BCS Assumptions

[whulorigan]

Also consider, that Traveller does have stealth -- practically perfect stealth. It's called a Jump drive. Using a Jump drive, a ship can achieve strategic, and, possibly, tactical surprise, as they just appear out of nowhere. What they can't do is gather intelligence and lie in wait. When they arrive, they arrive blind.

well that lack of info is mutual.

That is not entirely correct. The in-jumping ship will be able to observe the tactical situation as it was so-and-so-many light-seconds/minutes/hours ago from previously emitted/reflected EM-radiation, but the ships already in-system will be entirely unaware of the in-jumping ship's presence for the same amount of time.

So the in-jumping ship(s) will have a space of time for free action before the in-system ship(s) become aware of its presence.

 

[flykiller]

yeah ... you're right.

still, the incoming doesn't know what it's getting into until it arrives. and not sure how much of a role pre-existing sensor data vs new sensor data plays - I'm sure no combat system implements an engagement distance of 60ls, but is one minute of sensor data going to make any kind of difference?

heh. remember my in-system game where warwizard and pendragonman both precipitated their fleets on top of each other right next to the gas giant first turn?

 

[aramis]

At the ranges where the time matters, the ability to engage won't exist for long enough to matter. Even the most generous official combat system for traveller (Mayday) only has lasers hitting to 12 LS... in a 6000 second turn.

CT Bk2 is next most generous... with 2 LS and 1000 second turns. (A few designs can exceed this in TNE & T4... but those essentially are major bay mounts)

So, long run, it's one salvo of a combat turn's worth of fire consisting of dozens of salvoes.

 

[robject]

Better late than never:

So canon is to be retconed on the strength of a poll?

Absolutely not. Especially this poll.

 

[robject]

doesn't seem theological, seems more hard science. of course one may decree that "we don't know the stealth science of the future" (quite so) and one may disregard it for game purposes (just so), but this leaves everyone feeling twitchy (rightly so).

Not everyone.

(Viva la 2D galaxy!)

 

[robject]

What I really want to know... what I really really want to know...

Is... to what degree is one battle rider better than another battle rider? What's the measurement? What are the parameters? How granular are those parameters really?


BRs going toe-to-toe with BRs:

You might chant "TL TL TL", and you'd be right. But I think the design choices you make are constrained by TL, and therefore the actual playing of the game need not use TL directly.

You might say "Size", but I think that's not truly a parameter: rather, it is a conclusion based on your payload.

* Defensive Tradeoffs matter. What's your defense against mesons, beams, nuclear explosions, and kinetics? Are they balanced, or do you put more into meson defense? (And do you have a globe?)

* Offense matters. The bigger the spine, the badder-ass your Rider. But really the point is that a BR's offensive mix is skewed in one particular direction (the meson attack) -- and it appears to always be maximally skewed. And let's not forget skill. What's your crew like? Is the computer capable enough to boost offensive capability?

* Engines matter. Can you overtake/outrun your enemy?


There are other things that help, but is there anything else that matters as much as these Big Three?

 

[robject]

At one end, we have High Guard, or perhaps MegaTraveller, with a battery factor for every type of weapon and defense, an armor rating, a maneuver rating PLUS an agility rating based on excess power (based on the power plant's output in megawatts or EP). Factors range from 0 to 24 or greater. Maneuver and Agility range from 0 to 6 or so. Energy can climb arbitrarily high.

Too much detail. The richness of the Traveller universe drowns in buckets of dice rolls and tedious accounting.


At the other end, we have Fifth Frontier War, with ATT and DEF, and perhaps a BOM rating for ground assaults... representing one squadron. I believe those ratings might sometimes reach above 9.

Not enough detail. The richness of the Traveller universe is almost completely washed out.


And yet, if you want to fight fleet battles in a short amount of time, there's not going to be a lot of room for a lot of numbers.

Now I do think Battle Rider was a step in the right direction. But I think Frank was stuck on all those numbers. I'm not saying he did a bad job. I'm just wondering if perhaps there is a way to craft the game mechanics so that some numbers can be replaced by indicators... in a way that's not cryptic.

 

[flykiller]

to what degree is one battle rider better than another battle rider?

do you want to talk about it, or game it out and find out?

 

[robject]

do you want to talk about it, or game it out and find out?

That's part of the problem. I lack the time and patience to learn how to game the system and then game it out.

However, I'd be happy for others to game it out, and read the post mortem.

 

[flykiller]

I'd be happy for others to game it out, and read the post mortem

yeah ....

well I've put up two systems for depicting star system environments, each of which is game-neutral and able to support just about any ship/ruleset construct. little interest to date, but I'll run one side if anyone wants to run another.

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

Me too.

yeah ....

well I've put up two systems for depicting star system environments, each of which is game-neutral and able to support just about any ship/ruleset construct. little interest to date, but I'll run one side if anyone wants to run another.

I'd be down for a run since I have been talking to Rob about BCS since back when I was but rookie here.

And can you point me at the game you referenced?

 

[robject]

I'd be down for a run since I have been talking to Rob about BCS since back when I was but rookie here.

And can you point me at the game you referenced?

Thank you for volunteering, Craig.

 

[flykiller]

I'd be down for a run

cool.

the hex-map game starts here with associated maps starting here. some of the hex map graphics are missing but most are still present, you should need to see only one to immediately grasp what is going on. the game was an attempt to use highly generalized "ships" to portray jump-arrival and maneuver and system-wide strategic and tactical engagements. the "ships" can be replaced with anything - specialized generalizations, hg2 ships, whatever.

the vector game is here, again missing a few graphics but the intent should be obvious. it talks a lot about how to determine hits and damage, but the primary feature is vector movement and the "ships" can be pretty much anything.

there's no reason the maps have to be posted, we could each have a copy on our own computers and simply communicate the data - movement, dice rolls, whatever.

both of these games sort of grew over time and may be difficult to follow after-the-fact, but the intents should be obvious to anyone who has spent more than five minutes with a similar board game.

let me know if any of it interests you.

 

[flykiller]

So canon is to be retconed on the strength of a poll?

actually a single referee can retcon whatever he wants. most do.

 

[aramis]

actually a single referee can retcon whatever he wants. most do.

And Marc retcons occasionally based upon a whim. The Inner Circle do sometimes take the polls into account in advising Marc.

 

[Major B]

I am interested in the results too. Work has kind of spiked lately but I will check out the links and see if I can follow along and provide (hopefully pertinent) input.

 

[flykiller]

I am interested in the results too.

well as soon as any play occurs we'll have some results, and ...

provide (hopefully pertinent) input

... given the low volume of existing results any input will be pertinent.

 

[flykiller]

ok, some miscommunication between robject and Magnus von Thornwood, but I'm still game.

what is it, exactly, you want to study?

 

[whartung]

Speaking of this, I have mostly completed a program to run HG2 combat. I mostly just need to apply the damage now (which is straight forward, I just need to do it). Learned a few details implementing it.

The point being, that if you want to fling a couple of hypothetical fleets together, I can key the ships in from the USP pretty quickly and run a couple of rounds to give an idea what happens. And, so far, it only takes a couple of rounds for you to know what's going on.

So, if you want to put Riders against Battleships, I just need some Riders and B'Ships to beat against.

 

[flykiller]

I have mostly completed a program to run HG2 combat.

I think straight hg2 has been beat to death, several times over. I was under the impression they wanted something a little more advanced.