Five Things About Mayday

[robject]

Five Things I Like About Mayday

1. Movement. I like that movement can be vector-based, and I like the way orbiting is handled. I like that the game's tactics rely heavily on movement.

2. Sensor Locks. I like limits to sensors. I like not being able to lock onto another ship until it's in range, and I like losing the ability to lock once it is far enough away.

3. Attacks. I generally like the way attacks are handled -- it's about the same as classic Traveller, if I recall correctly.

4. The Ship Card. I like the compactness-yet-completeness of the ship card. It's easy to mark up damage, and it's a handy 3 x 5 index card, and yet the entire ship design fits on it.

5. The Board. I like hexmaps, and this one is very very very easily made and doesn't take up a lot of space.



Five Things I Don't Like About Mayday

1. Newton's First Law. Even though I like vector movement, it's too easy to let it get out of hand. My ship just sails off the map, unable to return. Experienced players learn to control themselves, but this can be quite a turn-off to newbies who otherwise might be in the market for a SF combat game.

2. Tiny Planets. The map size requires that planets fit into one hex. I've idly wanted to see (for example) gas giants which occupy several hexes.

3. Missiles and Multiple Bogeys. More than two things flying around the map slows the game down (too much?).

4. Tiny Planets #2. "Landing" on a planet means your counter is physically on top of the planet. Yet it seems to me that planets are far too big to abstract away like this. A corsair would never be able to find you once you're in the atmosphere, would it?

5. Tiny Ships. Any ships larger than the smallest ones (say, ships over 400 tons) start to slow the game down, because the number of independently firing turrets goes up.

 

[Vladika]

Five Things I Don't Like About Mayday

1. Newton's First Law. Even though I like vector movement, it's too easy to let it get out of hand. My ship just sails off the map, unable to return. Experienced players learn to control themselves, but this can be quite a turn-off to newbies who otherwise might be in the market for a SF combat game.

2. Tiny Planets. The map size requires that planets fit into one hex. I've idly wanted to see (for example) gas giants which occupy several hexes.

"Blow up" the sizes of planet and at the same time shorten the turn time scale. This solves both problems without altering the game dynamics one bit.

3. Missiles and Multiple Bogeys. More than two things flying around the map slows the game down (too much?).

True. Stop "wasting" missiles? They are expensive.:CoW:

4. Tiny Planets #2. "Landing" on a planet means your counter is physically on top of the planet. Yet it seems to me that planets are far too big to abstract away like this. A corsair would never be able to find you once you're in the atmosphere, would it?

See first response.

5. Tiny Ships. Any ships larger than the smallest ones (say, ships over 400 tons) start to slow the game down, because the number of independently firing turrets goes up.

Mayday really wasn't designed for more than a very few ships in play. (I do share your frustrations.)

 

[Piper]

Tiny Ships. Any ships larger than the smallest ones (say, ships over 400 tons) start to slow the game down, because the number of independently firing turrets goes up.

Mayday suggests using High Guard designs as an option. This would eliminate this concern and would address the complementary issue you raised in the High Guard thread about stylized movement.

If you haven't already seen it, "Triplanetary" (also by Marc Miller) might be worth a look. I often wish Traveller had followed it more closely for Book 2 ships.

 

[McPerth]

Some disagreements here (most of them already told about in other threads):

Five Things I Like About Mayday

2. Sensor Locks. I like limits to sensors. I like not being able to lock onto another ship until it's in range, and I like losing the ability to lock once it is far enough away.

I'd expect missiles to be launched at quite larger distances to incoming hostile ships, relying in their own locking systems once they are close enough.

Five Things I Don't Like About Mayday

1. Newton's First Law. Even though I like vector movement, it's too easy to let it get out of hand. My ship just sails off the map, unable to return. Experienced players learn to control themselves, but this can be quite a turn-off to newbies who otherwise might be in the market for a SF combat game.

That's exactly what I expect to happen in space battles if newtonian laws apply there: most fights would be a single round shooting while passing by by opposing ships at very high relative speeds, as one side has accelerated to intercept the other.

I envision fights with more or less matched vectors (the ones represented in Mayday) to be a rare occurence.


Mostly agreed in the rest.

 

[Vladika]

...most fights would be a single round shooting while passing by by opposing ships at very high relative speeds, as one side has accelerated to intercept the other.

I envision fights with more or less matched vectors (the ones represented in Mayday) to be a rare occurence.
...

Now this has always been an interesting argument.

I see this happening only during a "both sides must save face" and take a shot at each other just for macho bragging rights later. Neither side really risks much here.

Now if both sides are bound and determined to go at it I see it developing with deliberate movement. Much like two Sumo wrestlers.

