Jump point bomb fixes

[JayRaider]

It was a disastor.
A higher priority that nobody really wanted.
Huge ships that nobody wanted.
The majority of Arma ship models were a disastor with the majority still not released.
It added to the Swarm game, and moved further away from satisfying games into Power gaming territory.
It dropped the Tourney lists, which most forum members would agree were closer to balance than SFOS.
And those are just off the top of my head

To be fair, i liked the Ancients and Shadows/Vorlon changes. And the EA into 3 ages was fine too.

 

[thePirv]

what was so wrong with armageddon? (apart from the typos? )

Saggi was broken beyond belief and had to be officially changed shortly after publication in an S&P article.

Many people were unhappy with the £15 price tag for what could easily have been done as a softback for £5

Much of the book was given over to pictures, without any real content to speak of.

All races unsupported in the ONLY major rules update for the year.

*edit* Oh and it was delayed quite badly.

Basically Arma was touted as going to be the book that fixed ACTA when in actual fact it was largely inconsequential with more than half of the forum users voting in a poll that they were at least slightly unhappy about it, if not downright hating the book.

 

[emperorpenguin]

It was a disastor.
A higher priority that nobody really wanted..

actually a lot of you were calling for an "Armageddon PL" for ages

I wasn't so keen on it myself

 

[Burger]

I think the problem with Armageddon wasn't what was in it. What was in it, was mostly good IMO.
The problem was, that there was very little in it, after the massive build-up and massive influx of "it's fixed in Armageddon" responses to virtually every question on these forums.

Plus the Sag and the typos of course.

 

[No. 1 Bear]

Plain and simple keep the game mechanics simple BAN IT. No just BAN IT. How many of these pointless threads would that save when no one can make any agreement.

 

[emperorpenguin]

Plain and simple keep the game mechanics simple BAN IT. No just BAN IT. How many of these pointless threads would that save when no one can make any agreement.

so any time people disagree you'd ban the rule in question?

this'd be one rules-light game very quickly................. :wink:

 

[katadder]

and only 4 people want it banned so far, although quite a few want it scenario specific.

although the simple thing is to just house rule it banned if you dont like it. or house rule it specific scenario. this only really matters if you go to tourneys and random games clubs.

 

[No. 1 Bear]

No, sorry bad punctuation. I say keep the game mechanics simple and ban it. This would also save the problem of these long tedious threads, however there will always be the problem of rules which people hate.

 

[CZuschlag]

I voted scenarios only, and one precondition of that is, none of the generically generated scenarios for campaigns or tournaments.

Fucntionally, this is equivalent to a ban, I know. But it's what I want. Those of you who want to bring it back in with a scenario or a mutual agreement, fine, but otherwise, no.

EDIT: Ambush as currently written is already totally broken, but if you wanted to waste your turn 1 advantage not shooting/CAFing and bombing instead, more power to you, Blue Stars excepted (individual ship balance issue.)

 

[emperorpenguin]

No, sorry bad punctuation. I say keep the game mechanics simple and ban it. This would also save the problem of these long tedious threads, however there will always be the problem of rules which people hate.

my point still stands, there are lots of rules disagreements so that'd be a lot of bans!

 

[thePirv]

No, sorry bad punctuation. I say keep the game mechanics simple and ban it. This would also save the problem of these long tedious threads, however there will always be the problem of rules which people hate.

my point still stands, there are lots of rules disagreements so that'd be a lot of bans!

Hell, there'd be no; Stealth, Interceptors, Crits, Dodge...

The list of stuff that'd be banned would be almost limitless

 

[CZuschlag]

However, if you look at the poll, I would suggest that if the majority was left to decide when a disagreement was discussed, we'd get the current system without jump point bombs!

EDIT: Again, another reference to Surowiecki's The Wisdom of Crowds

 

[No. 1 Bear]

i do understand that alot of things would disappear if you listened to what i orriginally said but actually i believe that it should be banned as it was just a freak accident. However if you wanted to keep it you could make it scenario specific.

 

[emperorpenguin]

i do understand that alot of things would disappear if you listened to what i orriginally said but actually i believe that it should be banned as it was just a freak accident. However if you wanted to keep it you could make it scenario specific.

an accident is something that happens by chance

the ambush was planned therefore not an accident

 

[Da Boss]

i havent voted yet but there is one really important question i want to ask

Does anyone ACTUALLY (defintily etc) know if JPB will be as it is at the moment for 2e? what i mean is it definitly going to be like the way everyone is complaining about or is it going to change?
Shouldn't we wait to see it in 2e before demanding change??? we don't know for sure how it will be, it may have already been changed from what the 2e preview says!

I think that when Moongoose kindly produced the preview article it was partly to canvas for reaction (could be wrong?) to the forthcoming changes - one of which is JPB.

It is even possible that some things /ideas for 2nd Ed will come from reactions / ideas on the forum - at least in an ideal world!

 

[katadder]

I voted scenarios only, and one precondition of that is, none of the generically generated scenarios for campaigns or tournaments.

Fucntionally, this is equivalent to a ban, I know. But it's what I want. Those of you who want to bring it back in with a scenario or a mutual agreement, fine, but otherwise, no.

EDIT: Ambush as currently written is already totally broken, but if you wanted to waste your turn 1 advantage not shooting/CAFing and bombing instead, more power to you, Blue Stars excepted (individual ship balance issue.)

easier to leave it in and let people decide they dont want it than to not have it at all. you can house rule it out of the game if you like.

it is scenario specific anyway. only 6 out of 12 scenarios can the attackers use hyperspace (one of them being ambush).
I do agree with you ambush is broken though, especially when lpaying larger games. a 5pt war fleet being ambushed by 3pts of war is just nasty for the 5pt fleet. I would like to see some sort of CQ check to activate the defenders ships in the 1st turn, and if you fail they move forward the speed of the slowest ship in the fleet (as if they were in convoy not stationary).

 

[Greg Smith]

I would like to see some sort of CQ check to activate the defenders ships in the 1st turn, and if you fail they move forward the speed of the slowest ship in the fleet (as if they were in convoy not stationary).

Have you looked at the 2e version of ambush recently?

 

[Sulfurdown]

:idea:
What about making the JPB it's own special Special Action similar to "Give Me Ramming Speed!"? Remove the ability to dodge the jump point and replace that with a CQC.

Jump Point Shockwave Trap!
CQC: 10; Only usable by advanced jump capable ships in hyperspace if you have a Scout ship on the board. If CQC is successful roll another Crew Quality check, this will set the value that every ship under the Jump Point counter or within 2" of the forward arc must beat in their own Crew Quality check to avoid damage from the jump point vortex.
:idea: :?:

 

[katadder]

ooh did it change, i asked for that a while back but matt didnt tell us it changed like alot of others. or no that I remember anyway

*quickly goes has a look*

cool, that looks pretty much like the changes i asked for

 

[Arcadia]

:idea:
What about making the JPB it's own special Special Action similar to "Give Me Ramming Speed!"? Remove the ability to dodge the jump point and replace that with a CQC.

Jump Point Shockwave Trap!
CQC: 10; Only usable by advanced jump capable ships in hyperspace if you have a Scout ship on the board. If CQC is successful roll another Crew Quality check, this will set the value that every ship under the Jump Point counter or within 2" of the forward arc must beat in their own Crew Quality check to avoid damage from the jump point vortex.
:idea: :?:

Yeap: give the attacked ship opportunity to avoid the JPB, this is by Sulfurdown idea or by opposed CQ-check. Maybe allow it only when the attacking ship is of war or Armageddon PL. I don’t like when a little patrol ship JBP my war ship’s; to much power for the lower PL ships.
Vote: for 2e but would like it to be more difficult and to have a way to defend my fleet from it.

Arcadia.