High Guard rules questions

[Masconi]

Hello!

Maybe some High Guard(2nd ed) veterans could help me with some rules questions.

1. Battle Formation Step
When a ship in the "reserve" launches small craft, are these small craft automatically assumed to be in the reserve(like their carrier), or can the player assign them to the "line of battle" right after launch?

2. Initiative Determination Step
a) Do players roll 1d6 or 2d6 for Initiative?

b) There is a Initiative DM of +1 for "having more ships in the line of battle"; are small craft considered for the purpose of determining who has more ships?

c) There is a Initiative DM of +1 for "having the faster fleet"; are all ships considered in this case, or only those in the "line of battle"?
Are small craft considered for this DM?

3. Pre-Combat Decision Step, Emergency Agility
HG2, p.39:"The ship may still use its computers and screens."
HG2, p.28:"A ship may voluntarily refrain from using any weapons or SCREENS which require energy points..."

I guess the rule on page 28 is the correct one for Emergency Agility (i.e. no use of energy using screens allowed)?

4. Breakthrough Step
HG2, p41:"A breakthrough occurs if all of one player's line of battle ships have been rendered incapable of firing any offensive weapons."

Are small craft considered for the purpose of determining a breakthrough situation?
I.e. can a single undamaged fighter in the line of battle stop an enemy breakthrough?

5. Damage Step, Damage Results
a) I guess a "Power Plant disabled" result has the same consequences as a "Fuel Tanks shattered" result (no ship systems requiring energy may operate)?

b) Does the "minimum 10 ton fuel reduction" rule for the "Fuel-n" result applies to small craft too?
For most small craft it would mean the same as a "Fuel Tanks shattered" damage (i.e. a mission kill)?

Thank you!

Masconi

 

[Whipsnade]

1. Battle Formation Step. When a ship in the "reserve" launches small craft, are these small craft automatically assumed to be in the reserve(like their carrier), or can the player assign them to the "line of battle" right after launch?

Masconi,

All launched craft can be placed in either the Line or Reserve as the player wishes.

2. Initiative Determination Step. a) Do players roll 1d6 or 2d6 for Initiative?

1D6

b) There is a Initiative DM of +1 for "having more ships in the line of battle"; are small craft considered for the purpose of determining who has more ships?

Yes.

c) There is a Initiative DM of +1 for "having the faster fleet"; are all ships considered in this case, or only those in the "line of battle"? Are small craft considered for this DM?

All ships are counted, even small craft. If a vessel is currently being carried by another vessel, as with a rider or fighter, it is not counted. Craft launched that turn count too.

3. Pre-Combat Decision Step, Emergency Agility. HG2, p.39:"The ship may still use its computers and screens." HG2, p.28:"A ship may voluntarily refrain from using any weapons or SCREENS which require energy points..." I guess the rule on page 28 is the correct one for Emergency Agility (i.e. no use of energy using screens allowed)?

You've forgotten that there is one screen that doesn't require energy points, the Black Globe.

4. Breakthrough Step. HG2, p41:"A breakthrough occurs if all of one player's line of battle ships have been rendered incapable of firing any offensive weapons." Are small craft considered for the purpose of determining a breakthrough situation? I.e. can a single undamaged fighter in the line of battle stop an enemy breakthrough?

Yes to both questions. And before you complain about one fighter somehow shielding 100+ vessels in the Reserve, remember that HG2 is a highly abstract wargame and any system breaks down at the extremes.

5. Damage Step, Damage Results. a) I guess a "Power Plant disabled" result has the same consequences as a "Fuel Tanks shattered" result (no ship systems requiring energy may operate)?

Yes. Two different results with essentially the same consequences.

b) Does the "minimum 10 ton fuel reduction" rule for the "Fuel-n" result applies to small craft too? For most small craft it would mean the same as a "Fuel Tanks shattered" damage (i.e. a mission kill)?

Yes. Every fuel hit results in the loss of at least 10 dTons. Losing all your fuel due to one fuel hit or hundred fuel hits means your mission killed.

Several of your questions dealt with small craft, also called sub-100dTon craft or "fighters". Let me emphasize that, with the exception of the "No Bridge" computer size DM, small craft are treated exactly the same as any other vessel in a HG2 battle.

Set aside all the assumptions that the label "fighters" leads you to make. HG2 "fighters" are not our 21st fighter aircraft or Star Wars' fighters. They move differently and fight differently. They are very different things.


Regards,
Bill

 

[Masconi]

Wow, that was fast!
Thank you, Bill!

One last question about the damage result "Weapon-n".

The rules state :"Each hit destroys one battery of weapons, either offensive or defensive."

Does that mean, that even a "Weapon-3" result destroys only ONE battery, and not THREE batteries?

I ask, because the other rule in the paragraph reads: "The firing player chooses which weapons are affected, but damage must be divided as evenly as possible."

Now first of all, this rule talks about "weapons" not "weapon".
Second, this rule talks about how to "divide" the damage (which makes no sense if always only one battery is hit).
Therefore, this sentence seems to imply, that more than one battery could be hit?

Thanks!

Fred

 

[far-trader]

An answer, and a question...

(at least I think I've got it right, but I have been wrong before... )

One last question about the damage result "Weapon-n".

The rules state :"Each hit destroys one battery of weapons, either offensive or defensive."

Does that mean, that even a "Weapon-3" result destroys only ONE battery, and not THREE batteries?

Yep, the "-n" only applies to weapon factors where there is only one battery of a specific weapon type.

Example:

A ship with 3 batteries of factor 5 beam weapons subjected to a "Weapon -2" hit will result in 1 battery being destroyed and the ship having 2 batteries of factor 5 beam weapons remaining. A "Weapon -1 or Weapon -4 hit would have had the same effect. Subsequent hits will destroy the remaining batteries.

A ship with 1 battery of factor 9 missiles subjected to a "Weapon -2" hit will result in the 1 battery of factor 9 missiles being reduced by 2 to a factor 7, and subsequent hits will reduce it further.

Now mix the two. A ship with 3 batteries of factor 5 beam weapons and 1 battery of factor 9 missiles is subjected to a "Weapon -2" hit. The firing player may choose which battery to affect, either destroying one of the beam batteries or reducing the missile battery to factor 7. Let's say he chooses the missile battery. On the subsequent hits the firing player may not target the missile battery again until each of the beam battery has been hit (and destroyed). So the fifth hit will once again damage the missile battery.

Here's where I get a little foggy myself. Do subsequent hits after that all damage the missile battery since it is the only battery left? Or is damage still divided evenly by hitting the already destroyed beam batteries again?

Not really fair answering (I hope) your question and then raising another one

 

[DonM]

Questioning the question???

Here's where I get a little foggy myself. Do subsequent hits after that all damage the missile battery since it is the only battery left? Or is damage still divided evenly by hitting the already destroyed beam batteries again?

I've got to ask this...

What HG2 rule leads you to believe you would ever apply damage to something already damaged?

My first take on your question was "why is he asking that"... so I dug out my work copy of the book (the ratty version I keep in my desk at work), and still can't figure out where such a question would come from..

 

[Masconi]

Hello!

Bill wrote, that in the Initiative Determination Step each player rolls 1d6 for Initiative (not 2d6).

I am not a native speaker, but in the HG rules the sentence "Initiative for each turn is determined by DICE rolls..." seems to imply, that more than one die is rolled (i.e. 2d6)?

Thanks.

Fred

 

[BillDowns]

Fred, the next sentence sys "The player with the higher die roll...". The plural form is used there because each player rolls 1 DIE, so there are two DICE being rolled.

I know, English is confusing sometimes, even to native speakers

 

[Masconi]

Thank you for the quick reply!

regards

Fred

 

[skyth]

Now mix the two. A ship with 3 batteries of factor 5 beam weapons and 1 battery of factor 9 missiles is subjected to a "Weapon -2" hit. The firing player may choose which battery to affect, either destroying one of the beam batteries or reducing the missile battery to factor 7. Let's say he chooses the missile battery. On the subsequent hits the firing player may not target the missile battery again until each of the beam battery has been hit (and destroyed). So the fifth hit will once again damage the missile battery.

Actually, it would have to destroy 1 beam weapon and reduce the missile battery by 1.

Here's where I get a little foggy myself. Do subsequent hits after that all damage the missile battery since it is the only battery left? Or is damage still divided evenly by hitting the already destroyed beam batteries again?

At that point, it only has one battery of the type, so the hits reduce the USP factor of the battery.

 

[The Oz]

Hmmmm.....

I've been interpreting the "Weapon-N" hit wrong for years, then.

I've always read it as "Each -N is one battery destroyed, unless that battery is the only one of that kind on the ship, in which case the ship loses -N factors of that battery." A single "Weapon-N" hit is applied to only one battery at a time unless it destroys that battery, in which case the remaining damage is applied to some other battery keeping the damage divided as evenly as possible among the ships weapons.

So a ship with 2 laser-9 batteries and one missile-9 battery that took a "Weapon-3" hit could end up one of two ways:

1. You could choose to hit the missile battery and reduce it to a f-6 battery.
2. You could choose to hit one laser battery (destroying it completely) with one -N, then hit either of the other two remaining batteries and reduce it to a f-7 battery with the remaining two -N damage points left.

Notice that (IMTU) a ship that =had= many weapon batteries of one kind, but is reduced to just one of that battery type left, scores hits on that remaining single battery as if it had always been the only one of its kind on the ship. I do this to keep small ships from losing all their weapons quite as fast as they otherwise would.

 

[BillDowns]

Actually, Oz, I play it like you originally posted it, that is when I don't change the rule

As you indicated, the rule states "Each hit destroys one battery..." and later states "If the ship has only one battery of a type...a hit reduces its USP factor by the indicated amount." (emphasis mine) To me, that part indicates that Weapon-2 is one hit of amount 2.



Therefore, using your example of two laser-9 and one missile-9 and a Weapon-3 hit, the choices would be

1. Destroy one laser-9 battery
2. Or reduce the missile-9 to missile-6.

IMO, of course.

This is one of High Guard's rules that I don't care for. On every other type-n hit, the factor is reduced by n. But not weapons. I prefer a house-rule - for a Weapon-n hit, reduce one battery's factor by n. If it goes to 0, the battery is destroyed, and any remainder of the hit is wasted. Using Oz's example, then, one of those factor 9 batteries gets reduced to 6. Of course the next round's damage would have to go against a different battery to keep the balancing correct.

YMMV

 

[skyth]

Funny thing is, if you interpret it literally, on a ship with multiple of each battery, a weapon-4 result would only destroy one battery.

 

[Masconi]

The definition of a "hit" seems important.

If one "hit" is defined as one roll on the damage table, and each "hit" destroys a battery, then even a Weapon-3 "hit" would destroy only one battery (or reduces a single battery by 3 factors).

If one "hit" is defined as "1n", then each "hit" destroys n-batteries (or reduces a single battery by n factors).

Hmm...

Fred

 

[skyth]

The definition of a "hit" seems important.

If one "hit" is defined as one roll on the damage table, and each "hit" destroys a battery, then even a Weapon-3 "hit" would destroy only one battery (or reduces a single battery by 3 factors).

If one "hit" is defined as "1n", then each "hit" destroys n-batteries (or reduces a single battery by n factors).

Hmm...

Fred

If one hit is defined as 1n, then each "hit" reduces n batteries by n factors...

 

[BillDowns]

Funny thing is, if you interpret it literally, on a ship with multiple of each battery, a weapon-4 result would only destroy one battery.

Until you get to that last battery, then it's reduction by 4.

So, why is the last battery special that way? Taking even the looser interpretation, a Weapon-4 hit gets to destroy 4 Factor-9 batteries until the last. Then, that one is slowly chewed away?

That's why I use my house-rule - a Weapon-4 hit is the same all the time, from start to finish, whether there are 9 batteries or 1.

 

[skyth]

I don't like that because, that leaves Mesons as the only killers for high armor ships. Pulse lasers and nukes can score a mission kill by disabling all weapons on a ship though. Harders to do if you're taking them down one factor at a time.

 

[Masconi]

It seems that the "Weapon-n" result is very open to interpretation...

Fred

 

[Whipsnade]

It seems that the "Weapon-n" result is very open to interpretation...

Fred,

Actually it isn't.

The controlling phrase in all of this is the one that states that DAMAGE from the hits in a SINGLE ROUND must be applied EVENLY. It is not the hits, but the damage caused by hits. And it is not the damage over the entire battle, but the damage inflicted in one round.

FIRST: Each weapons hit - regardless of the N attached - is a discrete unit. You can only apply it as a whole unit and you cannot split it into smaller units. Thus a Weapons-N hit can;

A) Either destroy an entire battery of one weapon type if 1+ batteries of that type are present.

B) Or reduce a battery factor by N if only 1 battery of that type is present.

SECOND: Damage - not hits - must applied evenly. This means that the N totaled from all the hits must be applied as evenly as possible while still treating the hits as discrete packages.

People always over analyze the situation because people are always looking for loopholes. The rule was written to prevent people from playing the system instead of playing the game. When you remember that the firing player chooses which weapons (or screens) get damaged, you'll see that if such a rule wasn't in place a player could "game the system" to create unbalanced results.

