Generally I'm pretty happy with Derek & Beth's "Just whose planet is this
anyway" campaign rules, but one thing that bugs me is the concept that
everyone only has one planet to start, then you explode out across the stars
and find other planets with functional economies. I'd much rather start out
with established territories, but the problem then becomes "how do you decide
who gets what?"
And the answer, I think, is "Bid for them." Let's say you start out with four
players on a map with 17 stars. Each player has a home star (possibly all have
the *same* home star) plus a treasury with, say, 500 points. Everyone writes
down bids on each planet, and *regardless* of whether you win a bid, those
points are spent.
Depending on what you want, you can say that the winning bid for each planet
has 100% of the planet, with an economy equal to what he bid minus the next
highest bid. For example, Islamic Fed bids 20 for Coronado, and Alarishi
Empire bids 102. The AE spends 102 for developing the planet but the economy
runs at 82, and both the AE and IF have spent 20 points for which they get no
return.
Or, after all bids are in, all the bidders on a particular planet could agree
to share. In our example The AE then gets 102 from the planet and the IF gets
20.
Unused points can be added to the Naval Construction Fund.
Is there a link to the rules?
Michael Brown
[quoted original message omitted]
> On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 01:40:25PM -0700, Michael Brown wrote:
http://www.users.bigpond.com/derekfulton/Articles/Just%20whose%20planet%
20is%20this%20anyway.htm
or start from http://www.users.bigpond.com/derekfulton/ and follow the
links.
R
Thanks!
Michael Brown
[quoted original message omitted]
G'day,
> I'd much rather start out with established territories,
The bidding idea sounds like a nifty twist. Just for info sake Derek and I
played a mini campaign between us where we started with some planets. As there
were only two of us we used a rather arbitrary method that probably doesn't
work for more than two people. We divided the board in two and picked a home
system within that area. The for the systems in contact with the home system
in my half we both rolled D10, if I rolled higher than him it was mine (and we
determined its economy using the standard D10x20), if I rolled less it was
unowned. When then repeated the same in Derek's half of the board, except this
time if he rolled more than me he got the planet etc. This give us each a
small starting empire. For moderate sized empires we thought you'd just repeat
the "who owns it roll" for those systems connected to the ones you found you
"won" in the first round of rolls. For larger still keep repeating until you
run out of systems connected to ones you own... that way empires! can be large
but there can still be pockets of undeveloped land so to speak. For
multiplayer (were board division isn't as easy), instead of
half the board define x-hexes out as a sphere of influence and check in
there for ownership (that approach works in the fantasy campaigns we
run).
Cheers
On or about Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 09:47:53AM +1100, Beth.Fulton@csiro.au
typed:
> For multiplayer (were board division isn't as easy), instead of half
There's already a protocol for this sort of thing - it shows up in
Thomas Anderson's jump-lane plotting system (at
http://users.ox.ac.uk/~univ0938/sc/freakazoid.html). Just construct the
Voronoi partition from the homeworlds, and use that to define the areas of
influence...
(It's simpler than I've made it sound. Basically, for each world, it's either
owned by the player who has a homeworld nearest to it or neutral.
:-)
Bugger! I go off the list for a year or 2 to do stuff (wedding, honeymoon,
kid, etc) come back and in the first week find someone stealing my ideas.:)
My idea was to have the players start with 2 funds. One a development fund
that could only be spent on developing their intial economies. The other was a
buying fund that they could use to bid for planets, all roughly equally
distant from Earth, and purchase military forces. That meant that those
bidding high for good productive systems would then have small forces and vice
vercea.
As I havent run the campagin yet (still rounding up players) I cant say if it
works well but it is a thought.
Tony. "wilko over and out"
> From: "laserlight@quixnet.net" <laserlight@quixnet.net>
This message was sent through MyMail http://www.mymail.com.au
> twilko@ozemail.com.au wrote:
> Bugger! I go off the list for a year or 2 to do stuff (wedding,
If any one is interested in using the FTJava play-by-email system for
campaign games, I'm willing to help out the GameMaster. I know Roger has
expressed interest in such a project.
On Tuesday, October 07, 2003 10:58 AM, Jon Davis
[SMTP:davisje@nycap.rr.com]
wrote:
> If any one is interested in using the FTJava play-by-email system for
Sounds interesting. It may be fiddly on the GM to allow R&D, though.
Brendan 'Neath Southern Skies
IMPORTANT: Notice to be read with this E-mail
1. Before opening any attachments, please check them for
viruses and defects. 2. This e-mail (including any
attachments) may contain confidential information for the use of the intended
recipient. 3. If you are not the intended recipient, please: contact the
sender by return
e-mail, to notify the misdirection; do not copy, print,
re-transmit, store or act in reliance on this e-mail; and
delete and destroy all copies of this e-mail. 4. Any views
expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender and are not
a statement of Commonwealth policy unless otherwise stated. 5. Finally, please
do not remove this notice, so that any other readers are aware of these
restrictions.
On Tuesday, October 07, 2003 10:48 AM, twilko@ozemail.com.au
> [SMTP:twilko@ozemail.com.au] wrote:
Where are you based, Tony? I'm in Melbourne.
Brendan 'Neath Southern Skies
IMPORTANT: Notice to be read with this E-mail
1. Before opening any attachments, please check them for
viruses and defects. 2. This e-mail (including any
attachments) may contain confidential information for the use of the intended
recipient. 3. If you are not the intended recipient, please: contact the
sender by return
e-mail, to notify the misdirection; do not copy, print,
re-transmit, store or act in reliance on this e-mail; and
delete and destroy all copies of this e-mail. 4. Any views
expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender and are not
a statement of Commonwealth policy unless otherwise stated. 5. Finally, please
do not remove this notice, so that any other readers are aware of these
restrictions.
> If any one is interested in using the FTJava play-by-email system
I'd want to wait till the Tournament is over, but I'm at least theoretically
willing to run a PAU vs IF campaign then.
On Tuesday, October 07, 2003 1:06 PM, Laserlight
> [SMTP:laserlight@quixnet.net] wrote:
You know, nasty thoughts are bubbling up over this. I just finished reading
"War of Honor" again yesterday; using an email environment you can run the
government as separate to the admirals.
Say with 4 players per side, each player is a fleet admiral or subordinate for
the actual combats. Between them, they also divide up the roles of: President,
Minister of the Exchequer, Minister of War (Admiralty), Minister for Trade.
El Presidente directs policy "Take this system; build more ships". Treasurer
directs funds "200 MCr for shipbuilding, 10 MCr for security, 100 MCr for my
pockets" Admiralty directs ship dispositions "3 battleships to Yeltsin, 50
destroyers to Grendelsbane" Trade minister juggles the building priorities
"Construct 1 battleship & 3 cruisers this month, so we can build a
superdreadnought next month".
It all depends on the background detail outside actual fleet operations I
suppose (and fairly dedicated players).
Brendan 'Neath Southern Skies
IMPORTANT: Notice to be read with this E-mail
1. Before opening any attachments, please check them for
viruses and defects. 2. This e-mail (including any
attachments) may contain confidential information for the use of the intended
recipient. 3. If you are not the intended recipient, please: contact the
sender by return
e-mail, to notify the misdirection; do not copy, print,
re-transmit, store or act in reliance on this e-mail; and
delete and destroy all copies of this e-mail. 4. Any views
expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender and are not
a statement of Commonwealth policy unless otherwise stated. 5. Finally, please
do not remove this notice, so that any other readers are aware of these
restrictions.
> Robertson, Brendan wrote:
> Laserlight wrote:
> I'd want to wait till the Tournament is over, but I'm at least
That's a good idea. Most of my work is complete, but the players have more
games ahead of them.
On Tuesday, October 07, 2003 3:03 PM, Jon Davis
[SMTP:davisje@nycap.rr.com]
wrote:
> > Sounds interesting. It may be fiddly on the GM to allow R&D,
Replacing all those destroyed fighters is a pain when proper resupply rules
are in effect.
Brendan 'Neath Southern Skies
IMPORTANT: Notice to be read with this E-mail
1. Before opening any attachments, please check them for
viruses and defects. 2. This e-mail (including any
attachments) may contain confidential information for the use of the intended
recipient. 3. If you are not the intended recipient, please: contact the
sender by return
e-mail, to notify the misdirection; do not copy, print,
re-transmit, store or act in reliance on this e-mail; and
delete and destroy all copies of this e-mail. 4. Any views
expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender and are not
a statement of Commonwealth policy unless otherwise stated. 5. Finally, please
do not remove this notice, so that any other readers are aware of these
restrictions.
Sounds like fun email me when you are ready to start apter@bellsouth.net
> From: "Robertson, Brendan" <Brendan.Robertson@dva.gov.au>