Armageddon for the Dilgar

Uhm upgrade?

no rather like a shift to the correct lvl.....

If Dilgar were pushed down to the correct lvl, would you consider that an upgrade as well?

No there was a definite accusation at us, that we didnt care about other races. And you just replied that you wont complain about first ones, an consider Dilgar upgrades as minor against the Shadow switcharound.
 
What do you mean Dilgar pushed down? THEY'RE ALREADY AT THE CORRECT LEVEL! As has already been said, this isn't AoG, this is ACTA. Dilgar were released as Mongoose intended. THat's not an issue. The issue is the lack of support for the new races in the new MAJOR expansion.
 
Voronesh said:
No there was a definite accusation at us, that we didnt care about other races. And you just replied that you wont complain about first ones, an consider Dilgar upgrades as minor against the Shadow switcharound.

I'm complaining as a Dilgar player - the Shadows players can, and probably have, spoken for themselves.

As for not caring? It's getting to that point.
 
Woah, guys, peace! :)

We did not release new items for the Dilgar or Drakh, primarily because we like to see new fleets bedding down among gamers first - we like to hear feedback, see what you chaps think, and then press forward.

Rest assured, the Drakh and Dilgar have by no means been forgotten. . .
 
thePirv said:
Both Shadows and Vorlons recieved upgrades to their ships, and are included in Armageddon.

Well "upgrades" is not exactly what I would call it...at least as far as Shadows go.

The Shadow 5pt Raid fleet is far less effective at Tourneys as it once was (admittedly the old tourney Shadow Hunter was a big block of cheese)

The change to the Shadow Scout is admittedly great, it is now the old tourney version making it much more viable.

I would have been very happy if they just changed the Shadow Hunter to Hull 5 and left it as it is but they upped it a PL level...and modified its stats so it's a lot like the Shadow Ship in the old tourney rules...except less hits, less range on its gun and no turret arc!

Sure the Shadow Ship is at Armageddon but its not much tougher than the War version of the Shadow Ship in the old tourney rules, certainly not to merit a whole PL level.

Still they get their fighter for free so I am generally happy but still - they are not all upgrades!

My own whining aside ;) Don't get me wrong though - I agree its a shame that Dilgar and Drakh don't get a look in Armageddon and genuinely hope that will change as Matt said in S&P and later 2nd Edition - sorry guys, guess that sucks big time.

Personally I would like to see at least one choice for every fleet at every PL (with the exception of Ancient maybe!) its not competing for power that makes me want it, it's just having new ships to play with that would be cool, opening up new tactics, letting me try out different combinations of fleets and generally keeping things fresh and new helping to keep my enthusiasm for the game alive.

I appreciate the arguements on canon etc is important for some but personally I couldn't care less. I play ACTA as a starships game, not some kind of fanboy devotion to recreating the B5 series...which I hadn't even seen until I got into ACTA anyway!
 
thePirv said:
What i'm saying is that as a Drakh or Dilgar player, Armageddon simply isn't worth the price tag as our races have been omitted from the book.

So don't buy it. If you aren't only player in your area that's by far best option. I don't buy every single expansion that happens to come around unless it is usefull to me.
 
thePirv said:
What do you mean Dilgar pushed down? THEY'RE ALREADY AT THE CORRECT LEVEL!

Like shadows and vorlons were :wink: Just because they are at level X now doesn't automaticly mean they are at the correct level. Shadows and Vorlons prove that already quite clearly.
 
Hash said:
Personally I would like to see at least one choice for every fleet at every PL (with the exception of Ancient maybe!) its not competing for power that makes me want it, it's just having new ships to play with that would be cool, opening up new tactics, letting me try out different combinations of fleets and generally keeping things fresh and new helping to keep my enthusiasm for the game alive.

You don't need ships in every category for that wish. New options and tactics can be introduced by adding new ships to old category as well. Especially to fleets who aren't overfilled by choises already.
 
Just a few quoted from the last few pages of this thread:

TenaciousB said:
So Drakh and Dilgar ARE the only ones to get nothing in this expansion.

Altogether now: "Discrimination".

katadder said:
my ISA feel discriminated against because they only have 5 ships types (excluding fighters) and everyone else has so many more :)

TenaciousB said:
And I'm not accusing any of you of anything. It's Mongoose that has failed to support 2 of its races with this expansion.

And yet noone has yet mentioned the single most put upon race in all of ACTA history, the Pak'mara

They had one ship and one ship only in the original box set of ACTA, that got removed in the Revised edition, nothing for them in SFOS, nothing in the S&Ps, nothing in Armageddon.

