Greg Smith
Mongoose
Ben2 said:
I'm not going to tell what the licence is, nor drop hints and tease (that's Matt's job).
The Return?
- Thread starter shotgun-toting chipmunk
- Start date
I'm not going to tell what the licence is, nor drop hints and tease (that's Matt's job).
Just done a 'rules concept' expose on Planet Mongoose for more hints.
for those too lazy to go look:
For example, there are a number of fleets that have some similar ships - they all have a Frigate to choose from, for example. Now, two of the fleets had Frigates that were very similar but, on paper, one looked to have an advantage. It had heavier weaponry on the main decks, and a very nasty turret weapon. There had always been a niggling that this ship should be a few points more but, for various reasons, we had not made the change. In contrast, the other Frigate had slightly more shields and was more agile. Oh, and it had a 'pop gun' that could nonetheless penetrate shields. That just did not seem to be enough of a difference to make up for the weaker weaponry.
Last night's gaming culminated in a three-on-three engagement with these Frigates, to lock down some of the additional rules we have added and monitor these two types of Frigate. As it happened, for the latter at least, everything did indeed seem to balance.
You see, in this CTA, you get half the points value in VP if you destroy an enemy ship - but the full value if you board and capture it (plus a good possibility that you get to use it in the battle). In terms of troops on board, the two frigates were identical. So, that just left getting pounded to a pulp. The heavier gunned frigate does have an early advantage in the game and, all else being equal, would win every time. For the lighter frigate, the extra shields were useful, but marginal. The shield-penetrating pop-gun would never be fantastic, but it does allow for the occasional critical hit to pop up, which always causes problems. But a clear winner was its Turns of 2/45 against the heavier frigate's 1/45. Even when initiative was lost, if could still dance around its target.
All initial testing indicates these two ships are balanced after all! Still, we will keep monitoring them.
The games last night did impress upon me what a different dynamic this game has over B5. There is a _lot_ more manoeuvring involved, a ships seem to dance all across the table. Every now and again a little scrum breaks out as one ship manages to connect with another and a boarding action starts. Then you have to decide whether to send more ships into the action, or to keep their distance and not get involved. If the boarding action goes wrong, you might find yourself counterattacked and losing your own ship!
I did suspect at one point that the initiative system might make boarding very difficult. Instead, it seems to be rewarding the player who can predict where his opponent will move and set a trap for him - and it really is a beautiful thing when one of those traps is sprung. If you cannot do that, well, that is why we also have big guns!
When you begin boarding, things can look pretty hopeless, as you will be terribly outnumbered by the defenders. However, if you can get a foothold, and maybe a second ship in to attack from the other side, then things can begin to swing in your favour. We are tweaking different troop types at the moment, so boarding actions could become even more exciting, as you may never be completely sure of what the other player has on board their vessel!
Up to this point, we had reverted to keeping Crew scores in the game, but have subsequently decided to remove them. They add nothing and, with boarding actions, Troops are far more important - you will now be losing them with far greater regularity during critical hits.
People also seem to be using the Concentrate Firepower special action more often than they did in B5, which is something we have to fix. I was looking at perhaps limiting it to short ranged fire (12" or maybe even 6" maximum range), but someone came up with the idea of increasing Attack Dice with it (as opposed to re-rolling), but removing any possibility of causing critical hits. That is a lovely idea - should the Attack Dice go up by 50% or be doubled? What would you trade if you are losing any possibility of causing a critical?
We are also seeing too many rolls spent on shield regeneration. Something else that needs tweaking.
Anyway, the game is shaping up nicely, is on course for a February release, and we will be making an announcement shortly as to what it actually is - stay tuned!
initial comments:
Do you think any of the revelations in the new game are due to your / groups particular play style - for instance Maneouvering - this has usually been an important part of the B5 game for many fleets - ISA, Centauri, Shadows as they dodged and wove across the table. In a similar manner - some fleets - have used Concentrate alot in the past - we certianly did......why is it now "something to fix" - surely its just a valid tactic - and already has built in limitations - you can only fire on one ship. Did it actuay unbalance the game which would be a more valid reason that it get used too much :?
Crew Score - which you consider adds nothing (as to be fair do some others) - to me very debatable - it can be a massive help in terms of increasing individuality in ships - eg high damage, low crew or low damage high crew ships, even high tech or "alien" ships that require no crew. Having a crew score allows for weapon that only target crew/troops so it can captured.
Troops you mention "you can never be sure what the opponent has on board" - does that mean ACTA is moving away from full disclousure - again IMO a negaitve step except in specific scenarios etc.
I am excited that a new version is being planned but am concerned by the PM blog............
For example, there are a number of fleets that have some similar ships - they all have a Frigate to choose from, for example. Now, two of the fleets had Frigates that were very similar but, on paper, one looked to have an advantage. It had heavier weaponry on the main decks, and a very nasty turret weapon. There had always been a niggling that this ship should be a few points more but, for various reasons, we had not made the change. In contrast, the other Frigate had slightly more shields and was more agile. Oh, and it had a 'pop gun' that could nonetheless penetrate shields. That just did not seem to be enough of a difference to make up for the weaker weaponry.
Last night's gaming culminated in a three-on-three engagement with these Frigates, to lock down some of the additional rules we have added and monitor these two types of Frigate. As it happened, for the latter at least, everything did indeed seem to balance.
