Not the way I read it. More like 1% of 1400 is 14 tons, not 10 tons as you seem to be interpreting. The 10 ton rule is for smaller ACS, as per the CT damage I'm assuming.
CT/HG Range Bands
- Thread starter kilemall
- Start date
Not the way I read it. More like 1% of 1400 is 14 tons, not 10 tons as you seem to be interpreting. The 10 ton rule is for smaller ACS, as per the CT damage I'm assuming.
Now that is the sort of thing I'm looking for, concrete things to change/add.
I would envision that no self-respecting fleet commander is out there blind, they would have scouts in both directions, and there would be mini-battles as fleet scouts fight for information and deny the same.
So how much play value is there in playing that out vs. abstraction?
The velocity rules, phase II of this stuff, makes that abundantly clear.
One early bone to chew on- what counts is relative velocity. So if a target fleet is going 100V (my shorthand for current velocity) and a fleet is executing an intercept by coming up 'behind" having the same base course but at 110V when contact is made, well it's going to be the same as target fleet at 0V and intercepting fleet at 10V.
Well, the rule says 1% of the fuel capacity, not of the tonnage, so I'm afraid AnotherDilbert is right on it.
Another point is that if the ship receiving it has just come from jump, its fuel tanks may be far from full...
AnotherDilbert
SOC-14 1K
I would hesitate to add too much detail. It's easy to add detail and get bogged down in rolls...
At most I would make one main (opposed?) roll for the admiral dividing his forces and one (chained?) roll for each pincer, where all have to succeed for a successful pincer. If the pincer fails the defending force can retreat or engage one of the pincer forces. Possible a ±∆TL DM?
Hence this is a risky move, only to be contemplated if you have superior leadership.
Sure, but as a GAME, it's not very fun.
As a game of combat between two large ships with the players racing to roll a 12 before the other, not really interesting.
As a game of strategic warfare, it's an afterthought. Better to just use Fifth Frontier War's combat system. (i.e. come up with some mechanism to covert ships in to attack and defense factors, and just roll against a chart.)
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
You can blend the two.
Use HG to design the ships and then use the weapon factor and batteries to determine the numbers you will write down on the ship chit/card - this can be a simplified USP.
Use the combat matrices in FFW/IE etc to determine number of hits, then assign the hits using a random hits table to reduce the pseudo-USP.
Introducing maneuver rather than abstracting it is where it gets interesting - do you go with simple range band or hex grid movement or all out vector plotting.
My solution has always been to have different scales for the operational moving around a system and the actual tactical battle.
Use HG to design the ships and then use the weapon factor and batteries to determine the numbers you will write down on the ship chit/card - this can be a simplified USP.
Use the combat matrices in FFW/IE etc to determine number of hits, then assign the hits using a random hits table to reduce the pseudo-USP.
Introducing maneuver rather than abstracting it is where it gets interesting - do you go with simple range band or hex grid movement or all out vector plotting.
My solution has always been to have different scales for the operational moving around a system and the actual tactical battle.
Sure, and this apply too to TL. War don't use to be as TCS matches.
This is also problematic, as it does not reflect the true effect TL differences may have. Let's imagine the SW front in FFW:
In FFW game, the Imperium has to devote some forces to it, as the SW forces can do some damage too.
If you played it with HG (á la TCS camapign), imagine the whole Joyeuse fleet finds two 400 dton TL 15 SDBs, each with 15 armor, compueter 9 and 4 triple turret, 2 lasers and 2 missiles (each rated at factor3).
The Joyeuse fleet, being TL 11, will have at best armor 11, computer 5 and factor 8 100 dton missile bays and K rated PA spinals.
When the SDBs fire their nuclear missiles, they need a 6+. with a -6 for agility and +4 for computer difference (so 8+, with the size DM), and will overcome the beams and sandcasters (assuming rated 8, their best at TL 11) on a 6+ (10+ per table, with +4 for computer difference). Only the repulsors are true defenses (being rated at 4), as they are only overcome on a 12...
If they overcome all of this, they will do some damage on the surface explosión table with a DM of +11 (so, on a 10-), and on he radiation table with a +17, so on a 4-.
As for the lasers (assumed beam), they hit on a 9+ (size DM added), and overcome the sandcasters (at most rated 7) on a 6+. If they hit they achieve damage on the surface explosion table on a 4-.
If lasers are pulse, they hit on a 9+ too, they overcome 7 rated sandcasters on a 7+, but they damage on a 6-.
In the meanwhile, the 100 dton SW bays would hit the SDBs on a 2+ according the table, but DMs are -6 (agility) -4 (computer difference) ,and -1 (size), so the are useless. Even if the PA spinals are fired, being (at most) K rated, they hit on a 2+ too, with the same DMs...
So, in the end, the whole Joyeuse fleet would be defeated by those TL 15 2 SDB if palyed with HG rules...
As you see, the results of this front by using HG or FFW system are quite different....
I agree with those comments. Stastical results may be even realistic, and be how a real aldmiral would count it amnog large formations, but are boring for a game...
That's why I love the MgT1 barrages system, where a single roll resolves whe whole firing, regardless the number of turrets. And that does not mean I see no flaws on it, as I've said in several threads...
AnotherDilbert
SOC-14 1K
Unless the SW ships use imported computers and screens at trivial cost. TL12 equipment is available within the SW. TL14 equipment might be available from the Zho. Smuggled TL15 equipment might even be available from the Impies...
So divide all identical batteries into ten "barrages" and roll ten times? Same average, wider distribution.
Sure, but, again according TSC, they would need a TL 12 (or 14 or 15) to maintain them, as the ship TL is the one of its highest TL component, and it needs to be maintained in an equal or higher TL starport.
Even then, each battery will need several rolls (to hit, penetration ,damage, etc., while MgT system uses only one roll for all those batteries, the rest being featured on DMs.
When you confront large fleets, that is important...
Point taken on the fuel rule.
The scenario we are gaming is battle rider on battle rider, no jump. But yes in a more conventional ship there could be a lot more fuel hits possible at full fuel, and a lot used up if it just did it's own jump.
Errata says the n% is per total fuel tank capacity, not existing, and 10 ton minimum each, so say a half full one of Dilbert's design would be 20 hits.
AnotherDilbert
SOC-14 1K
Often assumed, but not stated in CT as far as I know.
Quite, but the MgT1 barrage was too simplified with absurd effects such as armour affecting meson weapons and 400% hits.
If you want fewer rolls you can calculate the total chance of hitting and penetrating and rolling d100.
I always looked at HG as a build system for the individual ships that made up the squadrons in each Imperium counter and a more detailed Imperium game.
Since each of those counters were 3-8 ships, a typical main fleet of 10 counters would be 30-80 ships.
So reverse the mechanics into Imperium counter values and just play Imperium/Dark Nebula.
I apparently recreated the barrage rules without knowing they existed, but their table is awful.
My take-
- determine to hit number,
- use 9 range for to hit, 0-2+ to hit is 99, 12+ to hit is 9, 13+ is always zero, result is probability multiplier,
- ((2d6-7) *.2) +1 = random multiplier (RM),
- RM x PM = percentage of hits to apply, round up, cannot get more then 100% hits.
Gets you the range all on one roll, which on an individual ship basis may be extreme swings, but will even out over a whole fleet battle.
Assume 100 hits possible, to hit is 3+-
Roll 2, RMxPM is 0 x 90, 0 hits (one out of whack result, consider it a corrective for the round up or assume the lowest value .1 x 90 for 9 hits).
Roll 7, RMxPM is 1 x 90, 90 hits.
Roll 9, RMxPM is 1.4 x 90, 126 rounded to 100 hits.
Assume 100 hits possible, 8+ to hit-
Roll 3, RMxPM is .2 x 45, 9 hits.
Roll 7, RMxPM is 1 x 45, 45 hits.
Roll 12, RMxPM is 2 x 45, 90 hits.
You get the idea.
If you don't like the wild range, substitute ((2d6-7) * .1) +1 for the RM result.
And then how are hits applied?
Because if they have to be rolled on the tables, you still have to roll an awful number of dice for its effects...
And asume the same question for defenses (screens, Point Defenses, etc).
Hey, one solution at a time!
For screen/PD results, should be able to do the same thing, only applying the variable hit count as input for to a new percentage generated by the RMxPM for the defense. But that still just gets you hit count, not damage rolling.
Like I said, I have a solution for the die rolling that should put most offensive rolling at least down to a few rolls, including damage. Inevitably, you can't use the same tables and you can't have the same exact results/optimization with the table change
Alright things needing doing and fixing to finish up and move on to the next part-
Die roll reduction is definitely heard but not on the menu for this first installment.
Anything else?
- Scenario generation to include setup for possible pincer moves, who occupies X space terrain, etc.
- Are range DMs right? Long range sniper spinals ok?
- Other battle scenarios people would want to do that needs alteration to this scheme?
Die roll reduction is definitely heard but not on the menu for this first installment.
Anything else?
AnotherDilbert
SOC-14 1K
It might be too easy to move a rangeband, just assign enough agility and you can always retreat to keep the enemy at long range.
In standard HG you can never guarantee any specific range, the enemy gets to choose sometimes.
In standard HG you can never guarantee any specific range, the enemy gets to choose sometimes.
They get to automatically move with 5G+ and Fleet Tactics-1, or 4G+ and Fleet Tactics-2, likely little to no Agility to avoid shots. At lower TLs that is a harsh tradeoff to make happen.
Two ways to skin that cat for TL15 magic power/armor advantage.
I could alter the roll to be compare FT skill and subtract lower FT vs. opposing higher- only the higher FT admiral gets to apply their difference to their fleet. If even, only the 6G would automatically move.
The second would be the spinal rule intended for the Velocity rules- if all potential Agility is thrown into Maneuver, then that fleet can only fire it's spinals in the direction of acceleration.
Last edited:
