• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

CT Starships & Mayday

Yes some of the most fun I have ever had was totally "winging-it" role-playing, whatever brings the most fun!

I am just having fun with the unlimited graphic capabilities available with these virtual game playing boards. Fun to bring together all the resources you need to resolve a Space Combat, a Boarding Action or an assassination attempt in a luxury hotel.

I have a copy of the Special Supplement 3 Missiles and I guess the band range movement is in reference to High Guard. I did see in High Guard or Mayday, I forget which at the moment something that did translate them into hex ranges. Anyways right at the moment I was just focused on Mayday then LBB 2. Special Supplement 3 does seem very important however.

I am surprised there hasn't been a lot on missiles here.

I plan on trying to develop a missile chart that will have easy "chit" system to describe warhead, guidance, and propulsion for each missile counter. I can already see an option where the counter could represent a group of missiles fired at the same time at the same target.

All sorts of options but I want to stay as "canon" as possible at the moment.
 
Nice work!

...as another friendly suggestion only (and a small bit or errata* ;) ) using your example here's more along the lines of how I've looked at doing the computer bit when I've dabbled with this kind of sheet:

ShipsData.png


The user simply crosses ("X") out the excess boxes with pencil (i.e. in the example, all but 4 of them). CPU boxes are left empty while Storage boxes are denoted with a single slash (not a full "X"). For added clarity Programs in Storage may be turned upside down (not flipped over, unless you print both sides and have the back side denoted as Stored, perhaps by using brackets) until swapped into CPU.

To make the usage easy, any Programs (such as "S2" aka "Select 2" in my example) using more than 1 Slot are bigger, 1 square per Slot used. So "S2" is 2 squares big, and fills 2 Slots.

This is going to require more room for the Computer box. If you want to keep it to the single page perhaps move the Damage Control box to the right and delete (I think you can live without it) the Missile Storage box. That should get you room for 50 Slots (up to a Model 6, which should cover every PC size ship likely to be played). For Programs not in CPU or Storage just keep them off the Ship Data Sheet entirely (for less chance of "accidental" loading in the heat of battle ;)).

* Model 1bis is CPU 4 and Storage 0, but I'm sure you knew that :)
 
Last edited:
I am surprised there hasn't been a lot on missiles here.

Define "a lot" ;)

I recall (I think) some designs with SS3, some suggested rules (salvo fire and new Programs come to mind), and a couple (at least) discussions. Ah, finding them, now that's the trick :)
 
The more one has to track, the harder it is to visualize. Hence why I much prefer counters on map for combats.

S4,

With regards to SS3, if the players are "gearheaded" enough to want to design their own missiles they'll be "gearheaded" enough to want to both see those missiles perform and control their performance on a map. The GM's descriptions, no matter how wondrous, cannot match watching their missile design perform.


Gents,

Obviously, you haven't read the special rules for Range Band Movement and missiles in SS3. There is no maneuvering. There are simple to-hit throws.

It's the GM who describes the maneuvering, if he wants.
 
Here's the way I used to handle ships, based soundly upon both FASA Trek and SFB play...

Tho' I used to draw them by hand on quadrile graph paper.

1_Screen_shot_2010-03-03_at_6.17.59_PM.png


Toss it in a page protector, and use grease pencils or wet-erase markers.
Goes nicely with counters, tho, too.

The nice sheet of Enoffs showcased by Dan goes wonderfully with this kind of ship display, y'know?
 
Last edited:
Hi Far-Trader

I was thinking at one point of making the program chits different sizes that fit slots. The boxes are ratios to the chits already and I was thinking of boxed cells. I was up late prototyping and settled for what I had developed so far.

I think the computer is essential to this game and making it graphically more fun would be a good thing. I'll toy around with it and see If I can make it not get too big. Thanks for the suggestion.

Ha ha I was wondering if someone noticed the 1bis being wrong. Of course I was just showing that I had made chits for the different kinds of computers.
 
Hi Aramis

I figure to eventual work towards a LBB2 Starship sheet. That chart has some good ideas!

I was trying to make "chits" that would work with charts in Cyberboard or could be Vassal, instead of having to keep a paper record. I like Cyberboard at the moment, vassal has become pretty complex. That way you could keep a graphical display of ship information maybe much like SPI's Air War or Avalon Hill's Flight Leader.

Its very much in beta, like many others I have to work for a living so I just have fun working on Traveller when I have time.

All suggestions are welcome and hopefully we can have some fun space battles
 
Last edited:
Obviously, you haven't read the special rules for Range Band Movement and missiles in SS3. There is no maneuvering. There are simple to-hit throws.


S4,

Obviously, you don't yet understand the point I was trying to make.

S3 allows people to design and build missiles with performance characteristics which are different than the listed standard missiles. Chief among those differences is the number and type of gee turns available to a missile. Players can juggle endurance and the top gee rating, they can even decide if a missile can thrust at variable gees or must always thrust at a fixed rate.

In my experience, if the players are gear-headed enough to want to design their own missiles and select it's specific operating characteristics they're also gear-headed enough to want to see and control that missile as it actually performs on the game map.

Shifting a counter between range bands as the GM paints a verbal picture before throwing a To-Hit roll usually isn't enough because that system is too "coarse" to accurately represent all the design choices that can be made to the players satisfaction.

Again, there is no "perfect" choice for all starship combat all the time. There are only choices which best fit the immediate needs of the group and session.


Regards,
Bill
 
Last edited:
Must...
Save...
All...
These...
Wonderful...
Record...
Sheets...

Woo-Hoo! Got 'em!

Thanks Enoff, Dan, and Wil!


Regards,
Bill
 
Obviously, you don't yet understand the point I was trying to make.

I do understand. You said that if people go to the trouble of designing missiles, then they'll want to play with those missiles on a board.

Point taken. But, I'm living proof that your point isn't always correct. I've designed plenty of missiles back in the day, and my players didn't know one thing about it. I just enjoyed doing it. Then, I'd make them available in the game.

Sometimes, I'd use a hex map. Sure. Especially if there were more than two ships included in the battle. Plus, you are correct, it is "fun" to try to out-maneuver the incoming missiles.

But, anyone who runs a few combats will quickly realise that type of play is only viable at low velocity--at the launch or arrival point. Otherwise, the ship has built up so much thrust that its basically just moving in a straight line anyway--no movement inside of a short period.

Thus, if two merchant vessels leave the starport heading for the Gas Giant, and all of a sudden, one of them decides to go pirate and attack the other, there's little the target vessel can do to out maneuver the missile.

SS3's Range Band rules work exceptionally well for this type of encounter.

Different tools for different scenarios.
 
You're also quite often the exception to "normal tastes," S4. More often than not, you're the outlier on the opnion scale. You even make jokes about it. ("Which means, Colin, you'll hate it.") I tend to be the other end outlier.

No one's saying you shouldn't enjoy range bands; we are saying some of OUR GROUPS don't like it for its lack of tactical precision, and as GM's, it doesn't work well for us because we prefer a more visual, less vocal focus for combat.

And a blip closing 5 lines is far less appealing visually than a missile arcing to intercept as you maneuver away, then back... a serious kind of cat and mouse that the range band system does not emulate well....

Likewise, put a half dozen fighters out, and range bands cease to reflect the differences as well.
Range band may be good enough for you... but it isn't good enough for everyone.
 
Last edited:
Range band may be good enough for you... but it isn't good enough for everyone.

Different tools for different situations, as I said.

And, I also said, if you get any kind of velocity, there's no real maneuvering anyway. It's just torps angling for a ship moving in a straight line.
 
Different tools for different situations, as I said.

And, I also said, if you get any kind of velocity, there's no real maneuvering anyway. It's just torps angling for a ship moving in a straight line.

Only if the relative velocities are high. Absolute velocity is irrelevant in this case. A 6G missile vs a 3G ship isn't a sure thing, especially if at any range near exhaustion (which for canonical missiles tends to be a few turns at most).

Just like drones in SFB, missiles are not fire-n-forget, but create interesting pseudo-terrain.
 
Well I decided to just add numbers to the program "chits" at the moment. Its just the easiest solution to the problem.

http://www.lexweb.us/programnum.jpg

Starships on playing board
http://www.lexweb.us/starships.jpg

Maybe different size "chits" for the cargo might be fun. I like the idea for the programs and the thought crossed my mind also but it is just extra work and I don't think it will contribute that much.

I do need to tweak the ship data card so the program "chits" in the CPU have more room.

regards
 
Last edited:
Well I decided to just add numbers to the program "chits" at the moment. Its just the easiest solution to the problem.

That's a good solution. And easy as you noted. Keeps the computer board from needing the whole page for higher models.


I do need to tweak the ship data card so the program "chits" in the CPU have more room.

Maybe a little, stacking presents the problem of not seeing the program you need. I still think the "programs available" space isn't really needed, just have them off the ship data board entirely. Use the extra space to give the programs actually in use on a turn more room. And maybe a little less room for the Storage? The focus is generally on the CPU programs so you want them spread out and not stacked.
 
Sorry these pictures are a little large 300k but I had to show off my Ship Status boards

This is the "Native" Ship Status Board
http://www.lexweb.us/mayday/nativeshipsdata.jpg

This is the "Intruder" Ship Status Board
http://www.lexweb.us/mayday/intrudershipsdata.jpg

Yes I ended up enlarging the computer area. Interesting I haven't played it but the Manual to the computer Traveller game Zhodani Conspiracy has a computer where the computer programs are different sizes and you have to fit them into slots. Funny
 
Back
Top