Roger, wilco!
Marc
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 madpax
Roger, wilco!
Marc
Agreed with you totally. The only problem I see is when creating ships from another design. If, for example, a CV has 48 'real' fighters, and that is translated by 24 or 16 Nova fighters, I fear the CV's CR will be horrenduous...
No that I said that, I will design some carriers with modest fighter number ad see what I obtain.
Marc
madpax wrote:I do not understand. You gave the Acr trait twice?
As Acr means a hit on 4 also (and not giving a +1 to AD), how it is useful?He's basically saying Acr makes it 1 easier to hit, so that allows the fighters to hit on a 3+ (which there aren't currently any rules for).
Right, I was talking from a strict rules point of view.
Which is why he simply kept the fighters at the same cost, but made them roll more dice AND hit easier. It effectively gave them cost effective firepower.
That doesn't solve my problem. If I want to use the same hull for, for example, a DN and a CV, the DN will be far cheaper than the CV. If my budget allows me to deploy one DN, along other smaller ships, it will not allow to deploy a CV.
Your solution is a solution, making fighters much better for the same cost, my solution would have been to make them cheaper for the same efficiency. Unfortunately, my solution means a modification in the way to create ship. It's simple to do, but has profound effects on the ship design.
Marc
What we do with fighters is allow all of the fighters in a hex (up to six are allowed) to fire just as a ship would during the owning players time to fire a ship.
Those are the rules, no?
The player can hve the hex of fighters fire instead of firing a ship. This makes manuevering them important. This has worked well. It makes drones significant because once they attack, there is no opportunity to fire at them and weaken their number the way that fighters can be fired at with the next turn in mind.
I tried drones once and they didn't seem effective. Just having to fire small numbers of them each turn isn't very interesting. Maybe I overlook something.
Marc
We played another game of Starmada here in Jacksonville. We think we have fixed Fighters & drones by giving them the equalivant of these weapon traits: {Acr,Acr,Dfs}, for the same CR & SU Cost.
I do not understand. You gave the Acr trait twice?
As Acr means a hit on 4 also (and not giving a +1 to AD), how it is useful?
That is, they hit on 3+ and roll twice as many dice as they would in the rules.
Aside for the 3+, giving Dfs is curious as there s no short of long range fighters. Hence, Dfs doesn't apply to them.
I have designed a CR=450 CVL with 10 flights of strong fighters, and a CV with 20 strong fighters that has a CR=900. It will be fun to try them.
My problem with fighters is not that they are undereffective, but that they are very expensive AND unereffective.
If a DN costs about 500 points, why should a CV the same but replacing heavy weapons by fighters costs twice its CR?
The problem will be that,with me, expensive ships will never be deployed.
So unless the figher cost isn't drastically reduced, it will thanks but no thanks. Currently, hey are simulated by seekers. Too bad, I liked the fighters acting as fighters.
Marc
I do not intend to go over the Atlantic to play, but I'm curious. Do you know how many games you are playing for games that clearly decide which won?
Last game I played lasted 4 turns. Not a lot but we played during a bit less than 3 hours (with some discussion and rule explanation inside)
Marc
Vassal works fine. You can find the module in the files here: http://www.mj12games.com/forum/viewtopi … amp;t=4684
You are right. But having multiple arcs for the same weapon type can become tedious. First, you have to determine, for each arc, which enemy ship is in, then determine how many AD. Roll dice for each target, resolve, etc.
If you have one weapon = one arc, it's very quick. With one weapon = three or more arcs, well, you can easily see that it will taker more time. My personal opinion is that it doesn't add game pleasure, but it's purely personal.
Marc
At last would I say.
Today, my friend and I played a 1500 fleet action game, using my own Star Trek oriented designs. I created those designs in order to make them sturdy whilst not too much to avoid having too lengthy battles, and simple enough to use them quickly.
In addition, I changed the movement rules that looks like a bit SFO. Before rolling for initiative, each player places a new order chit to each ship. There are four orders. All stop (no move but up to 180° turns), Turn hard ( up to 120° and able to move up to half thrust), Come about (up to 60° and moving between half thrust and thrust) and Full speed (no turns, moving between thrust and twice thrust). You can change speed as you like one turn to another, except that All Stop cannot follow or be followed by Full Speed.
The game was between Hydran and Andromedans. The Hydran fleet was made of one DN, 2 CA, 1 gunboat (aka pseudofighter) tender with its 6 gunboats, and one frigate. Gunboats are very fast, very easy to kill, but have one long range weapon. All other ships have potent short range weapons (Dfs and Cts ar range 9) and fighters simulated by seekers.
The Andromedans had a DN, BC, CA and DD. The were thus outnumbered by more than 2 to 1.
Their characteristics are that they are tech +1, regenerating (to simulate power absorbers), and with very powerful, medium ranged, weapons. Those weapons use many traits but do not display many attack dice (see below).
The board was displaying too asteroid fields on the Andys side, and a small, blue planet in the middle.
During first turn, my biggest ships were moving straight ahead toward the Andys on the left side of the board, whilst the gunboat did the same on the right. The Andy ships were all on their right side of the board, closing.
During the second turn, the Andy are separating their smaller fleet (a mistake IMHO), the BC moving toward my ships, the remainder angling to move toward the gunboats, which opened fire first using their long range weaponry, damaging the DD.
The BC is close enough to trade shot with the hydran ships, damaging a CA but being damaged too. Regen kicks in and many damages are removed, but the DD is still in a bad shape, having lost a lot of thrust and weapons.
Hydran fighters are flushing out, and no less than 30 of them (with Cts) are targeting the BC).
Third turn, hydran ships are so close to the BC that they should kill it this turn. And they did it! One hydran CA is crippled and the fighters, being seekers, are voided. Gunboats are trying to avoid the main enemy fleet but lose one of them due to long range shooting, but they kill nonetheless the DD.
Last turn, the Andy fleet is in disarray but fight nonetheless. The last shooting sees one gunboat destroyed and another crippled, with a CA damaged. The Andy DN is crippled, a clear hydran victory.
Now, some comments from my friend who played a 'regular' (ie without any house rules as for orders above) game before but found that the movement rules were a bit too complicated hence my orders house rules.
1st comment: He liked those house rules, which added some tactical problems and are easier to handle than regular rules.
2nd comment: Shields, even 6+ ones, have a profound effect on weapons using Dx2/Dx3/Cts traits as it creates an all or nothing effect. Every hit negated by shield means a lot of damages avoided.
For example, a 14AD weapon will, in average, inflicts the same number of damage as a 1 AD Dx2 Cts weapon. I suppose all AD hit a 6+ shield. In average, the first weapon will see about 11 to 12 damages. The second one will inflicts usually 14 damages, but could inflict no more than 6 if one AD is blocked with a lucky shiield.
Hence the all or nothing effect.
The solution: Simply doubling, tripling or D6ing the hits before (and not after) blocking them by shields.
3rd comment: Alternating fire is a good thing, but the reactive player can lose a lot of firepower just because the active player killed or crippled a reactive ship first.
The solution: Resolve fire as 'simultaneous rounds', each round implying one ship (or more, depending of its fleet size. For example, if the active player shoots with one ship and the reactive shoots too with one ship, both ships fire simultaneously. We still have the active player choosing his shooting ship first, but the reactive ship can shoot even if its weapons are damaged or even if destroyed at the end of the shooting round.
Other than that, it was enjoyable although I wonder why my Andromedans had so little firepower for their CR in the end...
I will have to rework them.
Marc
Not necessarily. Positioning is not really important if your weapons arcs are all TT. But if at least one, powerful, weapon has a more restricted arc, then strategy positioning is more important than with multiple arcs and obviously weakened weapons.
Marc
In your example, it looks like you have 4 close-in defense cannons. Two are FF, one is SH and one is PH. Personnaly, I'm more on the 'one weapon type = one big battery with one fire arc'. More easier to handle during play.
