The Ur-Quan Masters Home Page Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 27, 2022, 11:42:38 pm
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Paul & Fred have reached a settlement with Stardock!

+  The Ur-Quan Masters Discussion Forum
|-+  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release
| |-+  General UQM Discussion (Moderator: Death 999)
| | |-+  Star Control - The RPG/Board Game
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10 Print
Author Topic: Star Control - The RPG/Board Game  (Read 37222 times)
Clay
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 169


What can we do for you...today?


View Profile
Re: Star Control - The RPG/Board Game
« Reply #60 on: March 03, 2007, 06:41:51 pm »

1.  The Full Stop descriptor (from the Umgah Drone's Reverse Jump) should have been in the Androsynth text.  Oversight.
2.  Yes, wrapping is used.
3.  Chenjesu ALREADY has lousy PILOT.  I don't see what need there is to make it worse.
4.  Lasers, keep in mind you're not just defending against the lasers (which are, in fact, an automatic hit) but the other player's reflexes.  Can you teleport BEFORE the opponent fires.  The PILOT (and ATTACK) dice include much more than the simple math used in the game.
5. Misses hitting other targets.  Probably not.  If nothing else, because line of fire is abstracted (straight shooting weapons can effectively shoot a little to the left or right) it's complicated to determine the EXACT line of fire to see if other ships are hit.

As for the Utwig shield, it SHOULD have read PILOT die is rolled regardless to determine fuel regeneration.  This is an oversight.
Logged
Valaggar
Guest


Email
Re: Star Control - The RPG/Board Game
« Reply #61 on: March 03, 2007, 07:10:08 pm »

About inertia - thrust and inertia should not be cumulative. I mean, if  you move, say, three hexes forward, you should not move in the same turn's inertia phase the three hexes forward, because thrust means really simply modifying your inertia, so your max speed in a single turn should be equal to your thrust speed unless you use a Gravity Whip.
I mean:
Hexes moved via Thrust | Hexes moved via Inertia in the same turn  (assuming initial inertia 3)
0                                             3
1                                             2
2                                             1
3                                             0
(still, your inertia will still be 3 after the turn, it just doesn't effect anything/so much in that turn since the thrust makes all/part of the propulsion job)
Logged
Valaggar
Guest


Email
Re: Star Control - The RPG/Board Game
« Reply #62 on: March 03, 2007, 07:25:18 pm »

Also, turning should also subtract from your remaining thrust points in that turn, because, say, if you have 3 Thrust and 2 Turn, consider that in UQM using 3 Thrusts + 2 Turns will take longer than simply using 3 Thrusts: you must first thrust and only afterwards you can start turning, and while you turn you will still move out of inertia.
So: Ship using 3 Thrust/1 game turn:                   3 hexes forward       Time required: 3 time units
       Ship using 3 Thrust + 2 Turn / 1 game turn: 3 hexes forward + say 2 hexes forward out of inertia + 2 turns  Time required: 5 time units

So you can see that these different turns last different time intervals. So you must use my suggestion.  Smiley

Additionally, inertia should be like this (I'm not sure if it would be a good idea though): If in a turn you move 3 hexes north and 1 hex northwest, your inertia is 3 N + 1 NW, i.e. you move 3 N and 1 NW each turn with that inertia.
Logged
Clay
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 169


What can we do for you...today?


View Profile
Re: Star Control - The RPG/Board Game
« Reply #63 on: March 03, 2007, 08:00:02 pm »

I'm aware of the potential doubling up of thrust and inertia. I'm still trying to think of how to handle that simply.  However, keep in mind this is a board game and not a second by second computer game reenactment.  It's more important to keep the game fun and fast than to painstakingly recreate UQM's inertial law.

But I really hate to see, say, a Pkunk abuse inertia...10 hexes a turn is ugly.  As it stands, I can't think of an easy way to curb this usage.  Again, any major math during the movement/inertia phases should be highly discouraged.

I thought about making inertia "forced spending of THRUST points"  ie. if you have a N Inertia of 2 hexes, you automatically deduct two THRUST points before your movement phase.

The obvious problem is if you ever move your full movement in one direction, you'd be stuck moving that way FOREVER.

