2nd Edition Playtest Report- Terran Commonwealth

Check here for updates and discussion about the new edition of the Victory by Any Means Campaign System.
wminsing
Commander
Commander
Posts: 158
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 3:06 pm
Contact:

Re: 2nd Edition Playtest Report- Terran Commonwealth

Postby wminsing » Fri May 25, 2012 7:20 pm

Turn 17:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aXa ... Qc_Hw/edit
Turn 18:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/12g0 ... jMzb8/edit

Turn 17- 2448.07
Lalande has been seized by disgruntled miners. Negotiations have broken down and the 3rd and 4th Home Guard divisions are being deployed to Lalande. In happier news, the Commonwealth has finally increased to TL 1

Exploration Checks:
1st Exploration Constellation: Under Repair
2nd Exploration Constellation: 15 Scout total, +3 Bonus
Roll = 5 + 3 = 8, No Effect

Morale Checks:
Sol System: Good Order, Roll = 4, no change
Barnard’s Star: Good Order, Roll = 9, no change
Alpha Centauri: Good Order, Roll = 4, no change
Altair: Good Order, Roll = 6, no change
Sirius: Good Order, Roll = 5, no change


Piracy Checks:
Sol System: 5% (Trade Route) - 12% (12 ships or flights in system) = 1% (min)
Roll = 96, no Pirate attack
Lalande: 5% (Trade Route) - 4% (4 ships or flights in system) = 1% (min)
Roll = 64, no Pirate attack


Emerging Empire Checks:
Accumulated turns without successful exploration roll: 7%
Roll = 12, no Emerging Empire


Free State of Lalande
No Orders

Turn 18- 2448.08
The 3rd and 4th Home Guard Corps land on Lalande and undertake their policing mission. The end of the Lalande Free State. The only other news of note is the massive investment to raise the Tech Level of Sol.

Exploration Checks:
1st Exploration Constellation: Under Repair
2nd Exploration Constellation: 15 Scout total, +3 Bonus
Roll = 10 + 3 = 13, Jump Lane Mapped!

Morale Checks:
Sol System: Good Order, Roll = 3, no change
Barnard’s Star: Good Order, Roll = 7, no change
Lalande: In Rebellion, Roll = 3, -1 Morale (no real effect)
Alpha Centauri: Good Order, Roll = 8, no change
Altair: Good Order, Roll = 10, +1 morale
Sirius: Good Order, Roll = 8, no change


Piracy Checks:
Sol System: 5% (Trade Route) - 12% (12 ships or flights in system) = 1% (min)
Roll = 76, no Pirate attack
Lalande: 5% (Trade Route) - 4% (4 ships or flights in system) = 1% (min)
Roll = 57, no Pirate attack


Emerging Empire Checks:
Accumulated turns without successful exploration roll: 7%
Roll = 59, no Emerging Empire

New Star System Generation (Arcturus)
System Type Roll = 6, Single Star System
Spectral Class Roll = 9, Class M Red Star
Luminosity Class Roll = 9, IV Sub-Giant
Carrying Capacity = 7, 4 CAP
Raw = 6, 2 RAW
Biosphere = 11, 4 BIO
Jump Lanes = 7, 3 Lanes (1 back to Sigma Draconis, 5, 6)

System Specials:
6 = +1 Cap
7 = +1 RAW
9 = +2 CAP

Chance of prewarp natives = 7 x 4 = 28% chance
Roll = 8, Native Civilization Present!

Arcturians
Tech Level = 6, Industrial
(3 Census, 4 Morale, 9 Infrastructure)
Tech Advancement Cost: 100 x 3 = 300
% Accomplished = 20, 60/300 Tech Points

AIX Values:
A = 17
I = 38
X = 9

Initial Relations:
50 - (88 + 50 + 17)/3 = 3

First Contact War: 50/5 for 10% chance, roll = 28, no war
No Communications Established, current diplomatic state = non-Intercourse

Screen Shot 2012-05-25 at 3.19.36 PM.png
Screen Shot 2012-05-25 at 3.19.36 PM.png (58.41 KiB) Viewed 3219 times
"Ships and sail proper for the heavenly air should be fashioned. Then there will also be people, who do not shrink from the dreary vastness of space."
-- Johannes Kepler, 1609

wminsing
Commander
Commander
Posts: 158
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 3:06 pm
Contact:

Re: 2nd Edition Playtest Report- Terran Commonwealth

Postby wminsing » Fri May 25, 2012 7:34 pm

Ok, a LOT happening on turn 18! Couple of questions on the situation.

1) Troop embarking/disembarking- I hazily remember in the 1st edition that troops could load/unload at any point during the ship's movement, but a given unit could only load or unload once per turn.

2) Lalande. So my troops land, no resistance so I supposed I conquered it with no problem. What next? I presume the colony is still in Rebellion so I will need to run some intel missions to try to increase the morale. I also see I need to re-integrate the colony into the Commonwealth, which will take some time (per 3.4.14). Until then I presume I can't 'use' the colony (including special resources) until I have re-integrated, correct? Are there any other permanent effects of the colony being formerly independent?

3) Aliens!! Did I generate the species correctly?
a) What is the impact of 'Industrial' tech level on designing units? Are they just TL 0?
b) I see 9 generic 'infrastructure' listed for Industrial aliens. Is this just 9 I can assign as I see fit? And is this just standard infrastructure? I was thinking about giving them economy 3, agriculture 3, industry 2 and research 1, for example.
c) I think these guys just count as NAE's, what is the threshold on this rating again?

4) Did I do first contact correctly? And as a more generic question, is relations between powers a shared stat or an independent one? For example, is the relations 3 for the Commonwealth and the Arcturans or could the Arcturans have a different rating towards the Commonwealth? Some of the examples have me confused.

In any event, these aliens will give the Terrans (and me) a good chance to practice the diplomacy rules!

-Will
"Ships and sail proper for the heavenly air should be fashioned. Then there will also be people, who do not shrink from the dreary vastness of space."

-- Johannes Kepler, 1609

User avatar
LiolLangston
Ensign
Ensign
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 11:27 pm

Re: 2nd Edition Playtest Report- Terran Commonwealth

Postby LiolLangston » Mon May 28, 2012 4:11 pm

I'm a bit new here, but from the 20120513 VBAM 2e pdf,

1) I see no rules in this release for moving ground units, so you'll have to wait for tyrel or someone else for that.

2)When you conquer a colony you roll a d6 for every census in the conquered system and a 3 or less means that morale is decreased by one. As the colony has no population, you don't make that roll.
But on your next morale phase you make a special roll for each conquered system adding one for each previous roll that you have done. 2d6, on a 12 or higher the world is fully integrated into your empire. you do this until you are successful or the planet is lost agian.

3) Not sure here but my untrained eye see nothing wrong...
a)Let's see. Industrial units are made a tl 0 but cost four? times as much to make and maintain. I was certian I read that somewhere but now i can't find it.
b) apparantly. Nothing specific appears to be written about it.
c) the threshold in 10 GDP.

