FT is an interesting scenario for dice roller programs. Most envision you
rolling a few RPG dice to run an RPG or generate a character. FT requires a
boatload, and depending on circumstance, the number is variable (rerolls).
Something written as a client side java or javascript could be fully portable,
could provide an interface to enter the desired rolls, and could store certain
configuration details (in a cookie) as needed.
It could understand what a 'beam' dice was, the effects of shields, and
whether or not rerolls were being used. Other sorts of dice could be modelled,
if the list isn't too long or groteque.
I use a netbook with an initiative program written by JP Fiset (an ECC
regular) to do D20 initiative for my 3.5 D&D game. The netbook is small enough
not to hog space at the game table, is quiet, and the Initiativalizer makes
our games go a bit quicker (you still can't speed the human indecision
loop...).
Is there a general need for an FT die roller that could be run in a browser
without reference to an external server? I mean, sure it is easy for everyone
to say 'sure!' but never actually need or use it. How many of us would
actually give up the mass die rolling at their game table to let the computer
do it?
FT has, on occasion, been accused of being a bit short of tactical choices and
I sort of thought rolling dice (fistfuls of them) was part of the glee most
people got from FT, despite the ridiculous amount of time it takes. (Anyone
who has watched a big ECC battle realizes fully
25%+ of the game time ends up being counting die pips...)
So, is this actually something of general utility or interest?
I had been looking for an excuse to muddle with a bit of Javascript but had no
particular purpose. This might provide a bit of one, but its only worth
attempting if there are enough folks interested in the output. Even then, it
might take some time.
TomB
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 03:57:51PM -0500, Tom B wrote:
That's certainly my feeling. I'll use computers when designing ships and
fleets, but I don't have them on the gaming table.
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 3:57 PM, Tom B <kaladorn@gmail.com> wrote:
> (Anyone who has watched a big ECC battle realizes fully
It seems to me that 50% of your average FT game is paining over orders and
asking "Are you done? Are you ready?"
Not to thread jack an obviously good learning exercise but a bigger win, at
least to me, would be an electronic method of entering orders and other ship
management issues table side.
D.
Just add a sand timer for the order phase. :-)
/W
2009/12/16 Damond Walker <damosan@gmail.com>:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 3:57 PM, Tom B <kaladorn@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 8:04 AM, Wilper <wilper@gmail.com> wrote:
I've used chess clocks in the past but I don't think that would translate well
to FT.
D.
Damond,
I've noticed at convention games what you say is true. The average group must
be quite pokey at entering orders. With our group in Ottawa, I found that
there was a 'morale penalty' for being the last one done orders (the others
all made remarks about your lackadaisical
pace) so one learned to be fast. We don't allow pre-measuring, so
there was no 'measure, think, more measure, more think' in the orders phase.
Usually when I'm at ECC, unless I'm the last one firing in the round, my
orders for the new turn are written before the current turn ends. I always
find it funny when the GM (used to dealing with folks who take more time)
points out 'people have started writing orders now' because
I look like I'm sitting wool-gathering and I get to reply 'Mine have
been written for several minutes now'.
I don't think an electronic tool will do anything to solve this. If you can't
write 'PP1, MD1, RP1, Fire SM 1' or something like that in negligible time,
the problem is you need a stenographer or else the time is NOT being consumed
in transcription but in decision making. No tool will speed that up.
If you have a specific idea about how a tool could speed that up, other than
the ubiquitous kitchen timer sound alarm (which still won't speed people up
unless you inflict a big penalty if they don't get them done and even then
this may ruin their enjoyment of the game), I'd be glad to hear it.
People just need to learn that most of the time, the minute details of your
planning don't make that much difference. At times, yes, but mostly not.
The only time it matters much is if you are trying to dodge template weapons
(then being as unpredictable as possible is the way to go, assuming you've got
enough thrust to dodge them at all.... often not the case in vector...) and
the turn where your fleets interpenetrate. Then you just try to arrange to be
somewhere your main batteries can shoot at something. In vector, this is
fairly easy, in cinematic harder but still not that hard.
10-15 minute order phases will tend to eat 45-60 minutes or more in a
4 hour slot. Counting pips will probably eat the same if it's a big
engagement. At least that seems to be what I see at ECC.
