[Lite Wargame Concept] Fusion Skirmish

[robject]

I have one or two dozen units on the map; they are conglomerate, but their stats reflect a main central ship, or a base. Units benefit one another; when touching in a "line of battle", they can mass their weaponry into one devastating attack, while also making it more difficult for an enemy unit to flank them and attack their maneuver drives. This promotes tactical movement.

I place my units on the map, some in orbit around the mainworld. Smaller units, representing smaller ships (perhaps fighter wings) are only one hex in size. Dreadnought units are longer, perhaps three hexes. This is not to scale, but rather is potentially useful mechanically. They probably have a longer reach, for instance, but might also be easier to lock onto and attack. And a coarse estimate of size is useful as a defensive DM, among other things.

My units may have different Mission codes; a Mission is a single-letter code that expresses rules specific to it. Cruisers have a bonus to defense and troops. Frigates have a bonus to attack. Riders have an even bigger bonus to attacks, but have no jump drive. Note that bonuses are in addition to a unit's own capabilities; for example, a Lightning-class Cruiser has a Particle Accelerator with an attack factor of 14 and a defensive value of 28 (after its bonus); a same-size Frigate may have an attack factor of 21 with its bonus, but its defenses are 14, making it vulnerable. There are 24 types of units, defined by Mission code. Most of them are martial codes, but there are some non-combatant codes for scenario building purposes.

Units are created using a variant of High Guard.

I also have an Admiral, who is always associated with one unit, and may transfer to another unit. The Admiral allows special actions, such as the ability to "press" an attack on success, and the ability to "rally" and prevent dispersion when successfully attacked by the enemy.

In addition, I draw a hand of cards from a deck; the number drawn depends on the difficulty of the scenario and my experience with the game. If I am very cocky I only draw two cards. If I'm new to the game, I draw nine cards. This is my tactical reserve.

There are a number of scenarios I can play from, including the typical protect-the-system and attack-the-system ones. One is a "Battle of Two Suns" scenario, which takes place entirely in an asteroid/debris field in the middle of deep space.

In this scenario, two dozen unknown units show up on the periphery, drifting inward, one empty hex between them, represented by blank counters 1 hex in size. As soon as my pickets detect them, I roll on a table and replace the blanks. One or more blank counters are replaced with one opposing Unit. Tactically I usually want to know what they are ASAP, but sometimes it might pay to wait until I have units positioned for intercept. In other words, sometimes I want an ambush, and sometimes I'm ambushed, and sometimes things are in between.

I can hide behind a gas giant if I don't want the intruding Fleet to notice me.

During the Intruder's phase, I consult the proper state transition table and roll a die to determine the behavior for units of the fleet. "Flocking" may be one behavior, so when the designated unit moves, the other units tend to mimic it, unless otherwise indicated by the tables.

Attacks are led by playing an action card that permits an attack I can perform. A strike, perhaps, which requires proximity and allows me to move, attack, then move again. Combat is simple, with a DM based on relative size of units and relative capabilities, and the number of dice rolled (difficulty) is the range to target, in hexes. I always replenish my hand: when a card is played, I draw a new one.

The result of combat is no effect, temporary dispersal, damage, or destruction. Victory points are assigned based on scenario objectives; the first side to achieve a required number of objectives wins.

 

[Vladika]

I have one or two dozen units on the map; they are conglomerate, but their stats reflect a main central ship, or a base. Units benefit one another; when touching in a "line of battle", they can mass their weaponry into one devastating attack, while also making it more difficult for an enemy unit to flank them and attack their maneuver drives. This promotes tactical movement.

I place my units on the map, some in orbit around the mainworld. Smaller units, representing smaller ships (perhaps fighter wings) are only one hex in size. Dreadnought units are longer, perhaps three hexes. This is not to scale, but rather is potentially useful mechanically. They probably have a longer reach, for instance, but might also be easier to lock onto and attack. And a coarse estimate of size is useful as a defensive DM, among other things.

