Federation Commander

[storeylf]

ACTA already has to the concept of out running drones - you just have to be facing away from the enemy and going 'fast'.

It also has the evasive ship being able to dodge them.

The problem with both these actions is that you have no idea who seekers are going to get shot at (unlike FC where you see them coming). You can't really point ships away from the enemy on an APE order because the enemy will just shoot another ship instead. Evade is useless as it requires a 50/50 crew check and then another less than 50/50 roll to actually evade the volley. But again the enemy can just shoot someone else anyway.

Having seekers launch at the start of the turn (and impact later, either before or after direct fire) would solve the issue of the drone lobber being able to shoot someone else who hasn't taken the correct actions as you won't have choosen your actions yet. It would also simluate FC where you know in advance that you are targeted and you then manouver accordingly, not just the target but any other ships you want to use to help. It would in that respect help with IDF as you would know which ships to IDF and which not to bother with - again stopping the drone lobber just cherry picking the target based on who passed or not.

I don't think you'd have to have any penalties for not doing those actions as Bill suggests, but you would be able to remove the clunky 3 ships firing drone limit, as now the target can make proper decisions to counter what is happening.

Combined with more reliable SAs that would give you a wide range of anti drone tactics that more broadly reflect FC.

It might screw with plasma though, partly because defending against it is a lot easier, and partly because of the need to be close at the start of the turn rather than end (which means in practise you endure another round of shooting). But that could be re-looked at if such changes were implemented, if needed changing bleed ranges or AD per plasma.


A turn would go something like:

Kzinti (with his 10 ships) : I launch 15 drones against DN, 10 against each of those 2 cruisers and 5 against that DD.

Target (thinking to self): OK, DN will kill 8-9 drones, I'll send that vet CA on auto IDF with him to get another 5 or 6 plus he will boost shield to absorb anything that gets through, my 3 FFs with standard crew can IDF 1 of the cruisers (3 in case 1 fails on a roll of 1), the other cruiser will go APE and turn away to use the 'evade seeking weapon' rule, the DD will go evasive SA on a 2+, if he fails or gets hit anyway then he'll phaser 3 or 4 and take the rest on the nose.

All of that is what can happen in FC, you run, shoot or dodge past.

The interesting decision is when to resolve it. Before normal fire, or after. Or I suppose even during - you could say that whenever you nominate a ship to shoot he first gets impacted by the drones aimed at him and then resolves it as normal, maybe getting vaporised before shooting. That (or after all fire) allows for the drone lobber to kill IDF ships etc.

Resolving all drones as one volley would mean re-looking at ADD though. 1 ADD taking out 20 drones isn't going to work. Maybe group drones into volleys of 4 each for ADD purposes? hit by 15 drones will need 4 ADD rolls.

I'm not sure how bad the record keeping would be though as the battles got larger. The one thing I'd do though is bring back the SFB 'drone channel switching' so that we can hand wavium away worrying about killing a ship to stop its drones (and therefore have to record such things). I'd probably go back to no range bands to drones either (so that we don't have to try and record who fired at what range again). Knowing who is a target should (hopefully) provide all the edge you need to survive drones in the same way as FC without the range thing.

[Marauder]

I think the rules for seeking weapons in Staramada Nova (and the SFU counterparts) are good and could be adapted to ACTA. They have very minimal book keeping - and frankly ACTA needs some book keeping anyways (whether Mongoose wants to admit it or not). Check out your copy of klingon armada for details but its like this (very close to what SVC said):

When a ship launches seeking weapons place a marker beside the ship that launched it - write down the strength/number etc of the seeking weapon and the target. Note that you can target something outside the maximum range of the seeking weapon. Any ship that hasn't gone yet that turn can fire at the seeking weapon, but uses the location of the launch ship for range/fire arcs (i.e. where the marker is).

