Jump to content
Vedar

Firestorm Armada 3.0 headed our way?

Recommended Posts

Movement is a primary component of balance mechanics in FSA.  Turn limits are what give you the opportunity to goad a Dindrezi player a little too close to a planet to line up a shot before you blow past him, or reward the prescient player who cuts off a line of attack with a well placed mine and forces the battle to flow differently.

 

Put simply, not paying attention to turning at best deprives the game of drama, and at worst leads to unbalanced play where multi arc factions suddenly turn up with a perfect distribution of firepower every activation.  That's worth a little extra time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It can, but to claim a game would be not tactical because you can move the models more freely is nonsense. As the game offers no "opportunity fire" during movement, only end positioning matter, not actual movement, when it comes to tactics. And like others have noticed, most of time when people mean "manouvering affects fire", they mean "it disproportionately affects fore-fixed weapons". It has very little actual impact over fleets like aquans (literally none as they all turn on a dime), directorate, terrans to some extent, and relthoza. Sorylians are somewhat impacted too. The point is, for most fleets, it's far less of an issue than for one, maybe two very specific fleets.If dindrenzi didn't rely solely on FFix, there'd be zero reason to ever keep the fiddly turning system we have now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Put simply, not paying attention to turning at best deprives the game of drama, and at worst leads to unbalanced play where multi arc factions suddenly turn up with a perfect distribution of firepower every activation.  That's worth a little extra time.

It's not just Dins.  Aquan larges and everything above Sorylian T3s are subject to a turn limit, which can significantly impact available options (or lack thereof) to reach an optimal position and orientation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am pretty fiddly when I'm moving my RSN frigates, as I don't want to be within 10 inches, and want each one to fire two weapons at least... And usually, I want each frigate to have a different model in it's front arc... And I have to move a minimum of 5".

Aquans have the same incentives for precise tactical movement, but on everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most Relthoza ships want to line up Fore Fixed for potshots to gain any advantage before broadsiding when on the advance, too, so you could apply a lesser version of the Dindrenzi reasoning to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never had an issue lining up Doing Dindrenzi, Relthozan, or any other tier 3's. 8" move with TL 0 means you can fly in a circle and land in the exact same spot. Easy to adjust to line up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd potentially look at moving squadrons differently. When moving you pick a 'guide' model who moves normally, turn limits and the like. Once that model is placed you may place other models in the squadron around that 'guide' model following some rules about legal facing and arrangement. Or you may measure each ship individually. Basically codify what some people do already, especially for highly mobile smaller ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Firestorm Armada 2.0 clearly wasn't designed to enable 30 minute games, and why should it be?

 

Who says a game of Firestorm Armada, or any other table topping game for that matter,  has to be playable within a short amount of time?

 

If you want to be able to deploy vast fleets, and still want to be able to finish a game within two hours time, Firestorm Armada 2.0 clearly isn't the game for you.

 

And any game that would be able to accomplish that most probably wouldn't be a game for me...

 

This isn't about Firestorm Armada being a bad spaceship simulator, this is about the game not being suitable for your personal needs.

 

The new Firestorm:Taskforce will probably suit you better  ;)

 

As i said in my previous posts, i play on the afternoon, around 4 hours.

I've never speak about 30 min games.

I want to play more models on the same time.

A lot of people play low points games because they haven't time to play bigger battle.

Here are the stats from the warlog :

Patrol Fleet Games 207 46%

Battle Fleet Games 204 46%

Grand Fleet Games 32 7%

Mighty Armada Games 3 1%

 

If i were Spartan i would think how to make people play bigger battle than smaller.

Half games are patrol game, with low numbers of escadrons you lower the possibilities and tactical depth.

 

If nothing is done and people who demo the game don't manage to bring new players in, it could be the death of the game...

 

And Taskforce will suit me better if i have stats for all models (but i don't think spartan will do it).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Going forward, my plan was to use Task Force as a demo tool for Armada, anyway. I know we're probably sounding like a broken record at this point, especially since we don't even really have the rules in hand, but Spartan have been doing a good job of making Task Force sound like it solves every problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Going forward, my plan was to use Task Force as a demo tool for Armada, anyway. I know we're probably sounding like a broken record at this point, especially since we don't even really have the rules in hand, but Spartan have been doing a good job of making Task Force sound like it solves every problem.

Potentially (and hopefully) yes... But also potentially over correcting and it has me concerned about too much loss of tactical depth. Different ship profiles and drastically different rules could make it hard to graduate from one system to the other, though perhaps that isn't the intent. Hopefully the rules are broadly similar so that this is avoided. I'm eagerly awaiting sight of taskforce rules!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fact: ship movement in FSA takes time. It's easy to get a situation in game when using the templates is really a pain in the ass.

 

I did cut my own templates to keep only a thin line for the turns, and it still is a bother when there are too many ships too close to each other.

 

Using the way Halo game system handle the movements doesn't remove the tactics. It's just different and, most important, without having to use a template.

 

Having played Battlefleet Gothic (who used a template for turns only because GW was using round bases - hard to find angles on a circle), I know that moves were still important even with just a 45° turn on its axis.

 

So, I'm not afraid for this "new version of FA" if it is well implemented. Since Spartan Games are the ones behind Halo, I believe they know what they're doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As i said in my previous posts, i play on the afternoon, around 4 hours.

I've never speak about 30 min games.

I want to play more models on the same time.

A lot of people play low points games because they haven't time to play bigger battle.

Here are the stats from the warlog :

Patrol Fleet Games 207 46%

Battle Fleet Games 204 46%

Grand Fleet Games 32 7%

Mighty Armada Games 3 1%

 

If i were Spartan i would think how to make people play bigger battle than smaller.

Half games are patrol game, with low numbers of escadrons you lower the possibilities and tactical depth.

 

If nothing is done and people who demo the game don't manage to bring new players in, it could be the death of the game...

 

And Taskforce will suit me better if i have stats for all models (but i don't think spartan will do it).

 

It doesn't matter if you play 30 minutes or 4 hours, the point is that you asume you should be able to play a much bigger game in considerably less time, which clearly isn't the intention of the game.

 

Achieving your goals would require a significant simplification of the game, you will probably gain players should that happen, but you will probably lose players as well, because the game will then be aimed at a different player group.

 

That's probably why Spartan chose not to change Firestorm Armada that way, but introduce a second “faster” game instead.

 

And Spartan has already anounced that Firestorm Taskforce stats will become available for all existing Firestorm Armada models too, and that when new models are released in the future they will come with both Armada and Taskforce stats.

 

http://www.spartangames.co.uk/firestorm-taskforce-update

 

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My main concern about Taskforce is the potential split of the player base, which isn't that big in any case. Finding a game may then become very difficult, which leads to dropoff in play and potential withering of the game. Learning that it will be able to play at different points levels (rather than being just an intro to the wider Armada universe) has only deepened my concern in this regard, which has then been further compounded by people's comments on here about moving to Taskforce.

The fact that it uses the same models means that it won't split the player base, since you can't commit to one without committing to both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My main concern about Taskforce is the potential split of the player base, which isn't that big in any case. Finding a game may then become very difficult, which leads to dropoff in play and potential withering of the game. Learning that it will be able to play at different points levels (rather than being just an intro to the wider Armada universe) has only deepened my concern in this regard, which has then been further compounded by people's comments on here about moving to Taskforce.

 

That's a valid concern, and that's also why I prefer “modular” rules, because that enables you to adapt the complexity of the game to the size of the game and the time available without splitting the player base.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that it uses the same models means that it won't split the player base, since you can't commit to one without committing to both.

 

As a Task Force player you'll have the right models, but in the wrong quantities, something the Spartan “squadron boxes” system doesn't offer an affordable solution for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a valid concern, and that's also why I prefer “modular” rules, because that enables you to adapt the complexity of the game to the size of the game and the time available without splitting the player base.

I agree with you here, a plug and play sort of modularity might have been a wiser choice.

The fact that it uses the same models means that it won't split the player base, since you can't commit to one without committing to both.

I think splitting the player base is a valid concern. Just because I have models that work in two games doesn't mean I'm locked in to play both

When I played 40k, those models worked for kill team and 40k in 40 minutes and I played neither

My deadzone models are compatible with warpath and I don't play that either...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The fact that it uses the same models means that it won't split the player base

"Why would I play the clumsy, slow version when I can play the fast, easy version with the same models and in less time?" is going to split the community.

 

I love FA for all it's faults, but I have no doubt that if Spartan does push Taskforce as the fast, tournament-focused game, and gives proper support to it, then it will overtake Armada in popularity. Not many people who pick up TForce first will bother to learn a new, even if only slightly different, engine when the one they have is good, and appears to support almost the same number of models on board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter if you play 30 minutes or 4 hours, the point is that you asume you should be able to play a much bigger game in considerably less time, which clearly isn't the intention of the game.

 

The intention of the game is to have fun. Some aspects of the game can be seen as quite tedious - and thus not fun. When you play a big battle, it becomes quickly a mess when (and not if) the ships are getting close to each other, making the use of templates a real pain in the ass.

 

I stopped counting the times when I moved unintentionnally the miniatures on the board when I was trying to put the template right and sliding the base along it so that my movement was clear and precise. Of course, it's a real time sinking as well.

 

Using 45° turns on its axis without template, like Halo, doesn't especially remove all the tactics of the game. It's certainly not as precise, but most players in FA playing big battles usually are quite easy-going in the end. I usually don't use templates for frigates with 0 Turn Limit and enough speed if they are in a fair distance of annoying terrain - because it's just a stupid time wasting for no real effect in game.

 

So, if it is for the sake of making the game fluider without really losing the tactical part of the game, I'm totally fine with simplification. A game isn't especially better just because it has complex rules; it just means it takes more time to get used to them...and to apply them as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a matter of size, to me.

 

If I want to play a dogfight with plenty of details, Firestorm Armada will be good. I can play a Patrol Level game in a few hours just fine.

 

If I want to play a HUGE battle like 2000-3000 points...maybe Taskforce would be better, so that I can have at least a chance to finish the game to the very last turn instead of having to stop to the 3rd because there is no time left. It's really frustrating when it happens - and it happens often at that size.

 

Me and my opponents have to get back to their lives outside of the game, after all. Wifes and children usually ask for attention and don't like to see their husband/father being out for a whole day to "push a few miniatures accross a table". ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Oh, I have 60mins free tonight - I'll play Taskforce"

"Oh, I have 4 hours free - I'll play Firestorm"

That's how I'll be treating it. Same Universe, same ships, same races...just for different occasions.

Will I stop playing one or the other? No

I appreciate what you are saying about yourself......

However, humans are inherently lazy creatures and will take the path of least resistance when presented with it.

Look for all the posts that sounds like this "I'm the last person in my area that still plays because XYZ game plays faster/better". The last person is the hard core player that will always be the exception.

I'm not worried about the player base in my area. None of the FLGS will carry Taskforce, just like Halo and all the other Spartan products they do not carry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The intention of the game is to have fun. Some aspects of the game can be seen as quite tedious - and thus not fun. When you play a big battle, it becomes quickly a mess when (and not if) the ships are getting close to each other, making the use of templates a real pain in the ass.

 

I stopped counting the times when I moved unintentionnally the miniatures on the board when I was trying to put the template right and sliding the base along it so that my movement was clear and precise. Of course, it's a real time sinking as well.

 

Using 45° turns on its axis without template, like Halo, doesn't especially remove all the tactics of the game. It's certainly not as precise, but most players in FA playing big battles usually are quite easy-going in the end. I usually don't use templates for frigates with 0 Turn Limit and enough speed if they are in a fair distance of annoying terrain - because it's just a stupid time wasting for no real effect in game.

 

So, if it is for the sake of making the game fluider without really losing the tactical part of the game, I'm totally fine with simplification. A game isn't especially better just because it has complex rules; it just means it takes more time to get used to them...and to apply them as well.

 

You're assuming that what qualifies as “fun” for you also qualifies as “fun” for everyone else…

 

I happen to have “fun” meticulously planning and executing moves, that might not be your cup of tea, but it does happen to be mine.

 

And yes, the turning template is ****, but that doesn't mean the movement system is **** too.

 

I'll tell you something else, I would actually like to see a more complex movement phase in 3.0 ;)

 

Nothing is as simple as simplifying a game btw; if you and your gaming buddies long for a simplified movement phase no one is going to stop you from using a simplified turning mechanism, or even throw out the whole turning mechanism altogether and just move to any position within a ships movement allowance.

 

Just don't expect for everyone to like your group's version of the game...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • 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.