High Guarding again

[kilemall]

Well that's a fundamental problem with space combat anyway. It's folks in a bull ring with machine guns pointed at each other while wearing dayglo t-shirts. Range matters, but its the same for everyone. Facing, doesn't matter (outside of BL). Velocity doesn't matter (when it comes to actually shooting things, none of the systems consider the vector differential as a DM). Outside of range, maneuver doesn't matter. AT BEST you can "dodge" or "evasive maneuver". Size matters as a differential. Not so much with equivalent ships (the DMs wash each other out).

This is why B5 works at all. All of that stuff that "doesn't matter", they don't bother with. But just having a bag of numbers and a pair of dice, I mean, yea, with a vivid enough imagination you can visualize the bats swooping and diving around the car, but you can do that with anything. Cards, dice, piece of string, a bottom of the bag broken Doritos chip ("Ok, so this crumb is my fighter, and this salt shaker is the dreadnaught", oh, wait, there's that tactical visualization map again).

There's a reason modern games are all $70 miniatures and not 1/2" cardboard chits anymore. I mean, I used to stare at a black map with a 1/2 dozen squares of cardboard and could SEE the tension that the two players were wracking their heads around, because, I guess like B5, I knew the rules and what not and what was going on.

But it sure hella looks better with a 3" detailed mini.

With the tactical map, it's not just chits on a board. It's chits in motion, you know where things are going, or should go, or might go. Like looking ahead in chess. Placing pieces themselves with your mind on the map. "If I can slip these two tanks down that road and past the house..."

And, yea, I have not played a lot of B5. But there's a reason that it has a probability chart to help resolve combat (I think it's in TCS) to solve endless die rolls. See? Not only do facing, range, or maneuver matter any more, we don't even need dice. Yay! progress!

There's a video of a huge space battle, in a video game. Stellaris I think. Lots of ships, mindlessly blasting away at each other.

No reason to visualize, it's right there in 3D! And...it's not an interesting video. It's a spectacle, but not interesting. Just ships standing there. BANG BANG BANG BANG ... oops, I'm dead. Very B5, but even with the visuals -- not a very interesting battle. It was probably settled in the first few rounds as the dice punished the losers and push the balance to the inevitably winning side. Now, they just need to count the cost.

If anything, the battle reinforced "the pointlessness of war". Certainly took all the fun out of it.

Background fluff for NPCs certainly not something for proper PCs.

 

[jec10]

I disagree. HG is for squadron/fleet combat, while Striker (for what I know) is for small unit combat (and usable for personal combat, as AHL). I don't believe you can confront a full bataillon (or larger units) with Striker...

The abstract system in LBB4 is for large units, and so it's the equivalent to HG.

You could play a battalion in CT/Striker (the unit scale is 1 stand = 1 fireteam, and a typical infantry battalion might have 54 or more fireteam stands, so you'd probably be playing at 1/300 - 6mm figure scale to have that many miniatures on the table. But Striker had an optional rule for halving the ground scale to play with 6mm miniatures). The real headache would be preparing pre-game the tedious Striker rating and combat load of each individual soldier of that battalion.

MegaTrav Ref's Companion had a better system for delivering mass combat using what was essentially Striker. You could scale up and down the unit sizes+ground scale and field units from squad to battalion+ against each other. And being MegaTrav, you could incorporate everything from starships to grav tanks in the one battle as everything had hitpoints and did damage points.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Then are we introducing house rules in the equation?
(this aside, it would not be a bad one, as would use the same DM for skill tactics that HG gives to both, defensive and offensive rolls)

Sure, why not? I don't have anything against house-rules, i just have something against pretending house-rules are RAW.

Extending the existing skill rules to a few more skills isn't exactly revolutionary, nor does it change the system all that much. I would even house-rule in a negative DM for unskilled characters.


I would house-rule LBB2 too, to make it more usable. IIRC, the first house-rule I made for LBB2 was to ban missiles, after I realised each individual missile was supposed to manoeuvre independently like a ship.

Take a Free Trader with two LMS turrets, firing two missiles per round. After three rounds I have one ship plus six missiles, for a total of seven vectors, each to be changed and updated every round. I just gave up at that point...

Well, if you have pilot skill 2, LBB2 with Maneuver/evade 5 gives you a -2, on HG no DM. If your pilot skill is 5, DMs are respectively 5 and 2.

HG gives you half your skill, the same as Maneuver/Evade-2.

For your convenience the first DM-1, for Pilot skill 1-2 is already built into the to hit tables.
Would decreasing all the to hit difficulty by one, and then increasing the difficulty by one by giving everyone one more DM to Agility make any difference?

Both give you a skill bonus to the same rolls (with a house rule), perhaps rescaled. Gunners shoot, Pilots evade, Engineers repair.