However, in any other case battle will be determined by the faster ship. Both the decision for the battle as well as how it will take place. Unless the slower ship can hit the 100dia limit and jump the faster ship has plenty of time to "match vectors". It may very well take plenty of time, but then the faster ship has that time available.

 

[Dagrill]

Five Things I Don't Like About Mayday
1. Newton's First Law. Even though I like vector movement, it's too easy to let it get out of hand. My ship just sails off the map, unable to return. Experienced players learn to control themselves, but this can be quite a turn-off to newbies who otherwise might be in the market for a SF combat game. .

I must admit this is the reason I never bought mayday,

regards

David

 

[robject]

However, in any other case battle will be determined by the faster ship. Both the decision for the battle as well as how it will take place.

This is an important point which I think applies to all Traveller space combat. The more maneuverable craft determines the range of the engagement.

 

[McPerth]

Now this has always been an interesting argument.

I see this happening only during a "both sides must save face" and take a shot at each other just for macho bragging rights later. Neither side really risks much here.

IMHO, this is what will occur if you try to intercept an incoming fleet before your defended planet is in range.

As you must speed up to intercept it as far as you can from the target, you'll reach it at very high relative speeds.

If you try to match vectors, you'll intercept closer to the target than your intent, and, if they are accelerating towards it, you will not be able to match vectors unless you have far greater acceleration (unless you wait for them to stop for planetary attack, but then you have failed your misión to keep the target safe...)

Now if both sides are bound and determined to go at it I see it developing with deliberate movement. Much like two Sumo wrestlers.

However, in any other case battle will be determined by the faster ship. Both the decision for the battle as well as how it will take place. Unless the slower ship can hit the 100dia limit and jump the faster ship has plenty of time to "match vectors". It may very well take plenty of time, but then the faster ship has that time available.

Of course, this will occur when both ships begin with maching (or at least close) vectors, but, as said, I see that a rare occurence, as usually tactical situation dictates otherwise.

If one side wants to attack a target and the other wants to keep it safe, the above situation will occur; if one side's target is just damaging/destoying the other side, then probably the weaker one will try to avoid combat, and given ships are detected at very far distances, it will be able to do so unless the stronger fleet is faster and accelerates all the way, again giving probably high relative speeds taht will allow only for one or two rounds of combat before overpassing it and having to return.

One important thing that is all too often forgotten (and irrelevant in a one battle game, unless specified in the victory conditions) is that combat is fought with an objective, usually to take/damamge a target (or avoiding that) or just to erode enemy's combat power (both situations depicted above). Other objectives are possible, and will dictate other tactical considerations, that will sure affect the combat.

 

[robject]

It is said that the proof of the pudding is in the eating.

Changes to a game, regardless of what stage of development that game is in, requires playtesting from various angles by different types of people.

Implement changes, then play the game ten times.

 

[mike wightman]

Change the scale of Mayday to match LBB2 (which also reduces the ridiculous weapon ranges for the HG add on), one hex now represents 100mm, 1000s turns.

Use the LBB2 sensor rules for sensor locks.

 

[robject]

I read the overview of Triplanetary's rules and house rules, and kicked it around with Jeff Johnson, and I think there are some ideas worth considering for Mayday. Here they are, in the priority that I want to try them out:

1. Severely limit the number of missiles carried (= expensive and deadly).
2. Missiles move at 1/2 acceleration, and ignore Newton.
3. Gas Giants that occupy 7 hexes.
4. Re-use the mass combat rules from LBB4: Mercenary. Alternately, use the Virtual Battery rules from T5.
5. Impact rules, for ramming or maneuvering through debris fields.
6. Resupply, looting, and rescue rules.
7. Base rules.
8. Inner system map, including major moons and asteroid belts.
9. Rules for using "hidden" counters.
A. Generalize the computer rules into profiles, rather than programs.
B. Refueling (and tanker) rules.
C. Secondary "planetary disk" maps for conducting basic planetary assault.

 

[Piper]

C. Secondary "planetary disk" maps for conducting basic planetary assault.

There was a ground combat add-on for Imperium in JTAS #5. Created zoned world mini-maps. Might be worth a gander.

Also check out Star Viking's tile system. Thing of brilliance, truly.

review: http://www.projectrho.com/game/starviking.html
download: http://dwarfstar.brainiac.com/ds_starviking.html

 

[Piper]

Change the scale of Mayday to match LBB2 (which also reduces the ridiculous weapon ranges for the HG add on), one hex now represents 100mm, 1000s turns.

Mucks up your single hex planet, though and makes orbiting a bit of an issue.

 

[Vladika]

...if one side's target is just damaging/destoying the other side, then probably the weacker one will try to avoid combat, and given ships are detected at very far distances, it will be able to do so unless the stronger fleet is faster and accelerates all the way, again giving probably high relative speeds taht will allow only for one or two rounds of combat before eoerpassing it and having to return.

