THIS IS DRIVING ME NUTS!!! (Well, nuttier than I already am.)
I've been trying to piece together the design rules of Gothic Thrust. So far,
I can't get the blasted thing to fight correctly. I'm tempted to drop
construction rules altogether and just pull an EFSB. The only promblem with
that is:
1. How do I determine DP, and points cost? 2. I can't use my ramming rules
idea without hull strengths. I'll have to dream up somthing different.
I've put all the current rules up on the rules page:
http://www.uwm.edu/~cthulhu/FT/gothrules.htm
Comments, suggestion, flames, headache remedies? :-(
> THIS IS DRIVING ME NUTS!!! (Well, nuttier than I already am.)
I'll
> have to dream up somthing different.
I'm not really certain why, but I like the Idea of BFG. It's a difficult thing
to explain, but it just...appeals to me. Plus, I REALLLY like the ships. It's
not going to replace FT, as far as I'm concerned, but I certainly intend to
buy it (from one of them discount places) when it's released. Even if I just
get it for the ships.
What exactly is giving you so much trouble when getting them to "fight
correctly"? Is it movement or combat? Or is it simply impossible to
re-create the BFG ships using FT rules? Have you tried
reverse-engineering them? You should be able to get an approximate
point cost, at least, that way.
I'll have to sit down and give the White Dwarf rules a more thorough reading
tonight. I had intended to playtest them, but my gaming group has been in more
than the usual state of chaos recently.
(On a not-entirely-unrelated note, if there is anyone in the
Philadelphia area on this list, stop by Jenkintown Hobby Center tomorrow
(1/30/99), for their last day of business. I haven't been there in a
few weeks, but I am told that there is still a lot of lead/pewter left.)
> John C wrote:
> What exactly is giving you so much trouble when getting them to "fight
Opps... Typo... I meant "fit correctly." I've tried to use my conversion rules
to convert several of the BFG ships to FT 2.5. First I figure out the MASS of
the weapons and systems. Then I try to build the rest of the ship around it. I
quickly discover that no matter how much overal MASS I make the ship, I can't
get it the way I want it. Here's an example of what I mean:
Lunar Class Crusier MASS MASS 130, 39 DP, Average Hull 39 Thrust Rating 4 26
FTL 13 2 Fire Cons 2 3 Points of armor 3 Level 1 screen 6
Armament: 6x 2 arc Class 2 batteries 12 Class 4 Lance system with 2 standard
emitters. 16 1 SML with a 4 load Magazine. 11 2 PDS 2
---
Total Mass: 130
That is my final attempt at a Lunar Class Cruiser. On it's face, it looks
fine. But it doesn't seem to fit my vision of the ship. First of all, I
intended to give it a strong rated hull to give better chance of surviving
ramming under my proposed damage rules (BTW, what does everyone think of those
rules?). I also wanted to give it more armor points than 3 and a level 2
screen.
Know I think I can do a couple of things to help get me to this goal. First, I
can reduce the thrust rating to 2. I can also change the MASS formula from 3 x
Rating to 2 x Rating. I figure the this will give me 17 more MASS points to
play with. Enough to give it a strong hull and 4 more points of armor, but
nothing for a screen upgrade.
Granted this is merely a playtest ship from WD 225, and we don't know what the
final version will look like. Also I can scrap the construction system
altogether and take JTs suggestion to put together the ships the way I want.
However, I confess that I'm a little anal retentive and I feel "dirty" if I
can't use the construction system.
<SOB!> I need help!
> Opps... Typo... I meant "fit correctly." I've tried to use my
Doesn't it suck being a perfectionist? I used to suffer from this
myself...until I discovered the "It's Good ENOUGH, Dammit!" philosophy.
It's amazing what this has done for my painting speed....
In any case, I see what you mean. Reducing Thrust would be my first
move--Imperial ships seem to be the very definition of slow and
ponderous. If it restricts their manuverability too much, you can just
let them use all of their Thrust points in a turn--like the Kra'Vak.
Playing around with the same design, I came up with: Lunar Class Cruiser MASS:
145 Strong Hull (52 DP) 52 10 Points of Armor 10 THRUST: 2 13 FTL 13 Screen
Level 2 14
ARMAMENTS
6xClass 2 Batteries 12*
1 SML with a 4 load Magazine 11
2xPDS 2 Lance System 16 2xFireCons 2
*These are 3 arc guns; the MASS could probably be shaved down a
little--not enough to make much difference, though.
It's not THAT much bigger than yours; would it be workable? That's
without reducing the MASS of the Lance Emitter--that would bring it down
to 141...shave off a point of armor, and you are at 140.
