Skip to Content

Dice vs. Strategy

41 replies [Last post]
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011

Hi all,

Okay so my post is regarding "Dice vs. Strategy". What I mean by this is to replace the luck of dice by another mechanic which would be more strategic.

Right now my combat mechanic look like this:

1-The attacking and defending players each roll one (1) dice
2-If the defending player's roll is HIGHER than his opponent, combat ends
3-If the attacking player's roll is HIGHER than his opponent,
The difference between rolls + Crew Rating (1-5) + Weapon Rating (1-5) damage is done.

Player's mark the damage on the plastic sleeves of the cards...

Okay so here is what I am thinking:

-I want to be able to have a mechanic that does not need to TRACK damage (currently I am tracking damage via Dry ink pens and card sleeves).
-I am thinking that Crew Rating (=Defensive capabilities) and Weapon Rating (=offensive capabilities) would allow you to *configure* dynamic starships. Each starship has a health rating and two (2) modes: Defend and Attack.

So I am thinking about this mechanic more and would like some explanations.

Can anyone explain what Magic: the Gathering does to resolve Combat...? Can somebody explain to me combat in MtG???

Deveration
Deveration's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/12/2013
Magic combat is simple...

Magic combat is simple...

Attackers are declared and Defenders are declared to block certain attackers. There can be many blockers blocking per attacker. Once all that is declared things resolve. Defense and Attack are applied simultaneously from both attacker and blocker. Atk is compared to Def on both sides of the battlefield. So a 5 atk/ 5 def vs a 3 atk / 6 def would resolve in a stalemate as neither creatures atk can over come the others def. However if 6/1 vs a 1/3 both would die as thier scores trump each other.

In the case of many blocker to one attacker the player attacking may split his attack value as he would see fit among the blockers. so a 4/2 vs a 1/2 and 1/4 may opt to kill either or spread out damage. This is important as one can use instant damage to finish off the defender before combat ends.

If a creature is blocked in any way their damage is absorbed completely even if there are any left over that overwhelmed the blocker. As players are technically commanding creatures to attack each other, a creature thematically gets in the way of this charge so the attacker never reaches the player.

Once combat is resolved and survivors defined, all damage is wiped clean and next phase of the players turn begins.

StagCutlery
StagCutlery's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/02/2013
MtG does not have "hit points"

Damage is an all or nothing thing in Magic; if you don't do enough damage, the creature is not defeated and does not carry the damage to the next round.

Note: Sadly, I was thinking of this out as I was typing it, and I'm afraid it's turned into a table top version of the video game FTL...
Do your starships move across a field? If your ship moves like a minitures game, it could be represented by a single card. Suppose your ship "schematic" is a tableau made up of different cards, like Weapons, Thrusters, Cockpit, etc. You could also have a room for Shields, or Hull.

To track damage, you can have the damaged parts of your ship turned face down (you either do enough damage in one attack or not), or since it's laid out in front of you each part can track damage with tokens. Depending on the number of components, this idea could support a small number of ships (fighters), or perhaps one large one (battle cruisers).

As for removing dice from your game, were you planning on another form of number generation, like attack cards, or did you want to keep numbers static?

StagCutlery
StagCutlery's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/02/2013
Not well thought out static example

Supposed two ships are dog fighting. You use a piloting skill plus the ships propulsion system to get in range and set up your shot. Once in range, you use your piloting and maneuver jets/weapon targeting system to attack versus the opponent's piloting and maneuvering jets. If you hit, you do a set weapon damage based on the weapon(s) that connect.

radioactivemouse
radioactivemouse's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/08/2013
MtG is probably one of the

MtG is probably one of the most accessible card games out there, why don't you try playing it? You can play physically, online, and it's even free on certain platforms.

From the looks of your post it seems like you spend a lot of time designing games instead of playing games looking for good design.

