Army of Light - no more League? Playtest rules questions.
- Thread starter Greg Smith
- Start date
Methos5000
Mongoose
Da Boss said:
I wholeheartedly agree with this idea, the combined league is too powerful to the point where we didn't allow it in most of our campaigns as the individual league races could pretty much stand on their own.
The league always did seem to argue militarily, would the Abbai willing obey orders of the more barbaric(in their eyes) Drazi, would the Brakiri willing send in ships on costly attack runs while the Vree sit back and bombard safely from a distance. This was always the problem with the combined league, it operated to smoothly...they didnt get along that well.
During the Shadow war the Gaim did not want to come to the aid of the Brakiri because they thought if they stayed out of it the Shadows would ignore them...not exactly a staunch ally.
Maybe leave the combined league as is but you have to choose a primary command fleet and when you want to move a non-primary fleet you make a CQ check to see if the ship obeys your orders or sits there protecting their own self interests.
No. 1 Bear
Mongoose
Lord David the Denied said:
I feel this would be good. Its not like a comlplete mess of a league fleet but it shows others helping out their allies.
CZuschlag's idea has the most merit of other people's ideas to my mind - I don't like a straight "allow up to 1 or 2 FAPs of another fleet" as it doesn't really solve anything. The issue is of fleets filling holes in their lists with one or two ships from other people's fleet lists. You'll still see 8 Strikehawks with 2 Vaarls or 4 White Stars and a Stuteeka, etc.
With my suggestion, each of the ships are still valid but people can't cherry pick so easily as the default selections are standard line-battleships (of varying PLs). This means you can't take so many one-off specialists from each list but you can still take them if they're backed up by "standard" battleships.
With my suggestion, each of the ships are still valid but people can't cherry pick so easily as the default selections are standard line-battleships (of varying PLs). This means you can't take so many one-off specialists from each list but you can still take them if they're backed up by "standard" battleships.
abbot_amaury
Mongoose
The later is an ISA-combo. The AoL-fleet rule doesn't adress imbalanced ISA-fleets but just LONAW-fleets as far as I read the playtest rules. With these playtest rules you still can play 4 White Stars and a Stuteeka (?).Triggy said:
Anyway I see your point and I really like your suggestion (BTW this kind of rule could be a nice idea for every fleet list IMHO. Perhaps even a way to adress the swarm fleet problem.... I remember other great games with similar fleet selection rules: e.g. manowar). On the other hand the '1-2 FAP'-idea would keep the rules plain simple. A thing I like about ACTA.
Cheers,
Hagen
Okay... ditching the league... just plain bad...
I have an extensive collection of league ships, but I would be very hard pressed to do full 5 battle fleets with most of them. So this is nothing but a flat out screw job on the folks who bought the LoNAW fleet.
I didn't like it when it was done to the EA players... don't like now, but at least they got full fleet lists for their trouble. We league players are getting a general screw you... you don't need a scout, or a carrier, or a fleet carrier... or whole PL levels...
Second, aside from the Vree scout and the Gaim... what's broken out there? Both of these were already known to be issue ships/fleets, it's not an issue of the LoNAW, its an issue with these lists/ships.
I don't see anything that the league can do that the major races can't. Everyone has a scout (most good), everyone has carriers (most good) everyone has main line ships that work, everyone has low end ships that work... what exactly does the League do that other fleets can't beside change the shape of their hulls on the line? What special combos are far too tough for most races to kill? Eight Strikehawks and 2 Vaarls doesn't strike me as the most fearsome fleet we've seen at five raid, but maybe I'm wrong.
If the problem is cherry picking, maybe we need to look at the cherries, as they should all be the same as the rest of the fruit shouldn't they? Everything else is just a band aid...
Triggy's idea for the AoL is basically, let me make you take a bad ship for every good ship I let you take. Chris's idea is let me screw you for wanting to have a variety of hulls. In both cases they have whipped out a sledge to tap in a finishing nail. Show us what the problem hulls are, and let's talk about them.
