Celisasu
Mongoose
Haven't been around for awhile but while I was away we've been toying around with a bunch of different ideas relating to ACTA. Some of them ideas that people on this forum have suggested. Others are things that we tried out. Some we liked, some we didn't. Anyways where in the past people have often tried one or two rules, we've been trying them out as a group, the idea being to see how they work as a whole. Some we kept, some we discarded, some we've been tweaking, and so on. Note that none of us ever got to read P&P so these are changes to ACTA 2nd Edition rules. I've got them listed by a couple of standards.
Definate: We're very happy with these rules. We'd definately add them to the core rules.
Probable: We really like these rules but feel they need a bit more playtesting.
Possible: These rules have things about them we like, but there are definate flaws to them. Usually it's something we like but we felt added either unnecessary complexity to the game or broke something balance wise.
Sucks: We hated them.
Flavor: These rules are more about flavor than anything else. They aren't meant for one off games but if you're planning on doing a campaign set in a specific era and you're trying to really make it feel like that era they're of use.
Random Stuff: Not so much rules as thoughts that popped up while we were toying with everything else.
Definate:
Redundancy: We've tried a couple of versions that people mentioned awhile back for this and we've decided that we like the version which automatically negates one critical per point of redundancy(and lowers the score each time this happens). The trait itself can be the one you chose to repair during damage control although you can only restore one point at a time unless you use the All Hands To Deck! special action. We've defaulted to Redundancy 1 for Raid, Redundancy 2 for Battle, 3 for War, and 4 for Armageddon although the exact number can vary ship by ship. For example even though it's Raid we've tried Redundancy two and three on the T'Loth while for War we've tried lowering the G'Vrahn's rating to only two or one.
Weak: Instead of -1 to attacks, we've tried this as a trait that makes it so the weapon can't score criticals. It's a little thing but we like it better than how Weak is currently handled.
Boresite as a trait rather than arc. Boresite is now a positive trait rather than a negative arc. A weapon with a Forward or Aft arc can have the Boresite trait which gives +2AD to the weapon if you manage to line it up.
Probable:
Removing crew quality. This was something we experimented with as a method of speeding up the game. We needed to tweak some of the special actions as well as things such as how you approach debris but overall we've been rather happy without crew quality checks.
Advanced Interceptors. We've been trying two versions of them. One treats them like normal interceptors except instead of only keeping the last die you can hang onto as many as the rating has. Another version we tried was having it so the number you have to roll never increases but the dropping down to one die can still happen. Overall we think we like the first version better although the second version is simpler.
Change to how beams are handled. We've tried a few versions but ultimately we rather like the idea of:
1 or 2: Miss
3 or 4: One hit
5: Two hits
6: Three hits
No constant rerolls. This gives us a smoother curve on how much damage is done. You're less likely to get a complete miss but you're also less likely to get 20 hits or the like.
Possible:
Escort: We've tried out escorts as being able to hand out both Antifighter and Interceptors(basically everyone has the equivalent of the Centauri Guardian Array).
Advanced Antifighter: Instead of +1 to hit we've been trying it as Advanced Antifighter has a 4" range rather than a 2" range. Same chance of hitting, but Advanced Antifighter can threaten bombers who used to hide outside of the original's range.
Moving fighters into regular Initiative: We actually really like this rule. The big problem we've hit with it is that it makes things more complex which is why it's not definate. In specific the problem is that it forces you to keep track of what ships each fighter squadron is associated with or what wing. The idea is that each complete wing moves or when you move their carrier, all fighters associated with that carrier move and fire. We like it, but as noted the problem is that it requires you to keep track of potentially a ton of fighters which is why it's only listed as possible.
Admirals as ships: The idea here is rather than an admiral automatically being a FAP that can be added to whatever he wants(leading to someone figuring the best way to abuse the ability by figuring out exactly what ship gives the most bang for the Admiral's buck) the Admiral and his ship is always a Unique vessel with it's own modified stats and special rules.
Points: We've been experimenting with a point system rather than the FAP system. Granted that the FAP system is a point system, just with specific values, but in this case we've been trying a more traditional point approach with more than eight values(twofer, patrol, skirmish, raid, battle, war, armageddon, ancient in case you're wondering what I mean by the eight values of current ACTA). Honestly I like it a lot, the only reason I have it listed as possible is I know this is despised by a lot of the ACTA community. I've honestly been thinking of designing ships with different stats under both system so both groups can be happy.
Sucks:
Individual ship initiative: This was an experiment to get around initiative sinks. Ships had their own initiative that you added your fleet bonus to and things moved in the order of lowest to highest with ships of the same initiative moving one player at a time until they all moved. Tried it with some arbitrary values as a thought experiment, it was way too complex and slowed stuff down, we didn't touch it again.
Flavor:
Fleet composition limits: As opposed to balance reasons that people did in the past as suggestions for limits on ships like the Sag and it's missle spam or Dag'Kar and it's E-Mine spam and so on at various points, this is designed more to make sure fleets have a proper feel. One example was when we were toying with a varient Possedion in an Early Years EA fleet. The flavor text that Mongoose had about it suggested that two existed in the early years but were blown up. As a flavor rule we decided that there were two of them, but you could only ever have one in your fleet(a sort of variation of Unique but in a Campaign you could theoretically have two overall, just in different locations) and they could never participate in anything below a War level engagement as the EA would not risk their most advanced ship. Basically we had three traits to represent this.
Rare: This ship isn't unique but there's never more than one per fleet due to limited availability.
Priority Limit X: This ship will only participate in engagements of this priority or higher as the government won't throw such a vital resource into something of lesser importance.
Uncommen: This ship can not take up more than 1/4 of your FAPs or points(depending on whether you're using a point or FAP system). This is either due to the ship not being produced in mass numbers or generally only being assigned in a support role or who's manufacturing is just being started or who are currently being retired.
Random Stuff:
Star Trek: Yeah, we statted out some Trek ships. Horribly imbalanced at this point(we used micromachines for our ships). But there's definate potential. Still it was awesome taking the Enterprise-A with Kirk on it(normal Constitutions were roughly Skirmish level, A with Kirk in charge was designed as a Raid level ship, this was done point based so it doesn't quite work with FAPs, just that base Constitutions came out as strong skirmish vessels roughly while Enterprise A was roughly equivalent to a weak Raid ship).
Star Wars: As per Star Trek we statted out some ships. Things were even more out of whack than with the Trek ships, but once again there's potential.
Definate: We're very happy with these rules. We'd definately add them to the core rules.
Probable: We really like these rules but feel they need a bit more playtesting.
Possible: These rules have things about them we like, but there are definate flaws to them. Usually it's something we like but we felt added either unnecessary complexity to the game or broke something balance wise.
Sucks: We hated them.
Flavor: These rules are more about flavor than anything else. They aren't meant for one off games but if you're planning on doing a campaign set in a specific era and you're trying to really make it feel like that era they're of use.
Random Stuff: Not so much rules as thoughts that popped up while we were toying with everything else.
Definate:
Redundancy: We've tried a couple of versions that people mentioned awhile back for this and we've decided that we like the version which automatically negates one critical per point of redundancy(and lowers the score each time this happens). The trait itself can be the one you chose to repair during damage control although you can only restore one point at a time unless you use the All Hands To Deck! special action. We've defaulted to Redundancy 1 for Raid, Redundancy 2 for Battle, 3 for War, and 4 for Armageddon although the exact number can vary ship by ship. For example even though it's Raid we've tried Redundancy two and three on the T'Loth while for War we've tried lowering the G'Vrahn's rating to only two or one.
Weak: Instead of -1 to attacks, we've tried this as a trait that makes it so the weapon can't score criticals. It's a little thing but we like it better than how Weak is currently handled.
Boresite as a trait rather than arc. Boresite is now a positive trait rather than a negative arc. A weapon with a Forward or Aft arc can have the Boresite trait which gives +2AD to the weapon if you manage to line it up.
Probable:
Removing crew quality. This was something we experimented with as a method of speeding up the game. We needed to tweak some of the special actions as well as things such as how you approach debris but overall we've been rather happy without crew quality checks.
Advanced Interceptors. We've been trying two versions of them. One treats them like normal interceptors except instead of only keeping the last die you can hang onto as many as the rating has. Another version we tried was having it so the number you have to roll never increases but the dropping down to one die can still happen. Overall we think we like the first version better although the second version is simpler.
Change to how beams are handled. We've tried a few versions but ultimately we rather like the idea of:
1 or 2: Miss
3 or 4: One hit
5: Two hits
6: Three hits
No constant rerolls. This gives us a smoother curve on how much damage is done. You're less likely to get a complete miss but you're also less likely to get 20 hits or the like.
Possible:
Escort: We've tried out escorts as being able to hand out both Antifighter and Interceptors(basically everyone has the equivalent of the Centauri Guardian Array).
Advanced Antifighter: Instead of +1 to hit we've been trying it as Advanced Antifighter has a 4" range rather than a 2" range. Same chance of hitting, but Advanced Antifighter can threaten bombers who used to hide outside of the original's range.
Moving fighters into regular Initiative: We actually really like this rule. The big problem we've hit with it is that it makes things more complex which is why it's not definate. In specific the problem is that it forces you to keep track of what ships each fighter squadron is associated with or what wing. The idea is that each complete wing moves or when you move their carrier, all fighters associated with that carrier move and fire. We like it, but as noted the problem is that it requires you to keep track of potentially a ton of fighters which is why it's only listed as possible.
Admirals as ships: The idea here is rather than an admiral automatically being a FAP that can be added to whatever he wants(leading to someone figuring the best way to abuse the ability by figuring out exactly what ship gives the most bang for the Admiral's buck) the Admiral and his ship is always a Unique vessel with it's own modified stats and special rules.
Points: We've been experimenting with a point system rather than the FAP system. Granted that the FAP system is a point system, just with specific values, but in this case we've been trying a more traditional point approach with more than eight values(twofer, patrol, skirmish, raid, battle, war, armageddon, ancient in case you're wondering what I mean by the eight values of current ACTA). Honestly I like it a lot, the only reason I have it listed as possible is I know this is despised by a lot of the ACTA community. I've honestly been thinking of designing ships with different stats under both system so both groups can be happy.
Sucks:
Individual ship initiative: This was an experiment to get around initiative sinks. Ships had their own initiative that you added your fleet bonus to and things moved in the order of lowest to highest with ships of the same initiative moving one player at a time until they all moved. Tried it with some arbitrary values as a thought experiment, it was way too complex and slowed stuff down, we didn't touch it again.
Flavor:
Fleet composition limits: As opposed to balance reasons that people did in the past as suggestions for limits on ships like the Sag and it's missle spam or Dag'Kar and it's E-Mine spam and so on at various points, this is designed more to make sure fleets have a proper feel. One example was when we were toying with a varient Possedion in an Early Years EA fleet. The flavor text that Mongoose had about it suggested that two existed in the early years but were blown up. As a flavor rule we decided that there were two of them, but you could only ever have one in your fleet(a sort of variation of Unique but in a Campaign you could theoretically have two overall, just in different locations) and they could never participate in anything below a War level engagement as the EA would not risk their most advanced ship. Basically we had three traits to represent this.
Rare: This ship isn't unique but there's never more than one per fleet due to limited availability.
Priority Limit X: This ship will only participate in engagements of this priority or higher as the government won't throw such a vital resource into something of lesser importance.
Uncommen: This ship can not take up more than 1/4 of your FAPs or points(depending on whether you're using a point or FAP system). This is either due to the ship not being produced in mass numbers or generally only being assigned in a support role or who's manufacturing is just being started or who are currently being retired.
Random Stuff:
Star Trek: Yeah, we statted out some Trek ships. Horribly imbalanced at this point(we used micromachines for our ships). But there's definate potential. Still it was awesome taking the Enterprise-A with Kirk on it(normal Constitutions were roughly Skirmish level, A with Kirk in charge was designed as a Raid level ship, this was done point based so it doesn't quite work with FAPs, just that base Constitutions came out as strong skirmish vessels roughly while Enterprise A was roughly equivalent to a weak Raid ship).
Star Wars: As per Star Trek we statted out some ships. Things were even more out of whack than with the Trek ships, but once again there's potential.
