On a GZGverse Campaign Book:
This almost seems like a 'per gaming group' thing as if you write the 'verse
to be
Carrier-centric, the fighter jocks will be happy. If you write it LoB
heavy, the SDN crowd will be happy. If you can jump into a system anywhere,
the dreaded
near-C rock crowd will
be overjoyed. It might be an interesting collaborative project to develop a
version of this for a particular gaming group (Hmmm, I might know one...). But
I don't see it being really in the spirit of generic gaming for Jon to bother
with this.
Plus, we're at T+19
years since BDS was promised, so don't hold your breath...
On Campaign Rules:
Roger wrote a good start at them. And Phil Pournelle had written some good
sensor rules IIRC. And I took a stab at strategic movement speeds in FTL, the
hazards of pushing a
drive (jump shock/transit stress) and the crew by repeated FTL jumps and
a stab at figuring out how civilian and military drives might differ, etc.
Maybe pulling some or all of this sort of work together could get a workable
set together usable by gaming groups who liked it (or at least give others a
basis for departure). Not an official solution, but an *available* solution.
On Victory Conditions:
If, in the scenario, you can't win, but you can win in a strategic sense by
doing some damage, then here's an example:
The side that will win gets VPs as follows: 1 VP for first threshold on the
target ship 2 VP for second threshold on the target ship 3 VP for third
threshold on the target ship 4 VP for the final threshold on the target ship
Total possible: 10 VP
The smaller side, who can't legitmately win, but for whom damage inflicted is
of disproportionate value, gets VP as follows: 4 VP for the first threshold on
the target ship 8 VP for the second threshold on the target ship
So, in this sort of case, the smaller ship wins if he can work through two
thresholds on the enemy vessel, even if he is destroyed. If he can work
through 1 threshold and get away before taking his third threshold, he'll also
win.
Now, this makes no accounting of NPV/CPV nor does it make accounting for
hull boxes, instead using thresholding. And it also ignores systems damage.
But you can see the
principal - make the damage the smaller side is going to score, knowing
it won't be a lot, worth enough to counterbalance the fact the larger ship
will be pounding it.
That's one example, and a very coarse and quick one.
TomB
> From: "Thomas Barclay" <kaladorn@magma.ca>
This gets you into potentially lots of detail about fleet tenders, bases,
resupply manufacturing capability population base etc. The actual ship battles
can become a small part of the overall game.
What GZG could do is publish a series of missions liked by a narrative
campaign.
All the issues outside of the FT game don't need to be addressed.
Each mission can be a stand alone game or linked so that the winner of the
previous mission gets a bonus to the missions down stream.
Each mission could provide deployment guidelines, "historical forces", mission
conditions etc.
e.g. you might have a mission pack around a part of the KV war say on a inner
sphere colony system.
Initial mission could be scouting / recon at the edge of the system.
Then there could be raid at the system edge defence sensor site.
An attack on a merchant convoy trying to escape the system.
Attack on the primary colony orbital stations or and defence positions.
Battle(s) against the relief force / reinforcements as both sides bring
in reinforcements to supplement initial in system forces.
Each preceeding mission could provide a bonus to the winner for the next
mission. Say the winner on the attack on the sensor station gets to influence
the deployment of the attackers in the convoy escape mission representing how
close the attackers can get before detection.
the advantage of something like this is that no new rules outside of FT need
to be developed and these missions could be compatibel with any gaming groups
vision of their universe.
This would also be a good vehicle for GZG to introduce new ship model SSDs and
progress their universe.
> On 1/17/06, John Tailby <john_tailby@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
The Campaign sourcebooks for Renegade legion did a good job of this, including
some that linked scenarios for the space and ground games.
FASA used this sort of thing for their Battletech line. I don't know how
successful they were as a product, but I have a good chunk of them.
Brendan 'Neath Southern Skies
> -----Original Message-----
IMPORTANT 1. Before opening any attachments, please check for viruses.
2. This e-mail (including any attachments) may contain confidential
information for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient,
please contact the sender and delete all copies of this email.
3. Any views expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender and are
not a statement of Australian Government Policy unless otherwise stated. 4.
Electronic addresses published in this email are not conspicuous publications
and DVA does not consent to the receipt of commercial electronic messages.
5. Please go to http://www.dva.gov.au/feedback.htm#sub to unsubscribe
emails
of this type from DVA. 6. Finally, please do not remove this notice.
So what's to keep Jon from publishing a multi-volume set of Campaign
Books - one for each flavor? ;) Instead of Fleet Books vol. 1+2 there
could be Campaign books 1-14...
--Binhan
[quoted original message omitted]
> What GZG could do is publish a series of missions liked by a narrative
DP9 has something exactly like this for Lightning Strike, their space ship
miniatures game in the Jovian Chronicles universe.
Games Workshop's narrative campaign packs typically are well liked, though
they are seen by some to have an uncritical audience.
On the other hand, I think VBAM suffers a bit for trying to make each book a
separate campaign universe. Having digested a couple of their settings, I find
myself losing interest in digesting too many more.
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lhttp://www.jumpspac
e.net/Wargames/FT/Campaign.html
We also tried one using a circular map. It didn't work well as the K'rvak
player made a non-aggression pact with one of his two flanks, yelled
"Way of the Warrior!", and put everything in one massive attack fleet. By the
time
the non-aggression pact was terminated and ships mobilized The K owned
half the map.
Roger Books
> On 1/17/06, Thomas Barclay <kaladorn@magma.ca> wrote:
Not
> an official