I do, by the way, like your Ramming rules. Using the Hull strength makes
sense. I'd still want to add some kind of Ram, to increase damage
a bit more (Too many years of Car Wars. Gotta love those Ram Plates, don't
you?), but that might be just guilding the lily.
I do hope that they do Tyrannid rules at some point. If the ships are, in
fact, larger than the orginial releases, it will finally give me a fleet with
some capital ships. Sixty ships is a decent fleet...but when
your largest ship is the size of an crusier, it can be a bit demoralizing.
John C, also the man, sez:
***
I do, by the way, like your Ramming rules. Using the Hull strength makes
sense. I'd still want to add some kind of Ram, to increase damage a bit more
(Too many years of Car Wars. Gotta love those Ram Plates, don't you?), but
that might be just guilding the lily.
***
That was the idea I was trying to get across. Concerning the 'renewable'
quality I spoke of earlier, I just meant that the psuedo-armor value was
a threshold that remained each turn the ship was doing ramming as long as the
ram itself was intact, but any excess damage under the original ramming rules
became internal damage.
A small ship's ram would allow ramming other small ships with impunity, but
make ramming a large ship something to stop and consider.
However, I've lost track of Mark's current ramming rules, so I'll hush until I
find it again.
The_Beast
That sucks because the Tyrannids are the best race they have...
> John C wrote:
> Lunar Class Cruiser
Well, I came up with the 2-arc-Class-2s for one reason:
Broadside-only
arcs.
> It's not THAT much bigger than yours; would it be workable? That's
I noticed several errors in your calcuations. First is an error in the area of
Hull and DP; 40% of 145 is 58, not 52. Secondly, the MASS for the engines is
wrong; 10% of 145 is 14.5 rounding up to 15. The same for the screens and FTL.
Lunar Class Cruiser MASS: 145 Strong Hull (58 DP) 58 10 Points of Armor 10
THRUST: 2 15 FTL 15 Screen Level 2 15
ARMAMENTS
6xClass 2 Batteries 12*
1 SML with a 4 load Magazine 11
2xPDS 2 Lance System 16 2xFireCons 2 TOTAL MASS: 160 ^^^ You are off by 15
MASS.
> I do, by the way, like your Ramming rules. Using the Hull strength
Well, I was think that the ram was merely a reflection of the
re-inforced nature of the ship hull strength. The tougher the ship, the
stronger the ram. I didn't want to make a ramming ship invulunerable (though I
can be if it rolls a 0 or negetive interger), I just wanted a
way to make ramming a more appealing option for people playing BFG/FT
games.
> At 11:04 PM 1/29/99 -0600, you wrote:
Broadside-only
> arcs.
I know; I just thought that the restricted arcs would allow you to justifiably
reduce the mass a little. By.5 mass, perhaps.
> It's not THAT much bigger than yours; would it be workable? That's
Ummmm....oops? I'm not sure what happened; I was using one of the FTFB Excell
spreadsheets. I must have become confused somewhere along the way. I blame
society. Or putting in some wrong numbers somwhere along the way.
[Snip]
> TOTAL MASS: 160
It was...it was...a test, yeah, that's the ticket! A test of your ship
building abilities! You passed with flying colors...now, if you will excuse
me, I need to bang my head against a nearby wall.
> I do, by the way, like your Ramming rules. Using the Hull strength
Have you ever gamed with a guy who just *likes* to ram? Even when it makes no
sense at all? Just because it's "cool"? Some people are like that. Normal
people, I agree, need some kind of incentive. Are you going to keep the "Crew
must roll to avoid panic" rule?
> On Mon, 1 Feb 1999, John Crimmins wrote:
> > TOTAL MASS: 160
Ouch... Why don't you just use a calculator, pencil, and paper in the future.
You'll make fewer errors and there is less of a chance of brain damage.
> Have you ever gamed with a guy who just *likes* to ram? Even when it
No, I haven't yet. But that's more or less the point of these rules; to make
ramming a more appealing tactical option and to mold the game to fit the BFG
universe. Panic rule? Where is that in the FT rules?
Later,
> At 12:37 PM 2/1/99 -0600, you wrote:
It...soothes me. And I see such pretty colors!
> Have you ever gamed with a guy who just *likes* to ram? Even when it
Badly phrased on my part. It's in the original FT rulebook, under the ramming
section. Basically, when a ship attempts to ram the player must roll 1d6. On a
six, the ram occurs. On any other result, the crew refuses to go through with
it.