There are many ways of resolving conflict. You can dice-off (what you've mentioned), "shitloada" dice (a la Warhammer), lottery method (put variables in a tumbler and take out randomly), table method (roll dice, consult a table with answers), physical determination (like marbles), etc.

You must look at games you've played before and see what works in other games. If you've played Monopoly all your life, you're going to make a Monopoly-like game. If you're asking for game designs, you may not fully realize how it works when people ask cause you haven't seen it work in a good game.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
What I want to TRY to do...

StagCutlery wrote:
Supposed two ships are dog fighting. You use a piloting skill plus the ships propulsion system to get in range and set up your shot.

There is no *propulsion* or *movement*. Basically once the cards are in *space*, they can either attack or defend. Once the starship is in space, it cannot be "reconfigured"; it can only be destroyed.

StagCutlery wrote:
Once in range, you use your piloting and maneuver jets/weapon targeting system to attack versus the opponent's piloting and maneuvering jets. If you hit, you do a set weapon damage based on the weapon(s) that connect.

This is okay: weapon does damage (based on a hit - successful dice roll).

How it works now:
-You use 3 cards to "configure" your starship:
1-A Model/Class of the starship
2-A Crew that has a rating (1-5)
3-A Weapon that has a rating (1-5)

The model/class has a set of SHIELDS, the Crew rating and Weapon rating get added together when damage is dealt to a starship. BUT this requires TRACKING of damage...

Here is what I REALLY want to try to do:
-I would want that "Crew Rating" becomes the DEFENSE value of the starship.
-And would make the "Weapon Rating" the ATTACK value for the starship.

So if one player has a starship with:
-Weapon = 1, Crew = 2 (that would be like a 1/2 creature)

I would probably like to give a DEFAULT according to the CLASS of the starship. So maybe a Class E (utility starship) would have a 0/1 default value (Defense) and 1/0 default value (Attack).

Therefore the player would have (with the default in defense):
-Weapon = 1, Crew = 3 (and that would be like a 1/3 creature)

So you would need a starship with the minimum configuration of 3/2 to be able to defeat the above one.

BUT I still need to formulate a way to have MULTIPLE attackers vs. MULTIPLE defenders.

I REALLY think this has GOOD potential. The problem is understanding how to handle multiples at the same time...

Corsaire
Corsaire's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/27/2013
One thought for multiple

One thought for multiple combat is to use coordinated attacks as the concept. That would sum all the attacks to a single number applied to a single target. Maybe they can take a penalty (like lose 1 attack point) for each additional target.

Deveration
Deveration's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/12/2013
Magic handles multiple

Magic handles multiple attackers by defining that your creatures are attacking a player. Thus when you declare your attack you are declaring all creatures you wish to damage the defending player with. The defending player then declares which of their creatures they want to block your horde with as I discussed before.

In the WOW TCG you could actually declare weather you are attacking the player or specific creatures. In this case the attacking player chooses the defender and the defending player must defend with. That being said you can attack the same creature multiple times. In fact your "avatar" character is an example of this as a player can bash on that with multiple characters over the course of a battle. Kind of interesting but it's all one on one and is resolved in the same manner as magic.

Deveration
Deveration's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/12/2013
Banding There was also an

Banding

There was also an ability called banding that had players group up their attacker into one attack. It's been phased out but was handled in much the same way as multiple blockers is.

StagCutlery
StagCutlery's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/02/2013
okay...

Sounds like you're building a modular form of Magic combat. Sounds very vanilla, but okay.

How does one determine when they're 'offensive' or 'defensive'?

As for tracking damage, if you go the MtG route, then the ship would be destroyed.
Depending on how much crunch you want, you could still go with flipping the card over:
face up - operational
flipped - disabled (doesn't have to mean anything other than taken a hit)
removed - destroyed

czman
Offline
Joined: 03/26/2013
Not going to be easy

I think that removing luck from games is difficult to do.

Dice and cards both rely on luck (unless you start off with access to all of the cards).

I have looked at this a bit and I can pass on what I have found.