Consider the following example:

A Sword Worlds' strike cruiser suffers four weapons hits; two Weapon-2 hits and two Weapon-1 hits. The cruiser has three batteries remaining; a particle accelerator (PA) with a factor of 8, a missile (MS) with a factor of 8, and a fusion gun (FG) with a factor of 6. In order that damage be applied evenly, the PA will receive one Weapon-2 hit to produce a factor of 6, the MS battery will receive one Weapon-2 hit to produce a factor if 6, and the FG battery will receive two Weapon-1 hits(*) to produce a factor of 4. The damage has been applied evenly in the round.

(In the above example I finagled the hits and batteries to work out perfectly in order to make my point. The rule actually states you must apply damage as evenly as possible however. If the cruiser had been hit by three Weapon-2 hits and a single Weapon-1 hit, one of the batteries would have lost have lost three factors. The damage in that case wouldn't have been perfectly even, it just would have been as even as possible.)

Now consider the same example in which only the hits are applied evenly in the round. The PA battery receives one Weapon-2 hit, the FG battery one Weapon-1 hit, and the MS battery one Weapon-1 hit. Then, because all the batteries have been hit once, the PA battery can be hit again with the remaining Weapon-2 hit. The resulting battery factors would be PA 4, MS 7, and FG 5. You can see how the damage inflicted in this round was not applied evenly.

THIRD: Complaints about HG2 two-step damage method forget two important facts. The two-stage method speeds game play. HG2 battles involve huge ships with huge numbers of weapons. If weapons only nibbled away at battery factors, it would take far too long for battles to finish.

The two-stage method also represents what damage actually models in a HG2 battle. "Damaged" does not always equate "destroyed". Unless inflicted by a critical hit, the damage inflicted by hits is not permanent. During battle crews can repair damage and remove hits.

The two-stage method is modeling weapon battery degradation, not destruction, and it's a speedy way to model degradation too. When only one battery remains, it doesn't actually mean that only one battery is really operating. Instead, that "last" battery is really a combination of the remaining capabilities of all the degraded batteries. So, the "last" battery isn't "special".

Questions about why one hit can "destroy" an entire battery while another can "only" nibble away at battery factors simply forget that "damage" really means "degradation".

FOURTH: While damage must be applied evenly within the round it occurred, HITS are applied evenly throughout the battle. Each battery must be hit once before any battery can be hit twice. There is no specific order in which the hits must be applied, aside from applying damage evenly within a round. You do not have to follow the USP code from left to right for example. You can hit batteries in any order you choose just as long as the damage in every round is applied evenly and every battery is on "Hit N" before any one battery is on "Hit N+1".

Again, this "sequential" hits rule has to do with balance. While players cannot target one weapon system to the total exclusion of others, canny players can use the "sequential" hit rule to damage a weapon system somewhat more than the others. In the same manner that NFL teams prefer late 1st round draft picks and early 2nd round draft picks so that their two picks are close to each other, you can try to juggle your weapon hits so that an important battery is hit is subsequent rounds.

If the dice fall right, you can combine "sequential" hits and "as even as possible" damage to seriously hammer weapon batteries of your choosing. Even if the dice don't cooperate, you should still plan on it so you can seize the opportunity if it arises.(***)

FINALLY: Complaints about or befuddlement over HG2's various combat modeling methods, especially the (in)famous Sandcaster Question, forget about the actual nature of wargames. We overlook the fact that wargames are only imperfect models of an extremely chaotic event. Wargames are always abstract and HG2 is more abstract than most. Wargame designers must continually balance "reality"(**) with "playability", choosing which event or decisions to emphasize, which to fold together, and which to ignore.

Considering the fact that we're still playing HG2 thirty years after it was first published, I'd say GDW chose very well.


Regards,
Bill

* - Because the fusion gun battery was hit twice in that round, the missile and particle accelerator batteries would have to be hit before the fusion gun could be hit again.

** - Or a fictional reality in the case of HG2.

*** - It is the presence of this and several other mechanisms in HG2 that make me scratch my head when people say the game lacks enough "important" decisions. I believe it is HG2's relative lack of roleplaying decisions that blind folks to the game's many wargaming decisions.

 

[dean]

I always love it when Bill drops in an posts on stuff like this. Even if I thought I understood what the rule was, now I know the reasons behind it is what it is. Thanks Bill!

 

[Whipsnade]

Dean,

Thanks for the kudos...

... although I originally left out an important chunk of the post!

I guess my cut & paste skills are rusty.


Regards,
Bill