Jump to content

Ryjak

Member
  • Content Count

    3,000
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    30

Ryjak last won the day on November 8 2018

Ryjak had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About Ryjak

  • Rank
    NOVA GT Assistant

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    Array

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Array
  • Location
    Array
  • Interests
    Array

Recent Profile Visitors

2,371 profile views
  1. I’m not sure if there’s a better way to do this, but here are all the notes I took during my first reading of the 0.01 Beta Rules. FSA Beta Notes About halfway through my first read through, I think the words “Model” and “Unit” are being used interchangeably. Perhaps Model should refer to the physical Model on the Hex Base (as you manipulate the Model during various Movement Rules); Unit should refer to the gameplay entity physically represented by the Model and Hex Base, with the various gameplay statistics... and Squadrons for multiple Units that function together within the game. Mechanically, the Target Number must range from 2-11 (produce an odds chart for a single d6 vs every TN) Arc names seem wordy, and not unique enough. “Fore” is better than “Direct Fore”, but with three different ways to use the hex base, I can see why this was chosen. What are the minimum and maximum point limits the designers had in mind? This is important for testing, as the system will break down at certain thresholds. Player B has a decent chance to choose to go 2nd for a given Round... I’m not sure how to calculate it though, and brute-forcing the baseline 1,296 combinations is rough. Odds of a Reserved Helix arriving on a given Turn. Turn 1: 16.7% Turn 2: 27.8% Turn 3: 27.8% Turn 4: 18.5% Turn 5: 7.7% Failure & Unit Destroyed: 1.5% Things players have to track: Player Initiative Ready vs Activated for each Unit Unit Speed 6 types of System Damage per Model (yuck!) Movement Section: “Whenever a Unit is activated, the first Model to be Moved is the Lead Model for this activation.” “The Lead Model must always move the furthest of all other Models in its Unit.” I can see arguments breaking out about how to properly enforce this... how necessary is the second sentence? “To make a turn using the Turn Template, first place the end of the template against one the Quarter Arcs of the Model’s Base.” What is a ‘Quarter Arc’? From “Headings and Arcs”, the best I can find is: PQ – Port Quarter SQ – Starboard Quarter Moving through Models: players can intentionally end move on their own models to A) get more movement and B give another Unit ‘Come to New Heading’. Unit Coherency: “In the extremely unlikely situation where a Model cannot (for whatever reason)...” I cant seen ANY situation where this would happen, given all the preceding rules. BURN RETROS “A Unit with a Mass of 1 may reduce its Speed to zero at the start of its Activation and turn to face any direction.” By rotating the Model on the Hex Base, or turning the Hex Base? Join Formation: Can a Formation be broken by destroying a Model? Combat: “A Unit will attempt to engage the enemy with all the Weapons Systems that it can bring to bear.” Is this a procedural Rule, or flavor text? Declare Attacks: So Units attack other Units, not Models? (This section is poorly written.) How do you determine which Model suffers the System Damage from a given Attack? SYSTEM DAMAGE “At the end of an Attack a number of System Damage Dice are rolled and grouped by result. Whichever result is in the majority, that number of results are applied to the Initial Target and the remaining System Dice results are Cancelled.” So if I obtained 6 hits/successes from an Attack Resolution, and for system damage roll: 1,2,3,4,5,6... I only inflict One damage to One System? Common Weapon Qualities: Blast “To determine hits, place the template so that at least the Initial Target is touched by it.” There are no Rules defining ‘the Initial Target’, so I can’t determine where to place the Blast Template. Also, is a Model hit by the Blast if the template touches the Hex Base? Effective (X) “When Leading or Linking with this weapon, as long as the target is in range, this Quality is not required to match.” Match what? I think this is trying to say the weapon can be linked to other weapons without the Effective (or Minimum) Quality... rephrase to “this Quality is not required to match other Qualities.” End Phase Boarding Reads like both players can launch Boarding actions against each other... who goes first? SRS RESOLUTION “Suring this step” > During this step Rephrase 2nd paragraph to: Each SRS Token contributes 4 Dice to the SRS Attack Dice Pool; the Attack has the Kinetic Quality. Repair System Damage: “Models in Formation not only contribute +1 to the Repair Dice Pool, but the results may be applied to any contributing Model. However, the Target Number required by all the Models in Formation is always calculated from the highest multiple of the same System Damage that any individual Model has.” I think this is trying to say you make one repair roll for the entire Unit, and the TN is determined by the Model with the most damage. Any successes are applied to any Model in the Unit chosen by the player. (also, never end a sentence with ‘has’) I only skimmed the Glossary, since it is a reference document, but there are several terms I don’t remember seeing when reading the rules.
  2. While I’m really looking forward to seeing how they rebuilt this game, I’m not joining Facebook. Zuck isn’t getting more of my info for free, so I guess no beta-testing for me. I also realize all the terrain I made for FSA is likely obsolete; this makes me sad. I put a lot of time and money into it.
  3. I have always advocated for straight swapping the Movement Values for Sorylians and Aquans. Aquans don’t need to be fast at all; they have a high DR and are very maneuverable, plus 360 firing. Sorylians aren’t particularly tough, really, and have no forward firepower... they need speed to close the distance. The +1/-1 generally does this. Since FSA is primarily movement and positioning, even a small change like this can have a large impact on gameplay. I wouldn’t make any other stat adjustments until this is heavily tested. Also, in theory, Sorylians/Aquans should be very balanced when playing against each other... I would start the testing with this specific match-up, then expand from there.
