Federation Commander

It has been pointed out to me that there is a:
'Cadet' version of SFB.
'First Missions' for Federation Commander
but...
NO trial version of ACTASF.

It has been discussed by various play testers before, but never implemented.
Mainly because ACTASF is (or was) so short and simple that just including the basic rules for movement, targeting, damage, damage, and Special Actions would almost be giving the game away.
It's a bit larger than that now, so we're looking at it again.

First thing is - we need a catchy name! ACTASF - the Demo Generation just doesn't sound right, so I need suggestions.
Second: ideas about what MUST be included beyond the basics:
4 Phases have to remain.
Movement has to remain, but can be trimmed down.
Combat:
I'm thinking just 2 (maybe 4 ships total) Federation CA / NCL and Klingon D7 / D5
That means Phaser/Photon/Disruptor/Drone are the only weapons needed
Special Actions: These are critical and need to be included, but which are REQUIRED?
No terrain rules
One basic scenario... probably 3 versus 3, as that is the lowest number per side that actually works properly.

Any thoughts / Comments / Suggestions?

Scoutdad wrote:It's a bit larger than that now, so we're looking at it again.

YAY!

... we need a catchy name! ACTASF - the Demo Generation just doesn't sound right, so I need suggestions.

ACTA Star Fleet Flight Academy

Combat: I'm thinking just 2 (maybe 4 ships total) Federation CA / NCL and Klingon D7 / D5

Tony, I love the guidelines on demoing the game you sent to me. In it you suggested three of the same ship per player. Simple, only one set of ship stats to keep track of. I don't know how this would trim down the weapons included (do they need to utilize Drones?)



A related thought from me on Demos.. I'm thinkin about what minis people would most commonly have from each empire that would work as a demo using the (soon to be) quickstart rules. Flights of three ships each fairly well matched 'even steven'. The idea is no one having to go out and buy ships just to run demos (like people who don't play Feds/Klingons).

Thanks
Al B.

Scoutdad wrote:NO trial version of ACTASF.

I don't think you need one. It is not as big a deal in the miniature gaming world. Miniature gamers would much rather have Quick Reference Sheets and video demos or at least battle reports.

I am at a loss to recall any games I have played in the last few years that had a demo version or if they did that I ever checked out.

The sales model is also much different. For ACTASF you buy a rulebook and then read it and if you like it then you buy minis. For board games you have a higher initial investment and you are in it once you buy.

If you want to spend some time to create promotional material that will help sell the game then I would do a good battle report. Video would be preferred but even a nice print version with some photos would be good.

Should this be here or in the main ACTASF section?

pixelgeek wrote:Should this be here or in the main ACTASF section?

Since the Powers That Be have requested it - it will happen.

As for location, since it needs to be developed first...
I put it here. That allows the people who are invested in the game (namely, ya'll - the play test staff) to have input.
One we are finished with Flight Academy - we can then post it in the regular ACTASF section.

Until then, we keep it in the family.

Scoutdad wrote:Special Actions: These are critical and need to be included, but which are REQUIRED?

Reload, Overload, Evasive Action, Tractors, All Power to Engines

I think that covers all the necessary ones.

Remove the damage control rules but reference them in a summary of what is in the full rules.

I was leaning towards:
Boost Energy to Shields, Reload, Overload, Take Evasive Action, All Power to Engines

Tractors are really only used for scenario most of the time. And since Flight Academy will only be 3 on 3 battles, I thought they might be a good place to trim some fat...

Scoutdad wrote:Tractors are really only used for scenario most of the time. And since Flight Academy will only be 3 on 3 battles, I thought they might be a good place to trim some fat...

I was just adding them as a defence against drones but they are not critical

I'm hoping that SVC will let me do a modified ship roster for the ACRASF Flight Academy product and remove the drones completely.

That would allow the removal of an entire phase: Long Range Drone Attack
and all seeking weapons completely.

Since using just Federation CA and the Klingon D7, we could then further reduce the weapons rules to just Phasers, Disruptors, and Photons.

If I cannot remove drones, then tractors will definitely stay.

Scoutdad wrote:That would allow the removal of an entire phase: Long Range Drone Attack and all seeking weapons completely.

That would actually be a very good idea

Eh, sure, whatever you want is good, Tony. A recent conversation about ACTA raised the point that in a 10 on 10 battle initiative isn't that important. In a 3 on 3 battle initiative decides the winner.

Steve Cole wrote: A recent conversation about ACTA raised the point that in a 10 on 10 battle initiative isn't that important. In a 3 on 3 battle initiative decides the winner.

Not totally true.
In a 3 on 3, initiative plays a bigger part than in a 10 on 10 battle, but it's by no means a sure thing.

We [Battlegroup Murfreesboro] prefer 5 or 6 a side as the minimum, but even 3 on 3 is workable - as long as you play the game.
Terrain (to break LOS) is necessary.
Maneuver is necessary... if you just go straight, fire, go straight again, fire again... then yes. Initiative will decide the winner every single time.