After ship movement on the next turn, place all the seeking weapons that were launched on the previous turn beside their targets if they are within range measured from their launch location (if they are out of range remove them). Ships now can fire at them as if they were located where the target ship is. Seeking weapons attack the target immediately after the target ship resolves its fire for the turn.


What I like:
1) you can outrun the seeking weapons
2) you always get at least one opportunity to fire at the seeking weapons without having to introduce a special "seeking weapon" phase in the turn
3) You can plan out getting help from other ships if you need to (you will always be able to maneuver friends in to help you and if you "activate" the target last in a turn everyone nearby can get a chance to target it - provided you do way with that horrible need to make a crew check for "Intensify Defensive fire")
4) There is book keeping, but its light - you don't have to literally move the seeking weapons across the table and then have to worry about rules to deal with it (like how much they can move or pivot per turn etc). Note I know "moving across the table" is something that is very much part of SFU - I just don't know if it really comes across as that interesting when you are using whole turn movement.

-Tim

[storeylf]

[Savedfromwhat]

Why not just have a seeking weapons phase before direct fire? This would solve a lot of the uncertainty of drones.

[storeylf]

SAs are determined at the point of move, so doing seekers just before direct fire wouldn't solve the issue of it being pointless to take SAs based on drones attacking you (as you still wouldn't know what was going to be sent your way). I don't see how that solves anything if you are wanting drones in some way to affect decision making in either movement or SA choice.

Doing it before movement would mean no one would have chosen an SA yet.

The only 2 options I can see are have drones live over a turn break. Or have seeker launched before movement and impact after movement.

I seem to remember that one of those was tried during early playtesting and rejected. I personally prefer the launch before move, resolve afterwards. But over a turn would work so long as it avoided record keeping - markers for the drones themselves are one thing, it is when you start having to make notes of who fired at whom etc.

[Marauder]

I can see launching before moving working too. You could put counters beside the target with someway to indicate the strength of the attack. But I have not idea how you will simulate the ability to out run the seeking weapons as you've now lost the info about where it was launched.

I know some games have both launch point and target point counters.

-Tim

[storeylf]

It occured to me last night you'd lose the direction as well. Using another marker (like in the newish Star wars or, is it X-Wing, game and target locks) on the shooter would be one way, but you'd end up with a veritable plethora of markers given the number of ships with drones a typical size FC game might have.

The other 'problem' with the run away defense as it currently stands is that it is an opposed crew check to avoid drones , if you made Evade automatic (or near enough) then that would provide the same defense with no need to go fast or face away from the enemy. If SAs are made easier to achieve you would probablly need to revist the run away defense anyway in order to make it easier to avoid drones than just carrying on under evade, or make evade more restrictve (like in FC where you can't shoot) so that they each have a clear different purpose.

[lincolnlog]

I think one of the cheesy changes to drones, was the massive drop in accuracy after 18", from auto hit to needing a 5 or 6, please!

Drones should never naturally be worse than 3+. The with evasive action and/or Fast 4+ or 5+ combined. That makes sense.

There also needs to be a ruled order in which all this is applied. We do dodge first, then players dice against each other on defensive fire. You may be firing at a drone that's going to miss but you would not know that until it was too late to respond.

[Dal Downing]

Okay what about a compromise. We look at adding a Seek Weapon and targeting Phase between the Movement and Firing Phases.

Movement Phase would run exactly as it does now. You declare Special Actions and use the IGoYouGo as normal.

Then during the Seeking Target and Scout Phase you follow the same IGoYouGo order the Firing Phase would. Players alternate placing Drone or Plasma Markers on targets but, the actual impact and Defensive Fire occurs during the Firing Phase. Now for this to work a targeted ship would have to be allowed a HET (First Free all other Checked for success). If a ship choose to flee and makes it HET the ship would be spun 180degrees from the ship that fired the most Attack Die of Seekers and then moved 4inches away with no turns. The ship would gain a saving throw of say 5+ for each hit and the Target Markers stay with it.

