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

[Voronesh]

Correct experience is important.

But thats like saying, lets just make some ships even more important. Cause onoly experience counts, nothing else matters.

Everything matters. Cause if two relatively good players meet up. Who will win? The guy who got lucky, and the one with the better fleet.

I mean yes i take worse ships too. But only cause i have no better fraggin idea what to take......I used 2 Sullusts (Prefer the Prefect by far...) and a Demos with 2 Vorchans with tourney rules. But mostly because i didnt feel like taking anything else and i had no better idea what to else to take as well.

With me i pick a fleet and stick with that, buying bad ships only happens when i really like them (Rothans are not that bad, but i love their style and model) or come with the box (T'Loth well it is in the starter box and the first ship any B5 person sees). ANything else is well restricted, cause im a student and if a ships underperforms it wont see the gaming table, let alone be ordered.

Plus i have no problem with underperformers, for me that only hurts MGP sales, so i think that MGP themselves have an interest in fixing that.

Overperforming ships hurt the game. Anyone of you maybe left GW games because of that? Well i cant see it that much with B5, but theres too many of them flying around right now. Sags? A cheap players wet dream. Centauri Tertius, Prefect, Sullust, Ka'Tan, SFOS WS? For the Sneaky ones who arent as up front about it as the Sag players.

Just saying:

Get used to it and suck it down, isnt really a solution, well it is, but there are better ones. We want this game to improve and not get stuck with unbalanced ships in B5 v3.1............

Priority system is really fast. Though you WILL end up with ships you do not necessarily like (Above example). Slowing down the thought process....

Points system take maybe a little bit longer to decide upon, but you can still just fill out a fleet with extra fighters. Or you take some extra time to fiddle around. (No points system does not mean equipment overload like 40k).

Priority means MGP has to fiddle around for superlong to get every battle lvl ship to adhere to 200 points flat. If something is worth 205, they have to remove an AD from some weapon...maybe dropping it to 195....still not much better, more fiddling.

Points system means, they can just adjust ships however they like, and adjust the points. If people scream somehting is too cheap for its abilities, they can simply adjust the points to match, without touching the actual ships.

 

[Pauly_D]

All the talk of a +/- system has been an attempt to stay within the PL system but get a more accurate balance. Acting like it was anyones prefered system is just baiting. Compromise solutions often look unwieldy and are easily mocked, but sometimes they they add enough that everyone is able to find a comfortable space. Mocking folks efforts to find a middle ground a fairly low place to go.

im not deliberately mocking your efforts but the +/- system is too restrictive with limited choices, at the moment most races simply do not have enough ships to have a lot of options left if they choose a +/- ship, for example the ancient races or ISA they dont have enough ships to have ships at Raid -, Raid neutral and Raid +
if you manage to come up with a good idea that is playable then i would not mock it and we could talk about a way of how it could work

the points system is a good idea, but ACTA is a game that works well partly because of the quick playability of it, i prefer the priority level system, you are always going to get problems of "is that ship too powerful for x priority level" BUT MAKING IT A POINTS SYSTEM WILL NOT MAKE IT GO AWAY, you still are balancing ships to cost x points compared to other ships.

Overperforming ships hurt the game. Anyone of you maybe left GW games because of that? Well i cant see it that much with B5, but theres too many of them flying around right now. Sags? A cheap players wet dream. Centauri Tertius, Prefect, Sullust, Ka'Tan, SFOS WS? For the Sneaky ones who arent as up front about it as the Sag players.

ok yes the SFOS Whitestar was overpowerful but that got fixed in January!!! and yes the Sagi is broken but that ship is being looked at
But the Sulust and the Ka'Tan are no way overpowered for their PL level

 

[Greg Smith]

Overperforming ships hurt the game. Anyone of you maybe left GW games because of that? Well i cant see it that much with B5, but theres too many of them flying around right now. Sags? A cheap players wet dream. Centauri Tertius, Prefect, Sullust, Ka'Tan, SFOS WS? For the Sneaky ones who arent as up front about it as the Sag players.

It is interesting to see that once the Minbari are fixed and the Whitestar is fixed, everyone finds a new selection of overpowered ships.

 

[Target]

It's not that some ships are too powerful, some are plain awful in the same priority. They really need a points system if they are going to keep the stats they way have been.
Why is taking so long about the sag anyway, people having complaining about it for a long time. Isn't the "A" version more powerful than tourney version? I could of misread the posts about it though but if not that is really listening to your players. One Sag could probably take on 3 Kutai, 2 Kutai i'd say it would win, 3 Kutai should win. Maybe a job for the mythbusters, How Kutai's does take to kill a Sag?

 

[lastbesthope]

People seem to be suggesting a quantised points system.

Hmm, quantised points system.....PL...quantised point system....PL.....

:lol:

LBH

You're purposely misinterpeting what people are saying about PL vs. Points though.

Nope, I'm just pointing out that we're not talking apples and oranges here, just different types of apples.

LBH

 

[mthomason]

Nope, I'm just pointing out that we're not talking apples and oranges here, just different types of apples.

LBH

Prune-ing myself into the conversation here, a-pear-antly you're just plum bananas.

 

[lastbesthope]

:lol:

LBH

 

[Abraxas]

You know what the funny part is...

let`s assume Mongoose DID start the game way back then with a points system. The board would be flooded with people saying that one costs to much or to less and someone would have a luminous idea of saying `hey, let`s make a sort of level system, let`s make a priority system to label the vessels...` (remember BFG)

No, they wouldn't. With a points system you simply come to an agreement that this ship should be +/- x points... and the problem is soved. Here, if you change the level you have to consider if the ships stats fit in the new level. In most cases, they don't.

Imagine if the Vorchan was patrol. It would be taken ALL the time. But as skirmish, it simply doesn't see action. Same goes for the Demos. There are ships that are in levels that they do not belong in. With a points system you could add/deduct points as you see fit without having to change the stat line.

The point being, the game has a level engine. Not every ship is fairly balanced against each other and some are weaker, some are better. reality is, we will have to live with that!

Whoever said we had to live with it? If the mechanics do not work things need to be changed. A balanced fleet list does not make a balanced fleet. That is why you will never see a fleet without a sulust or prefect... and you won't see one with a haven (if they know better).

The individual ships need to be balanced and Mongoose Publishing has not done a good job about that.

And in the end, absolutely no-one prohibits you from taking the badder vessels instead of just fielding the good ones. I do that, I occassionally field ships like the Explorer and Oracle though I can have the Delphi and Chronos in their place for example (not everyone has Arma already, so this is talking EA SFoS style). I field Command Omega`s because, well, it is an Omega after all. My Orestes has seen it`s kilometres on it`s engine...

In one-off games I love taking ships that no one uses, but in a tourney were your objective is to win... especially if you paid to play, you're gonna play to win.

I think it just comes down to pure and basic competiveness. Competition isn`t bad in a human, it`s in your species nature. But this also makes that people take better vessels for easier wins (or at least attempts at that) and players who get wh****d complaining about it.

This isn't a sociology lesson, no offence. When we play a game we want a system that is fair. So far, MP has not delivered that entirely. I know they did not intend for this to happen, hoping players would not power game, but they do.

A Teritius will always come before a Secundus. A Sulust will Always come before a Demos. A Covran will always come before a Vorchan. A Haven will never show up on the table. Period.

It's too easy to power game with a priority system... that is the point of all of this.

The first tourney overhere I played an ISA fleet, and came out first. After that, suddenly I no longer was the only ISA player but they started to pop up from the bushes. Why? Cause they saw the little plucked chickens win a tournament. The next tourney, EA came out one and two, and no WS to end even near the top three (nor did the Minbari). This does mean one thing, experience does count a LOT in this game, and no matter how good your vessel or not, it does count out. Same with all those damage tables that pop around of that ship does so much and that only so much... but you can`t calculate bad or good rolls into that... it is a game and a game uses luck.

