REVISED: Current PL, Points or Diff PL?

[lastbesthope]

Points actually won!

Only over each of the other 2 categories individually, since there are more votes for a PL system between the two other categories, either changed or unchanged, then 'win' is a subjective term.

LBH

 

[Chernobyl]

I'd say there's not enough of a difference. barely 50 people have voted...

Chern

 

[Ripple]

I have to disagree with Darzoni's point above.

While a individual group may indeed decide how they will play variant restrictions, tourney players have no such advantage. In many groups this can also lead to political divides over who's ideas are being used. The neutral game designer making the game balance well on its own merits makes the game less controversial and more friendly to players of all levels.

As to the ISDs, I cannot see this being of any use given the races available. The buy in to this game is fairly high if you are going with mini's and I'm not about ot tell someone their entire investment is not worth spit locally cause we don't play your era.

Ripple

 

[mrambassador1]

Hi all,
Firstly I'd just like to say I love the PL system, I think it is a really inovative system and allows different ships to be used for different battles (such as not a good idea to send lots of patrol ships into war engagement or vice versa).

That being said, a points system won't work any better than PL system because then the debate will change from ships in PL aren't balanced to this ship is worth too many points, this one not enough. You think its tough to assign ships to the right PL when there are only 5, try a points system. Right now now one doubts a vorchan should be Skirmish, but in points system you will get a lot of people arguing over if its worth 15 or 17 points.

We'll use a point system so that each weapon is worth x points and each hull type is worth y points I hear you say. THe problem with these systems is that people then just debate over "pulse cannons should only cost 2 points each not 3, because I can just build a bigger hull cheaper than the increase in pulse cannons cost". You also have a terrible tendancy like in battletech for dominant designs principles to occur, one weapon will be better value for money and so everyone will want ships with 10 of one particular weapon and no others.

The PL system works better than any other system I've seen. The irony is that the reasons most people give for changing the PL system (especially to points system) is that most of the problems (in my opinion exagerated) are only exagerated under a points system. If you think there are dominant ship choices now, you wait until a points system is used.

As far as balance go, remember that the fleet lists aren't meant to be balanced ship for ship but fleet for fleet. There are many ship choices that are more useful in some situations and against some enemies than others. For example, I would take 2 Centauri Primus against an octurion any day, as the long range weapons should slag a single enemy before the range closes enough for the Octurian to use its more powerful secondary weapons, the primus has the same strength in primary weapons and you get two of them. However against multiple vorchans for example, the Octurian is far superior because its secondary weapons come into effect as the vorchan has shorter range weapons and has to get in close.

 

[emperorpenguin]

Points actually won!

not that anything will change though

not really, combine the two lots of people voting for PLs................

 

[Jhary]

not really, combine the two lots of people voting for PLs................

No youre totaly wrong 2/3 say that the exiten PL-System doen´t work and the most people say Pointsystem.

The other question is why can´t build Mongoose a balanced B5-Game?

There are Two posibilitys

One they don´t care. (what i don´t belive)

Or

Two the gametesters did a lousy Job.

 

[tneva82]

No youre totaly wrong 2/3 say that the exiten PL-System doen´t work and the most people say Pointsystem.

But most favour PL system over point system.

The other question is why can´t build Mongoose a balanced B5-Game?

There are Two posibilitys

Add in third(the real one): Balanced game is dream NOBODY can build.

Atleast as long as we are talking miniature games with as many variables as ACTA has.

Remove free fleet selection, free terrain placement and varying scenario objectives and balanced game is possibility(read: Game is scenario-only that determine fleet lists(and I don't mean ISA vs centauri but down to each ship...), terrain, deployment zones and objectives).

But as long as any of above conditions vary between games: Balanced game can't exist :lol:

 

[Chernobyl]

Well, I think I'm going to work on a +/- system and see what people think.

Chern

 

[katadder]

not really, combine the two lots of people voting for PLs................

No youre totaly wrong 2/3 say that the exiten PL-System doen´t work and the most people say Pointsystem.

The other question is why can´t build Mongoose a balanced B5-Game?

There are Two posibilitys

One they don´t care. (what i don´t belive)

Or

Two the gametesters did a lousy Job.

actually most people voted for a PL system wether the current one or a new one but still a PL system.
as for the balanced game part -
1: mongoose do care about balance
2: the playtesters work very hard in their own time to make sure of balance, some of the arguments we have on things being balanced go back and forth for ages until we get what the majority think is right.

 

[mrambassador1]

Hi all,
Balance is very finely balanced and complex in ACTA. Every stat on a ship matters, not just the Attack Dice. Range is very important as is the initiative modifier. Why don't you list a ship you think is unbalanced/useless and I will try to show how we use it in our group.

 

[emperorpenguin]

No youre totaly wrong 2/3 say that the exiten PL-System doen´t work and the most people say Pointsystem.

Really? So please explain why as it currently stands 20 say points and 34 say PLs :roll:

The other question is why can´t build Mongoose a balanced B5-Game?

There are Two posibilitys

One they don´t care. (what i don´t belive)

Or

Two the gametesters did a lousy Job.

good luck to you ever finding a balanced game, someone once said chess but was countered by the argument that since white always goes first it isn't :wink:

 

[Hash]

Ah the joys of interpreting polls...

I think it's fair to say that:

1.The majority of people who voted on this want to see a PL system in some form.
2. The majority of people who voted on this want a change to the existing system.

You know - I think this inspires another thread on game design direction for ACTA...

 

[Burger]

good luck to you ever finding a balanced game, someone once said chess but was countered by the argument that since white always goes first it isn't :wink:

But is going first, an advantage? If not then it is still balanced.

 

[emperorpenguin]

good luck to you ever finding a balanced game, someone once said chess but was countered by the argument that since white always goes first it isn't :wink:

But is going first, an advantage? If not then it is still balanced.

maybe it's a disadvantage :wink: then it's unbalanced

 

[Burger]

good luck to you ever finding a balanced game, someone once said chess but was countered by the argument that since white always goes first it isn't :wink:

But is going first, an advantage? If not then it is still balanced.

maybe it's a disadvantage :wink: then it's unbalanced

Well if you can't tell which it is, then I'd call it equal. So chess is balanced.

 

[emperorpenguin]

But is going first, an advantage? If not then it is still balanced.

maybe it's a disadvantage :wink: then it's unbalanced

Well if you can't tell which it is, then I'd call it equal. So chess is balanced.

I'm not calling it either if you actually read my post

someone once said chess but was countered by the argument that since white always goes first it isn't

:wink:

 

[Burger]

You implied that finding a balanced game is impossible. You cited a counter-arguement to the popular example, chess. I disproved that counter-arguement. Therefore your initial implication is false.

 

[emperorpenguin]

You implied that finding a balanced game is impossible. You cited a counter-arguement to the popular example, chess. I disproved that counter-arguement. Therefore your initial implication is false.

of course, give yourself a pat on the back :roll:

 

[Hash]

Guys - please let it go, arguements about chess are not what this thread is about and detract from everything else stated here which is a shame in my view.

More on topic, a points based system definately has a lot of support on these forums and one of the primary reasons cited for proponents of this is better game balance.

Regardless of whethere a "perfectly" balanced game may or may not be possible - I certainly don't think it's a quality that should be ignored or cannot be aspired to if deemed desirable by current and potential new players. What many people seem to agree with that if you can make the game more "balanced", i.e. giving both players a closer to 50:50 chance of winning, while leaving it fun (i.e. able to influence that chance by "outplaying" your opponent with tactics) the better.

I voted for a modified PL system but would be interested to see the results of point based systems see if the pro-points lobby can put together some evidence to show that it makes the game more fun to play

 

[cordas]

How about just shooting yourself in the head..... This arguement has long since past any relevance to anything rational.

There are 2 camps, 1 thinks points is the way forwards. The other says PL is good (although there a number in this camp who think the current PL system could be improved by changing it a little). Both sides are well entrenched and have their machine gun positions well spread.... and really its all starting to turn a bit WW1.

Hmmm maybe there is a new game that MGP can publish.... ACTA Trench warfare.... Do you choose to be a died in the wool PL supporter, or do you fight for the anarchistic Points faction.