So what's going on with the third edition of A Call to Arms?

A

Arch Lector Petrovski

Mongoose
Wasn't there supposed to be some sort of announcement about the third edition of a call to arms over the summer? I know I was away for the majority of the summer, but I don't remember seeing or hearing anything. Did I miss it or has it just not been announced yet?
 
^^ No! There is no big difference. May be you can estimate a little more precise and got one Fighter Flight on top if you take a smaler skirmish ship than your opposer - hey...

Unbalacing comes into being from the various Fleetspecialrules that make that some ships act perfekt together and others do not.
Pointsystems got the same probs. The Model itself got a Pointscore that fits, but in combination with Model"x" it is mutch to cheap and so one...
I play 40K, BFG and Aeronautica to, they all have the same probs.

May be some ships in B5 ACTA are cheaper Battleships and others are a little more expensive for a Battleship - and whats the heck?
You also have to roll the Dice and to fulfilling your Mission with your own tactics and a little luky hand :wink:
- I know only one exactly balancing Game on Earth - chess :!: -

example
Game BFG
Imperial Kolossus Cruiser 180 Pt
IMS Battlecruiser 425 Pt
The ISM Battlecruiser is an big warship with hull 6. The Waepons are needing to fly close to to enemy and the ship must be in the right position to use all of them for best result.
The Kolossus is only a Cruiser armed with Laserlaces that works like mini-beams. For 180 Pt each, you got two of them against the Battleship and this two ignore the Hull 6 from the Battleship complet and strike it doun with no problems.
Eldar Aurora light cruiser 140 Pt
The Eldar got a holofield that gives him a 2+ safe against all hits from the Kolossus minibeam Lances :cry: ....

example 2
Game B5 ACTA
Two ISA Fleets - both player got 2 White Stars and 2 Gunships...
One Player use all separate the other build squadrons :!:
Exact the same ships (PL or Pt) but not longer balaced :idea:
 
It would be nice to have points as its easy to tweek ships to get ships slightly weaker or better than present ones.

The PL system does mean its hard to make a more advanced version of a ship without going to the whole next PL.

I would agree that no system is going to be totally balanced but points is probably a bit more flexible?
 
It also allows for ships that would otherwise be at the same PL to beseperated by points if one is slightly (in some cases clearly) the better of the two. It would also probably lead to some more interesting fleet selections and the use of some ships that might not otherwise get used because getting the less expensive ships may allow you to get more or to get an even bigger command ship.
 
^Yes and no.
But the value of a ship is change if the opposer ship (or Fleet) is changes - thats the piont.
So whats the exact value of ship"xy"? Or in other words, make it a sense to know an exact value like the Pt-system will present?

example Fighter
All fighter are on PL Patrol and the finetuning is, how many you get for one point.

Shadow fighter (2 Flights)
Aurora Starfury (4 Flights)
(at Pt-system they may have a scorevalue per Flight, but in the end it is the same situation)
The shadow have 3AD AP DD, the Aurora have 2AD TW-L
The balancing is ok solong both attacks enemy ships, but in dogfight?

The shadows with double-cost have DF+0, Dodge 3+ and the Aurora DF+2 and Dodge 2+

The Value change if the facing enemy is changing and so I think it is impossible to say the ship /fighter "xy" got a valuescore of exakt one number and thats the last truth and it is balanced in any game that may comes.
 
I agree with your point to a certain extent...........

As someone who spends a lot of time making up ships its very difficult to make a new or more advanced version of a ship without going to the whole next PL. Its probably easier to tweek ships with points - I agree you will never cover all eventualities but I think its more flexible?

On the cost of shadow fighters - they do also (now) have a shield that now works in dogfights and against AF. I think they are also hull 5 vs hull 4 Star Fury. (There is a very long thread about how usless they were before this welcome change)

:D
 
The PL system does make it quicker to choose your fleet and get started on the battle, though. That along with the relatively easy rules makes ACTA a nice lightweight game which is quick for newcomers to learn. I've been able to give people a rundown of the rules and FAP system and get them into a game inside half an hour.
 
I like the PL system for what it is and how it works. Its just not granular enough. Its like only having 5 sizes of shoes. It also doesn't help when the break down favors small ships. I've NEVER liked that about ACtA. I LOVE playing with big ships, anything Battle and up is more fun. But I don't think fleet battles should be only a handful of big ships slugging it out. They should just be the stars. I never feel threatened when a War level ship is brought to the board. Because I *KNOW* that the same points worth of skirmish and raid will take it down. Very rarely is this not the case.

I don't want to see ACtA be a 'pure' points based game. Its just not right. It wouldn't feel right. But if there were a broader range, something like 10 levels, I think some issues would be solved. There would be better scaling between the levels, rather than the larger jumps there are now.

As for bigger ships being weaker... who said what about crit protection?
 
^^^Yes, now they have shilds in DF and AF, but the 2 Years without P&P?
Is only an Example to see that the Points are change if the opposing ship, fleet or your mission is changes :wink:
 
l33tpenguin said:
I like the PL system for what it is and how it works. Its just not granular enough. Its like only having 5 sizes of shoes. It also doesn't help when the break down favors small ships. I've NEVER liked that about ACtA. I LOVE playing with big ships, anything Battle and up is more fun. But I don't think fleet battles should be only a handful of big ships slugging it out. They should just be the stars. I never feel threatened when a War level ship is brought to the board. Because I *KNOW* that the same points worth of skirmish and raid will take it down. Very rarely is this not the case.

I don't want to see ACtA be a 'pure' points based game. Its just not right. It wouldn't feel right. But if there were a broader range, something like 10 levels, I think some issues would be solved. There would be better scaling between the levels, rather than the larger jumps there are now.

As for bigger ships being weaker... who said what about crit protection?
Click to expand...

Amen to the majority of that. Probably the best compromise would be a points system to allow much greater granularity (e.g. I give this ship missiles or a good captain but only for a cost of +10%) but with a (very) limited set of fleet composition rules. Maybe even something like at least half of your points must be spent on ships over a certain size/cost or even simpler, you must have a command ship for your fleet...

Crit protection (e.g. redundancy and/or easier repairing of crits) is something I'd like to see to some degree too.

The crit table needs evening out. As a minimum, having fewer "killer" crits. Most speed crits could be smaller but cumulative or percentage based instead and most weapons crits could be toned down (e.g. only fire on a 2+/3+, -1AD, half AD on your longest ranged weapon, etc.)
 
See i think the PL system should be weighted. So you say we'll play a 20pt battle and you get 20pts to choose ships from the fap breakdown below.

So as a base idea but this adversly effects large ships

1pt for a patrol
2pts for a Skirmish
4pts for a raid
8pts for a battle
16pts for a war
32pts for an Armageddon

In Line with the FAP breakdown This i still feel has problems with adversly effecting big ships.

1pt for a patrol
2pts for a skirmish
4pts for a raid
8pts for a battle
12 pts for a war
18 pts for an armageddon

This is how i think it should work

1pt for a patrol
2pts for a skirmish
4pts for a raid
7pts for a battle
11pts for a war
15pts for an armageddon

The above i feel would work better than the FAP system. Encourage big ships and have a nice feel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Critical Hits with multiple locations/systems
2
Replies
29
Views
696
Sigtrygg
Sigtrygg
M
Iron Ghosts of the Empire
Replies
14
Views
1K
Morgoth99
M
A
Um, what's up with the ever-increasing size of Aslans?
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
Condottiere
C
actionman
Thoughts on the Dark Imperium
10 11 12
Replies
239
Views
6K
actionman
actionman
V
Jump Precisions
5 6 7
Replies
136
Views
4K
Terry Mixon
Terry Mixon
Back
Top