If you're trying to combine scenario types, how about a Planetary
invasion/extraction mission? You could start with the FT mission where
you're trying to escort transport ships to a planet, either for extraction or
invasion, while an opponent defends the planet. However long the agressor
keeps appropriate ships in orbit is how long those services are available to
ground units. Also, the number of transports that survive
affects the troop size of the agressor/how many troops can be evacuated.
Once times are established, you can later play the SG2 scenario, based on
parameters established from the FT scenario.
Just a thought.
In a message dated 3/2/00 1:09:05 PM Central Standard Time,
> Hudak.Mike@dep.state.pa.us writes:
<< If you're trying to combine scenario types, how about a Planetary
invasion/extraction mission? You could start with the FT mission where
you're trying to escort transport ships to a planet, either for extraction or
invasion, while an opponent defends the planet. However long the agressor
keeps appropriate ships in orbit is how long those services are available to
ground units. Also, the number of transports that survive
affects the troop size of the agressor/how many troops can be
evacuated.
Once times are established, you can later play the SG2 scenario, based on
parameters established from the FT scenario.
> [quoted text omitted]
We did a combined DSII/FT scenario set in the Star Wars universe, it
went something like this: A planet (i don't remember the name) declared for
the Rebel Alliance, and Alliance ships came to protect the planet while
Imperial forces on planet were hunted down, by the locals. The local Imperial
Governor, upon hearing word of this, sends a sizable fleet to put down this
treason. It chases off the Rebels, and some of the fleet stays to blockade the
planet, while the bulk of the fleet goes running off to chase the Rebels. Not
wanting to abandon their new found friends, the Rebel fleet backtracks for a
rescue
mission.
FT Mission, Rebel Alliance: Break thru the Imperial blockade, and hold orbit
until transports land, pick up rebels, and lift off. Break orbit and leave as
fast as possible. During mission, protect transports at all costs.
FT Mission, Imperials: Hold orbital superiority, until reinforcements arrive.
Prevent escape of the Rebel scum, attack and destroy as many of the transports
as possible.
The FT part of the scenario started first, but went pretty much 1 for 1 turn
wise with the DSII scenario, with the turn the transports landed as the start
of the evacuation...
DSII Mission, Rebel Alliance: Evacuate as many civilians as possible to
starport, hold starport until last transports are away. Protect planetary
officials.
DSII Mission, Imperials: Pursue Rebel scum, capture as many civilians as
possible, prevent escape of Rebels and rebellious civlians. Capture or kill
planetary officials.
There were a lot of stands of civies, including one stand of 'Planetary
Officials" who had priority for both the Rebels and the Imperials.
This scenario was designed by Scott McKinley, one of the regular FT gamers in
Austin, at the University Wargaming Society. It was an interesting tense
scenario, with many frustrations and problems for both sides...
John
> "Hudak, Mike" wrote:
> If you're trying to combine scenario types, how about a Planetary
I'm not sure it's a good idea to link the SG turns all that closely with the
FT turns. The FT turns will be equal to roughly 3 SG turns. Just for
comparison, the Beer Game only lasted 6 turns, with a full platoon on either
side. Even if we doubled that length, which is about all you can hope to get
into 4 hours, we're still only talking about 4 FT turns. For the FT game to
have any impact at all, you're really going to have to peg their success to
something other than the number of turns.
-Mike
> "Hudak, Mike" wrote:
Maybe so, but it comes down to how many turns the FT ships can maintain orbit
without being driven off by the defenders. It would seem to me trying to hold
orbit for more than two turns would be very difficult. Base the SG2 game on
how long the attackers can actually hold orbit (And how many ships survive
orbit.)
But then again, having played only one FT game, and no SG2 games, I may be way
off base here.
<>
<>
<> The GreenWorks Gazette is coming! www.GreenWorksChannel.org
> On 2-Mar-00 at 16:22, Michael Sarno (msarno@ptdprolog.net) wrote:
However
> > long the agressor keeps appropriate ships in orbit is how long those
For
> the FT game to have any impact at all, you're really going to have to
Sounds perfect, 6 SG turns take 4 FT turns. So in the FT game you have
Approach and chase off defenders, 3 turns. Orbit planet and drop off troops, 1
turn. Hold high orbitals (with support missions depending on where you are in
orbit) 2 turns while 6 turns of SG occur. Recover shuttles and break orbit 1
turn.
So overall you have 7 FT turns and 6 SG turns.
> "Hudak, Mike" wrote:
> Maybe so, but it comes down to how many turns the FT ships can
OK, your scenario idea is the number of troops for the attacker is directly
proportional to the number of rounds they can hold orbit. What I'm saying is
that you're going to have to adjust that greatly. If the attacker can't get
orbit, then you don't have a game. If the attacker gets 1 turn of orbit, he'll
get a force of size X. If he gets two turns of orbit, he gets 2X. I'd find it
difficult, at best, to design a sceanrio that plays as well when a force of
fixed size goes up against 1X as it does against 2X. As an alternate, I'd
suggest that you playtest the FT scenario to see what can be reasonably
expected. Then adjust the size of the attacker's
force +/-10%
based on how well the FT team does in their transport duties. Anything greater
than 20% is going to sway the odd too greatly.
-Mike
> Roger Books wrote:
> Orbit planet and drop off
It seems that you won't have much variance from that, though. If that's the
case, why not take that as read and only play the SG portion?
-Mike
Coming into the discussion a litle late due to Time Zones.....but...
At CANCON this year we played the interlinked scenarios of SG and FT over the
three days. Two games parralleled what you are suggesting VERY closely.
In our case the FT battle determined how many dropships would managed to
deploy, therefore dictating how many troops and vehicles would land to
participate in the ongoing ground war!
After our play testing and 'brain storming' we decided that concurrent games
really weren't satisfactory. As someone has pointed out, SG game turns take a
lot longer in most games to play through than FT. Swapping from FT to SG back
to FT tends to break the continuity of the game but does allow some people to
play in both games if so inclined!
What would be wonderful to do but is likely impractical is keep the FT players
totally isolated from the SG players and play out the SG game in teh morning
and then the FT midday then another SG game in the
afternoon/evening
and finallya FT game to finish!
I'd like to see the AAR in any case!
Cheers,
Owen
> -----Original Message-----
> On 2-Mar-00 at 17:47, Michael Sarno (msarno@ptdprolog.net) wrote:
Recover
> > shuttles and break orbit 1 turn.
How many troop ships make it through? At the end of SG turn 3 the person in
charge has to make the call as to when to retreat, do you start bringing your
people back to the shuttles or do you hope that the ships can hang out 3 turns
instead of 2?
Victory, troops complete mission and escape. Make the mission something like
capturing some individual.
Draw, troops do not complete mission and still escape.
Loss, troops do not escape.
> Roger Books wrote:
> On 2-Mar-00 at 17:47, Michael Sarno (msarno@ptdprolog.net) wrote:
If
> > that's the
That really doesn't address my concern, though. I have yet to see a FT game
where side A ia guaranteed of making orbit, but it is still up in the air as
to how long they can hold it. More likely, you have a scenario where team A
can't make orbit, or, if they do make it, theycan only hold it for one turn.
Again, that just doesn't see like something that would need to be played to
add another level to the SG game. For this to be worth the effort of filling
two slots and coordinating the rest, the first scenario has to have a definite
impact on the second game, but still leave the second game undecided. I'm not
saying that this orbital insertion idea can't work, I'm just saying that
nothing proposed so far sounds like it will work.
-Mike
The set up should allow for cross loading the landing force on three or more
ships. The main mission is landed along with a larger (not played diversionary
mission). For playability you want both a force that can suffer some attrition
in space and yet not so large that if it gets through intact constitutes a
full scale invasion.
[quoted original message omitted]
> Andrew Apter wrote:
> The set up should allow for cross loading the landing force on three
I'm not sure if we're saying the same thing. But this is how I'd structure the
initial playtest. I'd create the FT scenario so that it is almost certain that
some troop carrying ships will get through. I'd use the Cargo Space rules from
MT to determine the carrying capacity of the various ships of the fleet and
the dropships. I'd make a good guess at the "average" CS landing for the
scenario, which would be modified by several playtests. Then based on the
number of CS landed, I'd give the landing forces a number of units
within +/-
20% of the baseline. The SG battle would only be small part of the overall
planetside battle, but performance in the FT game would have a definite
impact.
-Mike
One thing I was thinking is you could set up the scenario such that you know
how many marines are going to hit the planet. For instance using "Honor
Harringtonish" setup, the forces guarding the planet are doing maneuvers away
from the planet and you've slipped the aggressor force in without power.
Thus, you know exactly how many marines hit the planet, what you don't know is
how long they have.
With this kind of situation you can even play out the SG part first. You just
end the scenario at the point the marines call for pickup. Then you run the FT
scenario, if there are ships in orbit when pickup is called for extraction
occurs, otherwise the marines are stuck.
Victory for the marine player, accomplishing objective and reaching extraction
point.
Victory for the fleet player, surviving and having ships in orbit X turns.
Victory for the aggressor force, marines accomplishing objective
_AND_ escaping onboard ship.
Very nice, best suggestion I've seen so far. Kudos to you.
Please respond to gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
To: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
cc: (bcc: Aron Clark/AM/Avid)
Subject: Re: FW: Combined FT - SG2 Scenario
One thing I was thinking is you could set up the scenario such that you know
how many marines are going to hit the planet. For instance using "Honor
Harringtonish" setup, the forces guarding the planet are doing maneuvers away
from the planet and you've slipped the aggressor force in without power.
Thus, you know exactly how many marines hit the planet, what you don't know is
how long they have.
With this kind of situation you can even play out the SG part first. You just
end the scenario at the point the marines call for pickup. Then you run the FT
scenario, if there are ships in orbit when pickup is called for extraction
occurs, otherwise the marines are stuck.
Victory for the marine player, accomplishing objective and reaching extraction
point.
Victory for the fleet player, surviving and having ships in orbit X turns.
Victory for the aggressor force, marines accomplishing objective
_AND_ escaping onboard ship.
Roger
I'll throw out an idea.
FT Game: The Defender would have a force of mainly fighter groups (ground
based), corvettes, frigates, destroyers, and a couple of cruisers. The
Agressor force would have larger, but fewer ships.
Agressor: 3 goals. 1) Draw defense forces away from the planet so that cloaked
transports can enter orbit. 2) Ortillery strikes against ground targets.
3)
Reduce the number of defending fighters. Defender:
2 goals. 1) Keep the agressor away from the planet. 2) Protect/Conserve
the planetary defense force (Fighters and Ground units).
Rules of Engagement: Agressor forces will attack until X number of turns has
passed (or real time limit is reached). At this time the cloaked transports
will decloak in
orbit, launch the landing craft, and re-cloak. Each defender air group
on the planet or in orbit may make an attack against the landing craft. Each
ship in orbit may make one Ortillery attack per turn. Ortillery attacks will
reduce the Defender's Ground assets. Agressor force ships must attempt retreat
if they sustain over 50% loss of hull boxes. Agressor fleet must
retreat if it loses 50% of ships to damage/retreat.
Defender forces may withdraw at any time. However, this will allow the
Agressor forces to make Ortillery attacks. This may, however, preserve fighter
groups.
Special Rules:
Ships/Fighters in orbit are treated as 1 range band closer (does NOT
extend maximum range). Landed fighters may not attack. Landed fighters are
protected as heavy fighters. Ortillery strikes will choose Fighter or
Artillery to attack. These attacks (if successful) will reduce the ammount of
Air Strikes and Artillery barrages that the defenders may use.
SG game: Agressor force will have a set amount of assets. Artillery will be
limited (Some Ortillery ability is expected from the space forces).
Defense force will be in possition and/or hidden. It will consist of
infantry, some vehicles, fighter groups, and artillery. The fighters and
artillery will depend on how much damage they took from Ortillery strikes.
Agressor: Goal: Secure a spaceport to facilitate reinforcement by additional
troops. Defender: Goal: Defend the spaceport to encumber agressor
reinforcement.
Special Rules: Agressor: Agressor forces get X number of Ortillery chits per
ship in orbit (if FT game ends with agressor forces in orbit). Number should
be based on # of
weapons of Class-2 or larger.
Agressor forces get X number of Anti-Air defense (ADS?) based on the
number of PDS in orbit. Defender: Defender gets a number of Air Strikes based
on the number of surviving fighter groups from the FT game. Defender gets a
number of Artillery chits based on losses from Ortillery strikes in the FT
game. Defender may NOT direct ortillery strikes as any surviving ships will be
hunting for the cloaked transports or fighting surviving Agressor ships.
Anyway, its an idea.
> Roger Books wrote:
> With this kind of situation you can even play out the SG part
This doesn't seem like a bad idea. Although, neither scenario really affects
the play of the other scenario. It is a good
points-based final victory, though.
-Mike
What about an evacuate the embassies type scenario. A small force holds off
a mob protecting a group of civilians till help arrives. In space
several (non cooperative) nations race to be the first to the rescue.
Meanwhile the local space force tries to delay the force that impugns its
sovereignty.
A
basic boxer rebellion scenario with greater factionalism amongst the rescuers.
Use sealed orders on the rescue side with orders ranging from simple rescue,
to make sure ambassador X does not make it home.
Andy
> "Bell, Brian K" wrote:
> FT Game:
[snip]
> SG game:
[snip]
> Anyway, its an idea.
Brian, Yeah, but it's a good idea. I like the different goals and the scenario
specific rules should do the trick. Can we expect to see this at ECC
IV? <g>
If not, please, send the AAR to the list.
-Mike