help me grok vector movement

[weasel fierce]

I was just figuring that if a space ship battle occurs, it'll be outside of gravity range.

The only reservation I have, i guess, is that space combat can cost the PC's a LOT of money very rapidly

But thems the breaks I s'pose

 

[weasel fierce]

I was just figuring that if a space ship battle occurs, it'll be outside of gravity range.

The only reservation I have, i guess, is that space combat can cost the PC's a LOT of money very rapidly

But thems the breaks I s'pose

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by weasel fierce:
The only reservation I have, i guess, is that space combat can cost the PC's a LOT of money very rapidly

But thems the breaks I s'pose

Absolutely! It's a great GM tool to use to keep the PC's income in check.

Have them run a couple of profitable speculative trade runs. They'll feel good about themselves after that.

Then, pop a space combat on them, and take it all away!

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by weasel fierce:
The only reservation I have, i guess, is that space combat can cost the PC's a LOT of money very rapidly

But thems the breaks I s'pose

Absolutely! It's a great GM tool to use to keep the PC's income in check.

Have them run a couple of profitable speculative trade runs. They'll feel good about themselves after that.

Then, pop a space combat on them, and take it all away!

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Ptah:
Finally the range band approach is very good and an even more accurate representation of actual movement if only two ships are involved.

It does get a little sticky if three ships are involved, and all three are firing at each other.

But, if it's just the player's ship vs. two or more enemies, it's still quite simple. Just use columns on your notebook paper.

In each col., figure range to each enemy independently.

Waa-laa, no problems.

The Range Band method on notebook paper really only keeps track of range. If position is important for some reason (and it can be if two enemies are involved, or the PC's ship is trying to head in a particular direction), then you might want to use the Mayday Range Band method on a hex board or square grid.

You'll have to use map and counters, but the Range Band rules still work. The plot on the grid will give relative position as well as range--and, it's easy to see range between enemy ships (very hard using the notebook paper method).

-S4

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Ptah:
Finally the range band approach is very good and an even more accurate representation of actual movement if only two ships are involved.

It does get a little sticky if three ships are involved, and all three are firing at each other.

But, if it's just the player's ship vs. two or more enemies, it's still quite simple. Just use columns on your notebook paper.

In each col., figure range to each enemy independently.

Waa-laa, no problems.

The Range Band method on notebook paper really only keeps track of range. If position is important for some reason (and it can be if two enemies are involved, or the PC's ship is trying to head in a particular direction), then you might want to use the Mayday Range Band method on a hex board or square grid.

You'll have to use map and counters, but the Range Band rules still work. The plot on the grid will give relative position as well as range--and, it's easy to see range between enemy ships (very hard using the notebook paper method).

-S4

 

[Ptah]

I vastly prefer the hex based approach. If you have some spare cash, I've found some incredible hex mats for space combats here:

http://www.hotzmats.com/mat_anatomy_space.html

I've yet to buy any so can't vouce for the site.

With respect to planets, my son has some wall clingies of the solar system. These look like they could make good planet templates, the Earth and Mars ones are even about to scale if 1"=10,000km.

 

[Ptah]

I vastly prefer the hex based approach. If you have some spare cash, I've found some incredible hex mats for space combats here:

http://www.hotzmats.com/mat_anatomy_space.html

I've yet to buy any so can't vouce for the site.

With respect to planets, my son has some wall clingies of the solar system. These look like they could make good planet templates, the Earth and Mars ones are even about to scale if 1"=10,000km.

 

[Arthur Denger]

Originally posted by Robert Prior:

I use Mayday to teach vectors in high school.

That is outstanding! I wish my high school physics teacher had used it. The entire concept would have more easily understood, IMHO.

How receptive are your students to the Mayday Method?

 

[Arthur Denger]

Originally posted by Robert Prior:

I use Mayday to teach vectors in high school.

That is outstanding! I wish my high school physics teacher had used it. The entire concept would have more easily understood, IMHO.

How receptive are your students to the Mayday Method?

 

[Arthur Denger]

Originally posted by far-trader:

One quick bit of advice, you can skip the whole planetary gravity effects bit in my opinion, it'll simplify things a bit and you won't miss it. It never made much sense since Traveller ships seem to operate with an anitgravity effect that cancels out local gravity.

I've sometimes employed planetary gravity wells in Mayday as a slingshot tactic when engaging another vessel: it's kind of a dirty trick, as one's opponent often assumes one is trying to hide behind or perhaps orbit or land on the planet, only to be surprised when one's ship zings around on a new vector, ordnance blazing away. Takes careful plotting, but it stumps 'em (nearly) every time...

 

[Arthur Denger]

Originally posted by far-trader:

One quick bit of advice, you can skip the whole planetary gravity effects bit in my opinion, it'll simplify things a bit and you won't miss it. It never made much sense since Traveller ships seem to operate with an anitgravity effect that cancels out local gravity.

