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 PSYCO829
You could also do Steve's zoom and boom strategy. Get enough speed built up while staying out of range, then close the distance from out of range to short range in a single turn.
Have you considered a land based Starmada addition? Rules for terrain, potential urban combat, etc.
I haven't decided on a win condition, or if there should even be one. But this is the rough idea I've come up with for running a campaign.
Thoughts? Comments? Suggestions?
Rules: You can choose either a book race, chose to use a custom race, or a rogue faction of a book race (home designs based off of book ships, count as custom races for the purposes of this campaign).
For every player who is in the game, there are 3 "NPC" races that are a mixture of unused book races and custom races from other universe (Imperial Star Wars, Babylon 5, Stargate, etc). And every player and NPC start off with a set number of systems placed on a chart. You can only invade a system next to a system you control, and no player's system will start off touching another player's. Systems grant you resources and research, which allows you to continue building ships and advancing. We'll try to restrict totally removing any players from the game, and we'll keep adding new NPC's as the game goes on.
Book Races: If you choose to play a book race, then you have access to any and all ships under your race's fleet. And because you don't get to design your own ships to make them more deadly, you receive a percent bonus whenever you're facing against a custom race (I'm thinking 10% bonus would be fair). If we could find a way to prevent custom races from using "cheese fleets", we could have no % handicap.
The problem is... things are still stale for this method of playing. So I was thinking that instead of doing research, you can also build and design ships. You can only use weapons and systems present on ships already existing, and you must follow any theme already used by that race (Stealth, fragile systems, no ship has fighters, etc). This would allow you to have fun designing, just like the custom races too. Research for new traits and equipment can be unlocked, provided it fits the flavor of the race (You are not getting cloaking if you are playing Federation ships, for example).
Custom races: If you play a custom race, you're restricted at the beginning of the game. You only have access to 2 traits for weapons (not including accurate, Triple damage and Catastrophic can only be unlocked if you have double damage, Scatter can only be unlocked if you have Diffuse, Telescopic can only be unlocked if you have Focus). You also only have access to 2 different types of Equipment, and 2 different Ship Traits. You're given a set amount of points for a fleet to design your ships. As the campaign progresses, you can unlock research to unlock new traits and equipment. Players are discouraged from heavy cheesing, and custom ships will be reviewed before being allowed (If you have a speed 20 ship with range 3 and Diffuse, Scatter, and Triple Damage on a weapon, get out). Smart designing is good, simply trying to break the game purely for the sake of winning tends to ruin games.
As an avid DnD player, I've been wanting to create a campaign system for Starmada to use. I wanted to intergrate the use of book ships and custom ships, while making book ships not obsolete when compared to standard ships. And I also wanted to have a reason for this campaign to be taking place, rather than just have a random series of battles. Here's what I've got so far:
The story takes place in the Star Trek universe. The Romulans, Klingons, Federation, etc are all at war and each other's throats (might need some help with this, not as familiar as Star Trek canon as I could be), when suddenly rifts begin opening in space, and other being from other universes begin invading. The initial surprise costs all sides of the Star Trek universe to lose systems to these invaders, but now they're ready to fight back and drive off the invaders. Of course, things aren't settled with the conflict that was occuring before the invasion, and it would appear that the invaders aren't getting along so well either...
I wish Reinforced Systems were cheaper, I prefer them:(
Maybe you could make it a system instead of a weapon trait. This would prevent an over-saturation of system damage.
This posed a bit of a problem for me with my current setting. I've written some custom rules that revolve around crippling starships. Basically the rules allow you to make an "aimed shot" specifically at the Weapons, ECM, Shield, or Engine subsystems at greatly increased difficulty in an attempt to disable a ship for boarding or capture. Pirates and raiders factor heavily into my storyline so a way to cripple a ship without outright destroying it was pretty vital (you know, assuming the poor merchantmen didn't just surrender
)
You have my undivided attention
I never liked Ignore Shields. To me, it always seemed like a one-up trait, something you put on a ship only if you're facing ships that have shields. And I really don't like the thought of spending 1/2 my ships cost on shields, and you 100% ignore them with a single trait.
Piercing is fine to me, it already massively degrades the value of shields.
The disadvantage of seekers is that they don't do anything initially. If we exchange fire, yes you will probably have twice as many shots as me. But I'm not taking any damage for two firing phases, whereas you are. Meaning you will do a lot of damage to me, but I won't feel it until I've crippled your fleet.
