Proto-High Guard 5, take three

[flykiller]

Creativity thrives on those sorts of problems.

I dunno man, starting to look more like churn. if you streamline the process then you'll just have to accept that the results are streamlined too.

for example. "damage" is going to have to include "what is damaged" and that is going to require some distinction between ships. a j6m1 boat just isn't the same as a j0m6 boat. the to hit roll is going to have to include, or be, a hit location roll.

 

[robject]

Yes, of course you're right about streamlining == removing detail. What is the net effect when I remove detail about damage? How does that effect the whole thing? How meaningful is detailed damage when we're dealing with critical hits? Where are the abstractions felt most strongly? And so on. I am trying it out to see.

I'm thinking about a crit-UPP-like thing because I think damage is the least painful element to abstract, and gets me a track for near-critical-hits, and can keep the rock-paper-scissors nature of Traveller's weapon-and-defense mix.

And as far as a J6M1 versus J0M6 ship, let's face it, the jump drive only serves one purpose: last-ditch losing-hand run-for-the-hills escape for the intruder. It's not even useful for the native. My second reaction is to not give it its own slot. Put the entire engine room in one slot. (My first reaction is conservative: give every component its own slot, ending up with a ShipSheet, which is absolutely a nifty and customizable location map but is by no means a speed improvement).

Now ShipSheets could be what Marc wants to do. It's not slower than HG, and has some nice benefits. But I'm not considering it at this time. I'm trying to leverage critical hits for all I can.

(1) bridge inop - e.g. bridge, computer, etc
(2) spine inop
(3) hangars inop - includes cargo
(4) barracks inop - troops neutralized
(5) engine room inop - i.e. all drives down
(6) secondaries inop - wot, ALL of them? yeah, that's a stretch, and maybe there's a better way.

 

[McPerth]

I'm trying to leverage critical hits for all I can.

Let's review them:

(1) bridge inop - e.g. bridge, computer, etc

I guess that's a kill or nearly so (if the ship has secondary bridge/computers it may be out of comisión for a few turns only)

(2) spine inop

If you take the CT:HG as an example, there is the spinal/fire control disabled. I guess those hits (2 and 5)could be similarly merged (50%each, as in CT:HG)

(3) hangars inop - includes cargo

This has only effect on the tactical game if it has fighters to launch. Otherwise it's like a "no effect" (except for camapigns, of course)

(4) barracks inop - troops neutralized

Same sitation as in 3. As for the tactical game, it means "no effect" unless the goal of the fleet is to drop the tropos in a planet (it could well be the victory conditions for a spacific scenario). See that this could aslo be merged with 3 on a 50% each basis

(5) engine room inop - i.e. all drives down

As this will leave the ship without PP, I guess this is a kill too

(6) secondaries inop - wot, ALL of them? yeah, that's a stretch, and maybe there's a better way.

Why not all of them, representing fire control disabled? I see that easier than one specifical kind of them, as they are dispersed along the ship, while fire control is probably centralized on one specific place. See also point number 1 comment.

Alternatively (and to include more results):

1. Ship killed/dissabled (if needed to know, mostly for campaign games, roll 1d6:1=ship vaporized, 2-3= PP dissabled, 4-6= fuel tanks shattered.
2. Bridge/computer dissabled: (roll 1D6, 1-3=bridge, 4-6=computer) Ship out of commission. If back ups on it, it recovers in some turns (e.g. 1d6 turns modified by crew quality)
3. Spinal/Fire control disabled: (roll 1d6, 1-3= spinal, 4-6= fire control). Either Spinal or secondaries unusable.
4. Manuver drive inoperable: no more manuevering
5. Crew hit: crew quaiity reduced
6. Hangars/barracks destroyed: (roll 1d6, 1-3=hangars, 4-6= barracks).

 

[robject]

Thanks for that McP. I'll show you a little more of my thinking.

Ship systems attack and defend. Armor probably soaks. Active defenses may fire as in High Guard, or they may roll into the attack tasks (but I doubt all of them can).

In order to make larger ships more damage resistant but not impervious, I devalue crits into near-crits: controllers are tougher in larger ship classes. Why? Because this is how I make sense of the statement that "battleships can take damage" in ways that cruisers cannot. In other words, not one hit, one kill.

I want a pseudo UPP for a ship which only represents near-critical damage to these controllers (yeah, I like that term. Useful and not unbelievable.)

In a typical battleship, the UPP is 55-55-55. One hit reduces one value by one (and two in some cases). It would take many near-crits to kill it.

Okay, why do I want to slow down this nice, fast mechanic? Because it is easier to manage toughness with this expansion, than micro-managing small probabilities on attack rolls. Attack rolls are already loaded with mods. Adding more won't change the probabilities in ways that I want.

