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 Blacklancer99
Not automatically, no. But buying a hardcopy gets you the PDF for half price.
Cool. Thanks!
Everytime I think I'm out they pull me right back in!
Does the purchase of the hardcopy with counters etc also give access to a digital copy? I don't see that listed (admit I didn't do an exhaustive search)
Thanks!
Blacklancer99 wrote:I guess I would like to know what the precut counters would be made of. If they're just perforated cardstock (I think some of the B5Wars game supplements came with these) I wouldn't be as excited about them as if they were die cut out of some nice thick material like the games of yore
I'm having flashbacks to sorting Avalon Hill Blitzkrieg pieces.
So the precut counters would be laser-cut, thick chipboard. Very nice-- but utterly impractical for me to bulk order and warehouse. Thus the thought that I could provide DIY counters with the product and allow players to purchase the proper counters as an add-on at cost.
Ok, I like that option. DIY counters as part of the product and "hi-quality" counters available for purchase definitely seems like an everybody wins kind of thing. Thanks!
Something that I would like to see back in a Starmada game is a “Spinal Super Weapon”. It's a common trope and I feel like there is a place for a system that is NOT designed as part of the weapon system in Starmada, but is something that a ship is quite literally built around. It feels like a very high proportion of "Hero Ships" and quite often the Big Bad's command ship mount one. This would be like a wave motion gun, reflex cannon, meteor gun, planet cracker level item.
Here is what I was thinking-
The scale of the weapon is dependent upon the size of the ship it is built into, with the Hull = to the DMG rating of the weapon system. Before the weapon can be fired it must be charged/primed/energized. During the Combat Phase the controlling player declares that they are charging the ship’s main weapon; no other weapons fire may be declared though point defenses and tractor beams may still be employed during the turn. During the End Phase the controlling player rolls a Die and records the result. This is continued until the total energy points equal or are greater to 10. On the next combat phase the weapon must be fired. No other weapon fire may be declared this turn though point defenses and tractor beams may be employed as normal. Draw a line from the hex directly in front of the ship and proceeding across the map in a strait line all the way to it’s edge. Every vessel that occupies a hex that this line crosses (including friendly ships) take a number of Hits equal to the DMG rating of the weapon system. Every vessel in a hex adjacent to the straight line suffers a number Hits equal to ½ the weapon’s damage rating, rounding down.
There is no need to roll Impact as all hits succeed. Flares, Decoys, Stealth and Cloaking have no effect on this attack.
Any Fighters, Shuttles, Seeker flights or Minefields in the direct path or adjacent hexes are removed from the game.
On the end turn following the discharge of the weapon roll a Die. On a roll of 1, the ship which fired the weapon may not issue any new movement orders, employ any weapon systems (including point defenses and tractor beams) or begin charging the Spinal Super Weapon for another shot. On a roll of 2 or 3 the ship may plot new movement orders but may not fire other weapons systems though point defenses and tractor beams may be employed as normal, and the Spinal Super Weapon cannot begin recharging. On a roll of 4 or 5 movement orders and weapons may be completed as normal on the following turn, however the Spinal Super Weapon cannot begin charging. On a roll of 6, the firing ship suffers no restrictions on the following turn.
Anyway, just something I have been thinking about for a bit. Trying for something that has something like the effects seen on screen or read in books for a myriad of “super weapon” systems. Devastating, but with limitations, trade-offs and vulnerabilities that can be exploited.
Any thoughts?
I too think it depends on the size and use of the counters. I find that small, flat cardstock counters are difficult for me to organize, handle and manage as a game goes on. I have switched to small and tiny colored dice for almost everything that a numerical counter is used for, and for markers that have an image I always mount them on a backer/base. Real small markers or counters are much more difficult and tedious for me to mount so I might skip them completely. Pre-cut may help a bit with that.
Larger "ship counters" I wouldn't mind cutting out of a sheet, but I would still probably mount them to something else to add some depth to grip.
I guess I would like to know what the precut counters would be made of. If they're just perforated cardstock (I think some of the B5Wars game supplements came with these) I wouldn't be as excited about them as if they were die cut out of some nice thick material like the games of yore I'm having flashbacks to sorting Avalon Hill Blitzkrieg pieces.
To sum up: Uncut card is ok with me if the counters are large enough. Precut would definitely be preferred as an option if they are made from quality material, but not required as standard if they drive the price of the game up too much by their inclusion.
Myself, I would prefer a more randomized loss of specials rather than a set order along the track. At this scale ships aren't really loaded with lots of systems to soak up "criticals"/system damage.
Maybe a single die roll at each threshold to determine the # of systems lost, modified by row? Justs as a spitball...for example at the first threshold level roll 1d6-4 with a minimum of one...with my luck I would roll a 6 here (rolling ones everywhere I need sixes and the Universe demands balance) so I lose 2 systems of my choice and choose a PDS and the Jump drive (WE FIGHT TO THE DEATH!). At the Second threshold the roll the 1d6-3, again minimum of 1, and this time I roll a 2 so I only lose 1 system and choose the other PDS.
Not sure about how much of a modifier or how to determine it simply on a ship by ship basis if that would make more sense, but I think 1 die roll rather than a bucket o' dice type of saving throw roll could be doable.
Cheers!
Erik
I LOVE these! The clean design is really nice...nothing feels cramped or cluttered. I like the overall flow, layout and the graphical look of the arcs and such.
As someone who likes the design process of SS and has dabbled with it a bit but prefers the gameplay of Stamada I think this is great. Ad Astra has some computer game aids as well...haven't had much experience with them but maybe we could see something like those creep over to Starmada for course plotting and some other things to speed up gameplay (not to get done quicker- to blow up more stuff ) Official calculators/plotters would be better than my janky spreadsheets.
I think it's outstanding that the game designers can work together and fill all the niches for everyone's tastes
Cheers!
Erik
I figured I should show the difference between the Counter-sized pieces and the Marker-sized ones
[attachment=0]Markers.jpg[/attachment]
In the middle is a punch out from the card that becomes the center piece of the marker. I can get rolls of 100 glue dots at the local dollar store and they are easy to apply and add negligible thickness to the marker. With the facings, the core and the glue dots the finished pieces are roughly the thickness and weight of many of the die cut counters I have from many moons ago.
Cheers,
Erik
So Dan's question about boxed counters spurred me to share something I have been meaning to for a while now, namely,. my simple and relatively cheap method for making Starmada counters. I would love to have a room full of models/minis, but I've squandered most of the money I would need for those in other pursuits, and besides, have neither the skill or patience to create fleets of beautiful minis.
For a long time I have played games with square cut cardstock, and rarely, square die cut counters and chits. Along the way I tried various methods to add some stability and heft, with mixed results, and usually more effort than was worth the end result. A couple of years ago I settled on the following combination, and it has worked well for me. First, I print my counters without any defining borders or edges, then I punch them out with 1" and 3/4" round paper punches I bought at the local craft store. Then, I use 1" and 3/4" self-adhesive, circular felt pads sold at the local discount store as furniture feet/floor protectors. For a couple of bucks I can get bunch of ready to use pads that require no prep to mount my counters to (I tried "blacking" the edges of the tan pads with felt-tip marker but it was far too much work and had very little noticable improvement).
Here is what I end up with (apologies for photo quality shot on a whim at my desk)
[attachment=1]Engage.jpg[/attachment]
[attachment=2]Fleet-Counters.jpg[/attachment]
Here are the basic construction materials
[attachment=0]Components.jpg[/attachment]
These counters have a nice thick "rim" which makes them easy to pick up, and the felt makes them VERY secure on my felt hex mat. The cat can still scatter them, but they stay in place as long as she doesn't manage to bat them at close range. :twisted: Additional pads can be easily stacked for altitude, which I like quite a lot better than putting on an altitude marker)
For smaller markers I use cardstock I have saved from the backs of legal pads (not a hoarder, I SWEAR!) punched out with the 3/4 punch. Then I use dollar store glue dots to mount a marker on either side of the "chip". Not as girthy as the counters, but don't need to be. Slightly more labor intensive, but I made quite a few more counter-style pieces than markers so it wasn't a big deal.
Next time I actually get a game going I will try to remember to take a couple of shots of these counters in action. I usually just play with "generic" style counters, but we have in the past made a couple from B5 Wars silhouettes.
Hope someone finds this technique useful, or even motivates someone to post up an even better method that we can all use!
Cheers,
Erik
Would there be any possibility of an extended weapons input section? I'm not looking for tons more individual weapons, but when pretty much every single system has a secondary mode the spaces get eaten up pretty fast and I've had to spread a couple of factions over to another spreadsheet. I know it seems crazy probably, but that's where I'm at these days
Cheers,
Erik
PS Still hoping to get Lancing/Semi- in the mix. Thanks!
I have often joked that starship combat games are either Trafalgar, Jutland or Midway, depending on what they try to emulate.