Is getting a DM-1, instead of DM-2, from your Pilot-2 skill really that massive a difference? Isn't abstract movement vs. simplified vector movement a much bigger difference?

OTOH, this 2 added to agility also helps you to flee (or avoiding your enemy to)..

Yes, and it influences Initiative.
Of course Pilot skill helps you to outmanoeuvre your opponent. In LBB5, but not in LBB2, right?

Still don't see the difference?

Yes, the difference is that in LBB2 the player, not the character, manoeuvre the ship.
In LBB5 the character, not the player, manoeuvre the ship.

How does a player that is not good at vector math play a high-skill Pilot with LBB2?

Yes, in HG all those programing come for free, and your tiny computer 1 bis may manage all of them at once...

Quite, all that hoopla is replaced by a straight DM+ on all firing and DM- on all enemy firing, in addition to the crew skills. Simpler, faster, more action.

But with different effects of skills and characters' actions...

Gunners shoot. Roll to hit, roll damage. In both systems.
In LBB2 the Gunner might add full skill or none, in LBB5 he adds half skill (with a house-rule).
It's not a difference of quality, but of quantity.

Of course it's not identical rolls with identical results, it's two different systems.

To be just, though, HG it's not thought for that.
...
True, LBB2 is not thought for large ships, as HG is not for small ones
...
I disagree. HG is for squadron/fleet combat, ...

Both systems works for small ships. LBB5 is just streamlined enough to work with larger ships, or several ships..

There is no requirement to field a battle squadron to play with LBB5...

... while Striker (for what I know) is for small unit combat (and usable for personal combat, as AHL). I don't believe you can confront a full bataillon (or larger units) with Striker...

Theoretically you could fight battalions in Striker, but I guess all involved would give up of boredom after a few hundred dice rolls.

The abstract system in LBB4 is for large units, and so it's the equivalent to HG.

LBB5 isn't remotely as abstract as LBB4, Imperium, or FFW.

You still shoot individual laser turrets at individual targets. You can, if you wish, group a few turrets into a battery, but you don't have to.

In LBB4 abstract large units fire at large units. In LBB5 there is no squadron fires at squadron, just ship fires at ship, just like LBB2.

 

[McPerth]

I have tried HG for small ship combat, there was even a turn by turn thread on these very boards where a couple of us played through some combat scenarios - the results were boring in the extreme.

Yes, I remind them (tehre were more than one such thread). They might be boring, but sure were instructive, so I give the links here (curiously, I didn't find the hg2 combat with small ships - 1)

• hg2 combat with small ships - 2
• hg2 combat with small ships - 3
• hg2 combat with small ships - 4

 

[McPerth]

I don't have anything against house-rules, i just have something against pretending house-rules are RAW.

Neither I have anything against house rules, but they use to raise other discussions, when we're discussing about RAW, as sure you use different ones than myself.

Using the oposite way than you, I'd add the same modirifer than in HG for ship tactics to all offensive or defensive rolls.

For your convenience the first DM-1, for Pilot skill 1-2 is already built into the to hit tables.

Is getting a DM-1, instead of DM-2, from your Pilot-2 skill really that massive a difference? Isn't abstract movement vs. simplified vector movement a much bigger difference?

The DM for skills in HG is (skill-1)/2 rounded down, so you need skill 3 to have a DM of 1, and skill 5 to have a DM of 2. Pilot 1-2 gives you no DM.

And a +-1 or +-2 on a 2d6 curve is quite a diference...

How does a player that is not good at vector math play a high-skill Pilot with LBB2?

The same way a player with little to no tactics knowledge moves his units in Striker, or his character in any personal combat system... Even if you character has tactics 5, the player may have no idea of them (or vice versa)

Yes, the difference is that in LBB2 the player, not the character, manoeuvre the ship.
In LBB5 the character, not the player, manoeuvre the ship.

And in Striker/AHL/personal combat, is the player who maneuvers the character or units on his command, while in LBB4 abstract system, it's the character, not the player, who maneuver them...

Hence my comparison among HG and LBB4 abstract system, even if you're right HG is a little more detailed.

Theoretically you could fight battalions in Striker, but I guess all involved would give up of boredom after a few hundred dice rolls.

I guess headache will affect them even before boredom, if they dare to try it ...

You still shoot individual laser turrets at individual targets. You can, if you wish, group a few turrets into a battery, but you don't have to.

Again, headache and boredom will soon appear if you don't group turrets in large ships...

In LBB4 abstract large units fire at large units. In LBB5 there is no squadron fires at squadron, just ship fires at ship, just like LBB2.

In naval combat, the unit is the ship (at least among large ones), while in ground combat it is the company/batalion/regiment/whatever (depending on the scale you play). See that a ship's CO rank uses to be O3-O6, the equivalent to a company-regiment CO...

