Shipbuilding in Campaigns

[IanBruntlett]

Hi,

Given a big campaign (where governments go to war etc), new ships are constructed to try and gain advantages over opposing goverment's fleets.

I've got the ACTA rule book and fleet list book.

They're good but I'd like to take things further and use the B5 RPG's book, the "Ship Builder's Manual" in a big ACTA campaign, one day.

Could Mongoose provide some crossover rules for building new designs in B5 ACTA?

TIA


Ian

 

[Locutus9956]

The problem with custom ships is that the existing ACTA ships are not built to a preset set of rules and the PL system make it so that custom ships are open to serious abuse! It's a nice idea but I cant see it working very well with the current PL system I'm afraid.

 

[tneva82]

Hi,

Given a big campaign (where governments go to war etc), new ships are constructed to try and gain advantages over opposing goverment's fleets.

Don't tell me you are refering to system where you add X weapon and pay Y for it? Those won't work and inevitably will be broken by players so campaigns would soon turn from real ships to most broken ships players can come up with...

Ugh. No thanks :-/

 

[G'Reat]

Maybe you could houserule that in a campaign game you can choose which refit you get (instead of rolling two dice) ? I would increase the cost for this from 2 XP to 4 XP. Or that you allow that ships can be bought from an "allied" fllet list. So that you could play a Narn and choose for example to be allied with the Vree and buy a limited number of ships from your "allied" fleet.

 

[Burger]

I thought of allowing players to choose refits as well, most people said it was a rubbish idea but I still think it's a great one. Of course the good ones would cost more XP than the naff ones. So the choice would be: do you pimp your ship with lots of small upgrades now, or wait a few more turns for that really good one (and potentially die before ever getting it!)

 

[nekomata fuyu]

The house rule we use is that you pay to roll on the tables, but you don't have to apply the results if you don't like them. That at least softens the blow from results which are downgrades.

 

[noobdelux]

what do you mark as downgrades?

 

[Da Boss]

the new tables a re good step forward

Not a fan of Time in Orbit...................

 

[nekomata fuyu]

what do you mark as downgrades?

One example would be Turbo Weapons. The weapon in question may gain double damage, but it loses over half of its AD in the process, for a net loss. Reinforced hull is another one I would hesitate to take in many cases, where the extra couple of points of damage just don't begin to compensate for the loss of speed in my eyes.

 

[noobdelux]

maybe thats somthing to do with balance?

 

[Methos5000]

If the attack dice are reduced in turbo weapons for balance, where is the balance for the Minbari's Focused Neutron Generator or the Narn's Overcharged Ion Torpedos? Both of those receive upgrade to their damage (Triple and Double respectively) with no reduction in AD or range. Granted those are specific weapon systems but those are pretty impressive upgrades (especially in the Minbari's case, several ships can gain this refit and its a huge upgrade for a beam weapon now) also both of those weapon systems are also precise which means easier chance of getting crits AND it does more damage now, whereas everyone with the Turbo weapons upgrade get DD with 1/2 attack dice so they have less chances of causing crits with their newly upgraded weapons then they did before the upgrade.

Now im not saying the Minbari and Narn upgrades are overpowered, im just using them as an example that the weapon damage upgrades are not balanced. How does getting a damage upgrade but losing AD equal a damage upgrade with no loss of AD?

The Narn Upgrade is fairly limited to offset it, not many ships have Ion Torpedos, but the Minbari have several ships with beams so even between these two examples its not balanced. Plus the Narn weapon can be intercepted the Minbari one cannot.

My point being between fleets some upgrades are unbalanced to begin with. Turbo weapons is great on a ship with only a few AD per weapon system, but large weapon arrays suffer because of this 'upgrade' hence the reason some consider it a downgrade.

My solution just make Turbo weapons DD with no AD reduction, if your worried the ship will become to powerful in a campaign with many of they upgrades, well then you better work on making sure it doesnt survive.
Plus the calculation for Turbo weapons is messed up with 1AD systems, 1AD /2 = 1/2AD rounded up to 1AD +1 AD = 2AD DD Weapon from a 1AD single Damage gun, now thats an upgrade.....

 

[Harry Lonsdale]

Turbo Weapons doesn't halve AD, it reduces them to half (rounded up)+1. In our campaign I have a Strikehawk with it on both weapons systems and it is plenty nasty. The Dilgar City Levellers isn't quite as good since it reduces them to just half (rounded up).

I suppose the Strikehawk is a special case though, since 3 halved, rounded up, plus 1 is still 3

 

[nekomata fuyu]

Turbo Weapons actually hits low AD systems the worst, as the calculation given is how much the AD is reduced by. Example: For a 2AD system, half is 1AD, +1 is 2AD. 2AD reduced by 2AD is... well, the weapon system technically now has double damage, so it's supposedly balanced :lol:

It's all good and well saying that the drawbacks on certain results are for balance, but that requires balance between the benefit and drawback. As such, some results remain as downgrades, and I think it's bad enough for the player that they've just lost 2 hard fought for XP, without the slap in the face of also forcing him to downgrade his ship.

 

[Methos5000]

I guess it depends on how you read the rules. I have always read it as the weapons attack dice are cut in half (rounded up) and then 1AD is added to it.

so a 15AD weapon is cut in half to 7.5AD rounded up to 8AD and then 1AD is added for a total of 9AD.

Maybe I have read that wrong but I thought thats the way it was done?

Even if the way my group has done it is correct i still consider it a downgrade.

 

[nekomata fuyu]

I read it that way at first glance, at which point I was at least willing to consider it as being worthwhile, but now that I've reread it, it definitely says "reduce by" rather than "reduce to" . Unfortunately, this means that the calculation gives you the number of AD that you lose, not the number that you're left with.

 

[Taran]

Well, the question, in that case, is how good are the Mongoose Publishers at Math?

If they aren't so good, then I would agree that "x reduced by half +1" equals "x-((x/2)+1)"

If they are good at math, then it's "x-x/2+1"

 

[katadder]

Turbo Weapons actually hits low AD systems the worst, as the calculation given is how much the AD is reduced by. Example: For a 2AD system, half is 1AD, +1 is 2AD. 2AD reduced by 2AD is... well, the weapon system technically now has double damage, so it's supposedly balanced :lol:

It's all good and well saying that the drawbacks on certain results are for balance, but that requires balance between the benefit and drawback. As such, some results remain as downgrades, and I think it's bad enough for the player that they've just lost 2 hard fought for XP, without the slap in the face of also forcing him to downgrade his ship.

you should see it on a Tiracas beam 1AD halved rounded up plus 1 gives a 2AD precise DD beam. best upgrade for them.

 

[inq101]

If you want to put a custom ship into a campaign I'd advice making it part of the campaign. Write a mission where player A finds out about the new ship and tries to destroy it in dock/capture it/steal the plans for it.

It would also be good to check with the other players first and show them the stats for the new ship.

 

[nekomata fuyu]

Turbo Weapons actually hits low AD systems the worst, as the calculation given is how much the AD is reduced by. Example: For a 2AD system, half is 1AD, +1 is 2AD. 2AD reduced by 2AD is... well, the weapon system technically now has double damage, so it's supposedly balanced :lol:

It's all good and well saying that the drawbacks on certain results are for balance, but that requires balance between the benefit and drawback. As such, some results remain as downgrades, and I think it's bad enough for the player that they've just lost 2 hard fought for XP, without the slap in the face of also forcing him to downgrade his ship.

you should see it on a Tiracas beam 1AD halved rounded up plus 1 gives a 2AD precise DD beam. best upgrade for them.

Not according to the rules. 1AD weapons will have their AD reduced by 2AD, so you end up with a -1AD DD weapon (a repair beam?). Of course, if the rules are misphrased and "reduced to" is what's intended, we can throw it in with all the other errata we seem to be needing :wink:

 

[Burger]

Repair beam sounds cool. It's also a Crew resurrection beam! Nice!