 February 13, 2009 - 8:55pm | I'm having issues with how to resolve spaceship combat without the use of maps, counters, miniature or tape measures. I've emailed a few of you for advice, thank you. Your replies say that a Referee is needed but I want to avoid that if at all possible. Any more ideas out there? One of my ideas covers the placement of ships into zones, which is viable but it does not cover ship to ship combat. Ships can fire at any other ships in their zone. Large Capital ships can fire into the adjacent zones. Supply ships, Assault Carrier and the like hang out in the "Off the map".  |
 February 15, 2009 - 5:25am | First off your still using a map- its just a ladder or a flow chart but it is a map and while real tactics and maneuver here isn't important you can abstract this by assigning a value for success to each ship involved. so that instead of actually playing out a whole battle the regular way you resolve it with a few dice rolls. Off the top of my head and not necessarily a serious recommendation (But just something to get you thinking) total all the hull points or hull sizes involved; this is the value each fleet brings with it and then roll- highest sum of the roll and hull value wins. Loser must fall back. The % of difference between the 2 sums determines casualties for both sides on a chart. 1%-15% = 40% casualties for the victor and 50% for the loser. 16%-25%= 30% for the victor and 60% for the loser 26%-50%= 25% for victor and 70% for the loser and so on... maybe not using % but you would need a chart that would codify the rough values of one side getting a slight victory and both losing a lot of ships. going up to a resounding victory with with one side barely losing any ships and the other being routed/ destroyed. This chart could also specify that for a slight victory both sides must fall back. Unless its home territory for one side a better victory allows the victor to consolidate the area of the battle and a great victory allows the victor to follow up with a penetration deeper into enemy territory on the ladder. an automatic penetration move gives the victor an bonus value to add to the value based off the sum of his hulls to simulate confusion for the enemy by a massive route and follow up by the enemy. it also allows him to bring forward ships from his hanging back zone to the consolidated zone. You could also throw in a wrinkle that allows a fleet to recover some casualties if they stand pat for a round. basically a dice roll to see if some of the previous rounds casualties weren't that bad off and can be put back into service quickly but only if there is not follow up penetration by both players I might not be a dralasite, vrusk or yazirian but I do play one in Star Frontiers! |
February 15, 2009 - 4:12pm | Excellent suggestion. I will chew on this a bit. :-) |
February 17, 2009 - 10:57am | Second thought on my above suggestions- in the assigning of a value to ships based off the hull size you can also assign a value for an admiral as well be it + or - since the total value simply impacts chance of success adding in an admiral's value lets you quantify the chance that better leadership will impact the overall battle. This leads to scenarios with outgunned/lighter ships taking on heavier ships but through better leadership they manage to prevail. You could also assign values for crew motivation. Militia defending their home system will have a greater motivation and this could impact a battle. Where as militia tens or hundreds of light years from their system would be less so. Crews being green, regular, veteran or elite could also be factored in or not. Though factoring crew quality and motivation would most likely be an advanced optional rule but under this kind of system its easy to add in. In fact any number of factors imaginable could be factored in as a + or - to the hull number sum: supply and maintenance issues, crew fatigue, etc. I might not be a dralasite, vrusk or yazirian but I do play one in Star Frontiers! |
February 17, 2009 - 7:21pm | I do have a system of "Command Effects". Commander Effects Some officers and capital ships have commander effects that affect the performance of their fleet. Some commander effects are used at the beginning of a turn while others can be used at any time. Officer CE CE Officer Hold the line Captain of the Line + Power to weapons Chief Gunner, Power to shields Speed +1 between one star system Bonus Repair - 2 days to fix systems Dodge, automatic Evade, automatic Power to screens -20% to attack roll Power to weapons + 2d10 damage Accuracy to weapons +20% to hit You can not select the same CE more than once in a round. Once a CE has been spent it is gone until the end of the skirmish. For example, a Chief of the Ship could not spend her 3 CCs on "Power to the screens" in the same round. CCs may be spent on any ship in the fleet (assuming the ship has the ability to use the Command). Officers go down with the ship. Although the can use a lifeboat to escape to another ship. Officers that "swap ships" have a penalty due to the fact they need to get used to the systems and crew and the crew gets used to their command. A ship of Hull Size 12 or larger is considered a capital ship. |
