Register Register

Author Topic: Stupid project that will go nowhere; Let's rewrite warship combat for the table!  (Read 11632 times)

idea weenie

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3706
And could you imagine doing that with Battlemechs, ASF on the Altitude Map, and Combat Vehicles?

Warships would use the multiple items per critical slot because of their size.  Battlemechs, ASF, and CV aren't big enough

Charistoph

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2059
Warships would use the multiple items per critical slot because of their size.  Battlemechs, ASF, and CV aren't big enough

A Battlemech can have up to 12 different components in a section.  So if a Crit happens in Right Torso it could go Engine, Heat Sink, Jump Jet, Jump Jet, Autocannon, Ammo Bin.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

Charistoph's Painted Products of Mechanical Mayhem

idea weenie

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3706
A Battlemech can have up to 12 different components in a section.  So if a Crit happens in Right Torso it could go Engine, Heat Sink, Jump Jet, Jump Jet, Autocannon, Ammo Bin.

Ah.

Imagine you hit an enemy Warship through the Nose hexside.  Assuming the shot penetrates the armor then you look up the Nose crit table, roll 2d6 (maybe getting a '4'), and use that row to determine what could be hit.  If there are no items on that row remaining to be hit/damaged/destroyed in the Nose section, then the damage goes to Structural Integrity.

So you can have a larger ship with multiple weapon bays that will take longer to be destroyed, while a smaller ship might have only one weapon bay and be destroyed faster.  A civilian ship without any weapon bays would be destroyed fastest of all as there would be nothing else to absorb enemy firepower.

Charistoph

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2059
Imagine you hit an enemy Warship through the Nose hexside.  Assuming the shot penetrates the armor then you look up the Nose crit table, roll 2d6 (maybe getting a '4'), and use that row to determine what could be hit.  If there are no items on that row remaining to be hit/damaged/destroyed in the Nose section, then the damage goes to Structural Integrity.

So you can have a larger ship with multiple weapon bays that will take longer to be destroyed, while a smaller ship might have only one weapon bay and be destroyed faster.  A civilian ship without any weapon bays would be destroyed fastest of all as there would be nothing else to absorb enemy firepower.

I'm fine with Crits on a space with nothing in it doing additional Structure Damage.  I even floated a similar idea that one of my locals suggested as a possibility if the Endo-Steel slot was hit.  It didn't fly so well.

My comment was more a reference to how what was destroyed would be determined.  Having either party make that direct determination is bad, as it can be munchkined quite easily.  Having it go from left to right along a list is also bad, especially if someone can format that list themselves (it gets back to that direct determination thing).
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

Charistoph's Painted Products of Mechanical Mayhem

Cannonshop

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7912
I'm fine with Crits on a space with nothing in it doing additional Structure Damage.  I even floated a similar idea that one of my locals suggested as a possibility if the Endo-Steel slot was hit.  It didn't fly so well.

My comment was more a reference to how what was destroyed would be determined.  Having either party make that direct determination is bad, as it can be munchkined quite easily.  Having it go from left to right along a list is also bad, especially if someone can format that list themselves (it gets back to that direct determination thing).

I'm remarkably okay with replacing "empty" on the diagram with "structure damage"-but limiting it to a single point or low percentage of the weapon damage rating.

Yes, this WILL tend to make warship combat more lethal...it'll tend to make combat more lethal period.  Then again, we can probably find things to stuff in there-like heat sinks, crew quarters, or cargo.

On warships and dropships and other bigger items, we might even consider having a 'crew hit' in the space, but that would require tracking of some kind (possibly similar to the tables I suggested in an earlier post).

functionally I'd imagine it works like this:

Jeffrey's vessel has been hit by bob's salvo, and Bob rolled a threshold hit, followed by a roll of '8' determining one critical hit.  The hit location is in the nose, so the roll is to the nose critical hit table.

Bob rolls a '5' for the second row, and a '3'.  The only thing in this specific location is a 'crew' location.  He rolls on the Crew Damage table to determine the effect on Jeff's McKenna...

Crew and passenger damage table:

2D6

2: no effect
3: Engineering department, +4 penalty to all PSR checks related to thrust/overthrust, damage control offline
4: Engineering department, +3 Penalty to all PSR checks related to thrust/overthrust, damage control penalty plus five.
5: Engineering department, +2 penalty to all PSR checks related to thrust/overthrust, Damage control penalty plus three.
6: Gunnery Department, 1 bay of weapons offline for 1 turn (roll for location)
7:No effect
8: Gunnery department, 1 bay of weapons offline.
9: Sensors department, plus one to all gunnery checks, may be mitigated by successful damage control roll
10: Sensors department, plus TWO to all gunnery checks, may be mitigated by successful damage control roll
11: Senior officer out of commission, -2 to initiative for 1D6 turns
12: Roll two items from this list, Damage control offline[/i]

Jeff rolls a '9'.  all the weapons in that facing are +1 difficulty to gunnery checks.  Jeff can attempt a damage control check the next turn he's not being engaged to relieve this problem.