  4. How is vector movement predictable whereas naval movement systems are not? It sounds more like the vector movement systems you tried didn’t give you enough maneuverability within a game turn compared to the cinematic systems you have used. For example, X-wing miniatures typically gives you 8-12 basic moves to choose from for each ship, which is often multiplied 2x-3x by special Pilot moves. In the systems you tried, how many options did you have? If the answer is 4-6, the flaw is with the overall design, not the ‘vector’ part of it. And if you don’t need turrents, ever, then possibly that means the games you tried went too far the other direction... you had too many movement options available, and could always place your forces exactly where you wanted them. In this situation, where you could have 10,000 movement options, there is only one ‘good’ choice, which means you really have no choice, which makes it boring. A game in many ways boils down to a series of choices. If the choices are easy to make, the game is quickly mastered and becomes boring. Most games hide this with randomization mechanics, which can make even a simple game like tic-TAC-toe interesting (Hollywood Squares, for example). If the choices are too difficult, like chess often becomes, then the barrier to entry can become insurmountable to most players. I describe my favorite board game like this: there are only 18 choices in the game, but all of them are hard... and the more you learn about the game, the harder they become. It’s because you learn how to predict what other players will probably do, so you can try to control their future choices with your current choice... and sometimes your current ‘best’ choice isn’t the best long-term. But people never behave how you anticipate, for a variety of reasons, but the game’s structure means someone else will probably benifit before you can from these mistakes... if they are mistakes, because maybe they’re making a ‘bad’ play to deliberately impact you in future turns.
  5. Well, the best thing about Dreadnoughts in general is that they are hard to kill, and even after taking 6 points of damage can still do something... but should probably try to GTFO and draw as much fire in the process as possible. The Assault Carrier has one job; capture the biggest enemy target available. If you do the math, it’s a gamble against an undamaged Battleship, but you can effectively win the game when you pull it off. I don’t know how much you like to gamble, and you may not know either. If you can, playtest with each in three different games so you can get a feel for each, and you’ll probably capture a Battleship during one of those games.
  6. Probably too late, but 1200 points is exactly when you should field your Dreadnought. With a nearby Shield Cruiser, it can be almost impossible to kill... unless your facing Directorate Gunships. They’re almost guaranteed to land one Critical hit, so destroying one Gunship will be a top priority. Unfortunatly, nothing in your list is particularly offensive.... a problem with most Terran Squadrons. A Carrier with Bombers and accompaniments is an interesting option to go with the Dreadnought, or just bring a Battleship.
  7. I bet Warcradle could take all their game design experience and develop a really good skirmish game. I’m probably going to play a few games of 40k Killteam with a buddy this winter, but it’s a bad design. There is an awful amount of rolling just to get to one or two outcomes, and no thought into keeping both players involved during this process. Throw in designing to what already exists in standard 40k, and the end result is a whole lot of false choices in list design for what is supposed to be built for competitive play.
  8. You are not required to play a TAC, so use is optional, thus: it says you may use tac cards during the tac phase  That RAW quote applies to TACs with ongoing effects, not to TACs with instant effects, such as Focused Repair.
  9. Not exactly... here is what the rules state on page 67, when describing the 2nd step in the procedure for Torpedo attacks:
  10. This is the wrong way to view what rules actual do for a game, which is grant permission. The rules tell you how to play the game; thus, if they do not state you can do something (such as use an ally’s Token for Point Defense) then you cannot do it per the rules as written. Nothing is stopping you from creating your own rules for this, since you are already making up rules for multi-player games.
  11. This shows how SRS were never considered an integral part of the game, and were instead thrown in as an afterthought. That’s probably why SRS are so hard to counter without your own SRS. The easy solution is to remove SRS entirely from the game; has anyone tried playing that way? Why does the game need SRS Tokens? How do they make gameplay better? Or is it just a thematic thing that “feels cool”?
  12. The truth is adding one more ship to a Squadron adds far more game value than the points you pay for it, due to the game’s mechanics. If Cruiser Squadron size were unlimited, how many Cruisers would you take? While a 20-ship Cruiser Squadron sounds fun, you don’t really need to roll 80 Attack Dice, when you could instead roll 4x24 Attack Dice. Also, 20 Cruisers wouldn’t be able to mutually support each other with Point Defense due to size limitations. Depending on the Cruiser, I’m guessing people would eventually settle on 6-8 ships per Squadron. So the first re-design question should be... would it be bad if Squadron limits were removed? The game would end up being very different, and there would completely different balance issues. Interestingly, the current FSE rules would probably work pretty well in this game.
  13. Are people trying to rank Cruisers from best to worst based on stats, or based on point efficiency? For the latter, I’ll put the Aquan Cruisers at the top, but I don’t know if another Cruiser has better stats or game impact.
  14. Generally, any Cruiser you can take in Squadron of four will beat Cruisers you can only take as three or even pairs, due to how the game plays.
  15. “Really competative players” want to win as efficiently as possible. Unfortunately, in most game systems it’s much easier to win by consentrating on list-building and combos before th game than it is to win via positioning and outplaying your opponent during the game. I felt X-wing, when it first came out, was all about outplaying your opponent during the game, but since the game machanics didn’t actually reward you for out-maneuvering your opponent (you still needed to roll dice for damage, and RNG is fickle), FFG started adding things the made maneuvering less important, like turrets, and they also figured out a subtle way to make the game pay-to-win, which is great for the bottom line, but generally not great for gameplay. FSA 2.0 is more about positioning and maneuver than most games, and you are almost always rewarded for out-positioning your opponent. For example, pretty much everyone that plays FSA 2.0 loses their first half-dozen games, because they’re learning the value of tactical positioning and strategic timing for the very first time. Once you get the hang of your fleet and how it fires and maneuvers, you start drawing (per Battlelog) and that first actual win is very sweet.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.