So anytime you think your race is hard done by, think of the Pak'mara

:lol:

LBH
 
I am the aforementioned "rabid" Dilgar player that Davesaint mentioned. My second fleet right now is the Drakh. And I ...

... actually don't mind at all.

Why? Threefold.

Firstly, I really dislike several A changes, so this allows me to more freely ignore the release entirely. Espeically the new point breakdown structure, but that's just me. I just fear the fights against 32 Hermes. Ew! The old breakdown rules (except for the 1 Battle to 1 Raid and 2 Skirmish one -- that was bad) worked pretty well.

Secondly -- because most of the new ships, from the preview on S&P, are garbage. Possibly very annoying to fight if placed in an Assassination mission, but otherwise unremarkable. So it's not like I'm missing out on much.

But finally, and most importantly, what we need to address isn't the number of ships. It's balance.

For my races, what would have been nice in A?

Well, as a Dilgar, I'd have liked to see the Wahant's bolters fixed. Obviously, those ships started with some critical hit that never gets fixed. I'd also like to boost the Garasoch's pathetic launch rate.

As a player, I'd have liked to see the SFoS Targrath downgraded, because it's pretty Havarti. With dill. Or Camembert, double-cream.

As for something sensible as an expansion, I'd suggest Targrath variants. I think it was SNJ who posted -- and I replied to in my very first reply! -- Targrath alterations. A Targrath with an Ochliavita-style weapons layout would be intriguing -- Energy Pulsars, a Couple of Bolter dice or so, anti-fighter capabilities, and a two-die boresight beam would be interesting. Specialized Omelos would also be viable -- Carrier Omelos ... Escort Omelos?

And, of course, we all know that the Mishakur and Mankhat are already wretched War-level ships in general. A few extra hits might have been nice, but aren't compulsory by any means.

As a Drakh player?

I agree. Nothing should be published yet.

Seriously!

Our original assessment of several ships have been in flux. On first view, we thought the Light Raider was godlike and the GEG not worth its weight. We have since swung about 180 degrees, saying that the Carrier (of all things!) is busted, and that we don't mind the Light Raider or the Light Cruiser. Surprising! And this was before the most recent "6" ruling against GEGs, we have to evaluate it all over again. Given that our original assessments of these ships have changed so fundamentally and continue to do so, I'd be very very very scared to introduce a ship that may or may not be broken.

Durrenmatt's "Die Physiker" has a great quote paraphrased and translated -- "What is once discovered cannot be undiscovered." Let's not build anything that takes forever to fix, like the White Star. We can make something broken in a fit of "Get 'er done". Star Fleet Battles did it with scatterpacks and has never been able to take that mistake back; it crippled the game. Let's not build anythng before we think it balanced. I'd much rather wait for my product -- balanced like the number of angels on the head of a pin -- than get something fundamentally wrong. Even if it does mean that my two races have to wait a while for their goodies.

I'm patient.
 
msprange said:
Woah, guys, peace! :)

We did not release new items for the Dilgar or Drakh, primarily because we like to see new fleets bedding down among gamers first - we like to hear feedback, see what you chaps think, and then press forward.

Rest assured, the Drakh and Dilgar have by no means been forgotten. . .

Cheers, Matt. It'll be good to get some variant ships, or even new ships altogether. Much appreciated.

I think my rant switch has been sufficiently put to the "off" position..... for now :lol:

lastbesthope said:
And yet noone has yet mentioned the single most put upon race in all of ACTA history, the Pak'mara

They had one ship and one ship only in the original box set of ACTA, that got removed in the Revised edition, nothing for them in SFOS, nothing in the S&Ps, nothing in Armageddon.

So anytime you think your race is hard done by, think of the Pak'mara

Cripes - didn't even know about the Pak'Ma'Ra being in ACTA! Would be interested in seeing the stats for that, if someone could maybe publish it, or PM it, if it's allowed. :wink:
 
tneva82 said:
Hash said:
Personally I would like to see at least one choice for every fleet at every PL (with the exception of Ancient maybe!) its not competing for power that makes me want it, it's just having new ships to play with that would be cool, opening up new tactics, letting me try out different combinations of fleets and generally keeping things fresh and new helping to keep my enthusiasm for the game alive.

You don't need ships in every category for that wish. New options and tactics can be introduced by adding new ships to old category as well. Especially to fleets who aren't overfilled by choises already.

Sure you can and I know the gaps are meant to represent weaknesses in fleets etc. according to canon. I just wanted to make the point that you do not have to like B5 at all* to enjoy ACTA and wanting at least one choice at every PL (they don't have to be "good" ones :) ) is something I would like to see - just a matter of personal preference.

* (I sort of like it but in a "it was so bad that some of it was good" sort of way - in all honesty I thought some of the plot points were just ridicolous but I don't want to get into that)
 
Hash said:
* (I sort of like it but in a "it was so bad that some of it was good" sort of way - in all honesty I thought some of the plot points were just ridicolous but I don't want to get into that)
*cough*Lorien*cough*
 
TenaciousB said:
lastbesthope said:
And yet noone has yet mentioned the single most put upon race in all of ACTA history, the Pak'mara

They had one ship and one ship only in the original box set of ACTA, that got removed in the Revised edition, nothing for them in SFOS, nothing in the S&Ps, nothing in Armageddon.

So anytime you think your race is hard done by, think of the Pak'mara

Cripes - didn't even know about the Pak'Ma'Ra being in ACTA! Would be interested in seeing the stats for that, if someone could maybe publish it, or PM it, if it's allowed. :wink:

My point exactly, and conveniently I still have my Pre-SFOS shipviewer online:

http://uk.geocities.com/l_b_h@btinternet.com/Pre-SFOS_Static/League/Urik-Hal.htm

Remember those stats are pre Revised and Pre SFOS so they might not be quite inline anymore.

LBH
 
thePirv said:
What do you mean Dilgar pushed down? THEY'RE ALREADY AT THE CORRECT LEVEL! As has already been said, this isn't AoG, this is ACTA. Dilgar were released as Mongoose intended. THat's not an issue. The issue is the lack of support for the new races in the new MAJOR expansion.

We alreay had that discussion a while back.

B5Wars canon; ACTA not.

Even without the B5Wars being canon, no way Dilgar can be as represented in ACTA, the movie in the beginning says otherwise.

Dilgar are well experienced, have afleet centered around battle to represent their tech. EA beats them to pulp. Losing apparently few ships, as evidenced by the absolute arrogance as seen in 'in the beginning'

Now enter the Minbari, fleet centered around war to represent tech, little to no actual combat experience. EA gets beaten to a pulp, not even destroying a single ship. (Discounting Sheridan, but that wasnt a battle). Plus Fleets tend to get better after a war.....
 
EA was beaten so badly because the Minbari's technology is so far ahead of theirs. They could barely see the Minbari ships and even when they got a shot off their inferior weapons did little damage. It was like the modern British Army taking on the Gauls of Ceaser's time...
 
Ahh yes and that effects prioriy lvls by shifting ships up.

So the Minbari fleet is centerd around war, instead of like most other fleets around battle.

EA beats a battlecentered, war hardened fleet.

Then after winning that war, new tech, bigger military and stuff.........

They get beaten alot worse by a fleet centered around war without little to no actual combat experience.

Technology is part of the Priority lvl system already and as such already factored in.

Either Minbari are misrepresented and need a boost up. which in turn would mean further boosts for ancients and first ones....

Or Dilgar need a shift down.

At least if you want correct 'historical' battles. For tourney play, upshifted Dilgar are no problem. As long as you know, that a Mishakur isnt the "real" equal of a Sharlin.......
 
To my mind, Stealth represents the inability of the EA forces to hit the Minbari quite handily, and the firepower the Minbari bring to the table makes mincemeat of the EA fleet, so it's not far off right as far as I'm concerned.

Mind you I've never seen the Dilgar in action so I can't say if they're right or not. From what I've heard they're quite formidable, and "historically" they made a big mess of the League races before Earth got involved. The Vree especially were way ahead of Earth in terms of technology, so I suspect it was more down to tactics and the fortunes of war than any mis-match in technology levels that saw off the Dilgar.
 
Yes you are correect on all accounts BUT

Without stealth the Sharlin would prolly drop to battle. As such it is already factored into the priority lvl system.

And yes the Dilgar were kickass.

But why did EA manage to beat a battle lvl fleet and then managed to get wiped out itself by a war lvl fleet........

That part doesnt make sense.
 
Voronesh said:
Y
But why did EA manage to beat a battle lvl fleet and then managed to get wiped out itself by a war lvl fleet........

There can be many, many reasons. . .

Tactics.

Supply lines.

Fresh forces vs. war weary troops.

Bigger fleets.
 
Back
Top