Summary - your Top 10 items that need to be addressed


Cosmic Mongoose
In light of Matt's recent ask - I believe we can make his job a lot easier by rounding up these last few weeks of feedback into the top 10 items that we each feel need to be addressed before High Guard is closed. These 10 items (or less) should be listed in terms of priority and with no more than a 1-liner description. This post should not be used to argue other points but to serve as an index for concern and a starting point for Matt to make decisions on what he would like to address. It would be very informative too if he notices that the same item is in the top 3-4 of a bunch of us.

Again - lets not use this post to argue our points (those post exists) and lets keep editing our posts rather than adding more and more replies. Ideally, each person here should have 1 post with their listed items in order of priority.

I will start (and edit and modify as need be):

1) Change critical severity for crit hits on ships that 1000+ tons to be 5% of hull value. Otherwise we have a single large bay disabling ships with the current severity per 10 pts.
2) Effect of Salvos on Fighters - many fighters. A salvo should spread itself among fighters, therefore not attacking a single fighter with 100 + missiles.
3) Salvos cannot be used on fighters that are dog-fighting the firing ship. Salvos can be used by others on targets involved in a dog-fight but with some bad risk.
4) Hangars vs Docking Spaces vs Tubes. Build in the tube functionality into Hangars - so Hangars become the superior option to docking spaces (clearly so). Increased Launch rate and so on.
5) Clarify that sections are ships for breakaway hulls.
6) Increase Meson Spinal Damage (I believe we said we should double it?)
7) Clarify screens are an 8+ check
8) Clarify when dog-fights, when they actually start (preferably the turn when the fighters START in dogfight range) and how fighters have all thrust available each turn
9) ...


Cosmic Mongoose
For the #2 question, we actually need a process to group fighters by flights/squadrons/etc. X number of fighters automatically are grouped into a size category. Attacks against OR from them are treated as a single attack on a single target per turn. And attacking players have to determine their groups PRIOR to their launch, and they can organize them, within some reason, as 10 flights, 20 squadrons, etc. This reflects that fighters have to train together as a unit, and is also why they attack/defend as a unit.

If each fighter has 10pts of damage it can take, and there are 10 fighters in the squadron, then the fighter squadron can take 100 pts. Every 10 pts of damage reduces the squadron by 1 fighter, and the accompanying power that the squadron has.

Though really, what we need for fighters and sub-100 ton craft is an entire supplement covering carrier operations (heck, it should also probably include rider operations as well, since they are just bigger fighter craft for a lot of things). And this is where we could discuss launch rates, hangarage, etc. I think it would get a better shot at being done properly.


Cosmic Mongoose
Changes 160318.

Top issues:
1) High technology chapter, either it is in by default or it is out by default. Currently it is in by default, Warp drives and all.
2) Clarify (complete rewrite) dogfighting rules.
3) Clarify Breakaway hulls, each section is a separate ship. Clarify breakaway hulls in combat, which section is hit?
6) Increase Meson Spinal Damage.

7) Hangars, launch tubes... Currently Docking Clamps are default, because they are cheapest (in tonnage).
8 ) Clarify when the effect of Ion ends.
10) Clarify how remote control of drones controlled by Virtual Crew works. What skill? What skill check DM?
11) Include spinal mounts in list of systems that cannot be modular, p37.

13) Power plant technological steps (p12) are too small, or tech advantages are too big (p51). It is generally better to use a lower tech power plant with tech upgrades. E.g. at TL15 we use a TL12 power plant with three tech advantages "Size Reduction".
14) Clarify screens are an 8+ check. Clarify Screens only used once.
15) PD Batteries, type I and II useless. Make them Type I 2D+2, Type II 3D, Type III 3D?
16) Software Screen Optimiser: Small chance to do anything useful. OK if screens are 8+ check?
17) Software Broad Spectrum EW: Very small chance to do anything, allow hardware DM, no skill DM?
15) Crew requirements: Do we really need these armies of engineers (and gunners), but no bridge crew? Sensor Ops?
16) Nearly free armour on planetoids. The same 10 points of added armour is ~1/10th the cost on a planetoid.
17) How does a Force Link Apparatus [HG, p45] work? In the table we have a Pilot Check DM (docking roll?), but in the text it talks about a bonus on the boarding action roll?
18) Shallow Penetration Sensor gives detailed information at longer ranges than regular sensors upgraded with arrays and extension nets.
19) Clarify sensor performance at Very Distant and Far ranges, like the Sensor Target table (Core, p150).

Some more minor issues in the "Locking High Guard" thread. Sorry I got a little overexcited...


Cosmic Mongoose
AnotherDilbert said:
Some more minor issues in the "Locking High Guard" thread. Sorry I got a little overexcited...

We need more people to get "a little excited" like this. :)


Cosmic Mongoose
1) A line stating whether or not a barbette is 1 ton of turret space plus 5 tons of internal space or just 5 tons of internal space taking up a hardpoint in an unspecified way. I've had people argue at the table for both sides of the argument. (is it 6 tons or 5 tons on a design sheet basically)
2) How many weapons can be placed into a barbette? As being effectively heavy turrets can more than one weapon be placed in them ? Can altering tech levels and weapon size allow more weapons into the barbette?
3) better descriptions of different ship configurations, all of them. Pictures would be good as well.
4) Correct the breakaway ship example. The speeds are wrong. It should end up with M-8


Okay, I'll try to keep it to stuff not mentioned yet above:

1. Revisit hull point gradation. Nehersi put up a new table.
2. Clarify Ion weapon damage: how to apply it (a % of components or who choses where it goes?), and effects (what happens at -50% basic systems or if a ship's power is completely drained?)
3. Fleet scale systems, especially screens and in particular nuclear dampers and balance vs massed usage of nuclear missiles (my personal preference is for a 'trim' system -2D/missile).
4. Revisit multiple warhead weapons... after the other issues like screens and PD have been finalized.
5. Suggested change for Tachyons
6. Revisit low tech combat. Less than TL12 is simply mutual destruction by nuclear weapons (the rail gun spinal is redundant) without effective PD and dampers. TL12 will not be any different unless dampers work, etc.
7. Change the description of how screens work so they are used after the weapon attack roll not before. Also dampers should remove 2d/missile or torp, not multiples of 2d of one missile.