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 am strongly considering writing up a list for Hasslefree's Grymn.
http://www.jenova.dk/hassle/grymn.htm
Okay... these ROCK!
I want seven of each. Who's buying?
Dan
Dan:
I should clarify that these weapons are repeaters AND they re-roll misses.
Ahh... I see.
Then, I would suggest that the problem isn't necessarily with the expendable nature of the weapons -- all that really does is increase the number you can carry. You're still gonna have to pay the CR for 'em, which is gonna be hefty, I would think.
A 1/2/3, 3+ weapon with Range-Based ROF at short range is going to be nasty, expendable or otherwise.
Having said that, I'll admit that the expendable weapons have not been tested as much as they could have been...
Dan
I really liked the addition of expendable weapons but combinations like this are really over powerful.
We re-rolled all misses of the repeaters each set of rolls. Afterward we wondered if the re-roll should only be on the first roll for repeaters. What is the official call?
It may be that expendable weapons need to be examined more closely, but I think your problem has more to do with "Repeating".
Repeating weapons re-roll -hits-, not -misses-. Hits continue to be re-rolled until they miss.
Dan
After spending a lot of time with Iron Stars lately, I have been wondering if it would be worth transferring over an idea to Starmada (lovingly ripped off from Grand Fleets)...
Basically, the idea would be to assign each ship a "Hull Victory Point" (HVP) value; this would then provide VPs to the enemy per hull point damaged on any ship not destroyed.
The HVP is computed by dividing the Combat Rating by twice the hull size, rounding to the nearest integer. For example, the Dortmund (CR 321, Hull 7) would have an HVP of 23.
Thus, if the Dortmund were destroyed, she would award her opponent the normal 321 VPs; however, if she took 4 hull hits but survived, the opposing side would receive 92 points (4 x 23).
Thoughts?
I've read here and there mentions that the design systems presented in MJ12's games standing up to statistical analysis.
Is that true? Can I get a bit more background information on that it just sounds interesting.
Not being a statistician, I cannot comment on this -- Demian seems to know more about what "statistical analysis" would mean, or how one would "stand up" to it.
However, I can say that the point-cost systems for Starmada, ARES, and Iron Stars, are all based in math rather than playtesting. Which, I suppose, means they are theoretically able to stand up to statistical analysis.
I just know that things have generally worked out well -- aside from the occasional Starmada banked-weapons debate. 
Dan
I am I the only one that all folders that have a "new" icon go away after going to the first folder that is marked new and then go back to the index.
I'm sorry ... but I'm unable to recreate this problem (using Netscape 7.x) nor do I know what might be causing it. 
Dan
I just thought that I would pass along word that my copy of Grand Fleets from Lulu came in today, and it looks good! Dan, did you use RGB or CMYK color on that cover, because it came out looking very nice.
All of our covers are in RGB.
Can you tell me if the book is 8.5x11 or 8.25x10.75?
Dan
Left a big pile of IS lead on the table - the production moulds have truned out just great
Yippee!
(Can I say "yippee"? Perhaps "woot" would be more appropriate?)
Did the Bantam get produced? Can we get a pic?
Dan
This means that you could theoretically fall off a ship, and float freely at a speed of 130 miles an hour?
Theoretically, yes.
When an astronaut 'falls off' the shuttle, he is floating freely at 1700 MPH, so I don't think this is too extreme. 
Dan
So...
We've been working on rules for orbital bombardment -- one wrinkle of which is that the difficulty of hitting the target varies with its latitude: targets closer to the equator are moving faster, and are therefore more difficult to hit.
Out of this, I've come up with a scale of sorts for the game:
1" per turn = 100 knots
one turn = 6 minutes
1" = 10 nautical miles (11.5 statute miles)
This then brought up the question of how ships can move so fast in something which clearly has significant "resistance" (momentum equals half speed, and ships turn as if they were airplanes/wet-navy vessels).
My explanation?
The ether does not exert any influence upon normal matter (otherwise, the Earth would eventually come grinding to a halt in its orbit) -- however, by applying an appropriate electromagnetic charge to the propeller and "sails" of a ship, it can push against the ether and speed up, slow down, and change course.
A side effect of this, of course, is that while this charge is active, the ship cannot "coast" on its inertia -- the same ether that allows maneuverability provides a resistance which slows down the ship.
Make sense?
Dan
P.S. This provides for the potential of an optional rule: a ship may turn off its ether-charge and coast in a straight line according to its momentum. If it does so, its momentum remains unchanged (i.e., it is not reduced to 50%).
Have I mentioned how much I -really- like the weapon description tables?
