REVISED: Current PL, Points or Diff PL?

[Abraxas]

If the point of the PL system was to keep things simple... than why complicate it with "rarity" issues? A points system can eliminate EVERY single problem with ACtA and NOT introduce new complications.

Vorchan not good enough? Make it cheaper. Prefect too good? Make it more expensive.

Since neither ship is "good enough" or "too good" in the surrounding PLs... and we can't trust MP to make EACH ship in EACH PL appropriately balanced (leading to people taking obviously better ships [Covran] over otherwise sucky ones [Kuati])... why use a PL system? It doesn't allow for each ship in a fleet to be used because there will always be a "best choice" in a PL.

No one wonders why a Bin'Tak is taken 100% of the time? Given the choices, why the hell not take the best ship in the group?

Maybe I'm just an ass... or dumb... or both... but I can't see ANY logical reason to keep the PL system at all. Sorry .

 

[polemarch]

Keep the PL system, but redress the way ships are allocated within PL.

e.g.

Limit the variations on hulls to avoid over powered options.
Be stricter on in service times
Place a limit on the max or min numbers that can be taken of a particular ship.

As long as the game is fun I don't really care what they end up doing.

 

[tneva82]

A points system can eliminate EVERY single problem with ACtA and NOT introduce new complications.

False. It just wraps same problems into different system.

 

[cordas]

Maybe I'm just an ass... or dumb... or both... but I can't see ANY logical reason to keep the PL system at all. Sorry .

Maybe because it makes a nice simple system that allows to moderate the size of the fight being had. If you are fighting a 10 point skirmish, then you ain't fielding a war, although points wise you should be able to. We find in our gaming group that the PL system makes for nice fleet choices, where as points based games tend not to. Its a simple system that worked.

I will agree that its now being stretched to breaking point, but that can happen to any game... *COUGH* 40k *COUGH* with the release of 2e MGP have the perfect opportunity to rebalance the system, and I think a judicious introduction of a rare type system (not b5wars, but similar) would add to the rebalancing and allow the use of some cheesy ships and hulls, but restrict their use enough that they don't over power the game. Doing this using the points system would mean you would have to introduce some form of fleet pick system, or 1 player could just choose all the expensive cheesy ships and you are back where you started at.

If it ain't broke don't fix it. PL isn't broken it just needs a bit of TLC.

 

[Abraxas]

A points system can eliminate EVERY single problem with ACtA and NOT introduce new complications.

False. It just wraps same problems into different system.

I have to respectfully disagree.

Have a problem with a particular ship? Change the cost.

With a PL you have to consider every single other ship in the group and decise if THEY all need to be changed or if that particular ship needs to be changed. Should Raid ships look more like a Demos... or a Prefect? Should Battle ships look more like a Bin'Tak... or a G'Quonth?

It just doesn't make sence to tailor an entire group of ships into a single category...

Maybe I'm just an ass... or dumb... or both... but I can't see ANY logical reason to keep the PL system at all. Sorry .

Maybe because it makes a nice simple system that allows to moderate the size of the fight being had. If you are fighting a 10 point skirmish, then you ain't fielding a war, although points wise you should be able to. We find in our gaming group that the PL system makes for nice fleet choices, where as points based games tend not to. Its a simple system that worked.

All you proved was that with a points system there is far more choices. Now you have the spectrum of the entire fleet... and not just what's in a Skirmish class... or Raid... or Battle (depending on how you lash your PLs together).

I will agree that its now being stretched to breaking point, but that can happen to any game... *COUGH* 40k *COUGH* with the release of 2e MGP have the perfect opportunity to rebalance the system, and I think a judicious introduction of a rare type system (not b5wars, but similar) would add to the rebalancing and allow the use of some cheesy ships and hulls, but restrict their use enough that they don't over power the game. Doing this using the points system would mean you would have to introduce some form of fleet pick system, or 1 player could just choose all the expensive cheesy ships and you are back where you started at.

That is why the good ships will be expensive...

What is so bad about the point cost system in BFG? 40K? I play those games, so try and restrict your examples to those games if you can.

If you add rarity to a PL system... you haven't addressed the MAIN problem that occurs when you group ships together. If the ship is better it should cost more... not just limit it's availability.

If it ain't broke don't fix it. PL isn't broken it just needs a bit of TLC.

But I think it IS broken... and I guess I can wait for 2e to come out and see if they adjusted the stats correctly...

... but $10 says they overpower all the weak hulls that people complained about and we're back to where we started.

In a PL system there will always be ships that look better. Not because of what they do... but because the same task can be accomplished by a better ship. A points system allows for individual changes to occur WITHOUT changing the ship... just the cost.

 

[tneva82]

With a PL you have to consider every single other ship in the group and decise if THEY all need to be changed or if that particular ship needs to be changed.

And with point system you also need to concider every other ship in fleet...Also opponents...Also scenario to be played...You will still get broken ships as well...

One system or other. Both result in broken ships just as easily.

What is so bad about the point cost system in BFG? 40K?

That they are just unbalanced as PL system is. Neither game is balanced. Neither CAN be balanced.

 

[katadder]

BFG has a point system but most the cruisers are all around the same points value give or take 10-20pt. might as well just make them 2 points as make them 210, 190 etc.
and thats what ACTA does really. we could have lots of ships around the same value but for the meagre difference in points using a points system theres no reason. in gothic people always take the best ships, certain ships never see use and thats the way in 40k with armies etc. its always the way in any games system.
and if you dont think 40k is broken in points try pitting 2 guardians againsta marine, or 1 guardian versus a dark eldar warrior.
you could say that the points for those mentioned are relative to their armies, but then that works for our PLs to fleets.

 

[Celisasu]

I've always been an advocate of the points system. Really the PL system is a point system just with a very limited number selection. Namely values of 1(Patrol), 2(Skirmish), 4(Raid), 8(Battle), 16(War), 32(Armageddon), and 64(Ancient)

You;re assuming a base for reference at Patrol PL, and you're assuming a constant base level, neither of which is really true, the base level at which ships are bought changes.

For example, at Patrol PL, an Armageddon ship is worth 32 Patrol ships, whilst at Raid Level an Armageddon Ship is worth 24 Patrol ships.

Your point has some merit, but it is not as cut and dried as you suggest, the relative values of different levels shift depending at what PL the ships in question are being bought.

LBH

Well the higher priorities use inflation on low priority ships but that's why people almost never do a direct breakdown that way instead maximising the number of points they get via splitting a point and splitting again until they get down to whatever the highest bang for it's buck priority is where they'll stop splitting and just take two ships of.

 

[emperorpenguin]

Vorchan not good enough? Make it cheaper. Prefect too good? Make it more expensive.: .

alternatively balance them.....

 

[Johnny D]

In terms of both 40k or warhammer to use common examples both of them use rare/special/common or HQ/Elite/Troup/Fast Attack/Heavy Support restrictions to limit choices. Indeed both of them also restrict or enforce the numbers of times specific units can be taken ie 0-1 or 1+ choices.
By limiting numbers of individual ship types, you have an elegant and simple solution that helps to keep the distinctive priority system, but curbs the worst abuses

 

[cordas]

Really both PL and points have strengths and weaknesses, and both have some very vocal supporters.

I don't want to stiffle the debate, but it has been made clear that PL is here to stay. I think the 1 thing we all agree on is that it needs imporving from what it currently is, and whilst I am sure none of us want to see every fleet with identical ships, we also want some way of balancing hard ships at one level that wouldn't cut the mustard at a higher level other than stat adjustment.

I like the idea of rare, and maybe very rare. You could also have a class called common, which means you can take as many of as you want for points, such as Vorchans or White Stars. Whilst other normal picks are slightly restricted as in you can't take just a fleet of them such Dag'kars or Saggis.

 

[Gargoyle117]

I'm glad Johnny D mentioned the WH 40K system.

I like points, because they allow for a greater spread in the variety of units in a given PL. Points are also good for being able to buy upgrades. Want to see more or better missile variants for the EA? Points is the way to go. Want to see more options for any of the other races? Points again.

I love that the PL system helps to focus the variety of ships taken, but it does not seem to prevent some one from taking a fleet skewed to one end of the PL list or the other.

If ACTA gets a point system, please maintain the PL groupings or something similar to help focus the spending of points. There are lots of ways that both systems could be used together to benefit ACTA.

 

[cordas]

I like points, because they allow for a greater spread in the variety of units in a given PL. Points are also good for being able to buy upgrades. Want to see more or better missile variants for the EA? Points is the way to go. Want to see more options for any of the other races? Points again.

Urgh No thanks, thats exaclty why I don't want them to go down the points route. Personally I like the fact its standard ships.

I understand points and like them for the other war games I play such as SST, BF: EVO, Flames of War and used to play 40K. Points is good for those types of games where you would get specific squads equiped on a man by man basis to deal with specific threats, this type of re-equiping is fairly easy and cheap, and is often done (well I do think 40k takes vehicle customisation maybe a little to far, but thats one of the lesser sins of the system imho).

When it comes to fleet combat, a Captain get issued with his standard ship and uses it, he doesn't then get given a load of gear to customise his ship with.... When has this ever happened since the advent of professional navies?

OK I will grant you ships get re-fitted and systems do get upgraded, but thats on a ship by ship basis not fleets, I think this is covered by the campaign rules and see no need to bring this into throw away games. When a ship is refitted or upgraded that becomes the ship, they don't suddenly decide that the extra punch its got on its main guns is going to taken away or switched off, merely to save wear and tear or some such (points).

Yes points could be used to buy specailist missiles or energy mines or whatever, but we don't really need it, the way its handled now is fine in my book.

 

[Abraxas]

Why can't we do a points system WITH rarity classifications? Afraid we'll look too much like B5Wars?

Give it up. This game has every ship, model and weapon from B5Wars under a new (faster, easier) game mechanic... so why not use the B5Wars system as well? That worked.

And with point system you also need to concider every other ship in fleet...Also opponents...Also scenario to be played...You will still get broken ships as well...

If you think it isn't easier to adjust particular ships with a points system than you denying the fundementals of it.

Each ship in a PL needs to look like the rest of it's commrades. In a points system each ship can have a unique role with a unique cost.

BFG has a point system but most the cruisers are all around the same points value give or take 10-20pt. might as well just make them 2 points as make them 210, 190 etc.

20 points might let you get a Patrol ship... or a flight of fighters.

ACtA has a greater degree of freedom and a MUCH larger list of ships for each fleet than BFG. There will always be a choice for spare points.

Add refits (if you want) and that problem is solved... and you avoid the chances of people taking ships that are blatantly better inside a PL (Teretius v. Primus or Omega v. Puls Omega).

and if you dont think 40k is broken in points try pitting 2 guardians againsta marine, or 1 guardian versus a dark eldar warrior.
you could say that the points for those mentioned are relative to their armies, but then that works for our PLs to fleets.

I wouldn't. I would blame the money grubbing Evil Empire and their inability to listen to it's players for the MASSIVE difference between (Dark) Eldar and Chaos/Space Marines. Fortunately MP is a company that actually cares about what it's fans have to say.

If a points cost should change we will all come here, mention it, discuss it and MP will change it. Just look at the changes to the Sag. The White Star. The Command Omega.

MP works to make fans happy. GW works to sell the armies that people will buy (i.e. Chaos/Space Marines).

Well the higher priorities use inflation on low priority ships but that's why people almost never do a direct breakdown that way instead maximising the number of points they get via splitting a point and splitting again until they get down to whatever the highest bang for it's buck priority is where they'll stop splitting and just take two ships of.

A perfect example of how people power game.

A PL system is not free from this practice.

Vorchan not good enough? Make it cheaper. Prefect too good? Make it more expensive.: .

alternatively balance them.....

And risk a mistake with ship stats when compared to other ships? We have no metric to say what ship is Skirmish and what is Raid.

Again, I ask, should Raid ships look more like a Prefect or a Demos. Should Battle ships look more like a Bin'Tak or a G'Quonth?

We have no metric in which to base PLs on. We just want it to look like the best ship in the group.

In terms of both 40k or warhammer to use common examples both of them use rare/special/common or HQ/Elite/Troup/Fast Attack/Heavy Support restrictions to limit choices. Indeed both of them also restrict or enforce the numbers of times specific units can be taken ie 0-1 or 1+ choices.
By limiting numbers of individual ship types, you have an elegant and simple solution that helps to keep the distinctive priority system, but curbs the worst abuses

Not really.

If a Vorchan is common and a Maximus is common... no one will still take the Vorchan. All you have done is complicated the system. We'll have people arguing over what ships are common and uncommon even though we have NO canon evidence to prove ANY of it...

... unless we use B5Wars as a guide. In which case we might as well switch to a points system.

The most important thing to address in ACtA is the "stats to cost" ratio. When you basically only have 6 costs (Patrol, Skirmish, Raid, Battle, War, Armageddon) it restricts your ability to accurately make a unique ship.

I like the idea of rare, and maybe very rare. You could also have a class called common, which means you can take as many of as you want for points, such as Vorchans or White Stars. Whilst other normal picks are slightly restricted as in you can't take just a fleet of them such Dag'kars or Saggis.

Who said the Sagg was uncommon? What makes you think they didn't make a lot of them? They're good. They're long range support.

Who says they aren't common?

The point is, we can't do this unless we reference B5Wars... in which case we may as well use a similar points system as well.

Urgh No thanks, thats exaclty why I don't want them to go down the points route. Personally I like the fact its standard ships.

But it's not. That is why we run into Prefect v. Centaurian issues.





Look, I know I'm being an ass because of how vehemently I defend my point... and I am probably losing a lot of people's respect (if I had any before)... but I just think a points system would be easier and better.

It's a matter of personal opinion.

 

[emperorpenguin]

Give it up. This game has every ship, model and weapon from B5Wars under a new (faster, easier) game mechanic... so why not use the B5Wars system as well? That worked.

Give it up? Matt has stated categorically that the PL system is staying, you need to give it up!

Each ship in a PL needs to look like the rest of it's commrades. In a points system each ship can have a unique role with a unique cost.

needs to be similar to its comrades.

20 points might let you get a Patrol ship... or a flight of fighters.

or it might buy you bugger all as in BFG (which Matt stated was why they decided AGAINST points) or as in Warhammer, my Dark Elves got 2 points cheaper? Whoop de do, 20 points won't even buy you a dispel scroll!

A perfect example of how people power game.

A PL system is not free from this practice.

and a points system is!? :shock: :roll:

And risk a mistake with ship stats when compared to other ships? We have no metric to say what ship is Skirmish and what is Raid.

where do you get this idea that properly balanced ships would have mistakes? How many points based games have constant readjustments? About all of them, that's how many

If a Vorchan is common and a Maximus is common... no one will still take the Vorchan.

so again your argument is based on unbalanced ships, not the relative merits of the system. I can tell you in 2nd ed there are damn good reasons for hesitating when choosing between the two you mentioned

 

[katadder]

yep, me i would probably choose both or probably vorchans with a few maximus support.

 

[tneva82]

And risk a mistake with ship stats when compared to other ships? We have no metric to say what ship is Skirmish and what is Raid.

You think there's not same risk with point system? Both are essentially same systems...PL system just allows you to do things point system cannot do...

 

[Abraxas]

Give it up. This game has every ship, model and weapon from B5Wars under a new (faster, easier) game mechanic... so why not use the B5Wars system as well? That worked.

Give it up? Matt has stated categorically that the PL system is staying, you need to give it up!

Trust me. I know nothing I say will change the way this game is played... but if someone starts a topic, I'm posting my opinion.

Each ship in a PL needs to look like the rest of it's commrades. In a points system each ship can have a unique role with a unique cost.

needs to be similar to its comrades.

Semantics.

They need to be balanced with each other ship in the PL and each other ship outside the PL and each ship in each race.

20 points might let you get a Patrol ship... or a flight of fighters.

or it might buy you bugger all as in BFG (which Matt stated was why they decided AGAINST points) or as in Warhammer, my Dark Elves got 2 points cheaper? Whoop de do, 20 points won't even buy you a dispel scroll!

20 points buys me a power weapon... or lets me upgrade my Autarchs Swooping Hawk Wings to a Warp Jump Generator... it let's my Warp Spider Exarch take Power blades... gives another power to an Exarch.

The point is, the depending on how they assign values, 20 points could get you a lot.

A perfect example of how people power game.

A PL system is not free from this practice.

and a points system is!? :shock: :roll:

Never said it wasn't... but part of the argument FOR a PL system is that it cuts down on power gaming... which is clealy doesn't.

And risk a mistake with ship stats when compared to other ships? We have no metric to say what ship is Skirmish and what is Raid.

where do you get this idea that properly balanced ships would have mistakes?

Where do you get the idea that MP will make properly balanced ships?

How many points based games have constant readjustments? About all of them, that's how many

How many companies are as respectful to it's players as MP that they will actually make the change EVERYONE wants.

One thing about this community is that they want balance across the whole game. They complain that Earth has too many ships and they hope they concentrate on the rest of the game. No one wants a LoNAW fleet because people want the current fleets expanded.

In 40K there are people that take armies of possessed marines and think they need to be STRONGER. People take demon princes and complain they aren't GOOD ENOUGH.

My point is that the majority of those in the ACtA community aren't unscrupulous, which means when we adjust points it is because the (small) community here has discussed it.

If a Vorchan is common and a Maximus is common... no one will still take the Vorchan.

so again your argument is based on unbalanced ships, not the relative merits of the system.

The system is broken if the componet parts are broken.

If you don't have balance in a particular level, you don't have balance in the whole game.

I can tell you in 2nd ed there are damn good reasons for hesitating when choosing between the two you mentioned

Oh for Thor's sake. I don't know what 2e has yet... so bringing it up and using your impression of it is completely ridiculous since NO one (outside of the playtesters) have seen ANYTHING specific.

And risk a mistake with ship stats when compared to other ships? We have no metric to say what ship is Skirmish and what is Raid.

You think there's not same risk with point system? Both are essentially same systems...PL system just allows you to do things point system cannot do...

No. A points system lets you change the points and therefore fix the problem.

 

[lastbesthope]

Some people keep talking like PL and points systems are entirely different. They're not. a PL system is a points system, albeit one with a slightly variable index point the way it is implemented in aCTA.

LBH

 

[tneva82]

Where do you get the idea that MP will make properly balanced ships?

In that case points or priority level...DOESN'T MATTER! Underpointed or overpointed, still broken...If you don't feel they can make balanced ships then it's moot point because both ways system is broken...

No. A points system lets you change the points and therefore fix the problem.

You can fix balance problems with PL systems as well. No difference there...

Why you think PL system is somehow frozen where ships can't be balanced? That's laughable idea.