Floating an idea: Battle groups

Does this sound workable? (please say why)

  • Yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
Hash said:
Your Narn war party sounds suspiciously like your current Narn tourney fleet Reaverman...for the love of G'Quan don't give him a bonus for picking that! :twisted:

LOL!

Okay, I'm going to take away all the great ideas from this thread, draft up a proposal, and see where it goes. If it's accepted I'll be asking for some volunteers for experimentation...
 
Any of you guys play flames of war? I like the army selection stuff they have. you buy units by platoon, so they are designed to work together. You also have to select a base type of force, and get an allowance for "support" platoons based on that.

Of course you'd have to fight a whole lot bigger battles for that to really work well in b5. Or maybe just sub "ship" for platoon.

So you say I building a Recon/Skirmish/Assult force. Then based on that, you get to pick certain ships that fit that role as the majority of your force. If you want support- (artillery/sagitarius) scouts, etc you then have a limited number of points to spend on them.
 
What about a "canon" Task force? Getting a small bonus for picking only ships that have appeared in the series? Someone who picks just those ships is already at a tactical disadvantage compared to someone who mixes more freely; if mixed fleets got even more for their money, players would be punished for taking "pure" B5 fleets...
 
The starts to fall down when you realise you only ever see one or two ships per race on screen, with a few exceptions. How do you make a decent fleet out of Vorchan and Demos warships and Secundus battlecruisers? You've got no fighters, or anti-fighter weapons, unless you buy independant wings of Sentris, since we see them, too.
 
Where possible, the task forces should be based upon canon material.

Canon in this case is (most important first)

- What Mongoose have written (e.g. B5 RPG) - it's their game after all and they're unlikely to want to put something in S&P that contradicts their own material

- What happened on TV/Movies (willing to debate if any issues come up where the show proves Mongoose wrong but it would have to be a very good argument and not just "well we saw it once in that episode")

- Where neither of the above cover it, any other source will just have to do, coupled with some common sense such as ensuring carriers have escort vessels attached.
 
hmmm...

Oddly Mongoose B5 RPG and ACtA do not match fleet lists or fluff from what I have seen.

We have more than a few rules in the game based exactly on 'we see it in this one episode' or less.

Fleet composition that we see in the show is not what folks seem to think is obvious. Primus operating alone, G'Quon operate in squadrons with no support, Demos/Vorchan operate in large numbers alone, Drazi hulls operate in squadronsof the same type. The idea of modern naval task forces with layered defense and special purpose ships does not have a lot of support from the show.

And common sense is the birth of all arguements.

I would work from the show first. This is the base we can all agree actually happened. ACtA/B5Wars fluff next (in that order). Only then do you go outside and try for the RPG (again, this is not consistent with ACtA) and/or other sources.

On the example of the carrier of course needs escorts. This is a mistake in applying naval analogies to a hyper space world. In a B5 world carriers can simply hyper away if threatened. Second is the role of escorts, B5 escorts can not shoot down that missle for you, or detect something that your main ship can not see.

If you begin forcing people to take 'escorts', perhaps a guardhawk for the drazi, you will simply remove carriers from play. Coming from an SFB background I can tell you that with certainty. You will quickly get 'carrier races' and non-carrier races.

Ripple
 
Lets say "support vessels" as opposed to "escorts".

Lets also remember the idea is to group ships together, so a carrier has to come with "something" - nobody is forced to take that option, they'll just be encouraged to take more of a mix than just taking five carriers by getting some kind of "reward" for going with a task force that includes a carrier.

Sure, a carrier can just run away - but the point of going to battle is usually not to do that ;) Therefore it's a little unrealistic that anyone would send a lone carrier (or worse yet, a group of them) into a battle when they have hundreds (at least) of smaller ships capable of putting up a good fight just laying around. Obviously thats a generalisation - each fleet (and ship) needs to be examined carefully and treated on a case by case basis, as some ships are specificially designed to be a "one ship fleet".

On the question of material being contradicted within Mongoose material, I'll be asking people to point out specific instances so we can try and either rationalise them or find out which side of the story the show supports.
 
mthomason said:
On the question of material being contradicted within Mongoose material, I'll be asking people to point out specific instances so we can try and either rationalise them or find out which side of the story the show supports.

The story about "The Blind men and the Elephant" comes to mind :P
 
ok, I'm putting this on ice for a short while until Armageddon is out - it wouldn't make much sense to start doing this using current ship stats and performance as a guide.

Once Armageddon is out, I'll draft up the proposal, see if it gets accepted, and if so herd a group of volunteers together to go playtest it to death :)
 
Still an idea to keep at though. i think it is very good, though I would keep the groups fairly small e.g. one battle ship and a couple of escorts.

The epic-esque army card idea is very good as well.

Be happy to help if required.
 
philogara said:
one battle ship and a couple of escorts.

I think you're right, small groups and plenty of them to allow for variety.

Maybe a couple of large groups per race worked out as a standard-ish core for larger battles, but nothing really more than that.
 
Grrr. Torn here. On one had I really like the battlegroup idea. The little something extra is great. On the other, I was really struck by the person who suggested the main force, support, escort option. Then on the other, there is the person who suggested something quite similiar to the main force/esxcort thing, creating a FoW style fleet list based on the intended role of the fleet.

So heres my suggestion. Give people the option of taking a generic list consisting of the battle groups and individual ships. Also create specific types of Task Group list and tweak all avaible battle groups that can be taken in that list.

Wow, ya know, I know people endlessly sit and bitch about the rules and whats wrong but I do respect those who do come up with them in the first place. Trying to get balance from a set of words is difficult at times.
 
Well theres no solid decision on how it'll be organised, only that it'll be some method of encouraging a more "mixed" fleet :)

If it goes ahead, it'll most likely end up with playtesting of variations such as you've mentioned until we find the one that works best for the most people.
 
Okay, news on this :)

First the bad news: It's not suitable material for an S&P article. Amongst other things, the full range of options if presented in card format would probably fill two entire issues...

Now the good news: I'll get this project put up on the new ACTA community site as soon as it's up and running (which will be very soon) - everyone will be able to see the rules as they get constructed, and will be able to comment on them while they're being built. It'll also mean it'll be a "living" rules system that can be constantly tweaked and updated alongside new ACTA releases.
 
I like this idea.

I'd like to see a historical writeup of the different fleets (Battle Groups) of the different races. Example would be today's US 7th Fleet and the break down of the different ships in the different Battle Groups.

So an article in S&P would be cool if it were done with a historical perspective. Then playing a particular battle group makes sense.

Since I'm going for a Narn and LONAW fleet, it would be cool to see the history of the fleets and what ships where in each.

Just my HO.

CCotD'
 
Iv'e skipped about the last 5 pages. Ignore if this has been said.
Let say you were playing a 5pt raid game.
You either select like normal or select from the the battle group listings.
That way if you want your Cent Beam Team you could or the battlegroup that has extra ships in like havens for example. You shouldn't be able to mix the two types of fleet choices.
 
Back
Top