New Saggi!
- Thread starter Lorcan Nagle
- Start date
Slightly Norse John
Mongoose
The White Star can't either, by the stats.
The trait 'atmospheric' doesn't even mention ships; it's all about auxilliary craft. We are guessing and extrapolating from that as to what an actual ship, in atmosphere, can do.
It's already specified as being not possible to drop troops and bombard in the same round- p16, SFoS. I would suggest that an Atmospheric capable ship can choose to either deploy all it's troop payload (the last word in battle taxis), or to attack.
Emplacements or troops? I'd say that any anti-fighter weapon may be used to attack Troops (light targets highly dispersed, far from a perfect match but close enough), any other weapon may be used to attack Emplacements.
Shooting at it; trickier. Either it can be fired at freely, as a ship target, or being in the atmosphere actually counts for something.
In that case, I'd say it was a planetary target, and while not being one, has the same restrictions on being shot at as an Emplacement (SFoS p15, low orbit, holding position or orbiting, restricted weapon list, etc.) Which would make it an extremely useful thing to do, and a very efficient planetary defence to have some of your ships hiding in the atmosphere.
The trait 'atmospheric' doesn't even mention ships; it's all about auxilliary craft. We are guessing and extrapolating from that as to what an actual ship, in atmosphere, can do.
It's already specified as being not possible to drop troops and bombard in the same round- p16, SFoS. I would suggest that an Atmospheric capable ship can choose to either deploy all it's troop payload (the last word in battle taxis), or to attack.
Emplacements or troops? I'd say that any anti-fighter weapon may be used to attack Troops (light targets highly dispersed, far from a perfect match but close enough), any other weapon may be used to attack Emplacements.
Shooting at it; trickier. Either it can be fired at freely, as a ship target, or being in the atmosphere actually counts for something.
In that case, I'd say it was a planetary target, and while not being one, has the same restrictions on being shot at as an Emplacement (SFoS p15, low orbit, holding position or orbiting, restricted weapon list, etc.) Which would make it an extremely useful thing to do, and a very efficient planetary defence to have some of your ships hiding in the atmosphere.
Locutus9956
Mongoose
Well as Matt pointed out in the S&P article mistakes happen! I'm not enitrely sure how the Sag outcry could have been missed since we've all been screaming about it since the tourney list version came out but frankly Im just greatful that they DID listen and have now fixed the issue. 
Locutus9956 said:Well as Matt pointed out in the S&P article mistakes happen! I'm not enitrely sure how the Sag outcry could have been missed since we've all been screaming about it since the tourney list version came out but frankly Im just greatful that they DID listen and have now fixed the issue.
(I liked the old stats 
)I never wanted to field 10 Sagi in a game. I have only 2 on order. Hull 4 means they will die quickly but I like that they can be balanced with other EA ships and sit back & shoot like they are supposed to.
I look forward to using the new Sagi!
Locutus9956
Mongoose
even individually they were still too tough for the firepower the packed at skirmish level. Something had to change and its been done quite well I think. The ship still has VERY scary firepower for its PL but its now weak enough to take out quickly if your opponent isnt careful with them
Wulf Corbett
Mongoose
It would with the Ikorta... 10 Troops... :shock:hiffano said:
Whether it was me or not, the stats for a number of ships have changed in ACtA second edition, many in ways that I like... I am prepared to say that the Atmospheric Trait has been more tightly defined, and is far more common in 2ed.
Wulf
Wulf Corbett said:
good, it needed to be sorted. That was the whole point about the ikorta, it was supposed to be able to land a shedload of troops. All I personally want from second ed (in terms of my own fleets) is a decent avioki, and a Dag Kar that is once again feared. . . at least a little bit. . .
Wulf Corbett
Mongoose
Haven't checked the Dag Kar (I'm working on the Ancients & League), but the Avioki is under scrutiny.hiffano said:
Wulf
Locutus9956
Mongoose
hiffano said:
If by fine you mean 'oh my good god HOW MANY AD of beams did you say youre about fire at me?!?!?!' then yes, it is a fine ship indeed :lol:
Wulf Corbett
Mongoose
Personally, I was always happy with the Avioki. 8AD AP Beam DD is pretty damn good, especially when you can CaF! it. A couple of them made some nasty dents in the Armageddon Shadows...Locutus9956 said:
EDIT: I have been using the Tournament Avioki since it apperared.
Wulf
Locutus9956
Mongoose
Hmmmm Id always read the Kalivas lances as beams. Must be the BFG thinking in the back of my mind that equates lance = big laser of doom
Lorcan Nagle
Mongoose
Burger said:
You know, right after you posted I remembered some poosts about it post SFOS, and Matt saying it didn't get atmospheric for balance reasons. D'oh.
prelude_to_war
Mongoose
Good fix on the Sag - about time!
Greg Smith
Mongoose
Black Omega said:
The writing and playtesting was complete on Armageddon back in April (around the time complaints started to surface about the Sagi). Armageddon then suffered problems due to lack of photographs because of collapsing molds and then further delays at the printers. (all of which has been stated on threads on these boards).
Lorcan Nagle
Mongoose
I believe the art from the old fleet book is all sourced from B5 Wars books and/or fan sites. Not exactly easy to do with entirely new designs.
