Spartan Derek

Firestorm Armada 3.0 Designer Feedback Thread

325 posts in this topic

just sounding like this will turn out task force armada. the whole point of link fire was to allow squads to combine fire without getting out of hand and still let single ships pose a threat. With placed shots possibly making an appearance this is no longer the case as squads joining their shots will be undeniably the better option.

Movement and linked fire is what made firestorm what it is and stand out a bit from others. So far it sounds like both may be going to the pasture.I'm worried as it seems like planet fall and Task force are merging to make armada 3.0.

Archer12, Xerkics and LBPB like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hitting on 4 is nice and balanced, 3s is just too good:(

wasn't there supposed to be a blog post?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Presidente said:

Hitting on 4 is nice and balanced, 3s is just too good:(

wasn't there supposed to be a blog post?

Unless they have adjusted defensive ratings to match. We really don't know what 3.0 will look like. Sure making this change to 2.0 without any other changes would be game breaking, but I can't imagine the beta testing team would let that kind of thing go unremarked. Let's see what the new rules say before we start Edition Wars 2. I also didn't see where this assumption that all shots would now be Placed Shots and receive a +1 is based on. Just because placed shots are "in the rules" doesn't to me imply that they will be that easy to make. 

I understand where people's concerns are coming from, but this is exactly how people felt back when 2.0 was introduced, and that turned out to be a massive improvement to the game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok. Jumping in

"Placed shots" can only be acheived via spending command points, which are a limited recource. You also have to be in the correct range band for the weapon type. (All the same in planetfall). So yeah. Spend them all on that if you want rather than other commands or abilities or reserves or repairs.

As with everything in life you cant please everyone and its always going to be marmite. V2 introduced heaps of stuff people loved and/or hated. The power core idea has been ditched which was the only massive change really. Its still going to feel like firestorm. Movement? Yup. Linking? Yup. Ships blowing up? Yup.

Yes there have things I have disagreed with but I have either come round to them through thought and testing or things have been changed and met me (or others) half way. SRSs are changing. But I really like it. But I will put money on it some people will hate it and think its the worst thing ever to have happened. Too many people adopt the "I AM THE LOUDEST PERSON ON THE THREAD AND I SAY MY WAY IS THE BEST AND ALL YOUR IDEAS ARE RUBBISH, THE SKY IS FALLING, WHY ARE YOU NOT LISTENING TO ME?". I could make a Delta team from some people but they would never produce anything due to their different ideas and intransgiance. 

*waits for some one to jump on me and put words in my mouth*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Kaptyn Krys said:

*waits for some one to jump on me and put words in my mouth*

Translated....

"I really want to tell you about the new Pathogen rules, but I like tormenting you so I won't...."

Kaptyn Krys likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, CoreHunter said:

Pathawhat? Don't think they made it into 3.0. :P

 

50 minutes ago, Pathogen said:

Translated....

"I really want to tell you about the new Pathogen rules, but I like tormenting you so I won't...."

Beta team is only looking at the core6 plus natural allies currently whilst we work on the core game. Stat tweaks for them and other races will come later.

Hower I spoke to Neil at Salute about Saurians, Overseers and Pathogen. The Pathogen are very much still around! They are evolving. The idea is that there are a number of strains of pathogen. Each will have slightly different command abilities and upgrades/options to reflect how they have evolved. Just the concept currently.

azrael and Pathogen like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017-5-12 at 6:21 PM, Flamebeast said:

That statement, right there (bolding mine), betrays a disturbing level of ignorance of how FSA is played. It's a game of movement and counter-movement. Movement is the absolute basis for every single strategy and playstyle for every race, and if you're basically planning to approach that with the blase approach you're alluding to, then I'm genuinely concerned for the game. 

The fact that your back catalogue is littered with poorly written rules, balance issues and terrible launches (Planetfall 1.0 and Taskforce spring violently to mind here) doesn't fill me with confidence regardless of whether you have "designed games 10+ wargames games before", or whether or not you're worried - actually, given the two rulesets I've just mentioned, plus the lack of a coherent sentence in your little bit of "I'm great and have so much experience" self-trumpet-blowing up there, it is somewhat concerning that you're not worried.

Now, I'm perfectly willing to be proven wrong on this and intend to withhold judgement until I've seen actual rules, but it sounds an awful lot like FSA is about to become homogenised with Planetfall in terms of the rulesets, and I can't think of a worse way you could ruin it.

The point is actually, the movement ruleset is simply trash. You spend a lot of time using the ******* template to perform a 45 º movements, when it can be faster changin the application of this useless template by other method that can limit the maneuverability of the bigger ships and/or slower factions (drinzezi) and powering the more maneouvrable factions (aquan). But I totally agree with derek, the movement can be modified after and change the ruleset affected by the changes on movement rules. Of course, is easier to perform on the other way, change first the movement rules and after the other rules affected by the changes (MAR, shoots, stats, etc). I didn't know the planetfall rules, but in some places I saw that they have tons of mistakes and bad plannification, but the taskforce rules....it is true that they are so simple in some things that could be similar to FA, but I think that their movement is not bad, 2 turns for maneouvrable ships, 1 turn in the middle of movement for big or less maneouvrable ships. If you take into account this movement system and add additional points to give more things (f.i, I strongly recommend to allow turns equal to tier to the ships, and specific MARs to allow extra turns for concrete ships or factions). This fact reduces the time spent in difficult movements and keep the advantage of agile factions such aquans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Venter said:

Please avoid personal attacks to the designer and criticise the rules, not the people.