February 17, 2009 - 7:24pm | I like your idea of "assign values". I toyed with a ship building system, even thought of putting it on cards. |
February 17, 2009 - 7:36pm | Here is my attempting at putting a pen to some engagement rules. I think it would work for a half dozen ships, but more than that it gets cumbersome. Roll Initiative (Winner Defender, Looser Attacker) Attacker declares any engagements Defender declares any engagements Defender and Attacker may attempt to evade Defender and Attacker declares intercepts, any damage is applied immediately. Attacker resolves all attacks with Defender noting the damage Defender my Dodge one attack Defender resolves all attacks Attacker my Dodge one attack Both sides apply damage Attacker: "Prepare to engage enemy ships." Defender: "Sir, they headed straight for us." Defender: "Evasive action! Attacker: "Fire!" Defender: "Sir, they have locked onto us. Incoming torpedos! Helm, prepare to dodge." |
February 18, 2009 - 8:07am | The sum of assigned values for hulls lets you handle any number of ships as the opposing fleets of 12 capitol ships or of 200 will be essentially balanced and the raw value of each fleet will be close to the other. An abstract combat system of a die roll to determine a winner,loser or advantaged fleet then a second die roll modified by the % of victory on the first to determine casualties for both fleets is quick and dirty but doesn't seem very exciting. Having multiple objectives within a combat zone that force players to separate out detachments and squadrons to cover various objectives with combat resolved for each group and the other player not knowing exactly what you've commited to that objective to bring in an element of surprise (which breeds excitement). if a fleet is defending- possible objectives would be protect the asteroid belt mining infrastructure, protect inhabited planets, protect system shipping. you may wish to specify that a planet has say 4 zones of approach and the enemy can come at it from any zone with any amount of ships. So that if he commits everything to zone A and the defender commits 1/4 of his strength to each zone not knowing where the main attack will come from he'll be disadvantaged and possibly wiped out in zone A but since ships in Zone B-D are unengaged a % percentage of their strength can respond to the threat in zone A there by balancing forces there. if the attacker had small detachments in zones B-D to engage ships there but they were only 2 ships each so he could say that the defender was engaged but the defender had 12 ships each- because its such an imballance of firepower the defender will most likely wipe out those 2 ships and still be able to transfer some ships (not as many as when unengaged). This creates opportunity to try to find an advantage by defeating a piece of the enemy fleet in detail through crafty choices (and a little luck) In a convoy escort/ raid scenario the raider has to commit some ships to the blocking force and some to the ambush force and still have enough ships to run down each freighter as they scatter for safety. 1 warship can only run down 1 freighter. so if the escort ships can tie up the attacker long enough then more of the freighters can escape and drop off radar then shut down all energy emmissions and go ballistic on a random course change. the raider has to deal with the escorts and capture as many of the frieghters- the escorts have the cold blooded roll of going down fighting to give the frieghters a chance to escape. A straight up meeting engagement would simply involve 2 fleets meeting in space and choices available would be the main battle fleet, the reserve, and flanking manuever detachment I might not be a dralasite, vrusk or yazirian but I do play one in Star Frontiers! |
February 18, 2009 - 9:19am | The sum of assigned values for hulls lets you handle any number of ships as the opposing fleets of 12 capitol ships or of 200 will be essentially balanced and the raw value of each fleet will be close to the other. An abstract combat system of a die roll to determine a winner,loser or advantaged fleet then a second die roll modified by the % of victory on the first to determine casualties for both fleets is quick and dirty but doesn't seem very exciting. Having multiple objectives within a combat zone that force players to separate out detachments and squadrons to cover various objectives with combat resolved for each group and the other player not knowing exactly what you've commited to that objective to bring in an element of surprise (which breeds excitement). Ahh! Here's an idea.
|
