| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2010 12:43 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
atgxtg wrote:
| Quote: | Bren wrote:
| Quote: | | Hmmm. If I recall if you all out move that is your only action. |
Yup. Although I'm leaning against dumping that. Otherwise the Death Star Trench run doesn't work. |
But it would explain how the TIE's catch up so easily. Since being in the back, they don't have to dodge. Kind-of makes you wonder why someone didn't fly a couple of Y-wings with rear facing ion cannons to guard Luke's Six.
| Quote: | | Quote: | Bren wrote:
Also, the difficulty for flying at all out speed can be rather nasty. |
Not really. It depends on the terraqin. If it is just open space then the difficulty is pretty low. Considering that most fighters have at least 2D maneuverability and most pilots have a 4D skill, that means all out flying shouldn7t be much of a challenge, unless you7re doing it through an asterid field or inside a captial ship or death star. |
Since flying in clear space with no hazards is Very Easy, flying in the vicinity of other starships is Easy, and flying in the vicinity of many ships in combat is Difficult, we tend to play ships in combat as at least Moderate difficulty. Often it is worse since it is unusual for two or more ships to bump into each other in empty space rather than near a station, planet, asteroid, moon, or at least a large fleet.
| Quote: | Bren wrote:
| Quote: | | I'd be tempted to just blast some laser cannon fire in the general path of an incoming/outgoing vessel and let him crack up on the movement failure. |
<snip>
As for the Movement failure. THe guy is probablly rolling 6D or more and will propbably not fail, or if he does fail, he will probably only take a slip or spin penalty to any seubsequent actions in the round (a non penalty as going all out means that there won't be any more actions). |
Moderate Difficulty terrain (ships in combat with laser shots flying about) requires the pilot to roll at high speed (2 moves) which with 6D the pilot is likely to succeed at. At all-out speed (4 moves) the difficulty increases from Moderate to Difficult (16-20) with an average on 6D of 21 the pilot is likely to make one roll. However, if they must make several, they are likely to fail the roll.
Note if there are many ships in combat or if there are other things (asteroids, many civilian ships, debris, etc.) then terrain becomes Difficult. In that case, flying at high speed the difficulty increases one level so the pilot must make a very difficult roll (21-30) which he may well fail, possibly a serious failure.
If flying all-out the difficulty increases from Difficult to Heroic (31+) which most likely means the pilot spins out of control or even crashes.
This is why we seldom have ships doing a lot of all-out flying anywhere near combat.
I do think some of your problem would be mitigated by carefully looking at the terrain difficulties. Since most combat is going to occur near other objects, it is easy to justify terrain difficulties of moderate or higher, which helps self correct (but does not totally fix) the bat-out-of-hell starfighter problem.
Another to me easy fix is just to alternate the extra moves with other actions, e.g. TIE (search forward range 60) moving all-out (4xmove) towards YT-1300 which is moving away at cruising speed 5 (1xmove) (scan 360 range 25). Assume they start 62 spaces apart.
ROUND 1
1) TIE moves 10, YT moves 5 distance 57. TIE detects* YT which realizes it has been scanned, but not by what (assumed rolls succeeds).
2) TIE moves 10, YT move done, distance 47
3) TIE moves 10, distance 37.
4) TIE moves 10, distance 27.
* since the rules state that the TIE pilot moving all-out can take no action there is an argument that he cannot successfully identify the YT at all this round.
ROUND 2
TIE slows to high speed (2xmove) and declares two actions in addition to movement (so it can shoot).
1) Roll movement difficulty Easy or higher with -2D MAP. TIE moves 10, YT moves 5 distance 22. TIE takes non move action adn fires at long range(assuming it was already able to detect the YT, which according to a strict interpretation it can't), YT detects incoming fire/damage. YT could use the direction of fire to know what arc the hostile is in and switch to search mode sensors - range 40 and detect the TIE.