Otherwise, in the end this will only lead to another stop in communication from him. That's what nobody wants.

Moreover, the staff admit suggestion and ideas to solve the actual problems in the ruleset, so, instead of flaming the staff, people can send proposals and offer himselves to be testers. That can be more useful than say that staff has no idea to desig games

Venter and CorroPredo like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

....Yeeeeeeeah... There are a lot of things I disagree with here, but as much as possible I'd like to voice criticisms in a way that would make the designer WANT to answer them, hahaha.

 

In any case, any ETA on more tidbits? We mere mortals who could not keep up with the time demands of the Beta Crew are aching for more info. (EDIT) Was hoping that since you've got a fancy new banner of the Terran hybrid Battleship, there might be some nice info dropped here.

Pathogen and Small Mek like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Hive said:

(EDIT) Was hoping that since you've got a fancy new banner of the Terran hybrid Battleship, there might be some nice info dropped here.

Seconded, what's up with the Facebook Spartan 3.0 Battleship?
The angry colonists would like to know.

WestAustralian and BluFlcn like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Pathogen said:

Seconded, what's up with the Facebook Spartan 3.0 Battleship?
The angry colonists would like to know.

Someone mentioned on the facebook group that it was just a render for funsies but man I'd be real happy if Spartan would stick to a singular design scheme for the terrans. So if it turned out to be say an Apollo MK III or new battlecruiser design I'd be over joyed to shell out cash for it.

Pathogen likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BluFlcn said:

I'd be real happy if Spartan would stick to a singular design scheme for the terrans.

I rather thought a hodge podge of designs was *part* of the Terran design scheme, as they're continually rushing to upgrade their ships as they have the worst military tech out of all the factions. They got Shields from their allies and went all in on them and started grafting extra turrets on their hull to upgun their ships as quick as possible. 

Endrasalem likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ghost Stepper said:

I rather thought a hodge podge of designs was *part* of the Terran design scheme, as they're continually rushing to upgrade their ships as they have the worst military tech out of all the factions. They got Shields from their allies and went all in on them and started grafting extra turrets on their hull to upgun their ships as quick as possible. 

That's legit, but the new design, were it to be a new model, does look nice. I would never say to someone "no you can't bring your old school razorthorn." I just want a sleek new toy and a terran fleet that all looks new and shwanky. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess they evolved to be more rounded rather than more wedge shaped needle nosed to minimize similarity to star destroyers. We all know the Terran federation is really a nascent empire.

this is how the federation dies; in slow design evolution.

BluFlcn, Pathogen and Ghost Stepper like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The MK II cruisers do look kind of star destroyer-y. Honestly I think the new design for 3.0 looks sufficiently futuristic and unique. Shut up and take my money, Spartan. Keep cranking out awesome looking models!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...Okay, so... If boarding can't do captures anymore but some factions are, like, known for doing so... I'm assuming boarding will do damage to a ship, right? Can we get a single bonus Battle Log or Command Point or TV or whatever for killing a ship with an assault as a nod to capturing important crew and intel or placing a beacon so the wreck can be salvaged later? I agree that the actual 2.0 capturing mechanics added unecessary bookwork and stuff, but it would also be pretty lame to not have a nod to the fact that it's something that happens. 

 

...also, you Terrans are funny. You have never felt the wrath of Aquan and Relthozan shio design ADD!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think boarding will be use to prepare ships to anhihilation xD, maybe avoiding the objective can turn, or destroying their PD or shields, avoidint the shooting of part of the enemy weapons....and maybe a moderate amount of physical damage to the ship HP/crew, I mean, in a stronger way that actually boarding perform part of these actions. But it could be a good idea if you get additional points for destroying an enemy ship using a boarding action

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Vedar said:

I hope that turning template goes. It has kept a few people I know away from the game.

Precise movement is the foundation beneath FA, and you can't have precise movement without an accurate turn measuring devise.

Which doesn't mean the current turn template isn't a piece of ****...

Flamebeast likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding to the turning template, I'm thinking in something like the X wing templates, with slight differences: for example, instead of different X" templates, just use 3, one for turn 1, other for turn 2 and other for turn limit 0, marked with different signals to determine how many inches consume the turn of each ship (the same template should be divided into 2-3 segments to perform bigs and small turn movements). Due to the curve shape of the template the movement is easier and more organic than the movement performed using the current turning template, and with the method I described you can perform larger or shorter turning movements in an easier form that now, just taking off to the total movement the inch number marked in the corresponding template segment....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Hive said:

...also, you Terrans are funny. You have never felt the wrath of Aquan and Relthozan shio design ADD!

Indeed, Terrans are known the galaxy over to need many millenia to change even minute aspects of ship design.

USSTruxtunDD14.jpg

800px-Future_USS_Zumwalt's_first_underwa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now