My units may have different Mission codes; a Mission is a single-letter code that expresses rules specific to it. Cruisers have a bonus to defense and troops. Frigates have a bonus to attack. Riders have an even bigger bonus to attacks, but have no jump drive. Note that bonuses are in addition to a unit's own capabilities; for example, a Lightning-class Cruiser has a Particle Accelerator with an attack factor of 14 and a defensive value of 28 (after its bonus); a same-size Frigate may have an attack factor of 21 with its bonus, but its defenses are 14, making it vulnerable. There are 24 types of units, defined by Mission code. Most of them are martial codes, but there are some non-combatant codes for scenario building purposes.

Units are created using a variant of High Guard.

I also have an Admiral, who is always associated with one unit, and may transfer to another unit. The Admiral allows special actions, such as the ability to "press" an attack on success, and the ability to "rally" and prevent dispersion when successfully attacked by the enemy.

In addition, I draw a hand of cards from a deck; the number drawn depends on the difficulty of the scenario and my experience with the game. If I am very cocky I only draw two cards. If I'm new to the game, I draw nine cards. This is my tactical reserve.

There are a number of scenarios I can play from, including the typical protect-the-system and attack-the-system ones. One is a "Battle of Two Suns" scenario, which takes place entirely in an asteroid/debris field in the middle of deep space.

In this scenario, two dozen unknown units show up on the periphery, drifting inward, one empty hex between them, represented by blank counters 1 hex in size. As soon as my pickets detect them, I roll on a table and replace the blanks. One or more blank counters are replaced with one opposing Unit. Tactically I usually want to know what they are ASAP, but sometimes it might pay to wait until I have units positioned for intercept. In other words, sometimes I want an ambush, and sometimes I'm ambushed, and sometimes things are in between.

I can hide behind a gas giant if I don't want the intruding Fleet to notice me.

During the Intruder's phase, I consult the proper state transition table and roll a die to determine the behavior for units of the fleet. "Flocking" may be one behavior, so when the designated unit moves, the other units tend to mimic it, unless otherwise indicated by the tables.

Attacks are led by playing an action card that permits an attack I can perform. A strike, perhaps, which requires proximity and allows me to move, attack, then move again. Combat is simple, with a DM based on relative size of units and relative capabilities, and the number of dice rolled (difficulty) is the range to target, in hexes. I always replenish my hand: when a card is played, I draw a new one.

The result of combat is no effect, temporary dispersal, damage, or destruction. Victory points are assigned based on scenario objectives; the first side to achieve a required number of objectives wins.

Sounds good without actually seeing it. Should play fast with the amount of abstraction. In a way it sounds like "Magic" cards and play style.

 

[Piper]

Coupla quick thoughts:

1. crew quality ratings, but more importantly, some sort of commander rating possibly effecting the number of cards that can be played in one phase.

2. serious command control including the possibility of units misbehaving; failing to link fire control, possibly even moving out of formation, all of this tied to commander rating (subcommanders possibly?).

Biggest issue i see so far is what is there to prevent simply stacking all of your units in a single hex? (notwithstanding the need to protect soft units or objectives).

The attacker in your example; what benefit is there to coming in dispersed that way?

Overall, it's something new (at least new to me). Serious high praise there.

 

[robject]

That's a neat question -- I hadn't thought it out -- which brings out a lot of possibilities. For that matter, why not bring out your ships in lines of battle? Let's brainstorm on why one would want to stagger units with space between them. When is it advantageous? The disadvantage is in having a porous line of battle, and no potential to have "super batteries".

1. "Screened" configurations -- where the ship on top protects the ones under it -- have a distinct disadvantage? What? Minefields? No idea. It definitely has a putting-all-your-eggs-in-one-basket feel to it, though, doesn't it? So that should be the distinct feel -- the act of a desperate opponent. But there are more considerations and possibilities.

(I'm thinking that the "screened" configuration is the degenerate line-of-battle case in High Guard, where one lone element is in front and all the rest are in the reserve).

2. If the answer is "minefields", AND those mines are dangerous enough to wipe out entire battle groups, then the intruder's tactic may well be to use units as "minesweepers"... but then why not send out minesweeper units and THEN group your battle lines behind them? (Maybe that IS typically a valid tactic, which means this particular scenario has a slightly different problem).

3. For that matter, lines of battle probably have a disadvantage. What is it? Collateral damage from minefields? Maybe. Movement, probably, although the ability for a minefield to eliminate an entire line of battle is interesting. It would make minefields excessively powerful, not visible to the intruding player, and maybe several hexes in size. But that's not necessarily a bad thing. It just means there won't be more than one or two minefields in play during a game. Which means there's less tracking to do. I'm starting to warm up to the idea.

3a. The "minefield" might be a scenario event that the Native player can play if he has the card, but only in the first move. Sounds dodgy to me, tho.

4. For some reason, the intruder is at a sensory disadvantage and needs to cover as much area as possible in order to bring its intel fully online. Meh.

5. Victory points, being scenario-dependent, may in some cases require the intruder to secure several objectives quickly, and therefore will expect to lose many units. Perhaps this is the suicide scenario -- to scan or delivery covert payloads to as many planets and bases in-system as possible. So: blockade runners. Maybe.

6. ?

 

[rancke]

A mechanic I've seen in some game that I can't remember:

1. One side puts all his units (ships/squadrons) in a line.
2. The other side match each unit with a unit of his own.
3. Any units not matched may be moved to double up on an opponent unit.
4. Combat is resolved one set of units at a time. A unit with more than one opponent may choose which one to fire at.​

Lots of details not covered, but that's the basic scheme.


Hans

 

[McPerth]

Sounds good without actually seeing it. Should play fast with the amount of abstraction. In a way it sounds like "Magic" cards and play style.

I'd say more likely Enemy on Sight, Naval War or Up Front (all of them card games published by AH, back in the 80's).

Probably, the most similar would be Up Front, as I understand initial deployement would not be at random...

 

[LeperColony]

A mechanic I've seen in some game that I can't remember:

1. One side puts all his units (ships/squadrons) in a line.
2. The other side match each unit with a unit of his own.
3. Any units not matched may be moved to double up on an opponent unit.
4. Combat is resolved one set of units at a time. A unit with more than one opponent may choose which one to fire at.​

Lots of details not covered, but that's the basic scheme.


Hans

For some reason that sounds like the combat in FFW.

 

[McPerth]

For some reason that sounds like the combat in FFW.

Long time since I played it, but IIRC in FFW space combat you used massed firepower to see how many hits you produced to enemy, never matching units, and in ground combat you attacked an enemy unit, but neither there you matched units, just used as many factors as you liked to attack the desired unit...

 

[Piper]

Referencing Robject's number 6? above:

... as I understand initial deployement would not be at random...

I ran a small-scale system invasion game a while back and ran into the jump entry issue. Frankly, perfectly coordinated jump is boring (regardless of canonicity). I had ships roll individually for time and space deviation on jump entry. At a scale of 1 day/turn and 1 G-day per hex, some ships (1 in 6) could arrive 1 day early, some (1 in 6) could arrive a day late while most entered on time.

Similarly, ships could come out of jump in a random distance/direction from the plotted entry hex (dependent on navigator skill).

Not random deployment but uncertain enough to make you think a bit before jumping right to the 100-D limit.

I can think of a few reasons why a player might not choose to stack the entire fleet in one hex: limited weapon arcs, limited intelligence, multiple objectives and the need to protect soft targets (tenders, tankers and such). Adding any one of these might be enough, more would be better.

As for mines ... meh. Unless your missile ranges (mines are a type of missile, yes?) are simply huge you're going to need masses of them. There's a lot of space out there and an attacker could come in above or below the plane of the ecliptic just as easily as not. We don't have to use the third dimension but we should keep in mind that it's there.

That being said, there are plenty of uses for mines and they should be considered.

 

[Piper]

For some reason that sounds like the combat in FFW.

Sounds more like Imperium/Dark Nebula.