For a game to be purely strategic you need a few things:
Limited space
Limited movement
limited pieces that are in play from the beginning

Games like chess, checkers/Chinese checkers/even stratego all fit.

The one thing that all of these have in common is they have very simple "attack/defend" mechanics. The game play is strategic because it is about board positioning.

I am working on two separate games right now, a dungeon crawl and a space station defense game. I was unable to eliminate "luck" or "chance" from either of them. I think the only real to do to it is to make a throw back game. I just don't know if there is much of a market for a game like that anymore. There already are some great games that are very old that work fine.

If you are making a "starship game" you should just accept that there will be some chance/luck involved. Try to mitigate it by making somethings static. Damage could be static. Or you could make all attacks hit. Have different parts of the ship be given different numbers and the attacker rolls to see what they hit. When something is hit it is destroyed. If you hit the same thing twice it is basically a miss.

Crews could have the ability to work on specific parts of the ship. If a crew member is in a location that is hit they die.

I guess you could have blank ship designs. Have little cutout pieces that go into rooms. The rooms have numbers on them. The cutout pieces can be weapons, life support, controls ect.

I don't really know what the overarching idea of the game is. Just throwing out some ideas.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Still not clear...

StagCutlery wrote:
How does one determine when they're 'offensive' or 'defensive'?

This is rather simple:

-If a card is facing FORWARDS (like a regular card) that means it is in an OFFENSIVE position.
-Otherwise if the card is on it's SIDE (like a MtG tapped card) that means it is in a DEFENSIVE position.

I am already using this in my current prototype and it works pretty good. I am also thinking that after a starship attacks (maybe) it automatically goes on the defensive (tapped). Not sure about this yet... Needs to be playtested.

Okay I have already *read-up* about MtG combat and understand that players DECLARE Attackers and the opponent RESPONDS with Defenders (or blockers). What I DON'T understand is how to *compute* combat in such a situation...

Can anyone explain how the battles are calculated in MtG when there are MULTIPLE attackers and defenders???

Note: What I think is WAY COOL is that there are 125 combinations (Ship/Crew/Weapon). That is like having a potential deck of 125 *creatures*.

Note 2: Each player starts with the IDENTICAL 10 cards. Then the DBG part takes over and players trade resources to earn money in order to buy more (and BETTER) cards for their deck. They can also choose to accomplish mission which on the average earns more money.

Corsaire
Corsaire's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/27/2013
Combat in MtG

I'll use A/B for power/toughness. No special abilities.

Player 1 has 3 creatures: 1/2, 3/1, 2/4
Player 2 has 2 creatures: 1/1, 1/3

Player 1 decides to attacks he simply says: "All my creatures are attacking." That is all he declares.

Player 2 now has decisions to make. First he can block with 0,1, or 2 creatures. Then he has to decide whether to block together or separately.

Scenario 1:
P2 decide to focus on the 1/2 creature. He declares that both of his creatures will block that one creature. The two creatures combine their attack to make a 2 power, but their toughness stays separate. They deal 2 damage to the 1/2 creature.

The attacker will be dealing 1 and decides to apply it to the 1/1 creature. The 1/2 creatures dies because the two damage is enough. The defender's 1/1 also dies. The remaining two attackers deal 5 damage to the player.

Scenario 2:
P2 decides to block multiple creatures. His 1/1 blocks the 3/1, his 1/3 blocks the 2/4. The 1/1 and 3/1 each deal enough damage to kill the other. The 1/3 only deals one damage vs. 4 toughness and it only takes 2 damage. So both of those survive. The remainin 1/2 monster deals 1 damage to the player. At the end of the attackers turn, all damage is forgotten.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
The Derelict

@Corsaire: THANK YOU very much! Okay that makes things a little bit clearer...

The reason I needed this clarification was because I wasn't certain that one of my game's scenarios (The Derelict) would *work*.

Basically that scenario can be played SOLO or CO-OP. The idea was that an alien starship was trying to take over each player's homeworld (think base). So I was trying to figure out a way of still having this scenario as part of the game...

I was thinking that the Derelict starship could be 10/20 (something like this). It would rip through early on defenses and players would need to quickly beef up their defenses in order to destroy the threat. Not sure how high I will have to go... but my units have a maximum of 8/7 (on attack) or 7/8 (on defense).

Not sure about the Derelict's *Power* (or Attack)... If it's too high it will be impossible for the player to bet the enemy starship. Still need to think about... having read the multiple attackers post...

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Last question (I think) :P

questccg wrote:
I was thinking that the Derelict starship could be 10/20 (something like this).

Let's say that Player 1 (P1) has one (1) starship defending space: 1/3

Now it's the Derelict's turn to attack... and it does so.

P1 says he will block with his only starship. The Derelict delivers a whooping 10 Power versus the 3 of P1 defending starship. The defending starship is destroyed.

Now here is my question: The difference between those two starships is 7 (10 Power - 3 Toughness)... Does that mean my *avatar* (or base) loses 7 damage???

StagCutlery
StagCutlery's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/02/2013
In MtG, no... unless the

In MtG, no... unless the creature had an ability that allowed it to (see Trampling).

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Okay... so now I have a better understanding

@StagCutlery: Thanks for the *Trampling* clarification.

My concern was just that: all cards had the trampling ability (in MtG). What this would do is cause too much damage early on as you build your deck. It would make it impossible to accrue sufficient cards to take the alien starship out.

Without *Trampling* means that all it takes is ONE (1) starship to be deployed such that it defends the player's homeworld (base). This is what I was hoping to achieve. This way all you need to do is put a starship into space and let the Derelict rip through it until you accumulated enough cards to take the starship out.

You homeworld (for the Exterra race) has a health rating of 30 HP. So this is like 3 turns without defenses (if the Derelict is 10/20).

Still need to think about this... but early on, I think this might work out...

Note: Perhaps the Derelict should be 8/16 (instead of 10/20). If I make the homeworld's defense to be 32, that means a player can make up to 3 *tactical errors* before losing on the 4th one...

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Thank you all!

czman wrote:
I think that removing luck from games is difficult to do.

Dice and cards both rely on luck (unless you start off with access to all of the cards).

Well the issue was removing dice from the combat mechanic. I wanted something interesting that required strategy over luck. During my last 2 hour gaming session, it became obvious that dice rolling slowed down the game especially since the odds were in the defender's favor.

BUT what I think is UNIQUE is how starships are configured *dynamically* and then launched into space to defend the player's homeworld. It leaves a lot of possibilities when it comes to the configuring part of combat.

Since each player starts the game with the SAME ten (10) cards, it's all about strategy in how you build your deck... Now space skirmishes can also be strategic...

Thanks to all who have posted on this thread - it has helped me immensely.

StagCutlery
StagCutlery's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/02/2013
questccg wrote: Note:

questccg wrote:

Note: Perhaps the Derelict should be 8/16 (instead of 10/20). If I make the homeworld's defense to be 32, that means a player can make up to 3 *tactical errors* before losing on the 4th one...

It sounds like there's no use being defensive because if your max Def is 8, this ship is going to destroy you every time. In this case, it sounds like straight up MtG game with the serial numbers filed off. Maybe shields soak up X attacks before they're no longer useful?

Once you're ready to crunch numbers:
You want to avoid the scenario where all the player is doing is building a ship just to suck up hits. I don't know how fast ships take to be "built", but a player won't have fun if they get stuck building a ship that gets destroyed in order to build a ship that gets destroyed, etc.
Even if you net one ship a turn, it shouldn't be too static that a player can determine that if things continue as they do and perform the same number of actions (some sort of loop), then they'll win in X turns.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
More clarifications

StagCutlery wrote:
It sounds like there's no use being defensive because if your max Def is 8, this ship is going to destroy you every time.

It may well destroy ONE (1) ship per turn, but when you launch FOUR (4) starships up against it... Well it can only destroy one... Basically your goal would be to launch four configured starships into space such that their total Power (Attack) is equal to The Derelicts' Toughness (Defense).

StagCutlery wrote:
In this case, it sounds like straight up MtG game with the serial numbers filed off. Maybe shields soak up X attacks before they're no longer useful?

Not sure I understand what you mean...

StagCutlery wrote:
Once you're ready to crunch numbers:
You want to avoid the scenario where all the player is doing is building a ship just to suck up hits. I don't know how fast ships take to be "built", but a player won't have fun if they get stuck building a ship that gets destroyed in order to build a ship that gets destroyed, etc.

Starships can be built every turn (if your deck is well balanced). See that's the thing, it's a SOLO or CO-OP game. If it's a solo game, well then you need to have some room for error otherwise you will lose every time you play... And that is BORING.

It takes three (3) cards to build a starship: Model/Class, Crew and Weapon.

In the revised combat mechanic that amounts to: a standard based on the *Class* of the starship, a *Crew rating* (Defense or Toughness) and a *Weapon rating* (Attack or Power).

Using the *Monarch* role, you draw seven (7) cards (5 + 2). You should be able with a well balanced deck to build a starship in one turn. Perhaps the solo game's goal is to help players learn how to build a BALANCED deck...

StagCutlery wrote:
Even if you net one ship a turn, it shouldn't be too static that a player can determine that if things continue as they do and perform the same number of actions (some sort of loop), then they'll win in X turns.

The way I see it is this:
-Early on, you build starships to simply defend against The Derelict attacking your homeworld.
-If you do that successfully, the next step would be earning/buying new cards for your deck such as *Class A Destroyer* starship model... Or a powerful weapon with a rating of 5, etc.
-If you can amass enough cards, you can then deploy three (3) to four (4) starships with a combined Power (Attack) greater or equal to The Derelict's Toughness (Defense) which would be 16.

And then you win the SOLO scenario. But that is only one (1) of four (4) scenarios, there are still three (3) others which are meant for DUAL or VERSUS gameplay. And the number of players can be two (2) to four (4) players...

Note: The point of this scenario (The Derelict) is a that it is a solo (or co-op) game with HIGH tension. That alien starship is in space and every turn it gets, it is going to pound the cr@p out of the player... BUT then end goal is getting the best out of that starship and pounding back with that deadly final blow.

Note 2: One of the RULES concerning the *behavior* of The Derelict is that IT ATTACKS the WEAKEST starship first... With this rule, I think it would be possible to slowly creep up by putting cr@ppy starships with your bigger ones. Eventually the player will surmount the odds... Still needs plenty of playtesting - but this is a scenario I can test often (since it is solo gameplay).

StagCutlery
StagCutlery's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/02/2013
Keeping the derelict at bay

Keeping the derelict at bay in the beginning while you get the ball rolling would be fine, as long as you could do that, but you'd want a back-and-forth kind of play, not a snowballing one.

The static part I'm concerned about would play out like this:
I spend X turns building one ship to lose to the derelict while I get my deck fine tuned, then...
Build two ships, lose one to Derelict (My fleet is 1 ship at the end of Derelict's turn)
Build two ships, lose one to Derelict (My fleet is 2 ships at the end of Derelict's turn)
Build two ships, lose one to Derelict (My fleet is 3 ships at the end of Derelict's turn)
Build two ships, lose one to Derelict (My fleet is 4 ships at the end of Derelict's turn)
I attack with 4 ships and defeat Derelict
That would be no fun. If it took 3 turns or 10, I wouldn't have any fun if all I had to do was rinse and repeat to victory. I ESPECIALLY wouldn't be having fun if I was losing to an opponent like this.

