Suggestion for 2E

[Harry Lonsdale]

Don't know how anyone else feels about this, but I would find it much easier to put together a fleet if the ships were ordered by priority level rather than alphabetically by main hull type.

Or maybe I just need to play more so I can remember their stats and use just a list to build a fleet.

 

[lastbesthope]

Nope, I think alophabetically by ship[ name is fine, thenhave the PL lists at the start for each fleet.

If I want to look up a Sharlin I don't want to have to remember that it's a War Level ship first.

LBH

 

[tneva82]

If I want to look up a Sharlin I don't want to have to remember that it's a War Level ship first.

LBH

OTOH if I want to find which skirmish ship to choose I don't want to jump around ship list like madman chasing them around...

Especially fun when you don't remember each name. Was this skirmish or raid? Can't remember...Back to fleet list...

 

[MustEatBrains]

Don't know how anyone else feels about this, but I would find it much easier to put together a fleet if the ships were ordered by priority level rather than alphabetically by main hull type.

Or maybe I just need to play more so I can remember their stats and use just a list to build a fleet.

I feel the same way - organizing the fleet list into PLs, and then put the ships within each PL into alphabetical order seems more natural to me, but then I´ve spend years playing with GW-army books, and they are organised into groups like that. I´m used to the ACTA style by now, so both is fine with me.

 

[H]

I think it's down to personal choice. sometimes I know my ship name, so alphabateically is good, but if playing a new fleet, I want to wizz through in priority to view the ships available. It has to be oine way or the other and I suspect whichever you choose would make some peiople unhappy.

Thank the lord for ship sheets!! (Or rather thank Burger, and LBH, and chernobyl)

 

[lastbesthope]

Thank the lord for ship sheets!! (Or rather thank Burger, and LBH, and chernobyl)

Well in all fairness, my Ship Sheets are direct descendants of Obsidian's early works.

LBH

 

[H]

Thank the lord for ship sheets!! (Or rather thank Burger, and LBH, and chernobyl)

Well in all fairness, my Ship Sheets are direct descendants of Obsidian's early works.

LBH

and thank Obsidian ;-)

 

[Triggy]

Well the ships are alphabetically with their full profiles and have the summary, listed in order of PL at the start of the fleet section. This gives you both options available to you

 

[Burger]

I would like to see the PL put into the ship's information in the stats, too! It would save immense page-flicking-time, and wear & tear on the book. Also number of flights per wing for fighters. Flicking back to the fleet list so often is soooo annoying to me.

 

[Lorcan Nagle]

Isn't the PL listed opposite the ship name in the approiat main entry in fleet book, SFOS and Armageddeon?

 

[emperorpenguin]

Isn't the PL listed opposite the ship name in the approiat main entry in fleet book, SFOS and Armageddeon?

yes

 

[Burger]

Don't mind me, I'm just going crazy :roll:

 

[Lorcan Nagle]

I'll say - there's a bun spoiling what looks like a perfectly tasty cat there!

 

[Triggy]

Also number of flights per wing for fighters.

Now this is a good idea

 

[cordas]

I would prefer them listed by PL, and alphabeticaly with the PL group. Most ships you know by name you know their PL as well....

Adding the flights per patrol point for fighters is a great idea!!! I would also say that all fighters should be listed at the start (or end) of each fleet list, having to flick pages back and forth between different fighter types is a pain. I would also put Space Stations just after fighters....

 

[Chernobyl]

Of course I'd love to see pre-printed reference sheets...! :lol:

I'd also like to see a Card Insert in the rulebook that can be a quick reference for turn sequence, Special Actions, critical tables, ship and weapon traits.

Chernobyl

 

[H]

Personally, I'd love to see ACTA released in a ring bound folder, so errata and new ships can be slotted in, instead of carrying extra bits of paper around!

 

[cordas]

Personally, I'd love to see ACTA released in a ring bound folder, so errata and new ships can be slotted in, instead of carrying extra bits of paper around!

Nice idea, as long as the ring binder was of good enough quality and had a decent locking system to stop it accidently coming undone...

 

[Triggy]

I actually really dislike ring binder systems like this - the classic hard back rulebook has always been a favourite of mine.

In systems where updates are more integrated this tends to work better.

 

[Sulfurdown]

I'd be in favor of a ringbound book, the only problem is that to get the quality of the binding and the paper to where it will have the durability of a book it will most likely cost a good deal more than a book.