 

[robject]

As for mines ... meh. Unless your missile ranges (mines are a type of missile, yes?) are simply huge you're going to need masses of them. There's a lot of space out there and an attacker could come in above or below the plane of the ecliptic just as easily as not.

Too true. The essence of "mines" is the potential for something to disrupt groups of ships together. Calling it "mines" evokes a visual fantasy that is quite useful.

 

[aramis]

A mechanic I've seen in some game that I can't remember:

1. One side puts all his units (ships/squadrons) in a line.
2. The other side match each unit with a unit of his own.
3. Any units not matched may be moved to double up on an opponent unit.
4. Combat is resolved one set of units at a time. A unit with more than one opponent may choose which one to fire at.​

Lots of details not covered, but that's the basic scheme.


Hans

Federation Space used this mode.
It is slow, but can be excellent and fun.

 

[LeperColony]

Federation Space used this mode.
It is slow, but can be excellent and fun.

That's why it seemed familiar! Federation and Empire kept it too.

 

[robject]

Theme-Atmosphere. OTU small-scale to operational-scale warfare inside a solar system. A conflict game consisting of conglomerate units.

One or more players in three basic configurations: 'Home' player(s) versus 'Intruder' player(s); 'Home 1' player versus 'Home 2' player (and possibly versus 'Home 3' player); and 'Home' player(s) versus the "game" itself as the 'Intruder'.

Event cards in a player's hand can be played against another player's move, inhibiting the action or modifying the results. Cards may not be traded, and cannot be applied to another player (unless specified on the card itself of course). Dice are used to resolve attacks, with range as a modifier.

Handicapping ("Command Level") tells you (1) the number of cards in your hand, and/or (2) the number of cards that can be played in one phase.



Player Interaction Rules and Number of Players. Players may freely or partially (or not at all) share information with each other, to any degree desired. Some deceit is possible, and even recommended, for example in showing a card to an opposing player, but not showing another card which may fundamentally change it. In other words, different cards can distract a certain type of player, throwing them off-balance. Deceit has rules and limits, though, as it must always contain at least some truth.

I'm considering a setting where shared information is public; in other words, you cannot share with just your allies. This would only be useful if the game allows players to "understand" their allies better than they understand their enemies.

BUT, this might not be feasible, especially in the age of email.


Victory Conditions. Neutralization of a certain number of Intruder elements by the Home player; Home player successfully jumps a certain number of Home elements out of the system; Home player rescues elements from one of the worlds; Intruder claims and holds one or more worlds; Intruder neutralizes a certain number of Home elements; etc.


Data Storage. Damage to units is tracked via "hits", perhaps as counters placed on unit, perhaps recorded. Position of hidden units, if any, is recorded and kept secret until revealed or discovered.


Sequencing. Non-phasing players replenish their hands. Then, the phasing players play cards that let them move elements on the board, and resolve attacks. Following that, the non-phasing players play cards which modify the results.


Movement/Placement. Home units are placed in designated areas on the board. Intruder units are typically placed on the periphery. The average speed of units is about 7 hexes per turn, with various events that modify this behavior. A modified vector-light system, where a low vector is possible but not additive -- except for escape situations. No, I'm not sure about this one, either.


Information Availability. One has total control over selective visibility of one's cards, one's hidden units, and so on. However, one might not be able to control shared information: if something is revealed, it is revealed to all.

BUT, this might not be feasible, especially in the age of email.


Conflict Resolution/Interaction of Game Entities. Cooperating units may use each other's resources (worlds, bases, screens, etc). Antagonistic units attack one another of course.


"Economy" and Resource Acquisition. Logistics is a concern for the Home team only, and then only for units which are dependent on supply lines. The Intruding units might not have supply lines. This produces a different set of problems for each side: the intruders have to get their work done quickly, and the home team can't allow certain classes of units to be cut off from supply lines.

 

[robject]

What makes an Azhanti High Lightning a Lightning-class Cruiser?

• Planetary Bombardment
• Fleet Vanguard ("Highly Responsive")
• Rapid transfers of troops to and from orbit

Conceived originally as a fleet intruder (or flint boat, in naval parlance), the Azhanti High Lightning class vessels were among the few ships of their day below capital class to incorporate a meson screen. This meson screen, coupled with a high amperage tritium accelerator and a wide array of deadfall bombardment ordnance, resulted in extensive employment of the class in both the planetary bombardment and fleet vanguard roles. While the ships had short legs (only 2G maneuver drives), their jump4 capacity made them highly responsive to situations and crises over many parsec spans. They proved especially useful in the closing days of the war against the Solomani.

Being unstreamlined, these large ships were restricted to beyond the reaches of atmosphere, and carried shuttles and small craft for the transfer of personnel and equipment between the tops and bottoms of gravity wells. Rapid transfers of troops were considered essential, resulting in the adaptation of the ship's fuel shuttles for vehicle and troop movement when they were not committed to refuelling itself. The ships, constructed using an outer frame system, were unable to withstand the uneven stresses of gravity at a surface were they ever to land, even on an airless world. As a result, all troop or invasion situations depended on the shuttles as an integral part of the plan.

CA (Assault Cruiser) 60,000 tons Unstreamlined, BCr 34.
CA-60kU25-14

55% hull is used by fuel.
12.5% to the J-drive.
7.5% to the P-plant.
0.3% to the M-drive (stage effects).
4.5% for the spine (2700 tons) (PA-14/D=27).
3.1% to the secondary weapons. (Bay ortillery)
4.1% for staterooms/barracks.
4% for the fighters and shuttles. (1 light wing).
1% for the dampers and screens. (Big Damper, Big AM Defense, Big Screen)
0.5% to the bridge.
appx 8% for armor = 3 layers, charged = AV 84.

• Hull's general size (counter length)
• Hull's Configuration (silhouette)
• Troop carrier (hash marks above per infantry symbolics)
• Fighter carrier notation (one light wing symbol)
  
• Mission Code (CA)
• Movement rating ("2G")
• Jump rating ("J5")
• Primary rating/damage (PA-14)
• Secondary rating/damage (O-14)
• Defense ratings (14) (damper, screen, anti-missile...)

About 10 pieces of information: 4 visual, 6 textual. We're at the edge of usability for a short, lite, wargame.


Not enough? Does this need to be distinguished more clearly from other units in some way? We can always add more statistics, but I'm thinking there are other ways to differentiate ship classes. After all, a cruiser-sized CF with 2G, J5, a PA spine, ortillery bay secondaries, defenses equivalent to dampers, screens, anti-missile defense and 8% of armor, and an attached lite wing of fighters sounds an awful lot like a Lightning.

 

[robject]

Thoughts about Mission Codes

Mission Code as Shorthand
For 'lite' or 'pseudo' wargames, a ship's mission code can take care of a lot of details. For example, the difference between a Strike Cruiser and a Battle Cruiser. And, the difference between a Cruiser and, say, an Escort or Corvette. Regardless of what those differences are (I imagine there can be a lot of discussion about THAT), those differences can bake in a lot of assumptions about optimal designs in Traveller, or even how the OTU works.

And there are several ways to bake that in. Ideally there would be as little lookup as possible. The obvious use case to my mind is in a combat chart, where a roll of the dice is indexed against one of the defender's mission codes, perhaps modified according to the ship's damage level. In this way defenses could be baked into the mission code and degrade nicely without calculations. But there are other solutions too.

Example - AHL. If the Lightning-class cruisers used mission code to imply defenses, troop carrying capacity, and subcraft carrying capacity, then the 'counter' for a squadron might have 5 or 6 pieces of information, plus 1 physically useful datum (counter length being related to general size of vessel):

Lightning  CA-2g-j5  PA-14  O-14

(Counter is 3 hexes long)
CLASS Mission Code-Move-Jump Primary Secondary

Big Ships and Mission Codes
For example, the capital ships and heavy cruisers from Supplement 9 should be classifiable in unique ways; where two classes have the same mission codes, secondary design details should differentiate them -- drives, main armaments, defenses. But ideally the mix of mission codes are rich and flexible enough to represent any basic class of vessel needed... and the supplemental data is then enough to give finishing touches to that basic class.

Key:
Kt = kilotons.  Pri=primary weapon.  Sec=secondary weapon(s).  
Def=defenses.  Secondary weapon M=Missile bays.
M=acceleration.  J=jump.
mJ=Meson spine J, et al.
Lt=light.  Ba=basic.  St=Standard.  GG=Good.  XL=Strong.
HF=50t heavy fighters.  T=Troops.  T++=Piles of troops.  BR=Battle Riders.

Name & Mission            Kt  BCr Pri Sec  Def M  J
====================================================================
Midu Agashaam Destroyer   3   3   no  PA   Lt  6+ 4
PF Sloan Fleet Escort     5   4   no  PA   Lt  6+ 4
Kinunir Colonial Cruiser  1.3 1   no  no   Lt  6+ 4
Gionetti Light Cruiser    30  23  mJ  no   Ba  5+ 5
Arakoine Strike Cruiser   50  35  mN  PA,M St  4+ 4
Ghalalk Armored Cruiser   50  35  pH  M    Ba  5+ 4
Lighting Frontier Cruiser 60  43  pN  M    Ba  2  5
Atlantic Heavy Cruiser    75  59  mN  PA   St  5+ 4
Skimkish Light Carrier    29  20  no  lots Ba  2  4  80 HF
Wind Strike Carrier       75  58  mE  M    GG  6+ 3  80 HF
Antiama Fleet Carrier    100  65  no  PA   GG  2  4  300 HF
Tigress Dreadnaught BC   500 453  mT  M    XL  6+ 4  300 HF T++
Plankwell Dreadnaught BC 200 150  mT  M    St  5+ 4
Kokirrak Dreadnaught BC  200 169  mT  M    St  6+ 4  1000 T
Troyhune Monitor          50  22  mJ  no   St  6+ -  20 HF
Lurenti Battle Carrier   300  23  no  lots GG  2  4  200 HF  7 BR
Nolikian Battle Rider BRC 20  12  mN  lots St? 6+ -

Note that the Plankwell and Kokirrak fill slightly different niches. They could have the same mission code, since only maneuver and troop carrying capacity are different (from the table alone it seems as though the Kokirrak is more advanced, but perhaps some data has been lost. The question then becomes: is the lost data important?).

Some Mission Codes

Primary
Battleship/Dreadnought - power projector.
Cruiser - secondary battleship.
Frigate - secondary battleship with less armor.
Defender/Monitor - no Jump drive.
Corvette/Escort - screen, recon.
Ortillery - assault ship.
Fighter/Picket - recon and mobile close-range delivery platform.
Sentinel - assault auxiliary.
Tender - logistics ship.

Secondary
Assault
Battle
Close
Fast
Frontier
Heavy
Light
Long
Patrol
Rider
Slow

 

[robject]

[FONT=arial,helvetica][Partial Description] Azhanti High Lightning

[/FONT]I will assume that some of the AHL's distinctives can be buried in behavior, separate from numeric data. For example, perhaps the AHL can use a special "assault ship" movement rule. Here is the data I think the AHL actually needs:

Lightning-class Slow Colonial Assault Cruiser
[FONT=arial,helvetica]

• Ship class: Lightning. The ship class overrides defaults. Lightning-class ships have Jump-5 (default is Jump-4, perhaps).
• Slow: Movement penalty, automatically added to ships with a second role.
• Colonial: This sets the relative technological level of a ship. The Lighting is at a general disadvantage against most other ships.
• Secondary Role: Assault. This means the ship has drop troops and recovery vehicles. Many ships do not have a secondary role.
• Primary Role: Cruiser. This dictates the counter's length (3) and the presence of a spinal gun (PA is the default).
• All else (e.g. armor and secondaries) are default.

[/FONT]