Campaigns - random mayhem

[Hash]

One thing that I *very* much hope being addressed in V2 is campaign play.

At the moment - there are many scenarios that are blatantly unfair (Ambush and Blockade run being two).

In addition it seems incredibly grating when a hard one strategic target is lost in a patrol level scenario - all down to luck in a dice game? Well maybe but it would be really great if ACTA V2 could interject a greater strategic element to campaigns...

There have been several suggestions over the past year suggesting strategic type campaigns and of course it something you can house rule so I'm not that bothered about it being in ACTA V2 but please, please pay attention to the campaign random tables - In the 7 or 8 turns we had of our last campaign I got fed up of basically missing a go because the battle I rolled up I either couldn't field anything or it was so heavily stacked against me the only sensible thing to do was concede.

Sorry if this sounds like a rant, I just want to make sure ACTA V2 isn't simply some tweaked and some new fleet lists but a comprehensive overhaul of all the niggling things in a what otherwise is a cracking set of rules.

 

[katadder]

i do see where you are coming from here, we have had drakh raiders win planets by APTE right through a blockade in our current campaign which is quite annoying.
i think certain missions need to be played to actually take planets, so perhaps the attacker can be the only one to add a mod to the dice roll too (as not one of our games has got above raid yet and most being skirmish).

 

[H]

yup, we rolled 2 blockade runs last week. the Shadows sent in 3 scouts, and just stealthed past the Minbari (ahh the irony) then the drakh just sent a raft of raiders past the ISA. both were technically pointless being played, but damnit, between them, the Victory and a couple of whitestars DID kill a heavy raider, sheesh!!

 

[katadder]

well i have come up with a list of alternatives for each mission, which i have forwarded to the playtesters but would like to see what you think and let you all try them in your campaigns.

Campaign Mission Benefits:
(These only apply if attacker wins in most cases, although can have an adverse effect for defender in case of convoy duty and supply ships even if attacker loses).

Assassination: Defender is at -2 Initiative for next campaign turn due to disruption of losing high ranking officers.

Recon Run: Attacker gains 1 additional FAP at this target as long as he attacks it next campaign turn due to foreknowledge of enemy strength.

Convoy Duty: Defender loses 1RR per ship lost upto the maximum RR produce by the strategic target. (double this if using space liners).

Ambush: No additional benefit, just as mission says, do as much damage as possible then run.

Space Superiority: Attackers gains strategic target

Call to Arms: Attackers gains strategic target

Annihilation: Attackers gains strategic target

Blockade: defender gains no RR or benefits from the strategic target this turn.

Carrier Clash: Attackers gains strategic target

Flee to jump gate: defender gains no RR or benefits from the jump gate this turn

Supply Ships: Defender loses 1RR per ship lost upto the maximum RR produce by the strategic target. (double this if using space liners).

Planetary assault: Attackers gains strategic target

 

[katadder]

so thoughts anyone?

 

[Davesaint]

Interesting. We made these changes for our last campaign

Recon Run - Does not change control of planet. If sucessful the attacker may do the following:

1.) Roll a d6 and on a 1 or 2 may execute an ambush scenarion on the same opponent in the next turn. This does not count as your attack for the turn.

2.) Reduce the defenders FAP by 1 in his next battle


Ambush - Re-roll, unless due to sucessful recon run

Blockade - May be maintained from turn to turn, not counting as an attack, but the same ships must be used. The PL of the fight is fixed, and the attacker may not add ships to the blockading force.

If the attacker wins, he captures the site, if the defender wins, he gains RR but no other benefits.


Dave

 

[LordClinto]

well i have come up with a list of alternatives for each mission, which i have forwarded to the playtesters but would like to see what you think and let you all try them in your campaigns.

Campaign Mission Benefits:
(These only apply if attacker wins in most cases, although can have an adverse effect for defender in case of convoy duty and supply ships even if attacker loses).

Assassination: Defender is at -2 Initiative for next campaign turn due to disruption of losing high ranking officers.

Recon Run: Attacker gains 1 additional FAP at this target as long as he attacks it next campaign turn due to foreknowledge of enemy strength.

Convoy Duty: Defender loses 1RR per ship lost upto the maximum RR produce by the strategic target. (double this if using space liners).

Ambush: No additional benefit, just as mission says, do as much damage as possible then run.

Space Superiority: Attackers gains strategic target

Call to Arms: Attackers gains strategic target

Annihilation: Attackers gains strategic target

Blockade: defender gains no RR or benefits from the strategic target this turn.

Carrier Clash: Attackers gains strategic target

Flee to jump gate: defender gains no RR or benefits from the jump gate this turn

Supply Ships: Defender loses 1RR per ship lost upto the maximum RR produce by the strategic target. (double this if using space liners).

Planetary assault: Attackers gains strategic target

Other then the Convoy Duty & Supply Ships it seems well thought out.

Not to say that I don't like the drawbacks for the poor defender that gets stuck with Convoy Duty & Supply Ships, but there needs to be some benefit for the defender winning one of the missions. Maybe he can launch an ambush on the losing attacker in the next turn or the losing attacker gets one less FAP in a battle in his next turn?

 

[katadder]

ithe current campaign is there a bonus for the defender for winning? not really, its all about the attacker, this way you dont lose ur planet over a blockade run though.

 

[Da Boss]

Like the idea of the scenario outcomes having an effect based on the actual mission profile- cool idea thanks

 

[katadder]

also on the convoy duty and supply ships my orginal idea was if the defender loses he would lose all the RR but then i thought why not make it worth per ship basis so the defender actually has to defend those ships.
its perfectly reasonable and how i would see it.

 

[Iain McGhee]

Nice idea about the scenario effects. In my last few campaigns I ruled that only the Space Superiority, Call To Arms or Annihilation scenarios could be played if you targeted a planet (other targets as normal) and Planetary Assault was the only allowed scenario used when attacking the system's primary Settled World. Your table works much better.

 

[Target]

Not that we have played a campaign for a while but sounds a pretty good idea.