Another idea is to subtract half your inertia from your THRUST...but eh...I expressed how much I hate additional math.
Logged
Valaggar
Guest


Email
Re: Star Control - The RPG/Board Game
« Reply #64 on: March 03, 2007, 08:22:55 pm »

There's no need of calculus/18th degree equations here...  Grin

Why would it be so hard to calculate this? It's that simple:
Thrust=Max Speed in a Turn (Movement + Inertia phases) (KEEP IN MIND, I MEAN MAX THRUST, NOT THE THRUST YOU ACTUALLY USED IN THAT TURN)
Movement due to inertia decreases for that turn only in order not to go beyond the Max Speed in a Turn.
(without inertia actually decreasing)
For Gravity Whip speed boosts... you should first make the rule and then think of the inertia thing.

There's still a question you have to answer:
Turning should also subtract from your remaining thrust points in that turn, because, say, if you have 3 Thrust and 2 Turn, consider that in UQM using 3 Thrusts + 2 Turns will take longer than simply using 3 Thrusts: you must first thrust and only afterwards you can start turning, and while you turn you will still move out of inertia.
So: Ship using 3 Thrust/1 game turn:                   3 hexes forward
       Time required: 3 time units
_______________________________________________________________________________________
       Ship using 3 Thrust + 2 Turn / 1 game turn: 3 hexes forward + say 2 hexes forward out of inertia + 2 turns
       Time required: 5 time units (3 for thrust, 2 for turning the ship)

So you can see that these different turns last different time intervals. This means that turning should also cost thrust points, in order not to use more actions (turning/thrusting) than you can in one movement phase (not more actions than your thrust rating). So if you want to turn, you should sacrifice a bit of the thrust you would have liked to use in that turn.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2007, 08:25:29 pm by Valaggar » Logged
Clay
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 169


What can we do for you...today?


View Profile
Re: Star Control - The RPG/Board Game
« Reply #65 on: March 03, 2007, 08:38:07 pm »

I already answered the second question.  This is not a second-by-second computer game reenactment.  Grin  If you wanna play the computer game, play it.  I don't see the point in painstakingly accounting for the time it takes to turn, where every movement phase becomes a careful balancing of points.  Just move and turn.  It works.  It's simple.  Everything doesn't have to be a 100% accurate.

As for inertia...I'm not sure if I understand what you mean.  Are you saying to cap the amount you can move in any direction? (ie. a ship with 2 N and a max thrust of 2 could still move 2 hexes in its turn, just not in the N direction?)
Logged
Clay
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 169


What can we do for you...today?


View Profile
Re: Star Control - The RPG/Board Game
« Reply #66 on: March 04, 2007, 04:14:20 am »

Okay, updated rules with everything except:

1) PD Laser and other "attacking" reflex actions like the Avenger Hellfire is still ill-defined for dealing with stuff like Fusion Blasts and lasers.
2) Guardian bubble still blows (haha)
3) Fury Resurrection has not been attended to.
4) Inertia rules have not been revisited.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2007, 04:31:11 am by Clay » Logged
Valaggar
Guest


Email
Re: Star Control - The RPG/Board Game
« Reply #67 on: March 04, 2007, 08:17:27 am »

OK, now I see. If you were to accept my suggestion with the turning that costs thrust points, it would have been more difficult for the player to make sideways attacks. I surrender.

Quote from: Clay
As for inertia...I'm not sure if I understand what you mean.  Are you saying to cap the amount you can move in any direction? (ie. a ship with 2 N and a max thrust of 2 could still move 2 hexes in its turn, just not in the N direction?)
No. I had two suggestions for inertia:
1. One that I have decided to drop out: Inertia can have also directions like NNW, SSE etc. No need for details, it's a bad idea.
2-1. First, a question about inertia. In your rules, inertia remains just for a turn or until the ship applies greater thrust and thus changes it? For if it's the latter, if you have just applied a Thrust of 5 N, you would be stuck going 5 N forever in the Inertia Phase!!!
2. About the second thing, with doubling up thrust and inertia, my idea works only if inertia stays there indefinitely. To make it stay there indefinitely without remaining stuck at the maximum value, you can do like this:
Initial Inertia: 0
Thrust: 5 N
Inertia: 5 N
-turn end-
Thrust: 3 S
Inertia: 5 N - 3 S = 2 N
-turn end-
Thrust: 3 NE
Inertia: 2 N + 3 NE

But it's painstaking to make these calculations each turn, I agree.
I think that your Inertia Law should be re-thought from scratch.
There are, as somebody mentioned, other boardgame with inertia. Some ideas there may be applied here.
Logged
Draxas
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1044



View Profile
Re: Star Control - The RPG/Board Game
« Reply #68 on: March 07, 2007, 05:25:59 pm »

I already answered the second question.  This is not a second-by-second computer game reenactment.  Grin  If you wanna play the computer game, play it.  I don't see the point in painstakingly accounting for the time it takes to turn, where every movement phase becomes a careful balancing of points.  Just move and turn.  It works.  It's simple.  Everything doesn't have to be a 100% accurate.

It needed to be said. Bogging this game down in excessive math would do a good job of killing it. Keeping it fast and simple sounds like the best recipe for keeping it fun.

As for inertia, here are my ideas. For the first, every ship should have a maximum normal speed, which is equal to their THRUST value (assuming a lack of outside influences, such as planetary gravity, movement abilities, etc.). When a ship is moving at full throttle in a given direction, inertia should not allow it to exceed this speed. So, a minor adjustment to the inertia rules:

Instead of making inertia moves at the start of every new turn, have them occur at the end of the turn, after all actions are complete. As before, inertia should move ships based on their previous heading, but only up to their maximum speed. This is similar to, or the same as, the proposal Valaggar put forward. It seems like a reasonable way to handle it, but the system does have some quirks that make little sense at times. Let's take some examples (since my explanation on its own kind of sucks), including a few that illustrate said shortcomings.

Example 1: The aformentioned Pkunk, with a THRUST of 5 and unlimited TURN. It starts off moving 5 N. At the end of the phase, it makes no inertia move, since it moved at maximum speed (and had no inertia anyway, but let's assume it was picking up off of an existing turn). Next turn, it turns NE and moves 5. Once again, no inertia move is made; the engines of the Fury are powerful enough to make inertia from its previous course negligible. On the next turn, it turns to face SE, and only applies 3 THRUST. Since it hasn't used its full allotment of thrust, it will make an inertia move at the end of its turn. Its heading in the last turn was 5 NE, but it used 3 thrust points during the turn. So the final inertia move would be to drift 2 NE. Since its dominant heading for the turn was the 3 SE, this will be used to determine its inertia for the next turn.

Example 2: The significantly slower and less manuverable Kohr-Ah, with THRUST 3 and TURN 2. It starts off moving 3 N. No inertia move is made since all THRUST points have been used. On the next turn, it turns SW and moves 3. Now, normally one would expect a clunky ship like the Marauder to drift significantly during this manuver, but according to this ruleset, it has used its maximum thrust, so no inertia move is made (this is quirk #1). On the next turn, the Marauder turns to SE and moves 2. Since it hasn't used its full allotment of thrust, it makes an inertia move of 1 SW to make up the difference. On its next turn, its inertia will be considered to be 2 SE.

Example 3: The nimble Spathi, which has THRUST and TURN 5. It starts off moving 5 N, so no inertia move is made. On its next turn, it turns to S and moves 5, essentially reversing its last move completely; the Eluder has powerful engines, and I'm sure we've all seen them do this in-game. No inertia move is made. On the next turn, the Eluder pulls yet another 180, but only moves 3 N. Since it hasn't used its full allotment of THRUST points, it will need to make an inertia move. However, because its last heading was 5 S, inertia will carry it 2 S, which basically means that the ship jumped forward 3 hexes, and then back 2, for a net movement of 1 N (this is quirk #2, and much nastier than the first). This technique is very easily abusable. If the Eluder's opponent was a slower ship (as it most likely will be), the pilot could fire his weapon at the apex of their movement, and then allow inertia to carry them backwards and out of the range of their target.

These quirks have led me to look at a different (and somewhat more complex) way of handling the inertia movement. It involves making inertia moves *during* the pilot's movement phase. Like the above, it caps a ship's maximum speed when moving at full throttle. However, it involves making inertia moves any time thrust is applied in a different direction as said inertia. Under this system, the net movement is used to determine inertia, with applied thrust always being dominant over inertia when applicable. Once again, my explanation is crap, so I'll reuse the same examples as above to try to illustrate.

Example 1: The Pkunk Fury, THRUST 5, unlimited TURN. It starts off moving 5 N, and so makes no inertia move (let's assume it was heading that way before). Next turn, it turns NE and moves 5. However, because its inertia is 5 N, it will need to deal with that as it moves. So for each hex the pilot moves the Fury NE, it is also immediately moved N one hex by inertia (leading to the move looking something like this: NE - N - NE - N - NE - N - NE - N - NE - N. This set of inertia rules has a much more obvious and profound impact on the motion of the ship). Next turn, the Fury turns SE and moves 3. Once again, it staggers its move with the inertia from last turn (5 NE, since I will assume that the thrust of last turn is always dominant over the inertia applied for these rules). However, since the Fury only moved 3 hexes, and has 5 hexes of inertia, once it completes its normal move plus staggering from inertia, it will also drift 2 NE at the end of its move. On the next turn, the Fury will be considered to have an inertia of 3 SE (since thrust is dominant despite the inertial movement being greater; if the inertia was dominant, and any ship moved at maximum speed, they would be trapped in that inertial heading unless they applied equal thrust ina different direction to override it). It bears mentioning that in-game, the Fury would never make turns this gradually (this could be considered quirk #1).

Example 2: The Kohr-Ah Marauder, 3 THRUST, 2 TURN. The Marauder starts out moving 3 N, and no inertial move is made. On the next turn, it turns to SW and moves 3. Once again, its movement is staggered with its inertia, so it moves SW - N - SW - N - SW - N. This more accurately reflects the gradual turns one expects a big, clunky ship like the Marauder to take. Next turn, the Marauder turns SE and moves 2. Since its inertia is 3 SW, it staggers its movement again, and adds the extra hex of SW movement at the end. Its inertia for the next turn will be 2 SE.

Example 3: The Spathi Eluder, THRUST and TURN 5. It starts outmoving 5 N, and no inertial move is made. Next turn, it turns to S, and applies 5 THRUST. Because its inertia is already 5 N, it will alternate its thrust and inertia moves, essentially giving it a net movement of 0 hexes (full stop), and causing its next turn to be free of the influence of inertia. When it turns N and moves 3 on its next turn, it will not be influenced in any way by inertial forces. However, it bears mentioning that fast ships like the Eluder would not have to slow down this gradually to perform a 180 degree turn, as they are known for being able to revers direction nearly instantaneously in UQM (this could be considered quirk #2).

That's what I've come up with, pros and cons of each included. It almost seems to me like the upper system would apply better to faster and more manuverable ships, while the lower system applies better to the slower, clunkier ships.
Logged
Clay
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 169


What can we do for you...today?


View Profile
Re: Star Control - The RPG/Board Game
« Reply #69 on: March 08, 2007, 08:34:06 pm »

Collisions will be included with the planetary rules.

I'll comment on inertia once I have time to really think it over.  I've personally played two games with inertia rules.  One when I was like...ten...and I don't even remember it besides they were so horridly complicated that neither my brother (much older than me) nor I ever touched it again.  The other was Silent Death, a game much more similar to what I'm attempting with the UQM boardgame.  Unfortunately, I no longer have a rulebook...so I'd have to do some net research to find out how they did it, exactly.

For now, I'm working on tokens...I'll have a more coherent response when I post those!
Logged
Clay
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 169


What can we do for you...today?


View Profile
Re: Star Control - The RPG/Board Game
« Reply #70 on: March 08, 2007, 08:56:00 pm »

Okay, finished.  Keep in mind these were done fairly quickly from what I had to work with.  (Many are lifted from the graphics enhancement thread, some are poor copies directly from the game).  But they'll do, for now.  Certainly the "real deal" will look far better.

Anyway, these are inch-hex tokens.  If you use the program I mentioned before, make sure you print out maps with inch hexes.  4 letter-sized sheets taped together should do.

For in game tokens for stuff like Torch flames and Marauder shurikens, just grab some pennies. ^_^

Finally, I recommend printing the tokens on some kind of posterboard or cardstock, and to make the Guardian / X-form two-sided for easy flipping in game.

Still thinking on inertia...Main reason I'm hesitant to ditch the "inertia" phase is because it allows ships to "set up" other ships.  ie. You know ship X is going to move two hexes SW next turn.  Let me shoot a shuriken there, hehe!!

If you take that out, that little bit of strategy is gone (and the Torch is ENTIRELY worthless as written)

Edit: Uh...link might help.  http://www.wiseturtle.com/sc2tokens.jpg
Logged
Draxas
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1044



View Profile
Re: Star Control - The RPG/Board Game
« Reply #71 on: March 08, 2007, 11:18:44 pm »

I understand what you mean about losing the element of strategy your inertia rules provide. I think the only reason that alternatives are being suggested are because of the exploits inherent in them (ie. the Pkunk moves 10 hexes with inertia and thrust combined), and because they don't seem to represent how the ships behave in UQM very accurately. Then again, the same could be said about both of my alternatives (and I doubt we'll ever be able to accurately replicate inertia from UQM in a tabletop ruleset), and the project is yours to make the decisions on, so feel free to ignore us all at any time. Wink

As far as the tokens go, they look pretty nice for a start. It would be great if some of the talented artists here were willing to go and finish up the ships that haven't been enhanced yet, so that they all have a uniformity of appearance (I would love to help, but sadly, I don't fall into that "talented artist" category).

