Topic: Sector Assault imported damage lesson learned

[Skaren]

Man the more I look it over the better the map is.  Still the more I look it over the more I see hunderds and hundreds of ships.

That sorta scale is beyond the ability to resolve at least with my current methods.

How long did it last?  how many turns?  What ended it?

I would take a section of that map and use it.

PS I backtracked a little on the web address, that is fine site, I can see I will be taking a long lunch break tomorrow to digest it, look for rules, etc.  I have heard of this F&E interface and clearly need to learn more about it.  The only thing I do not like is the fleet locations are public.  Stll did I mention that is a nice map 

[KBF-Crim]

I do find it pretty cool that you folks are even discussing it.

So Krim,.. my question is why the need for missions in a turn based game?  I know in dyna you use them for money to buy better ships.  In my games you use control of planetary systems for EP/BPV to build new ships.  Control of resources is what should matter not how many hours you have played.   If your going turn based, missions should not matter.  You play only in terrain dictated by the map and where you have battles,  at the end of a turn you tally up hexes that produce EP and spend to build ships (those take turns depending on the size).

http://sfbuaw.com/UAWmap.htm  last campaign map with worm holes to a secondary map.  Systems produced EP based on the type of system.

In our games missions are developed by the natural course of the game.  IE someone is building a B11K at a base and you want to kill it before it is finished.  Or for example in our current game the Federation President has led an attack into Klingon, now damaged he is trying to get back out with a damaged fleet while Klingon units are converging on his space.  The game and players in a way create the missions themselves. 

I realize that this is like trying to rebuild a car from the ground up, but it is at least fun to hear the ideals inbetween dyna's

problem with turn based games..

unavaialble 24/7

No automation...Some of this stuff simply needs to be played against AI...

As you say...scale..

[Capt_Bearslayer_XC]

Made a relatively nice post for you Skaren, unfortunately, Dnet ate it when it went down...


http://coinich.com/starfleet/oclub/vg2.php

Is the STOC site with all the info you need....

[Skaren]

I have played with the Cyberboard stuff before and you cannot open VG2.gbx with any of the versions of Cyberboard.

I downloaded 3 different versions of it after the one on the website fails to open it.

It was a dead end for me.

Krim, then you need to look at why someone would set up a game that has an improper scale.  That does not "have" to be the case.  You only need to fall back to AI battles when the scale is set wrong to begin with.   For the most part AI battles are pretty lame, and the outcome pretty predictable.

Because you cannot play it 24/24 does not mean it is not worth playing.  You still can enjoy Dyna's 24/24.  The turn based games can offer so much more.  If run properly and designed well to begin with.

[Capt_Bearslayer_XC]

The file must be corrupted then, b/c I am getting the same info.... I am checking to see if I might have another copy stored away from when I was playing, but I doubt it.

BTW, you asked how many turns it went.  The first one I was involved with got to turn 22 before we switched to SCFII... That is when the VG2 came out and that lasted 26 turns. 

It ended well over a year & a half ago and we ran 48 turns between my joining in '99 and my leaving in 2004.

So it averaged about 1 turn a month.

[Skaren]

Sounds like a real nice campaign. 

If I recall about 9 months ago you proposed a F&E style game that got bogged down in,.. um,.. discussions.  I wish you had continued.  Sometimes better to just make the calls and game rather than have endless loops of talks.

I think it funny that the two different campaigns (STOC and mine)  evolved independently but have a lot in common, even the turn length is very close.

So how did damage get tracked in STOC?  Wouldn't that put it pre Sector Assault?  We used to do SFB campaigns and the first SFC one, had no damage carry over, it was either unit killed or 100% health in next battle.  Everyone was pretty excited to see Sector Assault Mod, it has become the corner stone of our campaigns.

[Capt_Bearslayer_XC]

Some of STOC was pre SA, especially the VG1 campaign. I entered the original VG in Turn 8 as a Fed.  And honestly, I don't think I  have the VG rules from SFCI to check what we did to resolve base attacks.  I do know it was very important to me as the Hydran leader as bases provided supply for fleets (3 hex range) and I took out a lot of Klink bases to secure my borders during VG2. (doncha just love the lack of bases along the klink/hydran border? )

Damage was pretty simple, if a ship took over 50% damage in combat, it was considered damaged on the VG map (look for the ones with red lines across the tile).  That meant no strategic movement (which was only base to base anyways) and it had to be repaired at a base or FRD (the tiles with the big H on them).  If they got into combat, spd 15 was the max it could do (player enforced there) and SA provided random 50% damage.  In the original rules, they took on class smaller to represent the damaged ship. (ie a Fed CL would represent a damaged Fed CC/CA)

As for starting up a similar game, yeah, I got discouraged... if I start back up again, I will probably start with the STOC VG2 Rule set and modify from there.  A lot of it worked quite well.  Battle resolution is quite the bugger for large fleets though.