For EA Players - is Armageddon worth it?

F

fluffy05

Mongoose
Hi guys,

I like the sound of the new rules in Armageddon but is the rulebook worth it for Value and Gameplay?

I am a dissappointed with the fleet lists for Crusade (few ship choices at lower priorities) & 3rd Age seems ok (but again seems to need a few ships at lower priorities).

I would really like to see a few more ships appear at Raid & Skirmish levels for 3rd Age & Crusade. I prefer a more balanced list.

Maybe MGP is planning to release more ships at these levels?

I just started collecting EA and have been playing SFOS lists with the only variation using the updated Sagitarius from S&P 37 for balance (since it seemed to be a problem for alot of players out there :wink: ) - I have never taken more than 2 Sagis in a game so far :D
 
I actually think I hear this complaint a lot from EA players that view the new lists.

The seperation between the lists indicates in a change of military philosophy for the EA as they develop new technologies and incorperate them into their ships.

As a result of their newer technologies the EA becomes more and more 'top heavy' as they work on bigger, better, more deadly capital ships, and their technology improves in their fighters. This is rather like the Minbari's capital ship structure. They take big, powerful ships that all carry their superior fighters into battle. They don't use a huge variety of smaller hulled ships, except for specific purposes. I really see the EA going the same way.

Now, I don't see what the complaint is, personally, since -each- catagory of EA fleet still has more variety of ships then almost every other race out there, with the potential exception of the narn and the centauri. If you couple that with the fact that they have three lists to choose from, there shouldn't be any problem building a fleet for your particular style.

The only real reason I think that folks would complain about this is that they can't fit all the most powerful ships at each priority level into their fleets, since they are now seperated into the different lists. This smacks of me of power-gaming and really trying to exploit the spirit of the game. After all, would you really expect the modern navy to use ships from WW1? That's essentially what you want to do when you mix and match the different fleet lists.
 
Considering you could get 3 Marathons for 1 Nemesis, or 2 Marathons and an Apollo (which can substitute for the Nemesis' fast loading missiles)? It's hard to justify using a Nemesis.
 
I'm not interested in power gaming - I actually avoid people who play like this. I spend alot of money on miniatures and if I cannot get a fun & challenging game (win, lose or draw I would rather not play at all - Vs powergamers bad sports etc)

What I am talking about is at the moment I play 5 point Raid games alot.

If I want to play a 5 point Crusade list the choices are extremely limited. An extra 2-4 choices at Raid & Skirmish level would help balance the fleet.

Being top heavy is not a good way to play a fleet a few hits with Criticals can bring down High Priority (battle & above) ship very quickly.

I agree with the EA philosophy in Crusade as you mention but even a big ship needs escorts :D
 
There isn't many races that don't have decent beams. If the Chronos had a missle rack, it would fill the role it's supposed to.
With what MGP has done it makes hard to have balanced 5pt raid games which is pretty much what a lot of people play. I thinking they are in to more a campaign style system while campaigns are fun most people play more one off type games.
 
fluffy05 said:
I'm not interested in power gaming - I actually avoid people who play like this. I spend alot of money on miniatures and if I cannot get a fun & challenging game (win, lose or draw I would rather not play at all - Vs powergamers bad sports etc)

What I am talking about is at the moment I play 5 point Raid games alot.

If I want to play a 5 point Crusade list the choices are extremely limited. An extra 2-4 choices at Raid & Skirmish level would help balance the fleet.

Being top heavy is not a good way to play a fleet a few hits with Criticals can bring down High Priority (battle & above) ship very quickly.

I agree with the EA philosophy in Crusade as you mention but even a big ship needs escorts :D
Click to expand...

the pronlem being that this is a game with a campaign side, the shortfalls of the EA in Crusade era are a mechanic, just like the Minbari being top heavy, the Narn not having carriers, the Brakiri having no scouts or patrol ships and suchlike.
If every fleet had the same options at every level it would become very boring.
 
I don't think it would become boring, im for every race having scouts, carriers. They don't have to excel at them. EA would have good carriers, support ships, Cent great fast attack, poor brawlers, Narn awesome brawlers. They would still play different and have different strenghts.
 
Target said:
I don't think it would become boring, im for every race having scouts, carriers. They don't have to excel at them. EA would have good carriers, support ships, Cent great fast attack, poor brawlers, Narn awesome brawlers. They would still play different and have different strenghts.
Click to expand...

but the fleet lists themselves and their makeup define the strengths and weaknesses every bit as much as the individual ships do
 
I would just like to see more than the Hyperion Assault Cruiser as a Skirmish ship.

I like the Raid choices but if an EA Crusade player wants to make it into range with his Raid ships it would be nice to beable to back them up without being forced to use Hermes or take 2 Raid points to field a Battle level ship.

I would have thought Hyperions would have been made redundant by Crusade?

Just my own opinion. No offense intended :D
 
i too hate playing power gamers but at most iv used 4 sag in a 12pt war level game against the vorlons
im in two minds about the new list i like the early era list and the third age list
but crusade just sits bad in my mind yes its understandable for a race to want more powerfull ships but you would have thought the first thing they would want to change was the boresight
and as for the warlock that was a great ship at war level i bought 3 of them and then they are made armageddon level
 
Biggest thing I found wierd is that 3rd age had lost the hyperion variants, but still had the obsolete Artemis around. Would have thought that would be the other way around.

I am a fan of most races having most options, just the utility of those options being different. That way the fleet flavour is made up of the different combonations of utility and weapon types. Just because both the ISA and the Narn have precise weapons does not mean they fly at all alike.

Ripple
 
I'm not interested in an overpowered skirmish or raid option.

But something to fill the void would be nice.

The Chronos (raid) was supposed to replace the Olympus (Skirmish)

The Apollo (Battle) was to replace the Sagitarius (Now Skirmish)

Perhaps there is a better way to reflect new technology without resorting to putting the replacement at to higher level (e.g. downgrade the Chronos slighty to reflect new technology but put it at skirmish level?)

Chronos & Apollo are by far better ships than their predescessors but the skirmish and slots are lost and now the Crusade fleet is a bit top heavy.

Does anyone else feel the same way?
 
fluffy05 said:
Chernobyl said:
how about a skirmish level chronos variant?
Click to expand...

Sounds really good
Click to expand...
In general, unless you're going to reduce its toughness, to reduce a ship with no fighters to the priority level below you have to cut its firepower by roughly two thirds. If you think this would make a decent ship then by all means try it out and see how it performs :)
 
katadder said:
seems EA players want everything, high tech and low level init sinks, which you got btw in the hermes.
Click to expand...

And if you don't want to take the Hermes?

I don't expect a high power ship at skirmish level. I don't want the EA fleet to become unbalanced. I prefer a nice even playing field, otherwise why bother playing at all?

Surely if EA has made new "Big Bad Ships" like Nemesis, Warlock & Marathon they would also make improvements in small ship design or refits of older ships to extend their service life.

I don't want the Chronos as it is to become a "Raid" choice. If a ship fits in a Skirmish level it has to be appropriate.

If Crusade EA wants to play at Raid Level and below the options are not great.

The Chronos, Delphi are good Raid choices then what - Hyperion (Raid) and Hyperion AC - Skirmish and then Hermes & Fighters for patrol.

All I'm saying is there is a gap at Skirmish & Raid level.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Kapcon 2025 (NZ) report
Replies
0
Views
172
TrippyHippy
T
Terry Mixon
Avatar Controllers and Avatars
Replies
4
Views
227
Terry Mixon
Terry Mixon
Terry Mixon
For When Your Type P Corsair Just Isn't P Enough
3 4 5
Replies
95
Views
2K
GypsyComet
GypsyComet
Garnfellow
Adventure Class Ships in the Deep and the Dark
Replies
3
Views
1K
Seffix
Seffix
F
Looking for players for a gritty Mercenary campaign [Traveller MGT2E] [Paid] [Online] [Tuesday 1.30 PM GMT/8:30 AM EST] [LF2M] [Foundry VTT]
Replies
0
Views
285
Frenesires
F
Back
Top