Firestorm Armada 3.0 headed our way?

[Xen]

Nice idea Blut.. Exactly what I was thinking. FSA small craft 'seeming' to fit into the escorting swarm role rather than as force projectors ala modern naval warfare.

Given this 'theme' for small craft in this game I do question the Carrier design principle that's been applied..

Have to get in reasonably close to be offensive but are not exactly front line units, for the most part.

As support vessels for Interceptor and Support Shuttle coverage they work great, but do take quite a chunk out of your points to do so. Especially as you're always buying the tokens on top.

To compound this the 2 tokens max makes the carriers far less versatile. 6 support shuttles for a Terran carrier anyone?

I've played many times giving Carrier designation vessels the ability to take 2x offensive tokens and an extra 1x support shuttle token. Much more useful and I have to say hasn't caused the FSA or the real universe to implode!

[Xen]

As a base vessel to host swarm craft Carriers would work magnificently. Then attaching their swarms to other fleet assets for practical application.

[Duetzefix]

I just thought about SRS again these days, as one does. Mainly because I remembered that in WW2 fighter planes had to stay out of the AAA-range of their fleet if they weren't completely suicidal, as it's really hard to tell your shells who to hit and who to miss. Well, in all honesty, first I thought about the trench run in the first Star Wars movie where the laser batteries stopped firing as soon as Darth Vader and his TIE escort entered the trench, but that's the same thing, basically.

 

This led me to the idea that maybe SRS need to lose their PD bubble while they are within PD range of friendlies. (Just imagine it as them staying in formation so the PD knows where not to shoot, or something like that.)

So: While SRS are within PD range of friendly ships they can only combine PD with ships that are in base contact with the SRS token, once it's outside of the 4" PD range the token has a 4" PD range itself. Just a little chip off PD mountain, if you will.

 

Another thought I had was that maybe the amount of dice-rolling actions any token is allowed to do should be limited. My earlier suggestion in this thread had some of this, but how about this:

• Any time a SRS token has just used either their AD or PD you reduce the token's strength by 1. (so a 4-strong Interceptor token rolls 8PD => now it's a 3-strong interceptor token)
• Same thing for the AP on assault shuttles?
• Returning to its carrier returns the token back to its starting strength.
• If at any moment the token's strength is reduced to 0 it is lost. FOREVER! Well, for the duration of the game, at least.
• Maybe fighters could get one free action that doesn't cost a wing or something like that?
• "Driven-off" = one point of "damage" on the token hit, "Hit" = two points of "damage"? Or keep PD results as they are now?

Let me know what you think.

[Captain Frederic]

I'm hoping 3.0 simplifies SRS rather than introduces even more SRS mechanical fiddly bits.

[Duetzefix]

6 hours ago, Duetzefix said:

My earlier suggestion in this thread had some of this

I now realized I was actually talking about a different thread. The "Limiting Bombers?" thread from a few months ago, to be precise.

 

@Captain Frederic: So ... what are you actually saying? Are you even talking about my post? If you are could be a bit more precise than "I don't like it", please? Otherwise it's not much of a discussion.

[Christar]

Personally, I would allow the SRS fighters 'not mandatory' to return to base. This will permit more use of the fighters by hiding them behind asteroid fields for exemple, or simply waiting at a strategic point.  And it make sense;

- The bombers need to resupply after a torpedo attack, so they must return to base.

- The assault crafts launched all their troops and need to come back.

- The interceptors need to stay close to the vessels they are protecting.  

 

 

[Commodore Jones]

In addition to what Christar has above, allow Fighters to intercept both SRS and Models.

[Captain Frederic]

9 hours ago, Duetzefix said:

I now realized I was actually talking about a different thread. The "Limiting Bombers?" thread from a few months ago, to be precise.

 

@Captain Frederic: So ... what are you actually saying? Are you even talking about my post? If you are could be a bit more precise than "I don't like it", please? Otherwise it's not much of a discussion.

My comment is more general not specifically about your suggestion.  I'd rather SRS be treated more like tokens (giving special abilities and attacks to attached squads) and less like a special kind of model.

[Ryjak]

I don't see how you can have bombers, let alone dogfights, with that approach.  Also, what game system uses "tokens" the way you describe?

