26

(57 replies, posted in Starmada)

thedugan wrote:

Dang it, is this off-topic now?


No.... wargaming forum threads never go off topic.  They just meander a bit.


And to meander a bit further.  I was thinking that it would be nice to have a graphic representation of the weapons on the ship sheet like Full Thrust and SFB.  Had an idea of how to do it and then took a look at the sample ship Victory.  It's got 21 weapons in total.  So that idea got deep sixed.  Besides.. it's just not necessary.

27

(57 replies, posted in Starmada)

Ok... some quick first impressions from a quick digestion of the new rules.

I really like the modular design concept of the rules.  I think that may be the big thing that may very well push Starmada front and center among starship gamers.  I can easily imagine that by this time next year being awash in settings ('skins' perhaps?) for these rules.  Not only all of the usual suspects of big and small screen, but also all of those ideas we've all had perculating.  I may drag out a couple of ideas myself. 

The movement rules were a needed upgrade.  The one thing I like about these vector rules is that the unknown I need to figure out is if my vessel has the necessary thrust.  Most other systems you apply thrust and the unknown is where your ship is going to end up.  Sort of a step learning curve that turns the best trained crews and the most advanced ships in several universes into a Drivers Ed course amongst the stars.  I'm looking forward to giving these rules a shakedown.

I'm glad to see the Expanded Firing Arcs.  I never could quiet get the hang of the usual firing arcs and kept having to refer to the rulebook.  I do wish that ship sheets had the firing arcs on them along with the now retired diagram for screens.  And a memo box for movement costs in the new system would have been good as well. 

And unfortunately there doesn't look to be a way to damage specials or options.  Granted Starmada X wasn't very satisfying in how it handled it and I'm not sure what a good answer would be to that problem.  Maybe something like Full Thrust with crit checks at certain points in the Hull damage track.

Still... minor quibbles.  I'm very jazzed about SAE.  Hopefully soon I'll be able to steal some time and give it a spin while it's still got that new game smell.

28

(92 replies, posted in Starmada)

I had problems ordering with rpgnow using the one click buy, but everything went fine when I added it to my cart and paid with paypal.

29

(92 replies, posted in Starmada)

Welll.... I definitely like the toolkit approach.  And so far I like what I see...but it's going to take a while to digest.

30

(92 replies, posted in Starmada)

Hmmm.... well hopefully a little later tonight it'll be out.  Either that or maybe this is one of those pavlovian experiments to see how many of us will continually hit the refresh button on the main site and forums.  I'm dying to see these new vector rules.  Got me an idea for a setting possibly.

31

(29 replies, posted in Game Design)

So a sub would move based on it's speed and the current pulse.  Say 10 pulses and speed 5 would move every other pulse.  But it would only be able to do an action based on it's command rating?  Is that where you're going googleplex? 

I never would have thought of that command rating idea.  It's brilliant.

32

(29 replies, posted in Game Design)

RiflemanIII wrote:
go0gleplex wrote:

Actually one thing I saw over at the SCN forum I found rather intriguing was to have units pre-plot movement at the beginning of the turn and forego initiative.  I could see something like that working well with your game proposal. big_smile

That's more or less what's already done in Starmada X, so it's a tried-and-true thing.

Also, as for the scene imagined in the opening post, I do believe there was a scene like that in Blue Submarine No. 6.

I'm wondering if pulsed movement wouldn't be better.  Would allow defensive fire during the movement against torps and recycle rates for the tubes.

I'm going to have to look into this Blue Submarine.  To Netflix I go...

33

(29 replies, posted in Game Design)

Ok.... here's how I imagine the detection side of things being handled in a non blind game.

Every sub has a Noise Rating with a basic value assigned to each hull.  It gets modified every turn by the speed at which the sub is moving, weaponry fired, etc.  Each sub then has sensor dice that they allocate to attempt to detect bogeys.  Every hit increases the firing solution versus that target.  That would mean having to keep track over time of the firing solution versus the targets tracked.  A sensor turn with no hits on the target would drop the solution down a level. 

And unless someone has a good real world or PSB reason for subs to be able to communicate with each other their firing solutions then each sub would be attempting to track targets independently. 

Torps would be the main weapons with each one stated out with Warhead, Speed, Endurance, Sensor and their own Noise Rating.  When a torp is launched it travels to a designated area and then goes active.  It starts rolling it's own sensor rating to acquire the target modified by the firing solution of the launching sub when launched.  (Unless it's wire guided.)  If it acquires a target it will close to hit unless it's shot down, spoofed or runs out of Endurance. 

Sorry if any of these seems meandering or not quiet well thought out.  I'm still thinking out loud at this phase.

34

(29 replies, posted in Game Design)

cricket wrote:

RE: Detection...

A halfway point would be to not have movement double-blind, but require detection in order to attack a target...

I think that's where I'm falling toward right now.  Sensor rolls to generate a good enough firing solution over time.  Although you can fire with a lower solution and take a modifier on the to hit.

