Seriously stupid question... but I need to ask...


... why pick a priority level over a points system?

I really don't understand the concept. I have never seen a game with so many supposed broken ships. Not to mention all the ships that may not fit their own priority level, but are too strong/weak to be moved lower/higher.

The Vorchan for instance. It's not quite a skirmish ship... but would be too strong as a patrol ship. The Teritius needs to go up a level... but doesn't deserve to be a war ship.

With a points system you can change the points as the ships get more powerful... rather than trying to fudge them into (supposedly) balanced categories. It also lets you score ships on a point-by-point basis. Why take a weak raid ship (Demos) when you can have any of the others?

I admit the my observations are restricted to the Centauri, but I would be surprised if other fleets are free from this issue. I mean, given your list of ships there are some you would rather take over others.

And don't give me the, "they balance out in the end" thing cause in plain and simple terms, they don't. Also, using ships in tandem with other ships simply doesn't work sometimes. I see no usefulness for a Demos. I see no reason to take a Kuati when I can get a Covran.

Basically, what was wrong with using a points system given the chance that some ships do not function as well considering their priority level? Was it about being unique? Didn't want to conform to the normal way? Didn't want to look like AoG? I just don't see a benefit in a priority level system.

Sorry to be such a pill.
I have to say that I wonder the same things and was considering making a post similar to this. I love the game, but the whole disparity of ship qualities among various levels is disappointing.

I don't agree with the 'overall balance issue', I mean if I was playing in a campaign game as Centauri - I would not include a Demos or a Kutai in my fleet list.
This discussion has been as around as long as i can remember.

Advantage of the system:
Quick and dirty

Disadvantage of the system:
Quick and dirty

The phrase fits just too well in my opinion. You get the advantage of not having to fiddle around for points, as in many other games.
But yes the system picks up a certain of amount of haziness.

Stuff has 2 reasons for being where it is, actual mission profile and lvl according. And power of the actual ship. And then you have to add on top, that ships within a lvl have different missions Artillery versus brawler versus Line, while still having to be reasonably well balanced (within 1-2% of their brethren. Able to make it work? yes. really well? no.

There are enough examples. Tertius and Vorchan are good examples. A tad little too good for its lvl, but way too weak for a boost, or the other way around. Dag'Kar? Useless at raid, Skirmish? No way, unless it receives another downgrade.

It is just a quick and dirty way of choosing a fleet. You win speed, but lose on the equality. Plus stuff is really hard to get right for Background reasons. Like certain ships should have a tad little bit more/less power, but that would push them out of a lvl....

ramble ends
I've always been a fan of points over the priority.
If you have points, you could give ships upgrades like veteran crew, AJP and numerous other things that are in the refit tables. It would give real personalised fleet which would be real cool. Maybe start with green crew and pay to upgrade them.
Could even have a Handicap system, if you go into battle with less points gain a bonus to initiative depending on how much you are under. That will stop people trying to fit every last point in.
Most of all ships don't have to be balanced with each other. Crap ships are just worth less.
If you are going to spend 2hrs playin a game, it won't matter if you spend a extra 10 mins doing a list.
I suppose that well, Points system = battlefleet gothic and too many powergaming munchkins.
Priorities are quick and easy, and your not trying to spend those last 2 points on something for 30 minutes on the off chance it gets you something cool. also I believe the games designers didn't want to re-make Battlefleet gothic. i may have already said that, but if you want a points based system, one already exists. It's something different, it's quick to pick up and create a fleet, and you know what your facing, as they are standard ships.

meanwhile down at portsmouth.. hey chief, this here frigate of ours, we have some points to spend on it, lets strip out the main hull and fit the super mega nuclear gauss cannon, that'll shock em. . . I'm sure the admiralty wouldn't mind.
locarrrrno24 said:
If the admiralty had a few super mega nuclear gauss cannons lying around, they probably wouldn't....

Knowing the MOD, we probably own 4 cannons, but no ammo for them.
Isn't choosing a Tertius over a Primus powergaming or Prefect over Centurion, Corvan over Haven. The list just goes on.
Using nice round numbers will help, being able to choose fighters as well as ships, gives nice easy way to choose fleets. Having a handicap system will encourage people to go under the points.
Actually with stuff like Sags around or less obvious things.

Centauri Raid lvl, why take a Demos again? Right i dont care about that last point.
Why take a G'Quonth or G'Tal instead of a Bin'Tak? Right i just want to get beatin to a pulp.

Sry but currently there are enough examples of glaring problems in the priority system, that you cant really assmue, that a point system would sprout powergaming. Actually it wouldnt, as you still have to find the points for fitting cool combos in.