This represents several things: The transfer of shockwaves from the initial damage, and the spreading of fire, but it also represents internal splintering and shrapnel overcoming the 'blankets' in the hull.

If Jeff were a Clan player, that '9' would have no effect.  (Harjel table), if he were running vacuum operations, same.

See Here:https://bg.battletech.com/forums/fan-designs-rules/stupid-project-that-will-go-nowhere-let-s-rewrite-warship-combat-for-the-table!/msg1777083/#msg1777083


"If ye love wealth better than liberty,
the tranquility of servitude
better than the animating contest of freedom,
go home from us in peace.
We ask not your counsels or your arms.
Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you.
May your chains set lightly upon you,
and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."-Samuel Adams

Cannonshop

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7912
I'm going to back off on this for a while.  I said it would go 'nowhere' and I meant it-doing an actual tear-down-and-rebuild of the game system is a full time job, and I'm not going to get paid for it, there are other projects I'm interested in pursuing (including ones that don't pay) and at some point, i have to get back to the writing/editing process for my own stuff for (*what I hope) will be paying publication (okay, vanity press shit doesn't pay and I know it, but still...)

going back over the thread, I'm flying circles-I keep going back to earlier posts and ideas without remembering I already hit them, so it's time to back off, and let you guys tear things up a bit.
"If ye love wealth better than liberty,
the tranquility of servitude
better than the animating contest of freedom,
go home from us in peace.
We ask not your counsels or your arms.
Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you.
May your chains set lightly upon you,
and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."-Samuel Adams

idea weenie

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3706
I'm fine with Crits on a space with nothing in it doing additional Structure Damage.  I even floated a similar idea that one of my locals suggested as a possibility if the Endo-Steel slot was hit.  It didn't fly so well.

My comment was more a reference to how what was destroyed would be determined.  Having either party make that direct determination is bad, as it can be munchkined quite easily.  Having it go from left to right along a list is also bad, especially if someone can format that list themselves (it gets back to that direct determination thing).

I'd be happy with defender choosing which item gets destroyed, but only from among the items on that line.  So if the hit was on row 4:
4 - Weapon Bay / Communications system / Thrusters / Fuel tankage

Assume that all the weapon bays in the appropriate hex side are out of action, the Communications are down, thrusters are down, fuel tankage is empty, but there is a giant set of passenger quarters remaining.  Since Passenger Quarters are not one of the items listed on that row, then excess damage goes against Structural Integrity.

The key is that since none of these items are armor, damage to them should be very painful.  An idea might be where if you do 50 pts of standard damage to a weapon bay, then that bay loses 50 pts of damage dealing capacity for the rest of the game (ammo feeds damaged, coolant lines ruptured, barrels out of alignment, targeting systems melted).  For example a hit by a pair of Heavy Naval PPCs against a ship with four weapon bays each of 80 standard damage will result in the damaged ship now only having a single weapon bay doing 20 pts of standard damage (4*80 - 2*150 = 20).  The problem is when someone chooses to mount multiple bays of Small Lasers to serve as half-ton points of armor, since the Small Laser is ~22500 C-Bills per ton (compared to regular armor at 10k C-Bills/ton, and IIRC Ferro-fibrous is 20k C-Bills/ton).  Not sure how to prevent that yet, and using the Fire Control Tonnage increase does not feel righ tto me (as the designer could just say that the Small Lasers are not hooked up to anything).


On the other side, if you are firing at an opponent through a hex side, and the defender has to choose which weapon bay gets destroyed, the defender can only choose weapons based on what can fire through that hex side (i.e. if hit in the bow it cannot damage Aft arc weapons).  An optional rule could allow for the defender to decide that the damage hit through adjacent hexes, but doing double damage (so instead of taking out 300 standard points worth of weapons, it would take out 600 standard points of weapons).

DevianID

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1002
Any thoughts on my hit chart or fighter rules from the bottom of page 10?

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 26337
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Not everybody sees the same number of posts per page.  A post number would be more helpful.

DevianID

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1002
Quote
Not everybody sees the same number of posts per page.  A post number would be more helpful.
298/299

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 26337
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Thanks... those are the bottom of page 6 for me.  #298 would be easier to understand if it was laid out as a table.  #299 totally loses me with the dice mechanic.