If a balanced deck lets you build one ship a turn, then you'll be locked in a stalemate as the derelict destroys your ship every turn it attacks. Assuming the cost to build a ship is just playing the three components, then the luckiest hand a Monarch can draw lets you build two ships (assuming a Monarch gets to draw up to seven cards each turn). I'm not a probability expert, my gut tells me this is going to be a tremendous uphill battle with a lot of my turns consisting of being locked in a holding pattern and making zero headway while I feed a ship to the derelict.

You might be able to build a solo mission/tutorial, but I don't think you can base it on one, large ship. I could be completely wrong and there's something I'm not seeing though. :-)

Edit: to be fair, that wouldn't be fun for ME; I would poll the forum here for more opinions.

Deveration
Deveration's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/12/2013
This scenario reminds me

This scenario reminds me heavily of OGRE.

http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/5206/ogre

Perhaps a looksey over that way (and maybe G.E.V.) might help in determining how things could be handled.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Very good points!

StagCutlery wrote:
Keeping the derelict at bay in the beginning while you get the ball rolling would be fine, as long as you could do that, but you'd want a back-and-forth kind of play, not a snowballing one.
...
That would be no fun. If it took 3 turns or 10, I wouldn't have any fun if all I had to do was rinse and repeat to victory. I ESPECIALLY wouldn't be having fun if I was losing to an opponent like this.

You are right, you would need to be able to build 2 starships per turn. That might be a hard task to do... And it probably would not be any fun either.

I could fine tune the scenario by making The Derelict a 5/15 starship... This might be more plausible. If your homeworld has 30 HP, that would mean it could survive 5 attacks (25 HP lost). On the 6th successful attack, the player would lose.

Moreover, you could build the more powerful ships to defend against the Derelict making the scenario composed of three (3) distinct parts:
1-Put up a weaker starship and let the Derelict rip through it (survival)
2-Put up a strong starship and then defend from the Derelict (blockade)
3-Put up enough starships to destroy the Derelict (assault)

This might make the scenario much more plausible... I personally think it's a question of *fine tuning*. If the Derelict is TOO STRONG, the player will always lose. If it is TOO WEAK, the player will always win!

Note: 5 Power (Attack) would not be too bad
-It would take a Class E utility starship (0/1) + Elite Crew (0/5) = (?/6) We know it can't destroy The Derelict
-It would take a Class D scout starship (0/2) + Advanced Crew (0/4) = (?/6)
-It would take a Class C transport starship (1/2) + Advanced Crew (0/4) = (?/6)
-It would take a Class B capital starship (1/3) + Regular Crew (0/3) = (?/6)
-It would take a Class A destroyer starship (2/3) + Regular Crew (0/3) = (?/6)

StagCutlery
StagCutlery's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/02/2013
the problem with all-or-nothing attacks and one ship...

My worry here is that there's no 'butter zone'; too small an attack number and you build an invincible ship too early, but too large an attack number and the play might lose before getting that ship out there.

Assuming there's no other cost to building a ship other than playing it (and the derelict's atk is 5), my worry would be how often can you 'top deck' a toughness 6 or better ship on the first or second turn?

You may want to remove tracking damage from the game, but for this solo mission, I think you could at least simulate 'regeneration':
Suppose the Derelict is composed of different cards - a hull, or hulls, and four or five weapon cannons. In addition, it has a face down deck of 'spare parts'. The cannons all combine their ATK values and target the ship with the weakest DEF. Once each turn, if the Derelict has lost a component, it draws the top card from its deck and if it fits, the card is equipped. Otherwise, discard the card. The player is then spending his time building ships and hopefully taking out enough cannons to minimize damage while he gets his dream fleet up.

EDIT: the cannon cards should have various ATK values; you don't want the play to know that the combined ATK value will always max out at one number. You want him to know what it's MOST OFTEN going to be, but every now and then he'll get a curve ball of 1-2 points higher. For example, he knows 90% of the time it'll be ATK 6, 8% it'll be ATK 7, and 2% he's just unlucky and the ATK will be 8.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Good for helping to learn

StagCutlery wrote:
My worry here is that there's no 'butter zone'; too small an attack number and you build an invincible ship too early, but too large an attack number and the play might lose before getting that ship out there.

