Skip to forum content
mj12games.com/forum
Majestic Twelve Games Discussion Forum
You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Active topics Unanswered topics
Welcome to the new Majestic Twelve Games Forum!
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!
Search options (Page 3 of 3)
Is there a way to get armor that works like "Damage Resistance" without breaking the game engine?
Or is there no longer an option for "this is a 16" shell, that's a 5" shell. You hit a battleship with a 5" shell and the Bosun's Mate curses because he's got to command First Division to repaint the mess you made. You hit a battleship with a 16" shell and it's got a hole in it."
Ken_Burnside
Lieutenant
Posts: 132
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 5:04 pm
I'm actually doing this on my own as part of a general custom overhaul that is meant to greatly increase the amount of combined-arms tactics involved in the game. One of the things that's great about this new version is how easy it is to add modifiers.
My mod is not finalized yet as I want to apply it to the new systems construction rules, but this is a partial outline. Weapons have an armor pen rating, and ships have an armor rating. You column shift right a number of columns depending on how much you failed to pen by. For example, an armor pen 2 firing at an armor 5 will shift 3 columns to the right, and hit for squat. I also have a -1 armor modifier to the AP and AS hex facings, and a -2 armor modifier to the aft.
There's a fair amount more than the armor to what I'm doing. I'll probably post it up here when it's finished.
I'm not sure I follow. You mean like the SAE "Faceted Shields" rule?
Yep
Is there going to be an optional rule for hex-facing shields?
How do shields work? What does "shields 4+" mean?
Could you clear up what all the arcs are?
FF = Front Facing?
FP = Front Port?
FS = Front Starboard?
What is AP?
Ah. That should have been obvious in hind-sight. 
Close Defense Cannons [FF3][FP4][FS4][AP6] 2-4-6 14-10-7-5-3-2-2-1-1-1-0-0
Why does this have 2 groups of numbers?
So why would you take that? Just for fluff?
How about:
Starmada: That's No Moon!
Or perhaps:
Starmada: The Stars Burn
Starmada: Burning Stars
Starmada: Z (The only cool letter besides X)
What is Carronade? It doesn't seem to be in the TAE book.
I think that you have it "back to front".
The arc numbers depend upon the total number of weapons in a battery and how many of the weapons fire into the arc.
"Low" numbers can mean that most or the weapons are covering that arc or that there are not many weapons opverall in that battery.
All will become clear when the rules are released and you have played with them.
I thought it odd at first but have come to like the system.
Paul
Curse you beta testers. I am impatient!
I notice that on the weapon readouts the strongest arcs are the ones with the lowest numbers.
It seems like it'd be nice if the arc #s were counted from the right, so the higher numbers were the stronger weapons?
I don't know if this would actually work, but high = bad seems somewhat counter-intuitive.
Have you actually played any games using the new movement system?
If not, I'd urge you to actually try using it before offering any "fixes."
There's nothing broken about it.
I'm pretty sure he expects comments, criticism and concerns about these new changes, as there are many in all of these threads. Obviously 90% of the people commenting haven't played with them, as they are not out yet.
All I can do is compare the rules as described to the many movement rules I've used in the past and point out things that seem problematic to me.
There isn't anything "broken" about the movement system as proposed, but all vector movement rules lie somewhere on the spectrum between ease of play and realism. I happen to not like where on the line being completely unable to turn at even relatively low speeds lands on that line.
Just as an example, in a recent game of full thrust I played I had thrust 4 ships going at 14 velocity. In these rules as I understand them (from what's written in OP) I'd have to spend 3 entire turns decelerating before I could deviate from a straight line a single hex.
Hmm I see the problem.
How's about this for an alternative: ship would move forward equal to its velocity, and then could use its thrust to move itself anywhere within its thrust rating of that end point. This wouldn't have to change its facing if you're set on ships facing their direction of travel. The current velocity would be equal to the distance from the final end point to the start point, and the facing could snap to the nearest hex facing along the vector between origin and end point.
This would let us perform those wide sweeping turns at high velocity and sounds almost as simple?
This doesn't sound like vector movement at all. Why must a ship exceeding its thrust only go in a straight line? It would turn widely if it was going so fast relative to its thrust, but it certainly would not be limited to a straight line.
I don't think I like the idea of a ship having to spend an entire turn doing nothing but decelerate before it can make even a minor course adjustment.
BTW, what do you prefer, play with existing universes created by you or other people, or create your own fleet versus a fleet created by you opponent?
Either is good. Right now I'm planning to stat out the nsl ships from gzg.
We've also started experimenting with the Escort ability, and having smaller ships with Escort may prove to be fairly effective at screening the bigger ships until they're within range. Kevin
Tell me more.
I've been reading through the rulebook, but have not yet played a game.
From what I've read so far, I don't see any real reason to take advantage of the kind of fleet diversity that I find so appealing in the (for example) GZG fleets.
Is there some compelling gameplay reason I'm not seeing for taking ships from the lowly corvette all the way up to a superdreadnaught?
I would like to hear your anecdotes or experiences.
What company makes that star mat? Would you recommend it?
I'm curious what aspects of weapon design will create a weapon with distinct tactical uses.
For example, the range of a weapon will change how the ship it is mounted on plays.
On the other hand hitting twice for 1 damage is the same as hitting once for 2 damage.
Will there be weapons that excel vs targets with broken shields, or against armor, or at destroying systems, or blowing up fighters, or blowing up battleships, etc? How much of weapon design is fluff, and how much is meaningful?
Posts found: 51 to 69 of 69