New VBAM Unit Traits

Playtesting & Rules Development
User avatar
murtalianconfederacy
Captain
Captain
Posts: 363
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Aboard the MCS Bavoralkin

Re: New VBAM Unit Traits

Post by murtalianconfederacy »

Tyrel Lohr wrote:Assault (X): Instead of having the rating of an Assault ship be based on maintenance divisions, I have started just assigning Assault ships an Assault Rating. One ground unit requires 10 Assault Rating to be transported/attack from Assault ships (or 5 for Marines/Compact ground units). This helps to allow source designers to differentiate capabilities between Assault ships. It also helps when trying to convert ships over from other games that give troop numbers, such as the old FASA Star Trek game.
I like this idea, because it seems stupid that a hull 20 assault vessel can only carry the same number as troops as a hull 5 assault vessel...
Not every laser dot has a loaded gun at the end of it
User avatar
Charles Lewis
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 937
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 3:58 am
Location: Des Moines, IA
Contact:

Post by Charles Lewis »

Tyrel Lohr wrote:With Supply, I have taken to splitting it into Collier (resupply), Cargo (cargo movement), and Field Repair (field repair).
<smacks head> D'oh! I hadn't even considered that possibility! I'm going to have to tweak my Voidstriker conversions and my take on Endurance (the proper name, thank you very much :wink:). It'll be easy, too, since Voidstriker differentiates between hull space devoted to Fuel bunkerage and fuel space devoted to Cargo.
'Fear God and dread nought'
Coat of Arms motto of Baron Fisher, of Kilverstone
User avatar
Tyrel Lohr
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
Posts: 1466
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 3:48 am
Location: Lusk, WY
Contact:

Post by Tyrel Lohr »

Rainer wrote:Tyrel, what (if anything) will happen with all the unit traits in the CSCR 2.0 revision?
Since this is "rules by committee" I can't say for certain, as we are still knee-deep in formation level discussions right now (but moving closer), but I would champion breaking out the traits into separate functions. The original functions can be maintained for legacy support, or as an additional option for a generalized vessel, but I do prefer breaking out the functions as separate traits.

As for some of the revised traits, if they prove popular enough I would really like to see them added to the CSCR 2.0 document.
User avatar
mwaschak
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 854
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 3:43 am
Location: The data mines of VBAM
Contact:

Post by mwaschak »

Tyrel Lohr wrote:
Rainer wrote:Tyrel, what (if anything) will happen with all the unit traits in the CSCR 2.0 revision?
as we are still knee-deep in formation level discussions right now (but moving closer)
BTW, I will be posting my tests on that in the next day or so.

-Jay
User avatar
Rainer
Commander
Commander
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2007 6:48 am

Post by Rainer »

Tyrel Lohr wrote:
Rainer wrote:Tyrel, what (if anything) will happen with all the unit traits in the CSCR 2.0 revision?
Since this is "rules by committee" I can't say for certain, as we are still knee-deep in formation level discussions right now (but moving closer), but I would champion breaking out the traits into separate functions. The original functions can be maintained for legacy support, or as an additional option for a generalized vessel, but I do prefer breaking out the functions as separate traits.

As for some of the revised traits, if they prove popular enough I would really like to see them added to the CSCR 2.0 document.
I am looking forward to seing what you will come up with.
User avatar
Emiricol
Captain
Captain
Posts: 267
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2007 2:09 am
Location: Near Seattle
Contact:

Post by Emiricol »

mwaschak wrote:
Tyrel Lohr wrote:
Rainer wrote:Tyrel, what (if anything) will happen with all the unit traits in the CSCR 2.0 revision?
as we are still knee-deep in formation level discussions right now (but moving closer)
BTW, I will be posting my tests on that in the next day or so.

-Jay
So, where are they? :D
User avatar
Emiricol
Captain
Captain
Posts: 267
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2007 2:09 am
Location: Near Seattle
Contact:

Post by Emiricol »

Tyrel Lohr wrote:Although not historically accurate, Pocket does sound much better 8)

In Starmada X terms (for your campaign), I would say the Pocket trait would halve the number of Hull boxes a unit has (rounding fractions up). So a Hull 5 Pocket warships would have Hull 3 for purposes of SX.

