Federation Commander Forum Index Federation Commander
A NEW fast paced board game of starship combat!
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

ship lists...proof readed???

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Federation Commander Forum Index -> A Call to Arms Star Fleet
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
kzintibasher
Ensign


Joined: 09 Feb 2012
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2012 10:16 pm    Post subject: ship lists...proof readed??? Reply with quote

hello

i have read the ship lists at the back of the book and am i missing something?


several ships dont look right compared to their FC version.

from the book it is clear that damage in ACTA is the number of hull boxes in FC doubled and Shields in ACTA are the value of no2/6 shield in FC. (except for the Klingons -20% rounded to the nearest even number)

so why is there an errata changing the Damage of Kzinti medium cruiser and New heavy cruiser, i think they should be 18/6 and 20/7 respectively.

why are the Kligon D6 and D7 different damage points?

there are other small petty errors in some ships armaments, the Kzinti new heavy cruiser command variant should REPLACE the turret ph-3 with ph-1, not just ADD 2 AD to its existing ph-1 batteries.

the kzinti frigate has ph-3 batteries, they should be 1AD each not 2 AD

there are probably a few more that even i have not checked out yet, such as firing arcs etc etc, but how much play testing was carried out and have the lists really been proof read and what confidence can we take from these lists

regards
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sgt_G
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 07 Oct 2006
Posts: 287
Location: Offutt AFB, Nebraska

PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2012 10:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Did you pull down the Errata file?

http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/pdf/sferrata.pdf
_________________
Garth L. Getgen
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Scoutdad
Commodore


Joined: 09 Oct 2006
Posts: 4478
Location: Middle Tennessee

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 1:09 am    Post subject: Re: ship lists...proof readed??? Reply with quote

kzintibasher wrote:
there are probably a few more that even i have not checked out yet, such as firing arcs etc etc, but how much play testing was carried out and have the lists really been proof read and what confidence can we take from these lists
regards


I can assure there was a lot of playtesting carried out.

Many of the items cited were reported to the PTBs at mongoose and they chose to go with their values instead.
Most of this has since been corected in the errata Garth refered to, since public demand trumped decisions made by Mongoose.

Some of the other apparent discrepancies are the result of porting 60 degree firing arcs into a 90 degree set-up.
The Klingon wing phasers are a prime example. In SFB/FC they cover a total of 180 degrees (LF,L,RR or RF,R,LR). These arcs can't be recreated in ACTA unless you expand them to cover FH,P and SH,P and that increases the arcs to cover areas that were not covered before.

As for the damage of the Kzinti ships, those were changed at the direction of SVC to place them in the correct point range for their respective sizes,even though it "violates" the typical ACTA daamge formula.

Tony
_________________


Scoutdad's minis photos here!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
kzintibasher
Ensign


Joined: 09 Feb 2012
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 11:10 am    Post subject: thanks for info Reply with quote

hi

i think the first thing WE all have to do is to realise we are not playing FC or SFB any more.

it is reasonable to expect that changes have to be made so that ACTA will work. with the "correct" damage points the kzinti CM and NCA would look a little light weight.

would be nice if we had a knowledge of the points system, so people could make their own house ships or amendments

many thanks for the replies

regards
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Scoutdad
Commodore


Joined: 09 Oct 2006
Posts: 4478
Location: Middle Tennessee

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 2:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's never been a secret
Pointsa are typically Fed Comm value muliplied by 1.25 and then adjusted by playtesting.
Damage is equal to hull boxes times 2.

although this formula produces some whack values as evidenced by hte civilian freighters.
That's where playtesting and common sense prevail.
_________________


Scoutdad's minis photos here!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
Aabh
Lieutenant SG


Joined: 27 Aug 2011
Posts: 134
Location: Arvada, Colorado

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 5:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm curious why it was just hull boxes instead of ALL boxes in the ship (Minus shields, of course)? I mean, if you look at the way the game is played in FC and SFB it seems that an incoming phaser shot doing 9 points of damage will damage the Transporter, Phaser 1, 2 boxes of the Warp Engine, the Emergency bridge... etc just as equally as hull boxes...

