Jump to content
Vedar

Firestorm Armada 3.0 headed our way?

Recommended Posts

Please don't make it more complicated, slower, more detailed, more universal Mars , if a squadron has special rules just put it with the fleet guide.  Would like to see scenery rules tweaked, make asteroids just impeded, ships easier to pass through if travelling at half speed, more scenarios, Srs changing, bombers lose pd, like torps yo be a little more effective, my 2cents

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

5 hours ago, Spartan Alex said:

Just to give people some tid-bits for the slow gaming summer many experience, here are some headline intents for FA v3.0;

  • Revisit fleet building - giving players more choice and opening this space for future development

 

I hope to see some love for Minor Factions such as:

Ability to take some ships from a Major, maybe special consideration for Natural Allies.

A TAC from a Major fleet on their "team", maybe more than 1 from Natural Allies.

Perhaps make some Minors Natural Allies with another Minor

Maybe allow factions to substitute one of their required Tier squads with a Natural Ally squad, though the Admiral should probably always be on a T1 of the core faction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cool, thanks for the heads-up on what we are looking at getting in 3.0, Spartan Alex...they all seem like reasonable aims.

My thoughts;

1 - I'd like to see the Primary Movement Segment sped up. For me, the killer here is having to place a template down on the table and hold it up against the base during some or all of the models movement, painstakingly inching it around several placements of the template for each model...particularly when you're in turn 4+ or 5+ and many of the ships can be clustered quite close together. I reckon getting rid of the turning template and simply pivoting the ships on the spot would be a solid improvement...and perhaps with Smalls, just let players place them in any position and orientation they like as long as they don't exceed their movement limitations and adhere to other movement limitations (like can't move through a planet etc).

2 - I'd like to get rid of SRS Boarding Assaults and Support Shuttles. I'd like to roll Fighters and Interceptors into one, and remove the PD from the Bombers. So you would be left with a choice between an SRS that hits hard in a Bombing Run, or an SRS that is a jack of all trades (PD Defence, Dogfighter, Less Powerful Bombing Run).

3 - If there is any way to reduce the amount of tokens on the ship's bases, I'd also be up for that, too

4 - As for the other often mentioned things like AD calculation and Mines etc...I'm pretty happy with all those as they are and don't see them as being overly complicated or overly powerful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/4/2016 at 3:20 PM, Awesomeshotdude said:

2 - I'd like to get rid of SRS Boarding Assaults and Support Shuttles. I'd like to roll Fighters and Interceptors into one, and remove the PD from the Bombers. So you would be left with a choice between an SRS that hits hard in a Bombing Run, or an SRS that is a jack of all trades (PD Defence, Dogfighter, Less Powerful Bombing Run).

So something along these lines;

Fighters are good at Intercepting (they get the 6" Intercept Move) and Dogfighting (hit other SRS on 3+), are good at helping defend ships with their PD and can still carry out weak Bombing Runs...enough to threaten a Frigate or heavily damaged lone Capital.

Bombers are good at carry out powerful Bombing Runs and can clear mines (lets say by dropping/launching bombs/missiles that are designed to clear mines) - for clearing mines it might be something like the Bomber SRS carries out an attack run against a Mine Marker. It rolls its AD and reduces the Mine Strength by 1 for each 4+ it rolls, then returns to base as usual. The Mine Marker is removed if it is reduced to 0 Strength...and Bombers are less capable Dogfighters needing a 4+ to hit other SRS.

SRS_zpsi0qqgju9.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I might be the minority,

I would like to see epic carrier battles, ergo B5 fleet action style. What if the dedicated carriers could carry 48 ( OR MORE) fighters/bombers at a time.

The balance would be paying 5 points per stand, and only being able to launch X amount a turn,  lose the carrier and the tokens are removed.

Fighters, Bombers, Assault ships aka (breaching pods)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it? Boarding assaults have higher potential AP values on boarding-focused vessels, but Assault craft split the enemy PD/AP and can swing repeatedly. Would some hypothetical means of replacing Assault Shuttles on carriers, say trading Wings for Second Assault or Third Assault and so on, be considered? Because whilst many a Carrier wants f***-all to do with assaults, a few present it as an interesting option. In addition, that's a major draw for Pathogen in general. While I'm not sure it's worthwhile to accommodate one faction that is already odd-man-out in many ways, it's still a consideration. I liked the one discussion we had where Shuttles potentially could carry troops OR engineers, wherein both Support Shuttles and Assault Shuttles were shuffled into the same class- mayhaps similarly to what many propose Fighters should be for Fighters and Interceptors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With all the changes/fixes/wishes/... for specific SRS and/or SRS in general thrown about (and not for the first time), 3.0 - even if not meant to completely change the game - should maybe be the time to look at the full spectrum of possible ways to handle SRS, before embracing one of those paths and fully developing/implementing it.

SRS could be modelled as anything from a group of new and/or existing MARs and stats (perhaps with a "wings" section present in carrier profiles in addition to "upgrades" and "hardpoints" to select them from for a price) such as the Second Assault just proposed by Hive to represent what are now assault shuttles or increased PD or Bigger Batteries to represent interceptors and maybe a new MAR to attach to a weapons system to signify it is being delivered by bombers.

SRS could be - as has also been suggested before -  a sort of token/effect that can be attached to models (possibly lending that model MARs as above?) with a special set of rules for attaching and removing them (the latter including involuntary removal, i.e., attacking and destroying the SRS).

On the other end of the spectrum, SRS could be treated as models with full profiles that can only be purchased together with carriers and/or that have some specific MAR that makes them benefit from/dependent on a carrier.

(The current solution falls between the token and the model approach.)

As I said, I see this as a spectrum, and perhaps moving SRS around in this spectrum (e.g., making them more or less model-y or more or less like tokens) is a better way to "fix" them instead of just changing their stats or combining types into one. 3.0 offers a chance to at least consider such changes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, N2OJoe said:

Bombers are good enough already, it's Support Shuttles that could use some anti-mine love.

Bombers certainly are pretty good. Removing their PD, as in my post, makes them less good because they then could not be used to help in ship defence. Giving them some other utility that sometimes forces the owning player to make a choice between clearing mines or carrying out bombing runs can be seen as making them even less good again, as the opponent can make use of mines to lure the bombers into clear mines rather than carry out bombing runs, in some instances anyway...over all, I wouldn't say removing their PD and giving them a utility that will sometimes be used, as making them better than what they are now. 

14 hours ago, Hive said:

Why cut Assaults? Non-usage?

I guess some factions and some circles of players would use Assaults. They seem to more easily get a result than boarding actions. However, I don't think that they are used all that often, but I guess my main reason is that this is already represented in the game by ship to ship boarding actions. Similarly, Support Shuttles are kind of already represented in the game when crews attempt repairs in the end phase...obviously this does not extend to returning lost crews points, like a medical shuttle can achieve.

 

If increasing game speed whilst still maintaining "granularity" is the aim, then removing some of these elements, or combing them into one is at least one place to look to achieve this aim, I reckon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's my thoughts on the the specific SRS Types:

  • Fighters: The Jack-of-All Trades that is rarely taken as the only thing it does better than anything is it's high move
  • Interceptors: Only really used for Torpedo Defense and so good at it as to be bad for the game overall.  Many ships pay too many points for good torpedo values to have them rendered ineffective by 15 points of SRS Token for large areas of the board.  I would be happiest to see Interceptors eliminated entirely and a bit of their abilities moved to fighters
  • Bombers: Way to good on defense.  They are attack craft, so why are they every bit as effective on Torpedo defense as fighters?
  • Assault Craft:  Way to good on defense (see bombers above). So slow that a ship with Launch Tubes actually has a longer Boarding Assault and some carriers can actually outrun the Assault Craft.  Given that we have the MARs Assault Blitz, Launch Tubes, and Second Assault along with Hardpoints/Upgrades, I don't think we really need these
  • Support Shuttles: This SRS has no PD and is painfully slow. I don't think anyone launches them if they are not going to immediately use them.  I think we are better off adding a MAR(s) like the old Medical Shuttles and Repair Shuttles to do the same thing
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From a game-design standpoint, the biggest, most expensive ships are generalists (Battleships and Dreadnoughts are tough & have a high damage potential) so smaller, cheaper ships will need to be more specialized to make them effective against them.  The smallest ships in the game, SRS Tokens, must be hyper-specialized to make them viable.

Alextroy pointed out every way SRS fail this except for Interceptors, which are too good because their hyper-specialization is too strong.  They're effective against:

Torpedoes

Boarding Assaults

Enemy SRS

On top of this, they have a huge defensive bubble.  One Interceptor Token can easily guard half a dozen Models, and often more.  And even 1 Interceptor Wing is useful; the only other SRS which can say this are the Support Shuttles, and they're so specialized that they are largely ineffective against most opponents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ironically, when I played Syndicate afew days ago, my opponent (had 2x3 interceptors in his fleet) "complained" about how useless his interceptors was, since Syndicate have no torpedos, are not good at boarding and I didn't have any wings of my own in that particular fleet. :)

 

I also love the idea of giving one of the SRS-tokens (support probably makes the most sense) to act as mineclearers. There really needs to be some way to clear mines in 3.0.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ryjak said:

From a game-design standpoint, the biggest, most expensive ships are generalists (Battleships and Dreadnoughts are tough & have a high damage potential) so smaller, cheaper ships will need to be more specialized to make them effective against them.  The smallest ships in the game, SRS Tokens, must be hyper-specialized to make them viable.

Alextroy pointed out every way SRS fail this except for Interceptors, which are too good because their hyper-specialization is too strong.  They're effective against:

Torpedoes

Boarding Assaults

Enemy SRS

On top of this, they have a huge defensive bubble.  One Interceptor Token can easily guard half a dozen Models, and often more.  And even 1 Interceptor Wing is useful; the only other SRS which can say this are the Support Shuttles, and they're so specialized that they are largely ineffective against most opponents.

Maybe if we took away the "six inch support bubble" and let the tokens fly free of command radius, imagine how that would change the tactics of the game.

I hate to bring realism into a space opera game, but come on..... fighters and such should be able to scout and attack farther than is now allowed. 

Game balance,  make them more expensive? I really don't think two or three CV's launching fighters at range 48 will ruin the game.

I will play test the idea next week.

But really, HUGE FRIGGIN TIE FIGHTER BATTLES!, I mean SRS token battles.

WANT!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi there!  Have some issues with some TACs, that seem to have a lot of "Skornergy" xD because the fact you can only play one at a given turn.

The TACs are "Charter Legacy", "Perfect timing", and "Intel gathered".

- "Charter Legacy": This is the worst TAC. You need to be sure your reinforcements will be arriving the turn you play it to benefit from it.... and the Dice Gods could be Cruel, very, very Cruel :( and you may end up losing a BL in h hopes to use it again. With the current rules I will only use it if I am bringing lots of reserves, but I mostly play at 800 p meaning there will be very few reserves, and because I usually play in a 4' x 4' area I prefer to flank rather than shunt. (and if you play sorylians, you probaly don't need shunting anyways)

 

- "Perfect timinig" its an OK card, as it helps getting the ship in when you  need it, but you can easily end up losing several BL points, or not needing the effects of the card at all (depending on how the Dice Gods like you)... and of course, you  can also have a bad roll in the shunt table (snake eyes, for example)

 

-"Intel Gathered". so good TAC, in fact it should be almost always present in your Admiral's hand. but if you despereately need some ships coming from foldspace you will need to take some hard decissions. If you are confident, you don't need the above cards and is very likely you get a noticeable advantage for your incoming reinforcements. However if you are unlucky and the ships does not arrive (or do not activate when they arrive) the opposing fleet is likely to outgun and outnumber you for one more turn.

 

 

So for 3.0  I think some TAC should be ammended, specially "Charter legacy". If a card does not take effect it should be returning to your hand for free or at a reduced BL cost. For example the card "Perfect timing" when you roll so bad and no reserves arrive even by spending BL to modify the roll.

and for "Charter Legacy" I suggest the following

"This turn add ONE to your fleet tactics roll bonus for initiative roll this turn

Additionally you may re-roll on the shunt table for each incoming squadron. The second roll MUST be accepted"

 

Hope you liked

 

Dan

So this way the card gives you a slight advantage even if your ships does not come by the time you play them

 

Link to comment
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.