Out of the box, Starmada is pretty solidly in the Jutland camp, but there's a bit of a problem with that. Historically, fleet composition and tactics is determined by the weapons technology available. The reason why Jutland-era battleships needed escorts in the first place was the homing torpedo - a single cheap torpedo could sink a very expensive battleship, and could be carried by fast, nimble, equally cheap small craft. Destroyers (nee torpedo boat destroyers) only exist for the explicit purpose of keeping torpedo boats beyond torpedo range from the battleships.
In Starmada, there's no such shipkiller weapon, although it might be possible to build one - under SAE I created a PoC using the custom Seeker flight rules that could do a fair job of at least severely damaging a battleship-sized ship. I haven't tried under the new Seeker rules. Regardless, in Starmada you can still shoot down Seekers; there was no way to intercept a torpedo.
Even if you assume that fighters fill this role, the best defense against fighters in Starmada is other fighters, and now we've got Midway instead of Jutland.
So given all this, to people who have created their own force lists &c. - what purpose do escorts serve in your fleets? Are they protecting the capital ships from anything? If so, what? What reason would there be for a navy in your setting to build anything smaller than a light cruiser?
I agree with your thoughts. Keeping away from the economic reasons for including smaller ships (not strictly escorts), a lot of it comes down to your opponent or if you are so inclined, your setting. if you are playing in a setting or perhaps a conversion that has escorts (whether against fighters, missiles, etc)...well...your Starmada fleet should have them. "In Universe" there can be tons of justification for Escort type ships. I personally have always preferred this model to the Min-Max style, but everyone has different routes to their fun. Once you get into free-design based games, I can see opportunities to use cheap, small Aegis/point defense/defensive battery equipped ships that operate as an anti-fighter shell around a more powerful unit, though I've never trotted one out myself.
In the last scratch project (non-conversion) I did the primary threat was from long-range seeker fire, which for all the parties ignored shields, and were real sledghammers. Escorts were like pre-WWI Torpedo Boat Destroyers- point defenses/defensive guns and/or flares to thicken the defenses of a larger ship, plus expendable seekers to harass the enemy if the opportunity should arise. Because of my preference, there were off-screen reasons for the forces available to each faction, so most battles I set up were more skirmish than fleet action- so escort types were pretty common.
Cheers,
Erik
Thinking of adding some tilt blocks to the lineup as well? 
If there is not an "aspect" reason the have a box, I would personally stick with a traditional counter as I prefer those to even the tent style ones. Honestly, if you did a PDF with lots and lots topside artwork, preferably some nice scalable vector graphics, in lots of different flavors and styles of ships I would buy that and make my own counters. I can crank something like that out on demand faster than I can assemble box miniatures. Years ago I dabbled with Attack Vector and made some "box minis" with some trim wood a can of spray primer and a couple of felt tip pens and I liked the feel of those a lot better than paper and card box minis.
Any possibility you might package a boatload of printable artwork for lots of factions even if you do some other kind of counter?
Cheers,
Erik
It appears that the traits Semi-Lancing and Lancing are not selectable in the weapon design list. Re-downloaded the version posted just to double check that it doesn't show up for me.
Erik
(trying to get back into the game after a couple of lost years )
Hi all
When I try to design a seeking weapon I can not find out to assign it a MA instead of a range. Any pointers for a neophyte please?
Is this what you are looking for from the instructions?:
RNG: Restricted to values from -18 to 24. Negative
values indicate standard weapons and must be in
multiples of three (i.e. -3, -6, -9, -12, -15, or -18). A
positive value indicates a seeking weapon (restricted
to values between 4 and 12) or customized range
bands.
For customized range bands, each RNG value must
be greater than the one preceding it.
Good, because that's how I intended it.
Ironically, tho... the lockdown has somehow provided me with LESS time to work on things. Apologies for the delay.
No need to apologize, trust me I completely understand. I apologize for my seeming impatience...it is an unfortunate side effect of being a lifelong Masshole. Science has yet to figure out if nature or nurture is responsible for our inability to even fake "laid-back"
In my head that “SOON” had voice-of-the-almighty reverb.
I feel like I have been preparing my whole life, looking forward to some nice peaceful isolation time...then I get deemed “essential” and I am stuck out in the world all day, every day when I should rightfully be creating Starmada designs. I am grateful to have a paycheck and benefits for the immediate future at least, but I would not mind if they told me to work from home (where I could design a battleship or two when nobody's looking)
Yes. The Unity Rulebook should be updated shortly.