So, it comes also to unit firing a unit. How large are they depends on the scale (size of the ships involved).

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Yes, I remind them (tehre were more than one such thread). They might be boring, but sure were instructive, so I give the links here (curiously, I didn't find the hg2 combat with small ships - 1)

After a quick scan, what I see are mostly rules discussions, of course it's boring.

The first time you played LBB2 would be even more confusing, with a lot more time spent before the ships even got close enough to detect each other.

 

[McPerth]

what I see are mostly rules discussions

There were many, among the fight proper, true... That's why I say it was instructive.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Neither I have anything against house rules, but they use to raise other discussions, when we're discussing about RAW, as sure you use different ones than myself.

Obviously my house-rules are not RAW, and if you say "By RAW, HG works", I have to yield the point.

By RAW the gunners still fire their weapons, with a to hit roll, but without any skill bonus. They are assumed to be competent, but not extraordinary, and that is built into the to hit.

Using the oposite way than you, I'd add the same modirifer than in HG for ship tactics to all offensive or defensive rolls.

That is already RAW, so no need to add it. Ship Tactics gives you a half-skill bonus to computer rating (=all combat rolls), and Fleet Tactics a skill bonus to Initiative roll.

The DM for skills in HG is (skill-1)/2 rounded down, so you need skill 3 to have a DM of 1, and skill 5 to have a DM of 2. Pilot 1-2 gives you no DM.

Yes, and the same for range, LBB2 gives up to a DM-5, LBB2 a DM±1 (except Mesons).
Smaller DM fits the narrow range of 2D rolls better.

LBB2 presumes a normal crew skill of 0, that is the baseline, anything more gives a bonus.
LBB5 presumes a normal crew skill of 2, that is the baseline built into the to hit, anything more gives a bonus.
On the same rolls, for the same actions, by the same characters.

That is not a major difference, IMHO, and does not affect the RPG-ness of the system.

The same way a player with little to no tactics knowledge moves his units in Striker, or his character in any personal combat system... Even if you character has tactics 5, the player may have no idea of them (or vice versa)

Quite, so the LBB5 abstract movement is more suitable for a RPG, as the character, not the player, manoeuvres the ship?

The LBB2 system is more board-wargame, as the character is ignored and the player manoeuvres the ship?

And in Striker/AHL/personal combat, is the player who maneuvers the character or units on his command, while in LBB4 abstract system, it's the character, not the player, who maneuver them...

Hence my comparison among HG and LBB4 abstract system, even if you're right HG is a little more detailed.

Agreed, the abstract vs. vector movement system is a major difference.

But, LBB4 abstract changes the scale, from LBB1 or Striker, from people to large units.

LBB5 does not change the scale from LBB2, we fight ship against ship in both. LBB5 can handle the same small ships as LBB2, and also larger and/or more ships.

Again, headache and boredom will soon appear if you don't group turrets in large ships...

Agreed, but that does not affect small ship fights.

Fighting a Mercenary Cruiser with eight triple laser turrets in LBB2 is mind-numbing, with 8 × 3 × 2 = 48 to hit rolls per round, or 96 rolls with a larger power plant and Double Fire. LBB5 has the advantage of being able to cut that down to a few rolls per round.

 

[McPerth]

hat is already RAW, so no need to add it. Ship Tactics gives you a half-skill bonus to computer rating (=all combat rolls), and Fleet Tactics a skill bonus to Initiative roll.

I know, but I explained myself awfully. I meant in LBB2 combat rules (this would be the House Rule)..

Sorry for the omission.

Smaller DM fits the narrow range of 2D rolls better.

But give more the possibility of heroic acts by those with really high skills...

LBB2 presumes a normal crew skill of 0, that is the baseline, anything more gives a bonus.
LBB5 presumes a normal crew skill of 2, that is the baseline built into the to hit, anything more gives a bonus.
On the same rolls, for the same actions, by the same characters.

LBB2 assumes (I guess) skill 1, as this is the basic one for CT (skill 0 is quite an exception, and does not allow you to fill a post in a ship).

This skill difference is quite logical, as LBB2 assumes non military ships, while HG assumes military ones.

And remember than the main defensive factor in HG is Agility, that is neither featured in LBB2 nor player, but ship dependent (except for the small part Pilot skill may give).

Quite, so the LBB5 abstract movement is more suitable for a RPG, as the character, not the player, manoeuvres the ship?

The LBB2 system is more board-wargame, as the character is ignored and the player manoeuvres the ship?

If your players become involved in personal combat, would you also like more an abstract system than a map of the zone and moving them through it?

Any (or at least most) the RPG combat is resolved more as a wargame, with player, not character, deciding what the character would make, regardless the tactic skill the character has.

Agreed, the abstract vs. vector movement system is a major difference.