The weakness of Seekers is in fighters and drones, especially drones. Seeking weapons are virtually useless against them. They can also be shot down, the enemy fleet clustered together can often reduce your bombardment down to harmless confetti.
Are the seekers being aimed at one ship only? Or do they fling seekers at all your ships?
I love this idea, especially for a campaign setting.
I agree. My spinal mounts are usually given slw, Dx3 and either proximity or piercing with a FR arc. I used to use catastrophic, but my rolls seemed to always be below the 3.5 average.
True, now compare that to how you used to be able to build big weapons. Up to 6 damage and impact off of a single 1 hit die meant you had a potential of 36 damage. And for people who like that kind of thing, you had the big hit or miss moment when rolling the to hit die. That's something Nova is lacking for people who like big, devastating guns, you never feel like you actually have it.
Personally, I like the idea of reintroducing the Fire Linked trait, where if one weapon in a battery hits all of them do. It helps simulate the idea of a big gun better (instead of your big gun rolling 9 dice and going off of that, you simply roll one. If you hit, you do 9 damage x your damage trait).
My only problem with attack dice is that it makes your big guns feel less big, instead of a big spinal mount I feel like I have several mini cannons setup. Having something like Fire Linked would change that.
I'm going to make tie-dye versions of these exact ships, bring them, and see the look on your face when you're getting shot down by space hippies. THEN WE SHALL SEE WHO'S LAUGHING!!!
My ships use a combination of stealth, ECM, evasive maneuvers (in close quarters), and some flares as well. Yesterday, when playing with GamingGlen, Beowulf (my uncle), and my grandfather, I dropped ALL the flares my ships had, just to see what would happen. The result was this.
<IMG src="http://i48.tinypic.com/4keljm.jpg">
</IMG>
My ships are the black ones, my uncle's are the Navy ships, and Glen's were the Romulan ships. After dropping all the flares, the Bird of Pray had a -8 (stealth 3, ecm 1, evasive 1, 3 flares) when firing on my battleship (the one with the big nose).
Does anyone else have a wacky way of designing and playing ships? I'm always looking for new and fun ways to make a fleet XD
I think it dépends on the way you are playing SNE. I remember a SAE topic. It was, more or less, 'what do you think about my space station?'. This SS looked like the Death Star. Very big, a lot of very powerful, long-range, weaponry adapted to kill ships. And the answer was 'well, I design a massive fleet of small gunboats with just one very short range, narrow arc, weapon, an engine with a value equal to 1, begining at that range and accelerating each turn in order to being 31 hexes bthe turn before ending adjacent to your SS and blasting it to ribbons in just one massive shooting from all unscathed gunboats'.
That was my spacestation XD
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).
Aside for the 3+, giving Dfs is curious as there s no short of long range fighters. Hence, Dfs doesn't apply to them.
Exactly, it was just an easy way of saying that he doubled their firepower.
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
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.
I like your fighter fix, and I'm glad fighters and drones don't shoot automatically before everyone else does anymore (that was evil).
We'll have to try it when you come back down here.
I love this idea
Cloch na Thintri Lunana class Carrier (500)
1 Armor 22 Hull
1x Aether Pulse (Acr/Dx3) FX0 6-12-18
3 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Traits: Fragile Systems, Stealth(3), Carrier[Str/Tgh](6), Cargo(518)
Thrust 5 4 3 2 1
ECM 1 1 1
Image to be posted
Cloch na Thintri Kirin class Bomber (500)
1 Armor 22 Hull
1x Aether Pulse (Acr/Dx3) FX0 6-12-18
3 2 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
2x Shadow Darts (Acr/Skr/Dx2) FH0 6-12-18
6 4 3 2 2 1 1 1 0 0 0
Traits: Fragile Systems, Stealth(3), Cargo(230)
Equipment: Drones[Fst/Str](10/_____)
Thrust 5 4 3 2 1
ECM 1 1 1
Image to be posted
It makes more sense to look at the available space on a ship for tonnage than it does to look at the hull. The hull is just a representation of how much damage you can take before you're destroyed.
And to think, the idea came from the Kalaedinese Expanse ships when Glen used em.
Accurate, Focus, Telescopic, and DX3 seekers. So much fun <3
mj12games.com/forum → Posts by PSYCO829
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.