• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

Counterstrike

No, I haven't seen that one. Hopefully I'm on the right track, then...


Here's a rough draft of my critical hit rules:

http://jeffro.mindsay.com/?date=2005-05-18

The patrol cruiser record sheet has two concentric circles... and the Merc cruiser has 4. The record sheets are just about at the Ogre level of complexity....
 
I've thought up a few more ideas to give a wider range of tactical options...

Proximity missiles get +2 to hit, +2 against Computer program attempts to kill them... but only have a penetration of -1. Another model gives bonuses of +1, +1, and 0 respectively. The Penetration value for the missiles will go up with TL... these figures are just 'run-of-the-mill.'


New Computer Program: Identify. Gives ship a chance to identify information beyond ship size. Modified by range. Turret contents, missile types, missile ETA's, and missile targets are kept secret until a successful roll with this program.

(This program will make it more difficult to pick the exact right programs a ship needs for each turn. Ships will run ECM when they don't need it unless they sacrifice some offensive software to figure out what's going on. The program will also make it difficult to choose the correct range to be at during the opening turns of the engagement.)

Turret contents are left blank on the counter until identified or fired.

Missile info is written on a missile counter and flipped over. (The ETA is calculated at launch according to a table.) The info is not revealed until impact or identification. Some Identify rolls will only reveal partial information-- ie, target and eta only, but not type. The counter is flipped over on the impact phase. The total time in flight is tracked publicly on the showing side of the counter.
 
Thread Resurrect

I've re-read all of these posts, and am thinking of this:

I. Overgame
A. Players bid on resources. Examples: mercenary unit, extra ship, Barony, corsair, Tukera stock. Players may also auction off their own resources.
B. Players fly a ship on a subsector chart to a system hex to place a Factor, land a unit, or conduct business.
C. When a player wants to replace an opposing Factor with one of his own, play switches to the Tactical Game.

II. Tactical Game
A. Players impulse-move units on an appropriate world map.
B. Winning is done via a simple zone of control scheme using terrain and the starport (or starports).

The default mode of the game has Tukera with strong Factors on each system on the Xboat route. We start out in Year 1105. Each turn is one year. The goal is to be the first company to unseat Tukera from any one of those systems by 1116.
 
Last edited:
Fascinating thread...

First read through kept reminding me of Avalon Hill's old Merchant of Venus game. Like Republic of Rome from the same company, the players competed against each other and the game. (IIRC, there was an alien race which appeared somewhat randomly as raiders.)

Everyone is a merchant in MoV moving goods and trying to avoid the raiders/pirates. That's fun, but it doesn't work for the varied styles/types of play you're looking for.

Second read through reminded me of Stars Without Number's faction rules. Those rules are meant to produce a continually running/updating background for the referee's campaign. The referee can then insert his players into any event the system produces and their actions can then influence the outcome.

Factions in SWN can be pretty much anything; planetary governments, merchant houses, cults of various kinds, intelligence agencies, criminal organizations, free traders, anything. They're rated for things like size, wealth, cunning, and so forth. They can buy, earn, use, move, attack with, defend with, and lose different kinds of assets. Certain types of assets are only available to certain kinds of factions. Factions can also be assigned different kinds of goals.

Players as factions might be an interesting mechanism.

Riffing off your riffing here... Tukera/Marquis Aramis is a faction controlled by the game/system. It's the competitor all the players need to worry about. The players themselves are one of several factions within the subsector/game map. One could be Oberlindes trying to break into the market, one a government flexing it's muscles among it's neighbors, one a free trader crew just scraping by, one the local Ine Givar, one a noble house trying to unseat the Marquis, and so forth.

Each player has different goals, different starting strengths, different starting asset, etc. The players will interact with each other indirectly and directly. "Winning" will depend on how they well they meet, fail to meet, or exceed their goals.
 
Fascinating thread...
[...]
Riffing off your riffing here... Tukera/Marquis Aramis is a faction controlled by the game/system. It's the competitor all the players need to worry about. The players themselves are one of several factions within the subsector/game map. One could be Oberlindes trying to break into the market, one a government flexing it's muscles among it's neighbors, one a free trader crew just scraping by, one the local Ine Givar, one a noble house trying to unseat the Marquis, and so forth.

Each player has different goals, different starting strengths, different starting asset, etc. The players will interact with each other indirectly and directly. "Winning" will depend on how they well they meet, fail to meet, or exceed their goals.

That's a great riff. Different abilities, responsibilities, and goals gives it just a bit of a "Cosmic Encounter" feel to it. I like it. Thank you for giving me something to think about.

I do like the "players vs the game" orientation, which could suffice for a solo game with some re-playability.
 
... just a bit of a "Cosmic Encounter" feel to it.


That's the name of the game I couldn't remember!

I do like the "players vs the game" orientation...

It's a balance. There's competition between the players too. It's just that, if you and your fellow players concentrate too much on each other, the game can easily win.

I remember a Republic of Rome tourney at an AvalonCon back in the early 90s where the game won on each of the initial round tables! The AH staff had to scramble around putting together a system to identify which players "lost the least" so that they could then seat them in the tourney's final round.

... which could suffice for a solo game with some re-playability.

IIRC, the Merchant of Venus solo version was basically the regular game with one added system. All that system did was increase the frequency at which the alien raiders appeared to shut down travel routes. A solo player would see the map get "smaller" every turn with systems and regions cut off while trying to rack up credits.
 
Back
Top