New for Federation - the Big Ships...
- Thread starter MongooseMatt
- Start date
archon96 said:
ACTA:SF is its own game its not SFB so not everything is or should be the same. When I posted the picture I was hoping people would use their imagination a bit I would like to see something in this style of hull for the BB go in a different style direction so I am posting this pic so I don't get told to go play hero clix.
Look it's the TOS version of the ship I just posted now this is what the Fed BB should look like IMHO.
Markdawg you are correct ACTA an SFB are there own seperate rule systems but there is one little thing you have blinders on to, that is they both are rulesets to play with the Star Fleet Universe. Just to point something out that is on every ACTASF product I have seen so far.
"A Call to Arms Star Fleet is a joint venture between Mongoose Publishing and Amarillo Design Bureau, Inc. and is produced under the strict terms of their contract with Paramount Pictures Corporation. The A Call to Arms game system is copyright © 2011 Mongoose Publishing. All Star Fleet Universe material is copyright © 2011 Amarillo Design Bureau, Inc. (History of the General War is copyright © 1995 Amarillo Design Bureau, Inc.)
Elements of the Star Fleet Universe are the property of Paramount Pictures Corporation and are used with their permission..."
Yes, that SFC II Fed battleship is cool but it is someone else Interlectual Property and it does not fit the exsisting Star Fleet Universe.
This is the same problem the Klingon D17 Cruiser is running a foul of. It is cooler than hell but it breaks SFU consistance. As such there has to exsist a reason for it to come into being besided a deservedly coolness factor. I am sure Mathew and SVC will both find a way for the Klinogon "10" seires fleet to exsist eventually and we will see these designs.
Maybe some day there will come a time when we can look at the conjectual Super Battleship Designs but right now those do not exsist and designing a model for them is way too premature. You may not like the looks of the Mars Class Battleship but they do exsist have been vetted as plausable in the SFU and are already ADB owned Intelectual Property.
"A Call to Arms Star Fleet is a joint venture between Mongoose Publishing and Amarillo Design Bureau, Inc. and is produced under the strict terms of their contract with Paramount Pictures Corporation. The A Call to Arms game system is copyright © 2011 Mongoose Publishing. All Star Fleet Universe material is copyright © 2011 Amarillo Design Bureau, Inc. (History of the General War is copyright © 1995 Amarillo Design Bureau, Inc.)
Elements of the Star Fleet Universe are the property of Paramount Pictures Corporation and are used with their permission..."
Yes, that SFC II Fed battleship is cool but it is someone else Interlectual Property and it does not fit the exsisting Star Fleet Universe.
This is the same problem the Klingon D17 Cruiser is running a foul of. It is cooler than hell but it breaks SFU consistance. As such there has to exsist a reason for it to come into being besided a deservedly coolness factor. I am sure Mathew and SVC will both find a way for the Klinogon "10" seires fleet to exsist eventually and we will see these designs.
Maybe some day there will come a time when we can look at the conjectual Super Battleship Designs but right now those do not exsist and designing a model for them is way too premature. You may not like the looks of the Mars Class Battleship but they do exsist have been vetted as plausable in the SFU and are already ADB owned Intelectual Property.
@Rambler
I realize that this game is set in the star fleet universe but it's not the same game as SFB. We don't have to follow every rule from SFB because if we did there would not be any ACTA:AF. We would all be playing SFB and if SFB was so good we would all be playing it. My point is there is a reason why we are here ACTA:SF stands on its own as a great game.
"Yes, that SFC II Fed battleship is cool but it is someone else Interlectual Property and it does not fit the exsisting Star Fleet Universe."
Look my point was not for an exact replica but something along these lines show a little imagination folks sheesh! :roll:
I realize that this game is set in the star fleet universe but it's not the same game as SFB. We don't have to follow every rule from SFB because if we did there would not be any ACTA:AF. We would all be playing SFB and if SFB was so good we would all be playing it. My point is there is a reason why we are here ACTA:SF stands on its own as a great game.
"Yes, that SFC II Fed battleship is cool but it is someone else Interlectual Property and it does not fit the exsisting Star Fleet Universe."
Look my point was not for an exact replica but something along these lines show a little imagination folks sheesh! :roll:
TheBeerPope
Mongoose
I agree with MarkDawg, I would love to see a bit more imagination put into some of the designs. I mean they have done a great job so far, the little additions of scales the the gorn or extra details on the wings of the Klingon ships for example are nice easy changes to them. So would adding a bit of flair to the federation nacelle or how they connect be that big of a change? It wouldn't be stealing intellectual properties, it would be evolving the design, just like any game company does with their models over the years.
