emperorpenguin
Mongoose
cordas said:
agreed
REVISED: Current PL, Points or Diff PL?
- Thread starter Valen is my name
- Start date
agreed
cordas said:
ROFL - perhaps just my vain hope that ACTA players do not embrace a belief of how things *should* be done with such zeal that they are not open to new ideas...as I said, I'm happy to reconsider if a viable points systems was generated for me to have a look at...
Also - what's wrong with an "alternative" to the PL system as an optional rule? Mongoose shouldn't, imo, look at this in "yes or no" terms but rather - hang on - these guys like this...is there something we can do to keep this significant (minority?) still interested? A S&P article for instance? hint, hint
Hash said:Also - what's wrong with an "alternative" to the PL system as an optional rule? Mongoose shouldn't, imo, look at this in "yes or no" terms but rather - hang on - these guys like this...is there something we can do to keep this significant (minority?) still interested? A S&P article for instance? hint, hint
Write an article yourself, and maybe they will publish it.....
cordas said:
...I have an open mind that a points system could work, not a current preference for one
- I was hinting that those who believed in a viable system could do so and have it considered "semi-official" through publication in S&P. I have no intention of putting forward that article myself though, sorry.I have previously suggested changes to the standard 5 point Raid game (commonly used in tournaments) on the forum, suggesting that 1 point Armagedon makes for a fairer and more balanced game (if slightly longer possibly) due to the way the points are split...that led to a long debate that I won't go into here
cos alot of them were way off and based by the looks of it entirely on damage output.
how do you put a points on range? or AD or the mnaouvrability of the ship its on? 1 thing individually easy enough, but then you need formulas for the combinations.
say a 6AD beam is 6pts (1 per AD, wouldnt be but just for example). how would this compare if it was forward arc, boresight or another arc? then its range? then if its DD TD QD etc. once you think the weapon is sorted what about the ship you placing it on. if its a high damage manouvrable ship then the points will go up. if its a boresight beam and it only has 1/45 turn that would be less than a boresight beam on a ship with 2/90 for turns. its also has to be compared to the ships hull score as the more survivable the ship the more expenive a weapon on it will be because its damage output is higher.
its a very complicated issue. using CBT as an idea theres a possibility you could come up with some sort of formula. but the CBT bv system is flawed, so this year they release bv2, but from what I have heard from differant people thats also flawed.
how do you put a points on range? or AD or the mnaouvrability of the ship its on? 1 thing individually easy enough, but then you need formulas for the combinations.
say a 6AD beam is 6pts (1 per AD, wouldnt be but just for example). how would this compare if it was forward arc, boresight or another arc? then its range? then if its DD TD QD etc. once you think the weapon is sorted what about the ship you placing it on. if its a high damage manouvrable ship then the points will go up. if its a boresight beam and it only has 1/45 turn that would be less than a boresight beam on a ship with 2/90 for turns. its also has to be compared to the ships hull score as the more survivable the ship the more expenive a weapon on it will be because its damage output is higher.
its a very complicated issue. using CBT as an idea theres a possibility you could come up with some sort of formula. but the CBT bv system is flawed, so this year they release bv2, but from what I have heard from differant people thats also flawed.
katadder said:
I can think of any easy way to do it....
Patrol = 10 points
Skirimish = 20 points
Raid = 30 points
Battle = I think you get the picture.....
For those of you who think I am taking the piss....... :lol: You now look at how hard you think a ship is at its respective PL, and adjust....
Prefect = Raid = 30 points, its a damn hard Raid ship but not quite a battle level so make it 34 points.
Dag'Kar = Raid = 30 points, its a bit weak.... 28 points.
New Trolligan = Battle = 40, bloody hard battle, in fact it gives War a close shave 47 points.
Thing is same as with any points system people will still squeeze in everything that can, either ship numbers or powerful ships, much as in BFG, with the last few points spent on something like a haven (at i would say 2-3pts in cordas's example).
so 150pt raid (5pt raid)
4 prefects = 4x34=136pts
7 havens =7x2=14pts (for init sinks).
broken already.
so 150pt raid (5pt raid)
4 prefects = 4x34=136pts
7 havens =7x2=14pts (for init sinks).
broken already.
Sorry, but four prefects and two havens (that's what you have in the points calculation) is much better than the PL systems gift. ie Four Prefects, a Maximus and two Corvans for the same fight. Even more sinks, a couple of flights of Raziks and two scout redirects all come as bonus package.
How did we say that...broken already?
Ripple
How did we say that...broken already?
Ripple
Mr_Punch
Mongoose
Burger said:
I tried something along those lines about a year ago, converting for B5W ship stats, using the mainline ships like Omega and Hyperion as yardsticks and the B5W points to establish preliminary values.
They never received much in the way of play-testing as the reaction (from some) was pretty negative to the whole concept (as you might imagine from parts of this thread).
The feedback I did get indicated that some of the weapon stats (like the HPC) were too high relative to hull damage, resulting in shorter games. I might revisit these with a view to correcting the balance if there's interest in it.
A sample fleet (with all the EA ships released from B5W) is below
Earth Alliance Fleet PDF 150kb
The other fleets I did can be found on my page (linked in my sig)
john[/url]
Valen is my name
Mongoose
the points for the EA look very good, especially with the fighter points. i wish there was someone who could try using points and then come back and tell us whether it was better or not than the PL system
I agree that the system isn't perfect but as Burger suggested it could be a starting pointkatadder said:
Actually I have included range, arc, etc. and are modified by Speed and Turns, etc. and the weapons themselves modify a ship's Stealth rating (e.g. the Tigara has worse effective Stealth than a Teshlan), etc. As an example, the basic modifier for range on a weapon system is [Range]/[Range+8]. Most of it's in a thread I've started in the past which you can search for if anyone's interested.
Anyway, I actually prefer the PL system as it is very simple and very different to most other systems out there.
Been a bit, but you were right in that he did say 7. I thought he got his points and number of units confused due to the silliness of pricing even a haven at 2 points. Given Patrol was 'base pointed' at 10 in the example above with some sway due to efficiency I thought he rated the Haven a 7, down from ten (and the corvan maybe a 12 up from ten say).
My bad, but the point was that you can break anything with quick slap at the initial idea before its tweaked. That's a necessary part of any point system, pl or otherwise. There is plenty of broken right now, the issue is defining broken a bit better so more folks are working off the same sheet.
Ripple
My bad, but the point was that you can break anything with quick slap at the initial idea before its tweaked. That's a necessary part of any point system, pl or otherwise. There is plenty of broken right now, the issue is defining broken a bit better so more folks are working off the same sheet.
Ripple
