Traveller Store CotI Features New Posts Mark Forums Read Register


Go Back TravellerRPG.com > Citizens of the Imperium > Other Versions of Traveller > Mongoose Traveller

Mongoose Traveller Discussion forums for the Traveller rules from Mongoose Publishing.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old January 26th, 2008, 03:36 PM
sablewyvern sablewyvern is offline
Citizen: SOC-12
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 144
Gallery : 0
sablewyvern Citizen
Default

No, and if you read my entire post, rather than just the two sentences you quoted, I think you'll see I'm not saying that. As I think I've made pretty clear, I like the basic concept of the resolution mechanic, and I've found it a relatively simple task to modify to the point where I like it. I think it's a great concept with a less than ideal implementation. The rest of the book appears to vary between excellent and promising.

Last edited by sablewyvern; January 26th, 2008 at 03:39 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old January 26th, 2008, 03:55 PM
Supplement Four's Avatar
Supplement Four Supplement Four is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 9,052
Gallery : 0
Supplement Four Citizen++Supplement Four Citizen++Supplement Four Citizen++Supplement Four Citizen++
Default

Your comments here and on the MGT forum indicate (and the general tone of your posts) that you're a strong supporter of MGT no matter what flaws are pointed out.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old January 26th, 2008, 06:21 PM
sablewyvern sablewyvern is offline
Citizen: SOC-12
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 144
Gallery : 0
sablewyvern Citizen
Default

Given that I have yet to be shown flaws I consider significant, or which I can't work around, and that it seems unlikely that at this late date anyone will point out anything both new and serious, yes, I'd say that's probably close to accurate in a literal sense.

As to the spirit of your post, if you feel that you can predict my reaction to any hypothetical, unspecified flaw yet to be discovered ... go ahead, I guess. The only way I could prove otherwise would be to cease supporting the game, so I'm not about to try and prove you wrong on principle or something.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old January 28th, 2008, 11:54 AM
sablewyvern sablewyvern is offline
Citizen: SOC-12
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 144
Gallery : 0
sablewyvern Citizen
Default

So, quite a few times, people have suggested fixing the Timing/Effect dice based on colour or somesuch. (So, red is always Timing, white always Effect or what-have-you).

Personally, I think that's defeats a large part of the benefit of T/E (which is giving players meaningful decisions to make), and it doesn't do anything to fix tbeard's fundamental problems with T/E.

However, in the case of autofire (and, multiple tasks generally), using this system would eliminate the core of the problem tbeard has raised specifically with respect to autofire.

It doesn't address the fundamental problems tbeard has with T/E, but it does remove the problem whereby a Timing die fixed to the lowest or highest die is increasingly guaranteed to provide a 1 (or a six) as the die-pool increases.

Yep, tbeard, I realise that in your estimation, it's just another tweak to prop up a crippled system. For those of us who see value in T/E, it is a potential fix for this specific issue, however.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old January 28th, 2008, 01:00 PM
tbeard1999's Avatar
tbeard1999 tbeard1999 is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Tyler
Posts: 2,705
Gallery : 0
tbeard1999 Citizen
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sablewyvern View Post
Yep, tbeard, I realise that in your estimation, it's just another tweak to prop up a crippled system. For those of us who see value in T/E, it is a potential fix for this specific issue, however.
Interestingly enough, I agree that you lose a lot of whatever benefit the system provides when you deprive the player of choosing which die is which.

However, you may have actually found a fix for autofire that doesn't suck.

On an autofire 4 roll, here are the stats:

-2 modifier: 72% chance of missing; .37 average hits (83%/0.17 single shot); Avg Timing Roll 5.3
-1 modifier: 54% chance of missing; .72 average hits (72%/0.28 single); Avg Timing Roll 4.9
0 modifier: 34% chance of missing; 1.26 average hits (58%/0.42 single); Avg Timing Roll 4.5
+1 modifier: 14% chance of missing; 1.88 average hits (42%/0.58 single); Avg Timing Roll 3.7
+2 modifier: 3% chance of missing; 2.36 average hits (28%/0.72 single); Avg Timing Roll 3.6
+3 modifier: <1% chance of missing; 2.67 average hits (17%/0.83 single); Avg Timing Roll 3.5

Seems a bit coarse, but I can't see a fatal flaw in it. You would deprive the player of having any say in how many segments the shot takes. Also, the incredibly annoying timing artifact emerges -- the worse you are, the faster you do it...

Note that this approach will not fix the base system however. It would still skew wildly to the extremes.

Last edited by tbeard1999; January 28th, 2008 at 01:09 PM..
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Multiple hits with Autofire ChalkLine MegaTraveller 18 September 4th, 2007 03:28 AM

This website and its contents are copyright ©2010-2013 Far Future Enterprises. All rights reserved. Traveller is a registered trademark of Far Future Enterprises .
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright (c) 2010-2013, Far Future Enterprises. All Rights Reserved.