I'm thinking if including something similar for our Space Fleet Omega game...
Dan
> -----Original Message-----
> From: zouave7 [mailto:zouave7@gmavt.net]
> AM I correct that Grand Fleets does not cover WW2?
>
> If that is he case has anyoe done any modifcations to use it
> for WW2 or does MJ12 plan to do so?
Actually, GF does cover it. There are two (?) scenarios from WW2, and the weapon data in the back of the book goes through 1940 or so. This means that you can convert WW2 ships to GF values quite easily.
The intent of the game was to focus on WW1, but there's no reason why you couldn't use it for later conflicts.
The one caveat is, while the game includes rules for aircraft, you probably wouldn't want to try to play, for example, Midway or Pearl Harbor...
Dan
Arrgh!
What's the first thing someone says when the IS minis are promoted on TMP?
"or they would work with FULL THRUST...."
Arrgh!
Dan
I'm already thinking of ways to convert these to work with Starmada. Shave of the turrets and toss on some GHQ Micronaughts Turrets to give them a more 'futuristic' feel to them.
Heretic!
Must... play... Iron... Stars...
Seriously -- if there's enough interest, I could whip up a conversion for the IS ships to S:X.
Dan
http://www.brigademodels.co.uk/Frames/IS/index.html
Oh... my... God...
These are WICKED COOL!
I've thrown together the start of a new campaign:
http://www.lclark.edu/~drake/starmada/hullbreach.pdf
Looks good!
I especially like the weapon designations table... sign me up for a bunch of triple kinetic darts!
Dan
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tony Francis [mailto:tony@brigademodels.co.uk]
> ... or, Iron Stars in lead. The first pre-production casts of
> the initial batch of IS models went pretty well tonight - we
> claim an 83% success rate in that 5 out of 6 models cast
> cleanly and without undue problems.
Verily, I say...
Woot!
Dan
I think that mines may end up being a huge 'terrain creator', especially with a sizeable squadron of small, fast ships.
Will the 'fighters' (FAC's?) be able to lay mines?
Yes.
Dan
I forget, does the rulebook say what happens when mines overlap each other? Do you take damage from each field, or just once?
You take damage from all fields, even if they overlap.
Dan
I was under the impression that he was thinking of 'throwing the mines' at the opposing fleet, as he used the term 'artillery'.
[...]
So, you lay a minefield, and turn immediately into it - apply minefield to that ship as per the rules.....
No, I think you're still missing it...
The original question was how to -avoid- treating mines like artillery (flinging them about) since that's what could conceiveably happen with the rules as-is. I am proposing that ships cannot change course during the turn in which they lay a minefield, thus avoiding the problem.
Dan
..and if they do, they get how much of the minefield damage?
I'm not sure what you're asking... the rules for minefields make it clear that they are laid at the end of movement, behind the ship. Thus, the minelayer should be able to avoid damage from its own mines.
I don't see as how this is a problem, other than simply tracking the minefield, then there's the problem of determining if one hits....:-)
Again, I think the rules are quite clear on how minefield damage is determined.
And no, minefields do not move.
Dan
but what happens if I speed (say 12") with my very small crafts (as the Volga's in the scenario 1), then turn 180°? in the end phase I can place the minefield up to 12" towards the direction I traveled, as a sort of artillery... I'm sure this is not intended, maybe should be fixed?
The easiest fix I can think of so far is to simply state that a ship cannot make any course changes in a turn during which it lays a minefield...
Dan
Ok, any thoughts about applying to the compendium rules??
Well, it should work in roughly the same manner -- it's just more difficult to quantify because the Compendium didn't separate weapon effects into clear ROF, PEN, and DMG dice.
But it should work fine with a bit o' tweaking.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: hundvighong [mailto:hundvighong@yahoo.com]
> Hmmm...I've been doing that all along and never noticed a problem.
> The little hulls can't carry that many mine factors, and the big
> hulls (even with gyros) can't turn sharply enough to be a huge
> threat. OTOH, I never tried it with a *lot* of small mine-flingers,
> either. It might break down kind when used en masse, eh?
I LOVE it!!!
We just change the name of the tech from "Mines" to "Mineflingers" and everything is just fine...
Dan
Yeah, that kinda stands out as a major source of error... did you say previously that they *only* print 8.5" x 11"? Or can they do odd sizes, but just erroneously slapped it on 8.5 x 11?
Well, initially it said they could accept files that varied from the standard size by up to 1/4"... but now it appears they only accept 8.5" x 11" or 6" x 9".
Huh.
Dan
mj12games.com/forum → Posts by mj12games
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.