Colleagues, a bit of help with ship-combat change

[Nerhesi]

Morning folks,

I'm implementing a significant change to ship combat in my game. As you may have noticed from my earlier threads, the following issue (at least what my group considers an issue) has been highlighted:

(a) Regardless of whether you are a fan of Star Wars, Star Trek, Babylon 5 etc.. You generally want player skills/capabilities to influence combat evenly. Which means, crew skill should affect trying to hit your target, and BE HIT by your enemies.
(b) Currently, Gunnery + Characteristic figure very heavily in being able to hit your target. Piloting skill is NEAR irrelevant.
(c) This results in average gunners (+1 Characteristic DM and Gunner 2 for example) having a trivial time in hitting targets, especially when considering Fire Control software.


Therefore, we've decided to significantly increase defensive modifiers for space combat. Now I need your help ladies and gents in vetting my idea to see if I may be creating a monster of a problem this way. Here are options:

Solution 1 - Dodging applies to all attacks and scales linearly by thrust spent:
(i) The Dodge reaction is now applied to all incoming attacks (-2 DM)
(ii) Allow multiple dodge reactions (technically - I dont think there is anything stopping this by RAW). This also better simulates craft with more thrust being more nimble then craft with less thrust. So while you only get to dodge once - you get to decide how much thrust to put into your "dodge" for that turn (1 thrust = -2, 2 thrust = -4, etc)
(iii) Possibly limit your total dodge modifier to not exceed your Piloting + Characteristic DM (This I added to avoid the scenario being driven into the other extreme where it becomes difficult/hard to hit anything)

Solution 2 - dodging affects 1 attack with a magnitude equal to how good(pilot) you are:
(i) Maintain that one dodge affects only one attack (clarify this to maybe mean 1 bay or 1 turret)
(ii) Change the dodge from a -2 to a value equal to Piloting+Characteristic DM
(iii) You would need multiple reaction/1 thrust expenditures for each attack you wish to dodge

Solution 3 - dodging applies to all attacks with a thrust cost dependant on how good (pilot) you are:
(i) The Dodge reaction is now applied to all incoming attacks
(ii) Change the dodge reaction from a -2 DM to a -DM equal to piloting + characteristic
(ii) Change thrust cost to be equal to 1/2 the -DM, round up. (e.g. Piloting+Dex = 3? -3 DM to be hit, 2 thrust. Piloting+dex = 4? -4 DM to be hit, 2 thrust).

---------------

In addition - We will probably be limiting fire-control with a very minor change. That is the max assitance bonus it can give is a +3 to any one single attack.

I'm looking forward to your comments and/or alternative solutions. Thanks!
Please not that the intent is to even up the affect of skill in space-combat defence (similar to classic CT) - and that overall, the positive DMs can still be greater than the negative ones.

 

[dragoner]

My solution would be to playtest all three and pick that which works best; but be forewarned before delving too deeply into houserules, they have a tendency to scare off players.

 

[Nerhesi]

Thanks dragoner - thats why I really want to stick to simple, elegant solution. I dont want us to have to remember a set of rules rather than make it feel almost natural.

 

[F33D]

(b) Currently, Gunnery + Characteristic figure very heavily in being able to hit your target. Piloting skill is NEAR irrelevant.

As it should be. As ships only have M-drives between 1-6 G's (~10-60 meters/sec) and weapons are either light speed or guided missiles with 10 G's of accel, what the pilot does has almost no impact on whether the ship gets hit. To rule it otherwise would be introducing "magic" as nothing else could explain it.

 

[Chas]

One variant you could try, and something I'd thought might help for fighter combat, is to allow the pilot skill to apply if greater than the gunnery skill to fixed mount weapons, or accrue.

 

[Nerhesi]

(b) Currently, Gunnery + Characteristic figure very heavily in being able to hit your target. Piloting skill is NEAR irrelevant.

