26

(12 replies, posted in Starmada)

Oh, by the way, since I'm designing a few ships based on Italian WW2 ships, I looked but could not find a reverse option for the Engines.    big_smile

27

(12 replies, posted in Starmada)

In short, no.  That system is too expensive, better to buy more Hull or Screens (why did you change the name from Armor?)

I designed a ship to fit my Italian Littorio-class BB miniature and set a goal of 700 points to match Beowulf's 700 point Arizona class, the primary opponent in the near future (or similarly designed ships of his).

Once I did that, I wondered about the use of Countermeasures.  That system seems quite pricey, and someone made a statement about our (Beowulf's and mine) overly offensive ships vs lack of defense.  Oh, the defense is there, just not in overly (IMO, and I think Beowulf's by him not using them in his ships) expensive defensive options such as Countermeasures and Ionized Hull.

So I decided to put Countermeasures-1 on my BB and see what I had to sacrifice to stay at 700 points.  In short, losing 15 Armor (from 27 to 12), er Screens, (and one Tractor Beam, oh my) was not worth it and here's the math to prove it.  Anyone is welcome to provide counter examples to prove Countermeasures is worth it, but I'm going with what probably will see play as my example.

Damage tracks, with Countermeasures or without [more Screens] (I like putting Shields on top as that's the first thing you have to check) :
Shields:      3 3 3 2 2 1 1
Screens:   [27-26-25-24-23-22-21-20-19-18-17-16-15-14-13-]  12-11-10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1
Hull:         14-13-12-11-10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1
Engines:    4 4 3 3 2 2 1
Weapons: 19 17 14 11 9 6 3

So Countermeasures cost me 15 free hits.  15. 

The enemy ship's main armament (as shown in the Basin) is 9-18-* ... 1x3+/1/4 ... Crn; Mdl
4 guns, 2 forward, 2 aft, but all 4 firing into nearly all the arcs but G & L.

The Shields will be useless against his main guns, of some use against his secondaries, but I'll focus on the primaries.

Let's play the average game.
Two rounds "long" range (really Middle range thanks to Crn; yeah, my weapons have Crn as well.. gotta fight fire with fire).  The enemy may or not have turned broadside to shoot at me with all his guns, but I will assume so for maximum effect (worst case scenario for my poor BB):

Countermeasures-0: 4 shots x 0.67 hit chance (3+) x 2 rounds = 5.36 hits, x4 damage = 21.44 (21); 6 Screens remaining.
Countermeasures-1: 4 shots x 0.50 hit chance (4+) x 2 rounds = 4.00 hits, x4 damage = 16.00 (16); 4 internal hits.

Status: Still alive and functioning at top efficiency, one Weapon takes out 3 Tractor Beams (ow?  wink ), Engine hit has not reduced speed, Shield hit has not reduced its maximum (still useful against his secondary weapons).

Third round, short range:

Countermeasures-0: 4 shots x 0.83 hit chance (2+) x 1 round  = 3.32 hits, x4 damage = 13.28 (13); 7 internal hits.
Countermeasures-1: 4 shots x 0.67 hit chance (3+) x 1 round  = 2.68 hits, x4 damage = 10.72 (11); +11 internal hits, 15 total.

Status: Still alive and functioning, many defensive and some (without Countermeasures) or many (with Countermeasures) secondary Weapons gone, Engine reduced from 4 to 3, Shields.. meh (still up, not that it matters much).

Fourth round, short range:

Countermeasures-0: 4 shots x 0.83 hit chance (2+) x 1 round  = 3.32 hits, x4 damage = 13.28 (13); +13 internal hits, 20 total.
Countermeasures-1: 4 shots x 0.67 hit chance (3+) x 1 round  = 2.68 hits, x4 damage = 10.72 (11); +11 more internal hits, 36 total.

Status: without Countermeasures: crippled, still functional; with Countermeasures: dead.   QED.

28

(51 replies, posted in Starmada)

For now, however, it has a 0.7 multiplier and works as follows: at the end of each move, if the seeker flight does not impact its target, its IMP is reduced by 1. When reduced to 0, the flight is removed from the game.

Thanks!  I can add it myself.    Is it ranged based?  The spreadsheet has a column for that.