Marc
Thanks. Knowing that means I will have to avoid placing fighters among mines which I did...
Marc
Oh, the Orion CA lacks the thrust, weapon, shield and ECM ratings.
Marc
I agree with daniel, I really wonder what kind of game could fit a SDN. With such a cost, the opposing fleet, if deploying cheaper ships (of the cruiser size, say 200 to 300 points) will be enormous. Ie, it could take a lot of time just to play it... but each time a SDN shoots means many enemy ships destroyed!
Other than that, I'm more on the easy designs, I prefer the 'one battery per weapon type' for example, but I understand your designs and why you did them that way.
Marc
No answer to my question? :cry:
Marc
Another question.
Ships are triggering mines. Do fighters act as ship in that regard?
Marc
There is then a fighter 'stat line' in the text. Is that per fighter or per fighter flight? I am assuming the latter.
You are right. A carrier (4) means 4 flights, ie 4 counters/units. That a flight represents 2 or 4 'real' fightershas no effect on the game.
Secondly, when fighter flights attack each other is the normal combat procedure followed i.e no special dog fighting rules?
AFAIK, no dogfight.
Marc
Thanks!
I didn't see that in the rules and wondered if they just disapeared that way. In my current vassal game, a cruiser, just before exploding, sowed 10 mines behind him over two hexes. And there is a damaged destroyer 4 hexes away from mthose mines, speeding at 9 but with its thrust rating now reduced to 5, and destined to make a rendez-vous with them.
Woh, that promised to be ugly...
Marc
Are mines removed when they attack?
Marc
I know they are not effective, but they can be very when worst comes to worst...
During a VASSAL gamme, 6 regular fighters fire on a lioght cruiser. Of 18 dice of fire, 8 are striking a 5+ shield. Only one goes through... Next impulse, another group of 6 fighter fire the same cruiser, but from the front and with directionnal defense, they have 12 dice. Only 3 hits... and worst, two are blocked by the 5+ shield. 30 dice and 2 damages where on average I would have 10 hits meaning at least 6 damage...
I know some pilots who are going to be shot down when they come back to the carrier...
Marc
Officially, faceted shields are translated as armor combined with directionnal defenses FF in Nova.
One point of facet being now one point of armor.
Marc
Well, those are not really command rules per se, but I didn't know what to say... :oops:
After one game with a friend (a newbie), who had some difficulties trying to use the movement rules (deciding which speed to use, using thrust, etc.), and seeing that it slowed the game, I decided to design the following, fairly inspired by SFO rules:
- Just before rolling the init, each playing places a face-down chit for each ship. Each chit is either All Stop, Hard Turn, Come About or Full Speed. You cannot place a chit if the speed if going from all stop to full speed or vice versa (at first, I thought to allow speed change only to the next, but it would have make the ship to cumbersome to maneuver). Hard turn and come about from the previous turn thus allow you to chose any speed.
- During the movement phase, using initiative as usual, a player activating a ship reveals its chit, removes the old one, and move his ship. Each speed has the following parameters:
- All stop: No move, up to 180° pivot
- Hard turn: May move up to 1/2 thrust, up to 120° pivot.
- Come About: Move between 1/2 thrust and thrust, up to 60° pivot
- Full speed: Move between thrust and twice thrust, no pivot.
If everything goes well, I should try that next week, in addition to ships designed by myself, designed especially to be as simple as possible to use, the goal being that I wanted to play big fleets during a (short) afternoon).
Marc
Surely that I missed something myself. I feel I didn't understand how the rules for targeting seekers worked...
Marc
Yes, the new forum is beautiful!
Now, I would like some cool starships moving across the screen...
Now, if an expansion rulebook is possible, maybe a new trait could be 'close escort' and, for a reduced cost, would work according the above proposals.
Marc
, or recreating the battles you see in films or on TV...
...where starships are firing at each other across a distance of mere hundred of meters
Marc
mj12games.com/forum → Posts by madpax
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.