Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About vorman87

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests

Recent Profile Visitors

701 profile views
  1. I see both sides of the arguement for catastrophic events. It really sucks to roll snake eyes at a cruical moment and then receiving extra punishment by having your ship obliterate itself into a thousand tiny pieces - whether it's "realistic" or not. I can see how people would say it doesn't reward player skill. What doesn't bother me, and something I actually enjoy, is the fact that both my opponent and I are equally at the mercy of the RNG, that this sort of thing can happen at any moment, that one turn it could be the other person and the next turn me. Another possible reason that "double-punishment" RNGs don't bother me is that it's very military... no one expected the magazine on HMS Hood to erupt after only a few minitues of combat...
  2. So I get the feeling that all this recent talk of campaign systems and "what is happening at 0HP" is aimed at having both formalised and part of the published rules. If I'm right - does this sort of thing really need formalising? I'm all for discussion and community developed content/rules though, it's absolutely great reading all the ideas and opinions bouncing around the forums, but I'm just not convinced I would use anything formalised. I never have. I like the idea of game systems having frameworks for me to play around with, whether it's intentional or not. I don't know if Spartan Games ever intended for the FSD mechanic to be used as part of a campaign system but that fact it's there gives me something to work with. However, if it wasn't there I would have created something like it anyway for campaign play.
  3. Campaign talk? well now you have my attention. I've written part of a campaign system based off what my old group use to play, in that each player is given a certain number of points to buy their starting force and each campaign turn they get a certain number of points to buy more forces depending on what territory they control - using BFG as an example, a Hive or Forge world would offer a lot of points compared to a barren world, but there are more barren worlds than hive worlds to fight over. The campaign play was completely open ended so it would involve players coming up with their own objectives, creating alliances, back stabbing friends, frenzied fights to the death and hasty retreats, and importantly no force organisation (so in FSA, a 1000pts of Frigates would be perfect acceptable). I'm also trying to incorporate build times into the rules as I wouldn't want to see a dozen battleships being built in a single turn! As to the point the OP raised; HPs I think for the most part work well and only frigates could do with a slight buff in the interest of campaign play (2HP to 3HP). I feel frigates should last a little longer otherwise their use starts becoming trivial in favour of bigger ships, which is not at all how actual navies work. I do agree that what constitues a "destoryed" ship once it reaches 0HP is open to personal interpretation so here's my take: Ships, especially space ships, are complicated beasts with many delicate systems needed just to keep the crew alive let alone the ship performing its role. You can't armour everything otherwise you start getting into the realms of deminishing returns. So ships tearing themselves apart becuase of explosive decompresion, burst fuel lines, ruptured magazines etc isn't too hard to believe for me (and I never bought into the 1/10000 sacle / 1km long cruisers part of the fluff). There is already a mechanic for withdrawing a ship when it gets too damaged (granted it needs tweaking) but I conceed that deciding whether a "destoryed" ship is actually destoryed or if it's non-operational needs addressing for campaign play. In this instance I'd go with a simple D6 roll: 1-2 destoryed, 3-4 dead in space, 5-6 under its own power trying to escape but power is running out. Anything more starts to get complicated I think. Regarding how effective a ship is the more HP it loses, again I find it quite within the realms of possibility that a ship continues pounding away at its target as she goes down. Just because half the HP has been lost doesn't mean that half of all the weapons and other sub-systems are lost as well. Back-up generators and seperate ammunication magezines would be placed at different locations around the ship so that it can continue the fight whilst other parts of the ship suffer.
  4. In the case of using the Battle Log, I think it would be a little challenging to model "playing the long game" - where by I suffer early loses to get myself in a better position for better effect. In most cases it would probably work and would force/encourage players to try alternate tactics and style but you could end up supporting "cheesing", and as I'm a thematic type of guy, would put me right off. Although I'd just play without the Battle Log like I do now.
  5. I like that house rule! I've never liked the hyperspace jump rules. I'd probably reverse the disorder marker part of the rule to make it harder as the ships crew are "disordered", so that captain barking the order to retreat would probably fall on deaf ears... or something
  6. Now you mention it, the bulk of our stoppage time is spent reading the less known rules only after we're able to find them!