I'm going to need it to keep those pesky Beo-Mart armed freighters from setting up shops in my vast Glenian empire.   :roll:


Our map is about 48 hexes long and 24-30 hexes wide.  We like maneuvering room (well, I do).

29

(51 replies, posted in Starmada)

mj12games wrote:

See Romulan Armada. wink

Oh.  So it has been thought of, good.

But I really don't want to buy another book for some design options.  Maybe I'll just stick to flying Klingons as I got lots of miniatures of those, just a few Romulan ships.

30

(51 replies, posted in Starmada)

I'm not liking the seeker save chart much.  That looks to be new to Starmada.

But without it, I wouldn't bother using the Plasma Torpedo I mentioned previously as it would be too easy to take down and definitely less intimidating than the big ball of plasma coming towards you (remembering the scene from ST TOS).  I'll have to break out my plasma torp counters from SFB (I kept a counter sheet of them for just such an emergency  wink ).

Have you considered using IMP as an indicator for hit points of a seeker?  Each point lessens the damage potential and once it reaches 0 the seeker is destroyed (makes for a better simulation of the SFB plasma torp since you can reduce its damage with phaser fire).  Most seekers have IMP-1 then one hit destroys them.  Seems better than a save roll, which is an extra die roll (and a kludge from some *ahem* RPG), IMO.

31

(51 replies, posted in Starmada)

Thanks for listening and replying.

Our battles here, between Beowulf and myself mostly, with our longer ranged weapons than those in the book (we go with 18, where as I see a lot of range 12 & 15 in the book), tend to be at medium range a lot more than long.  Usually one turn is at long and several at medium before 1 - 3 turns at short range After that it becomes a mix of short and medium, with cripples heading off to deep space  lol  and at long range for a bit.

I thought max range was 30? (goes to spreadsheet to check).  Yup. 

Any issue having seekers at speed 15?  I haven't played a game yet, so maybe 12 is fast enough. 
I changed a couple weapon line limits from -12 to -15, for the plasma torpedo, to see how it turns out.  Perhaps I'll drop it back to speed 12.   Just to give a hint to Beowulf what the Romulan Condor DN might be armed with:

Plasma-R Torpedo Launcher    MA-15    1×2+/5/5  Cts; Pr1; Slw    [Base SU=53.3]
(1) AB ☐☐
Plasma-F Torpedo Launcher    MA-15    1×2+/4/2  Cts; Pr1; Slw    [Base SU=32.6]
(1) ABC ☐ | ABD ☐

(yeah, could put double Slw on them, but these are quick charge plasma torps.   big_smile )

An option I thought about would be to have a degrading IMP per turn, sort of like Sct but only for seekers.  Plasma torpedoes in SFB lost damage potential the further they travelled.  Don't know how to implement that idea.

IMO, the Mdl trait is cheating.  I could understand it for a certain cyBORG faction. But just willy nilly anyone can have it?  *ugh*
Maybe I should call Beowulf "Borgwulf", based on his new ship design.  :mrgreen:

32

(51 replies, posted in Starmada)

Blacklancer99 wrote:
GamingGlen wrote:

That's not how a lot of the real gaming world works.  Min-maxing is part of competitive play and miniatures gaming is very competitive

It's about what you enjoy. Some people really enjoy the challenge of out-designing their opponents and the cat-and-mouse of design/counter.

I don't.
I would rather both sides have identical designs and try to outplay or even outluck an opponent. The beer and pretzels taste better to me when I win a game like that.

And I find that boring as... watching paint dry.  I want to play different types of ships, but point wise should be balanced.

Any game with a design aspect will see people try to find ways to “min/max” as part of the challenge. When the game becomes all about that it becomes Rock Paper Scissors as far as I am concerned.


No one is saying that is all the game is about.  I like ship designing, ever since Traveller's 3 little books came out.  But if exploits exist in the system they should be fixed, not house ruled by people who paid for the game.

Maybe the game is broken, and might require an exercise of restraint among designers to keep it tactically interesting. Otherwise it becomes a strategy game played mostly by oneself trying to weedle different combinations so that when you show up to the table the issue is decided one way or another.