I'm for cool designs as much as the next guy. But stop for a moment and look at it from a marketing point of view: why create minis that can only be used in ACTA and not SFB, or vice versa? As mentioned, both games are sisters within the SFU family. The minis have to work in both of them, otherwise you'll cut the sales in half.
There is a strong argument that "cool" looking ships will sell themselves to other markets based primarily on their appearance and/or so people can use them in other games as new ship /proxies in the same way as some already use old FASA or new heroclix ships in SFB style games.......or at least posted such on the FC forum...........
I purchase ships from a variety of sources, from Games Workshop/Forgeworld, Spartan and just ordered some Dropzone Commander. I may or may not play the games but if the ships look cool enough I think people will buy them anyway.
People do like shiny new ships to buy and without dredging up the arguments about similaity of appearance, I don't get the impression there are many more Klingon designs that are not merely the engine in a different place / additional engine, tiny changes to the ship.
The D17 not being made was very disapointing - although I understand that there is little point making new stuff until the numerous production issues are/were sorted out.....
I purchase ships from a variety of sources, from Games Workshop/Forgeworld, Spartan and just ordered some Dropzone Commander. I may or may not play the games but if the ships look cool enough I think people will buy them anyway.
People do like shiny new ships to buy and without dredging up the arguments about similaity of appearance, I don't get the impression there are many more Klingon designs that are not merely the engine in a different place / additional engine, tiny changes to the ship.
The D17 not being made was very disapointing - although I understand that there is little point making new stuff until the numerous production issues are/were sorted out.....
TheBeerPope
Mongoose
Nothing says a new design cant be used with SFB, the examples MarkDawg put up, was just examples of something different, he didn't say use this. Adding flair doesn't change what system it can be used in, in fact making something new and cool may sell it to older players who wouldnt buy it in the 2500 series because they own a 2400 series version already.
Zarathustra Suicune
Mongoose
That would be good, an idea for a ship (not the most original I know) would be to the usual position reversed, ie the saucer and engines are below the the main hull. Or a heavy destroyer that is the ramius with a hull attached possibly?
the problem to getting what you all seem to want, is the fact the ships must already exist in Fed Com. ADB is not going to let just call to arms ships exist and they have final approval on all the ships. The changes that have come have been mainly cosmetic but they still are the same ships that can be found in the 2400 series. I understand the frustration id love to have a fleet of nothing but klingon bird of prey's but until paramount eases up on the licensing and gives the same deal that ADB currently has for the TOS era stuff I'll have to be content.
archon96 said:
Why would ADB give a flying F**** about continuity in 2 different systems if a ship sales then it sales. This Idea that ACTA:SF can't do anything with out being just like some other game is a crazy Idea and from what I can tell has no basis in fact. If ACTA:SF had to be just like fed Com there would be no ACTA:SF only fed com.
This has zero to do with Paramount if you actually looked at what I posted. Did you see the TOS version of the ship I posted? Now I will say once more I am not calling for an exact replica just a style change and to show some imagination. This well within ADB and Mongooses preview.
Two thngs
1. Its a joint venture and ADB has very specific requirments and procedures for making new hulls in their games - hence the issue. I don't think this likely to change in the short term and so I think the best we can hpe for at present is a few improvements on old designs.
2. I really wish people would stop assuming that anyone who asks for new designs is looking for replicas of later shows/ movie etc ships - they are not in the main - just more varied designs.....
Honestly I think the D-17 and similar ships could form the basis of a Nobla Armada fleet and then people could makeup stuff for them if they want for ACTA:Sf - maybe post it here .....
1. Its a joint venture and ADB has very specific requirments and procedures for making new hulls in their games - hence the issue. I don't think this likely to change in the short term and so I think the best we can hpe for at present is a few improvements on old designs.
2. I really wish people would stop assuming that anyone who asks for new designs is looking for replicas of later shows/ movie etc ships - they are not in the main - just more varied designs.....
Honestly I think the D-17 and similar ships could form the basis of a Nobla Armada fleet and then people could makeup stuff for them if they want for ACTA:Sf - maybe post it here .....
TheBeerPope
Mongoose
No ones telling ADB to do anything, we are just saying it would be cool to see some variation, and as pointed out, we are not asking for Paramount stuff, just something a bit different. I mean I love the classic klingon ship design, but it would be cool to have a bit more variation in the fleet design. That goes for any of the empires.
I think they're doing a fan total tastic job with the ship designs.
One has to remember that not EVERY ship is going to be aesthetically pleasing to EVERYONE. Pick any miniature wargame that you play...I'm willing to bet that there is a selection in your faction that you feel they could have done "better" or "different".
I prefer they stick to established designs as they've been doing. I don't necessarily think the battle station is OMGFABBQ. However, it's really representative of TOS and it fits within all Starfleet worlds.
....I don't expect them to do a true starbase:
...and it's ok. This isnt "Paramount's Star Trek Battlesystem", it's ACTA:Star Fleet.
I don't expect X-Wing Fighters for use as flyers in my warhammer 40k game anytime soon....and that IS pretty much the same type of expectation.
Keep it up on the model design mongoose, bravo! As soon as the Mars is actually truly availiable...I'll be placing my order.
One has to remember that not EVERY ship is going to be aesthetically pleasing to EVERYONE. Pick any miniature wargame that you play...I'm willing to bet that there is a selection in your faction that you feel they could have done "better" or "different".
I prefer they stick to established designs as they've been doing. I don't necessarily think the battle station is OMGFABBQ. However, it's really representative of TOS and it fits within all Starfleet worlds.
....I don't expect them to do a true starbase:
...and it's ok. This isnt "Paramount's Star Trek Battlesystem", it's ACTA:Star Fleet.
I don't expect X-Wing Fighters for use as flyers in my warhammer 40k game anytime soon....and that IS pretty much the same type of expectation.
Keep it up on the model design mongoose, bravo! As soon as the Mars is actually truly availiable...I'll be placing my order.
Yes ADB does care very much, that is obviuos from all the posts on this same topic ive read over the last year. The ships must match what is in the fedcom game so as not to detract from the other products that ADB is still producing. Yes ACTA:SF is its own game but the ship styles it uses are based on ADB's Fedcom and must match. Thats why the approval process takes so long because weapons arcs and systems must convert in such a way to still reflect the way they are in FEDCOM. Steve Cole is very protective of his franchise and has set this up to reflect a continuity that not only is FEDcom, ACTA:SF, but SFB, federation and Empire. The idea is that If i go to purchase a miniature im not just limited to using it in ACTA:SF, but I can use it in any of the other games that ADB produces. From a business model its not a bad plan it makes the purchase of miniatures much more appealing when you can use them for more then one game.
Way to go make nothing new and never progress that's very Trek man... and bad business and when the hell have you walked in to a game store and seen people playing fedcom in the last 5years. I know I never have. We do see a lot of people playing this game. They would do well to make new and interesting models. If you are against new and interesting models then you should just play with tokens.
Zarathustra Suicune
Mongoose
If they can convert ships from this fedcom (Call to arms is the only star trek miniature game I had heard of until peopel on here explained about these other games) then surly they could develop new shipd for call to arms and then convert them over to the other systems?
I love what mongoose has done so far (and I will properly order a gettysburg, and a ramius blister, and possibly another kearsage or a manta way, not so sure on the mars) but some variation, especially in more small ships would be nice.
I love what mongoose has done so far (and I will properly order a gettysburg, and a ramius blister, and possibly another kearsage or a manta way, not so sure on the mars) but some variation, especially in more small ships would be nice.
well the one FLGS in my area plays nothing but FEDCOM, they wont convert to ACTA which is the only game I play. So the only chance for me to play is with my son and once in awhile the neighbor. Im just explaining the reason for the ship designs, personnally I hate the round nacelles on the fed ships but it is what it is. Could they make a ship for ACTA and then port it over dont see why not, will they ever do this no clue I just buy what they put out and live with it. If you follow the fedcom stuff we are almost at the end of the releases for the major races, once thats done you'll start to see some cool stuff with the other races that dont exost anywhere but SFU. And Mark I tried making my own stuff but found it unbalances the game too much. Im hoping we get the age of X-ships in a few years those models should be pretty cool.
archon96 said:
Where do you live? If you live near Everett WA we are having a great campaign right now. @ MuGu games. I don't want to make my own ships I just want ADB to design ships that look cooler than they do now the Mars is a pile of shhhh... look at this beauty it's in the TOS style they could take some lessons from something like this and if I am not mistaken this game I got this pic from is set in the SFU.
