disruptors = energy bleed???

[Da Boss]

Can anyone explain an in game reason for them to be changed?

Lots of people are complaining (often without alot of games played) about the drone advantage and so is it a good diea to reduce the only other weapon with decent range just so it can sort of be a bit more like SFU (which varies anyway from game to game :roll: )

 

[crosswiredmind]

I guess the thing that is bugging me the most, and thus the reason for the OP, is that by not having their damage reduce with range, disruptors are acting like photon torpedoes. The advantage photon torpedoes have in other Starfleet games is that the keep their damage at range. Disruptors are now just photon torpedoe for non-Federation factions.

 

[Keeper Nilbog]

not really true, as if your firing Photon's over 'long' range, it's generally as proximity fused, so half damage from them and a 50% hit change. This option isn't availible in FC, but neither is Derfac or UIM targetting for Dispruptors.

Personally, i think they work well at present, and do provide a stable heavy weapon system for the races that use them (as the last game i played a 7AD Plasma strike managed to do 13 damage - average should be around 24 (3.5 per die), the Torp didn't even flatten the shield of the ship it was fired at). Think keeping the Disruptor as Multi-Hit 2 is a a solid, as it fits with tactics for klingons - and your closing to get the overload strike once the sniping has done it's job.

Without floating maps, you end up closing anyway, so the range isn't a major issue, and there more accurate than Photon's, so hit more often at range.

 

[Stu--]

I think the issue with disruptors right now is that they are too powerful.
They don't lose damage potential over range, when in SFB we know they should.

The Klingons are agile enough to be mostly where they want to be.
So short of charging your opponent down, you get the silly 'reversing Klingons on the starboard bow' effect.

With a Killzone of even say 18" the Klingon would have a compelling reason to seek to close to ph-1 range, where he can still out-shoot everything anyway - maybe you'd still get the reversing Klinks, but at least there would be some return fire..

 

[Da Boss]

I quote from an SFU player in another Thread

"This is not SFB/FC" and even between those two games there are differences apaprently in the way weapons opperate - the same is true here. Matt said not every detail can or should be replicated and as Scoutdad said the idea is to get the feel not port everything over wholesale.

As far as I can see the disruptors were set up to be different from Phasers and Photons and according to the varous playtesters posting was tried out with different variations and this was the most workable. It may not be perfect but at present its an interesting alternative to the other guns.................

I think if there is a issue with the disruptors being too good - then it might need looking at - but to dramatically change the primary weapon of about 1/3 the ships in the game seems over the top to just keep a very small part of a tiny element of the SFU. I feel that if it was just the odd ship it would be something that should be looked at perhaps but if its not broken in game its a huge thing to do for no apaprent in game gain.

 

[Greg Smith]

I guess the thing that is bugging me the most, and thus the reason for the OP, is that by not having their damage reduce with range, disruptors are acting like photon torpedoes. .

But the range drop-off for disruptors in FC is a lot less than for phasers. At longer ranges they are more accurate and do more damage than phasers 1s.

ACTA has to make some simlifications to keep things quick and simple. Range effects are simplified for all weapons.

 

[Keeper Nilbog]

Sorry, might/must have grabbed the wrong end of the stick :shock: . Not sure how disruptors are 'too good'. Most of the games i have played tended to have engagement ranges of around 12-18", and that was only for the first few rounds of firing. Granted, only played a few games with mainly Klingon ships (klingon in every game, also used Romulan and Federation), so may have missed some of the fine points. It's not SFB/FC, you can close FAR quicker than in those games, and with use of SA like Reinforce Shield', sniping does little (apart from 'leaked' hits).

Disruptors appear to work well as a balance to Photon's at present, so lets see how things go. The 'bleed' wasn't that great (if i remember), and the several targetting systems helped it hit (hence the ACC+1), though not at long/max range.

 

[Stu--]

It's also worth noting and so far unmentioned that phasers at close range in FC actually do more damage than non-overloaded disruptors...


Look there are clearly two (or more) points of view here.

Maybe it would be better to just keep a track of the optional ideas people have so new players can access them should they wish.

For my money, I'll play with Kill Zone 18" because I prefer it.
I may also ban all reverse movement, because I think it's daft.

Each to their own!

 

[archon96]

reverse movement is my bread and butter as a gorn player.

 

[Stu--]

So play with it in your games

I'm going to make my players turn their ships...

 

[Da Boss]

I thought reverse movement was also in SFU (its definately in the show in fact they go backwards at max warp to escape the Romulan plasma IIRC )

A thread of fun ideas is an interesting idea - could put ramming there too.

As you said its really up to you how you play your games and if you want to reduce the effectiveness of Disruptors for all races that use them............might want to look at the points cost in that case?

 

[Stu--]

Yeah maybe it would change the costs.

So far, in our games at least, the Klingon ships have managed to easily overpower an equal pointed Fed ship. On initial games we though the points were broken, but it's possibly just poor captaining.

 

[Da Boss]

It might be there is an issue - don't know yet but it might be worth seeing how the different fleets intereact together - it might be that the Kilingons are better against some fleets than others?

What sort of size games were you playing?
Where the ships evenly matched in numbers as well as points - In sinking is a major thing in ACTA

 

[crosswiredmind]

I can appreciate that this is not SFB or FC, but it would be nice for it not to feel too different. There is also the issue of the text in the rules. If disruptors were meant to be effective long-range weapons then the text should also reflect that.

 

[Stu--]

it might be that the Kilingons are better against some fleets than others?

What sort of size games were you playing?
Where the ships evenly matched in numbers as well as points - In sinking is a major thing in ACTA

We played :
1 v 1 (fed ship had a poor salvo of phots and never managed to re-engage as the Klink was too maneuverable)
In particular the D7 being agile seems very different to FC, where it can certainly out-turn a constitution class, but by nowhere near as much as in this game..

2 v 2 (more options with weaving, but the Klingons maintained range easily and then eventually close to overload range)

4 v 5 (more like what this system seems designed for; a reasonably even fight, with several ships crippled and breaking off)

*oh i should point out that everyone who played thought the system was fun and showed a lot of promise

 

[Da Boss]

it might be that the Kilingons are better against some fleets than others?

What sort of size games were you playing?
Where the ships evenly matched in numbers as well as points - In sinking is a major thing in ACTA

We played :
1 v 1 (fed ship had a poor salvo of phots and never managed to re-engage as the Klink was too maneuverable)
In particular the D7 being agile seems very different to FC, where it can certainly out-turn a constitution class, but by nowhere near as much as in this game..

2 v 2 (more options with weaving, but the Klingons maintained range easily and then eventually close to overload range)

4 v 5 (more like what this system seems designed for; a reasonably even fight, with several ships crippled and breaking off)

Yeah that seems to be about right

1 on 1 ACTA normally does not work - for any of the three incarnations (*)
2 on 2 - hmm again game is not really designed for it (*)
4 on 5 - this about the lowest level that i woudl haev said ACTA works well - try a game of 8 versus 8 - also the Federation have cheap and effective In sinks - if they use them well the game becomes very different. As I have said before Terrain can make a big difference as well.

(*) despite what it says anywhere ACTA is really a Squadron to whole Fleet game

If everyone is haivng fun good sign - try larger games - a good bit of terrain and let the Federation maximise their ship selection and I think you will find that the Klingons and Federation match up very nicely without any real changes.

 

[Kirksfolly]

I played my second game this week, which was 1000 pts a side and saw 7 Klingons take on 5 Romulans. I was the Romulans and have no complaints about the effect of Klingon Disruptors as thing stand. I quickly learned that my heavier force (Dreadnought and 4 Cruisers) was totally outmanoeuvred by the Klingon 5 Cruisers and 2 Frigates - even when I won the initiative. I lost two cruisers within the first four turns before staging a comeback that saw things fairly even at the end (and we ran out of time).

It was a great game BUT it wasn't Klingon Disruptors that were the big problem, it was the consistant 'loss' of initiative. It brought it home that running 5 ships in a 1000 pt game is not really on.

Eagerly looking forward to the next game...with a bigger fleet! :lol:

 

[Keeper Nilbog]

Well, you wanted to take the 4th Star Legion for your Romulans. Next time, stick in some KF5R's

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Stu--]

Yea definitely seems more of a fleet game.
Perhaps for one v one / two v one or small squadron actions FC is a better choice.
But FC is not really a good choice for big actions.

Regards initiative, I'm in two minds whether the battletech style initiative would works better (I have 8 ships you have 4, therefore I move two every time you move one)

Bigger fleets would still be outmanoeuvred but not purely because I have my 'applause brigade' at the back with 3 E4's who are hiding in a gas giant

 

[Da Boss]

There are many many many threads about the In sink "problem" and similar solutions - tis a part of the game to be honest but you may wish to alter it for your own style of gaming