You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Play nice. (This means you.)
Logins from the previous forum have been carried over; if you have difficulty logging in, please try resetting your password before contacting us. Attachments did not survive the migration--many apologies, but we're lucky we kept what we could!
mj12games.com/forum → Posts by mj12games
I'm going for more of a star-wars feel, you know how the Death Star just can't hit fighters for crap with its big derpy turbolasers?
"Derpy" is such an excellent word.
Fair enough. As mentioned before, I think I can see fit to adding the anti-fighter trait -- but I'm gonna stand firm (maybe) on fighter-exclusive/starship-exclusive.
The one thing I haven't done yet (but need to do) is allow for drone traits, and possibly a second set of fighter traits, so you can have two different types of fighter on a single carrier.
I'd still prefer to have "Command" do something else -- since many players will likely stick with the simultaneous play option.
This is why EPM: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_warfare#Electronic_protection
<IMG src="http://i.imgur.com/nlOVj.png">
</IMG>
Forgot to mention before...
This is sweet! 
Haven't really considered it just yet...
FWIW, I don't see harm in including an "anti-fighter" trait (although I'd like to give it a better name). Where Admiralty probably went wrong was expanding it to "fighter-exclusive" and "starship-exclusive" (alhtough the latter was necessary for the Dreadnoughts setting).
It makes it sort of hard to draw a line between an anti-fighter weapon and an anti-ship weapon.
Aside from the "Dx2" and "Dx3" and "Catastrophic" traits?
The way I'm thinking of handling this is to make it so no weapon can target fighters that's over a certain ORAT (Before you add arcs, and with 0 thrust).
I'm not sure I understand why you would do this...
Yes, to both questions.
So, how do you convert 24 fighters (in flights of 6) in SNE?
Do they become 4 flights, costing 100 SU?
According to what has been done, it seems they become 8 flights costing 200 SU.
I would go with the latter (8 flights = 200 SUs).
BTW, how does SNE fighters flights behave compared to SAE flights (for the same price)?
Are they better, worse...?
Each Nova flight is roughly one-half an Admiralty flight. They should be comparable in power -- they have lost the ability to inflict damage before ships can respond, but they've gained a bit of firepower in exchange.
Ok I'll try to look at splitting the battery into smaller ones, although I'm probably going to mod the few batteries that turn out like this one.
Just to reiterate -- you CAN reduce all the arc mods by the same number, and shift the columns over accordingly, without breaking the game. The Drydock has an option (currently hidden) to do exactly this.
However, I think it's useful to know the total firepower of a battery, even if you'll only be able to bring a fraction of it to bear against a single target, and so for "official" purposes we will not be doing this.
I dont recall seeing an antifighter trait in the rules, did I miss something?
If not, will there ever be one?
You did not miss anything. I think I was hoping the "accurate" trait would suffice, but come to think of it, it really isn't the same thing at all... 
If you have a starting number of 32 attack dice...
... you're rolling too many friggin' dice.
True. I doubt you'll have a single 32-die weapon -- although now I've said that, I wouldn't put it past someone to try and design one.
However, I can understand a ship with LOTS of smaller weapons that end up totaling 32 or more dice.
I also think if you can make any changes you really need an anti armour won trait to balance it with shields.
I've been reluctant to add an anti-armor trait because "armor" isn't supposed to represent iron plates bolted onto the exterior of the ship, but instead reinforcement of the ship's entire structure. Thus, it's hard for me to envision a weapon that could "bypass" it...
They are actually "breachers" in Admiralty, which means they can be either fighters or boarding pods. For Nova, I'm converting them to drones.
I ended up removing "Command" from the rules because it just doesn't have much of an impact. In a game like Fleet Ops, where the initiative roll gives you the choice of moving all your ships last or attacking with all your ships first, it's clearly helpful. But with the alternating activation in Starmada, it's not as important. Also, it completely loses its usefulness if using Simultaneous Play (p.30).
The reason is not that you have to count more columns (although it's pointless), the reason is that the chart in my example doesn't go down to 0 or even 1, so what happens when you go off the chart due to the built in high mods.
If you have a starting number of 32 or more attack dice, you'll need to divide the battery into two or more "sub-batteries".
Finished rules? I always thought that the current rules of Nova ARE finished? Or did I just pay for a beta?
As stated on the order page:
"Pre-order customers will receive a download link for a 'beta' release of the rulebook in PDF format. Once hard copies ship in early April, pre-order customers will receive an updated electronic copy as well."
Although "beta" is probably a misnomer; I anticipate few (if any) substantive changes to the rules between now and the formal release -- but as noted on the errata topic, there are some typographic and editing errors that need to be fixed.
I've noticed the carriers don't seem to work right on the drydock. Adding carrier space has some weird randomy costing.
Can you give an example? It seems to work properly for me.
The first question is: is there are more elegant way to do combine fire than the multi-stage way that I listed (I'm thinking not, short of adding another line to the ship chart showing the number of weapon emplacements).
There really isn't. Unless all of the banks have the same arc modifier, you have to do it in "stages".
If all of the banks DO have the same arc modifier, you can combine three of them for a +3 bonus or four of them for a +4 bonus.
My only problem with it was that I plan to use a movement system that involves separate heading and facing, where I could fly a ship around much of the game with it's tail facing the enemy if I wanted to work at it.
But that's the point. You have to work at it in order to keep your tail facing the enemy (unless it's a "stern chase" scenario).
Really, I see two options at this point:
1) Leave the rules as-is.
2) Revert to "balanced" arcs.
I don't want to have a separate set of modifiers that apply only to the ORAT.
That's errata. The 4-6 fighters per flight was never changed after I cut the flights' SU cost in half.
My understanding is that Jay is interested in doing an updated VBAM/Starmada crossover.
mj12games.com/forum → Posts by mj12games
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