A couple of suggestions about the tokens, however:

1) While we intrinsically know the structure of the ships from playing UQM, someone who has never had that experience could easily become very confused as to the orientation of certain ships (the Eluder springs immediately to mind, but there are others as well). A simple way to remedy that would be a small white arrow pointing toward the front face of the token.
2) The Nemesis is going to require some means to keep track of the turret's facing. Perhaps a smaller "turret" token, or a clear hex token that can be laid over the top of the main one.
Logged
Clay
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 169


What can we do for you...today?


View Profile
Re: Star Control - The RPG/Board Game
« Reply #72 on: March 09, 2007, 01:16:22 am »

Hey Draxas,

I appreciate your faith, but if I were to take a "My way or the highway" attitude, there'd be little point in me posting at all.  Grin  If I try to defend something, it's not because I'm not open to changes, but merely because I wanted to clarify why I did a certain thing and, perhaps, what I'd want to include while fixing it.  I definitely appreciate you and Valagger taking an interest in the rules.

Regarding the tokens, if this were ever finished to a point I could present the concept for TFB and they'd green light it, I would commission new artwork for all the tokens so they'd be of a consistent (and at least for my minis, superior) style.  I'd also put more effort into the design, including a starry background and, yes, facing indicators.  Heck, I had trouble telling the Spathi front from back!

As for the Orz, being printed on the cheap paper most of us will, will make stacking tokens not likely to work well.  For now, just use a penny (or other marker) to indicate turret facing.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2007, 11:52:38 pm by Clay » Logged
Clay
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 169


What can we do for you...today?


View Profile
Re: Star Control - The RPG/Board Game
« Reply #73 on: March 09, 2007, 03:26:06 pm »

As stated in the rules, you always take the most recent movement.  So if your inertia phase is 5N, and that turn you move 5NW, your new inertia is 5NW.

Even so, yes, it's problematic.  I'm sure there's an elegant solution.  It's just (Spathi) eluded me so far.
Logged
Draxas
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1044



View Profile
Re: Star Control - The RPG/Board Game
« Reply #74 on: March 09, 2007, 06:21:03 pm »

Hey Draxus,

There is no U in my SN (pet peeve, sorry). Moving on.

Quote
I appreciate your faith, but if I were to take a "My way or the highway" attitude, there'd be little point in me posting at all.  Grin  If I try to defend something, it's not because I'm not open to changes, but merely because I wanted to clarify why I did a certain thing and, perhaps, what I'd want to include while fixing it.  I definitely appreciate you and Valagger taking an interest in the rules.

Unfortunately, that open minded position is going to get us suggesting all of this stuff, so when you get tired of us, just tell us to shut our pie-holes. Wink

Sadly, I've pretty much taxed my brain on the inertia question, so I can't think of a good solution that incorporates all of the elements we're looking for... So, that's all I'm going to say about that until the situation changes.

Quote
Regarding the tokens, if this were ever finished to a point I could present the concept for TFB and they'd green light it, I would commission new artwork for all the tokens so they'd be of a consistent (and at least for my minis, superior) style.  I'd also put more effort into the design, including a starry background and, yes, facing indicators.  Heck, I had trouble telling the Spathi front from back!

The white arrow I mentioned is a pretty simple but useful addition, even for this very preliminary stage. Considering that anyone I would play-test the game with would have little to no knowledge of UQM, they would be a big help if you could add them in.

Quote
As for the Orz, being printed on the cheap paper most of us will, will make stacking tokens not likely to work well.  For now, just use a penny (or other marker) to indicate turret facing.

I have something lying around that I can make do with, so it's no big deal. It's just an item for future consideration is all.

As far as tokens go in the future, however, I have no doubt that they could be done up in a uniform art style to suit the game itself. Then again (being a tabletop dork from years ago), I could see an even more interesting (though certainly more impractical, at least from a production standpoint) option being the use of custom plastic miniatures, including a few with moving parts (the Orz turret, or swing wings on the X-Form). I realize that's a pipe dream, but it certainly would make for a nice presentation to the game.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!