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 71 of 146)
Topics by mj12games User defined search
Posts found: 1,751 to 1,775 of 3,626
murtalianconfederacy wrote:A hull 20 ship being designed is given the Cloaking Device piece of equipment. Normally, this would be 492 units (4913*10%). However, it has a +1 in technology, so would it then be:
349 (rounded afterwards) or:
350 (rounded twice, once before, once after)?
The first one -- tech modifiers are applied prior to rounding.
Dave wrote:Turn 1 Speed: 5
Turn 2 Order: 2P4S
Turn 2 Speed: 6
thrust requirement is 6-5+4 = 5
This is correct.
ussskip wrote:My concern is that this signals an end to Iron Stars. It looks to this outsider as if the company is being forced to streamline into one game system. I will support whatever Majestic Twelve does.
I can't tell you what the future holds for Iron Stars (since I don't know myself at the moment), but I can tell you that the Starmada supplement is not intended as a replacement for the game system.
thedugan wrote:So.... You gonna post some pix?
Here's some from another site:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Td-wwsze5GI/SB4c268M0wI/AAAAAAAAAKk/y7DlSOo8MC8/s1600-h/ig-prowler.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Td-wwsze5GI/SB4ctq8M0vI/AAAAAAAAAKc/gqh6InXTBpM/s1600-h/ig-harrier.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Td-wwsze5GI/SB4cMq8M0uI/AAAAAAAAAKU/ljaFsbdr82Q/s1600-h/ig-gunship.jpg
After going back through my big (BIG) box of unpainted minis, I've discovered a couple things:
1) I have a LOT of the Industrial Gothic figures. So many, that it's unlikely I need to acquire more.
2) The Ronin: war minis, while nifty such as they are, are REALLY small compared to other lines in a comparable scale. The tanks might work as miniature "robot" tanks, but the real disappointment is the "knights" (smaller mecha). They actually don't come with weapons! I'd forgotten about the whole "customizable" thing; you have to buy the weapons separately, which are then attached to the mini using magnets. (Might be a big reason the game never caught on...)
So, in other words... never mind.
kehrer1701 wrote:If the first hit always gets taken by the shield...then no matter how big the hit, the shields will take it?
Seriously, tho...
My understanding of the suggestion is that the first point of damage is used to reduce the facing shield; not that the first "hit" is absorbed by the shields. Thus, a trait like "Piercing +3" would still suffice to simulate Borg weaponry.
kehrer1701 wrote:Well, and to add one more thought....if the first hit is always taken by the shield..how does that fit with a Borg Cube firing at a constitution class cruiser?
Well, since the Borg are not part of the Star Fleet Universe, there's no problem, right? 
thedugan wrote:If you do find something, could you post a pic? I've heard about them, but that's about it.
I actually have some --- I'll post pics when I get home.
I just want MORE.
GamingGlen wrote:I think this might be too much damage to the facing shield, though.
That seemed to be the case this weekend -- the facing shields were knocked down rather quickly. On the other hand, it didn't matter much; since shield damage doesn't take effect until the end of the turn, it was relatively easy for players to rotate their ships to move the reduced shield out of arc...
I was also thinking of a 1/3 ratio, although in my case I was going to change the die roll: 1-2 = the facing shield takes the hit; 3-6 = player's choice.
falstaffe wrote:The most important thing I can tell you about the playtest is...there's a lot of cat hair in deep space, judging by Cricket's battlemat. (Actually, it was a lovely mat, although the galaxy airbrushed in the middle kept making me think there was light shining on it from an overhead skylight, but there wasn't.)
I have to remember that my next cat has to have BLACK hair.
Klingon Armada was a lot of fun. It was a four-hour convention slot, and we played 4 Klingons vs. 3 Feds, with a mix of ships on either side, taking about 2 hours per game (we switched sides, reset and played again.) The first time, the Klingons tried to flank the feds, and wound up getting cut to pieces. The second time, they tried a head-on approach and came closer to victory, but were ultimately defeated.
Not that I really thought there would be a problem with game balance, but I was pleased with it just the same.
(If Dan posts pictures, I'm in the one where the Federation ships are "mating.")
You mean this one?
[attachment=0]imagejpeg_0.jpg[/attachment]
if destroyed Shields sometimes have to come off the side facing the attack, why not weapons? Would seem to make logical sense.)
In general, faceted shields DON'T have to come off the side facing the attack; but Klingon Armada is making this particular nod to SFB.
Drones. They really didn't bother me all that much. I'm not a Fed Commander/SFB player, and have advocated for a style that leans more towards the movies/tv show...but y'know, the drones weren't all that distracting. When I play, I'll probably leave the drones alone. (Hey, wasn't that a movie?)
They worked much better once we slowed their speed from 12 to 8.
Overall, the ships, weapons and shields "felt" right for both sides, capturing the flavor of a Contitution, D-7, etc., so good job, Dan! I'll definitely buy it when it comes out, tho' I'll probably cook up some house rules for heroic characters, (Scotty, I need warp power in seven minutes, or we're all dead!)