Now The Firing Phase would continue as normal. As a ship is destroyed only the Drone Markers would be removed as Plasma is self guiding. Defensive Fire happens as it does currently.
_________________
-Dal

"Which one of you is the Biggest, Baddest, Bootlicker of the bunch?"
"I am."
"ARCHERS!!! THAT ONE!!!!"

[Dal Downing]

[Steve Cole]

We all may have to rethink what we previously outlawed.

Unless there is a means by which seeking weapons affect movement and movement is the key way to avoid getting hit, you not only are losing a ton of realism, you're outside the SFU and don't need anything from us. If you want to use Feds, Klingons, and Romulans, you need seeking weapon to act like seeking weapons act and do what seeking weapons do.
_________________
The Guy Who Designed Fed Commander

[Savedfromwhat]

SVC,
I think That Storeylf might be on to something then with Seeking Weapons being fired before movement. If they are fired before movement and dealt with during the fire phase it would give people the chance to react by going All Power to Engines!, and Intensify Defensive Fire!, it would also dictate a lot of how they move.

This would however be very very bad for the plasma empires.

[Bill Stec]

[storeylf]

I've been musing about this, these are just my thoughts so far. They do not necessarily provide what some want, or even balance the game (playtesting needed for that). Either SVC or Matt may be dead set against these thoughts. As noted before I really think SAs need to be more reliable, so in the following I'm assuming a target 6+ for most SAs.

Whilst I don't mind markers I don't like record keeping in a game like ACTA - record keeping is what FC/SFB does (and I do play FC a lot, its not like I'm against record keeping per se). Markers I can handle, e.g a drone 6 marker to show 6 drones are attacking a ship, but I'd really rather not get into recording who launched what etc. A bit like SAs - we place markers to show what SA and use mini dice against a ship to show Shield boost.

The more I think about it the more I do like the idea of declaring drone fire before movement. I do prefer the ACTA mentailty of minimise things across a turn for what is meant to be a simple fast playing game.

In FC There are 2 main ways of avoiding drones. Go fast or shoot them down.

The thing about the 'go fast' method in FC is that you do not have really have to be heading away from them, in fact my usual tactic is to head at speed 24 more or less directly at them, and then just as I reach them use 24+ to speed past them. You can also turn and run parallel at speed for 1 or 2 impulses to get a lead on them before turning back where you were going before. Actually running away is not something that happens that much in my experience. Whilst you might be facing in such a way that the drones are not in front of you at some point, that may only be for a brief moment as you make a slight adjustment, certainly at the point they are launched you may well be heading directly at them, and still have no problem bypassing them.

That said there are tactics to the launch of drones and their subsequent manouvering that can make it harder to by pass all of them, requiring that you shoot a least some of them down. That is a fair reason to make such manouvers in ACTA subject to a crew check.


In FC There are 2 main ways of avoiding plasma. Run away or shoot them down.

Note that simply going fast is not the same here, whilst you can avoid drones by going fast directly at them, that simply results in you getting hit harder against plasma. With plasma you will nearly always be running away at speed.

There is another key aspect to plasma compared to drones that hasn't been mentioned. Drones last multiple turns and are that bit slower, plus they are easy to shoot down up to a point (how many phasers have you got). Most of the time you see drones coming at you and can choose how to avoid them based on the current situation. Even if it is mid turn you can very often delay until the turn end and then make decisions on how to avoid them, or just shoot down a few nuisance ones with Ph3s. Plasma is a different beast. It lasts for only part of turn (ok it may get launched just before the turn break, but the time it lasts is less than a full turn). It is very fast and it is a lot harder to shoot down. Unlike drones you are far less likely to see plasma launched at a point where you can evaluate how to avoid it after a delay, and you are less likely to be able to just shoot it down on demand. With plasma you make your plans based on the fact the plasma user will be launching at some point in the future, and you have to be ready to handle that when it happens. Which for the most part means you go speed 24 whether plasma is out or not. Going less than speed 24 before it is launched just paints a big target on you (unless you are safely miles away). One final aspect of plasma it that it can be that bit harder to get other ships helping, partly because it is faster and partly because it is usually launched at a much closer range, giving far less time to setup the other ships to shoot prior to impact. It is also worth noting that damaged ships become more vulnerable to plasma far faster than they do drones, lack of power for movement is a killer against plasma.

Clearly it is a gross generalisation, and there are exceptions in both cases, but in summary: Drones you see coming at you and then work out how they are best avoided, plasma you plan to avoid before they are launched, which means go full speed for the most part with energy in reserve for accels and other actions.

In both cases, whilst it is sort of true that it affects my movement, a more accurate description is that they limit my options, not just in terms of movement, but in terms of power to do other things. So long as you can reflect that ability to limit options then you would be recreating the FC feel to a large extent, probably more so then simply concentrating on the affect on movement.

So. If drones are launched prior to movement in ACTA then you can plan based on how many are launched at you. A few nuisance ones you could simply say 'pff, whatever' and plan to let the target handle them with its own phasers, larger numbers you can go for fast movement, or plan on multi ship support.

I deliberately didn't say seekers before movement, however, as I think plasma is probably best left as is. That better represents that you usually have to 'be prepared' up front for avoiding plasma, and the plasma chucker is in a better position to target a weak link.

For SAs therefore I woud suggest that both evasive and going fast provide a crew check of 8+ to avoid a drone strike. As I'd not really want to track who did the launch I'd not make it an opposed check (you need to know the launcher for that). I'd also not require that you be facing in any direction, simply going fast is enough. APE doen't require a crew check, but it effectively requires that you give up some weapon fire, evasive leaves you with weapons but limits your speed (and as noted above, effectively turn ability). IDF of course allows you to shoot drones down.

For the purpose of ADD and the crew checks to avoid you group drones into some number (4?), so if attacked by 15 drones and you went fast you would make 3 rolls against 4 drones each and 1 against 3 to avoid by speed. The standard crew has a 50% chance of avoiding each groups, vets are better, green worse. Any groups that hit can then be subject to ADD fire.

So drones are not so much affecting movement directly, but (as sort of noted in a post above) they are affecting your options and movement indirectly, which is more the reality of FC.

Plasma on the other hand, I'd suggest remains fired during the fire phase as now. With the following changes:

If you are move limited (be it via the power drain option, critical hits, or SA limits like evasive etc) then the effective energy bleed bracket is reduced by 1. So if a target has choosen a move 6" power drain it can be shot at from range 12" as though it was at range 8" or less. Note this is not about how far you actually moved, just whether you were restricted from moving full speed (you may have moved less, but you have the power to suddenly accel).

Anything moving 'fast' (greater than 12") means the energy bleed bracket is increased by 1. So firing at range 8" or less becomes range 12" for bleed purposes. Reflecting that a fast ship can better run out the plasma, again it isn't about how far you moved, but whether you were able to.

IDF against plasma that was launched at range 8" or less (actual, not adjusted) requires an opposed crew check by the IDFing ship. That reflects that support at short range is much harder to arrange in time. This is very nasty given how powerful plasma is in ACTA, but it would provide a real incentive for ships to make sure they have the 'fast' bonus.

Again, whilst plasma more directly affects movement than drones in FC, it reflects that in FC your best defense is to keep moving fast in the first place, and have the power to accelerate even on top of that. If you go slow you are toast. The above suggestions severly limit the options when facing plasma, as you will seldom want to choose move 6" power drain; so you will have to sacrifice firepower which is what happens in FC where anti plasma speeds tend to limit spare power. It also makes APE much more tempting as an anti plasma defense which also feels right. Again though it limits your firepower.

There would also be a clear distinction and different feel to plasma and drones, which both feel pretty much the same at the moment.

Long post, but they are some of my thoughts. There are probably all sorts of holes and issues I can probably think of a few myself.

[Bill Stec]

Storyelf,