This is nothing more than a curiosity, of course. I'm not in ACTA just yet. Smile
_________________

-------
Guy Davis
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
storeylf
Fleet Captain


Joined: 24 Jul 2008
Posts: 1883

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 5:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Does seem a slightly odd, if quick and easy method, given the internal damage roll of 1 (bulkhead) seems to be representing hull hits generally.

Looking forward to seeing my old favourites- hydrans, cruisers with 42 damage rating, and destroyers that are tougher than some others cruisers - woof!


Last edited by storeylf on Mon Feb 13, 2012 5:28 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Scoutdad
Commodore


Joined: 09 Oct 2006
Posts: 4478
Location: Middle Tennessee

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 5:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That was a decision made by the game designer.
I'm not sure why it was made the way it was, but it was.
_________________


Scoutdad's minis photos here!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
Marauder
Lieutenant JG


Joined: 23 Sep 2011
Posts: 28
Location: Vancouver BC

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 9:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well they had to go one way or another. Even if I don't agree with a bunch of they decisions I can live with them. After playing the game a few times a lot of the small things (while annoying) really are irrelevant. You pound someone with photons they still die just the same as in SFB. Bonus with this game is you can pound them with a whole fleets worth of photons in the same time you did it with one ship in SFB.

The errata didn't catch all the mistakes on the ships, and that's a bit of a shame. There is also some inconsistency between some of the Kestrel and Klingon ships that should otherwise be near identical. I think anyone from SFB/FC just notices these fast and gets irritated by them - but overall they don't really affect how your whole fleet plays.

Hopefully in time these will all be fixed, but I imagine the current production issues are keeping them busy for now... afterall it doesn't much matter if ship x has one less phaser when you don't have minis to play with!

-Tim
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Steve Cole
Site Admin


Joined: 11 Oct 2006
Posts: 3095

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 5:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Matthew is putting the final touches on an updated errata sheet which I think caught everything.
_________________
The Guy Who Designed Fed Commander
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
lincolnlog
Lieutenant SG


Joined: 18 Jun 2011
Posts: 108
Location: St. Louis, MO

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 8:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Scoutdad wrote:
That's never been a secret
Pointsa are typically Fed Comm value muliplied by 1.25 and then adjusted by playtesting.
Damage is equal to hull boxes times 2.

although this formula produces some whack values as evidenced by hte civilian freighters.
That's where playtesting and common sense prevail.


I got into a PM discussion with a guy on the Mongoose site about this. IMHO, when they converted Cargo Ships and Freighter for ATCA, the should have left 90% of the cargo out of the damage equation. My contention is that in the furture using precise weapons, if your attacking a freighter, would you be shooting at the cargo or the parts of the ship that make it go? Of course there are non-precise weapons and yes, the cargo would absorb some of the extra damage, but not one-for-one.

The structural integrity of the ship is not the cargo, but the hull that contains the cargo. I realize this doesn't translate over perfectly, but neither does the translation of the warships.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Steve Cole
Site Admin


Joined: 11 Oct 2006
Posts: 3095

PostPosted: Wed Feb 15, 2012 6:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SFU doesn't have precise weapons that can target part of a ship.

There is a limited ability to target weapons or power, but no such thing as "shoot the left engine".
_________________
The Guy Who Designed Fed Commander
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
lincolnlog
Lieutenant SG


Joined: 18 Jun 2011
Posts: 108
Location: St. Louis, MO

PostPosted: Wed Feb 15, 2012 11:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Steve Cole wrote:
SFU doesn't have precise weapons that can target part of a ship.

There is a limited ability to target weapons or power, but no such thing as "shoot the left engine".


Yep, I gotcha. I meant that with the precise trait of the phasers that can miss a bulkhead in ACTA, should be able to miss a bay full of pork and beans. Theoretically speaking.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Capt Jack
Lieutenant SG


Joined: 12 Mar 2011
Posts: 102
Location: England U.K

PostPosted: Thu Feb 16, 2012 2:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Have read the Errata, unless I have missed something. The the two bases appear to have some Stats/skills the wrong way round. Shocked
_________________
Captain Jack a.k.a The Unorthodox, Scourge of the Dreadnought and Master of the PH3, Grandmaster of the PH3 RA
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Federation Commander Forum Index -> A Call to Arms Star Fleet All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
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