35

(29 replies, posted in Game Design)

RiflemanIII wrote:

The first thing that came to mind other than "Sounds awesome", was that there should be rules for both double-blind (As you described) and standard play, as it can be difficult for me to get more than one person over. Plus, the non-blind version would work for quicker play.

EDIT: Something that actually came up on SCN. YOu should be careful with a detection-based system, because there's always the possibility of "Well, looks like I can't play this time."

I have to admit that I keep having second thoughts about going double blind.  I wanted part of the atmosphere to be like playing the old Red Storm Rising game by Microprose.  To be in a situation of, " I know he's got to be about there.  So I'll fire off a torp near there and let it go active and flush him."  But thinking it through I'm having to make some assumptions I'm not wild about.  No range mods for sensors for one.  And the playing area's going to be pretty sparse starting out.  And plotting for hidden units can be a real hastle.

The main issue I think is that instead of just the platform being responsible for all of the sensor work, the torps themselves should have a sensor rating to determine their actual chance to hit.  I'll try to post on outline version in a bit how I imagine sensor and combat working.

RiflemanIII wrote:

Secondly, a mechanic that comes to mind is the "Pressure threshold.": if the hull of a sub is weakened enough by weapons fire, the water pressure could cause damage to the sub as well. Of course, this largely depends on the depth that's applied to a particular battle.



"Pressure Threshold"  I'm liking that idea.  If we built it into the construction rules for subs to be rated at various depths and as they take damage that rating drops.  Maybe linked to Hull Points or maybe via criticals.

36

(29 replies, posted in Game Design)

Faustus21 wrote:

Sounds very intresting, looking forward to see what you got.

As long as I can make my bio-engineneerd Whales, with sonic cannons. I will play it.

:roll: What?

Also have you seen this?
http://www.deepangel.com/html/news___press.html

Might be able to stir up some ideas.


I've seen the Deep Angel stuff before.  Very cool and makes me want to add some sort of fighter (normally I don't care for fighters in ship to ship games, they never seem to balance out right.) 

Funny thing... I've wondered about adding biologicals in some way.  After all I is it too much to ask for sharks with some frickin' lasers on their foreheads?

37

(29 replies, posted in Game Design)

I'd definitely want unit design (as well as torp design).  Was just giving the sort of daydream image that started me down this road.

38

(29 replies, posted in Game Design)

I've had this idea kicking around for a few months of sort of a sci-fi underwater sub combat game.  Right now just thought and a few scribbled notes are all I've got to show for it..  The basic "image" I had for the game came when imagining a domed city on the ocean floor with a smaller force and outlying towers of weapons and sensors fighting off a larger attacking force.  It would be a blind game as the subs are plotted and not placed until sensor contact.  (Admittedly it's going to take a moderator or a trusting group.)  Weapons would be mostly torps and short ranged guns (with hypercavitational ammo).  If there's any interest I could post some of my meandering thoughts and notes.  If nothing else the hardest part may be done... I like "Turbulent Oceans" as a title.

39

(41 replies, posted in Iron Stars)

This might be worthwhile for atmosphere (I haven't had a chance to read it yet).  Apparantly the Hearst newspaper group decided to cash in on the success of War of the Worlds with their own serial.  It was called "Edison's Conquest of Mars" by Garrett P. Serviss and can be found here (http://durendal.org:8080/ecom/index.html).  It's a scan of the original newspaper and so hard to read.  Also CG Publishing is coming out with an edition soon (http://www.cgpublishing.com/Books/Edison.html).  Noted as the first story to have space suits and describe a battle in space.

Also there is another American serialization by the Boston Post and entitled "Fighters from Mars - or The Terrible War of the Worlds as it Was Waged in or Near Boston in the Year 1900".  Haven't found anything on that one other than a mention that it exists.

40

(41 replies, posted in Iron Stars)

cricket wrote:
aresian wrote:

Only suggestion I would make is for there to be different 'fingers'  in at least the political and military 'arms'.   Why would the Martians (or Natas) put all of their eggs in one basket?  Seems like any large organization is going to draw unwanted attention and get smashed.  Smaller ones might get lost in 'background noise'.

Seems reasonable to me... but in true evil empire fashion, there has to be someone (or someTHING) at the heart of it all... bwahahahahaha.... smile


But of course...that's where the 'criminal' arm comes in.



And thinking on why the Marsies have been sort of tardy in attacking the Earth.  Perhaps they never discovered Cavorite on their own.  But if they now have Earthling allies.... 

So they've spent the ensuing years building their new aether fleet.

41

(41 replies, posted in Iron Stars)

Only suggestion I would make is for there to be different 'fingers'  in at least the political and military 'arms'.   Why would the Martians (or Natas) put all of their eggs in one basket?  Seems like any large organization is going to draw unwanted attention and get smashed.  Smaller ones might get lost in 'background noise'.

42

(41 replies, posted in Iron Stars)

In alot of ways you're right about the Nazis and Nihilists.  It follows if one cannot ever know the difference of right and wrong then there is no action that is wrong.  There are alot of flavors of nihilism and anarchism out there.  Suffice it to say there would be any number of groups that would be willing to call the Martians in to help with a human suicide.  And there would probably be no consensus on what to do (or try to do) to the Martians before, during and afterwards.  No cool uniforms, which is sad.  But I do find them fascinating in an headachey sort of way.

43

(41 replies, posted in Iron Stars)

So the Martians were operating under Plan 'M'?

As for collaborators with Martians I would nominate a group of Nihlists.  Take the following quotes:

"Nihilism is . . . not only the belief that everything deserves to perish; but one actually puts one's shoulder to the plough; one destroys" (Will to Power - Nietzsche)

"Let us put our trust in the eternal spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unsearchable and eternally creative source of all life--the passion for destruction is also a creative passion!" (Reaction in Germany - Mikhael Bakunin)


And wouldn't the Martians be the perfect tool to destroy Earth civlization.  Basic ideology would be destroy the human race so that another dominant lifeform could evolve.  Perhaps that lifeform would be an Ubermensch that would be worthy of living.  I can just imagine the arguments this group would have with themselves.  Makes goths look like Pollyanna.

44

(41 replies, posted in Iron Stars)

I'll need to dig up some resources on the anarchists.  But if I recall...they probably would have allied with the Martians simply because they were a useful ally to overthrow the existing scheme of things.

BTW..did some digging on The Tripods on IMDB.  Apparantly the aliens were never mentioned as being (or not being Martian) and there's a movie version due out in 2007.

45

(41 replies, posted in Iron Stars)

Personally I would arge for a smaller invasion.  The Martians were thinking of hitting the main industrialized centers and going from there.  When they got wiped out they had to regroup and come up with another plan. 

I figure the humans haven't been too concerned with the Martians because:

1.  Overconfidence from having delt with the first invastion.  (Even if it wasn't direct human involvement.  Afterall, wee little microbes beat 'em.)
2.  From the discription of Martian ships they don't have Cavorite.  Also Earthers may believe they have a defacto early warning system from the lights seen on Mars from their ships launching.
3.  The fact that it's been years since the Martian invasion would probably led Earth experts to conclude that the Martians put everything into the first attempt. 
4.  Problems with other Earth nations just took precidence. 

My one real big unsolved answer is the Moon.  Best guess is that what to do with it is tied up in an international conference with the decision that nobody goes until it's decided how to determine who owns it or how to recognize bases and colonies.  (Also figuring from "First Men in the Moon" that the Brits know about the Selenites and are secretly negotiating with them.)

To make a longish post short.  I don't think there's any real problem with the history so far, but it might be good to mention why there's been nothing heard about or from the Non Terrestrials.

46

(14 replies, posted in Iron Stars)

I added some unofficial Soviet ships in the IS shipyard.  The only thing I've heard in terms of what's going to happen to them canon wise...

this is a quote from Dan the Man on that thread:
"You should know that the Soviets will be among the first to have some Martian tech... "

47

(28 replies, posted in Iron Stars)

Personally I think it's brilliant.  Only problem I see is that I didn't think of it first.

48

(47 replies, posted in Iron Stars)

That's exactly what I was hoping to hear about the Goalkeeper.  And using them as an umbrella for the ships they're escorting is how I've used them so far.  Definitely a niche supplement to the standard Gamma and not a replacement.  As that great tactician Hannibal Smith would say, "I love it when a plan comes together."  big_smile

49

(47 replies, posted in Iron Stars)

themattcurtis wrote:

Turks are going up for a playtest session this weekend against the IS rulebook Russians (my figuring is a clash between the Russian Imperial Fleet and the Turks).  We'll see how they do.

I also have a couple of friends wanting to play a TMW scenario, and I think I'll bring the Goalkeeper stats along to replace the Gammas used in the default version smile

Matt

You've got to let me know how that goes.  Tres cool.  You've made my night.   big_smile

50

(47 replies, posted in Iron Stars)

themattcurtis

Now that you mention it... I have to agree about ship sizes now.  And I for one like the Turks ships and fluff.

And when thedugan mentioned Argentina earlier it got me thinking. 

Say there was a rumor of hydrosteel deposits in a certain region near the River Paraguay.  Tensions mount with both Paraguay and Bolivia claiming the land.  Both sides want not only the hydrosteel, but control of the river means access to the Atlantic.  (Especially important to Bolivia as it lost it's Pacific coast in the War of the Pacific against Chile.)  The war could be expanded by Paraguay offering a trade deal to Chile for help and Bolivia calling upon it's ally during the War of the Pacific, Peru.  So in essence you get a Chaco War 20 years earlier and enlarged.  I'd have to do a some more research, but shouldn't be too hard to get the old Triple Alliance nations of Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay and the northern trio of Equador, Columbia and Venezuela involved for a general South American war.  Just thinking out loud for the moment.