied]

The only thing I miss from the tourney list is a Demos worth taking. It needs at least another 8 hit points and 2" of speed to be worthy of raid PL. Firepower is nice but worth the guns of two Vorchans, but I'd say a Centurion or Dargan is worth two Vorchans.

Why do we have ships in the lists that are literally too weak to use? Why wasn't it cleaned up in Armageddon?

 

[JayRaider]

I will be buying Arma for the rules updates etc.
However i've no interest in playing Crusade era, therefore no interest in the ships.
I am eagerly awaiting the Ancient boxset, although i doubt i'll ever use them.
Always wanted those models.

PS Mongoose is infamous for its larger ship models. So who had the bright idea, "Hey lets build even bigger ships!" .
Funny indeed. :evil:

PS i know one guy who has given up ACTA cause of the Sagi and Mongooses lack of listening to forum testers.

 

[H]

The only thing I miss from the tourney list is a Demos worth taking. It needs at least another 8 hit points and 2" of speed to be worthy of raid PL. Firepower is nice but worth the guns of two Vorchans, but I'd say a Centurion or Dargan is worth two Vorchans.

Why do we have ships in the lists that are literally too weak to use? Why wasn't it cleaned up in Armageddon?

Well David, the Centauri player, Adam, yesterday battered everyone with his 5 point raid fleet, I think he dropped 3 points out of 60, so the Centauri seem to be ok i guess.... this doesn't diminish your point, I just thought I would mention it. Against my fleet, he brought somewhere in the region of 20 dice of beams, to my 4 dice!! eep!!

 

[Ripple]

Sadly the Centauri defenders do not believe that buckets of beam dice is effective. The say its 'one trick' but fail to mention it is the only trick in the game that does not have a direct counter. Oh well...

Agree Arm. is crap. They basically just threw out all the testing of the tourney list, all the balance that was achieved. There is a movement in some game companies right now to just make everything huge, overpowered and unbalanced. The theory goes if everyone is unbalanced it will all work out. Course that is crap too, but seems to be the direction Mongoose is going.

I even feel that the new Vorlons/Shadows are no improvement over the tourney models.

This is what the playtesters kept telling us would settle all the issues. Well I guess it did, same old crap...and Mongoose has no interest in creating balance. Really upsets me as I was pushing hard for the company, especially when the tourney list came out. I could just point and say see, they have made great strides in balancing things out and understand the problems, just wait for Arm.

Ripple

 

[prelude_to_war]

The mongoose business model? Release a book every year, so the next one would have updated stats for Narn/Centauri? Then League, Dilgar, etc.?

Never a perfect system, just incessant updates. Hm...

 

[Celisasu]

So.....when do we get an online tournament list so we can play balanced games? :wink:

 

[Target]

I was really hoping for more balance, looks like our will convert the stats to d12's. This has worked well for us so far just a pain and take a little to get use. Sooner we have a points system the better.

 

[TenaciousB]

Does anyone have "homebrew" sets of rules for acta, with variations of rule sets and ship stats? Be interested in seeing those if it turned out they were more balanced.

 

[Target]

We have added extra SA, converted to d12's Primus is hull 11, G'Quan 12, things like that it's mainly on bits of paper lying round one day we type them up but still modding at the moment. Might post them all up one day just need time. Stupid work always getting in the way of gaming and beer drinking.

 

[TenaciousB]

Yeah, i hear that! Work always gets in the way of the fun stuff!

Would definitely be interested in seeing the stuff when its typed up, dude.

 

[Locutus9956]

Some parts may be a little dissapointing but by and large I dont think theres any huge issues with Armageddon:

To adress a few points, sure the Avioki isnt as good as the tourney varient but as we're back to SFoS lists you can now take KALIVAS.

The Centauri lose a couple of little bits but get back there 4AD sullusts etc.

The G'Quan loses its extra AD of lasers but it gets some bite back in its EMines (and gets varient emines back). (though to whoever said the centauri dont have a skirmisher with the same beam firepower isnt looking very hard I suspect as the sullust has 4AD of DD SAP beams that arent even boresighted, sure theyre 5" shorter but the sullust is faster and not boresighted so this is hardly a big deal...)

 

[Goldritter]

Does anyone have "homebrew" sets of rules for acta, with variations of rule sets and ship stats? Be interested in seeing those if it turned out they were more balanced.

I´ve tried to convert the (old) RPG ship stats into the Silhouette System.
I´ve many ships in the beta phase, but has nobody to test them.
So I cant say how good/bad the conversion was.

 

[H]

well, glad to see I am not alone, and sure the kaliva is a worthy pick, but the Avioki SHOULD be harder, it's supposed to be one of the more powerful ships in the league, all it needs is AP on it's beam, and voila! you have a much scarier ship, which isn't really overbalanced. Overall, I think armageddon and the scrapping completely of the allegedly balanced ships in the tourney pack was a step backwards for the game. I suspect a lot of house rules will be coming in now, eg Warlock remains with SFOS stats as a war pick amongst others.

 

[Goldritter]

(...), eg Warlock remains with SFOS stats as a war pick amongst others.

For me it´s Warlock with the tournamets stats.
I don´t like the 4 AD for his main Weapon. Even 4 AD TD does less damage as 6 AD DD.
The rest on Warlock is good for a War Level Ship.

 

[Burger]

4 AD TD does less damage as 6 AD DD.

On average, no it doesn't.

 

[Goldritter]

O.K I´not so good in posibility mathematic, so there can be mistakes.

But if I use 4 AD with SAP I have on average 2 Hits (2 with 4+, 0 with 5+) and so with TD 6 Damage/Crew.

With 6 AD I have on average 4 hits (3 with 4+, 1 with 5+) and with DD 8 Damage/Crew.

And the games I play give me right. (But it can be, that I roll below the average average .)