Alternatively, and this would actually cover Hull 1 Pockets, you could just add 2-3 more Hull hits to the hit chart -- I think having all hits be Hull hits would probably be appropriate for such ships. They are going to blow up easily, but they are cheaper and can cram more equipment in than normally would be possible for the same cost.
Thanks Tyrel, for the ideas. Here's what I added to the next version of the campaign guide:
2.2.6.3 Pocket Ships
Technically “war hulled”, the term Pocket Ship is what has stuck with the populace and media.

This trait is a Micro research item. Units with this trait do not cripple; they are simply destroyed when they take their DV in damage. In return, the ships are comparatively cheaper to build/maintain. Decrease the ship cost to 2/3 normal (rounding up) and increase the maintenance divisor by 50% (round up).

This ability will allow minor powers to field slightly more powerful warships, with the downside that they have little survivability.

In Starmada X terms, the Pocket trait halves the number of Hull boxes a unit has (rounding fractions up). So a Hull 5 Pocket ship would have Hull 3 in Starmada.

Ships must be Destroyer size or larger (5+ hull size) to get this trait. It may not be applied to space stations.

Thanks, Tyrel! Neat idea.
mriddle
Commander
Commander
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 11:12 am
Location: Charlotte, NC

Post by mriddle »

Tyrel Lohr wrote:
Another ability I have been trying to replicate, based on the Arachnid ships from In Death Ground, is the short range plasma weapons. A good concise name for the trait escapes me, though Short Ranged or Point Blank are contenders. With this trait, the ship would receive an AS bonus so long as it isn't placed into a formation bonus. This represents the extremely powerful but short ranged plasma weapons some of the Bug dreadnoughts were equipped with.
What about short ranged weapons fire last..
change the combat sequence..
ships with Long Range fire and resolve
Ships with out Long or Short fire and resolve
ships with Short Range fire and resolve
mriddle
Commander
Commander
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 11:12 am
Location: Charlotte, NC

Post by mriddle »

Tyrel Lohr wrote:I am currently grinding through The Shiva Option, but still have 300 pages to go (oi!).


Getting back on topic, another new trait I have been playing around with is Weak Hulled (there has to be a better name for this one). Units with this trait do not cripple; they are simply destroyed when they take their DV in damage. In return, the ships are comparatively cheaper to build/maintain. For a "hard and fast" rule, maybe decrease the ship cost to 2/3 normal (rounding up) and increase the maintenance divisor by 50% (round up). I am hoping that this ability will be able to be used to allow minor powers to field slightly more powerful warships, with the downside that they have little to no survivability.
Why is this better than halving the DV of the ship ?
User avatar
Charles Lewis
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 937
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 3:58 am
Location: Des Moines, IA
Contact:

Post by Charles Lewis »

mriddle wrote:
Tyrel Lohr wrote:
Another ability I have been trying to replicate, based on the Arachnid ships from In Death Ground, is the short range plasma weapons. A good concise name for the trait escapes me, though Short Ranged or Point Blank are contenders. With this trait, the ship would receive an AS bonus so long as it isn't placed into a formation bonus. This represents the extremely powerful but short ranged plasma weapons some of the Bug dreadnoughts were equipped with.
What about short ranged weapons fire last..
change the combat sequence..
ships with Long Range fire and resolve
Ships with out Long or Short fire and resolve
ships with Short Range fire and resolve
Hmmmm....that could work with minimal overhead.
'Fear God and dread nought'
Coat of Arms motto of Baron Fisher, of Kilverstone
User avatar
Charles Lewis
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 937
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 3:58 am
Location: Des Moines, IA
Contact:

Post by Charles Lewis »

mriddle wrote:
Tyrel Lohr wrote:I am currently grinding through The Shiva Option, but still have 300 pages to go (oi!).


Getting back on topic, another new trait I have been playing around with is Weak Hulled (there has to be a better name for this one). Units with this trait do not cripple; they are simply destroyed when they take their DV in damage. In return, the ships are comparatively cheaper to build/maintain. For a "hard and fast" rule, maybe decrease the ship cost to 2/3 normal (rounding up) and increase the maintenance divisor by 50% (round up). I am hoping that this ability will be able to be used to allow minor powers to field slightly more powerful warships, with the downside that they have little to no survivability.
Why is this better than halving the DV of the ship ?
It's a matter of effect. A ship with 4 DV and no ability to cripple is fully effective until it takes 4 damage - then poof. A ship with 2 DV and the ability to cripple stays around just a long, but at half effectiveness once it has taken 2 damage.

It may seem minor, but it does have an impact on the overall firepower of a fleet.
'Fear God and dread nought'
Coat of Arms motto of Baron Fisher, of Kilverstone
nimrodd
Commander
Commander
Posts: 135
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 1:59 am
Location: DFW, TX

Post by nimrodd »

Emiricol wrote:
2.2.6.3 Pocket Ships
Technically “war hulled”, the term Pocket Ship is what has stuck with the populace and media.

This trait is a Micro research item. Units with this trait do not cripple; they are simply destroyed when they take their DV in damage. In return, the ships are comparatively cheaper to build/maintain. Decrease the ship cost to 2/3 normal (rounding up) and increase the maintenance divisor by 50% (round up).

This ability will allow minor powers to field slightly more powerful warships, with the downside that they have little survivability.

In Starmada X terms, the Pocket trait halves the number of Hull boxes a unit has (rounding fractions up). So a Hull 5 Pocket ship would have Hull 3 in Starmada.

Ships must be Destroyer size or larger (5+ hull size) to get this trait. It may not be applied to space stations.
Instead of halving the number of Hull Boxes in Starmada, I would double the number of Hull hits on the Damage Chart. This way there is no confusion about how big the ship is (i.e. is it a hull 5 or hull 3?). Instead of a hull hit on a 1,3 or 5, you will take a hull hit no matter what is rolled.

This even works with some of the alternate special abilities I seem to remember: strong hull and weak hull. Strong Hull only took hits on a 1 and 4, here you would take hits on a 1,2,4 & 5. Weak Hull normally took hits on 1,2,4 & 5, now it would take 1 hull hit on 2,3,5 & 6 and 2 hull hits on 1 & 4.
Jimmy Simpson
mriddle
Commander
Commander
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 11:12 am
Location: Charlotte, NC

Post by mriddle »

Charles Lewis wrote:
mriddle wrote:
Tyrel Lohr wrote:
Another ability I have been trying to replicate, based on the Arachnid ships from In Death Ground, is the short range plasma weapons. A good concise name for the trait escapes me, though Short Ranged or Point Blank are contenders. With this trait, the ship would receive an AS bonus so long as it isn't placed into a formation bonus. This represents the extremely powerful but short ranged plasma weapons some of the Bug dreadnoughts were equipped with.
What about short ranged weapons fire last..
change the combat sequence..
eships with Long Range fire and resolve
Ships with out Long or Short fire and resolve
ships with Short Range fire and resolve

Hmmmm....that could work with minimal overhead.
might need to track fractional damage points to avoid the round down 3 times..
User avatar
Iron Knight
Lieutanant Commander
Lieutanant Commander
Posts: 73
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 1:14 am
Location: Joplin, MO

Post by Iron Knight »

mriddle wrote:What about short ranged weapons fire last..
change the combat sequence..
ships with Long Range fire and resolve
Ships with out Long or Short fire and resolve
ships with Short Range fire and resolve
Very cool, I think I will test this a bit, but I think this would make a great addition to the game. ++good. Mind if I put this in my next game?
Garland

Prepare today for the demands of tomorrow. Plan your move. - Fortune Cookie Nov. 6
User avatar
Emiricol
Captain
Captain
Posts: 267
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2007 2:09 am
Location: Near Seattle
Contact:

Post by Emiricol »

nimrodd wrote:Instead of halving the number of Hull Boxes in Starmada, I would double the number of Hull hits on the Damage Chart. This way there is no confusion about how big the ship is (i.e. is it a hull 5 or hull 3?). Instead of a hull hit on a 1,3 or 5, you will take a hull hit no matter what is rolled.
Interesting, thanks for the idea
Post Reply