No one is saying that the game is broken, just some parts of it are.  Perhaps all that is needed is a re-evaluation of some of the values.  For instance, I see by Beowulf's new design that Carronade is too cheap. 

Weapon A1: 6-12-18 1x3+/1/4 Mdl : SU = 90.6
Weapon A2: 9-18-* 1x3+/1/4 Crn; Mdl : SU = 81.5 - has a longer short range and won't suffer the long range penalties at range 13-18 like A1 does.  All my weapons will have Crn now.  We should not have to house rule not to use Crn.  Fix the value.  I'll play around in the spreadsheet and maybe come up with a proper value.  Carronade looks like it's more of an advantage than disadvantage, so it's multiplier might need to be over 1.

I would once again recommend setting all the TLs to 0. Much much much harder (in my opinion) to create “broken design” conditions.

Yet the designer says that should not matter.  What the high TLs do is show the flaws in the system.  Broken designs only show the problem in a big way, designs that happen to use exploits unintentionally will have an advantage.  A very small one that will most likely  have less effect due to actual tactical play and die rolls, but it is there.

We use high TLs to create designs based on real or fictional vessels from other games, without the need to have huge hulls. 

I'm not poo-pooing the entire game.  Those of us raising issues just want the issues addressed, probably corrected.

33

(51 replies, posted in Starmada)

BeowulfJB wrote:

Let me see if I understand this; the Kizinti use seekers, conquer the galaxy and all become... cat-food  :!:   tongue   <LOL>
PS:  I posted the BB with Mdl in the 'Basin

Have you read any of the Man-Kzin Wars books?  Kzinti pretty much treat all other species as prey.  The reason humans have won every war against the Kzinti is because they're lousy strategists and tend to think all other species are inferior.  They do now give humans some respect.

34

(51 replies, posted in Starmada)

So here's the Korath Dreadnought...
162 missiles, let's say that the ship's Point Defense gets to fire on the seekers on the turn before they strike (speed 6 seeker vs range 6 weapon).  Luckily it can fire 10 in an arc the seekers are in, at ROF 3 and 4+ to hit is 30 *.5 = 15 seekers destroyed (and this is at medium range).  That leaves 147 incoming, hitting at 3+ means 98 striking the level 4 Shields.  So 1/3 penetrate = 32, which is 16 hull damage out of 19.  It's not fairing well either.

Put in SFB terms, seekers let the Kzinti take over the galaxy and eat everyone.   :twisted:

35

(51 replies, posted in Starmada)

mj12games wrote:

All of this is true. While I haven't gone to the extent of 1000 missiles, this design is simple enough:

Munchkin MIGHTY MITE-class Uber-Frigate (278)
 
Hull: 10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1
Engines: 5-4-3-2-1
Weapons: 323-259-194-130-65
Shields: 3-3-2-2-1
 
Mini Missile (MA 6) 1×6+/1/1 (Exp)
323x ABCDEF // (162)

This may seem impressive, but consider:

On average...

323 will be fired, but only 54 of those will hit (not counting defensive fire).
Of those, 27 will be blocked by an average shield rating (3).
Of those, only 14 will cause hull damage.

So, this design can be reasonably confident of eliminating one CA-sized target in a single volley; after which, it is useless.

So you took one lousy example, show that it's not all that effective, and say the game is good.

I took your example, which I cost out to 242 but that's not important for this discussion, and I changed the missile to have a 3+ ACC, launching 162 missiles for 242 cost.  108 missiles will hit, 54 will penetrate average shields, 27 do hull damage, and killing just about anything on the field.   With a speed of 6 several seekers could be shot down before reaching their target, but that is too subjective to judge and you avoided that issue as well.   By the way, very few book ships have a chance to shoot down the seekers at striking time since few book point defense weapons have Dfn.  Pnp by itself is nearly worthless as a point defense option. 

Just to show I've looked at it more than once.
Target: Commonwealth Republic-class Dreadnought. With 5 shields only 18 seekers get through doing 9 hull damage which is half of its hull..  Survivable, but it is wounded by a frigate less than half its cost.
With 69 Mdl seekers: 46 hit, 23 hull damage.  Dead dreadnought.

Target: Arcturian Thunderbolt-class Advanced Cruiser.  With 4 shields only 36 seekers get through doing 12 hull (18 but 1/3 negated by Ionized Hull.  It has 13 hull points.  It will not be in good shape, and all other systems will get hit 6 times out of the 7 boxes each has.
With 69 Mdl seekers: 46 hit, 15 hull damage.  Dead cruiser.

Target: Arcturian Cromwell-class: 18 seekers, 6 hull damage (Ionized).  Half of its hits.
With 69 Mdl seekers: 46 hit, 15 hull damage, another dead cruiser.

Target: Kalaedinese Heavy Cruiser, with AFB and Countermeasures this seemed interesting.  Seekers now have 5+ to hit, so 36 hit, 18 penetrate shields, doing 9 hull damage out of the 11 it has.  Each system takes 6 hits, which is all they have, so the ship is mission killed.
With 69 Mdl seekers: 23 hit,  11 hull hits (favoring the defender), no matter, dead cruiser.

Target: Korath Dreadnought.  Oh, a toughie, that one will put up a fight.  Too bad all those point defense don't have Dfn. Fire at its support ships, let the rest of the fleet deal with this one.  But here goes... tell ya what, I want to save this post I've spent a lot of time making this so I'll follow up with another post later. Besides, I want to redesign it with Dfn on its point defense system.


Broken? Maybe. But given a game or two, I'm sure any competent opponent can find a way of countering it.

I'm working hard at this, but so far I've only come up with an expensive solution.

Fun to play? Not really. And that, frankly, is the ultimate answer to any attempt to min-max the game; "Is it fun to play and/or play against?"

That's not how a lot of the real gaming world works.  Min-maxing is part of competitive play and miniatures gaming is very competitive.  This is not some mamby-pamby Euro-trash board game (said with tongue in cheek since my game store sells lots of those).

36

(51 replies, posted in Starmada)

Never mind my suggestion on limited shots.  That's already been discussed and I had forgotten.

This is the weapon I came up with to counter that Volcano, I put 2 on a ship:
Seeker Killer 1-2-* 5×2+/4/1 Crn; Dfn; Pnp; Prx
(1) 360 ° ☐☐

This weapon is expensive.  It could be made cheaper by reducing it's arc.
On average, 1 seeker out of 2 flights of 6 should survive to make it's attack.  With 10 flights the Volcano can launch, every turn, that still is 5 seekers attacking at 3+, so 3 hit doing 3 damage each.  Still going to hurt and there's probably a second wave coming in next turn.

Guess I should put 3 on the ship.

37

(51 replies, posted in Starmada)

You could limit the number of seeker flights launched, equivalent to the maximum of fighter flights launched (sqrt of ship hull, drop fractions).  It still can be a lot of seekers, but at least anti-seeker defenses might be able to handle it some.

I've seen your Arizona designs.  Here's one of my Klingon designs, but now obsolete if you're going with Mdl. (that's expensive).  I put the damage limits in front of the weapons/categories.  IMO, seems more intuitive than at the end.

(700) Klingon D10-class Attack Cruiser
Tech: Engines +2; Shields +1; Weapons +2

Shields: 4 4 3 2 2 1
Screens: 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Hull: 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Engines: 5 5 4 3 2 1
Weapons: 22 19 15 11 8 4

Disruptor 6-12-18 1×3+/2/2 Pr1
(1) GHIJ ☐| GHIK ☐
Phaser-1 6-12-18 1×3+/1/3
(3) GHIJK ☐☐| GHJ ☐☐| GIK ☐☐
Phaser-2 6-12-18 1×3+/1/2
(1) JKL ☐☐
Gatling Phaser 3-6-9 4×3+/1/1 Dfn; Pnp
(1) 360 ° ☐
Defense Array 1-2-* 2×3+/1/1 Crn; Dfn; Pnp
(3) 360 ° ☐☐☐☐☐

(3) EQUIPMENT
Hyperdrive ☐| Tractor Beam ☐☐☐☐☐

MUNITIONS
Marines : 4 3 2 1

Traits: Cargo (1); Science (2)

38

(51 replies, posted in Starmada)

Do seekers have their own targeting, or can they use the Fire Controls of their launching ship?

