|
Post by cheethorne on Jan 15, 2010 15:52:58 GMT -4
This thread will be used to discuss the new rule changes to the SFB campaign rules v10. The campaign v10 rules can be found here: homepage.mac.com/cheethorne/sfb/#camprulesRight now, the missing sections are: * Espionage rules. * Ship build list substitutions. * Special Project lists.
|
|
|
Post by cheethorne on Jan 15, 2010 15:56:57 GMT -4
A few points I'd like to talk about are the following: * Espionage should be performed by Prime Teams assigned to this job instead of by some special "espionage team" that serves no other function.
Reason: Provides "espionage" teams with more actions so that they can do things even if a player doesn't want to perform espionage.
* Provinces should be able to perform multiple projects at the same time, but we should use the same rule as continuous damage repair in that you can only have one incomplete project carrying over from turn to turn.
Reason: Players can perform relatively small projects, like building a SAM or upgrading a base station to a battle station, without losing a ton of special project points because they can only perform one project at a time.
|
|
|
Post by john on Jan 16, 2010 10:39:27 GMT -4
Okay, from where do we get the prime teams? what's the regulations on them? How often can we produce them and where?
As for the special projects, why track two projects... easier just to allow a player to put excess point into the next project of his choice.
|
|
|
Post by cheethorne on Jan 16, 2010 14:53:50 GMT -4
Oh no, that would be the point. Players would never have to track two projects from turn to turn.
He could just do a small project that could be finished in one turn, while still working on another project.
|
|
|
Post by cheethorne on Jan 18, 2010 9:25:54 GMT -4
Problem 1: There is a new rule that limits the number of groups that can be in a single hex based on the "command & control limits" of the hex flagship.
This does prevent large stacks of small ships from being in a single hex, but it does little to limit the number of large fleets in a hex (you could have around 5 or so large fleets in a hex) and small fleets could always spread to adjacent hexes anyway.
Proposal 1: I propose that this rule be changed from a per hex limit to a per province limit. In each province, you have one unit or base be the "sector" flagship and it activates a number of other groups in that same province for movement. All other groups in that province are anchored in whatever hex they are in.
In this way, you could have a province with a large number of small groups (say two frigates each) in order to protect vulnerable resources, but it would take time to merge them all into larger groups commanded by larger ships.
Remember, being anchored as no effect on a ship's ability to perform any mission if it engages in combat, it simply cannot move from the hex it is in. We might even allow a change to the anchored rule to allow a group to move by Reaction / Reserve movement while anchored.
Generally, it would go like this: FF & SAM: 2 activations DD & MB & OB: 3 activations CL & CW & BS: 4 activations CA & BATS: 5 activations BCH & DN & BB & STB & SB: 6 activations
Activating the sector flagship's group would count as one of these activations.
Proposal 2: To go along with the above, instead of each CU representing all ships in a hex, each CU would represent 1 group. Players would be free to re-arrange their groups whenever they want (as they currently can), but if I look at a hex and I see 1 counter in that hex, I know that all the ships in that hex could fit into a single group.
This provides some bluffing for people, as they might want to try to artificially inflate their fleets in a given region by making it look like they have several groups, but it also works well with the above proposal since each of these separate groups would require a separate activation if you wanted them to move.
|
|
|
Post by john on Jan 18, 2010 10:32:03 GMT -4
So, are all CUs controlled by one province or another? Or does this rule only apply to CUs in a province? What is the effect on CUs outside of the province and how does this prevent an ungodly number of ships being stacked into one hex?
Also, your above statements about the number of small ships is somewhat inaccurate. Nothing says that a Hex being C&C by a DN wont mostly consist of smaller ships, as a general rule in the new campaign this will in fact be the general trend.
From what I'm understanding, pending clarification on the above questions, I'm not sure that this is a good idea. Instead of just being aware that you can only have X number of fleets or groups in a hex based on the ship with the highest C&C rating you now have a serioes of activations from each province that will have to be tracked each time and instead of limiting the number of ships in a given hex limits the total number of groups that you can activate in or associated with a given province. I really think all CUs that are capable of movement should be allowed to move on any given turn.
|
|
|
Post by cheethorne on Jan 18, 2010 11:06:54 GMT -4
So, are all CUs controlled by one province or another? Or does this rule only apply to CUs in a province? What is the effect on CUs outside of the province This rule would be done by a province by province basis. So all CU's in a single province would have to be activated by something in that province, be it a base or a ship. This would apply to provinces you controlled and provinces you didn't control. So under this rule, for example, it would be hard to invade a province with many groups of frigates, since none of the available sector flagships (all being frigates) would have the command & control ability to coordinate all of those groups. how does this prevent an ungodly number of ships being stacked into one hex? That's why this is done on a group by group basis, not on a CU by CU basis. And this is also where Proposal 2 comes into play, to visually show players where each group is located. This also gives players some measure of a "bluff" where they can create small groups of even one ship if they want to, but at a cost of each group requiring an activation to move. Instead of just being aware that you can only have X number of fleets or groups in a hex based on the ship with the highest C&C rating you now have a series of activations from each province that will have to be tracked each time But it solves the same problem and in a way that is harder to "cheat" around. If a DN is in a hex, it can command up to 6 groups (including its own group), but I could have a BCH in an adjacent hex and it could also command up to 6 groups (including itself). This is 12 groups in two adjacent hexes. A destroyer can control two groups besides itself, if you group consisted of a destroyer and two frigates, that means that each hex led by a destroyer could consist of nine ships (3 groups of 1 DD and 2 FF each). So you could have a swarm of small ships in three or four hexes. In trying to figure out what the "per hex" command & control limit was trying to do, I saw this as a big loophole. What does it matter what the per hex limit is when I could just spread some massive number of ships in a couple of adjacent hexes and have pretty much the same result? The province by province activation, however, does the same limit on how many ships could be moving from hex to hex (invading someone let's say), but it stops people from simply moving the excess fleets into adjacent hexes. Also, tracking of this should be easier, since you simply choose which groups to activate during the plotting of your movement each turn and those are the only groups you plan to move (by operational movement). You also don't have to worry about accidentally moving too many ships into one hex, which would break the "per hex" C&C limit.
|
|
|
Post by john on Jan 18, 2010 11:31:52 GMT -4
Alright, so it applies to all provinces that you have a presence in. You claim that this will stop large numbers of ships, but isn't anything you can't move anchored? And therefore could you just not move a large number into an area in waves?
Province A and B are adjacent to province C. On turn 13 I move five groups from A and four groups from B into C, On 14 I move 5 groups in C to their designated target the other 4 groups are anchored until some point in the future...
It does prevent some of what I'm trying to avoid by having a per hex C&C limit, but it still does not stop 15 frigates from being able to operate together in one hex... And I just don't see how frigates, unsupported by anything else, can effective control a hex so thoroughly. These five groups of frigates have as much ability as say a DN and 14 other ships in regards to pinning and controlling a hex. Whereas a Hex C&C rating based on the largest unit better illustrates this sort of control. Lets take the above example, Player A want to stop player B from penetrating deeply into his province, all that he has available to do this with is frigate groups, under your rules he can move 5 frigate groups into a hex and intercept and pin 15 ships of Player B. Whereas with my idea of a per hex limit means that Player A could only move nine ships into a hex to block Player B. Making the value of having a BCH or DN leading an assault or raid group important, whereas your rules said unit only has to be in the province and does not have anything to do with the actual confrontation.
Also under your rules we are only going to be able to move a finite number of groups, based on the largest unit in each province, whereas with my system all units are always able to move, there is just a cap on the maximum number allowed to be in a single hex, based on the best command rating for that hex...
|
|
|
Post by cheethorne on Jan 18, 2010 11:44:29 GMT -4
You claim that this will stop large numbers of ships, but isn't anything you can't move anchored? And therefore could you just not move a large number into an area in waves? Yes, you could definitely move stuff in waves, but moving in waves takes time and time allows your target to respond more effectively. And of course, an area of major effort will likely have a BCH or larger ship around, which means you can activate a lot of groups (and therefore a lot of ships) for an invasion. Attacking from two adjacent provinces is best, but that seems pretty realistic too since you could make the case for two separate theatre command & control infrastructures. (you remember correctly that anchored ships can't move from one galactic hex to another) I just don't see how frigates, unsupported by anything else, can effective control a hex so thoroughly. These five groups of frigates have as much ability as say a DN and 14 other ships in regards to pinning and controlling a hex. To me, this simply doesn't seem like that much of an ability. Yes, 15 frigates could block 15 larger and better ships from leaving the hex, but they can only do it for a few turns at most. The first turn, half of them will likely die in battle against the bigger and better ships. The second turn, half of the bigger ships can leave and the other half can stay and blow up more frigates. Any advantage those frigates have to pin bigger ships is very short-lived, which is as it should be. your rules said unit only has to be in the province and does not have anything to do with the actual confrontation. Because I take the long view of invasions. An invasion should last several turns and require a large number of actual battles. My invasion group might be delayed by your 15 frigates, but it will not be stopped by them. They are basically throwing themselves in my way to slow me down. In addition, under the hex C&C rules, sure, I can't put all of them in one hex, but what's to stop me from putting 9 in the first hex I can and then putting the remaining 6 in the second hex you enter? In the end, I'm still going to pin 15 of your ships.
|
|
|
Post by john on Jan 18, 2010 11:56:30 GMT -4
Well, I'm willing to give it a try, even though I think your suggestion is more time consuming and will ultimately require more paper work, the amount of paper work should not be too much for anyone. Just track your highest C&C in a given province, that allows you to move X many groups.
It will make phases of the game where large number of ships require refits somewhat tedious, but oh well...
|
|
|
Post by cheethorne on Jan 29, 2010 13:05:16 GMT -4
Updated Campaign Rules v10 with the following changes:
Ship Construction Changes: * Updated 2.4 - Ship construction is now broken down into three categories: peace time (~700 CPV), war time (~900 CPV), and economic exhaustion (~500 CPV). The details of the categories have not been determined yet. If the three category approach is abandoned, the war time production will become the standard production. * Updated 2.4.1 - Sector and star bases can also build small ships. * Updated 2.4.4 - Attrition units are now built by star bases, sector bases, and battle stations.
Reasons: We wanted to add some limited production to star bases and sector bases and it made sense to tie attrition units into the bases as well. Also, the rules as written mean that players who want more small ships, will have to not get attrition units from those bases. We don't yet have rules dealing with peace time, war time, and economic exhaustion statuses, so don't worry that you can't find them in there. We need to discuss those issues further.
Most importantly, I've added build lists for all of the races that we are playing in the current campaign (for comparitive purposes), as well as races that people have expressed interest in for the next campaign.
New Movement System: * Updated 3.5.1 - Lowered the number of activations a ship / base provides within a province. * Updated 3.6.6 - Legendary strategists now allow its group to activate in the middle of the turn. * Updated 4.3 - Players no longer plot movement at the beginning of each turn, instead they plot movement at the beginning of each impulse. * Updated 4.5 - Reserve Movement is now based on a group that players designate at the beginning of each turn and Klingon ISF ships.
Reasons: Players now activate significantly less groups per province, but in exchange, players no longer have to pre-plot movement for the entire turn. This allows us to keep reaction movement being useful and removes time consuming paperwork both outside of the game and from in-game sessions.
Since players no longer use local defense ships and police ships, Reserve movement stopped being useful, but it has been expanded to provide a single group with a special "I am a reinforcement force" bonus. Players will be able to get more such markers with expensive special projects and the legendary strategist now provides such a marker to its group.
Victory Point System: * Added 7.1 - Added specific section for notes on victory conditions and now the first player to 200 victory points wins. * Added 7.2 - Players are awarded victory points for controlling provinces, resources, and planets. * Updated 7.4 - Greatly increased the victory points awarded by minor victories.
Reasons: We want territory and resources to be important and for people to fight over them. This is now reflected by the fact that they are worth victory points. The winning victory point total has been pushed up because players now start at 57 victory points based on their starting planets. You lose victory points when you lose territory.
Miscellaneous: * Updated 3.3.4 - Moved the rules for establishing a colony to this section. * Updated 3.5.6 - Moving an FRD and Warp Gate requires tug functions. * Updated 4.3.4 - Relabeled Bonus Operational Movement as Fast Operational Movement. * Updated 4.7 - Fighters / PFs on blockaded bases and planets and pinned fightes / PFs cannot use Sortie Movement. * Removed 6.8.15 - Players can no longer form joint fleets with other players. * Updated Appendix A - Removed one spatial feature from the list and rearranged the types each player starts with, added open space clusters to map set-up and players start with two LTTs, but cannot build additional tugs, and two small exploration freighters and can build additional survey ships. * Updated Appendix E - Increased cost of the SAM station and trade route projects and added additional special projects.
Reasons: Did a better write-up for tug functions which is shown in a few changes above. Fixed a few wording issues (like changing "Bonus" movement to "Fast" Movement). Players now start with some basic ships that everyone needs to have (survey ships and tugs). Added additional special projects.
Still to Do: * Espionage * The Off-Map Resource Zone * More special projects * Ship substitution lists for ship construction. * Better write-up for claiming non-planetary resources
|
|
|
Post by cheethorne on Feb 19, 2010 14:03:35 GMT -4
Updated Campaign Rules v10 with the following changes:
Special Project Changes: * Updated 2.1.2 - Increased trade value requirements for the higher project bonuses. * Updated Appendix A - Removed some spatial features from the list and adjusted each player's starting VP total. * Updated Appendix E - Added additional special projects.
Notes: I made some changes here to get the starting special project bonuses to the place where we wanted them. I also added a bunch of new projects, including the very important province defense ones. More will be added in the next update, most likely the fighter / gunboat ones.
Province Defense Changes: (IMPORTANT!) * Updated 2.2.3 - Added merchant marine freighters to this section for disrupting a base as a supply point. * Added 3.3 - Added a section to cover all empire defenses and how they relate to the infrastructure special projects.
Notes: Non-military ship defenses are now all covered by special projects and provide certain defenses as defined in these sections. I also unified all mention of appearing freighters as the "merchant marine" so I could refer to them as a whole. Players still have choices to be made for ground bases, defense satellites, etc., but these choices can be made on the fly before a battle if need be, instead of planned out and built individually.
Miscellaneous Changes: * Updated 3.2 - Rewrote rules concerning claiming resources to eliminate the differences between claiming planetary systems and non-planetary systems. * Removed 3.3 and 3.4 - Removed sections on asteroid fields and planetary systems. All SFB battle information was moved to section 5.0 - Exploration in the valid charts. * Updated 3.5.8 - A colony that receives six points of razing value is reduced to a Colony Site. * Updated Appendix D - Added substitution list for Baduvai, Klingon, Ryn, and Seltorian.
Notes: Several things in here, claiming planets is no different than claiming an asteroid field, just gives you better stuff (mostly a supply point in an unclaimed province), but the process of claiming is the same. Section 5 is now the only place to go for terrain feature information for SFB battles instead of splitting it between section 3 and 5. Colonies can now be destroyed, which will give people a better reason to attack / raid / defend them. Added the substitution lists for some of the simpler races and one of the complicated races (the Klingons). The goal of the substitutions is to keep the cost relatively equal except for the ones that require special projects (like to get HDWs). Some races will have more flexibility in cost than others.
Future Considerations: * Given the fact that apparently D6s can be converted to D7s, I am going to revise the Klingon build list to only build a single D7 and two D5's. This will make them fall in line with other races (1x CA, 2x CW). If the Klingons want to build D6s, they will have to downgrade their CA slots to fit. The Romulan Kestral build list will be modified as well.
Future Projects: * Espionage * Raids (adding short-range military raids) * Off-Map Resource Zone
|
|
|
Post by john on Feb 20, 2010 10:28:51 GMT -4
Cool, this is coming along nicely. I'll give everything a read over during the next few days.
|
|
|
Post by cheethorne on Feb 22, 2010 14:50:44 GMT -4
There are a number of races with horrible light cruisers. The Kzinti and Lyrans both come to mind. The Romulans don't even have a light cruiser. As for your 'better' unit, the F6, you are not the only race with such a unit. The Federation have a similar unit, which is also barred, as do the Romulans, albeit it is their version of the F6. For other races, like the Federation, their basic CA is far worse than their NCA, or their heavy frigates are far better than their regular frigates, like the Lyrans.
Hampered only a little and really only compared to how you used to think of them, at least compared to most races. The Klingons still have two FFs, an FH, a DD, a couple of DWs, a couple of HDWs, a very good CW, and a large number of variants for the CAs. You are still missing an HCW (which is strange), but you have many variants for nearly all of your ship classes.
Your basic ships aren't that crappy compared to other races basic ships of similar price range. Yes, you have the crappiest FF I have ever seen (the E3), but you don't have to build it since you have the E4. Your E4 is comparable to other frigates I've seen. Your destroyer is weaker than most destroyers, but its not on your build list, the war destroyer is instead (as are all war destroyers) and that is ship is easily comparable to the ones flown by other races.
As for the D6 replacing a D7, that is still up for debate. I've been looking through the books and it doesn't seem like you can do that conversion and if you can't, the keeping the D6 as a separate build is ok, but if you can, why would it seem like a good idea to give one player effectively two CA builds where everyone else only gets one? You could always just convert a D6 to a D7 whenever you wanted to if that was the case. As for your drone upgrades, sorry no sympathy there as the Federation and the Kzinti have to as well and the plasma races have to do a plasma upgrade instead.
As for the F6 clearly not being an HDW, you are correct when you compare them to the HDWs from module R6, but really what else would you call a size-4 ship with 2/3 move cost and four heavy weapons (than the regular F6, but also on the Federation HDH and HDD). Those Federation ships also have a 2/3 move cost, four photons, two G-Racks, and eight phaser-1's. They cost around 116 points, which is a little higher than your ships. Really, these three ships (F6, DHD, and HDD) need to be classified somewhere.
Your IS ships do get a bonus. They can all use two hexes of reserve movement. As for your penal ships. I'd like to give them a bonus as well, but we've never come up with good a one.
|
|
|
Post by john on Feb 22, 2010 15:18:12 GMT -4
You seem to have missed my basic point. Took everything apart and trivialized the details, but missed the fact that you are requiring a special project to unlock this class of ship... anything that requires a special project is a huge consideration... the more things (tech or ships) get thrown into special projects the less likely we are of ever seeing these units actually get use. As I've mentioned before keeping the number of special projects down to a reasonable/balance amount in the areas of tech and ship design is going to be very important.
I still think my suggestion of building these units as part of the 1 in 3 is the best bet... for all such ships for all races.
Conversely, why bother with these units if its going to take an SP to be able to use them... why not use F5Ds (4 drone racks/2 disruptors) or is this ship going to be a special project also and actually be classified as something else???
|
|