That allows some things already discussed here, as the two lines (front and reserve), that could hardly be in vector movement, and the interactions there (as we said)

Agreed, the abstract vs. vector movement system is a major difference.

But, LBB4 abstract changes the scale, from LBB1 or Striker, from people to large units.

LBB5 does not change the scale from LBB2, we fight ship against ship in both. LBB5 can handle the same small ships as LBB2, and also larger and/or more ships.

You don't see a change in scale among a system thought for small ships and anotehr thought for large ships? I see as large one as in the comparison among Striker and LBB4 abstract system...

In all cases, those more unit centered games are for when the units are large enough as for being impractical to play as individuals, and having to treat them as units.

This, of course, reduces the individual person importance, something that is fully against RPG experience (though at times needed in an RPG game, if they become involved in such a fight).

Fighting a Mercenary Cruiser with eight triple laser turrets in LBB2 is mind-numbing, with 8 × 3 × 2 = 48 to hit rolls per round, or 96 rolls with a larger power plant and Double Fire. LBB5 has the advantage of being able to cut that down to a few rolls per round.

I guess playing a team of 8 persons (not that rare in RPG, though I prefer them a little smaller) fighting with automatic weapons will involve a symilar number of rolls...

HG will reduce to it to just a few ones, probably 4 rolls (as the more efficient way to group triple turrets is 6 weapons per battery) to hit and at most 4 more for damage, but it can even be a single roll to hit an andother to damage.

I guess the equivalent for stirker would be a platoon size combat, and I'll let to you to guess how many rolls would it involve, as ,as I already said, I don't know it well.

In LBB4 abstract system, it will involve just a few rolls, some more if you have to check if players are Injuried.

So, which one would be a better equivalent?

 

[mike wightman]

Just so people can follow all this:
"INDIVIDUALS
The skills of individual participants in a battle may affect i t s outcome, and the reverse is certainly true.
Skills. The skills of player characters, if sufficiently higher than average, may have a noticeable effect on the battle. The average skill level of a non-player character in his assigned job (and hence the background level of the combat system) is assumed to be two. Higher skill levels are useful in four cases:
Fleet Tactics: The skill level of the fleet commander is a modifier to the initiative die roll. See the initiative determination step.
Ship Tactics: The skill level of a ship's (or small craft's) captain affects its performance. Subtract one from the skill level of the captain and divide it by two, dropping fractions.* The resulting number is used as a + modifier to the ship's effective computer level (a computer model/5 is treated as a model/6). The computer must be working at at least level 1 for the modifier to apply.
Pilot: The skill level of a ship's command pilot affects its maneuver. Subtract one from the skill level of the ship's command pilot and divide by two, dropping fractions.* The resulting number is used as a + modifier to the ship's effective agility. The ship's agility must be at least one for the modifier to apply.
Ship's Boat: Treat ship's boat for small craft in the same way as pilot for ships."

so the default is a skill level of 2, bonuses are as follows

skill level 3 --- 3-1=2 then divide by 2 so a bonus of +1
skill level 4 --- 4-1=3 then divide by 2, which rounds down to a bonus of+1
skill level 5 --- 5-1=4 then divide by 2 so a bonus of +2

so a regular crew skill level 2, a veteran crew skill level 3, and elite crew skill level 5... (this is of course a a paraphrased house rule) I grant a -1 to green crews... so send your officers to the simulators, cross train your highly skilled people with instruction, send your inexperienced off on missions in escort class vessels to fight pirates and the like to gain experience. Note that both HG and TCS lack rules for whole crew quality and there is no experience system so crews can get better as they survive battles...

How many skill level 5 individuals are out there to crew a warship? How many skill level 7?

 

[Spinward Flow]

How many skill level 5 individuals are out there to crew a warship? How many skill level 7?

Vanishingly rare.

LBB5.80, p9:

I would expect anyone with skill 4+ to be reassigned to "research & development/test duties" (think Test Pilots) rather than getting sent to the front lines for tours of duty. There will be exceptions (of course), for reasons various and sundry (not to mention, petty rivalries among personnel).

Even better yet, the highest skill levels don't always go to the personnel with the highest ranks ... hence why an Admiral may need to defer to the experience of a Captain ...

 

[McPerth]

Subtract one from the skill level of the captain and divide it by two, dropping fractions.

(...)

so a regular crew skill level 2, a veteran crew skill level 3, and elite crew skill level 5... (this is of course a a paraphrased house rule) I grant a -1 to green crews...

See that if instead of "droping fractions" you write the sentence as "rounding down", a skill 0 would mean -1, so complying with your house rule (wich with I'd agree)...

 

[Rupert]

See that if instead of "droping fractions" you write the sentence as "rounding down", a skill 0 would mean -1, so complying with your house rule (wich with I'd agree)...

Quite a few people (and a lot of spreadsheet software) consider 'round down' to mean 'towards zero'.