Tom
This gets back to one premise I find in all miniatures games. Most players
can't keep track of more the 12 "things". Now a "Thing" could be a squad in
SG, a Brigade in Fire and Fury or a ship or Fighter Sqdn in FT. Once you reach
that point the game really slows down. In FT you could probably add half of
your opponents ships as part of that threshold. More "things" =
more time and more "oh I forgot that one".
Michael Brown mwsaber6@msn.com
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Tom B" <kaladorn@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 3:12 PM
To: <gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu>
Subject: Re: [GZG] FT Dice Roller
> Damond,
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Michael Brown <mwsaber6@msn.com> wrote:
IMHO I think you're being a bit too generous.:)
D.
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 06:19:12PM -0500, Damond Walker wrote:
wrote:
> This gets back to one premise I find in all miniatures games. ?Most
The user-interface design guideline I've often met is "5 +/- 2" - so
more than seven things is pushing it.
On the other hand wargamers are a bit weird. :-)
R
I'll admit to that <grin>. I find I can manage more by putting things into
groups of groups (to use Fire and Fury, Divisions and Corps).
Michael Brown mwsaber6@msn.com
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Roger Burton West" <roger@firedrake.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 4:22 PM
To: <gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu>
Subject: Re: [GZG] FT Dice Roller
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 06:19:12PM -0500, Damond Walker wrote:
wrote:
> This gets back to one premise I find in all miniatures games. ?Most
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lOn Wed, Dec 16,
2009 at 6:22 PM, Roger Burton West <roger@firedrake.org>wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 06:19:12PM -0500, Damond Walker wrote:
wrote:
> >> This gets back to one premise I find in all miniatures games. ?Most
That's what I learned, too, from various work seminars and other
non-work
things, that 7 things is about the maximum most people can deal with at one
time.
On the other hand wargamers are a bit weird. :-)
> [quoted text omitted]
Compared to....? ;-)
Mk
There is a reason that armies are subdivided into various echelons of
command, each of which (typically) has 2-4 maneuver elements and 1-3
support elements.
At least for the past few centuries.
John
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 5:40 PM, Michael Brown <mwsaber6@msn.com> wrote:
wrote:
> This gets back to one premise I find in all miniatures games. ?Most
My own experience is kind of varied on this. New players seem to overthink
things and need a bit of time each turn to have the rules explained to them.
After they figure it out (and this is partly paraphrasing and partly adding to
what was said) the only times it really matters are when plotting for placed
ordnance, plotting to be
able to fire on a fly-by, planning for the (re)appearance of a cloaked
force, and planning coordinated strikes between placed ordnance and fighters.
There's usually not a great deal of reason to divide your fleet into
individual ships, because they tend to get annihilated if you do, so in my
craziest battles I'm never likely to have more than one or two ship elements
and one or two fighter wings (not groups, I mean wings of several dozen groups
usually) to keep track of.
E
[quoted original message omitted]
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Tom B <kaladorn@gmail.com> wrote:
The Morale Penalty could work at ECC. I've come to know a number of folks
there quite well. So does the "oops...you walked away from the table? This
turn *you* drift at current speed paining over what to
do." :)
> Usually when I'm at ECC, unless I'm the last one firing in the round,
Same here. If I'm out of the action for the current turn I'm scribbling orders
for the next. So I'm with ya.
> If you have a specific idea about how a tool could speed that up,
So you fear ruining the game for one person? What about the other 5-9
people around the table? Even then I don't think you'd have to levy the
penalty more than once. What I don't like about large FT games is all the
shuffling of papers once the game gets interesting. Checking status of
this...the status of that...write orders...
I'd much rather have a display showing me the pertinent information all at
once. I may or may not want to see individual systems. I may only want to see
a "strength map" showing the general amount of pain I can throw out of a given
facing. When taking lots of damage (but not enough for outright destruction) I
want the app to determine and show
me what systems went down -- the summary strength map can show me that
in an instant. If I want more detail I tap the summary image and get the raw
data.
Remove the paper and I'm happy. Some folks may like that paper.
> People just need to learn that most of the time, the minute details of
BINGO! I've seen and subjected others to it in the past -- after you
game a bit you realize that there are situations that no amount of brain power
can get you out of. In these situations you gotta just clench 'em, cross your
fingers, and hope that the dice gods abandon your foe.
Damo