Should "armageddon" be a full 2nd Edition?

[Chernobyl]

I had a copy of the pocket set at one time.

Dungeons and dragons was spread over 5 box sets...these were considered to be the "simple" version of the game.
Basic, Expert, Companion, Masters, and Immportals. They were later collected into the D&D Rules Cyclopedia, and then as Classic D&D, and finially as the D&D adventure game.

Advanced D&D came out at the same time as the basic set of D&D, and was intended as a more complex game. 12 years later it became a 2nd edition, and then (some say) 2.5 with the player option series. 8 years later TSR was bought by WotC and became 3rd edition with the introduction of the D20 system. 6 years later (in 2003), we got the current 3.5 system.

 

[Triggy]

I actually disagree with Chernobyl on this issue. In my opinion so long as tournaments are a reality and campaigns continue to run in their current format, fundamentally different lists are needed for Minbari, ISA and maybe the ancients (the rest seem to be fine for both). These differences are not in their style of play, merely their reletive effectiveness/survivability as campaign play is sufficiently different that certain types of ship and fleet work better in one environment than the other.

At the moment I don't think there's enough material to confuse the issue too much and am not worried about a couple more addons. I think a second edition should only really come about when the game designers take a fresh look on the game as a whole and decide that it's worth streamlining certain areas of the rules - then they can combine this with producing a single rules package.

However, that being said if all were to be collated (at some point) I would have the separate books:

Rules (game mechanics only but includes all race specific rules)
Campaign Book (inc. race backgrounds, fleet lists and missions)
Tournament Book (inc. fleet lists, missions and suggestions for tournaments)
Period/Location Specific Books (inc. books such as Earth-Minbari war, Dilgar war, etc.)

I may well even produce this myself and see how things work...

 

[Chernobyl]

Isn't that pretty much where we're at though?

 

[Geekybiker]

Only if I had a copy of Adobe Acrobat editor I would be tempted to edit together a compendium for my own use. Complete with official rulings and error correctiong.

 

[Davesaint]

Will someone please explain to me Why we need Campaign and Tournament ships? I know that many of the balance issues went away with the tournament lists. Frankly I think the only issue I have in the tournament list is the Sagitarius, and that the Whitestar should have 5AD for it's Molecular Pulsar. If the varient hulls can be adjusted for tournament play, then make those ships the entire fleet list and ditch the SFOS list. Then you would have balanced fleets!

Dave

 

[MongooseMatt]

I think maybe next year a "compendium" edition might be a good idea.

This is the favoured idea in the office at the moment.

 

[Geekybiker]

Will someone please explain to me Why we need Campaign and Tournament ships? I know that many of the balance issues went away with the tournament lists. Frankly I think the only issue I have in the tournament list is the Sagitarius, and that the Whitestar should have 5AD for it's Molecular Pulsar. If the varient hulls can be adjusted for tournament play, then make those ships the entire fleet list and ditch the SFOS list. Then you would have balanced fleets!

Dave

Well the theory is that those ships are balanced for 5pt raid only. That if you use them in larger/smaller engaugements they may not be balanced.

Personally, I dont buy it. I think its maybe they just dont want to admitt that SFOF is wrong... again. They dont wany to piss people off and make them buy a 3rd fleet list before 2nd edition hits.

 

[l33tpenguin]

I wonder if true point systems have this many problems. I mean, apart from a couple % off here and there, judging the cost value of one ship over another when you have several thousand levels of value would be much easier imo

this isn't a vote for a true point system. Its just curiosity

 

[lastbesthope]

If Mongoose ever do a second edition of ACTA they should clearly state whether or not existing players will need to buy it, and what if anything will be compatible from the old version. ANd then make sure they follow through on any compatibility statements.

LBH
(In a rather pointed post mood)

 

[MongooseMatt]

If we do a second edition for CTA, it will be a complete blank slate - nothing else necessary.