You see, in this CTA, you get half the points value in VP if you destroy an enemy ship - but the full value if you board and capture it (plus a good possibility that you get to use it in the battle). In terms of troops on board, the two frigates were identical. So, that just left getting pounded to a pulp. The heavier gunned frigate does have an early advantage in the game and, all else being equal, would win every time. For the lighter frigate, the extra shields were useful, but marginal. The shield-penetrating pop-gun would never be fantastic, but it does allow for the occasional critical hit to pop up, which always causes problems. But a clear winner was its Turns of 2/45 against the heavier frigate's 1/45. Even when initiative was lost, if could still dance around its target.
All initial testing indicates these two ships are balanced after all! Still, we will keep monitoring them.
The games last night did impress upon me what a different dynamic this game has over B5. There is a _lot_ more manoeuvring involved, a ships seem to dance all across the table. Every now and again a little scrum breaks out as one ship manages to connect with another and a boarding action starts. Then you have to decide whether to send more ships into the action, or to keep their distance and not get involved. If the boarding action goes wrong, you might find yourself counterattacked and losing your own ship!
I did suspect at one point that the initiative system might make boarding very difficult. Instead, it seems to be rewarding the player who can predict where his opponent will move and set a trap for him - and it really is a beautiful thing when one of those traps is sprung. If you cannot do that, well, that is why we also have big guns!
When you begin boarding, things can look pretty hopeless, as you will be terribly outnumbered by the defenders. However, if you can get a foothold, and maybe a second ship in to attack from the other side, then things can begin to swing in your favour. We are tweaking different troop types at the moment, so boarding actions could become even more exciting, as you may never be completely sure of what the other player has on board their vessel!
Up to this point, we had reverted to keeping Crew scores in the game, but have subsequently decided to remove them. They add nothing and, with boarding actions, Troops are far more important - you will now be losing them with far greater regularity during critical hits.
People also seem to be using the Concentrate Firepower special action more often than they did in B5, which is something we have to fix. I was looking at perhaps limiting it to short ranged fire (12" or maybe even 6" maximum range), but someone came up with the idea of increasing Attack Dice with it (as opposed to re-rolling), but removing any possibility of causing critical hits. That is a lovely idea - should the Attack Dice go up by 50% or be doubled? What would you trade if you are losing any possibility of causing a critical?
We are also seeing too many rolls spent on shield regeneration. Something else that needs tweaking.
Anyway, the game is shaping up nicely, is on course for a February release, and we will be making an announcement shortly as to what it actually is - stay tuned!
initial comments:
Do you think any of the revelations in the new game are due to your / groups particular play style - for instance Maneouvering - this has usually been an important part of the B5 game for many fleets - ISA, Centauri, Shadows as they dodged and wove across the table. In a similar manner - some fleets - have used Concentrate alot in the past - we certianly did......why is it now "something to fix" - surely its just a valid tactic - and already has built in limitations - you can only fire on one ship. Did it actuay unbalance the game which would be a more valid reason that it get used too much :?
Crew Score - which you consider adds nothing (as to be fair do some others) - to me very debatable - it can be a massive help in terms of increasing individuality in ships - eg high damage, low crew or low damage high crew ships, even high tech or "alien" ships that require no crew. Having a crew score allows for weapon that only target crew/troops so it can captured.
Troops you mention "you can never be sure what the opponent has on board" - does that mean ACTA is moving away from full disclousure - again IMO a negaitve step except in specific scenarios etc.
I am excited that a new version is being planned but am concerned by the PM blog............
Da Boss said:
With all the fleets we did in CTA, you can usually find something that is similar to something else
Still, maneouvering does feel different in this game - I know why that is, but it is something to discuss later...Da Boss said:
It is not amazingly unbalancing (though ships tend to have less weapon systems in this). It is just repetitive, and therefore boring. We want people to _think_ about what SA they choose, not just default to the same one three turns in every four.
Basically, it is just to shake things up a bit.
Da Boss said:
Part of the reason is that you are already tracking Shields and, to a lesser extent, Troops. Between those two, I am quite happy to get rid of a bit of book-keeping that was always marginal at best. Everything you describe above is applicable to Troops anyway.
Da Boss said:
No intention to do so as yet.
Da Boss said:
It is all good
Da Boss said:
msprange said:[With all the fleets we did in CTA, you can usually find something that is similar to something else
hmm well unless there is a big change in the movement/ iniaitive system surely alot will have to do with how much your ship can turn and how fast it goes as well as where its weapons are located. What have the other playtest groups found in case it is related to play style? Also amount of maneovering often also seems to depend on other factors such as Terrain and weapons range?
Da Boss said:
msprange said:
In my experience the most used Special Actions in B5 ACTA were All Stop/ Pivot, Concentrate, Close Blast Doors and Come About with a reasonable amount of All Power and All Hands to Deck. This varied hugely from group to group with some using hardly any SA others using lots, but CBD and All stop was used ALOT!.
Given that the games have apparently been more maneuovre intensive I would have expected more use of All Stop / Pivot and Come About and perhaps All power to escape the boarding actions? Have any SA been eliminated or provide different interactions?
shotgun-toting chipmunk
Mongoose
Okay, interesting stuff about Project N.
Now I want to know about Project D!
Now I want to know about Project D!
