It must be over now. Now its time for the sleep deprivation to kick in to make
a full force Monday.
Ted, I gotta know: Was it good? Any catastrophes? Does it give the
organizers and participants a strong feel that a GZG-WCC II would be a
good
idea? <and that they also want to try to make it to GZG-ECC IV in
March!> Are you ready to give up your day job to become a convention
organizer?
I look forward to reading AARs, seeing pics, but mostly just to hear from the
participants that they had fun. That's the ultimate reason for these things,
and if my ECC experiences have been an indication, the 7 hour drive was worth
it (though <a nameless member of the Ottawa crew whose initials
are JP> might have a different feelings after his slightly pre-Canadian
border encounter with the NY State Speed Enforcement Gestapo). I had a blast
and met a lot of real nice people.
If there is a GZG-WCC-II, the Good Lord willing, I'll be there.
California in October sounds just fine to a Canadian. It'd sound even better
in
November... ;)
> --- "Barclay, Tom" <tomb@bitheads.com> wrote:
...
> Ted, I gotta know: Was it good? Any catastrophes?
XXX I will not speak for anyone else, but I would do it again next year. XXX
<and that they also want to try to make it to
> GZG-ECC IV in March!>
XXX God and money willing, I'll consider it. XXX
> Are you ready to give up your day job to become a
XXX I drive back up to Oakland and opened the con room up on Sunday morning, I
won all the games and all the prizes, (Ted, I like FT ships,), of course I was
the only functional person in the place. It seems the evening game ran rather
late and sunday was cancelled as a result. XXX
> I look forward to reading AARs, seeing pics, but
XXX The large 24000 'K' vs human game proved that one should stay with the
rules that are known. It turns out that the attempt to run the game
using FB1/2 rules (We normally use FT/MT) was
unbalanced, the 'K' won quite easily. (Add to the list to do: Find new balance
point ratio value for 'K'.)
Another related topic/suggestion:
Kravak scatterguns in the area defence mode should always do damage to the
target ship as well as the fighters that are targeted. Suggest using damage
of:
1) 1 + submunitions attack + rerolls on 6.
2) 1D3 no rerolls. 3) 1D3 reroll on 6 only. 4) 1,2,3=1; 4,5,6=2 reroll on 6
only. In any case the use of scatterguns should be the same against 'K' and
human ships (KR did not come to the con, and I was not able to acquire the FB2
rules, so forgive if I am in error.) XXX
That's the
> ultimate reason for these
Generally speaking a good time was had by all. (Even while being abused by the
'K', I had a good time. (And I got about a third of my ships off the board.)).
Bye for now,
Hmmm. If you make Scatterguns able to hit the protected ships, you should make
the same rule for PDS when used with ADFC. Remember
that PDS can be used in an anti-ship role also.
Although, if you are going to do this, I would suggest making it very simple:
a roll of a 1
when using PDS/Scatterguns in Area Defense
mode scores 1 point of damage on the ship it was trying to protect. Yes, this
ignores
screens, and can lead to the PDS/ADFC
being more effective than a class-1 beam,
but it avoids having to reroll (besides that will teach you to not have the
entire fleet share shield harmonics <smile>).
[I can hear Beth's screems of "Nooooooo!" from here.]
-----
Brian Bell bkb@beol.net
http://www.ftsr.org
-----
> -----Original Message-----
[snip]
> The large 24000 'K' vs human game proved that
[snip]
> Bye for now,
From: Bell, Brian K <Brian_Bell@dscc.dla.mil>
> Hmmm. If you make Scatterguns able to hit the
But each PDS shot is aimed; the scattergun just points in the general
direction and counts on the spread to hit.
True, scatterguns fire "many thousands of small hypervelocity penetrators"
"like a shotgun blast". This does not mean that it does not have to point at
the target. At 1mu = 1000km, the cone of projected locations for the target
fighter craft would be enormous. The scattergun would have to expend mass
equal to the ship in order cover areas up to 6mu away. Thus, it is reasonable
that the scatterguns focus the projectiles on the expected path of the fighter
group. In fact they have to be able to aim, otherwise they would just have 1
arc.
In the same way PDS fires many low power (in comparison
to Class-1 Beams) shots to cover a similar area in order to
shoot down attacking fighters. PDS do not hit with every shot; in fact they
miss as much as they hit. The beams don't just evaporate. If a friendly ship
is behind the fighter that you just missed, it is likely going to receive the
hit. For a visual example, review the Deathstar fighter battle, the TIE
fighters often strafe the surface of the Deathstar while trying to get a
fighter. Or the Hollywood version of Godzilla where the helicopters trash the
buildings, as they miss the 40 story lizard.
OTHOH,
Just having re-read the rules on scatterguns, I see that the
missing in area defense mode is covered already. That it
is not with PDS/ADFC is something that I can live with
even if it does not make the most of sense (to me).
> John Leary wrote:
> The large 24000 'K' vs human game proved that
If you haven't used the FB*1* rules before, then going directly to FB*2* was
probably a mistake. Far too much new stuff to cope with at once.
If you want to use FB2 tech systems (which is based on FB1) without
using the FB1 design system, then you'll certainly have to re-balance
the K-guns... they need to be *cheaper*, since the beams they're
balanced against are cheaper in FT/MT than they are in FB1 :-/
> Another related topic/suggestion:
[snip]
> In any case the use of scatterguns should be
Scatterguns *are* the same against both Kra'Vak and human ships...
Regards,
Pics are up, http://myweb.veriomail.com/mwbrown/gzgwcc1.htm. Excellent
time!
Even our youngest participant (my son Alex, 6 on 10-29) had a great
time (still talks of "Kabooming Don and Ted into Oblivion"). Lesson learned on
SG and FMA: PA is MEAN, as are Aliens (Originally rated d10x2, I'll change to
2d10), green militia can't do a great deal.
The initiative system was one the Bay Area Stargrunt Guild uses. Each side
rolls 2d6, difference is number of squads the higher can activate before the
next player. Tie rolls end the turn. Also allowed me to have multiple tables
running.
Will I go next time? You Betcha!
Michael Brown
[quoted original message omitted]
> Ted, I gotta know: Was it good? Any catastrophes? Does it give the
YES! Not really... Definiately! (Of course!) Not hardly, but I may be starting
a new job at a web design company a mile and a half (!) from my apartment.
Keep your fingers crossed for me...
> I look forward to reading AARs, seeing pics, but mostly just to hear
Yeah, I'll definitely agree with you there, Tom. Had some great folks come out
for the con. Some of the best (West Coast) GZG gaming
I've ever had. Good folks - good fun! (Oh - that could be a "tag line"
for promoting the next WCC!)
> If there is a GZG-WCC-II, the Good Lord willing, I'll be there.
California
> in October sounds just fine to a Canadian. It'd sound even better in
Tom - I'll see you for sure in March, but I hope you'll be just the
first of many of our Canadian brothers who'll make the trip down
to the Bay Area. I'm looking forward to continuing the Can/Am
Wars at GZG WCC 2!
'Course what I really want to get going is an "East Coast/West Coast"
thing...
> Ted Arlauskas wrote:
thing.
..
Great. Does anybody want to start the 'Ground Zero Games -- Great
Plains Convention'? (8-)
JGH
> Ted Arlauskas wrote:
Isn't that GenCon? ;-)
Though I wouldn't mind another GZG con a bit closer to me (and you all know
that North Dakota is located in the geographic center of North America -
ya, you betcha)
You mean GZG No Coast Con. No, I'm not volunteering.
[quoted original message omitted]