Good Point on Armageddon PLs and Quick Question

[Triggy]

I've just worked out why I think Mongoose went for the way of splitting up fleet points where you get a slight points break on lower PL ships if you split your points well. I'm pretty certain this is intended to encourage players to take a greater variety of ships in their fleet and lead to a wider mix of ships. This actually helps act against taking many, many points worth of identical ships all at the same PL. If this is the intention then well done Mongoose!

My question is regarding Starfurys and Thunderbolts in the ISA fleet. In the Armageddon pdf they follow the tourney lists of having the dogfight scores at +2 and +1 respectively (as opposed to +1 and +0 in SFoS). Do the ISA get to use the same fighters as the EA or are they limited to their inferior listings in SFoS? (I think I know the intent but as it stands the rules as written indicate that the ISA get the old versions)

 

[lastbesthope]

Posted a link to this thread on the main Armageddon pdf questions thread.

LBH

 

[Dennbok]

I like the new split (or rather the old split being expanded), it 'feels' much better. The broader fleets idea is also cool.

 

[Burger]

I don't like the new split. Using it feels too much like powergaming.

 

[Voronesh]

Agree here.

I get a free Ka'Tan in my 5point battle force.

Not that i actually think that is bad, but it feels like powergaming.

Centauri though get nothing from this. Specific for battle lvl games. Why go down to skirmish, because Raid is where the action happens.

This new split feels mroe like it is supposed to let you get a full (4 instead of 3) point of ships 2 lvls lower, if you also take a full point of ships just one lvl lower. But it does nothing too well, depending upon lvl and fleet.

Yes please Minbari at battle. Why go down to skirmish again?

 

[Captain Kremmen]

Agree here.

Centauri though get nothing from this. Specific for battle lvl games. Why go down to skirmish, because Raid is where the action happens.

Yes please Minbari at battle. Why go down to skirmish again?

I agree it is of little use for Minbari, but it makes Corvans more cost effective at the higher levels for Centauri. I intend to use 2 Corvans now and I would not have bothered otherwise...

Kremmen

 

[lastbesthope]

THe computing geek in me likes the new points split for breaking points down, it has a much more binary feel to it, makes it a little more intuitive for me anyway.

LBH

 

[Lord David the Denied]

Not for those of who aren't walking computers, though...

By the way, what's sappho juice taste like? :wink:

 

[E Nicely]

By the way, what's sappho juice taste like? :wink:

Probably worse than pure melange.

I agree that the points split is more intuitive.

 

[Ripple]

My only gripe with the new point system, well one of only two, is that it favors races that have good ships at all levels. If your races only has a couple pl's that it fights well at you cannot make effective use of the new splits.

The other issue is the just stupidly huge amount of ships available at the higher pls. I just do not want to play a game with 15ish ships per point per side. New fighter sequence might change a lot of those to fighter stands but still, that's just a very long game.

And I know folks that I can just choose not to play at those levels, but that does not work for the campaign games or potentially tournaments. (We went skirmish to battle in the last tourney.)

Ripple

 

[Lord David the Denied]

You could always play a low points game at higher levels. Battle 2 instead of battle 5. A lot less ships on the board however you split your points.

 

[Silvereye]

By the way, what's sappho juice taste like? :wink:

Sapho: high energy liquid extracted from barrier roots of Ecaz.

Kind of like menthol. I went through phase of drinking a mix of grenadine and creme de menthe. Not only did it stain lips red, but teeth too. Though too much of it made thinking kind of fuzzy.

It kind of freaked the goths out in one of the local clubs from time to time. And my GM in a Dune game (I scared him as a Mentat).

"It is by will alone I set my mind in motion. It is by juice of Sapho that thoughts aquire speed, lips aquire stains, the stains become a warning. It is by will alone I set my mind in motion." - Dune

 

[Lord David the Denied]

Christ... someone remind me to keep my yap shut in future, eh? :wink:

 

[Silvereye]

Since when has that 'please remind me...' ever worked for anyone on the forum.

 

[Lord David the Denied]

Fair comment.

 

[Ripple]

I know Captain David, whenever I have the choice of what to play I do tend to like my battles slighty smaller. The change is that campaign randomly determined battles are not under my control, nor are the scale of tournament fights. Sadly, while I run one of the local campaigns I have not as yet helped with the tourneys.

Ripple

 

[CZuschlag]

I worry about powergaming at the bottom end of the ship spectrum. Patrol ships have to be balanced so finely to keep them from just getting ridiculous. The stacks of T-bolts, in particular, is concerning. If a patrol selection is just a small bit too tough ti can be magnified with the new splits to ridiculous magnitudes. The greatest worries here are 1). all patrol scouts, the stealth ones in particular 2). the hermes, especially with Flash missiles, as their range is long enough that they can stay away from each other's explosion radii; heavy missiles are really bad, too 3). heavy fighters, such as the Rutarian, Shadow Fighter, Thunderbolt, and Frazi, 4). the Rbax Patrol options (Reshekar, amoungst others), which were probably ignorant that these changes were incoming.

High-power skirmish are worrisome as well -- Ka'T**, Omelos, Darkener, Rail Hyperion(sorta), Drakh Raiders .... I should include the Vorlon Destroyer, Strikehawk and its Sky Serpent here, but for some reason, they don't feel like it needs to be included. Can't put my finger on why.