ISDs aren't used enough, and are too arbitrary, to be any kind of solution. If we're going this way, we can put away the Drahk and Dilgar as far as I'm concerned... hell let's do away with scenarios and one offs and go to a strictly historical actions... that's right... we have about ten or fifteen battles to choose from... I mean if we don't see two ships together like in the army of light episodes they obviously can never appear on the table together, allied or otherwise
I'd like a Narn/Drazi list while we demanding screen evidence for each separate alliance. Not sure I want to go through and find all the discussions between league reps and EA/AoL/ISA debriefings to determine which fleets should be allowed together or not... but I guess I'm gonna have we right down to bible quotes level for stuff...
Ripple
I have an extensive collection of league ships, but I would be very hard pressed to do full 5 battle fleets with most of them. So this is nothing but a flat out screw job on the folks who bought the LoNAW fleet.
I didn't like it when it was done to the EA players... don't like now, but at least they got full fleet lists for their trouble. We league players are getting a general screw you... you don't need a scout, or a carrier, or a fleet carrier... or whole PL levels...
Second, aside from the Vree scout and the Gaim... what's broken out there? Both of these were already known to be issue ships/fleets, it's not an issue of the LoNAW, its an issue with these lists/ships.
I don't see anything that the league can do that the major races can't. Everyone has a scout (most good), everyone has carriers (most good) everyone has main line ships that work, everyone has low end ships that work... what exactly does the League do that other fleets can't beside change the shape of their hulls on the line? What special combos are far too tough for most races to kill? Eight Strikehawks and 2 Vaarls doesn't strike me as the most fearsome fleet we've seen at five raid, but maybe I'm wrong.
If the problem is cherry picking, maybe we need to look at the cherries, as they should all be the same as the rest of the fruit shouldn't they? Everything else is just a band aid...
Triggy's idea for the AoL is basically, let me make you take a bad ship for every good ship I let you take. Chris's idea is let me screw you for wanting to have a variety of hulls. In both cases they have whipped out a sledge to tap in a finishing nail. Show us what the problem hulls are, and let's talk about them.
ISDs aren't used enough, and are too arbitrary, to be any kind of solution. If we're going this way, we can put away the Drahk and Dilgar as far as I'm concerned... hell let's do away with scenarios and one offs and go to a strictly historical actions... that's right... we have about ten or fifteen battles to choose from... I mean if we don't see two ships together like in the army of light episodes they obviously can never appear on the table together, allied or otherwise
I'd like a Narn/Drazi list while we demanding screen evidence for each separate alliance. Not sure I want to go through and find all the discussions between league reps and EA/AoL/ISA debriefings to determine which fleets should be allowed together or not... but I guess I'm gonna have we right down to bible quotes level for stuff...
Ripple
Ripple - the problem is not individual "problem" hulls but it's that there are a lot of good choices with all of the negatives negated.
The Drazi are balanced around their distinct lack of non-boresight ships (that's why the Darkhawk is poor compared to other bombardment ships).
The Abbai have no massive beams and no long ranged weapons.
The pak'ma'ra have no Scout.
The Gaim have little "conventional" firepower.
Even the big races have these limitations:
Narn have poor dogfighting fighters.
Centauri have short ranges.
ISA have a reliance on traits and few fighters.
Basically each fleet is designed to have strengths and weaknesses. Now, I like that League fleets are possible, but I want to limit the "weakness-negating" (which can be cherry picking but isn't normally - just see the Drazi picks, anything non-boresight is a great addition). By breaking these fleets into League, AoL and ISA you give them all different feels. It's how we achieve a central balance that is at the heart of the matter. It may be through limiting selections, it may be through imposing penalties, there are many options. However, I really like the concept of a League until 2259, AoL until 2261 and ISA afterwards, each with their own issues and options. How about this for options:
League - players may make selections from Abbai, Brakiri, Drazi, Gaim, Ipsha, Lumati, pak'ma'ra, Raiders, Vree (following ISDs from 2259 or before) with -1 initiative penalty for every ship taken that is not from the "parent" fleet list.
Army of Light - players have the core of ships listed (with the addition of the Warbird, Strikehawk and Sky Serpent but removing the Centauri options) and a basic initiative of +0. For every "specialist" ship taken outside of this list, you get a initiative penalty of -1. Also, players must spend complete FAPs on ships from each fleet.
