 |
Federation Commander
A NEW fast paced board game of starship combat!
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Nerroth
Fleet Captain
Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 1740
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
 Posted: Wed Nov 20, 2013 10:04 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Sneaky Scot wrote: | | I really liked the way fighters were done in B5: ACTA. If you haven't played it, they were broken down into flights of 6 and given their own weapon characteristics for the flight. Any hit would destroy the entire flight, but being fighters, they got to dodge unless the weapon had certain characteristics (anti-fighter or accurate from memory as I haven't got my rules with me). That required no record keeping at all. However, I appreciate that might not work particularly well with SFB / FC fighters as an F-18 (or whatever) seems to be much tougher than a Star Fury in B5. |
For what (little) it's worth, I'd be more reluctant to see fighters grouped into flights, as was done for ACtA:B5.
Personally, I'd prefer the one-fighter-per-stand setup used in A Call to Arms: Noble Armada if/when the time comes to handle fighters in ACtA:SF; carriers there seem to work fairly handily, and indeed were made more accessable in the Fleets of the Fading Suns expansion.
Originally, a carrier in ACtA:NA had to pay for all of its fighters separately, whereas now it gets a "standard" fighter complement for free and only pays for swaps/upgrades. So, for example, the Hawkwood Osprey-class Heavy Carrier used to come with no fighters at all, and had to have its entire fighter wing paid for separately. Now, it comes with 18 Fitzhugh-class fighters at no extra charge. But each Fitzhugh the Hawkwood player swaps out for another fighter type (such as the Aurora-class stealth fighter) incurs an added cost.
Whether or not carriers (hybrid or true) need to pay for their attrition units separately here, or should have a basic point value that accounts for its "default" fighter complement, is another matter.
But, I suppose that kind of debate will really take off for whichever book the Hydrans end up being published in, or if fleet carriers for other Alpha powers are to be looked at before then.
_________________
FC Omega Discussion (v3)
FC LMC Discussion |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Steve Cole
Site Admin
Joined: 11 Oct 2006
Posts: 3821
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 21, 2013 4:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
One fighter per stand means a 12-ship fleet turns into 24 stands if there is one carrier in the mix. I thought the ACTA people didn't like clutter?
_________________
The Guy Who Designed Fed Commander
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bill Stec
Lieutenant SG
Joined: 25 Jan 2012
Posts: 158
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 21, 2013 4:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steve Cole wrote: | | One fighter per stand means a 12-ship fleet turns into 24 stands if there is one carrier in the mix. I thought the ACTA people didn't like clutter? |
This is why I have been experimenting with 3 fighters per stand, in flights. A hit destroys a fighter, subject to an evasion die roll. Incoming drones or plasmas can be shot down before hitting a fighter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nerroth
Fleet Captain
Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 1740
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 21, 2013 8:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steve Cole wrote: | | One fighter per stand means a 12-ship fleet turns into 24 stands if there is one carrier in the mix. I thought the ACTA people didn't like clutter? |
The fighters in ActA:NA go on smaller coin-sized bases, akin to the ones which (I think) the 2500-series shuttles were presented with.
So far as I've seen, those on the Mongoose boards who play ACtA:NA don't seem to have any particular issues with the inclusion of such attrition units.
But then, all of the weapons in that incarnation of the game system are treated as direct-fire systems. The closest you get to on-map "seeking weapons" is with either the Kurgan Khangard or Church/Li Halan Ananda Martyr (suicide) fighters.
Actually, I was thinking that, if the larger Mongoose stands were to be retained for use with 2500-series starships, and if shuttles and fighters can go on these smaller bases instead, the smaller diameter bases which Mongoose use for in-between classes (like the Kurgan Mujahidin-class Raider and the Hawkwood Wayfarer-class Explorer) could one day be used for 2500-series gunboats.
ActA:NA also uses those smaller (30mm, I think?) bases for ships like frigates, only using the larger bases for larger ship classes; as shown in this example. But since all ships in Starline 2500 use the larger 50mm bases, the gap could one day be filled by PFs instead.
_________________
FC Omega Discussion (v3)
FC LMC Discussion |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mdauben
Lieutenant JG
Joined: 15 Aug 2013
Posts: 92
Location: Rocket City
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 21, 2013 10:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Nerroth wrote: | | For what (little) it's worth, I'd be more reluctant to see fighters grouped into flights, as was done for ACtA:B5. |
Personally, I would love to see ACTASF go in the same direction. As Steve points out, once you start launching during a Carrier duel, you can easily double or even triple the number of manuver units on the table. For a fleet scale game I think having 2-4 "flights" of fighters is much more managable than dozens of individual fighters. I think it makes another clear distinction, too, between ACTASF and FC or even SFB.
_________________
Mike
"The best diplomat that I know is a fully-loaded phaser bank." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Monty
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 23 Aug 2007
Posts: 239
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 3:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Steve Cole wrote: | | Well, the Mongoosers hated my drone idea, but it was only one of two ideas (and Tony has already rewritten my idea since he's in charge, not me). |
I know it's heresy to say but I think it would be an interesting experiment in FC. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve Cole
Site Admin
Joined: 11 Oct 2006
Posts: 3821
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 4:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A workable direct-fire drone rule is about as easy to find as perpetual motion, but we have never stopped looking.
_________________
The Guy Who Designed Fed Commander
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jean
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Sep 2008
Posts: 1732
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 02, 2013 10:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Some of you have asked about what seem to be high shipping costs on our shopping cart for non-US orders. Almost nobody pays what the cart says, but the cart cannot calculate the "actual cost" (which is what we charge) and defaults to the highest of several different options. The reason for that is that the bank allows us to reduce what we charge you but not increase it. Once we get your order, Leanna calculates the "actual cost" and reduces the charge to that amount. There is really no practical way for the cart to calculate every possible shipping situation. (If you order a magazine or module it goes in an envelope. If you order a magazine and a miniature it goes it a box.) You can always email Leanna (Sales@starfleetgames.com) and tell her what you want to order. She will pull and weigh the order and calculate the actual shipping cost and tell you. (The cart will still show the higher cost but at least you'll know what the charge will be reduced to.)
We're getting a lot of totally new customers out of the recent change in the joint venture lines, and they are not aware that ADB is the single most responsive company in the industry. We answer every email and every question, and address every complaint and every issue. (Do not assume that such questions or issues will be ignored.) We make the extra effort to educate our customers into the how and why of the way our company runs, and many of them provide valuable suggestions and other input which we implement (sometimes overnight).
_________________
Business Manager/RPG Line Editor
Amarillo Design Bureau, Inc. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