If they cannot, then Countermeasures is a way to lessen the effectiveness of seekers.

39

(51 replies, posted in Starmada)

But the game should be balanced at all TLs.

How about this for a defense against massive seeker barrage:

Wave Burst  (1-2-*)  3x3+/*/1 (Crn; Dfn; Pnp; Prx; Sct)

You fire it 2 hexes away.  You could fire it in the same hex of the seekers so you don't suffer the -1, if you don't mind taking damage as well.  Does Countermeasures work against your own weapons?

Does Scatter increase the IMP if an adjacent hex is one range band closer?  In this case, at range 2 (medium) IMP is 2, does IMP become 3 at the adjacent targets now at close range?

I suppose one cannot fire into your own hex?  So you would need pairs, one to fire in either direction, if seekers are coming in all direction.  If not, that's more to fire in one direction.

edit: hadn't looked at Scatter option until after first post.

I'm a big fan of Traveller (he says as he eyes the box and shelf full of Traveller books), and a big fan of the superhero version of the Hero System (i.e., Champions), having owned every version since v1.  I wouldn't mix the two when it comes to the characters, maybe use Traveller ships in Hero but that would be it.  I'd also use the Traveller ship combat system and not convert to Starmada.  I've written up the small Traveller ships as Starmada ships (I have the miniatures), they're smaller than you've gone with, but then they were just targets/distractions for the larger warships fighting each other (a battlestar with it's rag-tag fleet  big_smile ).

Are your RPG players interested in a detailed ship-to-ship fight?  How often will they want to man their battle stations and roll a few dice? 

IMO, sometimes it's better to live with a few warts of a game system than trying to fit together the "best" aspects of two different systems.

41

(127 replies, posted in Starmada)

Drydock values for ECM scores and Defensive Rating are off from my rulebook (v1.1).

Size 10 hull, no defenses:  DRAT: Drydock: 14.25, my math (spreadsheet and by hand): 16.7.
Seems like the 1.67 constant value would be 1.425 instead, works for any hull size.

ECM score:  my book / Drydock: 1 = 0.82 / 0.8, 2 = 1.65 / 1.62, 3 = 2.5 / 2.42, 4 = 3.37 / 3.31, 5 = 4.25 / 4.17

Have the numbers changed?  I haven't found any errata for them.

(edit):
Hyperdrive defense score: (my book) 0.43 / (Drydock) 0.44; Fire Control defense score: 0.82 / (Drydock) 0.86

I come up with different ORAT for Range 3 weapons.  Example: (Thrust 5) 1 weapon, BAS 1, arc FX: ORAT 8.88, Drydock: 8.63.
All the other ranges are fine.

Armor defense scores do not match the book, either.

Putting in more than 1 fighter trait causes erroneous values.

Ban tech mods.

43

(13 replies, posted in Starmada)

The first Mauler-equipped ship was Romulan.

44

(8 replies, posted in Starmada)

No no no.. not another DAC (SFB's Damage Allocation Chart).

Use the Admiralty edition damage system.  I prefer AE over NE except for the movement rules, and a few weapon traits could use the NE version (like Repeating).

Here is something I wrote up a few years ago, keeping it simple, and originally for the Admiralty edition.  It is loosely based on an old computer game: Empire from the PLATO system (both are described in Wikipedia).  Now I might use Space Empires 4X as a basis for a strategic campaign.


[size=150]Wild Empires[/size]

Rules for a space-based strategic campaign

By Glen Bailey


Introduction
This document contains rules for conducting a multi-player strategic-level space war with an emphasis on space fleet strength being the determining factor on many outcomes and eventually determining a winner.  The main purpose of this campaign is to provide spaceship to spaceship battles with an overall goal in mind.
The rules are written as generic as possible, but some rules have to relate to the tactical rules system being used, which with this writing is Starmada.
Some game systems may have other ship systems.  Treat armor boxes like hull boxes for repair.

Historical Background
The campaign takes place where several interstellar empires meet.  Years earlier, a previous war became a costly stalemate that led to a peace treaty creating buffer, or neutral, areas between the empires.  That peace treaty has expired and no one wants to renew, as the planets of the buffer areas have developed into prizes worth fighting for.