Interstellar Alliance - players pick their fleet from the main ISA fleet list. In addition they may spend 1 FAP (not part of one) on ships from outside this list (from their current list of options) at an initiative penalty of -2.
I realise these limitations are a lot more lax than those previously suggested. CZuschlag in particular, are they enough?
The Drazi are balanced around their distinct lack of non-boresight ships (that's why the Darkhawk is poor compared to other bombardment ships).
The Abbai have no massive beams and no long ranged weapons.
The pak'ma'ra have no Scout.
The Gaim have little "conventional" firepower.
Even the big races have these limitations:
Narn have poor dogfighting fighters.
Centauri have short ranges.
ISA have a reliance on traits and few fighters.
Basically each fleet is designed to have strengths and weaknesses. Now, I like that League fleets are possible, but I want to limit the "weakness-negating" (which can be cherry picking but isn't normally - just see the Drazi picks, anything non-boresight is a great addition). By breaking these fleets into League, AoL and ISA you give them all different feels. It's how we achieve a central balance that is at the heart of the matter. It may be through limiting selections, it may be through imposing penalties, there are many options. However, I really like the concept of a League until 2259, AoL until 2261 and ISA afterwards, each with their own issues and options. How about this for options:
League - players may make selections from Abbai, Brakiri, Drazi, Gaim, Ipsha, Lumati, pak'ma'ra, Raiders, Vree (following ISDs from 2259 or before) with -1 initiative penalty for every ship taken that is not from the "parent" fleet list.
Army of Light - players have the core of ships listed (with the addition of the Warbird, Strikehawk and Sky Serpent but removing the Centauri options) and a basic initiative of +0. For every "specialist" ship taken outside of this list, you get a initiative penalty of -1. Also, players must spend complete FAPs on ships from each fleet.
Interstellar Alliance - players pick their fleet from the main ISA fleet list. In addition they may spend 1 FAP (not part of one) on ships from outside this list (from their current list of options) at an initiative penalty of -2.
I realise these limitations are a lot more lax than those previously suggested. CZuschlag in particular, are they enough?
CZuschlag
Mongoose
I threw out general numbers; I wasn't being particularly specific. I think that this is something to start, although AoL might get a significantly better init bonus --- on the order of +2 to +3 to compensate for the much smaller fleet listing. Not sure --- I have a lot of work to think on it.
Makes sense.
I think part of this has got to be with an eye to the future. There are likely to be many, many more League options created, and the balance will eventually get daunting. I'm expecting Hyach, Cascor, a full Ipsha listing ... and that just gets us to the end of our current licence agreement. After that, more worlds to explore.
By the way ....
This is the forums's 100000th post.
Board, congratulations on the 100000th post for A Call to Arms! Smartly done!
Makes sense.
I think part of this has got to be with an eye to the future. There are likely to be many, many more League options created, and the balance will eventually get daunting. I'm expecting Hyach, Cascor, a full Ipsha listing ... and that just gets us to the end of our current licence agreement. After that, more worlds to explore.
By the way ....
This is the forums's 100000th post.
Board, congratulations on the 100000th post for A Call to Arms! Smartly done!
I propose that the League of Non-Aligned Worlds not be dropped from ACTA.
What I propose instead, is the creation of a series of league time frames, where certain lists become legal. During the Dilgar War, the League came together to fight against one enemy, and a specific assortment of ships was available. During the Shadow War, the League as the Army of Light, was reifnorced by the foundation that would become the Interstellar Alliance. Once the Interstellar Alliance was born, the Army of Light and the League of Non-Aligned Worlds were no longer used titles.
With this in mind, player wanting to play ISD specific lists would have two options. A hybrid Army of Light version of the League, which allows White Stars and a pre-Crusade era Interstellar Alliance variant of ships in use just before the ISA was officially founded, and immediatly following that date, up until the Crusade era ships came into service.
There is no reason to tell people they can no longer play the League, and creating this overly restrictive Army of Light variant seems to confuse the issue. Is it ISA? Is it the league? Why are there Centauri ships there? The Centauri were on the Shadows side during the Army of Lights creation and through to the end of the Shadow War.
Please do not create a new list, that makes a much loved one die. Make restrictions that keeps you from taking too many craft, to limit the threat of swarms being overpowered. Balance larger ships so that their combined values equal what you'd get in smaller ships, so that people are encouraged to field those canonical ships.
Don't make this some expanded universe garbage where the ships we remember and love are not worth fielding.
This concludes my proposal.
What I propose instead, is the creation of a series of league time frames, where certain lists become legal. During the Dilgar War, the League came together to fight against one enemy, and a specific assortment of ships was available. During the Shadow War, the League as the Army of Light, was reifnorced by the foundation that would become the Interstellar Alliance. Once the Interstellar Alliance was born, the Army of Light and the League of Non-Aligned Worlds were no longer used titles.
With this in mind, player wanting to play ISD specific lists would have two options. A hybrid Army of Light version of the League, which allows White Stars and a pre-Crusade era Interstellar Alliance variant of ships in use just before the ISA was officially founded, and immediatly following that date, up until the Crusade era ships came into service.
There is no reason to tell people they can no longer play the League, and creating this overly restrictive Army of Light variant seems to confuse the issue. Is it ISA? Is it the league? Why are there Centauri ships there? The Centauri were on the Shadows side during the Army of Lights creation and through to the end of the Shadow War.
Please do not create a new list, that makes a much loved one die. Make restrictions that keeps you from taking too many craft, to limit the threat of swarms being overpowered. Balance larger ships so that their combined values equal what you'd get in smaller ships, so that people are encouraged to field those canonical ships.
Don't make this some expanded universe garbage where the ships we remember and love are not worth fielding.
This concludes my proposal.
eldiablito
Mongoose
Hindsight said:
While I agree with your proposal, I do want to pick a specific nit. The Centauri was apart of the initial ISA. Ambassador Molari signed the initial documents and became one of the founders that later became what we know today as the ISA. Now, this agreement did not last long... By the end of the 4th season and much of the 5th season, the Drakh started using Vorchans and Primus class ships to attack weaker nations of the League. This was the eventual reason why the Centauri left the ISA and was in turn attacked by the combined might of what we would think of as the League and the Whitestar fleet.
Also, to claim that the Centauri were allies of the Shadows is a little harsh. If you recall, the Centauri agreed to the early Shadow terms in exchange to ease their "Narn difficulties". I do not believe that the Centauri ever fought WITH the Shadows, nor did they go on the offensive against other races beyond the Narn. NOTE: Once the Shadow War was over, there was that time where the Centauri were puppets to the Drakh.
I think that the rationale behind putting the Centauri in the Army of Light was that the era in which the AoL existed was very narrow and sort of bridges the gap between the majority of the Shadow War and the dawn of President Sheridan's first term in office.
In any case, I agree, we cannot get rid of the League of Non-Aligned Worlds. Perhaps, the League could become more like this Army of Light; a specific list of ship hulls that put it squarely in the time frame of the Dilgar War through the Shadow War (afterwards, the League ships become members of the ISA and the Army of Light). By removing the EA, ISA, Narn, Centauri and expanding the range of available ships, we could still keep the League a balanced fleet without too many problems... (keeping my fingers crossed).
The Centauri Government was having its strings pulled by the Shadows, and Mr. Morden. For the Centauri to bring arms against another nation, it would mean that the government approved the action, and between the order to attack, and when that information reached the Shadow Agents on the Centauri Homeworld, the Shadows would have put preshure on the relevant people to deny the military aid.
I do not dispute that the Centauri were part of the initial ISA, thus it satisfies a small chunk of the fluff in that small time frame, but even in Season 5, Mollari was pissing everyone off all over again, and I imagine representing that in the game system can be tough, so I just reckon they were out of the ISA longer than they were a part of it, but I concede the point for the ISA, but not the Army of Light.
If not directly allied with the Shadows, the Centauri military would have been suppressed by the Shadows which would prevent it from participating in Army of Light activities, given the limited window in which the army of light existed. Since the Army of Light was based on Babylon 5, and they did not trust Mollari to even ask for aid, they would not have had an in with the Centauri military to even get that support, suppressed or not.
I do not dispute that the Centauri were part of the initial ISA, thus it satisfies a small chunk of the fluff in that small time frame, but even in Season 5, Mollari was pissing everyone off all over again, and I imagine representing that in the game system can be tough, so I just reckon they were out of the ISA longer than they were a part of it, but I concede the point for the ISA, but not the Army of Light.
If not directly allied with the Shadows, the Centauri military would have been suppressed by the Shadows which would prevent it from participating in Army of Light activities, given the limited window in which the army of light existed. Since the Army of Light was based on Babylon 5, and they did not trust Mollari to even ask for aid, they would not have had an in with the Centauri military to even get that support, suppressed or not.
l33tpenguin
Mongoose
A more 'accurate' way of presenting this hodge podge of fleet lists would be 'fleet in service dates'
xxxx-2261 - League of non alligned worlds - the original league fleet list
2260-2261 - Army of light - Mixed list of league, earth, narn and minbari ships, including white stars
2262+ - Interstellar Alliance fleet list, with former league races as allies.
The league was officially disbanded with the formation of the ISA, so technically, a league/ISA battle could never take place. The league also co-existed with the army of light. It wasn't until after the liberation of earth by the army of light did the league get disbanded.
If I'm wrong, feel free to correct me.
xxxx-2261 - League of non alligned worlds - the original league fleet list
2260-2261 - Army of light - Mixed list of league, earth, narn and minbari ships, including white stars
2262+ - Interstellar Alliance fleet list, with former league races as allies.
The league was officially disbanded with the formation of the ISA, so technically, a league/ISA battle could never take place. The league also co-existed with the army of light. It wasn't until after the liberation of earth by the army of light did the league get disbanded.
If I'm wrong, feel free to correct me.
l33tpenguin said:
True, but as in any game a lot of matchups would never occur such as early EA vs Crusade era EA or Dilgar vs ISA. I don't think that rationale is appropriate for prohibiting it. I agree with the actual fleet lists being constructed using timelines maybe, but this is also a game and that has to factor in as well.
Cheers, Gary
CZuschlag
Mongoose
While I understad the timeline-based approach being cited above, I don't think it's addressing Triggy's long-range concerns.
Consider each of the following steps of the proof and see if you disagree.
Lemma 1: If all ships A ... N are all balanced, a fleet list of any subset of ships cannot be more powerful than a fleet list of all ships.
Proof: Consider fleet lists A....M, and A.....N. For every fleet [see note at the bottom].
--------------------------------
Mould-In-Existence Contention: Any miniature made for Babylon 5 Warms will eventually be released for A Call to Arms.
Justification: The only fleets to be released with entirely new moulds in the history of A Call to Arms are the Drakh and the League member Gaim. This only occurred after every other race with a full-sized miniature (with one exception, Pak'ma'ra, just after the Drakh), had made its way to production.
The exceptions to this contention in full scale are the Resh'kas'su carrier, the Thor'not'ak Plasma Cruiser and the Gaim Moas/Markab Shafab.
----------------------------
Lemma 2: The League fleet list will grow faster than any other fleet list in the next 2 years.
Proof: With the expansion of casting to support A Call to Arms with Fleet Action miniatures, there are two more races available for casting immediately, the Cascor and Hyach. These can be expected to be the next released races. By the Mould-In-Existence contention, they will be the next major miniature release.
Cascor and Hyach are members of LONAW by multiple canon sources, including onscreen.
There are no other iniatures in fleet action that have not been released as full-size miniatures in A Call to Arms.
-------------------------------
Corrollary 1: Given that no other rule is changed and all future released ships are balanced, League will grow more powerful over time faster than any other nationality.
Proof: Falls directly from Lemmas 1, 2, and the Mould-In-Existence Contention. The LONAW fleet list will grow more than anyone elses (Lemma 2). If no other ruling changes, all other races will only grow more powerful by small amounts; at most, by variants and perhaps an individual hull or two. LONAW will grow by entire races. Therefore, by Lemma 1, it will become more powerful. It grows more powerful faster than any other force due by Lemma 2.
-------------------------------
Theorem 1 (Imbalance of National League Theorem): It is impossible to create perfect balance between any League fleet and any National League fleet of national units.
