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
Just to prove I'm not sitting around doing nothing... 
I've never even heard of the SFO universe until seeing it mentioned here.
www.mj12games.com/omegapedia
Enjoy!
No one's talking about abandoning the current timeline... but I think it'd be fun to port the mechanics to a different setting.
Maybe as a side project. Like I don't have enough of those right now.
Anyway, it does come down to cost, really. The multiplier for selective targeting would have to be staggering. However, having had experience with JC and Mekton Zeta (On which JC's mechanics are at least partially based), I would make mecha have a lower base speed than regular fighters.
Selective targeting = bad.
It's been proposed many times over the years, and I've never been able to justify it, as it would be prohibitively unbalancing...
Yeah I was scracthing my head as well, it would not be fair just to give them a different varient of the 109/190 assuming the rules are detailed enought to be worth the while going to that length.
The rules, while not as detailed as other games, would likely show some distinction between 109 variants-- but I agree that we should have a different design entirely.
The ki-61 looks like a good choice or maybe the Ki-100 to give the amercian fighteres a few worries
Ki-100 it is, then.
I see your point, mostly I was thinking of trying to give a good spread since most of the fighters the US has a mid-late war.
Fair enough. Maybe drop the Lightning and add the Wildcat?
Looking at the Russians it might be an idea to Drop one of the Yaks and go for ethier the Mig 1 or Mig 5. Just for variety
Okay... get rid of the Yak-1 and add the MiG-3.
But I would Drop the Defiant, althrough its an itresting aircraft, it did not preform all that well.
Replace it with Gladiator maybe?
Maybe. It'd be interesting to have a biplane in there. But I like the Defiant's turret.
Me 410 intresting choice, be intresting to see how it plays.
Honestly, it's the only other German fighter I could see including, having rejected the 262 for now...
I would drop one of the two Italian planes replace it with the Fiat CR.42 Falco mostly for varity
Fair enough.
I would suggest droping the D3A Val, maybe go with the KI- 27 Nate
You're absolutely right. I just realized I'd dropped all the other dive bombers but kept the D3A/Type 99. I would want to include a non-Nakajima model... maybe the Ki-61?
With the US I would drop ethier the Mustang or Thunderbolt and go with the F4F Wildcat or the F2A Buffalo.
Well, the Mustang and Thunderbolt are the two most-produced American fighters of the war... can't imagine leaving either out.
Nudge, nudge...
I consider myself nudged.
I must confess that I am still distracted by the possibility of a more "modern" sci-fi setting using the Iron Stars mechanics... I keep wondering about the SFO universe...
Here's a revision -- does this reflect how you'd like to see them repped?
Best option I've seen so far for mecha. And the point cost should be about right, too.
But I agree -- playtesting is needed.
where I can find the playtest rules? the link in the first message appears to be broken. thanks in advance!
Yup. The rules download was a victim of the changes we had to make post-hacker...
But that's okay, since I've improved them to the point where I think we're about ready for release. 
The key question at this point is, which aircraft to include? I've got data for over 300 different planes, but I only want about 10% for the initial release.
There are seven nations, and I thought it would be best to split their representation equally for the most part. I want to focus on fighters, even though ground attack planes and bombers will make an appearance. I also want to avoid jets/rockets for now... meaning the Me 262 will have to wait.
This is what I'm thinking; feedback appreciated:
BRITAIN:
Spitfire
Hurricane
Defiant
Mosquito
FRANCE:
D.520
M.S.406
GERMANY:
Bf 109
Bf 110
FW 190
Me 410
ITALY:
M.C.200
G.50
JAPAN:
A6M
Ki-43
D3A
Ki-84
RUSSIA:
I-16
Yak-9
La-5
Yak-1
USA:
Corsair
Lightning
Warhawk
Mustang
Thunderbolt
So what your saying is that the special equip. "Spinal Mount" is like a Forth weapon on the ship, but just not shown on the record sheet?
Maybe you can change something to make it show up on the record sheet?
Err... again, I'm confused. It does show up on the record sheet. It's shown as "Spinal Mount" under the special equipment section...
:?:
Hmm... There's no mention of Double Hull Damage in my rulebook at all.
Huh.
You're right -- it's not in the published book. But it's in my master document.
Weird.
I guess it got taken out at some point... but I don't remember when or why.
:?:
1) They have much larger areas of maximum effect, because the firing cone (or hemisphere, etc) gets bigger at long ranges.
This is accounted for, resulting in the x1.3 multiplier rather than a straight x1.
2) They're more likely to hit at maximum effect early on in the fight, before weapons are lost to incoming fire. Hitting hard early is much, much better than hitting hard late...part of why Expendable weapons can be so problematic.
Indeed. This is the main reason why the rule on banked weapons went away.
But it's still very hard to quantify. I would think that bumping inverted range to x2 would not be a bad idea -- x3 or more would be overreacting, I think.
Just wondering, do we have an ETA for the next IS book? How about the next wave of minis from Brigade?
Can't comment on the minis, but the book is currently on hold...
Not for any particular reason, other than I haven't gotten around to it yet. I suppose I could be nudged a bit.
TRANSFORMATION / BOARDER (x1.33): when this fighter flight scores a successful hit against an enemy vessel, it may choose to forego standard damage and board or transform. If it chooses to do so, each ship in the flight counts as one squad of Marines for boarding purposes. Only ships which score a successful hit may transform -- hence, the whole flight will rarely be able to do so a once.
Not a bad idea, but I would require the mecha to declare this option BEFORE the to-hit roll, not after.
Im sorry Dan , but ive noticed one problem with official SXCA. It doesnt change the stats when you make a weapon a spinal mount, as far as the range and damage? Nor can I make these changes myself,at least not without leaving some stats out but im afraid that would not put up a proper TV.
I'm not sure what you mean when you say "Make a weapon a spinal mount". Spinal mounts are special equipment, not weapons. As such, they are selected at the bottom of the sheet...
Also on side note in my Starmada X rule book v.2 dated 10-23-04 on page 23 paragraph B.12 "No Hull Damage". It says " cannot be combined with "Double Hull Damage" or "Extra Hull Damage" .
What is Double Hull Damage? It doesnt appear in the book?
Section B.2: Double Hull Damage:
This weapon can inflict massive amounts of damage to the target's superstructure. Whenever a damage die rolled by this weapon scores an “H” hit, two Hull boxes are lost, instead of just one.
In theory you could make a house rule that NHD weapons can take down fighters. Simply state that the damage required to bring down a fighter can also destroy ship-board weapons, blast engine thrusters to molten slag, destroy powerplants of equipment, but isn't strong enough to actually cause hull damage.
Yes, you can... but that would allow for the abuse that I wanted to prevent when I said NHD weapons cannot target fighters.
Is the hyperdrive supposed to be modified by tech level?
No.
Just give it to the first sinister hooded figure riding a demonic black horse that asks for it, that'll fix the problem.
Do I have to wait for the sinister hooded figure to ask? Or can I just hand it over post haste?
Hope you're having/had a good honeymoon.
Honeymoon? What's that?
Have you arranged the escape routes and places to claim asylum yet?
My groomsmen did offer to pool their travel points to get me out of the country, but I evenutally declined...
Thanks for all the good wishes... hopefully the ring stops burning my finger soon. 
This is almost comical.
:wink:
It seems as though as much trouble as you guys are having with the spreadsheets that they (or it, if it's a problem with just one version) need to be looked at and new definitive versions produced.
AFAIK, there are no problems with the official SXCA from the MJ12 web site. There were some flaws in the point values in the book, but that was from a bug that has been fixed.
So the official sheet is as "definitive" as it can get. As for the other variants floating around, I cannot say...
I really think that, while Starmada is generic and should handle anything you can throw at it, the issue is really scale.
Basically, at a capital-ship scale, mecha aren't going to act much differently than fighters -- perhaps with a special ability or two.
BUT, if you wanted to scale down the game so that it represents fighter-sized ships, with "fighters" as missiles/drones, then you could build mecha from the ground up.
These were included in a not-yet-released supplement, so there is no description to give you.
Hey... just thought I'd say I'm off to get married.
If I don't make it back, remember that I love you all... in a very platonic gaming sense, that is.
This actually doesn't sound too disimilar from Royal Fleet Operation, an upcoming operational starship board game from us at VBAM. It is in playtest if you guys want to give it a look.
Umm... yes.
Please.
This game is really a fantastic game!!!
Glad you like it! Let's see about your suggested equipment...
#1. Targeting Computer
--------------------------------------
Frankly, we've discussed the ability to target specific systems in the past, and it's always seemed way too unbalancing. At the very least, this system should DOUBLE the cost of all weapons on the ship -- since the smart player will nearly always choose "crew" or "hull" as the system to be targeted.
#2. C3 Computer - Command, Control, Communications
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This computer comes in two variants: A command node, and a slave node. There can be only one C3 network per side.
I like this idea... but point-costing it will be a pain in the arse. Your modifiers may be right, but it will be very difficult to demonstrate mathematically...
Weapon Special Ability - Energy drain. Factor = 2.5.
Its purpose is to drain energy. It affects the ships engine, shields, batteries, & special equipment. Whenever the damages comes up as a hull hit, the defending player chooses one of those systems. In the event, thatall those other systems not available, then treat hull hits as crew hits,
I like this -- but I would say that if none of the other systems are available, then there is no effect. Having it default to crew is mucho-powerful.
One other thing: a precept of equipment and weapons effects for Starmada has been that each should do ONE thing. So I would decouple the "ignores shields" effect from this one; if you want a weapon that does both, you have to choose both.
Stealth fighters: This confers the same range modifier to fighters as the Stealth ability for capital ships. --- Multiplier 1.2
Eh, I guess.
Spinal Mounts: This is the variant similiar to what I saw in BFG. This spinal mount uses the large blast template found in WH or WH40k.
I dunno... area-effect weapons in space have always struck me as way too much...
mj12games.com/forum → Posts by mj12games
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.