Space Combat Phase - Turn Sequence

[JT Fox]

Ok, don't get me started on the lucky shot story, it was a design fault in the Hoods original plans.

For the sake of the discussion lets assume it was lucky and in a game that luck means rolling double six or turning a queen card.

If you replayed the Hood/Bismarck game using dice the Bismarck may never roll double 6 and get sunk by the hood. This could happen game after game, not likely but possible.

If you used cards then you know you will get the queen sooner or later and sink the Hood. The Hood player knows this, he also knows history and that from the first turn of combat he's on borrowed time and has to adjust his tactics as needed.

I think it would make for a more exciting game.

I've also seen games were this concept went a step further. The players looked at their card and picked the one they wanted to play. It was like controlling off board artillery. The higher the card they played the more artillery support they, as commander, assigned to a particular attack/defense. Of course, there is only so much support available and if you use it all early in the game you can get smashed at the end. Some would argue that you could count cards and get an advantage, other might say it's good battlefield intelligence. No luck involved and no complaining about bad luck.

Back to the game.

I recommend using a 2 x 6 sided die.

I also recommend giving the cards system as an optional rule.

This would allow the player to choose.

Cheers JTF

[lehcyfer]

That implies lot of time during a game turn and it is a very unrealistic rule. Any player with some experience in space combat games will tell you that.

It need much less time than firing according to initiative - and simultaneously at that. It's much easier to follow and is getting faster with each play. Concentration of fire is very realistic - returning fire to one attacker only is realistic as well. But more important than realism is fast tempo and clarity - and it is much faster and less muddy than firing all to all.

I mean slow in terms of gaming, not slow in terms of ship speeds. The game must be fast. If you have to look through papers to establish ship movement sequence then it is slow. When you know that fighters move first, capital ships move last, it's fast.

Any actions that need comparison of ship attributes to determine order of battle are slowing flow of play.

How do you eat an elephant? One bit at a time. How do you direct singlehandedly huge armada? One ship at a time.

[Blackronin]

@JT Fox:

Iup. Hood was doomed. But the first salvo?! Going exactly trough the deck and into the ammunition room? Some roll, right?

@lecypher:

I disagree completely with you. That is not my experience at all. I play a lot of games and what you are saying doesn't make sense at all.

First. It is not realistic. I may consider to be more important to fire at another ship than to fire against the ship that is firing against me.

Second. It's old school and backwards as a game system. I go - you go cam be used very well in a lot of games, but in a fluid game such as a space battle makes it a weak system.

Third. You haven't read all that has been put here about the game. A lot of information will be in the base of the ship just to make sure things are easy and fast to be played.

Fourth. I don't know what you mean by all ships fire against all ships, but the idea is that all ships fire at the same time, but against one target at each firing arc the most.

[lehcyfer]

If all ships fire at the same time and the results are established after all shooting is done what reason is there for agility and sequence of firing? If you opt for realism why you dont mix moving and attacking?

Old ways doesn't mean backward - the opposite is often true - they are result of many earlier attempts to get the equilibrium betwen realism and playability. In case of this game the phases have to be fast and easy to be able to play in one evening from space assault to capitol sacking.

Information from the base has to be read and compared, class is visible at first look. What way is faster?

The firing arcs give one ship ability to fire to more targets, and targets to return fire once in each arc. Doesn't change much.

[JT Fox]

Just for the record my sequence suggestions are for fighter vs fighter style combat phase. No capital ships involved.

In my view initiative should be about giving the player with the best tactical position the reward of seeing the other players move before he/she moves. Initiative should not go to a player simply based on the type of ship he has.

In my second option the initiative goes to the player who is in a better tactical position relative to his opponents position to him.

In my third option the initiative goes to the player who has a better tactical position relative to the battle area. In WW2 terms, the pilot who is high and fast is better off than the pilot who is low and slow.

The calculating of initiative does not make a game slow down. In fact gaining initiative and to have the advantages it gives you should be at the for front of any gamers thoughts as the game is played. "How do I get into a position to shoot him before he shoots me"?

Cheers JTF

[Blackronin]

Faster doesn't mean better, and the difference is negligible.

The game has to be good. Not fast played to go from space assault to capital sacking.

The reason for agility is to be able to put your ship in a better position. One of the most "bad rules" things about BFG (a not so fast game) was that I couldn't ever put my destroyers in the rear arc of the enemy cruisers and the game was I go you go. So I really don't know what are you talking about.

How many games with simultaneous movement have you played to feel that they don't work or are slow?
Try this, please: www.youplay.it

It's not what we want, but get a good look (you can play) of a very streamlined simultaneous game that can be played with several planes in one hour.

[lehcyfer]

@JTFox:

It sounds good, but how to implement it for a fast and easy flowing game?

The airplanes, then rockets put an end to capital ships on Earth oceans - now the Carriers and their airplanes are controlling the waters (though Iran would be able to sink the carriers using rockets - if they'd venture to the Persian Gulf to attack Iran).

What realistically warfare would look in space? We can only deduce. At first we would reproduce the types of ships we had on oceans, then new technologies and weapons would warp it beyond our expectations. Therefore I don't intend to be too realistic - this is a game we are putting together - and gameflow and enjoyment, and big bada boom and sleek fast spaceships and Wow! effect is what I aim for.

You want realistic warfare? Join the army! Want great time? Play with us :D

[lehcyfer]

@Blackronin:

Slow game will not be enjoyable to mass players, and to make game a bestseller it has to be great pleasure, as visually as imaginatively and most important in playing. Realism is on the second plane.

See you tomorrow [Yaawn] :D

[Blackronin]

Originally Posted by lehcyfer

You want realistic warfare? Join the army! Want great time? Play with us :D

Been there - done that. Been here - done this.

We want fantasy enough to dream on it, reality enough to believe on it. As plain as this.

If a game has a rule that I can't stand because I find it just plain impossible I don't play anymore. Example: Warhammer Fantasy Battles (maybe they have changed this by now) I charge ergo I attack first. I charge against enemies with long spears ergo I attack first.

So. I'm trying to help making a new system that people will feel comfortable playing it. Fast, of course, but also realistic in the mechanics if not in the reality of it.

[cgutzmer]

OK - reading this made my head spin - wish I had beer on hand

This is what I like best and favor right now... I can be swayed given good arguments. Each unit will have an initiative - agility plus pilot vet status (call it reflexes) Highest initiative goes first. Then it will go down to lowest initiative. It does not matter for sides, it will be purely based on initiative as to who goes first - this adds a layer of strategy to picking your units but dont worry there will be plenty of interaction no matter who moves and when

Bob has a speedy fighter that survived some battles and gets high initiative. he moves first and gets to fire at another ship. The other ship does not have an appropriate firing arc and cannot fire back.

Bob also gets second move and that ship fires on a cruiser. He does not penetrate defenses but cruiser has a weapon in that firing arc so blasts back blowing the fighter to bits.

Niel gets to move next and his cruiser has third initiative and moves into the fray and fires on bobs fast fighter missing. bob is luckily pointed the right direction and fires back doing minimal damage.

Moves along pretty quick I think - at least in theory.

I think each ship gets one base AOO or ability to return fire. Plus one if has a gunner, plus one for each level vet status. Ships of the line get unlimited due to being manned by large crews not individuals. They always get their one attack (two if have a gunner on a different weapon) and always two on a cap ship.

I do want to stay fairly simple here so it moves quickly!
Chris