Proof: For every National League Fleet of ships A...J , there exists an identical League Fleet A...J. However, the Full League fleet listing contains each National League fleet listing as a whole subset of A....N. We then apply Lemma 1 to achieve our result.
-------------------------------
Theorem 2 (League Evolution Theorem): Given the current restrictions, it is impossible to balance LONAW now and LONAW in the future unless other balance flaws are introduced.
Proof: We prove by contradiction. Suppose that both conditions are true. If the LONAW is balanced now, its winning percentage against the Narn will be 0.50. Similarly, if it is balanced in the future, its winning percentage there will also be 0.50.
By Lemma 1, LONAW will become more powerful over time. Therefore, the Narn must grow more powerful in time as well. If all future units are balanced correctly, the only way for this to occur is rule change or by expanding the Narn fleet listing at the same rate as the LONAW fleet listing. However, this directly contradicts Corrollary 1. Therefore, our original assertion cannot be true.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So, what can we do to stop these two results?
Fundamentally said, there has to be a non-campaign over-the-board reason to take a national list over a LONAW list. If the National lists are balanced, that means you have to take away from LONAW somewhere. The current proposal is a system of exception caps and intitiative bonuses and penalties. Other ideas that have less impact on already-purchased mini armies is, of course, strongly preferred.
Note: Yes, I know, I have to fill in Lemma 1, but it's getting late and I sort of have the proof in my head. I'll fill it in tomorrow. Sorry.
Consider each of the following steps of the proof and see if you disagree.
Lemma 1: If all ships A ... N are all balanced, a fleet list of any subset of ships cannot be more powerful than a fleet list of all ships.
Proof: Consider fleet lists A....M, and A.....N. For every fleet [see note at the bottom].
--------------------------------
Mould-In-Existence Contention: Any miniature made for Babylon 5 Warms will eventually be released for A Call to Arms.
Justification: The only fleets to be released with entirely new moulds in the history of A Call to Arms are the Drakh and the League member Gaim. This only occurred after every other race with a full-sized miniature (with one exception, Pak'ma'ra, just after the Drakh), had made its way to production.
The exceptions to this contention in full scale are the Resh'kas'su carrier, the Thor'not'ak Plasma Cruiser and the Gaim Moas/Markab Shafab.
----------------------------
Lemma 2: The League fleet list will grow faster than any other fleet list in the next 2 years.
Proof: With the expansion of casting to support A Call to Arms with Fleet Action miniatures, there are two more races available for casting immediately, the Cascor and Hyach. These can be expected to be the next released races. By the Mould-In-Existence contention, they will be the next major miniature release.
Cascor and Hyach are members of LONAW by multiple canon sources, including onscreen.
There are no other iniatures in fleet action that have not been released as full-size miniatures in A Call to Arms.
-------------------------------
Corrollary 1: Given that no other rule is changed and all future released ships are balanced, League will grow more powerful over time faster than any other nationality.
Proof: Falls directly from Lemmas 1, 2, and the Mould-In-Existence Contention. The LONAW fleet list will grow more than anyone elses (Lemma 2). If no other ruling changes, all other races will only grow more powerful by small amounts; at most, by variants and perhaps an individual hull or two. LONAW will grow by entire races. Therefore, by Lemma 1, it will become more powerful. It grows more powerful faster than any other force due by Lemma 2.
-------------------------------
Theorem 1 (Imbalance of National League Theorem): It is impossible to create perfect balance between any League fleet and any National League fleet of national units.
Proof: For every National League Fleet of ships A...J , there exists an identical League Fleet A...J. However, the Full League fleet listing contains each National League fleet listing as a whole subset of A....N. We then apply Lemma 1 to achieve our result.
-------------------------------
Theorem 2 (League Evolution Theorem): Given the current restrictions, it is impossible to balance LONAW now and LONAW in the future unless other balance flaws are introduced.
Proof: We prove by contradiction. Suppose that both conditions are true. If the LONAW is balanced now, its winning percentage against the Narn will be 0.50. Similarly, if it is balanced in the future, its winning percentage there will also be 0.50.
