From: Izenberg, Noam <Noam.Izenberg@j...>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 14:39:12 -0400
Subject: [GZG] [FT] Point Blank / Passing Fire
I can give some details of this rule suggestion, as I've done a some playtesting with it and I think it works very well for modest size games. If many ships are going to be zipping by one another in a great melee, things can bog down significantly. I'd love to see what others think about how it plays. The "Point Blank" rule: **This rule requires real sportsmanship on behalf of opposing players, otherwise it will be a source of angst, acrimony, and gnashing of teeth and should not be used.** If players see that two ships will pass or have passed within ~6MU (~6MU is **approximate** and is exactly the kind of measurement that should _not_ be anally stickled with) of each other in the movement phase, they may declare "Point Blank" for those ships. The Point Blank Fire phase happens JUST BEFORE normal ship activation/ initiative. Point blank ships may fire weapons at each other using the following guidelines The Point Blank Fire phase consists of 4 parts: Fire all weapons bearing while converging (simultaneous) Assess converging damage Fire all weapons bearing while diverging (simultaneous) Assess Diverging damage. Which arcs bear during âconvergingâ and âdivergingâ is depends on how ships are passing each other. A Head-on pass is when, for example, ships A and B begin in each otherâs Forward arcs and end in each otherâs Aft arcs. Thus, converging fire is both ships firing all Forward 180 weapons simultaneously, and diverging fire is both ships firing (surviving) Aft weapons simultaneously. An Overtake is when ship A begins with its forward arcs facing Bâs Aft arcs, and ends with Aâs Aft arcs facing Bâs Forward arcs. Thus, converging fire is Aâs Forward arcs and Bâs aft arcs; and diverging fire is Aâs Aft arcs, and Bâs Forward arcs. Cases where ship A âT-bonesâ ship B by crossing from port to starboard side or vice versa can still be broken down to a variation of Head-on or Chase as long as sportsman rules apply (a variation would be to have the T-bonesd ship able to fire all port side weapons during converging and all starboard weapons during diverging). Ships engaging in passing fire are considered "activated" already when going through normal initiative. A ship opting not to fire point blank may be activated as normal. Yes, this means that an SDN going point blank with a Destroyer needs to decide whether to spend its activation dealing with the destroyer head on, or waiting until normal activation to potentially use multiple fire controls against multiple targets. If several ships go point blank of each other in close proximity, a "Firefight" is declared, and all ships within it follow the PB Fire phase at the same time. A Firefight with 3 or more ships should probably have the PB phase simplified to âall ships fire FH/assess/AH/ assesâ regardless of head-on/chase/T-bone passes. Passing fire would add a huge Cinematic feel for FT, opens new tactical options (and closes some less realistic mechanics-based ones), and provide something that no other tabletop game (that I know of) ha been able to do without segmented movement. Issues: Point Blank on two ships: If, for example ship X goes Point blank to Ship A at the start of a movement, and then to ship B at the end of movement (but both encounters are far enough apart that they do not cause a Firefight), then X must choose if he wants to use Point Plank resolution on either A or B (or neither and wait for normal activation in the turn order). Game speed/number of ships. This rule has worked well with small numbers of ships (4-5 on a side max). It can be fiddly, though. If two ships end turn one facing each other at 1 MU, both in F arc, then you'll probably get the ships firing on each other almost instantly twice in a row (at the end of turn X, and at the start of turn X+1), unless you also place a minimum (1/2 turn?) cycle time on weapons, which gets dicey if you fire 75% of the way through turn X and try to eyeball 25% of the way through turn X+1) On Jun 29, 2006, at 10:37 AM, gzg-l-request@lists.csua.berkeley.edu wrote: > While there seems to be no easy or