Glad to hear you enjoyed it -- and make sure you post your heroic characters!
If anyone knows of a source for "Ronin: War" and/or "Industrial Gothic" minis (both dating from the early 2000s and now apparently VERY difficult to find), please let me know.
kehrer1701 wrote:are you ready for other groups to do some playtesting yet?
Let me get some notes together from the weekend...
GamingGlen wrote:One thing I thought about trying is with the shielding Dan has shown us on these SSDs, but using the normal Starmada rules, is that when a ship takes damage from one source (i.e., one ship, one fighter squadron) then the shield facing that source must take at least one hit if any damage rolls results in a shield hit. The rest of the shield hits can be assigned by the defending ship's player; although I'm tempted to have those other shield hits rolled randomly to determine which ones take damage.
For the playtests this weekend we did the following: roll a die for each shield point lost. On a 4-6, the player gets to pick which facet is reduced; on a 1-3, it has to come from the one facing the attack.
It worked pretty well... (Details to come soon.)
Inari7 wrote:Hey Cricket, I would suggest going over to the FC forums and read about he tactics used in Fed Com. Then I would suggest playing a few games to get the feel of how it plays.
The game is all about maneuver and power. That is pretty hard to simulate in Starmada (power)
Exactly ... which is why this won't (cannot) be a straight SFB/FC "port" into Starmada.
Blacklancer99 wrote:Although for just 1 split second when I logged on I was excited that there were so many new posts!
Yeah... me too.
Klingon Armada is meant as a supplement to Starmada, requiring the Core Rulebook to play. The hope is that this will grow into a series of products, parallel to, but distinct from the other Starmada supplements -- i.e. you will only ever need the Core Rulebook from MJ12 to use the supplements from ADB.
Google Analytics tells me that the Jamaican visitors to our web site spend, on average, more time per visit than any other country -- 16 minutes!
(Okay, so that's based on ONE person from Jamaica who looked at TWO pages, but still... )
Honorable mention to the Greeks, who manage to find enough interesting things in our site to spend 6 minutes per visit.
Akalabeth wrote:Different factions use different ship class names for what are basically comparable craft. So yes a Klingon Battlecruiser is roughly comparable to a Federation Heavy Cruiser. FASA's old Star Trek Tactical Combat Simulator was supposidely even worse, and one Fed CA was a match for not one but THREE Klingon BCs.
Constitution-class cruiser = D 64.6 / WDF 12.4 = CE 801.4
D-7 class cruiser = D 54.6 / WDF 20.4 each = CE 1113.84
The D-7 actually outclasses the Constitution...
Gosh, but I LOVED the FASA game. 
Spence wrote:that is why you always saw D-7's in groups of 3.
I thought D7s came in threes because that's how you saw them in the TV show.
(At least, in "The Enterprise Incident" -- but those were D-7Rs, anyway...)
Spence wrote:The biggest thing I see that feels off is the ranges. Effective phaser range always exceeded photon and disruptor range.
Again, I only played SFB once or twice in college, so I can't speak from experience. But in FC, weapons all fire out to 25 hexes, except for Phaser-3s and overloaded heavy weapons.
alchemist wrote:Quick question / comment on the Fed CA photons... The data card shows that overloaded photons are slow loading but normal photons arent. A big part of Klingon / Fed duals in SFB / FC is that the photons are all 2 turn arming weapons (thus slow loading) versus the single turn lower damage per turn weapons on the klingon ships.
It's like that because I needed a drawback to the overload setting, since there is no power allocation in Starmada.
If the standard photon is slow-firing, then what is the negative to overloaded photons?
Soulmage wrote:Is this just because Fed tech is supposed to be so inherently better than Klingon tech. . . or just a fast and loose application of terms like Heavy cruiser vs. Battlecruiser. . .or just some legacy from Star Trek lore. . . just wondering how this situation came to be.
(b) and (c).
This is fun.
EDIT: I know, the Photons should be 1/1/3 (1/1/5 for overload), not 1/3/1 (1/5/1).
The point cost is correct, however.
Updated card to reflect various suggestions...
kehrer1701 wrote:shields: are you using the faceted rules out of IS or a variation of? Can you post?
For the playtest, we're just using the faceted rules from Starmada: Iron Stars, with a couple tweaks to try and capture the importance of maneuver in SFB/FC.
I know a lot of people have been hoping for some type of ablative shielding -- but I just don't see how it can work without radically changing the game.
Essentially, every option for the game should be "plug-n-play", in that it can be put into the game (or left out) without affecting any other rules. However, ablative shielding would change all sorts of things:
1) Combat would have to become sequential.
2) A large number of weapon traits would have to be radically altered (or forbidden).
3) The damage roll would be changed.
And so on.
Posts found: 1,751 to 1,775 of 3,626