 

[Geekybiker]

I wonder if true point systems have this many problems. I mean, apart from a couple % off here and there, judging the cost value of one ship over another when you have several thousand levels of value would be much easier imo

this isn't a vote for a true point system. Its just curiosity

Depends. A point system is easier to tune. You dont have to change stats, just keep adjusting the value up/down based on playtest feedback. Pretty fine granularity. The problem would be with the initial guesses on power levels. It could take awhile to get them in the right spot. You would also loose the PL break down where ships are essentially variable points based on the size fleet they are in. However points work well for most games.

Maybe convert from a raid level

War = 4800pts
Battle = 2400pts
Raid = 1200 pts
Skirmish = 600 pts
Patrol= 400pts

Problem is that a war ship probably isnt worth 12 patrol ships.

 

[lastbesthope]

If we do a second edition for CTA, it will be a complete blank slate - nothing else necessary.

So would '1st edition' players need to buy the new edition to be up to date, or would there be an upgrade path?

LBH

 

[Target]

It would so good to have everything in one book.
Pain in the arse trying to find books scattered everywhere

 

[MongooseMatt]

So would '1st edition' players need to buy the new edition to be up to date, or would there be an upgrade path?

Nothing else necessary, mate - you would just need the 2nd edition

 

[E Nicely]

If we do a second edition for CTA, it will be a complete blank slate - nothing else necessary.

Bring it on, Matt. A second edition nis a good idea. A unified fleet list is a great idea. The game will have been out 2 years as of this Summer, maybe it's time for CTA 2E.

Would 2E eliminate the need for a compendium or vice versa?

 

[firekite]

been working on a few things lately but thought i should voice my 2 cents on this. when this game system is complete with the exception of adding a new race or variant ships to the game, that would be a good time to create the 2nd edition. that way hopefully a majority of the "bugs" will be out of it. as for a point based system, i've seen to many of these repeatedly tweaked, overhauled or completely replaced because of various glitch'es. as for balanced fleets all i have to say (again) is "this way lies madness". i have spent years and lots of $ on adb's starfleet battles and watched it go from it's humble beginnings to a game that no longer has any flavor to the various fleets. the majority of the ships printed for the game now are done in "cookie cutter fashion" in order to maintain a form of balance in the game (example: why did race's a,b,c,d,f,g&j get the super cool new ship and race's e,h&i did'nt. i play race h and it's not fair). this leads to a game where you spend more time arguing over rule's then trying to have fun while figuring out what your apponents weakness is while trying to keep from having your used against you. sorry to sound so preachy but i happen to be a great fan of this rules set and don't want to see it go down that road( please dont let that happen matt). well i said this would be my "2 cents" and it looks more like $2 , so i,ll go back to working on my conversions.

 

[MongooseMatt]

Firekite - you are spot on with this analysis. Often what you leave out of a fleet/army list is just as important as what you put in and SFB (I speak of it fondly) suffers from this - as do some the 'legacy' ships we have in CTA, betraying their SFB origins. As time goes on, we'll begin working on them. . .

 

[firekite]

that matt is all i and i'm sure all of the rest of us on the forum could ask or hope for. thank you :!:

 

[Dywnarc]

Do you guys live int he same gaming world I do? When I bought Call to Arms i thought it was incredible value. A great game system with counters to get me started so I don;t have to run out and by models till I know what I like?

My only dissapointment was for that price a series of special order markers and player summary sheets are in order. But now you got servel excellent ones avaaible online so it dosn;t matter much.

I guess these days I feel there are a lot of game systems that cost a lot more to get started.

 

[MongooseMatt]

Do you guys live int he same gaming world I do? When I bought Call to Arms i thought it was incredible value. A great game system with counters to get me started so I don;t have to run out and by models till I know what I like?

Also worth pointing out here that if 2nd edition ends up as a hardback book (or two), we will keep the counters on sale as a separate pack. . .