Assuming there's no other cost to building a ship other than playing it (and the derelict's atk is 5), my worry would be how often can you 'top deck' a toughness 6 or better ship on the first or second turn?

Well the thing is, you need to *buy* the cards from their separate decks. At the heart of the *trade* part of the game is a Deck-Building mechanic (DBG). Using various roles, you can earn more quickly the right type of starship, crew or weapon.

The more and more I discuss issues with you guys, the more I see the Derelict scenario as a *How to play* this game scenario... And I think that is GREAT. If this scenario helps you in teaching how to better use the various roles in the game, building up to a stronger defense, how to take out a powerful opponent, etc. then I think this scenario has true merit. It may be a little bit rough at the beginning (trying to defend with weak cards), but once you survive that part of the game, you know you are going to win the game - it only becomes a matter of time.

You either lose before you can get a strong starship to be the blockade or you win once that starship is out in space...

StagCutlery
StagCutlery's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/02/2013
My suggestion is you should

My suggestion is you should still vary the Derelict's ATK somehow. :-)

Other than that, it might as a tutorial.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Roll 1d6 for The Derelict's Power

StagCutlery wrote:
My suggestion is you should still vary the Derelict's ATK somehow. :-)

Well what I could do is give the alien weapon a rating of 1d6. This could give a range between 1 and 6 Power. This could be cool because it could give players more chance in surviving... If the Derelict rolls a 1 for Power, he only causes 1 damage to the starship in space (or the homeworld).

Does this sound like an interesting variant... Personally I think it makes sense because it's about maneuvering and targeting. This is not an exact science, so the dice roll could be okay.

What do you think about that???

StagCutlery
StagCutlery's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/02/2013
You could do that, but isn't

You could do that, but isn't that going backwards? You wanted to eschew dice.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Hmm...

StagCutlery wrote:
You could do that, but isn't that going backwards? You wanted to eschew dice.

For space skirmishes between two (2) or more players, yes, no dice. Too much rolling of the dice takes time and I don't think it was very strategic (both players need to roll).

But for The Derelict starship it might be interesting... You already have four (4) d6 that can be used as counters (by space mission - because the game also has mission which earn you more money than trading), the extra die could be used to determine the Derelict's Power.

After the player plays his turn, it becomes the Derelict's turn to attack. There isn't much you need to do (except resolve combat). So rolling 1d6 might not slow the game too much and may make the scenario more fun to play (because damage dealt is random). What this means is that the weapon use is sometimes LESS EFFECTIVE and maybe sometimes even your weak starships survive an attack...

So the Derelict could have *1d6* (Power) / 15 (Toughness).

Corsaire
Corsaire's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/27/2013
"Holy cow! What is it?" "Eh,

"Holy cow! What is it?"

"Eh, captain, it's one might big ship, poofed onto the screen."

"When will it get here?"

"Kennit tell, it's forerunner tech and they CAN change the laws of physics."

i.e. Instead of random strength, what if you use the randomness to determine when the derelict will engage? Turn 1 & 2, not here yet, turn 3 arrives on a 6, turn 4 arrives on a 5+,...

I think you'd create some nice tension and replayability that way.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
What do you think about this...?

Corsaire wrote:
Instead of random strength, what if you use the randomness to determine when the derelict will engage? Turn 1 & 2, not here yet, turn 3 arrives on a 6, turn 4 arrives on a 5+,...

Hmm... Maybe the weapon could have a *recharge rate*?! After the Derelict attacks, 1d6 is rolled to determine when the NEXT attack happens. The 1d6 can be used as a counter... So if you roll a 6, you have 6 turns where the Derelict is busy charging it's weapons. Then I would make the starship 5/15...

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut