Playtest Rules Space Stations

Discuss Mongoose miniatures game here, including Mighty Armies, Gangs of Mega-City One, and Battlefield Evolution.
Taran
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 957
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 8:16 pm
Location: Altoona, Pennsylvania

Postby Taran » Mon Aug 25, 2008 9:52 pm

I haven't been paying much attention to this thread, so I'm not sure if it's been covered, but I'm not going to dig through 11 pgs to find out:

The Targets Trait. Is that gone now?
"Well, if it isn't, then it's not.
But if it is...
Well, there you are."
Greg Smith
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8845
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2003 10:58 am
Location: Kettering UK
Contact:

Postby Greg Smith » Mon Aug 25, 2008 9:54 pm

Yes. Targets is gone.
"Bringer of Warmth, Carrier of Carrion, Prophet of Dilgarness, Speaker of all thing Llort!"

Part-time Narn.

ACTA playtester
Victorious Grand Admiral
ATN082268
Mongoose
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 11:40 pm

Some thoughts...

Postby ATN082268 » Tue Aug 26, 2008 2:43 am

<Snip Post>

<<As for fighters its either limit the number of hangers you can have or for each flight of fighters killed earn VP's, being as a station is a lot bigger than a ship and is going to have more options than a normal vessel i'd go with the VP's as a counter ballance. Cause the more we restrict the options ppl can take the more we are going to end up facing the same station time and time again!>>

I think the problem is that if you make the fighters expensive enough to try and avoid abuse, then stations which don't abuse them won't buy any of them while those which do abuse them will still buy them. I'd place an upper limit on the hangers; Limits won't necessarily result in the same type of station being churned out but will prevent outright subversion.

I'd also consider a second module for certain things costing less. How many people are going to spend 6 hardpoints for an armor module that provides +1 bonus to the armor *and* for a large additional damage capacity and then spend 6 more hardpoints just to raise the armor by 1? How many Minbari stations are going to spend 4 hardpoints for Stealth and then spend another 4 hardpoints to raise the Stealth from 4+ to 5+. Etc. Etc. I think you get the point.

Sincerely,

Andrew Norris
Da Boss
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 7221
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 5:49 pm
Location: UK

Postby Da Boss » Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:27 am

presently all races get 2 Patrol points worth of fighters and a station with guns for a Patrol point. Plus the fighters do not give away VP.

At very least I would make the Hanger just add 1 patrol point of fighters - it's still more than a bargin however............

I think the Stealth module should be variable depending on the size of the station - a small listiing post is likely to be easier to conceal than a station larger than B5? Also a War levels station with Stealth 5+ and big guns and interceptors etc - nasty.............
Grunvald
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 330
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2007 7:16 pm
Location: Near Birmingham UK

Postby Grunvald » Tue Aug 26, 2008 10:09 am

not sure but doesnt it state that victory pts are not given for fighters from ships! Well a station isnt a ship, so u could gain vp's!
Greg Smith
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8845
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2003 10:58 am
Location: Kettering UK
Contact:

Postby Greg Smith » Tue Aug 26, 2008 11:16 am

My solution to the abuse of patrol-level stations would be to make them 2HPs. And to make hangars cost 3HPs and the big guns 6HP or more.

A patrol-level station could be a medical station (medbay module), a training acadamy, a strategic command centre (war room), with maybe a small weapon module or extra defences, but can't bring fighters, command, fleet carrier, and so on.

Even at skirmish-level you'd only be able to bring one hangar module. And if the big beams cost 6HP, you wouldn't be able to fit those in.
"Bringer of Warmth, Carrier of Carrion, Prophet of Dilgarness, Speaker of all thing Llort!"

Part-time Narn.

ACTA playtester
Victorious Grand Admiral
Da Boss
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 7221
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 5:49 pm
Location: UK

Postby Da Boss » Tue Aug 26, 2008 11:37 am

I'd also halve the starting damage :)
Grunvald
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 330
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2007 7:16 pm
Location: Near Birmingham UK

Postby Grunvald » Tue Aug 26, 2008 4:35 pm

Half the starting damage of all station cores!

Making Hangers cost 3HP wont work cause some of them all ready are 3HP!

Think the best overall way to stop abuse of the Hanger's will be to limit the to set numbers per core lvl like has been surgestted for weapons!

Make big guns 6HP or more, basically does exactly the same as limiting them as we have surggested in previous posts, BUT making them way expensive to even consider taking so all that will happen is everyone will take small guns and you'll end up with a wall of AD fire if you get into their range!!!!!

Usually your more thought out about these things Greg!

Was it just a spur of the moment idea or somethin????
noobdelux
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 584
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 11:03 pm

Postby noobdelux » Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:07 pm

btw up the drakh beams to 4 instead of 3
Image
Taran
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 957
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 8:16 pm
Location: Altoona, Pennsylvania

Postby Taran » Tue Aug 26, 2008 8:14 pm

Quick question, since it wasn't covered in the Proposed Rules:
How many Stations can a single player have in a game?

I'm finding it hard to figure out why anyone would take only 1 in any game above Raid...
"Well, if it isn't, then it's not.
But if it is...
Well, there you are."
Da Boss
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 7221
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 5:49 pm
Location: UK

Postby Da Boss » Tue Aug 26, 2008 8:21 pm

Taran wrote:Quick question, since it wasn't covered in the Proposed Rules:
How many Stations can a single player have in a game?

I'm finding it hard to figure out why anyone would take only 1 in any game above Raid...
thank goodness it does say you can only have one: Otherwise ships would be obsolete :)

"Either they will appear in a scenario where you will be told how their deployment affects each fleet, or you may include them in a standard battle. If you do the latter, however, you may only ever use one space station"
Taran
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 957
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 8:16 pm
Location: Altoona, Pennsylvania

Postby Taran » Wed Aug 27, 2008 5:42 am

Dang
"Well, if it isn't, then it's not.
But if it is...
Well, there you are."
Methos5000
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 457
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 3:24 am

Postby Methos5000 » Wed Aug 27, 2008 8:46 am

Has it been mentioned yet how this effects campaigns? I know the 3x cost is gone as is the 5 RR cost but what about the other things:
No adjustment to PL roll
Must show up in certain scenarios as certain PLs
Must be present at scenarios otherwise the Strategic target cannot be captured
G'Kar: I was doing fine until you showed up with that .. thing in hand.
Marcus: It's a Minbari fighting pike, several hundred years old. You are just jealous because you don't have one. Bad case of pikal envy, if you ask me.
Da Boss
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 7221
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 5:49 pm
Location: UK

Postby Da Boss » Wed Aug 27, 2008 10:20 am

Nope but I am hoping for a massive transformation of the rules if we have seen the last draft - otherwise as is it will be banned 5 mins after being published.

Looking forward to the real version :)
ATN082268
Mongoose
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 11:40 pm

O.K here is what I would like to see...

Postby ATN082268 » Wed Aug 27, 2008 1:11 pm

Here is what I'd like to see for Space Stations rules based on the current rule set. I may have some more later but here is the bulk of them.

1. With the exception of not being able to move in the first place, treat Space stations the same as ships with respect to general rules (firing arcs, critical hits, etc). That definitely would *not* include stuff like the old space station targets rule.

2. Limit the number of hardened Narn modules.

3. Limit the number of hangers. Fighters on space stations should be a relatively common sight although stations packed to the gills with them should not be.

4. I would suggest that all heavy weapons (say 3 hardpoints or more) be mounted in a particular arc. Secondary weapons (say 2 hardpoints or less) could be mounted in turrets but I would keep those to a minimum.

5. I like the extended overall weapon ranges for space stations. This isn't that big of a leap given the different ranges on the various ships for essentially the same weapon. Besides, if a station is out of range of something, it can't close the range if it wanted to.

6. Keep the limit of 1 space station per scenario unless noted otherwise.

7. I suggested it before but consider making *some* modules (the more expensive ones which have a cumulative effect) cheaper for the second one, with the stealth and armored modules coming to mind.

Sincerely,

Andrew Norris
Da Boss
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 7221
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 5:49 pm
Location: UK

Postby Da Boss » Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:57 pm

I agree with most of that Except the range unless it has arcs then maybe - I think it should be l/ranged but sorry 52" is just horrible.......

I feel the most should be 30" -36" range with a couple reaching beyond that.........Advance Neutron and only just.
greenboy
Mongoose
Posts: 190
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 7:14 pm
Location: Romsey

Postby greenboy » Wed Aug 27, 2008 4:08 pm

I think it would be better if the limit where one FAP of space stations so that you can use the rules to represent centari blocade mine sand earth defence sat etc
The real art of conversation is not only to say the right thing in the right place, but also to leave unsaid the wrong thing at the tempting moment
Taran
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 957
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 8:16 pm
Location: Altoona, Pennsylvania

Postby Taran » Wed Aug 27, 2008 10:02 pm

That allows me to bring 2 Skirmish stations at a Raid PL game or 2 Raid at a Battle Priority.

And believe me, I would.








...On the other hand, I'd stop using Gaim allies. I use Gaim because of the fighters. If I could bring Starfuries instead of Klikkitas, I definitely would...
"Well, if it isn't, then it's not.
But if it is...
Well, there you are."
nekomata fuyu
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1213
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 2:13 pm
Location: Reading, UK

Postby nekomata fuyu » Wed Aug 27, 2008 10:49 pm

I'm not too keen on artificial limits on modules myself. They start causing awkward questions too quickly (like "Why?"), and make the game feel artificial. How about though splitting hardpoints into surface points and internal points. This feels like a more natural way to limit which items are using which points.

Weapons for the most part will use up surface points, so this will limit the number of them which can be placed on a space station. Hangers might be a mix of surface points (for the launch mechanisms), and internal points (for the hangers). Medbays, training facilities and the like can purely use internal points.
Keep Death off the roads - clamp Binky!

Wanted: Federation Fast Cruisers (PM with offers)
ATN082268
Mongoose
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 11:40 pm

Balance...

Postby ATN082268 » Thu Aug 28, 2008 12:01 am

<Snip Post>
nekomata fuyu wrote:I'm not too keen on artificial limits on modules myself. They start causing awkward questions too quickly (like "Why?"), and make the game feel artificial.
There are limits on a lot of things in the game, including how you can only bring one space station to a pick up scenario. It's called balance. If it comes down to the game feeling a little artificial but fun to play, it is a trade off I'll make every time. Of course, if you can somehow make the game more realistic and fun to play, I'll take it without hesitation :)

Sincerely,

Andrew Norris

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests