Just chucking this out there---I will spitball some ideas for a new, HG design compliant combat system.
I've wanted to do this for decades, frankly. I have used various IMTU rules over the years, and wanted to actually make less of a kit bash, and more of a redo of HG/B2/Mayday that is internally consistent, and not fundamentally broken like HG is. Canon is to be observed, but only in the narrative sense. B2 is canon, and ships are invulnerable to beam attack with a couple sand caster turrets installed, for example. or that lasers cannot hit certain targets, ever, in HG, but spinals CAN.
A way to read canon is a sort of "read the intent" and "read between the lines." Members here sometimes post very good examples of how this works... "hits" might not be every hit from a battery, but the aggregate effect. That and hits that connect with useful parts. So 30 lasers in HG fire, and get 1 roll, just like 1 laser does. Fewer of the lower factor attacks "hit," however, so overall, the results are about right, they'd say. Meaningfully hit. HG doesn't care about recording scortched paint, or other "hits" that do nothing useful to keep track of. I get it.
That said, my small craft example above is telling. Our size 0, agility 6 craft is impossible to hit with ANY laser battery in HG at long range. Only 2.8% hit at close. A factor D MG or better, or a factor 9 or better PAW can hit it (A at long). If "hits" are in fact "effective hits" I can understand such a result vs, say, large, armored ships. A 100 lasers can actually hit, and not be capable of doing damage, where a MG or PAW might. In this case, the lasers are ONLY missing because of AGILITY and TARGET SIZE. Sure, the danger space of a PAW is bigger than a single laser, but not 100 factor 9 batteries of lasers (all of which fired at our test craft will miss---actually miss, since any hit WOULD be damaging).
So a fix might be to cease using agility as a DM to hit. Which makes agility useless. Clearly not what we want, right?
A given is a movement system to start, with a HG abstraction tacked on later for vast fleet actions. I'd use a version of BR for this (mayday with Task Forces).
First would be to define what a hit actually is so it is unambiguous. I'd assume that any hits that don't at least meaningfully crater the hull, or scrape off useful parts can be considered a "miss" even if they in fact hit the ship. So you might always hit the ship in reality at some range, but some shots for whatever reason cannot damage, and are "misses" as a game mechanic. This is OK within reason, or to disqualify some hits on the target that do no damage to minimize die rolls.
The to-hit vs damage. To-hit should be calibrated to be as realistic as possible, AND scaled to small targets. Meaningful damage should also scale well. It is absurd for 1 laser to do 1 hit damage, and 30 lasers to also do 1 hit damage. Example, you have a target that you can automatically hit in HG. Single laser is factor 2 in HG, base to-hit is 7+. For example we will have DMs set so it is 100% hit (+5 DM combo of target size, and relative computer). Same exact situation with a factor 9 laser, 30 weapons in battery. They both do 1 hit. Dumb, and no possible "subtle" reading makes any sense.
Clearly, though, 30 lasers have a better chance of getting at least 1 hit than 1 does, the trouble is they also have a chance at 30 hits.
My gut feeling for beams is that they should have a flat to-hit roll that is then modified. The base roll should be such that they can hit a static target virtually all the time.
So 2+ to hit for beams*, regardless of factor. We'll use lasers as the baseline, since they should always have the best to-hit of any direct fire weapon, period. (*this could go up a little, depending on what we do with the target size chart. We calibrate it so that a non-evading (agility 0) target of a particular size at a certain range is ALWAYS hit. So the below table can clearly change based on that somewhat.
Turret Beam fire 2+ to hit on 2d6
DMs:
-Agility
+relative computer size
+ weapon factor (more shots fired)
-X for range (per hex, or hexes/2, or something. Depends on game map scale)
+target size (make a new chart for this, scaled to cross-section of a sphere of Size dtons, 0 might be 1000 tons?)
Beam fire has no penetration table, penetration vs sand will be damage DMs.
Beam damage:
1d(factor) hits
so factor 1 does 1 hit.
factor 2 does 1-2 hits (1 hit on a 1-3, 2 on a 4-5 on d6)
factor 3 does 1-3 hits
...
factor 7 does 1d6+1 (2-7 hits)
factor 8 does 1d6+2 (3-8)
factor 9 does 1d6+3 (4-9)
DM -1 if sand deployed against the attack (sand will also be a DM on damage roll) (have another idea that might alter this...)
For the abstract system, the plan would be slightly MORE abstract than HG, so that incremental damage is abstracted (no rolls), and you look at critical hits.
Damage ideas next...
I've wanted to do this for decades, frankly. I have used various IMTU rules over the years, and wanted to actually make less of a kit bash, and more of a redo of HG/B2/Mayday that is internally consistent, and not fundamentally broken like HG is. Canon is to be observed, but only in the narrative sense. B2 is canon, and ships are invulnerable to beam attack with a couple sand caster turrets installed, for example. or that lasers cannot hit certain targets, ever, in HG, but spinals CAN.
A way to read canon is a sort of "read the intent" and "read between the lines." Members here sometimes post very good examples of how this works... "hits" might not be every hit from a battery, but the aggregate effect. That and hits that connect with useful parts. So 30 lasers in HG fire, and get 1 roll, just like 1 laser does. Fewer of the lower factor attacks "hit," however, so overall, the results are about right, they'd say. Meaningfully hit. HG doesn't care about recording scortched paint, or other "hits" that do nothing useful to keep track of. I get it.
That said, my small craft example above is telling. Our size 0, agility 6 craft is impossible to hit with ANY laser battery in HG at long range. Only 2.8% hit at close. A factor D MG or better, or a factor 9 or better PAW can hit it (A at long). If "hits" are in fact "effective hits" I can understand such a result vs, say, large, armored ships. A 100 lasers can actually hit, and not be capable of doing damage, where a MG or PAW might. In this case, the lasers are ONLY missing because of AGILITY and TARGET SIZE. Sure, the danger space of a PAW is bigger than a single laser, but not 100 factor 9 batteries of lasers (all of which fired at our test craft will miss---actually miss, since any hit WOULD be damaging).
So a fix might be to cease using agility as a DM to hit. Which makes agility useless. Clearly not what we want, right?
A given is a movement system to start, with a HG abstraction tacked on later for vast fleet actions. I'd use a version of BR for this (mayday with Task Forces).
First would be to define what a hit actually is so it is unambiguous. I'd assume that any hits that don't at least meaningfully crater the hull, or scrape off useful parts can be considered a "miss" even if they in fact hit the ship. So you might always hit the ship in reality at some range, but some shots for whatever reason cannot damage, and are "misses" as a game mechanic. This is OK within reason, or to disqualify some hits on the target that do no damage to minimize die rolls.
The to-hit vs damage. To-hit should be calibrated to be as realistic as possible, AND scaled to small targets. Meaningful damage should also scale well. It is absurd for 1 laser to do 1 hit damage, and 30 lasers to also do 1 hit damage. Example, you have a target that you can automatically hit in HG. Single laser is factor 2 in HG, base to-hit is 7+. For example we will have DMs set so it is 100% hit (+5 DM combo of target size, and relative computer). Same exact situation with a factor 9 laser, 30 weapons in battery. They both do 1 hit. Dumb, and no possible "subtle" reading makes any sense.
Clearly, though, 30 lasers have a better chance of getting at least 1 hit than 1 does, the trouble is they also have a chance at 30 hits.
My gut feeling for beams is that they should have a flat to-hit roll that is then modified. The base roll should be such that they can hit a static target virtually all the time.
So 2+ to hit for beams*, regardless of factor. We'll use lasers as the baseline, since they should always have the best to-hit of any direct fire weapon, period. (*this could go up a little, depending on what we do with the target size chart. We calibrate it so that a non-evading (agility 0) target of a particular size at a certain range is ALWAYS hit. So the below table can clearly change based on that somewhat.
Turret Beam fire 2+ to hit on 2d6
DMs:
-Agility
+relative computer size
+ weapon factor (more shots fired)
-X for range (per hex, or hexes/2, or something. Depends on game map scale)
+target size (make a new chart for this, scaled to cross-section of a sphere of Size dtons, 0 might be 1000 tons?)
Beam fire has no penetration table, penetration vs sand will be damage DMs.
Beam damage:
1d(factor) hits
so factor 1 does 1 hit.
factor 2 does 1-2 hits (1 hit on a 1-3, 2 on a 4-5 on d6)
factor 3 does 1-3 hits
...
factor 7 does 1d6+1 (2-7 hits)
factor 8 does 1d6+2 (3-8)
factor 9 does 1d6+3 (4-9)
DM -1 if sand deployed against the attack (sand will also be a DM on damage roll) (have another idea that might alter this...)
For the abstract system, the plan would be slightly MORE abstract than HG, so that incremental damage is abstracted (no rolls), and you look at critical hits.
Damage ideas next...
Last edited:
