Re: Designer's Notes: Defenses & Damage

Ken_Burnside wrote:

Is there a way to get armor that works like "Damage Resistance" without breaking the game engine?

It wouldn't necessarily "break" the game, but there are two considerations:

1) Over what span does the DR work? (Is it -X damage points from each attack? Each turn?)

2) How would this be incorporated into the point costing system?

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

Re: Designer's Notes: Defenses & Damage

Isn't how armor or shield (in an ablative way) would work?

Marc

Re: Designer's Notes: Defenses & Damage

madpax wrote:

Isn't how armor or shield (in an ablative way) would work?

Not exactly.

My understanding of "ablative" in this context has always been like shields in SFB/FC -- they absorb X amount of damage and then they're gone. I believe what Ken was asking about is more like damage reduction in Silent Death, where every weapon hit is reduced in strength by X points.

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

Re: Designer's Notes: Defenses & Damage

That's what I'm referring to.

Each hit is reduced by N points of damage that comes in.  I would recommend that on an

Ablative Armor is "armor as styrofoam blocks", DR is "armor as chunks of something hard and difficult to break." Dan's original Impact/Shield mechanism is that armor either works perfectly, or fails perfectly; this would be something that sorta kinda splits the difference.

I don't know enough about what Dan intends for the new damage systems to know if there's any difference between 3 1 point hits and 1 3 point hit.  DR is where that difference is really easy to show.

As to when it fails, I'd make it a threshold check like engines and weapons.

Does damage follow your dice-column-shift methodology?

As to putting it into the point costing system - not easily!  You more or less need to decide what the statistical average damage of a baseline weapon is and price your armor thresholds on how much they interfere with that, and all weapons with lower damage than that.

Re: Designer's Notes: Defenses & Damage

Ken_Burnside wrote:

Each hit is reduced by N points of damage that comes in.

But what constitutes a "hit": Each weapon? Each battery? All weapons fire from one ship to another in a single game turn?

Does damage follow your dice-column-shift methodology?

Not sure what you mean... there are two ways of simulating damage to weapons:

1) The "simple" way, where a single roll is made at 1/3 and 2/3 damage, with the result determining an overall attack modifier applied to all weapons, or

2) The "complex" way, where a roll is made for each weapon mount, with that mount becoming either damaged (-2 to attacks) or destroyed.

As to putting it into the point costing system - not easily!  You more or less need to decide what the statistical average damage of a baseline weapon is and price your armor thresholds on how much they interfere with that, and all weapons with lower damage than that.

This is the main reason I wouldn't be able to put DR in the game -- at least not right now.

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

Re: Designer's Notes: Defenses & Damage

cricket wrote:
Ken_Burnside wrote:

Each hit is reduced by N points of damage that comes in.

But what constitutes a "hit": Each weapon? Each battery? All weapons fire from one ship to another in a single game turn?

Each weapon hit, ideally.  I know you're more or less abstracting everything into batteries.

Does damage follow your dice-column-shift methodology?

Not sure what you mean... there are two ways of simulating damage to weapons:

1) The "simple" way, where a single roll is made at 1/3 and 2/3 damage, with the result determining an overall attack modifier applied to all weapons, or

2) The "complex" way, where a roll is made for each weapon mount, with that mount becoming either damaged (-2 to attacks) or destroyed.

Right.  You're more or less abstracting out individual weapons in favor of aggregated firepower factors. 

As to putting it into the point costing system - not easily!  You more or less need to decide what the statistical average damage of a baseline weapon is and price your armor thresholds on how much they interfere with that, and all weapons with lower damage than that.

This is the main reason I wouldn't be able to put DR in the game -- at least not right now.

Especially if you're forgoing weapon-level resolution at the game table.

Re: Designer's Notes: Defenses & Damage

Ken_Burnside wrote:

Each weapon hit, ideally.  I know you're more or less abstracting everything into batteries.

"Banks", actually.

Right.  You're more or less abstracting out individual weapons in favor of aggregated firepower factors.

Not nearly as much abstraction as some have feared. (Don't stir the pot again, Ken... smile)

Especially if you're forgoing weapon-level resolution at the game table.