DevianID

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1002
2: reactor
3: engines/thrust (kf boom/core in front)
4: doors/bays
5: right mobility (grav deck/dropship docking from left)
6: regular weapons
7: capital weapons
8: capital missiles+ams
9: left mobility (grav deck/dropship docking from right)
10: radiator
11: sensors (landing gear/jump sail in aft)
12: crew

As for fighters, instead of adding all the damage into 1 big number, or rolling 2d6 up to 30 times per fighter squadron, it's a mix of both.  So 1 die gets rolled that is added to a second die for every fighter in the squadron.  This makes 2d6 for each attack, just one of the d6 is the same for every roll.  Also, if you have multiple different fighters in the squadron, each type can get a different colored die: 1 shared yellow die for the squadron, 6 blue for the stingrays, 6 red for the corsairs, 6 black for the slayers.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 26337
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Ah, that makes much more sense, thanks!  That's an elegant way to account for both unit cohesion and individual pilots.  I like it!  :thumbsup:

As far as the table, I'm a little confused by the lack of symmetry between 3 and 11 results...  ???

You might also want to be a little more specific with your 7 result to better differentiate it from 8 (i.e., "non-missile capital weapons").

DevianID

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1002
The 3/11, being the second hardest to roll location, I put the hardest to damage things besides the reactor and crew in the middle of the ship.  In the rear, where you wouldn't have sensors, you instead hit the landing gear of dropship or the sail of jump/warships.  Likewise The front doesn't have a way to hit the engine so 3 hits the kf equipment instead.

The chart is a seat of pants, so you are right the naming is weak.  The focus of the chart was for maximizing gameplay, thus I only put results that might impact play; the 4 location dependant crits are a nod to the non-combat stuff while also serving to have a single hit chart instead of 1 per facing.  Each crit is significant since ships die really fast, so it's to try and be noticeable before being vaporized.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 26337
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
What I meant was the results are different when inverted.  I would have expected the "KF Boom/Core" to be the primary result of 11, for example.

DevianID

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1002
My thinking was that sensors are external, thus they are primary.  The kf core or kf boom would be buried inside the ship, thus only hit when the engines arnt in the way (front facing).  The kf stuff I put near the reactor (hit result 2) and the sensors I put near the crew (hit result 12).  Also kf stuff doesn't directly impact a tactical combat, thus it is 'narritive' damage and less important to hit.

Edit: For the locations mapping to armor, I'm of the opinion to use the alpha strike armor value for warships too instead of breaking down armor by facing.  I detailed why armor/30 is pretty much perfect for fighters in my giant posts 298+299.  For warships, they too benefit in much the same way.  Since they have 22/36 chance for the presenting facing to get hit, 61% of all damage goes to 1 location when hit from frying or rear, but armor is divided 6 ways so only 16% of armor is available for even distribution.  Thus giving 33% of your armor (from the /30) instead of 16% makes it more likely you survive getting 1 shotted due to how little damage spreads on the hit chart.  SI is already done this way for warships, so it makes sense armor follows suite.

Edit2: example.  The Bonaventure warship has 118 armor, and 21 in front.  So 39 armor with the /30, or 21 on its nose facing.  When attacked on the nose 35 damage will punch through the armor, as 35*.61 chance to hit nose is more than 21.  Thus armor /30 gives a bit more protection against being 1 shot at 39 instead of 35 effective armor soak before internals.  Obviously there are scenarios where the Bonaventure could take a little damage, rotate, take a little damage, rotate, ECT to get more that the 39 armor the /30 provides, but damage > armor in the game so 1 shot protection I rate higher than multiple turns of rotation protection.
« Last Edit: 14 November 2021, 18:20:48 by DevianID »

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 26337
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
That makes sense... it would probably be better off as two tables instead of one with slashes, then.

DevianID

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1002
Quote
That makes sense... it would probably be better off as two tables instead of one with slashes, then
so a dropship table with the kf boom, landing gear, and side docking collar, and a jumpwarship table with the kf drive, sail, and side grav decks?  Yeah in the clean final that makes sense.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 26337
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Definitely clearer that way!  :thumbsup:

DevianID

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1002
Unit selection:  Use alphastrike point costs for now.
For points up to 2000, 0-1 warships, 3-6 dropship maneuver elements (12 dropships maximum, 2 per element max), 0-6 fighter maneuver elements (120 fighters/smallcraft maximum, 20 per maneuver element max). 
For points up to 4000, 0-2 warships, 4-8 dropship maneuver elements (24 dropships maximum, 3 per element max), 0-6 fighter maneuver elements (180 fighters/smallcraft maximum, 30 per maneuver element max).
For points up to 8000, 0-6 warships, 5-10 dropship maneuver elements (40 dropships maximum, 4 per element max), 0-8 fighter maneuver elements.  (240 fighters/smallcraft maximum, 30 per maneuver element max).

Plan is to have a pretty varied fleet type without allowing any one element to dominate too much.  Also, what about requiring fighters to pay for a transport dropship per fighter?  Also, at least 1 transport dropship is required per fleet for victory conditions, requiring a few dropships as objectives, using cannonshops 'crippled are worse than dead' bit.

 

Register