Points system vs PL

The main advantage of a points system is ease of modification. If a unit is too powerful for its cost, you just up the cost. You don't have to faff about altering stats to fit into inflexible slots like the PL system.

For instance, a Vorchan is balanced for skirmish level, most agree. The Demos, however (pre-P&P) is better. So instead of nerfing the Demos, you just set the Vorchan at a lower cost. Vorchan, 200 points. Demos, 250, as ballpark figures.
 
Just to start off I don't think a points system would solve any problems people may have with ship selection, all the problems would still exist it would just shift ground. For example some people think a points system would solve the "My favourite ship is nerfed" problem. They often state that a points based system would allow for more fine delineation between ships rather than just lumping them into six categories (ie, this ship should be worth 14 points, that one 16 rather than both being raid). The Problem with this is that then people will complain that the ship should be worth 13 points, or even 15 or 16 rather than 14. A points system will create more arguments not reduce them. You think its bad when there is the occasional dispute that this ship should be skirmish not raid, wait till you get points rather than PL. I've never heard much talk that the Omega Destroyer shouldn't be battle PL, but we would hear a lot about if it should be worth 40 or 43 points, what about 42.
 
Yes, people will argue over the points values but those are easily solved with proper playtesting. What we won't see is stupid AD numbers, too high or low, to fit into artificial PL slots.
 
The other problem with a points based system is the rock paper scissors aspect to ACTA. Three ships A,B,C all the same priority level,

A has an advantage over B -- A may be fast and maneuverable and can get in B's blind spots,

B has an advantage over C -- B has longer range weapons than C and is a bit faster and more maneuverable and can just pick it apart from long range. C isn't fast enough to find that blind spot on B's flanks,

C has an advantage over A -- C is a brick and has more firepower than fast and agile A, unlike B, C has no blind spots for A to exploit

In a points based system what points would be assigned to these 3 ships. A should be worth more because it usually beats B, and B usually beats C, but just a minute A can't be more expensive than C because C pounds A most of the time.

ACTA isn't as straight forward as most systems where one ship is better than another. Different ships are effective in different situations the equivalencies have to be somewhat broad. They work well as a general assessment of the ship in most situations.
 
The other issue with a points system is that the current PL system is basically just a disguised points system, just without much variation in the values of the ships,
3 patrol
6 skirmish
12 raid
24 battle
48 war
96 armageddon

introducing a points system would not change much except instead of saying a demos is raid while vorchan is skirmish it would just be a 12 point demos with a 6 point vorchan. Sure you can change it a bit but its just as easy to knock down a stat or two of the demos as it would be to change its points value
 
incidently, in taking my position, I'm not saying a points system is inherently a bad idea. Many of the arguments for its use make perfect sense, giving greater flexibility in the value of ships allow for "half PL" ships, skirmish and a half if you will. That makes good sense to me in theory, its just that in practice I think its more trouble than its worth. I fear endless debates over the points values of every ship under the sun. Most people generally agree on the PL of most ships (with a few exceptions). But introduce points systems and all of a sudden you enter the whole squalid world of "my ship is raidier than yours".

A PL system makes ship values much easier and less controversial to assign and works pretty well for most ships. The main gripe I have against the points system is that it is a big fix for a small problem and is very risky in sparking more controversy over ship values.
 
The thing I like about the proposed FAP breakdowns (pretty much how they used to be if I remember correctly) is that it encourages battles to be fought at different priority levels. Some players disliked this as they felt it artificially limited their ship choices (which is true), but oddly enough thats exactly what I liked about it. I thought it was a simple yet inovative system to encourage variety in fleets (the right tool for the right job). No battles of War cruisers on patrol, or the mighty fleet of Tethys patrol boats in the War to end all wars. Big ships in big battles, small ships patroling the periphery. It was and will be a system that makes the game more interesting and helps encourage adaptability rather than just "I'll take my trusty Omega again because Omegas are best...what...just a patrol, fine, then I'll just take one instead of half a dozen"

If you didn't like the old (new) system and want to take whitestars to every battle, thats fine, I can understand liking whitestars (who wouldn't), but perhaps "try to look on this as an opportunity, not a problem" and enjoy the occasional battle with something different.
 
A points system would resolve the swarm issue, as you'd need a command ship standard, meaning everyone brings a capital ship, and we can finally balance the larger ships upwards, and just have their points reflect the change, make it a no brainer to take a 200 point ship if you've got a thousand to spend. Make people want to take a single 200 point ship if thats all they're going to get, because 200 points is 200 points.

Some ships are meant to be better than others, and I could just pay points for a better, healthier White Star, and not have to constantly be balancing towards some imaginary raid level standard.

I can pay for upgrades with points, instead of as a variant, and trim the fat and only take what I feel I need in cases where I don't need a fighter bay or scout.
 
katadder said:
why would points mean bringing a command ship or stop swarms?

could spend all your points on swarm ships.
Click to expand...

Indeed you can, but a point system like the one in B5 Wars would mean that one couldn't possibly get the horde of ships as under the current system.

I'm with Lord David that a properly balanced point system would be superior to the FAP chart as every ships would have an individual value.

So for example there can be games played with 500 points. Both players the could buy freely buy ships up to this value.
 
Matt claims this as one of his Golden points of ACTA. They will stick with the Priorities over actually costs per ship because it sets ACTA out from other games.

Lets hope the update balances this off so people can stop complainning about it.
 
I certainly hope they do not move away from the PL system. It makes building a fleet on the fly dead easy. 5 Point battle? I'll have 2 of A, 1 B, 3 C and 2 D and 2 E. Time to play.

500 points battle, that'll be half an hour trying to remember how much A costs and whether 2 of them are worth buying over 1 A and 2 and 1/2 Bs but then if I loose the 1/3 a B and 1 of the C's I can get a Q.... I find a proper points system means you spend too much time juggling army lists looking for the perfect way to spend your points. The PL system means that you spend your time actually gaming, and it is straight forward to substitute ships in and out when you want to try something new.

The PL system for the most part is pretty well balanced, with a few rogue ships here and there. I'm sure if here was a shift to points there will still be rogue ships that need a bit more balancing.
 
I am all for the existing priority system over points. In my view one of the best things about this game is that system. Totally agree that if we moved to points everyone would just moan and complain about that.
 
Almost certainly been discussed before but are there good reasons why you can't have a ship that cost a PL and bit eg:

The present version of the Demos costing a Skirmish and a Patrol pt

or a Drakh war era Minbari Sharlin upgrade costing a War and a Skirmish point?

thanks
 
I like the concept but it's balancing each ship up against each other I think Precise makes a huge difference and I can't stand it as a rule.
 
I like the PL system in theory, but in practice, it needs more work. I think more levels might help things a bit. say, 10 instead of 6. the current 2-fers need their own PL. I think 2-fers as 2-fers is just a really dumb concept. I would also like to see a level between 'armageddon' and 'ancient' that only the vorlons and shadows have ships at.

I like PL because of its feel and the theory behind it, but I have to admit, the granularity of points is nice as well. Fleets are constructed on these exact measurments of ability to fit within 6 levels of power. It is a very affected design
 
Good point. I could indeed live with a system with more PL's.

Makes ships better to fit into rather the 6 only levels yet.
 
stepan.razin said:
We could have about 50 Priority Levels. each PL would corespond to a point.
Click to expand...

Excellent then Mongoose can make and sell a D50 for the priority level. I hope it doesn't come with flash on it lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
New star system configuration discovered
Replies
4
Views
214
rinku
R
S
High Guard Smaller Weapons
5 6 7
Replies
132
Views
4K
Condottiere
C
Yenaldlooshi
Rules Clarification: Agent Programs (CSCp69)
2
Replies
38
Views
1K
Geir
Geir
Zhangar
Deepnight revelation or project bayern for exploration mechanics
Replies
18
Views
1K
Zhangar
Zhangar
Limpin Legin
Points for 'Likes' on this Forum?
Replies
6
Views
802
Anstett
Anstett
Back
Top