DR wouldn't have worked in the Admiralty Edition, either. Relatively few weapons had a DMG value of 3+, which means even a DR of 2 would essentially make a ship invulnerable.

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

Re: Designer's Notes: Defenses & Damage

I don't know how you're handling a positive PEN versus armor (say a PEN of 5 versus an armor of 2), but in GF it's simply no effect, and not a positive column shift.

Same here. My goal was that high-pen weapons were inefficient if the pen was not needed on the target. I want to encourage certain weapons\ships having strong targeting priorities to get the most damage per cost out of them.

I'm curious how you costed the penetration. I had my mathy friend work out a formula for me but it's got a number of assumptions since I don't really know how the damage of a weapon is costed till the rules come out.

Re: Designer's Notes: Defenses & Damage

Ozymandias wrote:

I don't know how you're handling a positive PEN versus armor (say a PEN of 5 versus an armor of 2), but in GF it's simply no effect, and not a positive column shift.

Same here. My goal was that high-pen weapons were inefficient if the pen was not needed on the target. I want to encourage certain weapons\ships having strong targeting priorities to get the most damage per cost out of them.
I'm curious how you costed the penetration. I had my mathy friend work out a formula for me but it's got a number of assumptions since I don't really know how the damage of a weapon is costed till the rules come out.

I don't know whether it'll do you any good, but in GF we're using it as part of the Orat equation.
It factors into the Orat equation as follows:

(2^(x/3))

Where x = penetration value

Re: Designer's Notes: Defenses & Damage

Sounds like a 4th type of defense to me!

1) ECM - make target harder to hit reducing the # of attack dice
2) Shields - act like deflectors giving a fix save (subject to modifiers from enemy weapon traits)
3) Armour DR (i.e. hard shell) - Reduce damage of shot coming in (or something like that)
4) Armour Ablative (i.e. more stuff in the way) - allow ship to absorb more damage

I think there is room in the game for both 3 and 4 - 3 is more like conventional armour - where 4 could be extra bulkheads or better structural integrity or layered armour.  One thing that bothered me a bit about the last version of Starmada was the only way to get more "hit points" was the make your ship larger - sure you could imagine it to be smaller - but having a higher hull affected the relative cost of shields/engine and gave you more space to fill up with weapons. 

Of course the problem with 3 is that you might have to layer on a new mechanic you were not planning.  One thought is to bring back DMG - except of course this time DMG wouldn't automatically be the "cheap" way to add more damage as it has utility in its ability to get past armour (3).

-Tim

Re: Designer's Notes: Defenses & Damage

This is (sort of) stirring the pot - it's not meant to be a knock on Starmada, which is aiming more for the "12 to 20 ships at a time" niche than Squadron Strike, which is firmly in the "1-5 ships per player" niche.

But these are the defenses currently in Squadron Strike.  Dan, you're welcome to use any of these for inspiration.

SS uses incoming damage facings - Nose, Aft, Top, Bottom, Left and Right.  Depending on the universe variables selected, you may also have a Profile rating which adds a variable between +2 and -4 to the shooter's Accuracy target number.  Faced Defenses are allocated per facing of the ship (sort of like faceted shields in SM). spherical defenses mean the facing of the ship doesn't matter.

In SS, the conventional defenses are:

ECM:  Adds to the Accuracy TN of the weapon firing at you.  (Lower Accuracy numbers are better; it's on a d10 based system.)  This is a spherical defense.  Profile Numbers are effectively side/shape/dimension-based ECM-like modifiers.

Deflector Shields (Mixture of DR and shielding - every unit of deflectors provides 4 shield bubbles; the last of those bubbles provides DR.).  The last box removed (and the first regenerated) in a give group restores the DR.  This results in an oddly brittle defense.  You're nigh invulnerable up until the incoming weapon fire can do 4 more damage than you have DR, then your defenses crumble quickly. It's an interesting dynamic. - Faced defense

Ablative Shields:  SFB-style shields.  Every unit of protection provides 6 shield bubbles, but no DR.  You can have both Deflector and Ablative shields on the same ship; the Deflector shields are on the 'outside'.  Shield regeneration works from the inside out, must complete repairing a single group of shield bubbles before moving to the next on that facing.  - Faced Defense

Armor - Acts like DR. Values range from 1 to 9 - Faced defense

Component Armor - increases the amount of damage needed to remove one box out of a group of boxes on a hit location row.  Values range from 0 (the default) to 2 (which means it takes 3 damage to remove one box of that particular type.) - Spherical Defense.

Hull & Cargo - the 'padding' boxes at the beginning of each hit location row.  Extra hit points that, when they ablate, are harder to restore, and which provide an imperfect defense.

Unusual Defenses:

Prismatic Globe:  This is outside of shields.  When active, roll a d10 for each point of damage that comes in; every d10 that equals or exceeds the target number on the globe means one point of energy is caught by the globe and is stored by the accumulator. The remaining damage from that weapon strike passes through to other defenses normally; e.g, it doesn't turn a 7 point hit with 3 absorbed damage into 4 1 point hits, it turns it into a 4 point hit..  Spherical Defense, does not put any restrictions on the mounting ship, other than the fact that accumulators can explode when they take damage, and they have a limited capacity to absorb damage.

Cloaking Device:  This doubles your ECM value and adds its level to the result on top of that for an Accuracy modiifer. When a weapon hits you in spite of this, your ship makes a Crew Rate check, adding the level to the result. If the Crew Rate check succeeds, you take half damage from the weapon. If the Crew Rate check plus modifiers exceeds 10, you take 1/4 of the damage from that weapon.  Spherical Defense, prohibits the unit from firing while it's active, has a limited percentage of turns it can be active in a scenario.

Ebon Globe:  This adds its value to the Armor or Deflector Shields DR value while active. Spherical Defense.  While active, you cannot fire, cannot apply thrust, and for Mode 1 movement, cannot change facing - you'll continue to drift on your prior vector. It can be set to only cover two facings of the ship, but they must be opposite facings.  If Nose/Aft, it still interferes with thrust.

For those who liked Starmada-X's damage allocation (with the ability to 'pad' parts of the ship), my damage allocation system is something of a spiritual descendent of that system.

Re: Designer's Notes: Defenses & Damage

Ken_Burnside wrote:

ECM

Covered in Starmada by "ECM".

Deflector Shields

Covered in Starmada by "Shields".

Ablative Shields

Covered in Starmada by "Armor".

Armor

Inclusion in Starmada would require an additional type of defense. Perhaps a special trait?

Component Armor

Not sure I get the difference between, for example, "Armor 1" and "Component Armor 2".

Hull

Would be covered in Starmada by increasing hull size.

Prismatic Globe

Definitely would require a Starmada trait.

Cloaking Device

Covered in Starmada by "Cloaking Device".

Ebon Globe

Again, Starmada trait.

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

Re: Designer's Notes: Defenses & Damage

cricket wrote:

Deflector Shields

Covered in Starmada by "Shields".

Similar to.  Not quite the same; your shields (if like SM-AE) are an all or nothing defense.  Deflector Shields in SS can be whittled down before you get to damage allocation, and they can be regenerated.

Armor

Inclusion in Starmada would require an additional type of defense. Perhaps a special trait?

Possibly - but I'm not sure your damage resolution handles it, given that "one damage point" is "enough to mark off one Hull box."

Component Armor

Not sure I get the difference between, for example, "Armor 1" and "Component Armor 2".

Armor reduces damage before it gets into the damage allocation routine.  Component Armor says "When you get to this group of boxes, each one takes an extra point of damage to remove." 

Think back to SM-X. where your ship was made up of 6 strings of systems, numbered 1-6.  In SM-X, one damage point was enough to mark off one system indicated by a letter in that string.  Component Armor would allow you to say "No, to kill the ECM system, you need to do 2 points of damage that deep into that hit location." and if there wasn't 2 damage -left-, the system remains up and the singleton point of damage is wasted.

It might not be transferable to SM-NE.

Hull

Would be covered in Starmada by increasing hull size.

And in SM-X by buying marines. smile

Prismatic Globe

Definitely would require a Starmada trait.

Cloaking Device

Covered in Starmada by "Cloaking Device".

Ebon Globe

Again, Starmada trait.

Yep.