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 Go0gleplex
If you're using excel and it's not giving you a pull down it's likely a compatibility issue or something. I switched to LibreOffice after getting the same headache (and several others) and it works just fine.
While there is still a large amount of stuff here on the forum, I've put together a Discord server for Wardogs! Link below good for seven days from this date.
Yeah. For a long time now. Sometimes things just get missed.
Posted all of three of the original Cold Navy boxed set ship miniature status cards on Facebook in the Starship Miniatures Group for those with access.
Been doing some spring cleaning and re-organization over the last several months...and this morning while sorting thru my cans of spray primers I came across a major find! (well...to me anyhow.)
The original laminated Cold Navy Ship Starmada ship cards for all three initial fleet boxes. I'll scan these babies in over the next few days and post 'em for those wanting them. I can now complete my Mauridian fleet records (as I'm the guilty party that named and statted up the expansion ships Ravenstar added models for.)
Added a Heavy Missile Fighter to this fleet today. Just sayin'. 
I typically paint mine the same way and number the bases...if the same fighter type.
If differing fighter types, I'll use the same color palette, but the markings would be different. What you're proposing sounds totally reasonable IMO.
ed: Looking back at my Yomi files, I did originally have a missile fighter. I just never updated the design with the newer general fighter. 'spose I should do that soon. (wry chuckle) Any other fighter types I should consider while I'm at it? lol
Yeah. I paint the whole ship.
Nice job on those btw...and thanks! Always nice to see my designs enjoyed. 
Which would work fine if printed on decent cardstock then glued to foam core squares. Some might think Sticker paper would be easier...but my experience with this method has the stickers peeling up over time as the adhesive used fails with age. The foam core makes things easy to pick up and is nicely durable. I still have and use the counters I made that way in the early 90's in near mint condition as it were.
That would fall under the latter half of my prior answer then.
Depends on the size of the counters for me. If small and many, then pre-cut would be preferable simple to save the hassle of all that snipping. If a bit larger with not so much snipping, then pre-cut would be a bonus but not really a necessity.
Depends on which version you are using. Unity...it tells you on page 34 in the Marines and Starship Combat section. Admiralty...is missing that (at a fast check) so take a step back to X where you roll a d6 per squad and a 5 or 6 result takes out a crew (hull) box until the ship can be captured more or less.
I think the intent here is that the weapons have to be have LOS to the target (via appropriate arc) so that their targeting systems can lock-on to it initially...even with the battery firing them, the battery would need to be able to target them. 360 would only be appropriate if the ship was using a central targeting system rather than individual battery based...but even then, once fired, the seekers would require updating which could theoretically be jammed, leaving them in target limbo.
Honestly, there are several ways to interpret the why's, how's, why-not's on this...but logically my initial statement seems the most likely.
It's been a long time...yet some things still sit at the back of my brain getting worked thru when the day job junk and life issues aren't stressing me out. 
I finally recalled the solution to the issue of not using Thermal Signature for lock-on in combat. This was actually covered under Melee combat which is Unit Size+1 as the base. So if using a steam-tech setting and not wanting to use thermal sig...the melee option becomes the default to hit roll.
Now...if I had only remembered that back when the question on this had originally come up... :roll:
Sooooo...you're saying you've lost face in their books, eh? That sucks. lol
Use of weapon traits can offset some of that cookie cutter effect and give the typical 'pea shooter' weapon a bit more bite while still staying a modest mass cost. Range though...range is key. I've had ships with statistically more dangerous weapons totally wrecked before even able to get into their effective range by simple long range pea shooters (and some very unfriendly dice). Part of the thing with doing designs for established settings such as Star Drek is that it is very very rare when the rules allow for an on par conversion. So such designs should be taken with a grain of salt when evaluating their 'canon consistency'.
Yeah. But range gets sacrificed to a degree, which hurts. And, while when they hit they hit hard, multiple smaller and less costly weapons actually out perform them over time. Not to mention few large weapons suffer from 'all the eggs in one basket' syndrome when taking damage. The trick is to find the happy medium with one or two nasty packages while still having enough peashooters to stay effective in the fight longer.
That would indeed be me. Glad you're enjoying the ships! 
It is the common sense rule. If you have a speeder/hover bike for instance then it will be able to deal with any of the listed terrain. If you have a jet ski then obviously it will only be able to access Ocean/River and possibly open swamp (though there may be a risk of being fouled by weeds and such). A tracked type of mount would have difficulty with anything but open terrain. In short, it depends on what type of mechanical mount is being created in how the terrain restrictions are specifically applied.
The rules were written to be generally flexible rather than rigidly defined so folks could model what units they want with a bit of ingenuity on their part and less of a catalog of a unit section.
(as to the late reply: I've been dealing with a cheating spouse and subsequent divorce/custody battle, holding down multiple jobs, multiple immediate family deaths, and am now battling cancer and insanely high bills these last six years. So my priorities have been a bit demanding. )
Example of a 3mm x 3mm supermagnet based PLA ship on what I call a 'nail base'.
Those that have been watching the Facebook groups I am involved in already know this;
I have over 200 ship miniature STL files I have designed posted at the link below; most for free if you have a 3D printer. For those not having a 3D printer, I have an agreement with Pulsefire Printing (US) and 3 Dimensional Dreams (Germany) allowing them to print any of the ship designs posted on the linked site should folks wish to order them. Ship sizes mostly range from 12 mm to 100 mm, give or take, though there are several ranging into the 120+ mm range. Stations, a jump gate, satellites, etc are also part of things designed. So if looking for something a bit different than the usual fare, check things out.
Vehicles of any sort are not ever going to be immune to a stability check unless they are dug in or something. Impacts, especially from kinetic weapons, easily knock them out of control. Heck, a vehicle can actually flip if the right conditions are met simply crossing the center line of a two lane paved road. (At least that's what several road design engineers teaching my classes have stated-I've not personally seen it happen...yet.) This really boils down to being a rule of common sense. If conditions are such where it makes sense the vehicle is braced against incoming fire (such as bunkered in or having outriggers deployed like a fire truck or Terran Seige Tank) then ignore the stability roll if everyone agrees. If the same vehicle is in the open, moving, and/or on unstable terrain...it may be even easier to send spinning off. And yes...tanks can be knocked cattywampus when hit. THIS I have personally seen. A 120mm round carries a lot of kinetic energy.
Ground vehicles are really only at an advantage on a prepared road in terms of speed. Even on open ground. Having ridden in a few USMC Amtracks across various terrain, they are much slower than what a mech could be for a variety of reasons all related to how the terrain is traversed and that any troops in being carried are subject to SEVERE injury the faster the vehicle goes of diverse terrain. (felt like a loose gumball in a violently shaken tin can and the bus was only going 35-45 mph in the equivalent of a 4x4 mud track.
Short answer to all of this is: I based much of the game mechanics on real world models of combat, physics, and engineering principles as I wrote the rules; and being several decades in the civil engineering field I do have a pretty good insight on such things.
Personal Mounts-
Each trooper in the squad is issued a personal mount, either organic or mechanical in nature. Organic mounts can be horses, giant birds, sea creatures, or the like. Flying creatures are excluded from this due to things like saddles and such interfering with the ability of the creatures to fly. Mechanical mounts can be motorcycles, hover bikes, ski-doos, and the like. Again, actual flight type vehicles are excluded since this is covered under separate equipment…and no politician cares to spend that much money just to equip some uneducated grunt. Both types of mounts are listed below with their advantages and disadvantages.
Organic Mount
MP x3
Thermal Signature +1
Terrain Limitations: Ocean/ Deep water or Any Land
EM Cost: 1
Offensive Modifier: +1
Mechanical Mount
MP x5
Thermal Signature +2
Terrain Limitations: Ocean/ Deep water, Heavy Forest, River, and Any Swamp or Any Land
EM Cost: 2
Offensive Modifier: +2
Basically: The Terrain limitations are what the mount can access. So if an Organic Mount is aquatic it is obviously limited to aquatic terrain. Or a horse...is limited to any Land. Why not swamp too? While it is possible to traverse a swamp on a horse...it is far FAR more trouble than it is worth...and is faster on foot or by boat. (I grew up riding before I could actually walk so have a bit of first hand experience on this one.) Hope that helps.
I use magnets for all of my ship mounts so my recommendation is: If using PLA or resin ships, a magnet with a min. 1.5 lb pull strength works well for up to 4-5 cm long ships. larger ships would need a 2.5 to 3 lb pull strength magnet. For metal ships of similar size: you want a magnet on the base as well as on the ship or a 3.5+ lb pull, especially if the contact point on the ship is not at the balance point of the miniature's mass.
mj12games.com/forum → Posts by Go0gleplex
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.