Ok, so now put the best ships in a priority level in the hands of an experienced player and you have a very, very hard opponet who will almost always win against novices and even some veterans.

The priority system is flawed because some ships do not belong in certain levels, but rather between them.

 

[Pauly_D]

It's not that some ships are too powerful, some are plain awful in the same priority. They really need a points system if they are going to keep the stats they way have been.
Why is taking so long about the sag anyway, people having complaining about it for a long time. Isn't the "A" version more powerful than tourney version? I could of misread the posts about it though but if not that is really listening to your players. One Sag could probably take on 3 Kutai, 2 Kutai i'd say it would win, 3 Kutai should win. Maybe a job for the mythbusters, How Kutai's does take to kill a Sag?

yes one Sagi could take down 3 Kutai but the Kutai plays a different role
The Kutai is a bad example to use anyway because it does not have a beam weapon, im not saying i dont agree that it is overpowered, i know it is, and we are looking at it but balancing ships can be difficult as reducing a small thing can totally change a ships usefulness, Dag'Kar anyone?

 

[Pauly_D]

No, they wouldn't. With a points system you simply come to an agreement that this ship should be +/- x points... and the problem is soved. Here, if you change the level you have to consider if the ships stats fit in the new level. In most cases, they don't.

yes but the point that a few people have made earlier in this thread is that even if it did go to a points system then it should be a not particulary challenging points system, points go up in 5's or 10's

Whoever said we had to live with it? If the mechanics do not work things need to be changed. A balanced fleet list does not make a balanced fleet. That is why you will never see a fleet without a sulust or prefect... and you won't see one with a haven (if they know better).

The individual ships need to be balanced and Mongoose Publishing has not done a good job about that.

Individual ships arent the only things that have changed since the rules first came out, some of the rules have been nudged a bit and this had led to some ships becoming more powerful than others, this is something we are constantly looking at, also the Sagittarius isnt the only thing we have been trying to balance. The Minbari and the Ancients, people have been complaining about whether these are over/underpowered since the rules came out. In the tournament lists the Sagi didnt have missile varients so it wasnt quite so overpowering. But it is getting changed, but it isnt up to me when it is going to get changed

 

[Abraxas]

No, they wouldn't. With a points system you simply come to an agreement that this ship should be +/- x points... and the problem is soved. Here, if you change the level you have to consider if the ships stats fit in the new level. In most cases, they don't.

yes but the point that a few people have made earlier in this thread is that even if it did go to a points system then it should be a not particulary challenging points system, points go up in 5's or 10's

I thought the point of a priority system was to make things easier? If the points system can be "unchallenging" then why can't they make a gradual transistion?

I am not being argumenative. It's out of honselt suriosity that I am asking this.

Whoever said we had to live with it? If the mechanics do not work things need to be changed. A balanced fleet list does not make a balanced fleet. That is why you will never see a fleet without a sulust or prefect... and you won't see one with a haven (if they know better).

The individual ships need to be balanced and Mongoose Publishing has not done a good job about that.

Individual ships arent the only things that have changed since the rules first came out, some of the rules have been nudged a bit and this had led to some ships becoming more powerful than others, this is something we are constantly looking at, also the Sagittarius isnt the only thing we have been trying to balance. The Minbari and the Ancients, people have been complaining about whether these are over/underpowered since the rules came out. In the tournament lists the Sagi didnt have missile varients so it wasnt quite so overpowering. But it is getting changed, but it isnt up to me when it is going to get changed

I know your intention was not create an unbalanced system and I know that evrytime a rules set comes out some people get better and some people get worse.

My point is that with a priority system ships are put into categories that they do not belong in or should be in categories that don't exist. A points system would alleviate all of this.

Ok, so power gaming in a points system is debunked especially when you play opponets that take advantage of the ptiority level by taking sulusts instead of Demos'.

The speed issue is debunked because using simple numbers without upgrades allows you to add ships up quickly.

What is the issue with a points system? I fail to see one.

 

[Pauly_D]

What is the issue with a points system? I fail to see one.

im not saying that Points Systems are bad, only that Priority levels are a lot easier in getting new people to play the game
other than we already have a system and we would have to work out points values for every ship then thats all the issues with changing the systems.

 

[Jhary]

Nope even with a point system its fast to learn to play.

When some one comes with the munchkin in play answer so what now you take rase x in level y with ship z

 

[Pauly_D]

i've seen a lot of people put off with Points systems because of the time taken to add it all up, players like a system where they can choose a fleet in hardly any time

 

[Target]

The priority system didn't have anything to do why i purchased the game. I don't believe that even made one person but it for that reason. It's B5 and is fun and quick to play not easy to choose a fleet.
On Pauly D reasoning we should only choose ships with Beam weapons which is what happens now. Kutai shouldn't be that bad vs a Sag. It's fast to close the range, it has dodge but it is hull 4, 12 hits & Crew, The twinlinked weapons are range 4 giving you no chance to knock down interceptors. What is the Kutai good for then. As for the Vorchan, why did they mess with it? It was fine. Dropping from 18 hits to 16 was no real biggy but then take away SAP was the killer. It had plenty of weakness, only 1 arc and fragile never thought it was overpowered.

 

[Abraxas]

i've seen a lot of people put off with Points systems because of the time taken to add it all up, players like a system where they can choose a fleet in hardly any time

Now, I mean no offence to those people... but if they are "put off" with having to spend a few extra minutes adding 2 digit numbers together... then they shouldn't be playing any game, let alone this one.

Also, like I said, the priority system really isn't that much faster. I still need to go through the stats and decide which ship gives me my best use of a raid point. THAT is power gaming. And that is why the priority system is no better than a points sytem... if not worse.

Please, when you read my comments do not assume I am being rude or snide. I just can't wrap my brain around the usefullness or advantage in a priority system, and so far, I haven't heard any reason to think otherwise.

 

[Ripple]

And no offense to the PL folks, but trying to explain why the value of a ship changes based on the value of the battle has been a headache. I do not know how many folks get that wrong the first dozen games they play. Add in the funky buy two get one free exchanges and your recreating the headache of those special little widgets that broke the point systems for many people.

Ripple

 

[Jhary]

why a point system is faster.
you look on th points and choce.
what we have now you have to look over all races and then pick wht suit the best against the opisit force.

 

[Hash]

I still need to go through the stats and decide which ship gives me my best use of a raid point. THAT is power gaming. And that is why the priority system is no better than a points sytem... if not worse.

Please, when you read my comments do not assume I am being rude or snide. I just can't wrap my brain around the usefullness or advantage in a priority system, and so far, I haven't heard any reason to think otherwise.

A PL system system differs from the points based system in that you can tailor it to suit your style of play e.g. If you like high powered battle select war (or armageddon) lvl priority when playing battles and the "best" use of a point is at war or battle level.

If you prefer a more low key game, say raid, then the best use of a raid point will be spent at raid or skirmish.

Why is this good? Well a solely points based system doesn't make this distinction a ship worth 400pts is always worth 400pts in whatever level battle whether a 5000pt game or a 500pt game.

This alone IMO makes the PL system far superior - however, I do agree with you in that you can power game the system which is why I'm proposing a high PL but low FAP taking advantage of the new armageddon splits (see the Poll thread I have for details).

 

[katadder]

point system can get right down to detail but then you will get all the arguments about this ship is worth more than its actually pointed at withing this fleet. then they get a points value for value to fleet but you take 10 of them and they are underpointed (sagi).