• From: Denver, CO
  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 3,578

Topic: Starmada/Multiple PDS

beowulfjb@aol.com wrote:

> Hello everyone,
> 
>      I have been playing Starmada for the last week  here in
> Jacksonville, Fla.  I have had lots of fun designing  ships. 
> So far, my friends and I are using the Compendium rules.  It 
> seems easier for the new players. I have made Klingon type
> ships  with 6 blasters and 4 strike missiles for my friends to use.
>  They are  speed 9 with Lv4 shields.   The ships I uses are
> designed just  as
> WW2 battleships and cruisers with Rail guns in FX2 or FX3 &
> Ax2 or  AX3, etc.
> arcs for main turrets and Laser Cannons for the secondary
> weapons  (PB&SB). 
> Its been great!

Glad to hear it. smile

>     I was wondering if its legal to place 2 Point defense 
> systems on a ship?
>  I designed a ship like that and gave it no shields  (!)  I
> have each PDS one on every other turn.  This gives the ship
> the  equivalent protection of Level
> 4 shields.  While the first is on for a  turn, the second
> recharges.  It makes the ship resistant to Ion beams and 
> particle beams also.  And if any Marine boarding pods attempt
> to board,  those rolling 1 to 4 don't bounce off, they are
> eliminated (I think that's how  that would happen).  The Ship
> printout looks funny because there are no  shields. Its is a
> bit costly... But is this allowed?

Sure... why not?

Of course, in Starmada X, the benefit of having a second PDS is lost...

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

mj12games's Website

  • Registered: 2005-03-28
  • Posts: 287

Re: Starmada/Multiple PDS

cricket wrote:
beowulfjb@aol.com wrote:

>     I was wondering if its legal to place 2 Point defense 
> systems on a ship?
>  I designed a ship like that and gave it no shields  (!)  I
> have each PDS one on every other turn.  This gives the ship
> the  equivalent protection of Level
> 4 shields.  While the first is on for a  turn, the second
> recharges.  It makes the ship resistant to Ion beams and 
> particle beams also.  And if any Marine boarding pods attempt
> to board,  those rolling 1 to 4 don't bounce off, they are
> eliminated (I think that's how  that would happen).  The Ship
> printout looks funny because there are no  shields. Its is a
> bit costly... But is this allowed?

Sure... why not?

Of course, in Starmada X, the benefit of having a second PDS is lost...

Game effects may be lost but it would provide redundancy, right?
If one gets destroyed the other is still there.

  • From: Denver, CO
  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 3,578

Re: Starmada/Multiple PDS

Taltos wrote:

Game effects may be lost but it would provide redundancy, right?
If one gets destroyed the other is still there.

That is correct... but you have to pay "full price" for each unit.

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

mj12games's Website

  • From: Denver, CO
  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 3,578

Re: Starmada/Multiple PDS

samuel i. ulmschneider wrote:

> Yeah, it get prohibitively expensive fast, unless you happen
> to have a very small hull and a very high TL for Special
> Equipment.  However, in VBAM, this is quite possible --
> design 'escort corvettes' to do squadron duty with larger
> corvettes, and give them two PDS and minimal armament apiece
> -- mobile shield generators!

This all reminds me... nowhere in the rules does it explicitly say that you can have redundant systems; yet I see no reason to disallow them.

Should we write an official rule to address this?

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

mj12games's Website

  • Registered: 2005-03-30
  • Posts: 272

Re: Starmada/Multiple PDS

cricket wrote:
samuel i. ulmschneider wrote:

> Yeah, it get prohibitively expensive fast, unless you happen
> to have a very small hull and a very high TL for Special
> Equipment.  However, in VBAM, this is quite possible --
> design 'escort corvettes' to do squadron duty with larger
> corvettes, and give them two PDS and minimal armament apiece
> -- mobile shield generators!

This all reminds me... nowhere in the rules does it explicitly say that you can have redundant systems; yet I see no reason to disallow them.

Should we write an official rule to address this?

Probably ought to, the next time you do a new edition.  Clarify which systems have stackable effects and which just serve as backups.

On a related note, I'd love to see all those pieces of special equipment split into two categories, say "Equipment" and "Upgrades", with "Equipment" being all the stuff that counts toward (and is lost from) Q hits, and "Upgrades" being everything else (for ex, Armor Plating).  Making a formal division would save a lot of confusion.

Rich

  • Registered: 2005-03-28
  • Posts: 158

Re: Starmada/Multiple PDS

Rich wrote:

On a related note, I'd love to see all those pieces of special equipment split into two categories, say "Equipment" and "Upgrades", with "Equipment" being all the stuff that counts toward (and is lost from) Q hits, and "Upgrades" being everything else (for ex, Armor Plating).  Making a formal division would save a lot of confusion.

Rich

Excellent Idea!

  • Registered: 2005-03-29
  • Posts: 859

Re: Starmada/Multiple PDS

A question:

Are security teams and marines affected by TL? In KDLadage's Fleet Designer it says no, but for ages I've designed them as being affected by TL. Am I wrong (just saying in case...:D)

  • Registered: 2005-03-28
  • Posts: 287

Re: Starmada/Multiple PDS

There is a post around here somewhere (failed to find it with a fast search) where Dan listed out the TL affected stuff.

I thought they both were "officially" and because I promptly house ruled that the security teams were not.  lol

  • Registered: 2005-03-28
  • Posts: 158

Re: Starmada/Multiple PDS

http://mj12games.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=287&highlight=

This is the thread where I asked about it some time ago... and I was given an answer. The list indicates that Security Teams and Marines would be affected; but Troops would not -- which is something that makes no sense to me.

So... I can correct the Tables tab of the Shipyard sheet to reflect this... but I am not sure that I will use that rule in my games.

  • From: Denver, CO
  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 3,578

Re: Starmada/Multiple PDS

KDLadage wrote:

http://mj12games.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=287&highlight=

This is the thread where I asked about it some time ago... and I was given an answer. The list indicates that Security Teams and Marines would be affected; but Troops would not -- which is something that makes no sense to me.

The reason (in my mind) is simple:

Marines and Security Teams have actual equipment that allows them to do what they do -- especially Marines with their boarding pods. It is possible, then, for technology to reduce the amount of space taken up by this equipment.

Troops, on the other hand, are merely people and bunks. It's hard to reduce the space requirement for these -- unless you pull a Star Trek and turn all your embarked troops into calcified dodecahedrons... smile

However, this is my ruling -- and it is one that does not affect gameplay or balance. So, if you want to change it, go right ahead. I can see an argument for Security to be unaffected, but Marines really should remain tied to TL.

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

mj12games's Website

  • Registered: 2005-04-03
  • Posts: 68

Re: Starmada/Multiple PDS

The last time this debate came up, the thing that popped into my mind in the space vs. TL debate with Marines and Security Teams was Farscape and their DRDs (including the Scarran anti-personnel models). So, in my mind, the Security Teams themselves go from armed individuals protecting the ship at the low-tech end, to automated anti-personnel weaponry at the high tech end. This is my way of explaining away the fact that they are affected by size.

As for Troops, I do agree that they shouldn't be miniaturized by tech, since your species isn't going to be getting any smaller (I hope).

-Tyrel

  • Registered: 2005-03-29
  • Posts: 859

Re: Starmada/Multiple PDS

The Asgard? They are high-tech, and small...:D big_smile