The Neglected Ships

[Joe_Dracos]

hi again

now I have not really played much against the P+P one (although yet to see the 6+ save vs crits work for other Narn ships) so it may be a different thing...........

As always in ACTA crits a big thing and with the Centuari and Dilgar chucking lots of Precise or Double Damage guns at ships - crits are more common/ hurt a lot more.

You should try, you will be unpleasantly surprised when your Advantage of flanking it is taken away by "Track That Target" and the first two crits are ignored. Oh yeah, stay outside 9". Also, if there is a patrol vessel in the path of your Primus, RAM IT! I rammed a guardhawk with my warlock once. It was funny. Its also a valid naval tactic.

 

[AdrianH]

Going the other way is even more amusing. Pick an expendable Skirmish or Patrol level ship and have it ram a large enemy ship. It won't do much damage, but the return damage from the large ship against the tiddler will cause it to explode. You can therefore turn a Haven into a one-shot energy mine. :lol:

@ Burger: if an escort destroyer is a ship which destroys escorts, what does that make a battle destroyer such as the Ka'Toc? (Apart from very ambitious. )

 

[Burger]

I don't know what it makes a battle destroyer - I am more worried what a light carrier is! Something to do with the 2260 Olympics?

 

[Da Boss]

A Centauri Light Carrier would have wonderous and decorative lights to amuse the nobility as they watch the fleet anhiliate any inferior race that
bores them :wink:

@ Joe - Track that target certainly may help if they can make the check! - CQ 9 so 5+ roll if I recall correctly..............

I have palyed against P+P Narn but the 6+ critical defense has never seemed to have an effect. No one has used a P+P G'Quan against me yet.

Ramming is not something we have seen alot of to be fair - never seem to be in quite the right position or have other special roders to do........

I did put rules for the Dilgar Suicide frigate into the Dilgar War Pack........ :wink:

 

[Joe_Dracos]

What? You gave the Dilgar a blue star? :lol:

 

[G Quan]

The Narn need to learn how to build ships. They have a carrier with no "Fleet Carrier" trait and ...

^^Thats precisely Narn like! Narn are verry novices in Space and don´t have the electrical equipment to build a full fleet carrier. They got a lot of manpower, many light Waepons, a few big ones and they are all idealists.
Narn are like a large Shark with a big mouth, but to lesser teeth.
Make your peace with this truth, or look around to another fleet :wink:

The T`Loth and T`Rann are nothing more than large, well reinforced Frighter :!: One with Troops and Shuttles and one with Fighter and Pilots on Bord.
The T`Rann is a background-ship, to jump into the Dangerzone, launch the Fighter and jump out - not anything more 8)

 

[Foxmeister]

Is it really too much trouble to add 2 small boxes to your ship data sheet and learn 1 more new rule?

Well, you don't even need to add any boxes to the data sheet, since Redundancy is more like shields as it "resets" every turn. Redundancy definitely makes the G'Quan competitive, but it is getting agreement from your opponents to use it that's the problem - which is why I hate "optional" rules!

Regards,

Dave

 

[Foxmeister]

Narn are like a large Shark with a big mouth, but to lesser teeth.
Make your peace with this truth, or look around to another fleet :wink:

I disagree completely - the best ships in the Narn fleet don't follow that pattern, and they also tend to be the ones you see on the table the most - I'm thinking G'Vrahn, Var'Nic, Dag'Kar, Thentus, Ka'Toc, Sho'Kov and Sho'Kar. You can build a great Narn fleet using just those ships - the problem is that the iconic Narn ship from the show isn't in the list!

Regards,

Dave

 

[Joe_Dracos]

Redundancy definitely makes the G'Quan competitive, but it is getting agreement from your opponents to use it that's the problem - which is why I hate "optional" rules!

Regards,

Dave

I don't really see it as an optional rule (its so good its manditory). I'd also have to question why somebody wouldn't want to eliminate the War level ship killing 2 AD beams. All three Beam systems in that book are far more balanced then the one in the core book. In my view its not much of a choice. Its either make the big ships more durable or play with Skirmish and Patrol level ships because they last just as long.

 

[Da Boss]

not played with as yet - be interesting to try...........certainly would have made a recent game very different where i rendered a war lvele ship impotnent with a few crits - although the order of them might have mattered..........as I got quite a few in one round.

re beams - I agree however, most of our group don't like them - they prefer the randomness and beaminess..................also the game designer does not seem to like the variant rules - see the very cursory S+P article. Somewhat sad when the offer was made by Burger for a a much more interesting, in depth and comprehensive article.

 

[AdrianH]

My favourite is the system where beams hit on 3+ and re-roll for more hits on 5+. This tones down the random element of beams while not eliminating it completely. You can still get a flat miss or a runaway expansion, it's just less likely, and the expansion is likely not to run away quite so far.

I've yet to try the redundancy or fire rules, though... But even without redundancy, it's still worth using larger ships in high priority scenarios - in a War level scenario, better to use one Battle and two Raid than just three Raid, for example. That plus the addition of stealth means the Shadow Stalker is finally worth using.

 

[Triggy]

My favourite is the system where beams hit on 3+ and re-roll for more hits on 5+. This tones down the random element of beams while not eliminating it completely. You can still get a flat miss or a runaway expansion, it's just less likely, and the expansion is likely not to run away quite so far.

Ah, the good old Triggy's Beam System

Kenny and I tried it out in a 5 FAP War game the other month and it worked really well. The odd beam that was 50% better or worse than expected but nothing utterly bizarre and most beam shots gave a good account of themselves (except when stealth and dust clouds came into it!)

As for the redundancy rule - I really like the version where you get a few redundancy points for the entire battle (more per PL) and I'd love to see this sort of system in the next iteration of ACtA.