4)When you first contact them, either side may attempt establish communictations, i.e. attempt to find a way that they may interact in a meaningful way. the 2d6 rolls are as follows, and modifiable by past attempts
4 or less is a failure that results in 1d6 lose of relations
5-8 has no effect
10-11 adds +1 to any future rolls
12 or more is a success.
Until you get a success, both sides are technically in a non-intercourse treaty with the other.

As for the relations, though i prefer to think of it as a shared opinion of each other, is a shared stat.

hope this info helps you out.
Politics is the womb in which war develops.
Karl Von Clausewitz

Violence has resolved more conflicts than anything else. The contrary opinion that violence doesn't solve anything is merely wishful thinking at its worst.
Jean Rasczak (Starship Troopers)

wminsing
Commander
Commander
Posts: 158
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 3:06 pm
Contact:

Re: 2nd Edition Playtest Report- Terran Commonwealth

Postby wminsing » Wed May 30, 2012 12:59 pm

1) I see no rules in this release for moving ground units, so you'll have to wait for tyrel or someone else for that.


I'll stick to the 1st Ed rules for now then until I hear otherwise.

But on your next morale phase you make a special roll for each conquered system adding one for each previous roll that you have done. 2d6, on a 12 or higher the world is fully integrated into your empire. you do this until you are successful or the planet is lost agian.


Yep, I had seen that in the rules. Just wanted to make sure that there was no other implication of Lalande being conquered that I was missing.

Let's see. Industrial units are made a tl 0 but cost four? times as much to make and maintain. I was certian I read that somewhere but now i can't find it.


That sounds workable enough for me! :)

c) the threshold in 10 GDP.


Aha, thanks! So they'll be a NAE for a little while but might eventually grow into a NPE proper.

When you first contact them, either side may attempt establish communictations


Had almost forgotten about this, thank you.

I'm going to resolve the rest of the impact of the new race being generated and then pick up and start rolling along again with the turns unless I hear that something is radically wrong from Tyrel.

-Will
"Ships and sail proper for the heavenly air should be fashioned. Then there will also be people, who do not shrink from the dreary vastness of space."

-- Johannes Kepler, 1609

wminsing
Commander
Commander
Posts: 158
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 3:06 pm
Contact:

Re: 2nd Edition Playtest Report- Terran Commonwealth

Postby wminsing » Fri Jun 01, 2012 12:35 pm

Finally got off my duff and ran a few more turns.
Turn 19:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XrY ... Dgzjw/edit
Turn 20:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Cfl ... cHTEU/edit

I'm not going to post the Arcuturan turns until they hit interstellar development level, right now their turn sheets are a pretty boring build-up and tech-up routine.

Turn 19- 2449.09
Mankind discovered it is not alone in the universe as the 2nd Exploration Constellation discovers an intelligent pre-space faring civilization at Arcturus. Initial encounters are peaceful but establishing communication has been difficult.

Terran Commonwealth
Exploration Checks:
1st Exploration Constellation: Moving
2nd Exploration Constellation: Moving

Morale Checks:
Sol System: Good Order, Roll = 5, no change
Barnard’s Star: Good Order, Roll = 3, no change
Lalande: In Rebellion, Roll = 7, no change
Alpha Centauri: Good Order, Roll = 3, no change
Altair: Good Order, Roll = 7, no change
Sirius: Good Order, Roll = 8, no change


Piracy Checks:
Sol System: 5% (Trade Route) - 12% (12 ships or flights in system) = 1% (min)
Roll = 78, no Pirate attack
Lalande: 5% (Trade Route) - 4% (4 ships or flights in system) = 1% (min)
Roll = 68, no Pirate attack

Intelligence Missions:
Propaganda: Counter Insurgency from Sol to Lalande
Difficulty 3 + 1 jump = 4, 3 agents / 4 = 75% chance of success
Roll = 79, failure! No change.

Lalande Integration Check: 7

Arcturan Pentarchy
Morale Checks:
Arcturus: Good Order, Roll = 1, -1 Morale

Universal

Diplomatic Affairs: Terran Commonwealth and Arcturan Pentarchy attempting to establish contact. Roll = 10, Partial Communications +1 to future rolls


Emerging Empire Checks:
Accumulated turns without successful exploration roll: 8%
Roll = 31, no Emerging Empire


Turn 20- 2449.10
Mainly consolidation on the part of the Terran Commonwealth as ground forces are sent out to prevent a repeat of Lalande happening again. Sigma Draconic is also undergoing some development, it is targeted for rapid build-up as a forward defense/exploration base.

Terran Commonwealth
Exploration Checks:
1st Exploration Constellation: 15 Scout total, +3 Bonus
Roll = 7 + 3 = 10, Partial Success, +1 to next roll
2nd Exploration Constellation: 15 Scout total, +3 Bonus
Roll = 9 + 3 = 12, Jump Lane Mapped!


Morale Checks:
Sol System: Good Order, Roll = 2, no change
Barnard’s Star: Good Order, Roll = 7, no change
Lalande: In Rebellion, Roll = 7, no change
Alpha Centauri: Good Order, Roll = 10, +1 Morale
Altair: Good Order, Roll = 7, no change
Sirius: Good Order, Roll = 1, -1 Morale
Sigma Draconis: Good Order, Roll = 9, no change

Piracy Checks:
Sol System: 5% (Trade Route) - 12% (12 ships or flights in system) = 1% (min)
Roll = 87, no Pirate attack
Lalande: 5% (Trade Route) - 4% (4 ships or flights in system) = 1% (min)
Roll = 41, no Pirate attack

Intelligence Missions:
Propaganda: Counter Insurgency from Sol to Lalande
Difficulty 3 + 1 jump = 4, 3 agents / 4 = 75% chance of success
Roll = 75, Success! +1 Morale (System is now in Good Order)

Lalande Integration Check: 5 + 1 = 6


Arcturan Pentarchy
Morale Checks:
Arcturus: Good Order, Roll = 2, no change

Universal

Diplomatic Affairs: Terran Commonwealth and Arcturan Pentarchy attempting to establish contact. Roll = 12 + 1 , Communications Established!

Emerging Empire Checks:
Accumulated turns without successful exploration roll: 8%
Roll = 88, no Emerging Empire



New Star System Generation (Wolf 359)
System Type Roll = 7, Single Star System
Spectral Class Roll = 9, Class M Red Star
Luminosity Class Roll = 9, V Main Sequence
Carrying Capacity = 10, 10 CAP
Raw = 11, 4 RAW
Biosphere = 5, 1 BIO
Jump Lanes = 9, 4 Lanes (1 back to Sigma Draconis, 1 to the Vortex 1, 2)

System Specials:
7 = +1 RAW
6 = +1 CAP
6 = +1 CAP

Chance of prewarp natives = 12 x 1 = 12% chance
Roll = 81, No native civilization

-Will
"Ships and sail proper for the heavenly air should be fashioned. Then there will also be people, who do not shrink from the dreary vastness of space."

