Romulans vs Klingons. Oh my...

1000pt FedCom game

We did 3v3 the other day in fleet scale and it took 3 hours. That can't be more than 400 pts.
I forgot how intricate the space accountancy is :p

Anyway in regards to hull points and crippled effects does everyone like how the system is as written? Certainly playing with regular hull boxes and effectively calling crippled ships 'going home' (because they're otherwise getting killed) speeds the game hugely
 
Stu-- said:
1000pt FedCom game

We did 3v3 the other day in fleet scale and it took 3 hours. That can't be more than 400 pts.
I forgot how intricate the space accountancy is :p

Fleet scale is not really much faster than squadron scale. You still have the EA, the move each ship one subpulse at a time, all the decision making etc. And whilst the ships are half as big, the fire power is half as big so the ships don't die any faster.

It probably also helps that we play a lot, anything from 1 FF vs 1 FF to 2000 pt base assaults around terrain etc. There's a lot of variability, a 1000pt game could be over in 3 hours, or be a tense cat and mouse over 8 hours, but 5 hours probably covers most such games.

Also worth pointing out we tend to play campaign games, if 1000pts meets another 1000pts there is no fight to the death except in rare cases. Once someone gets a clear upper hand, or achieves what they set out to do someone is likely to turn and disengage and preserve the rest of their fleet.

Out last 2 big battles were:
2000 pts of Gorn to 1400pts of Andro in asteroids, that took about 8-10 hours, being a tense game where the Gorns just had to survive 10 turns without taking too much damage (campaign wise they were preparing for a Starbase assault) and the Andros needed to do as much damage as possible to the Gorns without regard for loss, So the Gorns were happy to run around asteroids for 10 turns.

A big Gorn fleet (a bit bigger than the one above) against a fed Star base with about 1000pt of defending ships. That took about 4-5 hours as the Gorns just swept in and wiped the starbase.

Anyway in regards to hull points and crippled effects does everyone like how the system is as written? Certainly playing with regular hull boxes and effectively calling crippled ships 'going home' (because they're otherwise getting killed) speeds the game hugely

I like ACTA as is in the rule book except for the special action handling, which feels too random too me. I don't mind some 'luck' element - like the photons through the shield that wipes a ship instantly, those things are pretty rare but quite 'cinematic' (as GW would say). I don't like that many tactics rely on 50/50 rolls. That in turn feeds heavily into drones and plasma being problematic, as you can't reliably defend against them. But Yes, I personaly think the shield/Hull/crit system is pretty decent as is, there may be a few quirks but nothing worth worrying about for what is meant to be a simple fast playing game.
 
Well, we just finished the ACTASF at Nashcon. We used 1,000 point fleets.

there were three sessions on Saturday with 3 games in each session, so 9 gamestotal.

Each game was allotted 3.5 hours.
That time limit included:
Reading the scenario/Tactical Challenge to familiarize yourself with the game...
Filling in the 2-person fleet roster for each game.
Deployment...
Play game...
Calculate victory points after game...
Record data on roster sheet and give to GM to check/track total points earned...
Pick-up ships / terrain from table to clear the way for the next game.

Only two games ran over the requisite time limit - and those were do to special rules of the scenario slowing play.
Most games were finished and the tables cleared well under the time limit.

on Friday, we played 65 ships and a BATS with a total of 12 players.
Started at 4 p.m., played til 11:00 p.m. with a one hour break for dinner and completed 5 whole turns!
That's five whole turns with a dozen players and 60+ ships in 6 hours. And since it was an introductory type game, several of the players had never played ACTASF before...
That's not too bad.
 
Hi all, been awhile now since I posted my ideas for revising drones.
We continue to play with them and find they work well.

Just wondering if anyone else gave them a go? (or for that matter any of the other house rules I posted)
 
Back
Top