Jump to content
Vedar

Firestorm Armada 3.0 headed our way?

Recommended Posts

i have terrans and i dont see the Problems with linking, if i get lazy with calculating i just make dice pools and half the linking pool.

this is not more complex and time consuming then to compare different Stats for attacker and Defender in other games and gives a great Feeling with degrading Systems because of damage. Tabletops are not known for their simple rules and most Wargamers Play them because it is more then just a simple Boardgame you can learn and master in a evening. The Taskforce Forum is very silent, i thougt their would be discussions all over the board but? Is it so much simplified you dont have somethink to talk about? I think this is a good tracer for oversimplyfi a Game System.

 

Spartan did a good Job with the Rules in FSA 2.0 for a Tabletop game if they want to rework somethink in 3.0 it should be the Scenarios and their "living fleetstats pfd´s" which are outdated and stats for ships have to be collected from different pdfs or is not aviable like the Roto stuff. (only Interceptors provide a Little too much PD for my taste)   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something I'm really missing in FA 2.0 and the accompanying Fleet Guides is a way to identify oop models.

 

At the moment only Google offers a solution for finding out what oop model belongs to what name.

 

Which is a bit awkward imo...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not think out of print pictures is helpful.  The player that owns the ship(s) can name it any of the designations they want within the stat block as listed.  

 

I can call my Apollo a Razorthorn if I want to.  Who is really going to snitch to the gaming police?......  :ph34r:  :ph34r:  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do we still need to? Will we have to have the models that went out of print 5 years ago listed till the end of time? 2.0 was a transition period, but by now, no new player will really pick up the old boxes. Just make a footnote what each old Mk1 model counts as, and that's it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's strictly necessary to print pictures of the ships with stats for OOP models. 

 

I think what might be cool is in the background section if they had sketches of each class of ship and the progression, but it's entirely for flavour of the evolution of the fleets. But you could use this section to tie the classes together for players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking more like :

Ship (OOP)

In the stats, no images, etc...

But Pok is right, 1.5 and 2.0 were transitioning those models out. It may have been useful in 2.0 printings, but in 3.0 there likely isn't enough floating around to worry about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's strictly necessary to print pictures of the ships with stats for OOP models.

I think what might be cool is in the background section if they had sketches of each class of ship and the progression, but it's entirely for flavour of the evolution of the fleets. But you could use this section to tie the classes together for players.

This would be the best option. Something you could look up as background info to help reinforce the setting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I call the teutons, Hermes or sentinel, teutons isn't really a terran name I would say, there generally have spacey, constellation type names like Apollo, solar, Ares, horizon and so on :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll toss in my 2 bits here. I feel that the only useful information I can contribute is the reasons I stopped playing and sold my fleet. Maybe it will help or maybe FSA just wasn't the game for me in the end.

1. Too many exploding dice. It was a novelty at first but now I don't care for the randomness of it. I realize that this is just a part of the game and I probably should have picked a different game.

2. Small ships squads are useless after loosing 1 or 2 models. They should be able to combine with like small ship squads at will (respecting group limits) or perhaps dice from large ships just don't explode on frigates or something. Near the end, I only ever took smalls because I had to and i took the bare minimum.

3. Drive-by mine attacks are overpowered. Period. If you are not running over top of enemy squads dropping mines in the middle of them, then you are playing Aquans wrong. Mines need some sort of limitation or counter.

4. I can fire my torpedoes around a planetoid, through an asteroid field, and between other ships in the enemy fleet and hit my target, but.... only if the target is in my starboard arc? Really? Those torps can dance around asteroids and planets but can't make the right-hand turn from the fore tubes?

5. Comets... Comets... If we are marketing to 8-10 year-old boys then, OK, comets. But really? My crew can't see that coming from light years away with standard sensors and just, real subtle like, move the ship?

6. This is purely cosmetic but I never liked the discrepancy in scale between planets and the ship models. I would much rather have a planet be the backdrop to the battle than an enormously disproportionate piece of terrain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4. I can fire my torpedoes around a planetoid, through an asteroid field, and between other ships in the enemy fleet and hit my target, but.... only if the target is in my starboard arc? Really? Those torps can dance around asteroids and planets but can't make the right-hand turn from the fore tubes?

Fluff answer, torpedoes rely on the ship's targeting arrays for the long distance guidance (missiles/torps are too small to accommodate the long range sensors used aboard ships). Typically guidance arrays are set up on the side of the ship the torpedo fires from. With the combination of ships long range guidance and the torpedoes own short range sensor it can dodge obstacles, but must remain in it's parent ship's sensor arc until it gets close enough with its own sensors to bypass even cloaking tech or dense terrain.

Terrans and Aquans are one of the few races willing to drop the cash for all-around dedicated torp tracking/targeting systems. Dindrenzi main guns are fixed fore and thus don't need full arc covering targeting scanner, they also skimp on the ship building costs and simply link torpedoes into the main guns targeting system. Unless you opt to pay the extra cost for the upgrade to give the torpedoes their own dedicated full arc forward targeting array.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4. I can fire my torpedoes around a planetoid, through an asteroid field, and between other ships in the enemy fleet and hit my target, but.... only if the target is in my starboard arc? Really? Those torps can dance around asteroids and planets but can't make the right-hand turn from the fore tubes?

That kind of argument would be made by someone that thinks the earth is flat and every ship should be the same, with weapons that act the same, and have the same movement.

Not a complaint in my book.

I liked have to play ships that act differently and have different weapon arcs.

Now, that being said, the arc I hate for torpedoes is FF. That drives me nuts!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, if i understand you correctly, because I think a torpedo should be able to find it's way around the ship that fired it (as well as navigating around planets and weave through asteroid fields), I am in the same camp as people that deny the Earth is a sphere and that every ship/weapon in the game should be the same? Thanks, bro.

 

Just pointing out that it is pretty silly and difficult to imagine as anything more than a rule and inhibits immersion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, if i understand you correctly, because I think a torpedo should be able to find it's way around the ship that fired it (as well as navigating around planets and weave through asteroid fields), I am in the same camp as people that deny the Earth is a sphere and that every ship/weapon in the game should be the same? Thanks, bro.

Just pointing out that it is pretty silly and difficult to imagine as anything more than a rule and inhibits immersion.

At least I didn't accuse you if liking FT...... :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6. This is purely cosmetic but I never liked the discrepancy in scale between planets and the ship models. I would much rather have a planet be the backdrop to the battle than an enormously disproportionate piece of terrain.

 

Actually it's the ships that are enormously disproportionate, the planets are at table scale.

 

The rest of it you got mostly right… ;)

 

And what you got very right is that it doesn't make any sense for “torpedoes”, which should be called missiles anyway, to be limited to a 90 degree firing arc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The scale is funny. I figured that the Dindrenzi battleship is about a mile long, truescale. If it takes up the full 3mm peg, then Earth in relation to that would be nearly 78 feet wide on the gaming table. The planetoids present on the table are basically just big asteroids or micro moons. Gravity Wells are supposed to represent actual planets, in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me it is pretty clear that a Dindrenzi Battleship doesn't take up the full 3mm peg, it must be much much smaller at table scale.

 

I think the peg diameter is just meant to be “close enough” to determine the position of a unit for gaming purposes.

 

Would help if Spartan told us what table scale is supposed to be of course...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The scale is funny. I figured that the Dindrenzi battleship is about a mile long, truescale. If it takes up the full 3mm peg, then Earth in relation to that would be nearly 78 feet wide on the gaming table. The planetoids present on the table are basically just big asteroids or micro moons. Gravity Wells are supposed to represent actual planets, in my opinion.

 

Until System Wars got released I assumed the same thing.

 

I'm still hoping if System Wars scenarios get updated for 3.0 that the invasion planets will be much larger for default.  I'd personally like them to be 12"  at least to represent a habitable world.  Still way too small technically but at least able to hint at the scale of a planet.

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.