As it should be. As ships only have M-drives between 1-6 G's (~10-60 meters/sec) and weapons are either light speed or guided missiles with 10 G's of accel, what the pilot does has almost no impact on whether the ship gets hit. To rule it otherwise would be introducing "magic" as nothing else could explain it.

This is the same irrelevant argument that we've had on the T5 forums:

(a) If piloting skill is irrelevant then so is gunnery - then both should be removed.
(b) Your argument is rife with assumptions being able to actual place your "crosshair/aim/whatever" on your target in the first place.
(d) The game system flatly counters your argument being allowing modifiers for distance and dodging in the first place.

If you consider dodging magic, I recommend you remove all gunner skill, characteristic, distance or any other modifiers from your game. Simply have a modifier for the "computer" - and if you want ot be truly realistic, then you should not have any shot miss. At all. Because if you can't hit at those distances, you will never hit. And if you can ever hit, you should always hit.

In other words - we're playing a game - not a math-sim of select the target and click on it.

 

[F33D]

This is the same irrelevant argument that we've had on the T5 forums:

It is only irrelevant if one doesn't understand or use, Trav ships.

 

[Nerhesi]

This is the same irrelevant argument that we've had on the T5 forums:

It is only irrelevant if one doesn't understand or use, Trav ships.

The same traveller ships that rely heavily on gunnery "skill" and are affected by dodging modifiers, and somehow have modifiers to light speed weapons depending on if the target is 1000km or 25000km away? Core/Highguard RAW; you're being selectively obtuse by applying real world math when required and ignoring it when it doesnt fit your viewpoint.

Your argument is directly contradicted by core rules - which I am not arguing. I'm not looking to make traveller a realistic equation with no character interaction.

 

[F33D]

Core/Highguard RAW; you're being selectively obtuse by applying real world math when required and ignoring it when it doesnt fit your viewpoint.

No, I'm just pointing out that a pilot isn't that useful for dodging. It is the level of Manuever available that is telling. A person with Pilot-100 can only dodge based on the M-drive. A pilot-1 can apply as much "dodging" as a Pilot-100. Whereas a gunner can possibly use skill to get past ECM, weapon lock jamming, etc.

You are simply not thinking. (there two can be obnoxious)

 

[Nerhesi]

Core/Highguard RAW; you're being selectively obtuse by applying real world math when required and ignoring it when it doesnt fit your viewpoint.

No, I'm just pointing out that a pilot isn't that useful for dodging. It is the level of Manuever available that is telling. A person with Pilot-100 can only dodge based on the M-drive. A pilot-1 can apply as much "dodging" as a Pilot-100. Whereas a gunner can possibly use skill to get past ECM, weapon lock jamming, etc.

You are simply not thinking. (there two can be obnoxious)

What garbage - lol.

a) If piloting skill is not useful, then gunner skill should not be useful for targetting. It doesn't take skill to select the target and have the computer fire. This is your scenario.
b) Gunnery skill has nothing to do with any of what you claim - note the game has a seperate mechanic for lock-on and jamming. That is rightfully a sensor-ops roll.

You're all over the place with your argument - just like the other Thrust thread.

First you argue that piloting skill does not matter. (A piloting skill is required to dodge by RAW)
Then you argue that it does matter but it doesn't - it is merely a available thrust that matters. A clearly non-sensical statement that you'd have to prove before making (You're saying all pilots are equal in the same craft basically - complete hogwash. Somebody tell the airforce and ignore all the history books please).
Finally, when on your heels, you argue that Gunnery has to do with ECM, Weapon Lock jamming and other things that covered by completely different rules and are flat out not what it is by RAW. (I guess dextrous fingers help you with ECM jamming? It must be a tetris game since Gunnery can be based off Dex or Int).

You need to find an actual argument and stick to it - not jump between reasons whenever one is tossed in the trash because it makes no sense. If you want to play a game where skill doesn't matter, then please do! I hope you enjoy it! Just dont go around pushing your house-rules as "rational" when your arguments are basically you're adhoc decision on what should matter and what shouldn't.