Is there a timetable for this or a part of the process I am missing? I purchased Unity rules directly from MJ12 and it looks like the only version I can access is 1.02 and does not include changes as appear in the annex. Thanks.
That's not how a lot of the real gaming world works. Min-maxing is part of competitive play and miniatures gaming is very competitive
It's about what you enjoy. Some people really enjoy the challenge of out-designing their opponents and the cat-and-mouse of design/counter.
I don't.
I would rather both sides have identical designs and try to outplay or even outluck an opponent. The beer and pretzels taste better to me when I win a game like that.
Any game with a design aspect will see people try to find ways to “min/max” as part of the challenge. When the game becomes all about that it becomes Rock Paper Scissors as far as I am concerned.
But each to their own.
Maybe the game is broken, and might require an exercise of restraint among designers to keep it tactically interesting. Otherwise it becomes a strategy game played mostly by oneself trying to weedle different combinations so that when you show up to the table the issue is decided one way or another. I would once again recommend setting all the TLs to 0. Much much much harder (in my opinion) to create “broken design” conditions.
I may be ranting a bit in my old age, but I have seen a lot of games “broken” over the years by exploiting design process or rules. You know what I have consistently found? The game becomes a lot more fun for myself and the people that I have played with when we find a way to eliminate an exploit through a house rule or imposed restrictions. Seen it in board games, card games, and miniatures games. A few people have chafed at “restricting rules” but most come around when the games get fun again.
Some have left and never came back.
But that's ok, it means there is more pizza for the rest of us.
Cheers,
Erik
Have you considered lowering the weapon TL? I have personally found that keeping everything at TL 0 as a baseline makes pretty much every version of Starmada for the last 10 years less subject to things like this, fighter swarms, etc...I know that everyone plays differently and has different philosophies & points matching should mean things have a balance, but lower TL does seem to mitigate things like this imho.
Erik
Couple of things...First, just wondering if the Evaporating trait is going to be added to the base Drydock now that Romulan Armada is in the wild and the trait doesn't seem to be a 100% SFU-specific trait. Also, wondering if it would be possible to add the "Ammo" tracker such as for Drone Racks, even if there are no specific rules to cover its inclusion as I personally prefer it for expendables over the launch everything if you want to type of expendables. Obviously I can add an ammo tracker to my designs but I would rather have it built in if possible (because I am lazy, I mean I am very busy). Last but not least, should the Drydock be "Stuck" to the top of the Starmada Forum or in the Files Section?
Thanks,
Erik
No...I've also thought of something along those lines--it certainly would allow a more true-to-source-material conversion of B5...
Several of the settings I like use something along the lines of a gate drive, with B5 being pretty Much the poster child.
The EDT (extra dimensional travel) drive from The S:X VBAM edition pretty much fit the bill and I have been surprised nothing like it has appeared in later editions.
Erik
Just spitballing but thinking Fed racks "cost more" because of the defensive mode---though it shows up in the K&K racks as a lower cost rather than an increase on the Feds.
Erik
I got the rules yesterday and I would like to echo the thought that the rules seem a bit scattered throughout the SFU section making it a bit more difficult to find/reference.
I like some of the stuff that is apparently SFU exclusive and like others I am a bit disappointed that there is no construction/cost info. I think it would be nice to integrate things into the rules rather than apparently saying "well these are specific to this one setting so the ships from this setting are balanced...but you can't really use in other settings because they are possibly unbalanced " or something to that effect. To me it undermines the Universal nature of the design system to have clusters of setting specific rules. For example, I think there are many settings that could benefit from the inclusion of the power management rules, and I think the Tight Turns/Wide Turns trait are a more elegant option for altering maneuverability than Graded Turns
I know that I can include anything I want from the SFU stuff in my designs and in the games, but I would just rather see them a official, cross-genre options.
Thanks for continuing to make a game I like and support the players the way you do!
Erik
Am I the only one that thinks Starmada is currently missing something like a Gate Drive/ Fold Drive? Something that would be big and complicated but useful for moving a bunch of ships (with limits of how close the sips need to be or placement of a gate or something). I have some house rule ideas, but I think this is something that is missing from the "official" product since it is something that shows up quite a bit in Sci-fi. I always feel that it is fun to put it on the biggest most powerful ships in a campaign because then you risk losing your squadron or fleet if you don't "protect" your biggest and potentially most powerful ship.
Just a thought.
Erik
mj12games.com/forum → Posts by Blacklancer99
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.