-- Johannes Kepler, 1609

wminsing
Commander
Commander
Posts: 158
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 3:06 pm
Contact:

Re: 2nd Edition Playtest Report- Terran Commonwealth

Postby wminsing » Fri Jun 01, 2012 12:42 pm

The embarrassment of Terran riches continues. Wolf 359 is a way around the singularity wall AND an excellent colonization site to boot. 150 EP to plant the flag but I think the Terrans will grab this colony as soon as they can. I'm going to pull the 2nd exploration constellation back to Altair for now to explore the two remaining jump lanes down there, I want to try to push the frontier out 3 jumps in all directions if I can before another empire emerges.

Also finally got Lalande out of Rebellion, though I still haven't re-integrated the colony yet.

So end of the second year, the Terran Commonwealth is still sitting pretty. What will the new year bring though? (An emerging empire, I expect)

-Will
"Ships and sail proper for the heavenly air should be fashioned. Then there will also be people, who do not shrink from the dreary vastness of space."

-- Johannes Kepler, 1609

wminsing
Commander
Commander
Posts: 158
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 3:06 pm
Contact:

Re: 2nd Edition Playtest Report- Terran Commonwealth

Postby wminsing » Fri Jun 01, 2012 8:32 pm

So apparently I am developing physic powers, as the very next turn I have indeed had an empire emerge. The rules on how to conduct pre-contact exploration could use a little fleshing out but overall I think I muddled through and generated the new empire. A couple of notes/questions from this process.

1) Pre-contact exploration. I house-ruled that an emerging empire would get a +1 to all rolls on the chart for every 4 systems the most widely-explored empire had. Topping out at 4 systems explored without a 'roll again' seemed like it would produce very small empires on the average. For a multi-player game not so bad, but I fear that for a single player campaign it would produce empires only fit to be steam rolled fairly quickly. I'd consider changing the chart to a % value of the most widely-explored empire. As it was the new empire got to explore 6 systems, and had colonies in 4 of them.
2) I did have to fudge a few system generation rolls to make sure the new empire didn't run out of jump lanes before they got to their number of explored systems. As mentioned above, some more detail here would be good.
3) I just placed their home system in a location that felt right to me, as placing them in the most important system would have created a fairly marginal home system. As it was the 'free' boost to 4 cap/raw/bio made a marginal system a good one and left the other three potential colony sites in pretty good shape.
4) I also had to fudge their facilities some, as otherwise they would be in a starvation situation right at the start. So I spotted them an extra orbital farm so they were at least breaking even. Some guidance on how to handle these situations (rolled too many high Census colonies and not enough BIO) would also be good.
5) On a totally different tangent I decided to give them a carrier as a starting unit, and I'm not sure the current rules on the carrier trait (1 carrier = 1 BC of flights) makes sense. As an example:
Their basic warship is a 5 BC unit with with DV/AS/PD of 3/4/1 and FTL(1)
Their carrier is a 10 BC unit with DV/AS/PD of 3/1/1 and FTL(1), Carrier(10)
Their fighter is a 5 BC unit with DV/AS/PD of 3/5/2 and no traits

This looks fine, the fighter with no atmospheric to worry about is pretty good unit. But the carrier with full fighter load (two flights) is 20 BC, for an aggregate 9/11/5, and for 20 BC I can get 4 warships for a total aggregate of 12/16/4

If I min/max, make the carrier 1/0/0 with Carrier(14), and max the fighters out to 7 BC and give them 3/9/2 then I get an aggregate of 5/18/4 which gives me more firepower than the warships but I don't think this combination will survive very long (pop the carrier and the flights are lost at the end of combat if I understand the rules right).

I might just not be designing the fighters with the right mindset either. I mean, 1 rating of carrier = 1 BC of unit = 2 MU of fighting power and that seems to be a mathematically winning formula.

-Will
Last edited by wminsing on Fri Jun 01, 2012 8:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Ships and sail proper for the heavenly air should be fashioned. Then there will also be people, who do not shrink from the dreary vastness of space."

-- Johannes Kepler, 1609

User avatar
Tyrel Lohr
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
Posts: 1416
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 3:48 am
Location: Lusk, WY
Contact:

Re: 2nd Edition Playtest Report- Terran Commonwealth

Postby Tyrel Lohr » Fri Jun 01, 2012 8:41 pm

Sorry for being so late getting back to you on this - what a week! But here's the feedback:

1) Troop embarking/disembarking- I hazily remember in the 1st edition that troops could load/unload at any point during the ship's movement, but a given unit could only load or unload once per turn.


This is correct for 1E. There was a rule for this in 2E at some point, but I think it got lost when the Cargo rules were taken out of Movement and moved around (and subsequently left in limbo). I did find the original 2E rules and it backed up this interpretation, but I really prefer allowing units to be embarked or disembarked at the start of movement and the end of movement. That allows a unit to load cargo in one system and then deposit it in the other system at the end of its movement. I need to get those rules put back into the rules. Any preference or recommendations on where the most logical place to put that is? I have a Basing sub-section blocked off in the Military chapter, and that might be the best area. Call it "Embarking & Disembarking" and put that information in there.

The only caveat with this rule resolution is that a unit couldn't travel A => B => C and drop cargo off in A or B, as it would have to end its movement in the system where it planned on offloading the cargo.

2) Lalande. So my troops land, no resistance so I supposed I conquered it with no problem. What next? I presume the colony is still in Rebellion so I will need to run some intel missions to try to increase the morale. I also see I need to re-integrate the colony into the Commonwealth, which will take some time (per 3.4.14). Until then I presume I can't 'use' the colony (including special resources) until I have re-integrated, correct? Are there any other permanent effects of the colony being formerly independent?


I reworked the Conquered Colonies rules slightly since the last draft. Under the current system you'd roll a D6 for each Census and each offers a 50% chance of losing Morale (which isn't an issue, as Lalande doesn't have any Census). The system is now a Conquered system, and ... wait a minute... I screwed up those rules when I rewrote them. Crap. I'll get that fixed this weekend. Anywhere, here's an overview of what SHOULD happen after that:

1) The 2D6 integration roll really should still be a table like exploration. Here's the missing table:

Integration (2D6)
Roll, Effect
2-5: Insurrection. -1 Morale
6-8: No Effect
9-11: Partial Integration: +1 to future rolls
12: Full Integration: Colony is no longer a conquered colony

2) Ground units can't be purchased at conquered colonies because the colonists are disloyal and can't be conscripted to fight for their oppressors.

3) Population increases in conquered systems provide a -1 Morale penalty instead of a +1 Morale bonus.

I think that covers the main gamut of what was really intended that I obviously forgot about when I reworked those rules. Sometimes I get a bit too overzealous in cutting the rules back to the bone to make them easier to work with and end up missing the original intent. Again, I'll get that fixed tomorrow.

3) Aliens!! Did I generate the species correctly?
a) What is the impact of 'Industrial' tech level on designing units? Are they just TL 0?
b) I see 9 generic 'infrastructure' listed for Industrial aliens. Is this just 9 I can assign as I see fit? And is this just standard infrastructure? I was thinking about giving them economy 3, agriculture 3, industry 2 and research 1, for example.
c) I think these guys just count as NAE's, what is the threshold on this rating again?


3a) I've been playtesting a bit in deciding whether or not to keep Information age around. Right now the mass modifier split looks like this:

Pre-Industrial: 20%
Industrial: 40%
Information: 60%
Interplanetary: 80%
Interstellar: 100%

This means that an Industrial power designing a 6 BC unit would have 6 x 2 x 40% = 5 MU to spend on the design. Pre-Industrial and Industrial civilizations are going to have crap units, where Information and above are going to be at least reasonably powerful.

3b) Correct, it's infrastructure that you can assign as you like between the different forms of colonial infrastructure. It's not much, but it gives them enough to get started.

3c) It looks like a system income of 9 EP per turn, so that would make it a NAE. The threshold is set at 15 EP per turn right now, but it might need to go back down to 10 eventually. I'm still feeling that out. The difference between NPE and NAE again are at the NAE automatically sign/break treaties and don't need to roll for it. That saves a player from rolling offering, breaking, and declaring chances for each of the little piddly empires in the game that honestly don't matter. I

just checked and NAE also don't declare wars against other powers, though I might amend that so that they will declare war on other NAE. That way the little morons can sit and fight wars with each other, injecting a bit of excitement into the game even if it'll amount to the one guy sending a single cruiser over to harass the other one's homeworld.

4) Did I do first contact correctly? And as a more generic question, is relations between powers a shared stat or an independent one? For example, is the relations 3 for the Commonwealth and the Arcturans or could the Arcturans have a different rating towards the Commonwealth? Some of the examples have me confused.


I consolidated the relationship values so that you have a single relationship between each empire pairing. This was largely because tracking two relationship values didn't make a lot of sense and just added to the bookkeeping in 1E. In this case the Commonwealth and Arcturans have a single relationship (+3) and a single diplomatic shift roll is made each turn for this one relationship (i.e., each empire doesn't make a separate diplomatic shift roll).

I do need to revisit the examples, and one thing I started during the preliminary layout is breaking out two-page integrated examples of the most important rule elements to describe in detail and hopefully make everything a bit clearer.

In any event, these aliens will give the Terrans (and me) a good chance to practice the diplomacy rules!


I am in about the same boat as you. I managed to play two turns of my game late last week and the Filosi Consortium ended up running into an Industrial power that was sitting in a strategic system. Between your game and mine we should be able to put the diplomacy rules to the test and see what happens. In my case, I might end up forcing the filosi to degrade their relationship with the other power to reach a point where I can just invade their system and not have to deal with them, though.

That does bring up one thing that I'm still working on but is in the newest draft: diplomatic missions. Right now the cost I'm using is 5 x Distance between nearest capitals. You then roll on a table for effect. The current slate of diplomatic missions is limited to improving relations (bonus to relationship), degrading relations (penalty to relationship), and influencing relations (modify the target's relationship with another power towards the empire's own relationship value with that power). For the first and last I plan on giving a +1 per 5 bonus for having Diplomatic units at the target capital. For the degrading option that doesn't make a lot of sense, though.
"Touch not the pylons, for they are the messengers!"

User avatar
Tyrel Lohr
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
Posts: 1416
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 3:48 am
Location: Lusk, WY
Contact:

Re: 2nd Edition Playtest Report- Terran Commonwealth

Postby Tyrel Lohr » Fri Jun 01, 2012 8:58 pm

Thanks for jumping in with answers, LiolLangston!

RE: Conquered Colonies
It's probably worth reiterating that part of the reason why conquered colonies exist as a separate thing and are subject to penalties is that I've found it unrealistic in most 4X games where an empire can conquer an enemy colony and instantly turn around and start using it to build units and treat it like one of its own colonies. In previous drafts there were more Morale penalties associated with conquered colonies, but those didn't translate well into the current rules. Giving them a chance of Morale loss early on and taking about 5-10 turns to integrate at least delays that and provides a thorn in the conqueror's side that they have to deal with -- and buys the former owner time to liberate it, if he can.

I also just noticed a hilarious duplication of the population increase rules in 3.4.2 Population. Sigh. Making note of it to get that corrected tomorrow, too.

a)Let's see. Industrial units are made a tl 0 but cost four? times as much to make and maintain. I was certian I read that somewhere but now i can't find it.


I had that in a previous version of the rules, nestled into the Tech chapter, IIRC. After further testing I've opted for the 20/40/60/80/100 percentile split for MU availability instead as it's more straightforward and accomplishes the goal of allowing the low tech empires to design and build reasonably effective units, even if the cost to build them is fairly high. For example, a Pre-Industrial empire has to spend 10 EP to get a 3 MU unit, but it's unlikely to have a very strong economy in the first place and that should control the number that they can realistically field better than an artificially high maintenance cost.

c) the threshold in 10 GDP.


I bumped this up to less than 15 total system income just to cover a bit more ground. I'm worried that it might be set a little high now, as a 6 Census / 2 RAW homeworld would fall into NAE territory, but from my experience thus far I think that an empire that was earning 12 EP per turn would still not have enough economic clout to make a major impact on the game and would still be worth tracking as a NAE.

The distinction between NPE and NAE is fairly thin, anyway, and it might ultimately not be fully worth the hassle, but I remember several 1E games where having a half dozen little empires really became a pain during the Diplomacy Phase and wanted to be proactive about it in 2E.

Until you get a success, both sides are technically in a non-intercourse treaty with the other.


Correct. I borrowed a page from the old Starfire rules here because I felt that it would make the exploration and diplomatic elements of the game more interesting if you had to wait several turns to establish meaningful contact instead of instantaneously being able to start offering treaties. The "universal translator" solution to the problem is common in films and movies for obvious reasons (you kind of want your aliens to be able to talk to each other), but in a game like this it's nicer to encourage players to have to spend some time opening up lines of communication, even if that means stationing a frigate in a system where the opponent has units or colonies and just waiting for a breakthrough. I also would really like to have Diplomatic units and empires that excel at diplomacy via the custom race rules be viable later on down the road.

As for the relations, though i prefer to think of it as a shared opinion of each other, is a shared stat.


Correct, it's a shared stat. In practice so far it's much simpler than having two separate relationship values for each pairing as was the case in 1E. The culture modifiers from both empires provide enough back and forth off the base relationship value to add a bit of flexibility and tension to the relationship and keep things interesting.
"Touch not the pylons, for they are the messengers!"

User avatar
Tyrel Lohr
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
Posts: 1416
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 3:48 am
Location: Lusk, WY
Contact:

Re: 2nd Edition Playtest Report- Terran Commonwealth

Postby Tyrel Lohr » Fri Jun 01, 2012 9:43 pm

wminsing wrote:Finally got off my duff and ran a few more turns.


Glad to see I'm not the only one that got derailed by the holiday weekend :)

I'm not going to post the Arcuturan turns until they hit interstellar development level, right now their turn sheets are a pretty boring build-up and tech-up routine.


The minor powers really do have such simple turn orders that sometimes you get complacent and just leave them sitting there for turns on end. I know I used to do that in campaigns where I had a low tech empire that could do nothing but purchase tech points. Unless something happened to them you could just safely leave them be and catch them up after the fact. Luckily the Arcturan Pentarchy is just large enough to be a bit more engaging.

Diplomatic Affairs: Terran Commonwealth and Arcturan Pentarchy attempting to establish contact. Roll = 10, Partial Communications +1 to future rolls


Did the Terran Commonwealth leave a ship behind in Arcturus to continue the communication attempts with the Pentarchy? I need to make it more explicit (it's almost a throwaway line right now, after re-reading), but an empire must have assets in the same system as an opponent's own units or colonies to continue communication attempts. This can be two scout ships sitting in the same location or one empire's ships in a system that contains the other's colony.

Intelligence Missions:
Propaganda: Counter Insurgency from Sol to Lalande
Difficulty 3 + 1 jump = 4, 3 agents / 4 = 75% chance of success
Roll = 75, Success! +1 Morale (System is now in Good Order)


Just a quick check: Did you roll a D10 against mission difficulty (in this case 3 for a Counter Insurgency) to see if they were killed/captured in the attempt? This is the balancing factor for using large numbers of spies to get better mission success chances.

Also, Will, are you finding the spy costs (both construction and maintenance) to be too high or do they seem about right? The 1 EP per turn for each spy seems a bit overwhelming considering the number of military units you can maintain for that same cost, but on the other hand I don't want spies to be too cheap, either. It might be a case of giving them 5 MC and allowing them to be reserved and mothballed like military units. Reserve spies would provide a defensive bonus but can't be used offensive, mothballed wouldn't do anything but would still be there until ready.

Diplomatic Affairs: Terran Commonwealth and Arcturan Pentarchy attempting to establish contact. Roll = 12 + 1 , Communications Established!


Woo hoo! Even without the previous success you would have still established communications this turn. That's a good bit of luck!

wminsing wrote:The embarrassment of Terran riches continues. Wolf 359 is a way around the singularity wall AND an excellent colonization site to boot. 150 EP to plant the flag but I think the Terrans will grab this colony as soon as they can. I'm going to pull the 2nd exploration constellation back to Altair for now to explore the two remaining jump lanes down there, I want to try to push the frontier out 3 jumps in all directions if I can before another empire emerges.


The nice thing about those high RAW systems with good CAP is that even though you'll need farming worlds to feed them they'll be able to generate a huge amount of income for your empire once they're fully developed. Being a way around the shield wall is just an additional perk.

Also finally got Lalande out of Rebellion, though I still haven't re-integrated the colony yet.


Now you just need to increase the system's Census, have it fail an integration roll spectacularly (as per the previous table), and then get to fight the rebels again. Lalande shall rise again!

So end of the second year, the Terran Commonwealth is still sitting pretty. What will the new year bring though? (An emerging empire, I expect)


Famous last words, indeed!

wminsing wrote:So apparently I am developing physic powers, as the very next turn I have indeed had an empire emerge. The rules on how to conduct pre-contact exploration could use a little fleshing out but overall I think I muddled through and generated the new empire. A couple of notes/questions from this process.


I'll look at what you went through and try to figure out ways to expand them. In various incarnations those rules have ended up being overly long and overkill for most situations, but we'll walkthrough what you did and then I'll see what we can come up with to make it easier to resolve in the future (or see how many errors I left in from previous drafts!).

1) Pre-contact exploration. I house-ruled that an emerging empire would get a +1 to all rolls on the chart for every 4 systems the most widely-explored empire had. Topping out at 4 systems explored without a 'roll again' seemed like it would produce very small empires on the average. For a multi-player game not so bad, but I fear that for a single player campaign it would produce empires only fit to be steam rolled fairly quickly. I'd consider changing the chart to a % value of the most widely-explored empire. As it was the new empire got to explore 6 systems, and had colonies in 4 of them.


I like the modifier based on the size of the largest player empire, although over time this would lead to fewer small emerging empires being found. That's not really that big of a complaint, though, because if you're a 20 system empire you really don't want to be finding 2 system empires here or there that aren't ever going to be a threat. Maybe make it a +1 per 5 systems controlled based on the largest player empire? That isn't "explored" but actually colonized and controlled, which I think is a better bellwether was you could explore a lot of systems but still not have hardly any of them colonized.

I do agree that it should probably be a percentage chart here, after hearing your arguments. I use percentage elsewhere, and it would be fairly reasonable to use the same 10% - 200% range of values, rounding the number of systems up in all cases.

2) I did have to fudge a few system generation rolls to make sure the new empire didn't run out of jump lanes before they got to their number of explored systems. As mentioned above, some more detail here would be good.


Aye, this also stems from me reducing the number of jump lanes across the board and I think it might have ended up making most systems have too few jump lanes. What kind of systems did you end up running into along the way?

3) I just placed their home system in a location that felt right to me, as placing them in the most important system would have created a fairly marginal home system. As it was the 'free' boost to 4 cap/raw/bio made a marginal system a good one and left the other three potential colony sites in pretty good shape.


That's something worth noting in the rules, that you can decide for yourself which system looks like the best candidate. Before I was offering a +2 bonus to CAP, RAW, BIO but ultimately removed that because it wasn't assuring that empires could feed themselves after the bump up to 3 food per Census on the low end and on the high end you were ending up with hilariously good home systems that were just begging for someone to come invade them.

If food consumption drops back down to 2 per Census I'd be tempted to go back to the flat +2 bonus, though, just because with the other changes to sysgen you're still probably going to end up with an average of 4 for each resource.

4) I also had to fudge their facilities some, as otherwise they would be in a starvation situation right at the start. So I spotted them an extra orbital farm so they were at least breaking even. Some guidance on how to handle these situations (rolled too many high Census colonies and not enough BIO) would also be good.


Point taken. The best bet is probably going to end up being to reduce Census and provide bonus economic points (10 x Census removed?) that the empire can use to purchase extra facilities or units at the start of the game.

5) On a totally different tangent I decided to give them a carrier as a starting unit, and I'm not sure the current rules on the carrier trait (1 carrier = 1 BC of flights) makes sense.


The major difference between the carrier/fighter and all warship fleets is that the carrier/fighter fleet forces the enemy to split their PD between increasing their own formations and firing on the flights. Splitting fire like this makes a fleet easier to hit/damage and should make up for the firepower disparity. That and a carrier really shouldn't be roaming around on its own, and it should have enough escorts to keep it insulated against an attack.

If I min/max, make the carrier 1/0/0 with Carrier(14), and max the fighters out to 7 BC and give them 3/9/2 then I get an aggregate of 5/18/4 which gives me more firepower than the warships but I don't think this combination will survive very long (pop the carrier and the flights are lost at the end of combat if I understand the rules right).


Correct, low DV ships (especially low DV carriers) are a bad idea. The only time a 1 DV carrier would make sense is if you were building a super-cheap escort carrier that you hoped to field in insane numbers. A 2 BC, 1/0/0, Carrier 1, FTL 1 would be a good example. They bring 1 x 1 BC flight into the fray and you aren't too worried when you lose the carrier or the flight. I would personally probably bump this to 3 BC, 2/0/0, Carrier 2, FTL 1 if I wasn't worried about doubling the construction time (2 turns vs. 1 turn).

I might just not be designing the fighters with the right mindset either. I mean, 1 rating of carrier = 1 BC of unit = 2 MU of fighting power and that seems to be a mathematically winning formula.


The reason I went the direction I have with flights is to encourage players to build smaller flights. They are highly efficient from a MU perspective, but costlier than traditional warships (carrier+fighter combo costs more to build/maintain) and more vulnerable to damage (carrier death = flight death, unless you have somewhere else to base the flights). The advantage to carrier warfare is that you can split the enemy's PD fire and flights are easier to replace as even your frontier colonies without Shipyards can still build them if they've got the industrial capacity. A carrier fleet that loses most of its flights can just move to a friendly colony to pickup more flights or have freighters deliver them new flights and they're back up to full combat capabilities. Meanwhile, a crippled warship squadron has to rely on field repair units or move back to shipyards for repairs.

You're basically paying a high economic cost in return for extra versatility. As in the modern world, only the largest powers are likely to field large carriers or carrier heavy fleets because of the cost aspect. I think most smaller empires in this game will have to rely on escort or light carriers for fighter support, unless they want to go whole hog and just throw everything into carriers.

Another thing to consider in relation to the "1 rating of carrier = 1 BC of unit = 2 MU of fighting power" equation is that how much DV a unit has really determines how powerful it is because combat factors halve when a unit is crippled (round up). The cheap units like fighters or frigates start out with a good concentration of firepower, but their lower DV values mean that their effectiveness is blunted faster. Rounding up combat factors after a unit is crippled does benefit 1 AS/PD units, but at the same time these units aren't very effective in the first place, and even if fielded in large numbers they are likely to be blown away pretty fast in combat.

It'll be interesting to see how large your emerging empire is, and what tech level it's starting at. Given the Commonwealth is only TL 1, I doubt that it's probably too much higher. I'm tempted to add a minimum bonus to some of the TL results on that chart (+1 for 125%, +2 for 150%, +3 for 175%, +4 for 200%) just to add some extra variety for the early game. That would have put the Kishok at TL 5 at first contact. I may still end up going back and doing that and seeing how it affects the units.
"Touch not the pylons, for they are the messengers!"

wminsing
Commander
Commander
Posts: 158
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 3:06 pm
Contact:

Re: 2nd Edition Playtest Report- Terran Commonwealth

Postby wminsing » Fri Jun 01, 2012 11:02 pm

Thanks for all of the answers!

The only caveat with this rule resolution is that a unit couldn't travel A => B => C and drop cargo off in A or B, as it would have to end its movement in the system where it planned on offloading the cargo.


All of my trasports are FTL 1 right now so the difference is trivial. I'll use this rule from here on out. I agree putting in the military chapter makes the most sense.

1) The 2D6 integration roll really should still be a table like exploration. Here's the missing table:


Ok, I didn't reintegrate until the last turn so I'll just assume the integration did not happen; makes no practical difference at this point. I think the rule as is makes sense though- I agree with the premise.

3a) I've been playtesting a bit in deciding whether or not to keep Information age around. Right now the mass modifier split looks like this:


Aha, I can re-work the units for the Arcturans without too much of a problem, I just designed one general purpose ground unit for them.

3b) Correct, it's infrastructure that you can assign as you like between the different forms of colonial infrastructure. It's not much, but it gives them enough to get started.

3c) It looks like a system income of 9 EP per turn, so that would make it a NAE. The threshold is set at 15 EP per turn right now, but it might need to go back down to 10 eventually.


Ok, did that right then. 9 EP per turn is correct, right now they are investing all that they can in tech and waiting for the chance for an infrastructure upgrade of some kind.

That does bring up one thing that I'm still working on but is in the newest draft: diplomatic missions. Right now the cost I'm using is 5 x Distance between nearest capitals. You then roll on a table for effect. The current slate of diplomatic missions is limited to improving relations (bonus to relationship), degrading relations (penalty to relationship), and influencing relations (modify the target's relationship with another power towards the empire's own relationship value with that power). For the first and last I plan on giving a +1 per 5 bonus for having Diplomatic units at the target capital. For the degrading option that doesn't make a lot of sense, though.


Cool! I appreciate having the ability to actively influence the relationship. I'll try this out at the recommended cost.

-Will
"Ships and sail proper for the heavenly air should be fashioned. Then there will also be people, who do not shrink from the dreary vastness of space."

-- Johannes Kepler, 1609

User avatar
Tyrel Lohr
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
Posts: 1416
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 3:48 am
Location: Lusk, WY
Contact:

Re: 2nd Edition Playtest Report- Terran Commonwealth

Postby Tyrel Lohr » Sat Jun 02, 2012 12:03 am

wminsing wrote:All of my trasports are FTL 1 right now so the difference is trivial. I'll use this rule from here on out. I agree putting in the military chapter makes the most sense.


Yeah, the issue only comes up once you have faster ships that can zip all across the galaxy. Which is the other reason I made FTL so hugely expensive: there has to be a trade off for that strategic movement advantage.

Ok, I didn't reintegrate until the last turn so I'll just assume the integration did not happen; makes no practical difference at this point. I think the rule as is makes sense though- I agree with the premise.


The Lalandean miners aren't exactly in a position to raise much of a fuss anyway. Their rebellion is the definition of impotent rage.

Aha, I can re-work the units for the Arcturans without too much of a problem, I just designed one general purpose ground unit for them.


That's usually all I do for little empires like that, too. You could build them a little Atmospheric flight on a lark if you really wanted to, but it would be of limited utility to them as it could only be included in ground combat.

Cool! I appreciate having the ability to actively influence the relationship. I'll try this out at the recommended cost.


The range-based nature of the cost makes it cheaper for an empire to affect its relationship with closer neighbors because, realistically, an empire isn't going to care about its relationship with an empire that is located on the high frontier that it really doesn't have any close proximity to. Its next-door neighbors are a different thing altogether. The Nova Solar Federation has paid for one diplomatic mission to Filos Prime to try and improve relations, and as I said the Filosi are trying to build tension with the Attican Baronies (an Industrial power they found in a strategic border system).

I'm also looking at reintroducing treaty delays, but as a simple "treaty acceptance is halved for 10 turns after a failed treaty offer" instead of the constant counter that we had before. It might not end up working out, at which point I'll just crib the old 1E mechanic, but it's something I'm actively testing right now.
"Touch not the pylons, for they are the messengers!"

wminsing
Commander
Commander
Posts: 158
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 3:06 pm
Contact:

Re: 2nd Edition Playtest Report- Terran Commonwealth

Postby wminsing » Sat Jun 02, 2012 2:34 pm

Glad to see I'm not the only one that got derailed by the holiday weekend


I also had a busier than anticipated week at work for the first few days, that was a one-two punch!

The minor powers really do have such simple turn orders that sometimes you get complacent and just leave them sitting there for turns on end. I know I used to do that in campaigns where I had a low tech empire that could do nothing but purchase tech points. Unless something happened to them you could just safely leave them be and catch them up after the fact. Luckily the Arcturan Pentarchy is just large enough to be a bit more engaging.


Yep, once they've build up enough they can move from being a nobody to at least a bit player. I'm debating whether the Terrans would let them go full on towards interstellar status or try to explore and colonize around them to 'contain' them later (which might lead to future conflict).

Did the Terran Commonwealth leave a ship behind in Arcturus to continue the communication attempts with the Pentarchy? I need to make it more explicit (it's almost a throwaway line right now, after re-reading), but an empire must have assets in the same system as an opponent's own units or colonies to continue communication attempts. This can be two scout ships sitting in the same location or one empire's ships in a system that contains the other's colony.


Ack, they did not! Missed that this was a requirement. I will undo the established communications and get a another ship over there to work on it (though it might be a few turns). Do I still check for raising/lowering relations for two powers that have no communications?

Just a quick check: Did you roll a D10 against mission difficulty (in this case 3 for a Counter Insurgency) to see if they were killed/captured in the attempt? This is the balancing factor for using large numbers of spies to get better mission success chances.


I did not (forgot to the first time and wasn't sure if we had decided that successful missions needed a roll for the second). I will roll for spy loses here on out.

Also, Will, are you finding the spy costs (both construction and maintenance) to be too high or do they seem about right?


Right now they feel fine; I think spies should be expensive to prevent intelligence mission spamming. Now that I have another power with it's own spies we'll see how it goes.

Now you just need to increase the system's Census, have it fail an integration roll spectacularly (as per the previous table), and then get to fight the rebels again. Lalande shall rise again!


Haha, I'm currently debating if the Commonwealth will EVER open up Lalande for general colonization now! Though after the spy mission Lalande also got a +1 morale boost on it's own, so maybe the issues that spurred the miners to revolt have been resolved satisfactorily. :wink:

I'll look at what you went through and try to figure out ways to expand them.


I'll post the walkthrough sometime this weekend and some more detailed questions (and how I resolved them).

I do agree that it should probably be a percentage chart here, after hearing your arguments. I use percentage elsewhere, and it would be fairly reasonable to use the same 10% - 200% range of values, rounding the number of systems up in all cases.


Yep, I was looking at the TL chart when I made that suggestion- a similar chart for explored systems would make a lot of sense. It could be a pain for a GM if it comes up late in an exploration style campaign and they need to generate 30-40 new systems in a single swoop though.

Aye, this also stems from me reducing the number of jump lanes across the board and I think it might have ended up making most systems have too few jump lanes. What kind of systems did you end up running into along the way?


Part of it was bad luck on the type of systems. The in first three systems two were class V that I rolled badly for on the # of jump lanes and I ended up with a VII White Dwarf that should have only had 1 jump lane on the table as I rolled it, but already had 3 jumps leading to it from already explored systems per the map. I know I 'gave' it an extra jump lane there so there was an unexplored outlet. I later rolled a class 1 Giant and two class IV's I think and ended up ok in the later stages.

Point taken. The best bet is probably going to end up being to reduce Census and provide bonus economic points (10 x Census removed?) that the empire can use to purchase extra facilities or units at the start of the game.


That would also be a good compromise, though I'd consider making it higher (25 x Census?). Losing Census directly impacts future economic growth.

The major difference between the carrier/fighter and all warship fleets is that the carrier/fighter fleet forces the enemy to split their PD between increasing their own formations and firing on the flights.


Do'h, I had managed to completely forget that flights were targeted with PD, not AS. That goes a long towards making them more effective for their cost. Thanks for the pointers!

flights are easier to replace as even your frontier colonies without Shipyards can still build them if they've got the industrial capacity


Just to check, just this apply just to atmospheric flights or can any flight be built at a colony without a shipyard?

-Will
"Ships and sail proper for the heavenly air should be fashioned. Then there will also be people, who do not shrink from the dreary vastness of space."

-- Johannes Kepler, 1609

User avatar
Tyrel Lohr
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
Posts: 1416
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 3:48 am
Location: Lusk, WY
Contact:

Re: 2nd Edition Playtest Report- Terran Commonwealth

Postby Tyrel Lohr » Sat Jun 02, 2012 5:13 pm

wminsing wrote:Yep, once they've build up enough they can move from being a nobody to at least a bit player. I'm debating whether the Terrans would let them go full on towards interstellar status or try to explore and colonize around them to 'contain' them later (which might lead to future conflict).


The one thing that I've found that I need to make a note about is that there is no reason why a pre-Interplanetary power would interfere with supply lines, and I think the rule for Contested systems needs updated to reflect that. That way the Industrial home systems would never be "contested", per se, and you could continue to trace supply through the systems. Our interstellar empires could then expand through these low tech powers and just jump right over them and leave them alone if we wanted. It'd be nicer to become their friends and make them into protectorates/vassals, but they definitely shouldn't interfere with exploration because there's no way for them to bother a spacefaring power.

Ack, they did not! Missed that this was a requirement. I will undo the established communications and get a another ship over there to work on it (though it might be a few turns). Do I still check for raising/lowering relations for two powers that have no communications?


You still check for diplomatic shifts because the two empires could still decide to go to war with the other power if their opinion of them falls sufficiently before communications are established. However, without any means of communicating that declaration, the aggressor would just have to let their enemy know their intentions by opening fire on them and blowing them right out of the sky. That tends to get the point across pretty clearly.

I did not (forgot to the first time and wasn't sure if we had decided that successful missions needed a roll for the second). I will roll for spy loses here on out.


I think it's pretty important to have spies be threatened by every mission. That puts a potential cost on every mission that player performs. The chance of losing spies on an Espionage: System mission is very low (difficulty 1, so 10% chance of being killed per spy), but the chance goes up from there.

Right now they feel fine; I think spies should be expensive to prevent intelligence mission spamming. Now that I have another power with it's own spies we'll see how it goes.


Okay, we'll keep on testing and see what happens. As you said, trying to combat intel spamming is a major goal here. I had a set of intel rules that I used late last year where there was no reason to not spam intel missions all the time and it became a huge logistical headache.

Haha, I'm currently debating if the Commonwealth will EVER open up Lalande for general colonization now! Though after the spy mission Lalande also got a +1 morale boost on it's own, so maybe the issues that spurred the miners to revolt have been resolved satisfactorily. :wink:


I'm sure the miners are going to be happy now that your troops have their boots on their necks and are evidently feeling much better about themselves. Just increase the population, give them some infrastructure... what's the worst that could happen?

:twisted:

Yep, I was looking at the TL chart when I made that suggestion- a similar chart for explored systems would make a lot of sense. It could be a pain for a GM if it comes up late in an exploration style campaign and they need to generate 30-40 new systems in a single swoop though.


By that point in the game I would hope that there would be enough empires in the game exploring that the emerging empires chance would stay hovering below 5% most of the time and the chance of finding a new empire would be relatively low. But if you did find an empire that large... ouch... it would probably be a game-ending situation where you'd just handwave it away, unless you were looking to add a new big bad to your campaign to stomp everyone else into dust.

Part of it was bad luck on the type of systems. The in first three systems two were class V that I rolled badly for on the # of jump lanes and I ended up with a VII White Dwarf that should have only had 1 jump lane on the table as I rolled it, but already had 3 jumps leading to it from already explored systems per the map. I know I 'gave' it an extra jump lane there so there was an unexplored outlet. I later rolled a class 1 Giant and two class IV's I think and ended up ok in the later stages.


It's probably somewhat unfair that I have class VI sub dwarfs and class VII white dwarfs horrible jump lane chances, but it fit the pattern that I was aiming for in correlating jump lanes to lumonsity (star size). It does mean that white dwarfs tend to be dead end stars without any outlets, except in cases such as yours where it already had quite a few jump lanes already connecting to it.

I do need to add a note to the exploration rules if there isn't already one about adding extra jump lanes if you think it's necessary, especially in situations such as the one above where you end up without any outlets. It's sometimes interesting to have an empire stuck in a cul de sac without any other expansion options, but it's not any fun if it cuts off an entire section of your campaign map.

That would also be a good compromise, though I'd consider making it higher (25 x Census?). Losing Census directly impacts future economic growth.


25 x Census would give them a considerable boost, and you're right that it probably would be more commensurate with their short-term economic loss from having fewer Census. I would worry a bit if the player ended up having multiple Census losses in the same system, however, as then the player could end up with too many extra economic points. For example, a system with 6 CAP and a 8 CEN colony would (at 10x) get 10 x 8 + 10 x 7 = 150 EP. At 25x, that would increase to 25 x 8 + 25 x 7 = 375 EP. That would be a huge number of economic points, and probably a bit overkill after actually running the numbers. It would be enough to field a huge warfleet bent on conquering the rest of the galaxy, though.

Do'h, I had managed to completely forget that flights were targeted with PD, not AS. That goes a long towards making them more effective for their cost. Thanks for the pointers!


That is the major advantage of flights right now (splitting PD fire). It ends up working pretty well, because the flights themselves aren't necessarily all that powerful, given their size, but their presence on the battlefield can weaken enemy formations just enough to allow the attacker to get some good hits in before the flights or their carriers are taken out of the fight.

Just to check, just this apply just to atmospheric flights or can any flight be built at a colony without a shipyard?


Flights can be built in any system with industrial capacity. Shipyards are only required to build/repair non-atmospheric starships. Any of your colonies can build flights, although planetary basing is limited to atmospheric flights (non-atmospheric flights are just crated and stored as cargo). A Fighter Garrison facility expands planetary basing and does allow non-atmospheric flights to be fielded in the system, however.
"Touch not the pylons, for they are the messengers!"

wminsing
Commander
Commander
Posts: 158
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 3:06 pm
Contact:

Re: 2nd Edition Playtest Report- Terran Commonwealth

Postby wminsing » Mon Jun 04, 2012 2:32 pm

Ok, a quick update on the emerging empire, I'll list systems and maps first and then explain how I went about it.

Systems:

Ross 128- Class K IV Sub-giant Single Star System:
Carrying Capacity 5, Raw 3, Bio 2
3 Jump Lanes
Wolf 359[5]
The Vortex[4]
Van Maanen’s Star[3]

Van Maanen’s Star- Class D VII White Dwarf Multiple Star System:
Carrying Capacity 1, Raw 1, Bio 1
4 Jump Lanes
Ross 128[6]
The Vortex[5]
Scylla[4]
Helotrix[3]

Helotrix- Class K IV Sub Giant Single Star System:
Carrying Capacity 6, Raw 3, Bio 3
3 Jump Lanes
Van Maanen’s Star[6]
Scylla[5]
Procyon[1]

Procyon- Class A I Super Giant Binary Star System:
Carrying Capacity 5, Raw 4, Bio 0, Trade Resource
4 Jump Lanes
Helotrix[4]
Sarran[3]
Geidi Prime[2]
Unexplored[1]

Geidi Prime- Class G V Main Sequence Multiple Star System:
Carrying Capacity 7, Raw 4, Bio 4
3 Jump Lanes
Procyon[5]
Sarran[6]
Unexplored[1]

Sarran- Class F V Main Sequence Binary Star System:
Carrying Capacity 5, Raw 4, Bio 1
2 Jump Lanes
Geidi Prime[1]
Procyon[6]

Map:

Screen Shot 2012-06-04 at 10.05.29 AM.png
Screen Shot 2012-06-04 at 10.05.29 AM.png (61.4 KiB) Viewed 3035 times


So to start I rolled randomly for all of the unexplored jump lanes as a point of origin. Unluckily for the new guys, they jumped straight into The Vortex. I generated the system they came from, and it had only one outlet down in direction #3. I generated that system, and that was the point where I had to 'cheat', as it turned out to be a White Dwarf that should have had no new jump lanes. I added an extra in a random direction which continued to skirt the Black Holes down to Helotrix, which was the first decent system. Just one additional jump lane, which I followed and generated Procyon. This system finally had an abundance of jump lanes, though now I was confused about which one to explore next. I rolled off for it, generated Geidi Prime, and again rolled randomly and generated Sarran. Here I decided to spot them an extra explored lane back up to Procyon to create a somewhat more sensible exploration pattern. Other then the aforementioned Bio problems, the Geidi Empire is economically in pretty good shape. I rolled 4 colonized systems, a major colony each at Geidi Prime (which I designated the homeworld) and Helotrix, a colony at Procyon and an outpost at Sarran. They actually have more census than the Terrans, but they are concentrated in only a few systems. Their next goal will probably be to explore off from Geidi Prime and Procyon hoping for a high BIO system.

Also, for First Contact War rolls, do you add the aggressiveness of both races together, take the highest, or what?

-Will
"Ships and sail proper for the heavenly air should be fashioned. Then there will also be people, who do not shrink from the dreary vastness of space."

-- Johannes Kepler, 1609


Return to “Second Edition Development”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest