Feedback needed on scenario in S&P 52

[Tankdriver]

Hello, everyone,
I am wondering if I could get some feedback on the ACTA scenario in S&P 52.
Anything that struck you as interesting or particularly bad?

 

[Banichi]

It looks pretty cool. The raiders ship hidden in the convoy strikes me as like a reverse Q ship.

 

[Tankdriver]

any other comments?

 

[Harry Lonsdale]

Looks like a lot of fun; I'm planning to try it next week.

 

[Harry Lonsdale]

Read it over again, and there are 3 things that I think should be addressed:

1) The Civilian Trader was dropped in 2e.

2) Description says that the Raider may deploy along the short map edges; the map shows their deployment zone along the exit edge as well.

3) What priority level is it? This will affect the relative value of the civilian ships and Porfatis fighters in VP calculations.

I've always liked the idea of Q-ships (since playing the Orion in an SFB campaign) and this is an interesting twist, as Banichi said. Pak'ma'ra were a great choice to face the Raiders in this.

 

[Tankdriver]

Thank you very much. I had written that out before I got 2E and failed to make the corrections before submitting.
I actually chose the Pak because I thought the were a fleet that needed attention and I had earlier written a scenario with the Vree.

 

[Iain McGhee]

Looks interesting, I'll likely try it out with different races as I've not enough/any of either in your scenario.

One thing, are the civilian ships intended to be used as in the rulebook scenarios or as part of the fleet as normal ? (i.e. move in end phase and give +2 bonus VPs if destroyed only)

 

[Tankdriver]

Part of the fleet as normal.