2) TIE moves 10, distance 12, YT can detect with scan mode (or search)
TIE takes second shot, YT can finally take a shot if gunners are ready and actions declared. Pilot should be able to now evade.
I think treating the all-out move as 4 moves rather than one giant step fixes some of the problem without adding too much complication to the actions.
| Quote: | <snip>
I snagged it from the STAR WARRIORS game. In fact, I think there is a lot of good stuff in that game that could and should be ported over to the RPG. Not to the same level of detaf, but some of the ideas. I like the range and move rates, ability to fire during a move, aux power, the way shields are angled, adn the ability to jury rig temporary reapirs during combat. Most of those rules could port over almost exactly as is. |
So where does one find these rules for this long out of print game. Ay there's the rub.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14034
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2010 2:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Your players must be in really slow ships. Anything that can go SPACE 6 can hit 24 in all-out. A TIE/ln has SPACE 10, and a TIE Interceptor Space 11, so they would need to go all out as well just to keep up, and therefore won7t be able to shoot. |
The fastest PC ship (bar those in fighters) i have come across was a SR od 8. Most were between 4 and 6, with the rare 7. So an ave of 5.5 (round to 6).. Since i was corrected in that Tie fighters go 10 regular, that means they are losing only 2 per round when they are regular and the pcs are double speed. And only 4 per round at full versus flank. That means the Ties get (ave fighter has 25 range), 5 rounds of fire at the PCs without them being able to dodge until the Tie has to speed up for one round to catch up (hell overtake), then they can do it again...
| Quote: | | Since flying in clear space with no hazards is Very Easy, flying in the vicinity of other starships is Easy, and flying in the vicinity of many ships in combat is Difficult, we tend to play ships in combat as at least Moderate difficulty. Often it is worse since it is unusual for two or more ships to bump into each other in empty space rather than near a station, planet, asteroid, moon, or at least a large fleet. |
IIRC of the movement rules, if the terrain is moderate or less, going flank adds 1 cat. If it is more than mod it adds 2 cats (+10). So if in open space (easy - 10 diff) that flank should place it to 15..
| Quote: | | I think treating the all-out move as 4 moves rather than one giant step fixes some of the problem without adding too much complication to the actions. |
Yup.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 15, 2010 12:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: |
But it would explain how the TIE's catch up so easily. Since being in the back, they don't have to dodge. Kind-of makes you wonder why someone didn't fly a couple of Y-wings with rear facing ion cannons to guard Luke's Six. |
Not if Luke is going "full throlttle" like he said. IMO the old method of allowing actions when doing 4 moves works better here. THat would make going full trolltle along the death star treach while dodoing towers possible. Difficult, but possible.
| Bren wrote: |
Since flying in clear space with no hazards is Very Easy, flying in the vicinity of other starships is Easy, and flying in the vicinity of many ships in combat is Difficult, we tend to play ships in combat as at least Moderate difficulty. Often it is worse since it is unusual for two or more ships to bump into each other in empty space rather than near a station, planet, asteroid, moon, or at least a large fleet. |
You may play it as moderate, but that isn't in the RAW. In fact, if you do treatit as moderate then any sort of maneuvering quickly becomes difficult (or worse).
Considering how big space is, and how big the Space Units are, I wouldn7t raise the difficulty for a battle with just a few ships in open space. A big battle, with fighting flying rings around captial ships, however, would be something else.
But a lot of adventures tend tofocus on one PC ship being chased by a handful of fighters. If the PCs are out in front in fairly open space the difficulty shouldly be hard. Especially if they are just flying in a straight line.
| Bren wrote: |
This is why we seldom have ships doing a lot of all-out flying anywhere near combat. |
I susppose that would depend on what you consider combat. Something like the Battle or COruscant, with ships all over the place is one thing. A section of fighters trailling a lone ship is something else.
| Bren wrote: |
I do think some of your problem would be mitigated by carefully looking at the terrain difficulties. Since most combat is going to occur near other objects, it is easy to justify terrain difficulties of moderate or higher, which helps self correct (but does not totally fix) the bat-out-of-hell starfighter problem. |
Not as much as you might think. For starters the move rate of ships means that fights rarely take place "near" other object. It7s mostly a case of having a single planet to avoid. A good case is when the PCs want to move away from a planet and make the jump to lightspeed. In many circumstances, going all out, while the navigator does the astrogation is quite viable.