Each player is a representative, whether that would be an admiral of the fleet, a provincial governor, or a baron of business, of his respective space empire and winning this war could very possibly lead to his succession of becoming the new leader of that empire.

General Rules

Game concepts

Empire is the term used for each player's interstellar polity although it can be named anything else, such as a Confederation, a Republic, a Federation, a Union, a Domain, or a Hegemony.

A sector is one section of the map that contains a planet.  Spaceships move strategically from sector to sector.
An area represents starting areas for setting up the map.  An area can contain numerous contiguous sectors.

A planet represents the main location in a sector such that owning that planet allows the owner to have control over the entire sector, including any income and production capabilities of that sector.


The Map
The strategic map consists of areas that are either neutral or controlled by one of the empires at the beginning of the game. 

Generating a map
If creating your own map, equally spread out each empire's controlled areas around a large neutral area and separate the empires with narrow neutral areas starting from the large central neutral area and extending to the edge of the map.

Each empire's area shall have of one A-class planet, the player's home planet and base of operations, and two B-class planets.  The large central neutral area should contain one A-class planet per two players and one B-class planet per player. Each narrow neutral area should contain at least one planet, but may contain more.  These areas should be equal in planet worth for fairness. 

Add or subtract one or more planets to the central area if necessary so that the total number of planets on the map is an odd number.

Section the map such that each planet is in its own sector and that each sector should border at least two other sectors.

Insert empty sectors if desired.  These sectors may never be owned or controlled.

Costs/Income
All costs and income are in terms Starmada's CRAT (Combat Rating).
All ships must have a CRAT greater than zero.
Troops cost 1 per troop.

Starting Forces
All empire-controlled A-class planets start with 5000 troops and all empire-controlled B-class planets start with 2000 troops.  Neutral A-class planets start with 2500 troops and neutral B-class planets start with 1000 troops.  These values are also the maximum number of troops that can be on a planet.

Each player has 10000 points to use to buy their starting space fleet or additional troops.  These forces begin at the player's A-class planet.

Optional: Players get a free base at their home planet for its defense.  This base must have the same cost/combat value for each player.

Sequence of Play
One strategic game turn consists of:

    Movement and Combat Phase 1
    Move Step
    Plot FTL movement of spaceships.
    Move spaceships.
    Combat Step
    Spaceship combat
    Bombardment
    Troop combat
    Transfer Step
    A planet's ownership may be transferred to another player.
    Movement and Combat Phase 2
    Movement and Combat Phase 3
    Movement and Combat Phase 4
    Victory Check Phase
    Economics Phase
    Increase troops on all planets.
    A-class planets get 100 troops.
    B-class planets get 50 troops.
    Income Step
    Receive points from your empire.
    Get points for planets you control.
    Maintenance Step
    A non-troop unit may be scrapped for 25% of its cost.
    Repair damaged ships.
    Production Step
    Pay for new forces.
    Place new forces.

Economics
An A-class planet produces 100 per turn.  A B-class planet produces 50 per turn.

An A-class planet can repair any amount of damage, build 12 new fighters, and raise up to 200 troops.  A B-class planet can repair a total of 50 hull, build up to six new fighters, and raise 100 troops.

An empire's starting A-class planet can build any number of ships, fighters, and troops, as well as repair any number of hull.  If the empire has lost his starting A-class planet then one of the B-class starting planets can be designated as a new temporary base of operations and be treated as an A-class planet for new construction and repair until the original A-class planet is retaken.  If an empire has none of his starting planets then that empire must fight with what forces he has and what can be built from planets he does own.

During each Income Step all planets receive a free increase of troops.

Victory
When a player controls more than half of all the planets on the map during the Victory Check Phase he has won the game.

Repairs
A spaceship's systems are repaired after a combat.  Hull damage must be repaired at a controlled planet during the Economic Phase.  The cost is 1% of the ship's CRAT per hull box repaired (round any fraction up to the next whole number).

FTL movement
A spaceship with an operating FTL drive (Starmada: Hyperdrive) may move from one sector to an adjacent sector.

Simple logistics
One of the two sectors, either the starting sector or the destination sector, must be neutral or owned by the player controlling the spaceship.

If a spaceship retreats from a combat then it must move to a sector that the spaceship's player controls or is neutral at the beginning of this Movement and Combat Phase.  If this is not possible then either the ship fights to the death, is scuttled (destroyed), or is captured by the player controlling the sector it moved to, in which case treat all but one hull box as destroyed.

Spaceship combat
Spaceship combat may be conducted in any manner agreeable to all.  Terrain may be added.  As an option, pick certain planets or sectors at set up to have a particular terrain (i.e., one B-class planet is an asteroid field so all combat at that location must use asteroids in the playing area).  But one rule must be followed: all spaceships that are in the sector where combat will take place in a Movement and Combat Phase must be in play.

Bombardment
Spaceships and fighter squadrons may conduct bombardment on a planet containing enemy troops if no enemy spaceships exist in the sector.

Spaceships and fighter squadrons bombard a planet as if doing one round of combat at a range of 1; all weapons may be fired (no arc limitations).  Planetary defenses are: (Starmada: A-class planets have a shield level of 3 and B-class planets have a shield level of 1; both are treated as having Armor Plating).  Each damage point destroys one troop, but the last 100 troops on a planet cannot be killed by bombardment as they are too well dug in.
Option: taking neutral planets is easier due to their lower technology: every damage point destroys two troops.
Spaceships and fighter squadrons that bombard are attacked by the planet's defensive weapons.  For every 500 troops, or fraction of, on the planet (before combat starts), treat the planet as having one weapon (Starmada: Anti-fighter Battery; Full Thrust: PDS), which gets to fire at every spaceship and fighter squadron that bombards.
Option: taking neutral planets is easier due to their lower technology: reduce the number of defensive weapons by 1.

Game designer note: allowing the defensive weapons to fire on every bombarding unit is a simple approach and avoids having to decide where to target the defensive weapons and who gets to decide.  It also allows players to conduct their own bombardment and planet return fire to help speed play.  If individual targeting for planet defenses is desired, then for every 100 troops the planet gets a defensive weapon.

Troop capacity
One troop space holds one troop.

Troop combat and planet control
A planet can only have one player's troops, or neutral troops.  Whoever has troops on a planet owns the planet.  Use troops to invade a planet to take ownership of the planet and control of the sector. 
Troop combat is simple: losses are 2:1, the invader loses 2 troops while the defender loses 1 troop.  If the invader has troops remaining after the defender has none then the invader has won and taken ownership of the planet.

Option: taking neutral planets is easier due to their lower technology: losses are 1:1, the invader loses 1 troop to every troop the defender loses.

Option: (Starmada) Each Hospital space on a ship in the sector returns 0.1 troop lost to combat after the combat is over if the invaders win, up to 10% of the total losses (drop any fractions).  Defenders get 20% of their losses back if they win (drop any fractions).


Sample map for 4 players

Planet classification, A or B, is noted in parenthesis.
Where sector border lines intersect movement is allowed across the diagonal.  For examples, a spaceship can move from Bau to Harindair, or from Harindair to Felindus, or from Jaras to Dertninbu, or from Crigel to Whylsn.
Two planets, Jaras/Jynnes and Whylsn, are modified for providing terrain for tactical combat.  Treat each as one planet for strategic purposes.
Note that no two planets start with the same letter (excepting Jaras and Jynnes but they are in the same sector).  This can simplify movement orders by using the first letter of the planet/sector the spaceships are moving from or to (e.g., Avenger : G to N).

[img]<URL url="http://s856.photobucket.com/user/GamingGlen/media/empiremap_zps52924fa8.png.html">[IMG]http://i856.photobucket.com/albums/ab129/GamingGlen/empiremap_zps52924fa8.png[/img]</URL>[/img]</r>

Way too complex.  It will never get off the ground.  Start simple, add complexity later.

I would not tie FTL movement to thrust rating.  You could have an sovereignty-wide TL rating for hyperdrives (ships can move 2 - (upper limit) hexes/areas when in supply).

