The version that I had in the first test proof came out too low resolution for some reason, but I think that is because I exported it using the wrong Acrobat Distiller settings. That is part of the reason that I am waiting on the arrival of a second proof copy before I set the book up for POD availability; I want to make sure people get the best quality book possible, even if they have to wait awhile to get a hard copy ordered to go along with their electronic version.

-Tyrel

Would it be possible to apply the concept of the Fighter Defense Network (Defense Grid?) in the following way:

Any ship unit equipped with this system rolls 1 die per remaining Hull, hitting righters at a roll of 5+. This fire is omnidirectional and may be applied to one or more fighter flights located within 1 hex of the firing ship.

The quandary comes in when this benefit should be used. Perhaps the best way to use it, as far as the current discussion trend is going, would be to have ships equipped with FDN be considered "fighters" for purposes of Fighter Phase initiative. This doesn't allow them to fire first against incoming fighters, but it would allow for some degree of response during the fighter phase.

That all being said, I think AFB is still a very valuable system; there have been many circumstance in which having AFB would have been a life saver, and in Starmada X VBAM campaigns it is one technology that is routinely attempted just so that, given the need, the empire will be able to provide passive fighter defences for its ships.

-Tyrel

I have to preface this with the note that I have never played SFB, so I may be completely off-base, but I seem to recall from discussions with people trying to convert Lyrans from SFB to B5W that the ESG is meant to both damage enemy craft and provide some sort of defense to the target, right?

If that is in fact true, then would it be possible to combine the effects of the Shockwave and Point-Defense System to generate its effect? You can then adjust the effects of this based on range as follows:

ESG Range 0: Shockwave Range 0, PDS intercepts on 1, 3, & 5 (Normal).
ESG Range 1: Shockwave Range 1 (Normal), PDS intercepts on 1 & 3.
ESG Range 2: Shockwave Range 2, PDS intercepts on a 1.

Effectively, it becomes a toss up between using the ESG to improve your defense, or extending its range to damage targets within a larger range.

Again, this idea may be totally off-base -- but it would make use of two established rules concepts with a little adjustment to add additional tactical options.

-Tyrel

In converting over ships from Babylon 5 Wars to SX, I have had to make a few 20+ Hull ships. Of course the space isn't *used* in most cases, but to get the raw mass converted over it was necessary. Starbases, too, end up with a lot of hull -- which makes taking a starbase down a very difficult job.

There was also that Scarran Dreadnought that necessitated a larger ship

For the most part, I have set a personal cap at aout 40 Hull, simply because that is what the Excel sheet can hold without me going in and tinkering with it some more.

When I am just designing my own ships and not converting over from another source, I do tend to keep myself at about the 7-12 Hull range for most cruisers (light through heavy). But, then, that is usually because in my campaigns I am quite cursed when I roll on the prototype chart. Invariably the larger and more expensive the ship, the more likely it is to blow sky high when Ensign Red Shirt flips the power switch in engineering (*sobs*).

-Tyrel

VBAM's level of detail is set at a point where you aren't dealing with the minutiae that you might encounter in a campaign system like Imperial Starfire (which I think is one or two revisions after New Empires). You worry about more discrete Census, not large population numbers, and you don't have to worry about missile funds or tracking things at that level.

The demo isn't all that forthcoming about firm details; it does however give an overview of some of the different elements that you can expect to find in the book.

Oooh!  Oohh! “I played it many times, and hated each and every time. I hope that someone strings them up and leaves them out in the desert to die a horrible, painful death. Especially the guy that wrote the Companion... I hate that guy.”

At its most basic level, VBAM can be used as a simple campaign companion for Starmada. You can add on or strip off as much detail as you want. The game is all about optional rules and letting you tailor it to how you want to play. The first several games of VBAM I played, I stripped out the economics and Intel rules out and played with alternatives. Everything else worked. Then, as I warmed up to portions of the rules, I added them back on... and then wrote more. And more. And then put them in a big book of optional rules.

I am scary.

As previously answered, the KEB mechanics and other special items aren't special to VBAM itself, just the Boltian/Kuissian setting that was being presented. VBAM is setting neutral, so the effects of such things as KEB (or standard SX Defense) are abstracted into ship statistics, statistics that are only important if you are using the CSCR to resolve some combats strategically. Otherwise the only unit statistics that are strictly important (IIRC) are construction cost and maintenance cost. Everything else is pretty secondary.

-Tyrel

At least he reactions thus far have been generally good

I know that the length is a bit of a problem, but that is my problem all the way around. By the time the next Escalation Wars book is finished, I have a feeling it will be about 300 pages of *stuff*.

The major classes will get this extensive of a write up, but I don't see the minor classes getting much more than a page. It is kind of like in the old FASA Star Trek books, where some classes got four pages and some ships only took up half a page.

The style behind the current write ups comes from inspiration after spending some time the last week converting early WWII vintage ships over into Grand Fleets. Reading the ship entries on Wikipedia made me get in the mood for writing similar treatments for the existing ships, while expanding upon the backgrounds provided in Empire Rising. Some copying and pasting will still happen in cases where I said all there was to say previously, but putting designs in perspective is important, I think.

I managed to get one other class' text, the Ilustris Heavy Destroyer, written last night. About four pages for that one. Most of the other classes will be one pagers.

I also plan on having either art or silhouetted three-views for most of the ships when the book is 'done' -- if I can pull it off. Or it might just be silhouetted two views, if I get lazy. But that way everyone will at least know what the ships look like.

Jay: No separate KEB tech research; the limitation on tech levels should be the biggest problem for them. As noted, the Circasians are pretty low-tech, largely because they were only in space about 100 years by the time these ship classes appeared. After the war they get some better tech, but they still weren't all that advanced by the time of the Escalation Wars in the 2007-2023 period. They were better, but still not as high tech as the Ukal, Novon, or Kholran.

BTW...
Heavy Basing: A fighter bay equivalent that can base shuttles, breaching pods, and super-heavy fighters, but not normal fighters.

I am also toying with the rules that would be needed to make breaching pods work in SX in the form that I have in mind. I am thinking they will be fighters with a Breaching Pod class added them that will function as reusable Marines -- go to the target, "attack" and deposit troops, and then return to pick up some more. That allows me to apply other custom fighter types to them and make them interesting -- though potentially not worth the hassle, too.

-Tyrel

I still need to dig into the Iron Stars material, but given the banter back and forth I am starting to wonder if the campaign side of Iron Stars would be principally a setup where the Earth-based powers are fighting here and there in space, with random events and/or missions providing the major impetus for play.

Whether it is the untimely arrival of a new Martian invader, or an order from Her Majesty to escort her royal yacht to Venus and back... things that could earn the player Victory Points.

In other words, have the Iron Stars campaign not be centered around a military victory per se, but instead be more of a prestige victory.

-Tyrel

The last time this debate came up, the thing that popped into my mind in the space vs. TL debate with Marines and Security Teams was Farscape and their DRDs (including the Scarran anti-personnel models). So, in my mind, the Security Teams themselves go from armed individuals protecting the ship at the low-tech end, to automated anti-personnel weaponry at the high tech end. This is my way of explaining away the fact that they are affected by size.

As for Troops, I do agree that they shouldn't be miniaturized by tech, since your species isn't going to be getting any smaller (I hope).

-Tyrel

RE: Fighters as Small Starships

I would actually prefer if fighters were done as small ships, but that is just me. It would make the rules largely consistent between the two, and allow players to create more flavorful fighters. You could still have the fighters destroyed in a single shot, or optionally use the normal hit system, which would result in them dying half the time anyway.

In playing with the formulas on the spreadsheet, I have found that the Engine SU formula would have to be changed, as likely would some other options, but other than that it could work (maybe). I think as long as the "average" TL still had a fighter of Engine 10, Weapon AB arc 1/1/1 about where it is now, it should stay relatively balanced, but who knows?

I readily admit that fighters in SX are abstracted as they are for playability purposes. That's fine, but for some settings it would be nice to have the fighters be a bit beefier (Wing Commander is one great example).

Another option that might be easier to introduce would be to fractionalize some of the existing bonuses. Instead of just having Slow or Fast, you could apply the modifiers based on how slow or how fast the units are. That allows you to be a little more flexible in terms of setting a fighter's range. You could likewise add PEN and DMG modifiers alongside the current ROF advantage (Assault). Add a few opposing abilities as well (Light, where 3 fighters die for every 2 hits, vs. Heavy) and repackage the fighter rules, and you would have a more extensible fighter system that is still virtually the same but with a bit more meat to it.

Again, as always, I must add the caveat that my comments are coming from my VBAM / B5W background, and don't necessarily (if at all) apply to what the goal of the SX game design is.
-Tyrel

I feel like I am going around and killing everyone's best friend today... two frowny emoticons so far today!

I had forgotten all about that, Jimmy. Found it again now, and will put it in a safe place. One question, though; the range seems to be independent of size, or at least it breaks beyond a certain size. Any ideas why? I make the fighter bigger and the available "fuel" doesn't increase.

I am probably just using the sheet wrong, but it doesn't hurt to ask.

-Tyrel