So I want six characteristics to the UPP for battleships, because it provides a nice 1D roll to determine which control location you damaged. I picked Command and Spine. You suggested Crew, which would work, and a combined Hangars/Barracks, which would work, Maneuver Drive, which, again, would work. Those are reasonable. I'd change the catch-all to Power Plant, probably.

Defenses would presumably be left operational until control is knocked out in whatever way we like. Could be part of the Plain Old Kill, plus their strength could be halved when C&C goes - whatever. In the end I have a UPP:

Spine-Command, Maneuver-Crew, Barracks and Hangars-Power.

 

[robject]

By the way: this is not churn. This is examination and "defense without examples" after my suggestion is put forth. Every thesis has to be defended, and this is the constructive criticism phase common to every such suggestion.

A quick pseudo-example before I have to go.

The Dreadnought Quicksilver takes a salvo, despite valiant efforts to screen it and active defense fire to neutralize it. The salvo penetrates armor, and one hit is recorded. 1D is rolled, a 3, corresponding to Crew. Perhaps Crew is the only direct mapping of the Ship-UPP: when it gets dinged, performance actually degrades. Crew on a battleship is typically 5, corresponding to thousands of crew. One hit reduces it to a 4, perhaps reducing it to 700-plus-or-minus. On future crew tasks the asset is reduced from a 5 to a 4: they respond more sluggishly. Perhaps this also maps to morale rolls in some ways. It certainly plays a part in boarding actions.

Suppose instead that the current value for Crew was 1. That last near-crit reduces it to zero, and the ship no longer has sufficient crew to function. A kill.


Note the games I can play with this UPP:

I can rule that Auxiliaries take four hits when hit by a near-crit. Or I can just truncate their UPP to two elements and reduce their values: an Auxiliary has a UPP of 3-3. Much easier to kill.

 

[McPerth]

By the way: this is not churn. This is examination and "defense without examples" after my suggestion is put forth. Every thesis has to be defended, and this is the constructive criticism phase common to every such suggestion.

Of course, I understand that, and I'm at once pointing what could be (IMHO) improved in your ideas and presenting mine.

A quick pseudo-example before I have to go.

The Dreadnought Quicksilver takes a salvo, despite valiant efforts to screen it and active defense fire to neutralize it. The salvo penetrates armor, and one hit is recorded. 1D is rolled, a 3, corresponding to Crew. Perhaps Crew is the only direct mapping of the Ship-UPP: when it gets dinged, performance actually degrades. Crew on a battleship is typically 5, corresponding to thousands of crew. One hit reduces it to a 4, perhaps reducing it to 700-plus-or-minus. On future crew tasks the asset is reduced from a 5 to a 4: they respond more sluggishly. Perhaps this also maps to morale rolls in some ways. It certainly plays a part in boarding actions.

Suppose instead that the current value for Crew was 1. That last near-crit reduces it to zero, and the ship no longer has sufficient crew to function. A kill.


Note the games I can play with this UPP:

I can rule that Auxiliaries take four hits when hit by a near-crit. Or I can just truncate their UPP to two elements and reduce their values: an Auxiliary has a UPP of 3-3. Much easier to kill.

I think I understand your point, and I see it can be great for combats involving a handful Capital Ships (plus some squadrons/fighter groups) per side, but I'm afraid bookkeeping could ruin it if too many of them are involved.

Ever played AH Wooden Ships & Iron Men? On it, damage was (IIRC, it's long time since I played it) rated as Hull, Rigging, Crew, Gunnery and Criticals. It was a nice game for small squadrons, but, once more, try to play the Tragalgar scenario if you dare... I advise you to have analgesics for headache handy, and a large table for the maps and papers needed...

IMHO, if you want for a game that allows large fleets to confront each other, you need a simpler damage system, that can be handled with counters (as in AHL), so needing little to none bookkeeping.

I guess your system will be great for a BCS, but might be too detailed for TCS, so to say...

 

[flykiller]

And as far as a J6M1 versus J0M6 ship, let's face it, the jump drive only serves one purpose: last-ditch losing-hand run-for-the-hills escape for the intruder.

so ... you're not looking for a combat system, but ... a narrative ... ?

Yes, of course you're right about streamlining == removing detail.

have to remove more than details.

heh. I think when you're done your system is going to look a lot like hg2 ....

 

[robject]

IMHO, if you want for a game that allows large fleets to confront each other, you need a simpler damage system, that can be handled with counters (as in AHL), so needing little to none bookkeeping.

I guess your system will be great for a BCS, but might be too detailed for TCS, so to say...

You're right - there's an upper limit here, and I am aiming at HG2 and Battle Rider.

This is the third run-through: there will probably be a fourth iteration. This one has gotten closer than the other two. Actually, ship design is settling nicely (except for tuning the weapons to combat), and the combat system has narrowed to three options. Movement is still unknown.

I prefer a nonmonotonic path, but I'll take local minima and then give it a kick.

 

[robject]

heh. I think when you're done your system is going to look a lot like hg2 ....

That's the idea.

But it's not going to be HG2. And that's also the idea.

 

[robject]

Consider the Kraken

Kraken, TL14.

Meson Spine S (Factor 14, double fire), 7700t.
154 KEP Spine Power Plant, 4620t.
Spine PP Fuel, 3080t.
Gunner barracks, 320t.
Ship's Troops (brigade), 1000t.
Total payload tonnage: 16,720t.

Armor (4 layers): 16%
Jump-3: 7.5%
M6: 6%
PP6: 9%
PPFuel: 6%
J fuel: 30%
Crew: 3.5%
C&C-7: 4%
All defenses and screen secondaries, rating 4+4=8, total: 12%
Barracks: 2%

Total tonnage: 416,000 tons
Size Code: 4 (battleship)
Crew Size: 4 (=size)
Troop factor (brigade): 7


Damage Map (5 points per section; each section is armored at Factor 4)

1 C&C and Jump
2 Spine
3 Barracks & Hangars
4 Secondaries
5 Power Plant
6 Maneuver Drive


Attacks

To hit: (range) dice < Attacking Factor (Factor 14 spine) + Attack C&C (7) - Target Agility (0 to 9); in this case, typical effective range would be "3". 4 would be half effective. 2 would be close to a "sure thing".

To screen: Every applicable and installed defense type (except meson screens) gets one go. The task is:

2D < Defense Factor (1 to 9 typically) - Attacking Factor (14) + Defense C&C (4 to 7 typically).

Expanded out it looks something like this:

     --- Attacking Factor ---
Def  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 
 1   7  6  5  4  3  2  1  -  -
 2   8  7  6  5  4  3  2  1  -
 3   9  8  7  6  5  4  3  2  1
 4   10 9  8  7  6  5  4  3  2
 5   11 10 9  8  7  6  5  4  3 
 6   12 11 10 9  8  7  6  5  4
 7   13 12 11 10 9  8  7  6  5
 8   14 13 12 11 10 9  8  7  6
 9   15 14 13 12 11 10 9  8  7

Damage:

Damage dice is Attacking Factor divided by Range to target, drop fractions.

Meson attacks: Hit when damage > Target Hull Configuration + Meson Screen Factor.
Other attacks: Hit when damage > Target Armor Factor + Ship Size Code.
Or perhaps they can be reorganized so that they hit a hit location on 1-6, or miss on all other results.

"Double Fire" spines make two damage rolls instead of one.

 

[robject]

To screen: Every applicable and installed defense type (except meson screens) gets one go. The task is:

2D < Defense Factor (1 to 9 typically) - Attacking Factor (14) + Defense C&C (4 to 7 typically).

Expanded out it looks something like this:

     --- Attacking Factor ---
Def  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 
 1   7  6  5  4  3  2  1  -  -
 2   8  7  6  5  4  3  2  1  -
 3   9  8  7  6  5  4  3  2  1
 4   10 9  8  7  6  5  4  3  2
 5   11 10 9  8  7  6  5  4  3 
 6   12 11 10 9  8  7  6  5  4
 7   13 12 11 10 9  8  7  6  5
 8   14 13 12 11 10 9  8  7  6
 9   15 14 13 12 11 10 9  8  7

Design Commentary. High Guard 2 used different combat tables in order to show that all factors are not created equal: when you paid for a bay, you paid for it in a constant volume but price, power, and effectiveness depended on the weapons installed. The secondaries tables in HG5, which yes are in a state of flux, vary in percentage of hull, modified by ship size class, per factor, where "factor" represents a blanket defense coverage of bristling gun bays, barbettes, and turrets. Percentage by weapon/defense type and cost per kiloton thus varies. The factor, however, is normalized across weapon types. We only need one table -- actually, we only need one task: the table generates from it and is a nice graphic to show the spread.

 

[McPerth]

Design Commentary. High Guard 2 used different combat tables in order to show that all factors are not created equal: when you paid for a bay, you paid for it in a constant volume but price, power, and effectiveness depended on the weapons installed. The secondaries tables in HG5, which yes are in a state of flux, vary in percentage of hull, modified by ship size class, per factor, where "factor" represents a blanket defense coverage of bristling gun bays, barbettes, and turrets. Percentage by weapon/defense type and cost per kiloton thus varies. The factor, however, is normalized across weapon types. We only need one table -- actually, we only need one task: the table generates from it and is a nice graphic to show the spread.

So I understand secondaries are only used against a single target, as they are all grouped in a single factor.

If so, IMHO they lose their main usefulness: to be able to shoot against several minor targets (e.g. fighters) while the main weaponry is used against enemy's Capital Ships.

 

[robject]

So you see, having defined damage, I can now turn to figuring out the ins and outs of the attack/defense tasks.

So I understand secondaries are only used against a single target, as they are all grouped in a single factor.

If so, IMHO they lose their main usefulness: to be able to shoot against several minor targets (e.g. fighters) while the main weaponry is used against enemy's Capital Ships.

Here's the idea: secondaries on capitals are for defense. Each factor represents the bristling defenses of one particular type, scattered over the ship, which may bear on incoming attacks. Thus the factor always gets a shot at stopping all applicable incoming attacks.

I haven't yet considered about how they handle return fire, however. Since the attack task is generic, it could simply be re-used.

The only multiple-target scenario I've thought about is the fighter cloud, because it is in essence an agile, mobile, reconfigurable, and assignable battery. I have not yet abstracted that to, for example, a squadron of auxiliaries, but my first stab would be to treat them in exactly the same way, rather than give each one its own stats and hit boxes or whatnot.

 

[McPerth]

The only multiple-target scenario I've thought about is the fighter cloud, because it is in essence an agile, mobile, reconfigurable, and assignable battery. I have not yet abstracted that to, for example, a squadron of auxiliaries, but my first stab would be to treat them in exactly the same way, rather than give each one its own stats and hit boxes or whatnot.

Also hamsters must be taken into account when thinking on secondaries offesive tasks, and even against other Capital Ships they have limited utility in wearing down them (at least on CT:HG/MT).

 

[mike wightman]

Bay weapons are the primary weapons of lower TL BBs.
You are not thinking across the TL ranges.
At the lower TLs missile bays and PA bays may well decide battles more than the spinals that are available.
Remember a TL9 BB is very different to a TL11 BB is very different to a TL13 BB is very different to a TL15 BB.

 

[mike wightman]

While bored at work today I started sketching what a typical small fleet looks like in FFW, I decided on a BatRon and two CruRons made up my fleet.
That's eight BBs, twenty four CR and about one hundred and twenty eight escort class vessels.

If you have a ship card for each BB and CR that is a lot of book keeping for even a small fleet engagement, if you have a ship card for each escort you have entered the realm of unplayable...

 

[kilemall]

Ok, here's a thought for fast ship damage resolution.

A successful is one that we would define as critical and/or multiple damages wearing on the target.

Each ship class has a separate damage state counter, with a pool as large as the original undamaged state. Each counter has different 'results' on it that shows different effects- spinals gone, maneuver reduced, jump impossible, crew damage, etc.

Each ship class has as many damage state possibilities as ship size. So small ships are gone with the first hit, destroyers have 1 damage state and then are gone, cruisers 2, etc. etc. with battleships of size 4 having 4 potential damage levels (meaning they have 5 counter pools).

So when a hit is successful, instead of rolling rolling rolling and keeping track of systems and whatnot, simply draw from the correct damage level pool to get your ship results.

Spinals and nukes are double damage, as applicable. Meson spinals should be hard to hit, but possibly triple damage.

IF you don't trust freehanding your damage levels, roll it out from a more detailed damage result and translate into the abstract.

Don't want a zillion counters? Make a d66 table for each damage level ahead of time and mark them that way.

 

[mike wightman]

Expanded out it looks something like this:

     --- Attacking Factor ---
Def  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 
 1   7  6  5  4  3  2  1  -  -
 2   8  7  6  5  4  3  2  1  -
 3   9  8  7  6  5  4  3  2  1
 4   10 9  8  7  6  5  4  3  2
 5   11 10 9  8  7  6  5  4  3 
 6   12 11 10 9  8  7  6  5  4
 7   13 12 11 10 9  8  7  6  5
 8   14 13 12 11 10 9  8  7  6
 9   15 14 13 12 11 10 9  8  7

You know that looks an awful lot like the tables used in the board games for attack resolution?
About ten years ago I made a post about using the board game tables to make large scale LBB2 combat more manageable. I can find my word version dated march 2006 but I can not find the thread I started here.
The reason I bring it up is that the attack matrices in the board games could be adapted to giving the number of hits a ship takes in only one matrix...

While dredging through old threads I found the one I made about constructing squadron combat factors at various TLs.

 

[robject]

While bored at work today I started sketching what a typical small fleet looks like in FFW, I decided on a BatRon and two CruRons made up my fleet.
That's eight BBs, twenty four CR and about one hundred and twenty eight escort class vessels.

If you have a ship card for each BB and CR that is a lot of book keeping for even a small fleet engagement, if you have a ship card for each escort you have entered the realm of unplayable...

That is indeed a lot of bookkeeping. It helps to use one card per auxiliary squadron. But it's hard to see cruisers and battleships abstracted to the squadron level.

 

[robject]

You know that looks an awful lot like the tables used in the board games for attack resolution?

And High Guard attack resolution.

And Panzerblitz, vaguely...