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

[Jhary]

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).

I see no Point why a ship what is a sitting duck in Pl is better then if its in a point system cheap to buy.
When i look over the rules Centaurie and minbarie are the big ones followed from EA and Narn. Why shoud any one play Liga ships like the vree they are under gunned poor hullrating slow manouverbal but slow.

 

[katadder]

actually the league are really good fleets. the drazi needs more thinking but the rest have some good ships at their levels, love the vree command saucer, hull 6 and some nasty all round weapons. thinking of doing abbai myself, have an interesting fleet in mind with 15 combat lasers

 

[Pauly_D]

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.

please explain is this doesnt really support anyones opinion on which system is faster or slower

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.

i teach to a lot of younger players, the people who have only ever played GW games before, personally i wouldnt mind having a points system but the people i play against really like the priority levels

 

[Voronesh]

Ok a few misconceptions.

People who say, that points might put ppl off.

First about 99% of all wargames use point systems....leaves us with players where ACTA is their first wargame.

If they cant add up normal numbers in a fast fashion, aka using the calculator, they shouldnt play this game, because:

GOSH this is a game involving chance and statistics, which are two different pairs of shoes. If they cant live with linear addition of numbers they shouldnt be playing any wargame at all.

So now that the mocking is done, on to more serious matters. (And im only mocking people that would actually NOT play a game because of CLASSIC POINTS SYSTEM, so not you guys here.....)

Yes there would be talk of certain ships being undercosted and such. Add a few extra points.

Currently you have to remove some AD, remove some weapon trait, remove damage, remove speed.....until you find a combination of traits that drops you on exactly 8 points, which is how much a battle lvl ship currently costs.

ANd you can keep the cost increase for smaller ships. Simply create two points values, one for close to correct lvl, and one below that lvl. ANd then create a few priorities, detailing stuff. And then you only have to check, ok lvl below, more expensive value is taken, same lvl or higher cheaper value counts.

If that would be complicated, i dont know how some people evaluate firepower of their ships........

 

[katadder]

if you gonna use say 8 points for a battle level ship you may as well stick with PL levels as using such small points is basically the same thing. now if you say 800 is your standard battle levl ship then you have leeway for slightly worse, moderately worse, really bad at battle level etc.

 

[Abraxas]

if you gonna use say 8 points for a battle level ship you may as well stick with PL levels as using such small points is basically the same thing. now if you say 800 is your standard battle levl ship then you have leeway for slightly worse, moderately worse, really bad at battle level etc.

Well, the suggestion was to set the Omega at 200 and go onf rom there. It's not mandatory, but a points system should stem from assigning a ship an arbitrary number and then working from there.

Also, if you start adding too many PLs then you may as well go to a points system cause after 15 levels it becomes ludicrous.

I swear the only reason I can possibly think of why MP chose to do a priority system was because they didn't want to look like AoG. That is the only deffinitive reason I can think of...

i teach to a lot of younger players, the people who have only ever played GW games before, personally i wouldnt mind having a points system but the people i play against really like the priority levels

Do you mind asking them why? As a veteran gamer, this priority system through me off. Maybe it appeals to novices for some reason... I would be curious to see why.

 

[Voronesh]

if you gonna use say 8 points for a battle level ship you may as well stick with PL levels as using such small points is basically the same thing. now if you say 800 is your standard battle levl ship then you have leeway for slightly worse, moderately worse, really bad at battle level etc.

That represents very much the current priority lvl system.

patrol 1
skirmish 2
raid 4
battle 8

A more classical points system would have the ability to represent battle lvl ships around 200 points or even more......

Its just very hard to balance something on 8 points on the dot.

 

[Hash]

I think the pro-points system lobby make some good points generally, however, I don't agree at all with the mockery and general contempt of players who won't would find a classic point system more dififcult to get into. The games market is extremely competitive and it only takes a small deterrent to let someone new to the field as it were choose something different to do with their time. However I don't really want to get into the debate that simplicity is better for new players, that's just my opinion and a matter of personal preference, and I appreciate there are very different views on that.

Currently you have to remove some AD, remove some weapon trait, remove damage, remove speed.....until you find a combination of traits that drops you on exactly 8 points, which is how much a battle lvl ship currently costs.

ANd you can keep the cost increase for smaller ships. Simply create two points values, one for close to correct lvl, and one below that lvl. ANd then create a few priorities, detailing stuff. And then you only have to check, ok lvl below, more expensive value is taken, same lvl or higher cheaper value counts.

Yes, excellent point, indeed you can have a high and low value for points, effectively creating a hybrid of a PL system (a HIGH priority and LOW priority) + a corresponding points system. I'm sure you could also playtest enough to make it work, I just think that the PL system is a far more elegant way of achieving that outcome.

I'm not saying a points based system wouldn't be good, I just don't think its the best way to go for fleet (as opposed to single ships where I think you are actually right) balanced games.

Well, the suggestion was to set the Omega at 200 and go onf rom there. It's not mandatory, but a points system should stem from assigning a ship an arbitrary number and then working from there.

Wooah dude, no need to throw all current playtesting completely out of the window! If you did start a points based system, the PL system does give you head start without having to pick arbitrary values...

Armageddon: 32
War: 16
Battle: 8
Raid: 4
Skirmish: 2
Patrol: 1

This reflects the *current* power level balance in ACTA, not very much to distinguish between them I know but, if as katadder suggest you apply a multiple of x100 then;

Armageddon: 3200
War: 1600
Battle: 800
Raid: 400
Skirmish: 200
Patrol: 100

You then have a starting point for every ship...and also a likely range if you create a minimum and maximum based on the lower and upper levels respectively i.e.

Armageddon: From 800 to 6400 points with an average of 3200 points
War: From 800 to 3200 points with an average of 1600 points
Battle: From 400 to 1600 points with an average of 800 points
Raid: From 200 to 800 points with an average of 400 points
Skirmish: From 100 to 400 points with an average of 200 points
Patrol: From from 0 to 200 with an average of 100 points

Not quite going to the drawing board and working from there but obviously you would need a *lot* of playtesting from that point.

 

[Voronesh]

Currently you have to remove some AD, remove some weapon trait, remove damage, remove speed.....until you find a combination of traits that drops you on exactly 8 points, which is how much a battle lvl ship currently costs.

ANd you can keep the cost increase for smaller ships. Simply create two points values, one for close to correct lvl, and one below that lvl. ANd then create a few priorities, detailing stuff. And then you only have to check, ok lvl below, more expensive value is taken, same lvl or higher cheaper value counts.

Yes, excellent point, indeed you can have a high and low value for points, effectively creating a hybrid of a PL system (a HIGH priority and LOW priority) + a corresponding points system. I'm sure you could also playtest enough to make it work, I just think that the PL system is a far more elegant way of achieving that outcome.

The mockery is done only because of the constant whining, that adding points together takes so much longer. First we deal with a game of chance, and that is objectively more complicated than adittion. Second with the priority lvl system, i sometimes take 5 minutes just to make a choice, and go with the "To hell with it" option, simply taking some ship because of its fluff, and not neccessarily because of its battlefield performance (which would be the more prudent choice, as this is a wargame after all, and we should try to give our enemies a hard time. Winning against opposition is the best fun i have).

I agree on the part that the priority lvl system is very elegant. Actually i dont care what kind of system ACTA has. Its just that the priority lvl system is currently in a state that is close to 40k-like problems (Yes EE cant even get point values right, but i dont think that is the case with MGP), turning the game into something close to: Some ships suck. from an objective viewpoint, and not from a personal opinion.

 

[Abraxas]

Well, the suggestion was to set the Omega at 200 and go onf rom there. It's not mandatory, but a points system should stem from assigning a ship an arbitrary number and then working from there.

Wooah dude, no need to throw all current playtesting completely out of the window! If you did start a points based system, the PL system does give you head start without having to pick arbitrary values...

Armageddon: 32
War: 16
Battle: 8
Raid: 4
Skirmish: 2
Patrol: 1

This reflects the *current* power level balance in ACTA, not very much to distinguish between them I know but, if as katadder suggest you apply a multiple of x100 then;

Armageddon: 3200
War: 1600
Battle: 800
Raid: 400
Skirmish: 200
Patrol: 100

You then have a starting point for every ship...and also a likely range if you create a minimum and maximum based on the lower and upper levels respectively i.e.

Armageddon: From 800 to 6400 points with an average of 3200 points
War: From 800 to 3200 points with an average of 1600 points
Battle: From 400 to 1600 points with an average of 800 points
Raid: From 200 to 800 points with an average of 400 points
Skirmish: From 100 to 400 points with an average of 200 points
Patrol: From from 0 to 200 with an average of 100 points

Not quite going to the drawing board and working from there but obviously you would need a *lot* of playtesting from that point.

It would work this way, excpet there would have to be considerations for uber powerful ships and wimps that don't deserve to be in their weight class would have to be made...

So, does anyone want to write a first draft? Anyone? Hello? :?

Of course, I don't... mostly cause I haven't played this game a lot (or at all for that matter) and don't think I am qualified.

 

[Cerebral Cortex of the Da]

Lurking is fun . I do not own the game (yes), but have been playing wargames for 30 years. Assigning an arbitrary number is not how game design starts. Usually there is a base number to represent something, like 100 points / hull point, or 8" for movment as the base, then made higher or lower based on what the expected value of the unit is.

There is a free game system out there called No Limits and they have a system where you can take any miniautre and apply +'s or -'s based on what the figure looks like, etc. to come up with unique armies.

Maybe reviewing this system would give someone an idea of where to start with for a point based system.

Now I really want ACTA's so I can see what all the fuss is about.

Hmm Hmm, Controversy, Does a Brain good! :lol:

CCotD'