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 Andromedan
Me too!!! I have been looking forward to the release for awhile.
The big difference between the Klingons and Kzinti is the number of drone launchers and short range phasers. Kzinti have more short range weapons and note drone launchers. Klingon has smaller number of drone launchers and a larger number of offensive (longer range) phasers.
I agree. That is the way I understand it too.
Huh? Seeking Weapons are fired like every other weapon in the Nova Edition. So they can not be fired at on the turn that they a "fired", only the turn that they will hit the target. Since the all attacks/firing is done simultaneously.
Note: I am not talking about Drones.
I agree. What is changes is when the seeking weapon gets to attack. Instead of attacking when the ship that launched it gets to attack for the turn after launching (i.e. when the seeking weapon is face up). It attacks after all ships have fired (i.e. when the seeking weapon is face up).
Love the cover. I can't wait to get the product.
Daniel,
I would be to help out.
Paul Franz
Daniel,
Are the Nova Editions available? The reason I am asking is that in the catalog I see the following for both entries which seems to infer that the ones available for download are the Nova Editions:
"Although ownership of the Starmada Nova Rulebook from Majestic Twelve Games is strongly recommended, it is not required: the essential Starmada rules are included!"
"Damaged" on Page 14 refers to the definition on Page 5. That is:
"When all the hull boxes in the first group have been checked, the ship is damaged; when all the hull boxes in the second group have been checked, the ship is crippled; when all the hull boxes in the third group have been checked, the ship is destroyed."
So when 1/3 of the total hull boxes are gone you do a "damage check" and then again when 2/3 of the total hull boxes are gone you do a second "damage check". There is a maximum of 2 damage checks.
If it is a straight port of the SAE ships per the NE rulebook. Then no.
But the real question in my mind is what is the -1 penally suppose to represent. If it is the small target modifier then this should stay as is. If it is the penally most heavy weapons have against drones then it should get PinPoint. My guess is that it represents neither and is just how the Starmada system is. Now, why Phaser-3s would get it (and why they have Anti-Fighter in SAE) would be because of the purpose of the Phaser-3s which is purely defensive.
So how close are we to seeing either Klingon Armada: Nova or Romulan Armada: Nova or both? 
How do you plan on handling the differences in movement? (i.e. planned movement of SAE vs. non-planned movement of SNE)
If I have a weapon bank that is:
Phaser-1 [FX2][AX2]
If a target is in SR arc (i.e. includes both weapon arc), do I need to fire the Phaser-1 bank twice with a -2 modifier?
Or can a weapons bank only fire once and the above needs to be re-done to make the arcs mutually excessive? Something like:
Phaser-1 [SR0][PR0][FF2][AA2]
There are only two things that really balance out fighters:
1) They are easy to kill.
2) They require require a carrier to get between battles.
If you remove either one the fighters can unbalance things.
I think Option 2 is best. Because it conveys the idea of fighters are more manueverable than ships so it gives them that kind of advantage. After that, (i.e. when it comes to firing on each other) there is no advantage.
I think the biggest issue with trying to add an impulse-based system into Starmada is that there is no max speed at the moment.
Agreed. I like "Starmade: MM12"
Agreed. I would rather wait an extra month then get a sub-par product that needs a lot of errata to be usable.
I like "Starmada: Battle Group Edition"
I don't like Starmada: Task Force Edition . Reminds me of the failed publishing company called Task Force Games.
I don't like Starmada: Warlord . Reminds me of another SFU game called Star Fleet Warlord.
I don't like Starmada: Final Edition . Because you never want to make the customer think that this is the last version of a product. (i.e. it ends with this edition).
Of course, that is just me. How about:
Starmada: Empire Builder Edition
Starmada: Fleet Builder Edition
Starmada: The Empire Edition
cricket wrote:
That being said, Starmada has never really been intended to simulate ship-vs-ship duels.
Well, even it was not intended that is what happened. The conversion of the SFB ships to the Star Fleet Armada series it was pretty much a direct conversion. That is a Federation Heavy Cruiser in SFB would have 4 Photons and the Federation Heavy Cruiser had 4 Photons.
SFB is definitely a ship-vs-ship kinda of game. (Large fleet battles are hard to play and take a long time) And doing a direct conversion communicated to the SFB community that it was a ship-vs-ship kind of game.
So the way I see happening in the future is a split like what happened in StarFire, where some people like the 3rd edition and some people glommed onto the 4th edition. That is some people will stick with the older version and will be happy and some people will be thrilled with the new version.
For me, I will probably use the old version to do ship-vs-ship kind of game and use the new version as a fleet version (i.e. instead of the Fleet Ops).
I have been reading the Design Notes and from my understanding of the rules and how the play will be going. It seems that the new edition abstracts out the ships more. That seems to be making the new edition basically a fleet edition. The ships are no longer ships in that there is a narrative of what happened on the ship. (e.g. My port phaser was knocked out allow the missiles to slam into my port-aft shield) So it is less a tactical game and more just a conflict of a set of ships.
The new rules will be interesting to play larger fleet battles (i.e. 5 to 20 ships or each side). But smaller squadron battles will be less interesting. So even though I think it will be interesting to play. I am not as excited about the new rules than I am about the current rules.
Paul Franz
From looking at the sample ship displays, it looks like the number of weapons is trimmed down. I assume it is for better fleet action. Is this the case? Will the 4 Photon Torpedos be trimmed down to a single weapon with a single die roll for firing it?
If this is the case, it will help fleet play and be a replacement for "Fleet Ops" but it will lose some of the tactical flexibility that the "larger" scale ships have.
My understanding from Steve Cole is that it is a new edition of the Starmada rules. It is possible it is only for the SFU stuff. But I am not 100% sure.
mj12games.com/forum → Posts by Andromedan
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.