It can even become a better obption if the PC pilot has a high skill score. Go into top gear, use some CPs is you have to, and then watch the NPC ships crack up.
| Bren wrote: |
Another to me easy fix is just to alternate the extra moves with other actions, e.g. TIE (search forward range 60) moving all-out (4xmove) towards YT-1300 which is moving away at cruising speed 5 (1xmove) (scan 360 range 25). Assume they start 62 spaces apart.
ROUND 1
1) TIE moves 10, YT moves 5 distance 57. TIE detects* YT which realizes it has been scanned, but not by what (assumed rolls succeeds).
2) TIE moves 10, YT move done, distance 47
3) TIE moves 10, distance 37.
4) TIE moves 10, distance 27.
* since the rules state that the TIE pilot moving all-out can take no action there is an argument that he cannot successfully identify the YT at all this round. |
Breaking up moves does help with some things. It is one of the things I think 2E did better than 2R&D. It also would help with the all out problem since the trailing ships could still shoot, and the PCs would suffer a -4MAPs from the speed.
| Bren wrote: |
I think treating the all-out move as 4 moves rather than one giant step fixes some of the problem without adding too much complication to the actions. |
THat is just what 2E did. I'm starting to think the segmented movment works better for characters too. It would allow character to move-shoot-move.
| Bren wrote: | ]
So where does one find these rules for this long out of print game. Ay there's the rub. |
Me? I find them on my shelf. Other could try Amazo, eBay or some such.
For the most part the rules are compaible and Warriors does a lot of things better than the RPG.
Some things I like about it:
1) Ships have a top speed. They can go faster than this, but only by 1 or 2 points.
2) Pilots total of the difficulty of all the things hey are doing and then make one roll against that difficulty. Doing more means a higher difficulty and a grreater chance of something going wrong.
3) Weapon ranges and move rates are much lower than in the RPG (and the ranges in Warriors predate those in the RPG), making it easier to keep a bunch of ships on a map.
4) THe X-Wing has two shields, and shields basically reduce the damage from the attack rather than boosting the hull. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 15, 2010 12:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | The fastest PC ship (bar those in fighters) i have come across was a SR od 8. Most were between 4 and 6, with the rare 7. So an ave of 5.5 (round to 6).. Since i was corrected in that Tie fighters go 10 regular, that means they are losing only 2 per round when they are regular and the pcs are double speed. And only 4 per round at full versus flank. That means the Ties get (ave fighter has 25 range), 5 rounds of fire at the PCs without them being able to dodge until the Tie has to speed up for one round to catch up (hell overtake), then they can do it again... |
AH, that7s why. THe "all out escape" option becomes more pronounced if the PCs have some speed. I'm running a Clone Wars campaign, and the PCs have fighters than can go 9. While the Vulture Droids can move 10, most of the other ships can7t, and the rforce most foes to go all out just to keep up. And if the bad guys are going all out to keep up, they can't shoot.
So the temptation to go at high speed is strong among the players. THe fact that going fast doesn7t incur MAPs, even though it might raise the difficulty, is another factor. In te old rules a the MAPs for going fast made players more cautious.
For example, one the playersin my group is a Padawan learner with e MEC of 3D. He was in a Delta 7 (high Maneuver variant) with a MAN of 4D. Now with 7D he is pretty connfident of making a difficult roll, and can even do some very difficult stuff.
In 2E, the MAP peanlty for all out (at least -3D, if that is all the PC does) would have a bigger physcological impact on the player. The fact that thre character looses dice means that character points and force points would be less likely to help him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14034
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 6:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Of course they will be outclassing (or coming close to it) in fighters.. That is why you have ships ahead of them which have mined the area, then 'herd' them into it 
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2010 12:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
atgxtg -
We agree on alternating moves and actions works better than a single x4 move.
