Mayday Guard- Bringing Movement To HG2

[kilemall]

This sounds to me as playing AH Bismark game (1978 edition) in its advanced rules version. Ever tried it?

We tried it twice with some friends, back in the late 80's, once engaging BCs (KM Gneisenau and Scharnhorst against HMS Repulse and Renown) and once engaging 4 destroyers per side. In both cases, we ended with awful headaches.

If you are talking about the one with the staggered squares for search patterns, I've seen it but not played it.

Hmm, looking it over, that's an odd maneuver system. Comfy with the SSD box system, among other things TFG had a kiddy naval game with SSD ships that was fun to screw around with, but at least you were moving on a hexmap that made sense.

http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/121549/Battlewagon-Second-Edition

Nowadays we would use the latest Seekrieg, with a sort of Striker-like perspective in that you have to manage your battle with comms being a major command action.

Deals with general hull damage AND mission kill via major system damage far short of sinking. You really get that 'I could devastate the enemy at this range but that last hit knocked out the radar fire direction fusebox' stuff.

 

[Piper]

Given the scope of what you're attempting, have you considered using some level of computer assisted gaming?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer-assisted_gaming

 

[McPerth]

If you are talking about the one with the staggered squares for search patterns, I've seen it but not played it..

Yes, but I meant its advanced tactical combat system, that was thought to be played with miniatures (or the same counters used as them).

On it, each battery had a number of shoots and you checked how many of them hit, and then, each hit was checked for where did it hit, penetration against armor, and damage in this section of the ship (incluiding posible criticals, as magazine explosions or rudder damage). As you may imagine, even a single ship per side encounters might become a nightmare of tables and dice rolled and last for quite long just for this reason (and a full fleet battle could check your sanity, to say the least).

A similar (if not outright equal) system was used in the computer game Great Naval Battles (again talking about tactical combat, not the strategic part). Being computer game, and so all those calculations being done automatically, it made for a nice game (though its AI was quite poor, makinng it too easy to win, even with the Germans).

 

[mike wightman]

Here is something out of left field - I once knocked up a damage resolution system based on this from HG2

The amount of energy a weapon transfers depends on its type and factor. Turret and bay weapons inflict a number of energy points equal to their factors times the energy point requirement for one such weapon installed in a turret. Non-nuclear missiles inflict two points times their factor; nuclear missiles inflict 100 points times their factor; meson guns inflict 20 points times their factor. Spinal mount weapons inflict their full energy point requirements. For example, a particle accelerator bay with a factor of 8 would inflict 40 energy points each time it hits and penetrates.

 

[McPerth]

As an aside, from the quote Mike Wightman gives us:

For example, a particle accelerator bay with a factor of 8 would inflict 40 energy points each time it hits and penetrates.

(bolds are mine)

Penetrates what? Isn't one of the advantages for PAs that they need not to penetrate anything once they hit?

 

[mike wightman]

It's just sloppy writing - also note that the EP of the particle accelerator bay is based on the barbette rather than the turret.

Note number two is that in the combat overview on page 46 step E also says weapons that hit and penetrate determine damage.

 

[Piper]

... each battery had a number of shoots and you checked how many of them hit, and then, each hit was checked for where did it hit, penetration against armor, and damage in this section of the ship (incluiding posible criticals, as magazine explosions or rudder damage). As you may imagine, even a single ship per side encounters might become a nightmare of tables and dice rolled and last for quite long just for this reason (and a full fleet battle could check your sanity, to say the least).

Quoted for truth. Too much detail and/or inelegant handling can transform a game into a mind-numbing chore.

Where I think he's headed here is only having to track damage like this on a single ship - the PC's. The other ships are tracked at some level of abstraction which can, if needed, be converted into more detailed damage.

If so, I think it's definitely doable.

I'm looking forward to seeing some rules.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Penetrates what? Isn't one of the advantages for PAs that they need not to penetrate anything once they hit?

Armour?

 

[McPerth]

Armour?

Not before the Black Globe, that is why those EP Mike quoted were counted...

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Not before the Black Globe, that is why those EP Mike quoted were counted...

Sorry, I misunderstood the context.

 

[kilemall]

Given the scope of what you're attempting, have you considered using some level of computer assisted gaming?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer-assisted_gaming

Heh, you still first have to mock up what your logic is before using either a simple bucket o dice handler or more sophisticated algorithms.

Most computer games are run through a gedanken paper phase first to make sure the logic is right before a single spec goes out to the programmers.

 

[kilemall]

Yes, but I meant its advanced tactical combat system, that was thought to be played with miniatures (or the same counters used as them).

On it, each battery had a number of shoots and you checked how many of them hit, and then, each hit was checked for where did it hit, penetration against armor, and damage in this section of the ship (incluiding posible criticals, as magazine explosions or rudder damage). As you may imagine, even a single ship per side encounters might become a nightmare of tables and dice rolled and last for quite long just for this reason (and a full fleet battle could check your sanity, to say the least).

Seekrieg is the same way, no getting around it if you want something that runs reasonable validation checks like the real battles.

http://www.seekrieg.com/

I'm looking for something a little more detailed then War at Sea/Imperium counters but not much more (BR style may fit the bill even if I HGize it), and high detail for engineering and command drama for the players.

 

[kilemall]

[FONT=arial,helvetica]The amount of energy a weapon transfers depends on its type and factor. Turret and bay weapons inflict a number of energy points equal to their factors times the energy point requirement for one such weapon installed in a turret. Non-nuclear missiles inflict two points times their factor; nuclear missiles inflict 100 points times their factor; meson guns inflict 20 points times their factor. Spinal mount weapons inflict their full energy point requirements. For example, a particle accelerator bay with a factor of 8 would inflict 40 energy points each time it hits and penetrates. [/FONT]

This largely was my initial pass at the highly detailed ship floor plan version.

X amount of EPs equaled Y tons of damage, determine armor penetration and entry point, remaining EPs do damage at initial point, randomly determine next adjoining room/system, that's the direction the shot is going.

Then keep going through the ship until either armor bulkheads stop it, the ship explodes due to secondary capacitor or magazine detonations, runs out of EPs to do damage, or possibly exits the ship.

Then apply hull damage to the EPs that actually hit the ship, and ignored subsystems that are very hull oriented (such as power runs, control/computer cable runs, grav systems, life support and ultimately hull integrity) are impacted to generate engineering drama.

In most cases, in that system if a spinal hits the Beowulf it would not explode, it would obliterate all in it's path but not vaporize the ship likely, most of the EP would exit the other side of the shot, but hull integrity would be virtually guaranteed to be gone and the ship would effectively be sawed or splintered in half.

Part of the point, I wanted to see who was alive with their half of the ship drifting off after a big hit.

The Rampant Platypus example I gave above was typical of what I had in mind and would be a valid result under that system.

Was fairly close to really doing up this system until I realized I would have to have floor plans of everything, including ships I don't care about, and backed off.

 

[kilemall]

Quoted for truth. Too much detail and/or inelegant handling can transform a game into a mind-numbing chore.

Where I think he's headed here is only having to track damage like this on a single ship - the PC's. The other ships are tracked at some level of abstraction which can, if needed, be converted into more detailed damage.

If so, I think it's definitely doable.

I'm looking forward to seeing some rules.

Well their dastardly/honorable opponents too, especially if there will be boarding one way or another.

The fighting the ship component really requires an opponent that is on the same time scale/decision cycle, so you CAN do something clever with the power and fire weapons ahead of the enemy, then go to full agility for his shot for example.

One direction I am going is looking to tie in several of those bays and turret batteries into salvos. Could really fix my armor/tohit/range problem nicely AND reduce buckets o' dice.

 

[whartung]

Looking over the Battle Rider counters, looks like boiled down stats for extant ships, 12 direction maneuver, some level of involved missile game, crew/skill resolution cards likely randomized by ship or squadron, and sensor/thrust state.

BR is 6 facings, not 12. BR is essentially Mayday movement.

What is BR's hex range and time? NOT interested if we are back to 5 hours and 1 LS hexes.

30,000km -- 1/10 light second, 30m turns.

Looking over BL, seems like it is the same 12-direction maneuver system, scale is individual ship, sensor and firing arcs, task-based starship action rolls, basically TNE Mayday.

BL has a completely different maneuver system than Mayday or BR. BL has the 12 facings, but maneuver is through thrusting, then turning, in contrast to Mayday/BR where you can simply put the ship anywhere you want within the G window of your drive.

Both BL and BR are individual ship scale, but BR groups the ships in task forces for maneuver on the map. But damage is ship on ship.

Does BL allow me to build a ship without TNE?

BL has a Technical Booklet, which is essentially a condensed FF&S1. As long as you want to work with the weapon selection in the booklet, then it's fine. But BL is ACS+ sized combat, BR is designed for the 10+KdTon ships. You could build a 1MdTon ship with BL, but it would just have a zillion lasers, and killing such a ship would be tedious at best. Augment with FF&S to make bigger guns for the larger ships. BL Tech Booklet is very good, it could be a wee bit simplified by bundling the detail of all the electronics systems in to a single package, just to get rid of some detail. But BL is all about detail.

I also strongly disagree with arcs being 'a thing' for anything short of being under full thrust. Plenty of time to roll pitch and yaw around to bring every single weapon to bear every 100s turn even at half thrust.

BR has no facing rules under the basic rules, BL does. BL lets you change your facing proportionally to the amount of thrust you use during the turn. If you're burning full G, then you're not going to be able to point the front of the ship wherever you want. BR has advanced rules that sorta mimics this behavior. For small ships, arcs don't mean much save for spinals. BL considers things like rolling, as ships essentially have 3 arcs: front, middle, back. It has 20 hit locations, but most of them are available to be hit from any particular angle since they assume your ship is rolling. You could always say your ship isn't rolling if you wanted, taking weapons out of play, but also taking hit locations out as well.

Or hull arc being a detection modifer, Star Cruiser's take notwithstanding. Powerplant exposure, EMF (which is a big thing given what I am doing with power), maneuver use (whether impinging by gravitic field distortion or reaction thrust of some sort), weapons use- that's all much bigger.

Both games use thrusting to light up sides of the ship for detection. So, if you're decelerating in to combat, expect to be lit up by your opponents as they lock on to that bright, shiny thruster pointing at them.

I do have stealth in but it's abstracted and hideously expensive. It's all in the Sensors and Engagement Ranges thread.

BL and BR have a full suite of sensors and detection.

No real stealth here, but there is Electro Magnetic Masking packages which can add 1 or 2 diff mods to the detection rolls. This effectively makes ships smaller. They always know "something is out there", they just can't quite get a lock on it if you have an EMM package.

You also have missile based jammers and missile detonation white outs to try and break lock on.

All that being said, I am sold on needing to check on the maneuver and missile systems, that is a major sticking point and I could do with some elegance. If missiles are predicated on Mongoose ranges though I expect to be less then enthralled.

BL and BR handle missiles differently. BL is more detailed and designed for ships dying through the thousand cuts as lasers poke deep, itty bitty holes in to ships. Missiles are basically laser platforms.

Of course, the missile rules are just like the missile rules have been since the beginning (The missiles are basically 12G12 missiles -- that is a 12 G drive with 12 G-Turns of fuel), that is before the complete nonsense that is S3 Special Edition "no missiles have always been like this despite 15 years of game development history to the contrary, through different versions, through different authors plus the extra 15 years of nobody is telling anyone about how wrong it's all been interpreted that whole time" Revised BS. So, you'll hate the missiles.

BR is a Big Gun (i.e. meson and PAs) means Big Crit's and dead ships system, so idiomatic BL missiles don't really work (since most lasers aren't big on crits anyways). So, Chadwick tweaked the missile game to give them more punch and to make them effective in BR.

 

[aramis]

It is worth noting that, while BL & BR require FF&S1 for maximum value, neither actually requires it for play, and no combination of these three actually require the TNE rulebook.

The TNE core rulebook ship combat is an abstraction of BL; call it BL semi-light... as nothing in TNE is "light rules"...

The scale of 30 minutes and 0.1LS (30,000km) makes rocky planets usually single hex; Large GG's hit about 5 hexes across. (Yes, Jupiter is about 0.46 LS across); Small GG's hit about 2-3 across.


http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/jupiter/facts

 

[Piper]

Where I think he's headed here is only having to track damage like this on a single ship - the PC's. The other ships are tracked at some level of abstraction which can, if needed, be converted into more detailed damage.

Well their dastardly/honorable opponents too ...

In a small engagement this could mean that ALL enemy ships would require this level of detail. It also complicates the situation where friendly ships combine fire against a common target.

... especially if there will be boarding one way or another.

You don't actually need detailed damage results to create openings and/or obstacles for boarding. These can be tied in to abstract damage levels: X level damage creates Y number of breaches and Z number of blocked/damaged sectors.

This assumes that you're planning a level of boarding detail beyond the abstract system of High Guard.

 

[kilemall]

Whartung tyvm for the thorough review of the products. I do want to comment but not right at the moment.

Ty too Aramis, although with that time and movement scale, isn't that a bit off the 1000s 1=G 10,000 km standard? I would think maybe 3000s, or 50m turns for a 1:1 ratio to the literal movement, or am I missing something?

Piper, the boarding 'holes' left by various explosions certainly are points, but I would also like an explication of various twisted metal and hazard points for both crew and boarders.

Mostly though, engineering drama and near-absolutely logical hit forensics, for both engineering fixit drama and scars on the ship that remind them of the wounds taken by the shot.

But yes I backed off from a thorough deck by deck damage flow, and it would take a lot to go through anything more then 2 ships for that. Above all, doing ALL of the deck plans for EVERYTHING ever encountered. Yow!

 

[aramis]

Whartung tyvm for the thorough review of the products. I do want to comment but not right at the moment.

Ty too Aramis, although with that time and movement scale, isn't that a bit off the 1000s 1=G 10,000 km standard? I would think maybe 3000s, or 50m turns for a 1:1 ratio to the literal movement, or am I missing something?

1800s @9.8m/s² ... Vector accumulated is 18,000 km/s over 1800 seconds, and TNE uses 9.8m/s², not the 10m/s² of CT/MT.

That gives 31752000. m/t. They then rounded down, allowing for off-axis thrust issues.

 

[whartung]

If you do the math, in space combat with 30Kkm hexes and 30m turns, 1G = 9.258 m/s^2.

So, it's a little weak G, but close enough to make the math work with simpler units (1/10 of a light second hexes, 30m turns).