Why ACTA Flails.

[H]

Please don't misread my intentions here. I like ACTA and that's why I'm posting here. The purpose is to explain why I think ACTA isn't as popular as it could be.

It's all the changes in the ship stats. They're driving me up the wall because it's hard to keep track of "Well okay, which one is the most recent? Which version are we using?" This means I'm taking along a gazillion books to keep track of the fleet lists. It makes the cost of entry higher for new players as well, since they need the core books, Sky Full of Stars, and Armageddon to get things right. Even then it's easy to get confused by which rules apply.

Hopefully this changes with second edition.

<EDIT: Angry WHATYOUSHOULDDOISTHIS rant removed.>

... What the hell was I thinking? *goes looking for who let the angry cat out of the bag*

Basically I think that ACTA suffers from having too many rule changes too quickly, and that this is kind of a turn off to players. I also hope that 2nd Ed follows a "All the rules in one book" philosophy so we don't have the "Which ship stats do we use this week?" problem.

In terms of new material... well, Signs and Portents does a pretty good job at distributing new ships and stuff. Could always just release a new supplement when there's a critical mass of stuff to be printed or updated.

hey mate, just read through this thread. Don't let it get to you, play with what you play with, house rule to unbreak things, and just enjoy yourself, unless you wanna play a tourney, the rules you have, or the rules you are happy with are what matters, nothing else.

 

[Karhedron]

atleast its way better than the work of GW

Good point. Go onto any forum discussing GW games and the most common complaint is that the devs never listen to player feedback and never fix broken lists.

I guess you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. :roll:

 

[Greg Smith]

Too true.

 

[On_DS9]

Here's my advice to MG regarding ACTA, and this comes from the guy who was spitting nails mad earlier: you're on the right track.

I like the idea of splitting the box set into the rulebook and 'big-book-o-fleets.' So they can be updated individually. My advice would this: update (relatively) often but put all the updates in a rule-book re-release.

Look, I have no problem with you guys doing a rulebook update every two years. I have no problem with buying the same ruleset every two years. I know I may be in the minority on this, but if I only have to buy ONE book, then that's okay. Adding a new book that I have to buy increases the buy-in cost, which drives people away (as it almost did for me).

So let's say you guys do a new rule-book release every two years. Well, there's gonna be tweaks you'll have to do in the interim. My advice: on-line. Free. Then every two years, you collate the tweaks and any othe rmajor rules changes and re-release the rulebook.

I'm more than willing to admit that I might be wrong and that people might not want to re-buy the rules so often, but I don't think so. I think it would be far better than the current system.

Just my thoughts.

 

[Burger]

Agree 110% On_DS9!
I only want to have to look in 1 book for all the rules, rather than the current "oh that rule is in book 1, this rule is in SFOS and the other rule is in Armageddon"

 

[Valen is my name]

plus itll keep the costs down for people new to it, but who have friends who have been playing for a while. One of my friends is thinking of starting, but hes put off by the fact that for him to have all the same rules as me hell have to buy the revised edition, SFOS and Armageddon, and that will cost quite a bit, i know 2es coming out but at best he will have to get the revised edition and then 2e, why couldnt MGP do a PDF with the things needed to understand SFOS so he only needs one book and is not very far behind me.