(Mathematical Equation for fleeing ship [constant acceleration]= Mathematical Equation for pursuing ship [varying acceleration then deceleration]). The unknown to solve for is "x" the intercept point. Velocity of BOTH ships, AT that point can be anything the faster ship decides it wants it to be. The closer each ship velocity is to the other, the longer the chase. That is ALL there is to it.:devil:

Some basic Physics and a bit of Algebra. If the slower ship "jinks" to evade, the formula simply breaks down into the xyz vector components.

The slower ship CAN NOT evade, forever, in open space.

One important thing that is all too often forgotten (and irrelevant in a one battle game, unless specified in the victory conditions) is that combat is fought with an objective, usually to take/damamge a target (or avoiding that) or just to erode enemy's combat power (both situations depicted above). Other objectives are possible, and will dictate other tactical considerations, that will sure affect the combat.

True. In this situation you are either going to destroy the invader right off or he is going to get some shots into the defended position. The faster he goes by, the fewer shots he gets.

If he sticks around the battle lasts longer. If you are faster, and stronger, you chase him down and destroy him or wait for the whole thing to play out again.

You better leave a strong force behind to deal with his second attack wave.

 

[Piper]

Another option here, one I've been meaning to try when I had the time, is to use Book 5 systems in Book 2 hulls with Book 2 power plants generating Book 5 energy points.

If I remember correctly, you could just barely squeeze in a Meson bay (and power it) in a 3000 ton hull.

 

[Vladika]

Another option here, one I've been meaning to try when I had the time, is to use Book 5 systems in Book 2 hulls with Book 2 power plants using Book 5 energy points.

If I remember correctly, you could just barely squeeze in a Meson bay (and power it) in a 3000 ton hull.

This is one I use for a Small Ship Universe. Anything you can get into a 5000dt hull from HG for navy ships.

Civilian ships are Book 2 other than turret weapons and computers. God help the civilian though that is caught with an over weaponized ship that can't generally turn a profit. De Facto Pirate...:toast:

 

[rancke]

If one side wants to attack a target and the other wants to keep it safe, the above situation will occur; if one side's target is just damaging/destoying the other side, then probably the weacker one will try to avoid combat, and given ships are detected at very far distances, it will be able to do so unless the stronger fleet is faster and accelerates all the way, again giving probably high relative speeds taht will allow only for one or two rounds of combat before eoerpassing it and having to return.

With the large number of die rolls often involved in HG combat, luck tends to even out and become less of a factor than it could be. It might be worth while to add factors that remove the stronger side's ability to be sure that it is the stronger side. Things like crew morale and tactical ability.

In David Weber's Honorverse books he establishes that the Royal Manticoran Navy has a tradition of sticking around even if outnumbered, which means that an enemy knows that it can't expect just to show up with superior forces and scare the defenders away; they have to be prepared to pay a heavy butcher's bill too.


Hans

 

[aramis]

things I like about Mayday
1. newtonian movement.
2. book 2 type damage system
3. character skills can easily be applied
4. simple to run
5. fast to plsy, even with 5-8 on a side

things I don't like about Mayday
1 scale.
2 scale
3 apparent complexity (a false impression that it gives)
4 hg adaptation
5 ct implications of the HG adaptation

 

[Rabbit 3]

I read the overview of Triplanetary's rules and house rules, and kicked it around with Jeff Johnson, and I think there are some ideas worth considering for Mayday. Here they are, in the priority that I want to try them out:

3. Gas Giants that occupy 7 hexes.
.

Given the scale the standard Mayday planet counter represents a small gas giant about the size of Uranus or Neptune, a large gas giant like Saturn or Jupiter scales out at somewhere between 5 and 7 hexes with 1G gravity bands extending a couple of hexes further!
The thing about Mayday was that it was intended as a low cost budget game with simple rules, things like large GG templates can always be made by the players.

 

[robject]

Given the scale the standard Mayday planet counter represents a small gas giant about the size of Uranus or Neptune, a large gas giant like Saturn or Jupiter scales out at somewhere between 5 and 7 hexes with 1G gravity bands extending a couple of hexes further!

I have thought a bit about more than one gravity shell.

Since wargames are not slaves to reality, we are free to do something in the spirit of reality, rather than its letter. For example, 4-hex or 7-hex disks for gas giants, and larger disks for stars, but not proportionally so.

And in fact, what's the game reason for having larger disks? It's visually appealing, but what mechanical rule is it helping us express in simple terms?

(1) It could be obstruction. A ship can hide behind a gas giant.
(2) It could be movement. A bigger gravity well might sling us around it faster.
(3) Can it be a hazard?
(4) What else?