  7. Having read the comments here I find myself leaning towards the "linking minus total squadron damage" approach. But I have to agree with some of the comments here in that I really don't find the math angle very hard and it doesn't take up any time at all in games. Admittedly we're like 3yr olds lining up all our dice and doing "physical" math instead of mental math! Out of interest though, since the topic is based around making the game easier and therefore, ultimately, faster - what length of game are people hoping to achieve through these efforts? For me and my group, a typical 1200pt game will take a 2-3 hours, but then so does a typical 1500pt (or1850pt if your that way inclined) 40k game.
  8. Id steer clear of apps. Ive played against folk who have loaded their battlescribe lists onto their 'pads and the fights have dragged on as he scrolled left and right, zoomed and unzoomed etc. I think the more common problem with app based gaming, as opposed to forgetting to press a button or track an event, is to fully charge your 'pad for the evening!
  9. so I feel as if I may be the only one here who's relatively happy with FSA, and I fully anticipate some backlash, but please be aware I'm not saying any of this to upset/enrage anyone, merely putting my 2p into the discussion. there was some talk at the start about stats being represented on the flight bases which I all for - table clutter is a bug-bear of mine. there seems to be alot about stream-lining crits but I'm not quite sure why. Crits work just fine I feel, but aside from that I agree the crit table could do with being a little more relevant. I'm NEVER fussed about losing crew as i don't see it having much of an effect, and as a Dindrenzi player it's always funny to watch my opponent go "A crit! Yes! And its... Shields offline... Damn" speaking of looking up tables, if thats your issue with FSA then you need to play a game of Battletech: Tactical Ops... You know nothin' (John Snow)... I also remember someone(s) saying about how brutally arbitrary some games can be, over before turn 1 etc. Isn't this thread about making the game quicker? But That brutal hammering you've just taken could have very easily been you hammering the other guy surely? Plus if it's over quickly you get to have a rematch... personally, compared to the other games out there, I think FSA does a surprisingly good job of appealing to a lot of players instead of a small sub-group - such as GW and their gearing certain games towards select playing styles. I for one am against less dice or tourney style speed-um-ups. Give me buckets of dice and my opponents measly 2Shields any day... And damn Terran Aegis' to hell! If I had to pick holes in FSA though, I think I would settle on SRS relevance and the lack thereof, token clutter and rule book layout. if you really want to speed the game up, then id argue the turn system has to change. The you-go-i-go squadron activation should be replaced by something like WH40k. To be clear, I'm not advocating this, but its by far one of the biggest hold ups in my friends gaming - that and pre-measuring. Knowing you have to ability to check your in range and double check your arcs each inch you move... Too tempting not to abuse. please be gentle
  10. Hi all, I thought I'd share a link to a recent, and a little random, solo-fight I had. Happy to hear your thoughts! http://wargamersbunker.co.uk/2018/02/06/news-from-the-front-7-500ishpts-dindrenzi-versus-rense-system-navy/
  11. Hi all, I thought I'd share a link to a recent, and a little random, solo-fight I had. Happy to hear your thoughts! http://wargamersbunker.co.uk/2018/02/06/news-from-the-front-7-500ishpts-dindrenzi-versus-rense-system-navy/
  12. Hi everyone, I hope you've all been enjoying successful games. I thought I'd finally get around to sharing my last 2 games with you. One of them was from the RAF Wargamming Association weekend and one was after a shopping trip to Salute 2017. I've left the pictures out to keep the size of the file down, but if you want to see them they're on my blog (linked below - follow the "News from the Front" link on the home page). Enjoy folks! FSA 1200-1000 battle reports.doc
  13. might be controversial to say this, but I actually like the current shooting mechanic. Not sure how else to speed up the game but my group can reach a suitable resolution within 2-3hrs. So long as we have fun. Though I grant you the current mechanic aren't very competition friendly.
  14. Hi all, I've been reading up on the NOVA Open event and saw some of their rules expanding on the "Models Cannot Touch" rule. These being; models cannot be removed or rotated on the flight stands, nor can the peg heights be adjusted. I quite like these though I'm unsure my club would adopt them, but it got me thinking what other house-type rules do people use? My club quite likes using a D-Wars style terrain setup which often doesn't give the 25% suggested, but we agree it's space, and space is mostly empty anyway. So what sorta house rules do you guys/gals use? Cheers
  15. Hi all, I posted this over in the Dindrenzi forum as I promised to post some feedback after the help they gave me learning the game. Thought I'd come here though and share 2 battles I've written up. Hope you enjoy! FSA BatReps.doc
  • 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.