BAN Ancients from the ID Gaming War Tourney

[Twin-Linked Aldades]

This may sound odd, but as far as I read the rules on ancients, you can`t even take them in tourneys as their level only works `downwards`...

They have a table that allows the opponent of an ancient to take x ships of that level, splitting nor;ally, but not how many points of war or battle or whatever the ancient itself is worth.
Its assumed they are 2 arma each, but as far as I can see the rules of these beasties and their ancient `level`, they are written for 1 off battles in which you take an ancient and field for example 3 sharlins against them...

edit: have my book near now, p74: "... the table below shows how many ships may be purchased for each ancient ship a fleet faces..." so it`s not like I play a 4 war and I bring an ancient, its I bring an ancient and you can bring 3 war level ships.

 

[Burger]

It also says they are a level above Armageddon. Buying up a level, costs you 2 points of the level below. So you can buy one Ancient for 4 War points.

 

[Reaverman]

I reckon the Trimviron will still kick the crap out of big ships (especially Vorlons and Shadows) but we'll see I guess.

So from my orginial analysis, I am right then?

 

[Twin-Linked Aldades]

It also says they are a level above Armageddon. Buying up a level, costs you 2 points of the level below. So you can buy one Ancient for 4 War points.

Actually it says `a priority level above armageddon` this can either be A as in one, or A as in undefined how far above...

 

[Burger]

It also says they are a level above Armageddon. Buying up a level, costs you 2 points of the level below. So you can buy one Ancient for 4 War points.

Actually it says `a priority level above armageddon` this can either be A as in one, or A as in undefined how far above...

True; but since the downward-splitting is the same as if they are one level above Armageddon, I'd take it to mean A as in one.

 

[Reaverman]

It also says they are a level above Armageddon. Buying up a level, costs you 2 points of the level below. So you can buy one Ancient for 4 War points.

Actually it says `a priority level above armageddon` this can either be A as in one, or A as in undefined how far above...

True; but since the downward-splitting is the same as if they are one level above Armageddon, I'd take it to mean A as in one.

So from my orginial analysis, I am right then?

 

[Hash]

Sorry mate I - while your stats are superb , I disagree with your conclusion (that Ancients are unfair). The little vs large principle still very much holds true.

It really depends on the crits and the tactics of both players - I don't think ANY of the ancients are undefeatable with the right fleet selection and an average amount of luck.

The Ancients will do best against an opponent that takes very few, high PL, ships...against crit hunting swarms, properly squadroned, then all the Ancients are going to have a very HARD and boring time.

We would have tested the Triumviron too but it was late - maybe will try that next week...you want to have a go? I would like to see how my Drazi do against it

 

[Triggy]

If I was trying to abuse the tournament I'd probably try a fleet consisting of 5 Tertius and 10 Prefects.

5 Tertius, 9 Prefect and 3 Corvan you mean

5 Tertius, 9 Prefect, 1 Vorchat and 2 Corvan you mean

Hash - thanks for that, I didn't know that and it's certainly not been said before! I don't mind that ruling at all, just would have liked to know about it beforehand :roll:

If that's the case then big ships become even worse as you can't get away with "not-stacking" weapons crits. With most games I've found it's very rare for a ship more than 1 PL higher than the mission to work effectively. If you were playing a 2 point Armageddon/1 point Ancient game the Ancients would probably work better and more to how they're supposed to - as the Vorlon game shows and the EA game shows how they don't work so well versus swarms.

 

[Burger]

If I was trying to abuse the tournament I'd probably try a fleet consisting of 5 Tertius and 10 Prefects.

5 Tertius, 9 Prefect and 3 Corvan you mean

5 Tertius, 9 Prefect, 1 Vorchat and 2 Corvan you mean

Assume you mean Vorchar, the scouty one?
Nah, I'd take 3 Corvan over a vorchar and 2 corvan. Corvans are going to stay at the back, so their interceptors 1, sentri flight and all-round weapons are better than the vorchar's 6AD F-only weapon IMO.

 

[Ripple]

Really really surprised by the -1 AD crit stacking...

...does that mean that if you lose an arc you if must be a new arc each time? I mean it does say lose an arc, and it has to be an arc you have, and if you already lost it you do not have it so...

Sorry, but that rule really blows. I liked that there were some 'minor' crits on the tables this means you can literally de-weapon a whole ship with a couple of -1 AD hits if the ship relies on multiple weapon lines. Think it really hurts the big ships in particular. <and again, another example of why I think the game Matt plays and the one we play in the field are not all that similar>

Ripple

 

[Burger]

...does that mean that if you lose an arc you if must be a new arc each time? I mean it does say lose an arc, and it has to be an arc you have, and if you already lost it you do not have it so...

No, lost arcs stack as well. That is, you can lose the same arc twice. And +4 to fire all weapons stacks, you'd have to roll +4 twice for each weapon to fire.

 

[emperorpenguin]

...does that mean that if you lose an arc you if must be a new arc each time? I mean it does say lose an arc, and it has to be an arc you have, and if you already lost it you do not have it so...

No, lost arcs stack as well. That is, you can lose the same arc twice. And +4 to fire all weapons stacks, you'd have to roll +4 twice for each weapon to fire.

that isn't correct. You would need to repair the crit twice in order not to suffer it but they don't stack

likewise if you suffer two -4 speed crits you are not at -8 speed, but you need to repair both otherwise you suffer the crit

same applies with -1AD to all weapons

 

[Tank]

EP

All we can say is that Matt said the -1AD stacks

 

[emperorpenguin]

EP

All we can say is that Matt said the -1AD stacks

Matt has "form" on this! :lol: He's always contradicting himself!

 

[Tank]

Yes, yes he does but he did say so we took it as gospel, straight from the horses mouth :lol:

 

[emperorpenguin]

ok I just checked my rulebook and it says "the special effects of criticals are not cumulative"

where is the ambiguity?

 

[Tank]

Matt Said!

 

[H]

Well, I suppose some people feel that as Matt wrote the book he might know what he's talking about, personally, I'm not so sure ;-)

 

[Tank]

Im definately not sure but I dont care, I was having fun trashing a Kiriashic Lordship

 

[emperorpenguin]

Well, I suppose some people feel that as Matt wrote the book he might know what he's talking about, personally, I'm not so sure ;-)

I wonder myself sometimes! :lol: