Author Topic: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System  (Read 58663 times)

Welshman

  • Mostly Retired Has Been
  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10509
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #60 on: 20 November 2014, 23:22:20 »
Not sure if this is possible but a list of unit breakdowns would be nice to setup our own battles.
this would allow us to test the system on a large scale and give more enlighten feedback. (exp=heavy Mech company,light mech company etc.)
 O0

Ask and you shall receive. I have attached  the ISW Generic Combat Element table to the first post. It shows the stats for each type of game unit at the Company/Star  (Combat Team)  level.

-Joel BC-
Catalyst Freelancer (Inactive)

"Some closets will never contain Narnia, no matter how many times we open the door." - Weirdo, in relation to the power of hope.

victor_shaw

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1391
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #61 on: 21 November 2014, 00:08:44 »
Ask and you shall receive. I have attached  the ISW Generic Combat Element table to the first post. It shows the stats for each type of game unit at the Company/Star  (Combat Team)  level.
you now my 2nd fav person in the world (grandma first lol)

Welshman

  • Mostly Retired Has Been
  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10509
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #62 on: 21 November 2014, 00:20:14 »
you now my 2nd fav person in the world (grandma first lol)

I'll have to take third place. Alexander Knight created the table, I just let you see it.
-Joel BC-
Catalyst Freelancer (Inactive)

"Some closets will never contain Narnia, no matter how many times we open the door." - Weirdo, in relation to the power of hope.

Welshman

  • Mostly Retired Has Been
  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10509
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #63 on: 21 November 2014, 02:11:31 »
Folks,

If you are tying more combats, please try with a Ground Map that is 7 hexes across, instead of the current 5.
-Joel BC-
Catalyst Freelancer (Inactive)

"Some closets will never contain Narnia, no matter how many times we open the door." - Weirdo, in relation to the power of hope.

victor_shaw

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1391
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #64 on: 21 November 2014, 02:20:40 »
ok a few more ?

1. how do you figure out speed when making a unit from the IO-ISW Generic Combat Elements
a.lowest speed (if this one it hurts the clans bad ,one word elementals)
b.highest speed
c.average speed
2.are the armor/range damage added together or averaged

and the game works better on the turning point maps so far but if you needed it run on a 7 hex map i can try that.

Alexander Knight

  • Peditum Generalis
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4957
  • O-R-E-O
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #65 on: 21 November 2014, 02:22:59 »
1.
B
2.
Added together.  Movement is the only thing that's averaged.

Welshman

  • Mostly Retired Has Been
  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10509
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #66 on: 21 November 2014, 02:39:14 »
and the game works better on the turning point maps so far but if you needed it run on a 7 hex map i can try that.

Thanks, great feedback. Unfortunately it won't be feasible to create enough Turning Point maps to represent even a broad sample of Inner Sphere worlds.

So will be using the generic Planetary Combat Map as our base. We just need to find the right size. A standard BattleTech map is too big, 5 hexes across is too small.

-Joel BC-
Catalyst Freelancer (Inactive)

"Some closets will never contain Narnia, no matter how many times we open the door." - Weirdo, in relation to the power of hope.

victor_shaw

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1391
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #67 on: 21 November 2014, 03:02:03 »
1.
B
2.
Added together.  Movement is the only thing that's averaged.
so is it b or averaged

victor_shaw

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1391
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #68 on: 21 November 2014, 03:26:49 »
now on to another question
the battle of twycross list the Falcon Guard Cluster as mv=6,arm=233, s/m/l= 111/106/33
now divided by 5 thats arm=47/46,s/m/l= 22/21/7

from the battle of twycross Sourcebooks we have the OFB for the Falcon Guard
the units trinaries should be
Name        MV       Arm      S    M    L
Alpha        5/6      213      97  97  53   With command star added
Bravo        6/7      146      68  68  36
charlie       6/7      141      67  67  35
Delta         4/6      103      51  36   7
Echo         4/6      103      51  36   7
Totals       5/7      676     334 304 137
MV= average/highest

so the question is am i add the units wrong or was there a error in the stats in the ACS beta

Blacknova

  • Bullet Magnet
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1735
  • I am Thomas Hogarth's Love Child
    • The Kapteyn Universe
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #69 on: 21 November 2014, 03:51:10 »
Is there any chance of seeing AAR's from play tests?  I would love to see how these scenarios play play out within the system.
Dedicated to committing viciously gratuitous bastardy of the first order.

Unofficial LD for 2 seconds - It was a glorious moment!

"They can bring it. We fought off an army of guys who wore 20 pound decorative brass shoulder pauldrons. I'm not afraid of the Disney Land mascot brigade" - MadCapellan, in reference to the Confederation possibly facing the Clans.

Alexander Knight

  • Peditum Generalis
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4957
  • O-R-E-O
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #70 on: 21 November 2014, 11:46:35 »
so is it b or averaged

Sorry, should have been C.  As for the Falcon Guard, generic Trinaries were used to construct it, while the Battle of Twycross was consulted for a guide.

Welshman

  • Mostly Retired Has Been
  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10509
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #71 on: 21 November 2014, 14:38:40 »
Is there any chance of seeing AAR's from play tests?  I would love to see how these scenarios play play out within the system.

Blacknova is one of our writers on this project. What he says, we want to see AAR reports please.

Joel
-Joel BC-
Catalyst Freelancer (Inactive)

"Some closets will never contain Narnia, no matter how many times we open the door." - Weirdo, in relation to the power of hope.

Atlas3060

  • ugh this guy again
  • Global Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9385
  • Just some rando
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #72 on: 21 November 2014, 17:57:43 »
Blacknova is one of our writers on this project. What he says, we want to see AAR reports please.

Joel
I'll be working on Sarna soon.
I'll post my findings in the AA part of the forum later.
It's not about winning or losing, no it's all about how many chapters have you added to the rule books after your crazy antics.

Welshman

  • Mostly Retired Has Been
  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10509
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #73 on: 21 November 2014, 19:02:26 »
I'll be working on Sarna soon.
I'll post my findings in the AA part of the forum later.

Post a link here please when you do.
-Joel BC-
Catalyst Freelancer (Inactive)

"Some closets will never contain Narnia, no matter how many times we open the door." - Weirdo, in relation to the power of hope.

Atlas3060

  • ugh this guy again
  • Global Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9385
  • Just some rando
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #74 on: 22 November 2014, 03:36:44 »
Still working on it, found some hiccups/questions that are driving me crazy.

I'll be using the Sarna scenario from the PDF, because why the heck not!
Let's begin at the beginning with Formations.

I created a Formation named TF (Task Force) Wind:
Screaming EaglesAerospace WingRegularMV 6
Ground Support Wing5th Syrtis FusiliersRegularMV 7
Screaming Eagles'Mech RegimentRegularMV 6
Mercs count as 2 Elements for building so really out of these 3 I got my 5 limit done rather quick

As they plodded around, liberating the snot out of Sarna, they were ambushed by a hidden Formation named  DF (Defend Force) Rebels:
5th McCarron's Armored Cavalry Regiment 5th MACVeteranMV 4
Sarna Planetary Militia #1MotorGreenMV 4
Sarna Planetary Militia #2MotorGreenMV 4
Sarna Planetary Militia #3MotorGreenMV 4

Same merc unit limitations for these 4 fulfilling the 5 spots as per the rules.

Since Liao won the Initiative in my die roll, they go after the Davions start plotting their attacks.
Now for all purposes of Leadership, TF Wind is Regular and DF Rebels are Vets right?


LR for a Regular is 6, Veteran is 4
Which means the TN for Wind is 4 (2 * (6/3))
While TN for Rebels is 3 (2 * (4/3))

Rebels opt for a Medium Ranged attack, while Wind goes for Long Ranged.

Which brings up my second question: What benefits are there to a Long or Medium ranged attack over the short one?
It isn't like this will affect the enemy's roll somehow.
Might as well go short ranged to get all the damage you can on them.

Now to break down the roll modifiers for each side.
TF Wind is facing someone slower than them, because the slowest unit in Wind is 6.
4-6 = -2
Because I subtract my enemy's movement from my own.
Though shouldn't that be reversed if this is going to alter the roll and not the TN?
If anything Wind should get a bonus because they are faster.


Now the "Force Experience is" part, is that for the target?
Then it makes sense, trying to target a higher LR value target would be trickier.
I just thought some clarification could be used here too.

Same question goes for Force Loyalty.

With those assumptions, the mod to the roll will be a -10 for TF Wind.
Because the +2 for being faster than the target was canceled by the target's experience, but Wind did get the handicap of being ambushed. Since there was no indication of Loyalty on the charts, I'll assume Reliable (which gives no mod either way). Also they are fighting long ranged.

DF Rebels would get a roll mod: -6 for facing faster, Regular trooper, and fighting Medium ranged.

Assuming anyone can hit with those mods, I spread around the damages to individual elements within those forces right?

So far I'm thinking correctly, right?

Another concern I had was how Aeros just aren't maneuverable in planetary atmo.
They lose half their MP and each hex traveled is 2 MP cost.
Plus do they have to be within a range for their "home base" hex?
It's not about winning or losing, no it's all about how many chapters have you added to the rule books after your crazy antics.

Welshman

  • Mostly Retired Has Been
  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10509
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #75 on: 22 November 2014, 04:03:24 »
Just saw this.... I'll try and respond tomorrow. Please remind me if I forget.
-Joel BC-
Catalyst Freelancer (Inactive)

"Some closets will never contain Narnia, no matter how many times we open the door." - Weirdo, in relation to the power of hope.

Issamuel

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 45
  • Pirates! Bandits! Mercs! The Periphery!
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #76 on: 22 November 2014, 09:38:04 »
I have been attempting to play the "Luzerene" historical campaign with my partner, but need some clarification to the rules.

Damage Phase
My questions is based on the following two passage from the rules:
...damage inflicted by each Combat Element in a Formation has been determined, it is added together and then assigned to the Formation’s target. The damage is then applied to the Combat Elements within the targeted Formation randomly, in 20 point lots...
and
....damage formula is Combat Element Damage for selected range * Damage Inflicted Modifier, all divided by 4 and rounded to the nearest whole number....

Question(s):
1) I do not understand how to distribute damage to combat elements in a formation "randomly": Does this mean the 20 point (Or 2 point lots if using the divided by 10 calculations) lots would require a separate dice roll to allocate the lots randomly to the combat elements? (E.g: 6 combat elements in a formation labeled 1 to 6. 80 points damage dealt to the formation in total, which is 4 lots. Roll 1D6, with each dice result for a corresponding combat element to be assigned the damage lot.)

2) By "randomly" assigning to the combat elements, who will be the assigner of the damage: The dealer of the damage, or the receiver of the damage?

3) For the damage formula, I do not understand the "divided by 4" part of the calculation for a combat element. Does this mean that if the element has the following stats.... (divided by 10):

4th PGC / Jaguar     - MV:5    ARM:24    S:11   M:10   L:4   PV:90 Elite

It does the following damage as an element at "Medium" range, and with "No" Tactics:

M:10 damage * 1 (For no tactics for modifiers), divide by 4 = 2.5 which is rounded up = 3 damage by the element...

...before adding to the formation total damage to be inflicted to the opponent?

4) Using the "Luzerene" historical campaign, resolving combat based on the following opposing formations, is it possible to provide an example of how the damage distribution would work as envisioned by the rules? For this case, range is "Medium" and "No" Tactics are used by either formations.

Star League Forces ( Figures divided by 10)
Formation 208th ComGuard Division
Combat elements:
A / 208th - MV:5    ARM:13    S:4   M:4   L:2   PV:37 Veteran
B / 208th - MV:6    ARM:11    S:4   M:4   L:2   PV:35 Veteran
C / 208th - MV:5    ARM:7     S:3   M:3   L:1   PV:27 Veteran
D / 208th - MV:4    ARM:12    S:4   M:4   L:2   PV:37 Veteran
E / 208th - MV:3    ARM:6     S:2   M:2   L:1   PV:22 Veteran


Clan Smoke Jaguar ( Figures divided by 10)
Formation Luzerene Garrison
Combat elements:
4th PGC / Jaguar     - MV:5    ARM:24    S:11   M:10   L:4   PV:90 Elite
6th Striker / Jaguar - MV:5    ARM:23    S:11   M:10   L:5   PV:80 Elite


As a reference, currently, I am calculating the following damage based on my shaky understanding on the rules:
Formation 208th ComGuard Division
A / 208th = 1 damage
B / 208th = 1 damage
C / 208th = 1 damage
D / 208th = 1 damage
E / 208th = 1 damage
= Total formation damage 5. Total 2 point lots = 2 . There is 1 point extra.


Formation Luzerene Garrison
4th PGC / Jaguar = 3 damage
6th Striker / Jaguar = 3 damage
= Total formation damage 6. Total 2 point lots = 3.


Damage distribution from Formation Luzerene Garrison = 6 damage, 3 lots of 2 damage , roll 1d6 for randomness (re-roll result 6), damage receiver player roll for Formation 208th ComGuard Division
B / 208th = 4 damage received from 2 lots.
D / 208th = 2 damage received from 1 lot.


Damage distribution from Formation 208th ComGuard Division = 5 damage, 2 lots of 2 damage, and 1 additional damage , roll 1d6 for randomness (Results of 1 to 3 for first element in formation, 4 to 6 for second element, damage receiver player roll for Formation Luzerene Garrison
4th PGC / Jaguar = 4 damage received from 2 lots.
6th Striker / Jaguar = 1 damage received from the leftover extra.


Am I doing it wrong completely?
Issamuel

Issamuel

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 45
  • Pirates! Bandits! Mercs! The Periphery!
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #77 on: 22 November 2014, 10:06:12 »
One more question before I pack up by game board that I used for the beta test and wait for replies and errata:

For Transport/Dropship Formations that are carrying ground unit Formations (Mechs, Supportive units, etc), how do we handle the damage inflicted to those Transport/Dropship Formations and their valuable cargo?

This question came as part of the "Luzerene" historical campaign : My partner's warship formation - and some bad and risky 50% offensives rolls on my part - wiped out my SLDF Troop Transport Squadron, and caused 75% damage to the Assault DropShip Squadron.... in other words, 1 ARM left (In the divide 10 stats). I was trying to find out how to decide which ground unit was "alive" for the ground combat purposes - but could not find how to resolve transported unit damage.

After discussion with my partner, we proceed with having all ground units deployed at 75% damage each.... the resulting morale rolls was.... hilarious... so to speak. For my partner that is. I was not amused. :'(

Also, good work on the ACS! O0 Can't wait to get the final official IO rule book, and be the general who changed history, and brought George Hasek's head to the Archon-Princess! (And prevented the loss of an expensive warship to a kamakazi attack.... always hated that part...). Keep it up!  O0
Issamuel

victor_shaw

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1391
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #78 on: 22 November 2014, 12:53:21 »
One thing that's missing seems to be a way for you to Screen your more imported units in a battlegroup (command elements,artillery,etc.)
my suggestion would be a new defensive action
1.Screen (defensive)=May Assign on a one for one bases one Battalion to screen another  which must be attacked before the Screened unit.
or
2.Screening unit takes 50% of all damage assigned to the screened unit.

also Troop Transport Squadrons units need a carry limit
to avoid the whole invasion for being destroyed by one lucky  shot.

In the Sarna Campaign how do the reinforcements arrive on the board
1. from orbit landing on round 4
2. just appear on the battlefield on round 4
« Last Edit: 22 November 2014, 13:02:36 by victor_shaw »

Welshman

  • Mostly Retired Has Been
  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10509
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #79 on: 22 November 2014, 16:46:59 »
One thing that's missing seems to be a way for you to Screen your more imported units in a battlegroup (command elements,artillery,etc.)
my suggestion would be a new defensive action
1.Screen (defensive)=May Assign on a one for one bases one Battalion to screen another  which must be attacked before the Screened unit.
or
2.Screening unit takes 50% of all damage assigned to the screened unit.

Hello,

The Shield Command from ISW is designed to cover this. I'm quoting it here.
Quote
Commands with this order protect other forces (with combat if needed). This order safeguards other combat commands from damage while repairing, resting or resupplying, so long as the command being protected makes up no more than 30% (round up) of a total force on a planet. If this condition is met (which may require more than one command on planet to be using the Shield order), the player does not need place the shielded force on the Planetary Combat Map when using the Abstract Combat System (see p. XX).
If at the start of a sub-turn, the shielded force becomes equal to 50% or more of the allied force on the world, the player must either place the unit on the Planetary Combat Map in the next Sub-Turn, Surrender, Withdrawal or Go to Ground.
A Combat Command that uses the Shield command must spend 2x its Combat Supply Point Requirement and generate 1 Fatigue even if no combat is seen and 2 Fatigue if engaged in combat
Shield costs zero order points. It must be combined with either the Attack or Defend order.


Quote
also Troop Transport Squadrons units need a carry limit
to avoid the whole invasion for being destroyed by one lucky  shot.

Generic Transport Units will generally carry 1 Combat Unit (Battalion). We'll be updating them to reflect this. For now, have as many GTUs as you have battalions.


Quote
In the Sarna Campaign how do the reinforcements arrive on the board
1. from orbit landing on round 4
2. just appear on the battlefield on round 4

Normally it would be 3. At the Zenith or Nadir JumpPoint at the start of Turn 3.

However since PAM movement is broken, have them arrive in the Inner Zone at the start of Turn 3.

-Joel BC-
Catalyst Freelancer (Inactive)

"Some closets will never contain Narnia, no matter how many times we open the door." - Weirdo, in relation to the power of hope.

Welshman

  • Mostly Retired Has Been
  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10509
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #80 on: 22 November 2014, 17:19:16 »
Still working on it, found some hiccups/questions that are driving me crazy.

Sorry to drive you crazy. Honestly it's not part of some secret plot.

Quote
Now for all purposes of Leadership, TF Wind is Regular and DF Rebels are Vets right?


Yes, Leadership is based on the highest rated unit in the formation.

Quote
Which brings up my second question: What benefits are there to a Long or Medium ranged attack over the short one?

Other than getting a -4 to your Combat Roll for Short range?

Quote
Though shouldn't that be reversed if this is going to alter the roll and not the TN?

Yes, General rule of thumb, if something benefits the Formation it is a positive modifier and if it doesn't, it is a negative.

Quote
Now the "Force Experience is" part, is that for the target?

Good catch. The answer is yes and no.

We will be updating the table to give split value. For example Veteran will read "+3 / - 3". If the attacker is Veteran, they get a +3 to their roll. If the Target is Veteran they get a -3 to their rolls.

Same answer for Force Loyalty

Quote
Assuming anyone can hit with those mods, I spread around the damages to individual elements within those forces right?

Yes- Remember the target number is only a 2.

Quote
Another concern I had was how Aeros just aren't maneuverable in planetary atmo.
They lose half their MP and each hex traveled is 2 MP cost.
Plus do they have to be within a range for their "home base" hex?

A game turn is seven days long. Unlike ground forces, aerospace have to go back and land after every mission. So MP is divided by 2 to represent flying from its home base and back.
-Joel BC-
Catalyst Freelancer (Inactive)

"Some closets will never contain Narnia, no matter how many times we open the door." - Weirdo, in relation to the power of hope.

Welshman

  • Mostly Retired Has Been
  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10509
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #81 on: 22 November 2014, 17:29:40 »
I have been attempting to play the "Luzerene" historical campaign with my partner, but need some clarification to the rules.

I'm sorry, I can't read all the fon't color changes. Can you please repost in normal text and I'll go through it.

Thanks,
Joel BC
-Joel BC-
Catalyst Freelancer (Inactive)

"Some closets will never contain Narnia, no matter how many times we open the door." - Weirdo, in relation to the power of hope.

Issamuel

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 45
  • Pirates! Bandits! Mercs! The Periphery!
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #82 on: 22 November 2014, 18:24:25 »
I'm sorry, I can't read all the fon't color changes. Can you please repost in normal text and I'll go through it.

Thanks,
Joel BC

My apologies. :)

As requested, and including my other post into this reply as question 5 ) .

=========================

I have been attempting to play the "Luzerene" historical campaign with my partner, but need some clarification to the rules.

Damage Phase
My questions is based on the following two passage from the rules:
...damage inflicted by each Combat Element in a Formation has been determined, it is added together and then assigned to the Formation’s target. The damage is then applied to the Combat Elements within the targeted Formation randomly, in 20 point lots...

and
....damage formula is Combat Element Damage for selected range * Damage Inflicted Modifier, all divided by 4 and rounded to the nearest whole number....

Question(s):
1)I do not understand how to distribute damage to combat elements in a formation "randomly": Does this mean the 20 point (Or 2 point lots if using the divided by 10 calculations) lots would require a separate dice roll to allocate the lots randomly to the combat elements? (E.g: 6 combat elements in a formation labeled 1 to 6. 80 points damage dealt to the formation in total, which is 4 lots. Roll 1D6, with each dice result for a corresponding combat element to be assigned the damage lot.)

2) By "randomly" assigning to the combat elements, who will be the assigner of the damage: The dealer of the damage, or the receiver of the damage?

3) For the damage formula, I do not understand the "divided by 4" part of the calculation for a combat element. Does this mean that if the element has the following stats.... (divided by 10):

4th PGC / Jaguar     - MV:5    ARM:24    S:11   M:10   L:4   PV:90 Elite

It does the following damage as an element at "Medium" range, and with "No" Tactics:

M:10 damage * 1 (For no tactics for modifiers), divide by 4 = 2.5 which is rounded up = 3 damage by the element...


...before adding to the formation total damage to be inflicted to the opponent?

4)Using the "Luzerene" historical campaign, resolving combat based on the following opposing formations, is it possible to provide an example of how the damage distribution would work as envisioned by the rules? For this case, range is "Medium" and "No" Tactics are used by either formations.

Star League Forces ( Figures divided by 10)
Formation 208th ComGuard Division
Combat elements:
A / 208th - MV:5    ARM:13    S:4   M:4   L:2   PV:37 Veteran
B / 208th - MV:6    ARM:11    S:4   M:4   L:2   PV:35 Veteran
C / 208th - MV:5    ARM:7     S:3   M:3   L:1   PV:27 Veteran
D / 208th - MV:4    ARM:12    S:4   M:4   L:2   PV:37 Veteran
E / 208th - MV:3    ARM:6     S:2   M:2   L:1   PV:22 Veteran

Clan Smoke Jaguar ( Figures divided by 10)
Formation Luzerene Garrison
Combat elements:
4th PGC / Jaguar     - MV:5    ARM:24    S:11   M:10   L:4   PV:90 Elite
6th Striker / Jaguar - MV:5    ARM:23    S:11   M:10   L:5   PV:80 Elite


As a reference, currently, I am calculating the following damage based on my shaky understanding on the rules:
Formation 208th ComGuard Division
A / 208th = 1 damage
B / 208th = 1 damage
C / 208th = 1 damage
D / 208th = 1 damage
E / 208th = 1 damage
= Total formation damage 5. Total 2 point lots = 2 . There is 1 point extra.

Formation Luzerene Garrison
4th PGC / Jaguar = 3 damage
6th Striker / Jaguar = 3 damage
= Total formation damage 6. Total 2 point lots = 3.


Damage distribution from Formation Luzerene Garrison = 6 damage, 3 lots of 2 damage , roll 1d6 for randomness (re-roll result 6), damage receiver player roll for Formation 208th ComGuard Division
B / 208th = 4 damage received from 2 lots.
D / 208th = 2 damage received from 1 lot.



Damage distribution from Formation 208th ComGuard Division = 5 damage, 2 lots of 2 damage, and 1 additional damage , roll 1d6 for randomness (Results of 1 to 3 for first element in formation, 4 to 6 for second element, damage receiver player roll for Formation Luzerene Garrison
4th PGC / Jaguar = 4 damage received from 2 lots.
6th Striker / Jaguar = 1 damage received from the leftover extra.


Am I doing it wrong?

5) For Transport/Dropship Formations that are carrying ground unit Formations (Mechs, Supportive units, etc), how do we handle the damage inflicted to those Transport/Dropship Formations and their valuable cargo?

This question came as part of the "Luzerene" historical campaign : My partner's warship formation - and some bad and risky 50% offensives rolls on my part - wiped out my SLDF Troop Transport Squadron, and caused 75% damage to the Assault DropShip Squadron.... in other words, 1 ARM left (In the divide 10 stats). I was trying to find out how to decide which ground unit was "alive" for the ground combat purposes - but could not find how to resolve transported unit damage.

After discussion with my partner, we proceed with having all ground units deployed at 75% damage each.... the resulting morale rolls was.... hilarious... so to speak. For my partner that is. I was not amused.

==========================
Issamuel

victor_shaw

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1391
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #83 on: 22 November 2014, 20:34:54 »
Ok the battle of Sarna is 4 weeks in

and has devolved into slugging matchs for Adivasi and the Tengo Aerospace Factory

Current Losses
Davion
5th Foot D
5th Foot E

Liao
1st Foot PM
1st Mech PM
3rd Tank PM

Battle for Adivasi

5th Syrtis- 65% (Unsteady)
1st Syrtis tank- 70%
2nd Syrtis tank- 50% (Wavering)
Syrtis Foot F- 67%

3rd MAC- 66%
5th MAC- 66%
1st Motor PM- 71%
2nd Motor PM- 86 %

Battle For Tengo Aerospace

2nd Screaming Eagles- 78%
1st Crater Cobras- 78%
2nd Crater Cobras- 95% (About to pull out to Reinforce the 5th Syrtis)
Syrtis Motor G- 71%
Syrtis Motor H- 85%
5th Syrtis Artillery- 100%

2nd MAC- 59% (Wavering)
4th MAC- 53% (Unsteady)
1st Tank PM- 36% (Retreated)
2nd Tank PM- 85%
2nd Foot PM- 67%

Now for the questions/suggestions
1.dividing damage by 4 seems to make Offensive tactics useless for fighters and inf
2.with the bigger map the 1/2 MV for fighters limits there usefulness
also with 2 MV per hex makes having a 5 MV wasteful (except in combat)
3.the scouting rule seem to involved for this level of play (ie they slow the game)
4.Aerospace fighters boil down to he how has the most ARM wins, as stated before with the divide by 4 rule the most they ever due is 1 Damage.
mind you im using the divide ARM/S/M/L by 10


« Last Edit: 22 November 2014, 20:37:24 by victor_shaw »

Atlas3060

  • ugh this guy again
  • Global Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9385
  • Just some rando
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #84 on: 22 November 2014, 21:55:42 »
Sorry to drive you crazy. Honestly it's not part of some secret plot.
I know, its all part of the playtest experience.
Besides my family members are the ones with secret plots to my insanity. ;)

Quote
Other than getting a -4 to your Combat Roll for Short range?

See I read an earlier post:
The Combat Factors table has Short Range as +0, Medium Range as -2 and Long Range as -4.  The example then has Short Range as +4, Medium Range as +2 and Long Range as +0.  Should we use the example modifiers or the table modifiers for range?
The Table Modifiers. The Base Target Number is 2, so it's an easy target number. The modifiers lower your final 2D6 roll.
And just assumed to use the Table Mods.
Which made me question the way I did.
If I followed the Table Mods, short range get no roll modifiers.

Quote
Yes- Remember the target number is only a 2.
Well yes and also the LR divided by 3, round down and added to Base TN.
The Combat Factors table does have that one thing which alters the TN.

Quote
A game turn is seven days long. Unlike ground forces, aerospace have to go back and land after every mission. So MP is divided by 2 to represent flying from its home base and back.
Fair enough, but another question I have did pop up.
What happens when enemy units reach the "home base" hex, assuming we aren't using Dropships and the like?
It's not about winning or losing, no it's all about how many chapters have you added to the rule books after your crazy antics.

victor_shaw

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1391
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #85 on: 22 November 2014, 23:16:02 »
Ignore the above report  #P
we where doing damage wrong  :'(

Welshman

  • Mostly Retired Has Been
  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10509
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #86 on: 23 November 2014, 01:09:32 »
Ignore the above report  #P
we where doing damage wrong  :'(

Not going to ignore it completely.

If you are doing damage wrong, then we are explaining it wrong.

What happens when enemy units reach the "home base" hex, assuming we aren't using Dropships and the like?

Hmm... Well I am working on some rules for damaging Industrial and Economic Targets. We are also going to add in better rules for DropShips on the ground. We'll have to also look at the Home Hex as well.

Short answer is if the ASF can't get back up to space, then they are lost. Probably need to address supply losses as well.
-Joel BC-
Catalyst Freelancer (Inactive)

"Some closets will never contain Narnia, no matter how many times we open the door." - Weirdo, in relation to the power of hope.

Welshman

  • Mostly Retired Has Been
  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10509
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #87 on: 23 November 2014, 01:33:49 »
My apologies. :)

As requested, and including my other post into this reply as question 5 ) .

Quote
1)I do not understand how to distribute damage to combat elements in a formation "randomly":

We'll work on this. In general BattleTech does not have a hard rules for randomly choosing something. Under current rules a Formation can contain up to 15 Combat Units (Battalions) so determining which is damaged is left up to you.

Here is a suggestions, let us know how it works. Roll 1D6 two times. The first roll determines if you damaged Combat Unit 1-5 (1-2 on D6), Combat Unit 6-10 (3-4 on D6) or Combat Unit 11-15. The second roll determines which Combat Unit in that group is damaged (reroll a 6).

Quote
2) By "randomly" assigning to the combat elements, who will be the assigner of the damage: The dealer of the damage, or the receiver of the damage?


The attacker. This is in line with Total Warfare where the attacker rolls location.

Quote
3) For the damage formula, I do not understand the "divided by 4" part of the calculation for a combat element. Does this mean that if the element has the following stats.... (divided by 10):

Yes- we will be changing how damage is calculated. For now though the damage formula is <<< S/M/L * Damage Modifier / 4.

So a unit that does 50 damage at short range with a 140% damage mod would do 18 pts of ARM damage (50*1.4 / 4 = 17.5).

Quote
4)Using the "Luzerene" historical campaign, resolving combat based on the following opposing formations, is it possible to provide an example of how the damage distribution would work as envisioned by the rules? For this case, range is "Medium" and "No" Tactics are used by either formations.

In the next update of the rules Combat Units (Battalions, Level III, Trianry) will become the building block for all Formations. Once that is the case, use the suggestion I have above.

With the Luzerne example, just roll 1D6 and reroll anytime you roll 6.

Quote
5) For Transport/Dropship Formations that are carrying ground unit Formations (Mechs, Supportive units, etc), how do we handle the damage inflicted to those Transport/Dropship Formations and their valuable cargo?

We're going to leave this at a nice abstract level. As long as the transport is alive, the cargo is. Transport dies, so does all the cargo.

We are in the process of updating ISW (the basis for Transport Units) so that it is very clear what unit is in what Transport Unit. For now change the Transport Squadron ARM to 5 and give the SLDF 5 of them. Divide the combat forces evenly.


Quote

Now for the questions/suggestions
1.dividing damage by 4 seems to make Offensive tactics useless for fighters and inf
2.with the bigger map the 1/2 MV for fighters limits there usefulness
also with 2 MV per hex makes having a 5 MV wasteful (except in combat)
3.the scouting rule seem to involved for this level of play (ie they slow the game)
4.Aerospace fighters boil down to he how has the most ARM wins, as stated before with the divide by 4 rule the most they ever due is 1 Damage.
mind you im using the divide ARM/S/M/L by 10

1- Damage is being investigated.
2- We'll look at ASF
3- Can you give some more feedback on this? What is making it cumbersome? Any suggestions?
4- Assuming this was part of the doing damage wrong.
-Joel BC-
Catalyst Freelancer (Inactive)

"Some closets will never contain Narnia, no matter how many times we open the door." - Weirdo, in relation to the power of hope.

Welshman

  • Mostly Retired Has Been
  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10509
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #88 on: 23 November 2014, 01:36:55 »
THE DEVELOPER ASKS

Time for some questions back to all of you.


1- 7 hex Map, better?

2- Terrain- The goal is a fast game, which is why we don't have terrain. Is leaving the option to use Turning Point maps sufficient?

3- Value Scales, dividing all the stats by 10, how is this working for folks?

4- General game flow? We have several technical issues to work out, that's clear. How does the game feel though? Are we on the right track or is this just broken?

Thanks, more soon.
Joel BC
ISW Lead Developer
-Joel BC-
Catalyst Freelancer (Inactive)

"Some closets will never contain Narnia, no matter how many times we open the door." - Weirdo, in relation to the power of hope.

victor_shaw

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1391
Re: Catalyst Asks- Abstract Combat System
« Reply #89 on: 23 November 2014, 03:48:24 »
THE DEVELOPER ASKS

Time for some questions back to all of you.


1- 7 hex Map, better?

2- Terrain- The goal is a fast game, which is why we don't have terrain. Is leaving the option to use Turning Point maps sufficient?

3- Value Scales, dividing all the stats by 10, how is this working for folks?

4- General game flow? We have several technical issues to work out, that's clear. How does the game feel though? Are we on the right track or is this just broken?

Thanks, more soon.
Joel BC
ISW Lead Developer

1. yes with the exception of being to large for aerospace fighters suggestion aerospace fighters pay one per hex instead of 2

2.a random terrain generator chart would be nice

3.ten definitely better but unit chart needs to be upgraded for it.

4. one word "MATH" to much math for a large scale game (die divide by 4  >:D )

now responses to the Sarna campaign we just restarted

1. the TN generation is not flowing (would work better if all Mods were to the TN and not some to the roll)

2. a correction ASF are great at tipping the balance in a fight but we need some dog-fighting rule (air superiority is a big part of a strategic game) P.S ASF have to much ARM (in Aerotech they had thresholds and can be knocked out of the air with far less damage then in space (wing hit :'( )

3. the attackers and defenders Exp should effect the roll.

4. I could be wrong but i feed a tactics cross-reference chart with solid bonuses would work far better then the % system

5. also size of force is not the only factor in flank/rear attacks speed should also be a factor (example you need 1 less battalion for ever 2 MV over your opponent)

6. i would also suggest a hard limit of no more then 6 battalion per battle-group (seem to speedup play)

7. on the subject of scouting i think a more generic scouting system would cut time off the turn with battlegroups being able to scout one of the 6 hex around them per turn.

now for not important but would be cool

1.faction flavor (The units right now are kind of vanilla)

2.city fighting bonuses/ rules for attacking cities/factories.