I've sometimes employed planetary gravity wells in Mayday as a slingshot tactic when engaging another vessel: it's kind of a dirty trick, as one's opponent often assumes one is trying to hide behind or perhaps orbit or land on the planet, only to be surprised when one's ship zings around on a new vector, ordnance blazing away. Takes careful plotting, but it stumps 'em (nearly) every time...

 

[Saxondog]

If I may borrow a concept from "Hard Vaccuum" and slightly alter it.

Each ship has 8 markers. Front, back, left, right and all 4 corners. Each turn you move your ship according to these markers. For example,you have a 4 to the front and a 2 to the right, then each turn you move 4 units forward and 2 to the right.

You can add the value of your M-drive to one (or more if you divide the thrust) markers each turn. In the example above, if you have a thrust of 3 then you can add 3 to any marker. Say ahead. Now you have a 7 to the front and a 2 to the right. The next turn, you want to straighten out your direction so you add 1 of your thrust points to front and use the other 2 to cancel the drift to the right. Now you have a front number 8 and no others. So each turn that you don't change anything, you will move 8 ahead.

This could be done with 4 markers but it might make changing directions on the diagonal harder without some trig.

Now, obviously if there are numbers on opposite sides, you can subtract the lower from both. For example, a ship drifting left at 2 accellerates 3 to the right. You wouldn't want a 3 on onde side and a 2 on the other. You would just take 2 from both sides leaving a 1 on the right and nothing on the left.

Am I making sense?

 

[Saxondog]

If I may borrow a concept from "Hard Vaccuum" and slightly alter it.

Each ship has 8 markers. Front, back, left, right and all 4 corners. Each turn you move your ship according to these markers. For example,you have a 4 to the front and a 2 to the right, then each turn you move 4 units forward and 2 to the right.

You can add the value of your M-drive to one (or more if you divide the thrust) markers each turn. In the example above, if you have a thrust of 3 then you can add 3 to any marker. Say ahead. Now you have a 7 to the front and a 2 to the right. The next turn, you want to straighten out your direction so you add 1 of your thrust points to front and use the other 2 to cancel the drift to the right. Now you have a front number 8 and no others. So each turn that you don't change anything, you will move 8 ahead.

This could be done with 4 markers but it might make changing directions on the diagonal harder without some trig.

Now, obviously if there are numbers on opposite sides, you can subtract the lower from both. For example, a ship drifting left at 2 accellerates 3 to the right. You wouldn't want a 3 on onde side and a 2 on the other. You would just take 2 from both sides leaving a 1 on the right and nothing on the left.

Am I making sense?

 

[far-trader]

Originally posted by Saxondog:
Am I making sense?

I think I get it. Interesting, have to give that a bit of a try and see. It looks like it has potential.

 

[far-trader]

Originally posted by Saxondog:
Am I making sense?

I think I get it. Interesting, have to give that a bit of a try and see. It looks like it has potential.

 

[Ptah]

Originally posted by Saxondog:
...
Am I making sense?

Makes perfect sense. Why 8 markers though, wouldn't 3 be enough for true 3D movement?

SPI's Battlefleet mars had a simialr system but yo had 3 markers, x-component, y-component and z-compnent, to velocity. You changed velocity the same way,adding/subtracting points to individual markers up to a max total of your acceleration.

It did use two tactical mapes, one x-y the other x-z. To determine true distance they had handy little tables already done up for you, just lookup for your x,y, and z distance. Weapons couldn't fire more than about 6 squares away IIRC so these table were never too large.

 

[Ptah]

Originally posted by Saxondog:
...
Am I making sense?

Makes perfect sense. Why 8 markers though, wouldn't 3 be enough for true 3D movement?

SPI's Battlefleet mars had a simialr system but yo had 3 markers, x-component, y-component and z-compnent, to velocity. You changed velocity the same way,adding/subtracting points to individual markers up to a max total of your acceleration.

It did use two tactical mapes, one x-y the other x-z. To determine true distance they had handy little tables already done up for you, just lookup for your x,y, and z distance. Weapons couldn't fire more than about 6 squares away IIRC so these table were never too large.

 

[Saxondog]

Originally posted by Ptah:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Saxondog:
[qb] ...
Am I making sense?

Makes perfect sense. Why 8 markers though, wouldn't 3 be enough for true 3D movement?
</font>[/QUOTE]It could probably be done with two since Traveller usually just works in 2d enviroments. Using 8 would help learn the way it works. Front, back, left, right and all the corners.

I would probably use 4. That way it would be possible to change speed on the diagonal without figuring the trig to go forward and to the side.

 

[Saxondog]

Originally posted by Ptah:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Saxondog:
[qb] ...
Am I making sense?

Makes perfect sense. Why 8 markers though, wouldn't 3 be enough for true 3D movement?
</font>[/QUOTE]It could probably be done with two since Traveller usually just works in 2d enviroments. Using 8 would help learn the way it works. Front, back, left, right and all the corners.

I would probably use 4. That way it would be possible to change speed on the diagonal without figuring the trig to go forward and to the side.