 

[rust]

Could the gentlemen perhaps continue their little flamewar with
personal messages ? :roll:

 

[DickTurpin]

Both of you seem to be warping what the other is saying and then pointing out how ridiculous the altered version of the argument is. To make things simple I will lay out the arguments with examples to make the actual arguments clear.

"Ship thrust is more important that Pilot skill when dodging":

Very true. There is a clear point of diminishing returns with pilot skill (or any skill in Traveller). After Pilot-3 additional increases in skill do not add much to the chance of success in normal circumstances. AND most ships that characters have access to will not be doing much dodging anyway. Free Traders, Far Traders, Fat Traders, Heavy Traders and Yachts all have Thrust 1. They can either move or take a single maneuver action (such as dodge), not both. If they are heading for the jump limit to get away then there is nothing else the pilot can do, no matter how skilled he may be. Even a ship like the Corsair that has extra Thrust available probably has more important things for the Pilot to do than sit still in space jinking the ship from side to side.

If the pilot wants to help the gunners hit, he can Help line up a shot, if he wants to help defense he can Dodge incoming fire, if he wants to Dock (or avoid being docked with) he can do that as well. That last option is the only one where having an unusually high Pilot skill would be helpful. I don't think the Pilot has any reason to whine about not being able to do anything in combat; he should instead be whining that they need a faster ship.

"If the computer does everything then Pilot and Gunner skills should both be dropped":
Sadly, this is also true. By TL 13 automated ship should be the norm, leaving actual people (the players) with nothing to do. By removing staterooms, bridge, galley, etc. valuable space can be freed up for paying cargo. If people need to get between star systems they can be shipped as freight in low berths. This does not make for a very exciting game however so it is probably best that we suspend our disbelief and leave those skills, along with other unnecessary skills like Sensors, Comms, Steward, etc. in place.



I can see making a dodge count against every attack that turn; I don’t think there is a huge problem with that change. Making the Dodge DM scale with Thrust applied can quickly get out of hand, but only on the rare ships with really high Thrust. If you want to go this route I would change the Dodge DM to equal the Thrust applied rather than twice Thrust.

 

[Nerhesi]

Could the gentlemen perhaps continue their little flamewar with
personal messages ? :roll:

I do apologise - it's gotten out of hand. I merely wanted feedback on how to make skill matter, in a scenario that applies skill in a one-sided manner.

I was not looking at how realistic any of solutions are, as a realistic solution would simply dispense with gunnery skill, and the missing your target all-together (as the gent above had pointed out).

 

[Nerhesi]

"If the computer does everything then Pilot and Gunner skills should both be dropped":

Sadly, this is also true. By TL 13 automated ship should be the norm, leaving actual people (the players) with nothing to do. By removing staterooms, bridge, galley, etc. valuable space can be freed up for paying cargo. If people need to get between star systems they can be shipped as freight in low berths. This does not make for a very exciting game however so it is probably best that we suspend our disbelief and leave those skills, along with other unnecessary skills like Sensors, Comms, Steward, etc. in place.

I can see making a dodge count against every attack that turn; I don’t think there is a huge problem with that change. Making the Dodge DM scale with Thrust applied can quickly get out of hand, but only on the rare ships with really high Thrust. If you want to go this route I would change the Dodge DM to equal the Thrust applied rather than twice Thrust.

First - thanks for the feedback.

I think the issue stemmed from the idea of opposed skill-tests and fact that gunnery+characteristic ends up being a massive skill bonus. Your possible positive modifiers with zero negative modifiers for skill means that a veteran crew in an enemy space-craft is basically blasting away at you, never missing - reducing the effect of player character statistics and skill/decision making (reducing, not removing).

Perhaps it could be as simple as removing the dodge mechanic completely and simply subtracting piloting skill+char from gunnery skill+char whenever the target if fired upon.

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

(c) This results in average gunners (+1 Characteristic DM and Gunner 2 for example) having a trivial time in hitting targets, especially when considering Fire Control software.

What difficulty DMs (if any) are you using?

 

[dragoner]

Perhaps it could be as simple as removing the dodge mechanic completely and simply subtracting piloting skill+char from gunnery skill+char whenever the target if fired upon.

I would not remove something that has the pilot character rolling in combat, just on rpg principle.

 

[Nerhesi]

In an interesting comparisson, this is Classic Traveller:

ATTACKER'S DMs
Predict/1 +1
Predict/2 +2
Predict/3 +2
Predic/4 +3
Predict/5 +3
Gunner Interact +gunner skill

DEFENDER'S DMs
Maneuver/Evade/1 -1/4 pilot skill
Maneuver/Evade/2 -1/2 pilot skill
Maneuver/Evade/3 -3/4 pilot skill
Maneuver/Evade/4 -pilot skill
Maneuver/Evade/5 -pilot skill
Maneuver/Evade/6 -5
Range greater than 2500mm -2
Range greater than 5000mm -5
Obscuring sand (per 25mm) -3


Interestingly, assuming equal skill and technology; you would hit your target, at best on 5+. At longer ranges on 7+ or 10+. Should they be using sand, itd be impossible to hit them at ranges of 5000mm+

 

[Nerhesi]

(c) This results in average gunners (+1 Characteristic DM and Gunner 2 for example) having a trivial time in hitting targets, especially when considering Fire Control software.

What difficulty DMs (if any) are you using?

Hey Shawn,

Using High Guard ranges - the second you have long range weaponry (particle and so on) we've encountered the following:

Gunnery + Characteristic (anywhere from a +3 to a +5 depending on the character. That is any character that be firing a turret generally). The maximum you may get is actually a monstrous +7, not counting if any psionic is on a turret possibly adding more positive DMs. Regardless, I am neither counting maximum nor psionic enhancement.

Considering a range modifier of 0, and no other negative DMs, you end up needing anywhere from a 5+ to a 2+ to hit. Dodging and evade software can modify this but they can be easily outdone by firecontrol software and lining up the shot (-2 and -1 vs up to +5 and +1, respectively).

Lockong and breaklockon can be a wash too.

Am I missing anything shawn?

 

[Nerhesi]

Perhaps it could be as simple as removing the dodge mechanic completely and simply subtracting piloting skill+char from gunnery skill+char whenever the target if fired upon.

I would not remove something that has the pilot character rolling in combat, just on rpg principle.

Oh I would definitely still have them roll to hit bud. I'm saying their +DM to hit would be:

Gunnery+characteristic - target's Piloting+target's characteristic.

You'd still then roll with your net modifier needing an 8+ as per normal.

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

(c) This results in average gunners (+1 Characteristic DM and Gunner 2 for example) having a trivial time in hitting targets, especially when considering Fire Control software.

What difficulty DMs (if any) are you using?

Hey Shawn,

Using High Guard ranges - the second you have long range weaponry (particle and so on) we've encountered the following:

Gunnery + Characteristic (anywhere from a +3 to a +5 depending on the character. That is any character that be firing a turret generally). The maximum you may get is actually a monstrous +7, not counting if any psionic is on a turret possibly adding more positive DMs. Regardless, I am neither counting maximum nor psionic enhancement.

Considering a range modifier of 0, and no other negative DMs, you end up needing anywhere from a 5+ to a 2+ to hit. Dodging and evade software can modify this but they can be easily outdone by firecontrol software and lining up the shot (-2 and -1 vs up to +5 and +1, respectively).

Lockong and breaklockon can be a wash too.

Am I missing anything shawn?

Ok, say on a clear day you can see forever, etc. You have a clean first shot at a peaceful ship parked outside. Then what happens? Your next shot is not going to be as easy.