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
So, in case you hadn't heard, the state of Colorado is closed. 
This means I'm not in my office, and potentially won't be for a week or so (if I don't get in tomorrow, it won't be until after the New Year since we were already closing next week).
I have internet access, but all the stuff I've been working on lately was on my desktop at work... 
White Christmas -- woo hoo!
And now, the top three reasons why this WON'T work:
1) Crew Casualties. These automatically cause a hull hit, which doesn't translate easily (or at all) to this new system.
2) Torpedoes. These roll D12s for damage location, increasing the chances of hull and armour hits, something that can't easily be done in this new system.
3) Hull Victory Points. Right now, you gain VPs for every hull hit inflicted; again, this doesn't translate.
Never mind.
Haven't heard much complaining, and we play IS a good bit over here. Is this a new approach you're considering for the next book?
It's a bit early to say if this is the approach for the next book -- but regardless, this would just be an optional rule; I'm not advocating getting rid of the existing system. In fact, since the two systems give the same results (on average), one player could roll d20s while the other could use this system...
I haven't heard much complaining either, just some observations at cons and such.
Anyway, here's an example of what the ship display would look like (this one's for HMES Bantam).
Oops... I forgot that the Iron Stars damage ranges are designed so that you're only supposed to lose 1/2 your systems before getting destroyed. So, divide the number for each system by 2 in the above steps, and things will work out. Thus, the Senjo's damage track would look like this:
_-_-_-_-_-L-T-_-P-S
_-L-_-A-T-_-_-P-S-L
T-_-_-L-_-_-X
So, one of the (minor) complaints I've heard from players regarding Iron Stars is the rolling of d20s for damage location. It does seem to be the part of the game that slows down the most, although it's not that big a deal in practice.
However, I've been thinking about alternatives, and I was wondering if something like this might be an interesting option (Silent Death vets may find this rather familiar... ):
First, determine the number of hits it "should" take to kill the ship -- this is done by dividing the hull size by the chance of scoring hull damage. As an example, let's take the Senjo, which has 12 hull points and a 9/20 chance of scoring hull damage -- 12 * 20/9 = 240/9 = 26.7, rounded off to 27. This is the number of boxes on the damage track.
Next, place an "X" in the last box of the track. When this box is crossed off, the ship has been destroyed.
Now, we need to place armour (A), thrust (T), primary (P), secondary (S), and light guns (L) on the track. For each category, add one to the number of that item and divide into the number of boxes on the track, rounding UP. For example, Senjo has armour 2, so divide 27 by 3, resulting in 9. Now, count this number of boxes in on the damage track and place the appropriate letter in that box and repeat. Thus, there should be an "A" in the 9th, 18th, and 27th boxes of the track. If there is already a letter in the box, move to the next available box -- therefore, since there's already an "X" in the 27th box, the third "A" is not placed.
Continue until all letters are placed; the Senjo's track would then look like this ("_" is an empty box):
_-_-L-T-_-P-S-T-A-L
_-T-P-S-L-T-_-A-P-T
S-L-_-T-P-L-X
When the ship takes damage, instead of rolling d20s for location, simply cross off the appropriate number of boxes. When a box with a letter is crossed off, you also cross off one of the appropriate systems. For example, if Senjo took 6 points of damage, she would lose one light gun, one point of thrust, and one primary weapon.
Whaddaya think?
If a ship with Organic Hull takes hull damage, repairs some of that damage and then takes additional hull damage, does it only hit the hull spaces that have been hit before (killing no additional crew) or can it hit "fresh" hull spaces? I have an opponent that I keep plinking for 1 hull damage, he keeps fixing it...how soon does this go through his crew.
Unless you have crew-killing weapons, then you have to live with this.
However...
You should also be knocking off systems, so eventually he will just be a worthless hulk.
I'm seriously considering banning users with gmail accounts... it seems to be the addy of choice for spambots lately.
Grr...
Spitting Fire is currently #1 on the miniatures section of RPGNow...
Yaay!
and the finished product looks a LOT nicer than I originally hoped.
And the pictures will be posted... when?
I'm also fond of the Do-24, the BV-222, and the PBY-5a - I must have a thing for seaplanes. The FW-189 is also pretty useless, but it just looks so cool. Not as cool (or as wierd) as the BV141, but still cool.
Yeah, like I'm gonna hop to it and release cards for these planes within the hour.
Nice try...
It's gonna take at least until Monday.
Or do WWI. I know MJ12 already has a WWI game, but I like the idea of using the same basic system (perhaps with the scale shifted to accomodate the lower speeds and greater maneuverability) for both.
There's a reason why we have two separate systems (aside from the fact that Jim designed the one and I did the other ). It's that I see the two periods as very different from one another... in WW1, air combat was still very much a dueling atmosphere, which Aces at Dawn simulates. By WW2, "fleet" actions were more the norm, thus Spitting Fire is suited for much larger combat.
Nope... no file. :?:
Well ... I'm kind of tempted to leave them the way they are - it's more versatile. :wink: But if RT would be the same point value, that would probably be more accurate. Actually, FR would probably be closest.
Er... what's "FR"?
Just out of curiosity, what's the circle on the BV-138 data card?
"A few Bv 138C-1s were equipped with a large electric degaussing ring and used for minesweeping."
Although it doesn't appear on most versions of the 'Seedrache', I still think it's neat.
Of course, none of the SF arcs are going to match precisely, but the forward firing capability of BL/BR seems to give them a bit much freedom. Was the main consideration in choosing BL/BR for the two weapons to be independent?
The main consideration was that my data merely said "one in each of the barbettes on the side of the fuselage". I took that to mean BL/BR... but if you wanted to combine them into a single FT weapon, the point cost would be unaffected.
without having to wait for Dan to get an interest in, for instance, the BV 138 or FW 189 or Lysander or other oddities
You mean like these?
The numbers seem reasonable on first glance...
But playtesting will reveal The Truth.
I'm not sure how I want to proceed with Spitting Fire, so I'm reluctant to give away all the state secrets (except to say that the math ain't that hard if you want to give reverse engineering a go... ).
However, by way of tiding you over, here are three more marks of the Spitfire...
Dan - you don't mind if the list of planes included remains intact, do you?
Nope. Although to be safe, you might want to send me the file before you post it again.
That's my understanding of how copyrights work.
Your understanding is correct. For obvious reasons, I would hope that no one uses the graphics from Spitting Fire in anything that is going to be distributed, even freely.
However, there are plenty of non-copyrighted images of most of the planes -- check commons.wikimedia.org to start... it's where I got the cover pic for the rulebook.
Regarding the spreadsheet, I'd feel better if it were distributed sans data... that way, those who own the game can enter in the values relatively easily, and it's still a useful tool. Please note that "feel better" does not translate to "condone or endorse"...
(who's now trying to figure out how to make excel do a conditional object embed so that when a plane is selected, the appropriate picture appears on its card)
Lemme know if/when you work that one out...
Had a moment to fiddle in Excel today, and created the attached. Let me know what you think.
Nice work... although I don't know what I think about having all the plane data out there and available to any and all, even those who haven't bought the rulebook.
As far as more plane data goes, patience will be rewarded.
Under the description for the LRS it states that it counteracts the -1 to-hit penalty for attack at long range. What if the weapon has Doubled Range Modifiers? Does it only counteract one -1 or all of the long range penalty? What if the weapon has Inverted Range Modifiers and is getting a +1 at long range? Is there no benefit in that case?
When LRS is used with Doubled Range Modifiers, the -2 is reduced to -1.
There is no benefit when combined with Inverted Range Modifiers.
Sorry, yet another drone question. If I recall, the rules say that drones operate as fighters with certain exceptions. Do they halve shields as fighters? Do they fire before ships do, like fighters?
Yes and yes.
Would it be possible to have drones that hit better (or worse) or have increased PEN and DMG?
Possible, yes. I don't see why any of the mods that can be applied to fighters couldn't be used for drones as well.
I have a quick question on drones also. I am at work and unable to reference my rulebook but, do drones continue to fly around the board until they hit their target or are they limited by some kind of endurance?
They do not have a limited endurance... however, they do not remain until they hit, only until they attack. If they miss, they are still removed from the board.
mj12games.com/forum → Posts by mj12games
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.