Supply: use the good ole Zone of Control, either a ship is in supply or not.  It is in supply if it can trace through any number of hexes free of enemy units or their uncontested ZOC back to a supply depot.  You could tie strategic movement to supply status: out of supply: can move 1 hex, in supply: move multiple hexes.
Other effects of being out of supply: when entering a tactical combat, mark 1 damage to each system (Thrust, Weapons, ECM, Shield), lose 1/3 of any munitions, increase chance of damage to equipment by one level (treat Reinforced as Normal, Normal as Fragile).

ZOC: every ship, with CRAT>0, exerts a ZOC into the hex it is in and, if equipped with a hyperdrive, any adjacent hex.

Planets: Too much detail.  I suppose if you have dirt lovers (Generals) among your players they might like ground combat detail.  Starmada is for space combat and that's why most of us play it.  Treat the planet as one space.  It has a rating for supply: supply depot or not; all ground forces are grouped with one value, and any invasion is one value.  Depending on scale, they could either all fight to the death on one turn, or it may take several turns doing x% damage to each other.

You did not cover orbital bombardment.

Too much detail on shipyards and repair. 

Games to look at:
Imperium, Fifth Frontier War (these two are Traveller related);
Twilight Imperium;
Space Empires 4X (a new board game, first published in 2011, I just got.)

I saw that, and was pleased.  Perhaps it's more to do with the the massive hulls and armor that Beowulf puts on his ships, using the Fragile system option to put on more of them.  I've built many ships of varrious sizes with various shield strengths, and none have held up compared to his designs.

Mostly though, it stems from his ships hardly getting thesholds for the automatic 2 box hits for systems.  Ablative armor, which we do not play with here (I think it's too cheap an option after trying it a few times) makes it more so.

But, perhaps I found a chink in his designs.  Our last battle, where I designed massive hull and armor ships with Fragile systems (on the same point value scale, i.e., 400-600 pt ships to his 500ish pt ships), but included Fire Control with the caveat that at short and medium ranges my ships will always use 1 thrust for evasive maneuvers which the FC counteracts.  Once his ships got thresholded then he had very little fire power, -2 (weapon damage) + -1 (evasive) for -3 shift, compared to mine.  This was one of the most balanced games we've played in a long while, but then I stopped fighting the urge to use shields and went Fragile+hull+armor.

IMO, Fragile systems might be a touch too cheap.  Perhaps making the Equipment chance for damage go from 1,2,3 to 1,2,3,4 might balance it more. Seems like the regular system checks is more severe than it is for Equipment damage checks when going from Normal to Fragile systems.

I give up and will join the rest on ship designs.  Seeing my shielded ships getting blown up and barely getting one threshold, maybe a second threshold on one ship because I concentrated the entire fleet's fire on it, on the enemy while on my way to a very one-sided battle loss has shown me the light.

Fragile hulls with lots of hull and armor is the way to go.  Shields are too expensive for their effect.

49

(31 replies, posted in Starmada)

underling wrote:
GamingGlen wrote:

I find the attack dice mechanic to be "unrealistic" and I dislike it, but.. not much I can do about it except not to play at all.

I realize everyone's opinion differs, but I'm curious as to what you don't like about the dice columns?

Kevin

It's turning a game into an abstraction.  Instead of rolling for each weapon with modifiers, let's pool all the weapons and modify that.  This also applies to damage. We no longer damage individual weapons, we damage them all at once.

The next version, Starmada Cosmic Edition, will probably just be a comparison of Offensive Combat Rating vs. Defensive Combat Rating, with a Movement Rating being used for a modifier for Initiative.  As long as the math is correct it should play the same, right?    tongue

50

(31 replies, posted in Starmada)

madpax wrote:

I don't play with simultaneous play. Not only does it seem, to me, not realistic, it does bring some problems non-simultaneous play resolves. For example, I don't have to remember what damages were suffered that turn of before.
Marc

"not realistic" .. muhahahahaha... for a made up game with made up rules, what is "realistic"?  big_smile

I find the attack dice mechanic to be "unrealistic" and I dislike it, but.. not much I can do about it except not to play at all.

Personally, I'd put in a launch subphase at the beginning of the attack phase then all direct fire weapons will have all the targets available to them.