We disagree that most space combat occuris in empty space. While I understand your point that this may accord with real world space it is not what we see most of the time in the films and cartoons and frankly it is less interesting to me. Much like a ground chase on an open highway with no traffic is not interesting compared to a chase through rush hour traffic or through a crowded downtown. So I tend to run things with more obstacles. We can agree to disagree here.
I am curious though, if you are in empty space with one or two ships chasing one ship why you find moving off the map to be an issue. It seems like the motion is really just motion on a track and you could map it easily be tracking relative position change rather than absolute position change, i.e. one ship moves 36 the other moves 40, relative change 4 units. Move one ship 4 units closer.
This is why I generally prefer not to treat space combat like a board game, but a bit more dramatically. It allows me to smooth over issues with sequential movement, opportunity fire, and range. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | Of course they will be outclassing (or coming close to it) in fighters.. That is why you have ships ahead of them which have mined the area, then 'herd' them into it |
Sometimes. A lot of that depends on the adventure. I ran one several months back where they were being chased by droid fighters not to mention a ticked off Ventress in an asteroid field. But that was atypical. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2010 3:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: | atgxtg -
I am curious though, if you are in empty space with one or two ships chasing one ship why you find moving off the map to be an issue. It seems like the motion is really just motion on a track and you could map it easily be tracking relative position change rather than absolute position change, i.e. one ship moves 36 the other moves 40, relative change 4 units. Move one ship 4 units closer. |
Sounds good in theory. Doesn't work so good in praqctice. For example,last session the PC Padawan had a hyperpsace mishap and arrived at the destination about a day ahead of the rest of the group. He got into a fight with 4 fighters. During the fighting he pulled a coule of tight turns and maneuvers to try to limit the number of fighters that could shoot at him. This lead to the fighters also doing some maneuvering to try and keep on his tail.
SOme made the rolls, and some did not (two eventually rammed into each other and made a nice fireworks display), and that lead to ships being spread out all over the place. The PC was going 18, some of the fighters were going 14, and one had sto stop and one stun out to a stop and had to build up speed.
| Bren wrote: |
This is why I generally prefer not to treat space combat like a board game, but a bit more dramatically. It allows me to smooth over issues with sequential movement, opportunity fire, and range. |
THe mmap helps to get the PCs to do more maneuvering. Otherwise I see a simple pursue/flee thing going on. Putting a mapboard, with obstacles gives them reasons to do some fancy flying. FOr instance, the PC Padawan did some maneuver to keep out of firing arcs, and even caught one guy off guard by pulling an Immlemann, acclerating and blowing past him. It shouldn't have worked either, but seven consequutive sixes on the wild die proved otherwise.
There are ways to get it to work out, it is just the current RPG rules aren't really great for this. Star Warriors did a great job at this, althouth it is a little more complicated and has alearning curve.
he way the old James Bond RPG handles chases would work too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2010 3:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | he way the old James Bond RPG handles chases would work too. |
IIR that is more that way we play it.  I also kind of miss the speed dice from 1E since it allowed for more smoothing while also allowing a good pilot in a slower ship to out run or catch a poor pilot in a faster ship. That seems more like what we see Han Solo do wrt TIE fighters.
I think multiple moves with MAPs and alternating move and other actions is simpler and smoother to play out than higher difficulty x2 or x4 single moves at the start of the round. I don't see that as an improvement to 2ER&E. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2010 5:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: |
I think multiple moves with MAPs and alternating move and other actions is simpler and smoother to play out than higher difficulty x2 or x4 single moves at the start of the round. I don't see that as an improvement to 2ER&E. |
This is how we do both personal and vehicle movement. In most cases this also handles any modifiers to difficulties automatically.. The more stuff you can handle with MAPs the better..
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2010 4:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: | | Quote: | | he way the old James Bond RPG handles chases would work too. |
IIR that is more that way we play it. I also kind of miss the speed dice from 1E since it allowed for more smoothing while also allowing a good pilot in a slower ship to out run or catch a poor pilot in a faster ship. That seems more like what we see Han Solo do wrt TIE fighters. |
I kinda of figured Han catching the TIE was an AUX powerr thing. BTW, that is another thing that Warriors had that the RPG could use. AUC power could be spent to take a shield loss or to soak up a little damge or even to "persomf an action".
| Bren wrote: |
I think multiple moves with MAPs and alternating move and other actions is simpler and smoother to play out than higher difficulty x2 or x4 single moves at the start of the round. I don't see that as an improvement to 2ER&E. |
It looks like everybody agrees on that. That is significant considering how infrequently we all agree on a rule.
THere are quite a few 2R&E rules that I7m having second thoughts about. At first I thought the new move rules were an improvment, but I7ve bengu to miss the segmented movement.
And I still keep thinknig about bring back the haste rules. The solve the "wait for the Jedi to raise lightsaber combat before he can deflect blaster bolts" bug in 2nd edition. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 9:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | And I still keep thinknig about bring back the haste rules. The solve the "wait for the Jedi to raise lightsaber combat before he can deflect blaster bolts" bug in 2nd edition. |
I have mixed feelings about the haste rules. Sometimes I like 'em, sometimes I like one side effectively having to wait their turn. The rule does help higher skilled characters to act first, but bacause of MAPs it may prevent a character from firing first and moving (without falling down). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 11:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: | | Quote: | | And I still keep thinknig about bring back the haste rules. The solve the "wait for the Jedi to raise lightsaber combat before he can deflect blaster bolts" bug in 2nd edition. |
I have mixed feelings about the haste rules. Sometimes I like 'em, sometimes I like one side effectively having to wait their turn. The rule does help higher skilled characters to act first, but bacause of MAPs it may prevent a character from firing first and moving (without falling down). |
Hmm, please remind me about the 'haste rules'.
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 12:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Hmm, please remind me about the 'haste rules'. |
Sure thing ZzaphodD. If I remember (and can find them) I will post the rules we've used, which I believe were posted on Jae Walker's old SW list about 15 years ago. But this should serve as a reminder:
| Quote: | gc311-13-2007, 12:39 AM
Use the "haste" rules from one of the rules supplements. To go first in a fight you can bid "Haste"... you lose a D6 but go first. You can bid Haste more than once... highest score goes first. You can even bid haste after you see what your enemy is doing.
GM: "He pulls the switch and destroys the station"
Player: "I haste and shoot him first!"
GM: "Well, he hastes twice to go first!"
Player: "I haste twice"
GM: "Well, he hastes 3 times!"
A player could not bring the dice for his actions to zero. Simple actions (like pulling a switch) would be based on a stat, so the GM in this case could not bid more hastes than the character's stat. This sometimes led to spending force points. |
Nabbed the above from http://forum.rpg.net/archive/index.php/t-364249.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 2:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ZzaphodD wrote: |
Hmm, please remind me about the 'haste rules'. |
Basically you sacrifice dice to bump up the order of your actions. So by taking a level of haste you loose 1D, but your actions go off before those of unhasted characters.
What I like about it was that it allowed characters a way to take consequentive actions. For example,a Jedi could use haste to raise lightsaber combat, draw his lightsaber and fight with it in the same turn, before the bad guys shot. In 2E the Jedi has to do it in alternative actions.
| ZzaphodD wrote: |
I have mixed feelings about the haste rules. Sometimes I like 'em, sometimes I like one side effectively having to wait their turn. The rule does help higher skilled characters to act first, but bacause of MAPs it may prevent a character from firing first and moving (without falling down). |
I've got mixed feelings as well. Haste does solve a lot o the bugs that 2E sequencing brought about, but I think most of those could be solved by tweaking a few rules,lightsaber combat in particular. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