[alextroy]

19 hours ago, Captain Frederic said:

My comment is more general not specifically about your suggestion.  I'd rather SRS be treated more like tokens (giving special abilities and attacks to attached squads) and less like a special kind of model.

Funny. I was thinking the opposite: SRS tokens need to be treated more like models.

[Presidente]

Noooo they don't, they are models in dystopian wars and its causing more problems than you can shake a stick at.

[Captain Frederic]

On June 15, 2016 at 4:03 AM, Ryjak said:

I don't see how you can have bombers, let alone dogfights, with that approach.  Also, what game system uses "tokens" the way you describe?

Sci fi skirmish games where they represent things like personal drones augmenting the model they are attached to.  They effect the single model, are too discrete to target with the granularity of the attack mechanics and can be reassigned to different units as an action.

[Ryjak]

You mean Infinity, right?  How many of them do something other than providing a buff, and how many can be actively targeted or countered?

 Most importantly, how vital is it to transfer these abilities between models in the game? 

[Captain Frederic]

5 hours ago, Ryjak said:

You mean Infinity, right?  How many of them do something other than providing a buff, and how many can be actively targeted or countered?

 Most importantly, how vital is it to transfer these abilities between models in the game? 

I've never played Infinity.  I think maybe I saw a demo at GenCon in 2013.  But that might have been a different game with a similar name.

 

i was referring to several Savage showdown adaptations including "bug hunt" and a set of cyber-punk rules.

most could be targeted with a called shot with the same equivalent difficulty of a precision shot on a normal sized character.  They did any number of things from increase accuracy allow you to shoot around corners perform additional attacks.  How often they transferred between characters depended on the scenario and the objective.  Sometimes they were used to push an advantage other times to bolster a weakness.  Late game they'd tend to collect on the few survivors but they were usually spread throughout the squad during early turns.

 

i don't think SRS should work exactly like that the scale would be off but it's just an example of a different way to abstract an element operating at effectively a different level of interaction from the rest of the game pieces.

[Xystophoroi]

9 hours ago, Ryjak said:

You mean Infinity, right?  How many of them do something other than providing a buff, and how many can be actively targeted or countered?

 Most importantly, how vital is it to transfer these abilities between models in the game? 

Drones (or Remotes in game parlance) are separately targetable models in Infinity. Sometimes they have odd activation rules such as medic bots - when you activate the controlling doctor their remotes activate too - while others are essentially independently activateable and are treated as regular models.

[Captain_Dan]

There's another game with units that make extensive use of drones: Beyond the gates of antares. Even tanks are just very big drones like the Concord one.

Those rules, suggestion & inspiration could be very useful for Firestorm races that make use of lots of drones like the Ryushi

[Xerkics]

Spartan are very focused on their Halo release for the summer atm and races like Sorylians and Relthoza still havent had their double box yet nm whether that delayed development of 3.0 FSA . Im wondering are the releases going to pick up for FSA after the summer Halo release or is it just going to be more Halo in which im frankly not interested at all.

[Presidente]

Its going to be the year of delay by the looks of it

[schoon]

I look at it this way - HALO is a solid license that will translate into reliable sales. 

Reliable sales mean more product developed for all the lines that have good sales figures. 

It might take some time, but it's a good thing, long term. 

[Xerkics]

4 hours ago, schoon said:

I look at it this way - HALO is a solid license that will translate into reliable sales. 

Reliable sales mean more product developed for all the lines that have good sales figures. 

It might take some time, but it's a good thing, long term. 

That's if halo actually sells.

[gr1mdan]

Halo is currently out selling FSA by a fair amount.

[Presidente]

Defiantly, halo will be know to way way more people too

[Hive]

That is interesting, particularly since it doesn't seem to be if you went by forum activity. I wonder if there's some analysis that could be done that would show that smaller games tend to gather bigger online communities as the in-person aspect is harder to manage?

[Xerkics]

Well if i didnt know better by just looking at dates of posts on these forums id assume the forum was dead and Halo has even less posts on it.

[gr1mdan]

The Halo Facebook page is quite active compared to the forums (and more active than the FSA Facebook page). A lot of people don't like the forums due to toxic nature of them and prefer the instant "hit" of Facebook. You can post pictures much easier on there and its generally more relaxed.