By Lemma 1, LONAW will become more powerful over time. Therefore, the Narn must grow more powerful in time as well. If all future units are balanced correctly, the only way for this to occur is rule change or by expanding the Narn fleet listing at the same rate as the LONAW fleet listing. However, this directly contradicts Corrollary 1. Therefore, our original assertion cannot be true.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So, what can we do to stop these two results?
Fundamentally said, there has to be a non-campaign over-the-board reason to take a national list over a LONAW list. If the National lists are balanced, that means you have to take away from LONAW somewhere. The current proposal is a system of exception caps and intitiative bonuses and penalties. Other ideas that have less impact on already-purchased mini armies is, of course, strongly preferred.
Note: Yes, I know, I have to fill in Lemma 1, but it's getting late and I sort of have the proof in my head. I'll fill it in tomorrow. Sorry.
CZuschlag - for those people out there who understand the logic of that argument (including me) that is very clearly and succinctly expressed. This is exactly my concern as we have a (roughly) balanced set of individual League races and the League/ISA/AoL fleets take these lists and add variety whilst losing very little or nothing at all.
It's not choice I want to reduce, I want to ensure that with that extra choice comes penalties to match so that the fleets in the game remain balanced.
It's not choice I want to reduce, I want to ensure that with that extra choice comes penalties to match so that the fleets in the game remain balanced.
1. Asserting that because one fleet is not expanding (Narn) is proof that another fleet that is expanding will make the latter more powerful overall in the future is flawed because a) you don't know the specifics of how the expansion will happen and b) you don't know what mitigating factors will be built into the additions to compensate.
2. Asserting that the two other League races will be added anytime in the near future is pure conjecture. Matt has specifically stated that Iron Wind has to show that it can make a profit by approximately this time next year or the license may not be renewed anyway. There is no reason to expect new miniatures for these races anytime soon so using that as justification to prove your point is also flawed.
3. Suggesting that the League fleets will become more powerful over the next couple years is hypothesis only. Some may, others may not. The end result if they are *all* balanced appropriately is that your Lemma 1 is proven correct and all the current panic-spawned problem fixing ends up nothing more than the same thing that occurred with Y2K: a lot of work expended for something that never came to pass.
4. Triggy IMO is suffering from "OMG! What is going to happen next?" syndrome. Does the League fleet work *now*? The answer to that is obviously yes. He is proposing dropping them now because they *might* become more powerful in time. IYAM he is trying to do so at the wrong moment because none of those factors have come into play yet. Better to wait till ACtA 3rd edition than try and deal with a potentiality that may never occur through a simple expansion to the current game.
Sorry, all this perambulating seems like nothing but smoke & mirrors. Someone sees a potential problem in the future so they want to make a fix now when none of the conditions for the problem exist in any real context. This results in numerous undesirable consequences such as invalidating people's miniature collections, irritating players who happen to use and like the existing ruleset, and causing a lot of extra work for no real long-term gain. Sorry, but I happen to agree with the premise that if you fix the few problem ships such as the Vree Scout, you fix any potential problems with the League fleet idea and none of the aforementioned negative side-effects come to pass.
All that said, I have no doubt that such change will happen anyway and simply because certain people want it to. However, IYAM the negatives far outweigh any potential positive result and odds are it will be more of a step backwards than forward with regard to the game's progression. JMO though.
Cheers, Gary
2. Asserting that the two other League races will be added anytime in the near future is pure conjecture. Matt has specifically stated that Iron Wind has to show that it can make a profit by approximately this time next year or the license may not be renewed anyway. There is no reason to expect new miniatures for these races anytime soon so using that as justification to prove your point is also flawed.
3. Suggesting that the League fleets will become more powerful over the next couple years is hypothesis only. Some may, others may not. The end result if they are *all* balanced appropriately is that your Lemma 1 is proven correct and all the current panic-spawned problem fixing ends up nothing more than the same thing that occurred with Y2K: a lot of work expended for something that never came to pass.
4. Triggy IMO is suffering from "OMG! What is going to happen next?" syndrome. Does the League fleet work *now*? The answer to that is obviously yes. He is proposing dropping them now because they *might* become more powerful in time. IYAM he is trying to do so at the wrong moment because none of those factors have come into play yet. Better to wait till ACtA 3rd edition than try and deal with a potentiality that may never occur through a simple expansion to the current game.
Sorry, all this perambulating seems like nothing but smoke & mirrors. Someone sees a potential problem in the future so they want to make a fix now when none of the conditions for the problem exist in any real context. This results in numerous undesirable consequences such as invalidating people's miniature collections, irritating players who happen to use and like the existing ruleset, and causing a lot of extra work for no real long-term gain. Sorry, but I happen to agree with the premise that if you fix the few problem ships such as the Vree Scout, you fix any potential problems with the League fleet idea and none of the aforementioned negative side-effects come to pass.
All that said, I have no doubt that such change will happen anyway and simply because certain people want it to. However, IYAM the negatives far outweigh any potential positive result and odds are it will be more of a step backwards than forward with regard to the game's progression. JMO though.
Cheers, Gary
Expansions for the League will either be more ships or more fleets. There aren't any mitigating rules there for the future and there haven't been in the past. The League races are balanced through playtesting with the vast majority of tests being for individual fleet lists.silashand said:
We have had playtest rules for the further League races amongst other things already... it's only a matter of time before they come out regardless of miniatures!silashand said:
As you say, if.silashand said:
I disagree with your "obvious" answer and would say no, even without any further expansion. I think they are overpowered, as particularly shown by at tournaments the mixed League fleets consistantly outperforming single-race fleets. The number of times I've seen a Drazi fleet on its own is never but with a few Vree Vaarl allies... let's just say most of the time.silashand said:
If you check my last suggestions they are not very different to the current League and ISA rules and they certainly allow players to keep their fleets. In the League I actually see very few individually overpowered ships. Within the Vree list the Vaarl is actually pretty balanced due to the lack of weaponry without Super AP or Twin-Linked, however in other fleets it is a lot, lot more effective.silashand said:
If you check the opinions on this thread they are very mixed and the debate over League fleets has already been around for a while.
If rules come out for the other races, all well and good. That is still no justification for dropping the League or nerfing it as some of the suggestions have said. If all fleets manage to be balanced, then a combined League fleet will also be. That such a fleet can mitigate its weaknesses through cooperation with the other members is IMO appropriate, normal and to be expected. Some fleets are already there, i.e. the ISA. The claim that an overreliance on traits is a "weakness" per se is based on my experience incorrect.
And yet you *do* see single race fleets of Vree, Paks and Gaim which suggests it is not the League which is overpowered, but that the main other three races are underpowered. That fact alone would indicate that the position that the League itself is broken is a falacy. Also, Mixed League fleets outperforming *some* of their constituent member fleets is not evidence that they are broken in any context. If they win a disporportionate number of events against *all* races, then maybe.
As to the "there has been discussion about the league for some time," the same can be said of all fleets. Nearly every fleet out there (except maybe raiders) has been called broken by someone at one point or another, and all those armchair admirals have reams and reams of anecdotal evidence to support them. With the exception of a few key ships as I've already mentioned, there is precious little actual evidence for support though.
As you've noticed, I don't mind the idea of a League-->AoL-->ISA progression as it makes the most sense as per the canon. However, I still think most of the perceived problems with the League are just that. Forest for the trees and all that.
Cheers, Gary
Triggy said:
And yet you *do* see single race fleets of Vree, Paks and Gaim which suggests it is not the League which is overpowered, but that the main other three races are underpowered. That fact alone would indicate that the position that the League itself is broken is a falacy. Also, Mixed League fleets outperforming *some* of their constituent member fleets is not evidence that they are broken in any context. If they win a disporportionate number of events against *all* races, then maybe.
As to the "there has been discussion about the league for some time," the same can be said of all fleets. Nearly every fleet out there (except maybe raiders) has been called broken by someone at one point or another, and all those armchair admirals have reams and reams of anecdotal evidence to support them. With the exception of a few key ships as I've already mentioned, there is precious little actual evidence for support though.
As you've noticed, I don't mind the idea of a League-->AoL-->ISA progression as it makes the most sense as per the canon. However, I still think most of the perceived problems with the League are just that. Forest for the trees and all that.
Cheers, Gary
