> side just got a huge advantage for (relatively) little output.
Like HMS Hood was for the British Navy ;-) Or that lucky torp
on the Bismarks rudder, life is *sometimes* like that.
> Also, we found that rolling for *each* Core System gave there
Good house rool. this reminds me a bit of the way Silent Death did it, their
crits system was good.
Ta also for included crits list, suggestions
I usually don't play with the Core Systems in the FleetBook because I feel
they take ships out a bit way too harshly. Yeah, they're fun and all to do
(eg, watch happen to your opponent), but I don't find it really fun when
either some of my ships or my opponent's ships go drifting off because they
took a Bridge hit, or had a Power Core hit. Yes, I know, you don't check for
them until the second Threshold Check, but still, it can be very unbalancing
very quickly, esp if it's a cap ship which has most of its systems still
intact and all of a sudden it takes a Core System hit (or more than one) then
that side just lost a significant amount of its firepower, and the other side
just got a huge advantage for (relatively) little output. It can be as
unbalancing as 'game over' for the unfortunate side.
Also, we found that rolling for *each* Core System gave there being a higher
chance of any one of them going on the first threshold run (the odds of
rolling a 6 with three die are significantly higher than with just one). So
typically when we do use them we only roll once for the Core Systems, and if a
Threshold Check fails, roll to see which *one* of the Core Systems bit it.
A friend of mine in Colorado came up with another set of Core Systems a while
back that are not quite so 'all or nothing' unbalancing, but give
a fun flavor to the game. I've used these more often. :-} I've
included
his write-up below for your reading entertainment.
Mk
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
-+-+-
From: poe@fokker.fc.hp.com
To: kochte@stsci.edu
The following are non-catastrophic critical hits. They are "hit" like
any other system during a threshold check (unlike the catstrophic hits which
are
checked at -1 on the die rolls). They cannot be targetted by needle
weapons.
Computer -- you must plot your movement one turn in advance (e.g.
if I take the computer hit in turn 5, when writing turn 6 orders I also write
for turn 7. In turn 7 I'll write for turn 8...). Should your computer get
fixed you can erase what you had previously written down for the turn and
write new orders. Should you take engine hits or repair engine damage, you
still need to follow the orders you had written but may change the thrust
levels involved (e.g. MD4 becomes MD2 orTS2 becomes TS3;
but you cannot change TS to PS -- the "letters" must stay intact
and thrusts cannot be reduced to zero). You do not have to plot
missile firing or fighter launching in advance -- only movement.
[symbol: icon of computer terminal & keyboard inside a circle]
Communications -- ships with communications damage fire after all
ships with intact communications have finished. (In a PBEM game, this hit
might also have an effect on your ability to communicate with your buddies.)
[symbol: icon of a typical phone handset inside a circle]
Sensors -- when firing, for weapons with multiple range
categories, the target is treated as if it were one range category further
away. For weapons with only one range category, the
target is treated as if it were twice as far away (i.e. a Class-1
battery has an effective range of 6).
[symbol: icon of sensor dish inside a circle]
We used them in our playtest last night and I really liked them -- they
add flavor without turning the battle. We also used the catastrophic
criticals,
on which I'm ambivalent -- we seemed to get them too often for my taste.
Maybe for catastrophic hits if you only made one threshold roll for the set of
three (the "catastrophic hit check") and if positive, roll to see which one.
That'll change the odds:
Chance of one or more catastrophic hits (cumulative chance in parens):
Current system 1-check method
1st row dies none none 2nd row dies 42% (42%) 17% (17%) 3rd row dies 70% (83%)
33% (44%)
That's more to my liking. In fact, I'll probably do that for
non-catastrophic criticals too:
Chance of one or more non-catastrophic hits (cumulative chance in
parens):
Current system 1-check method
1st row dies 42% (42%) 17% (17%) 2nd row dies 70% (83%) 33% (44%) 3rd row dies
88% (98%) 50% (72%)
I'll send lots more mail on the battle and various observations later.
Daryl
> On the fine day of 10/9/98 2:58 pm Tim.Jones@Smallworld.co.uk wrote:
> Also, we found that rolling for *each* Core System gave there
I like this idea - it'll limit crits a bit more. One thing - isn't a +1
added to the current threshold number for these "crits" - according to
the second paragraph in this section of the FB. This makes it impossible to
receive a critical hit until one starts checking on for the second and
subsequent threshold points.
> Off the beaten path I reign <KOCHTE@stsci.edu> wrote:
[snippage]
> Also, we found that rolling for *each* Core System gave there being a
I've got to agree with Mark on this one. Even a 1 in 6 chance on the second
threshold check amounts to a 50% chance that at least one is going to go out.
I'd rather win - or loose - a game on skill, as opposed to 1 or two bad
rolls on my Superdread
[snipped interesting rules]
I'll have to experiment with these before I can comment on them.
> Also, we found that rolling for *each* Core System gave there
Aye, that's correct, matey. But once you hit that second threshold check row
(which is, in effect, first for the core systems), then things start
potentially happenin' quickly...
Mk
> >when we do use them we only roll once for the Core Systems, and if a
About 42.2%, actually. (1 - 5/6 cubed).
On Thu, 10 Sep 1998 09:19:51 -0500 (EST), Off the beaten path I reign
> <KOCHTE@stsci.edu> wrote:
> I usually don't play with the Core Systems in the FleetBook because I
That was my thought from playing a game using them. Especially since I was the
only one losing core systems. :-)
I like the idea, but think that they should be pared down, both in time and
effect. A bridge hit should be at least half the time, or maybe just two
turns. A major pain, but not a ship destroyer. Likewise, the warp core breach
should be reduced to a "power system down" result. Maybe split the effects
between bridge and power system hits. Losing the bridge means you can't
maneouvre for a couple of turns; losing power systems means you can't fight
for a couple of turns. Losing life support... hmmm, have to think about this
one...
> Also, we found that rolling for *each* Core System gave there being a
I like this. I'm going to adopt this as a house rule. I'll go one better: roll
1d6. On a 1-4 the bridge is hit; on a 5, life support is down; on a 6,
the warp core goes critical. Tie this into my idea of halving the time lost
for a bridge loss (but maybe making the time cumulative each time the bridge
is lost) and you've got a more manageable critical system. A 1 in 36 chance of
losing the ship to a core breach, a 1 in 36 chance of having to abandon the
ship, and a 1 in 9 chance of having the bridge go on you. This is opposed to a
1 in 6 chance for each of these systems, as it occurs right now (and your
house rule makes it impossible to lose all three at once!)
[snip stuff]
> I like this idea - it'll limit crits a bit more. One thing - isn't a
Keep in mind that by the time you've hit the second threshold point, half of
your ship's structure has been pounded to scrap anyway... at that point it
would be odd if things DIDN'T start to fail by the bucketload....
Just a thought.:)