If your opponent found a fleet choice that gives him another 5 points well hes lucky then, but its only 5 points more than you have. If it would actually sprout a huge difference, then there might be a problem with the point value instead of the system. You could always take a few cheap fighter flights.

Both systems have their advantages. But i think its sad, that you just cant use some ships without fiddling with the rules to make them work. (Concerns few ships but there are some).
I think the PL system isn`t that bad at all. It makes the game just `different` from many out there, but I think the only really small fix needed is one I and quite a few others have suggested: level restrictions...

Why take a G`tal? Cause I already have my 1 allowed Bin`Tak in my fleet.
You can`t field a 10 Sagg fleet, that vessel is only 0-2 choice...

Added benefit is that with a point system, they would need to redo all their books and even a part of base mechanics. With giving some ships a rarity level, they only need to print some ships with for example 0-1 or 0-3 etc at the ships with would be restricted. Hyperions for example wouldn`t need that as a core vessel.

The only danger is doing the restriction to much, and giving scores to about each and every vessel...
Restrictions seem like a good idea. But it still doesnt make ships better.

Your rather reduced to the:

"Crap im out of (insert good ships here) and have to take weak vessels, just to fill my fleet"

It would reduce the number of broken fleets and apparently stupid choices out there, but still everyone would take certain MUST HAVE ships. Not really an imrpovement, but rather only a "cover up".

Im not in favor of a points system. For me its either get a points system, then balance doesnt have to be against other ships, but only based on the points.

Or get the priorities right. There are pressing matters like Sags, and less pressing things like Avioki, Demos, G'Tal.......list goes on.
Well, a point system will keep those must haves around as well, as in `how may (the infamous ubership) can i have for my points` and as such wouldn`t make ships better either...
Well but you get a smaller amount of uberships, cause you pay uberpoints for them. 40k from EE is a prime example. There is stuff that is downrigth terrifying, until you check the point costs and realize that you could just get alot of extra small stuff that overwhelms with numbers.

For example if point costs would mean i get 3 G'Quonth or 2 Bin'Taks i might go with either.
Okay, silly question from me now and TOTALLY out of topic,

40k i take means Warhammer 40.000, only played it like twice like 3 years ago, but what is EE? Yes, my knowledge of games outside spaceships is limited to historical gaming, rarely played scifi of fantasy, and barely never the last years
Youre right on.

And EE means evil empire. Which in turn is the description most used on this forum for Games Workshop.
I really just think MP was afraid of looking too much like AoG and GW. That is why they developed the priority system. I understand that this is new and they are still "defining" what raid ships are like. And what it means to be a battle ship. How many flights of a certain fighter you should get for a patrol point... but I just don't see why they didn't start with a point system in the first place.

There are just too many ships that are more appealing than others, even though they are the same ptiority. Restrictions help some but restrictions could be applied to a point system as well... so I fail to see why the priority level is better.

Also, I don't find the priority system all that much faster than a point system. A priority system requires me to look at all the ships availible as well as any ships that I can get for a "translation" (i.e. raid = 2 skirmish... but do 2 skirmish vessels REALLY = 1 raid?). It takes just as much effort, if not more, to do a priority system over a point system.

Also, as someone already mentioned, a point system offers so much leverage depending on the detail and effort you put into the system. Plus, if a ship is under/over powered consudering it's cost, you just change the points accordingly... it's that simple.

In a priority system you have to change speed, weapons, power, special abilities and then squeeze it into an apropriate category. I just don't see the benefit.

I understand that going back and changing things now would be futile... I am just curious as to why they started with a priority system in the first place.
Oh just a funny revelation.

Bascially ACTA is a points based system.

Patrol: 1
Skirmish: 2
Raid: 4

and if you buy smaller stuff, it gets more expensive all of the sudden.

Yeah i know this is really farfetched, but i think it represents really well, that you only have 5 point costs (Soon to be 6) and that makes it so hard to introduce different ships.

Still not in favor of a points system, i like the Priority system. But it needs alot more work.
Well, that would work IF the translations were all consistent... but they change. They are not defined by how many lower priorities you can get.
Voronesh said:
Restrictions seem like a good idea. But it still doesnt make ships better.

Your rather reduced to the:

"Crap im out of (insert good ships here) and have to take weak vessels, just to fill my fleet"

Which is probably realisitic. The US Navy now (and the RN in its heyday) would be "stuck" with a number of less than ideal ships.
Yes and ofc the US NAvy beats the crap out of most other fleets anyway, due to superior technology, and superior numbers.

Please this is a SF first physics might not always make sense, and how often do you see balanced battles out there in the world.

You know there aint no 2 generals meeting before battle, and deciding General A has to take less tanks, cause he would be 5 Battle lvl points over his allotment?

Reality is one thing, this is a game.