Frictionless Space Movement Tutorial

Post by **pesgores** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 1:10 pm

I want to be a MOD now. But Rayhawk is so inactive that I don't know when I should ask him to make me one...

I'll Pm stubby and RH.

Post by **jifel** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 7:32 pm

TBD: Perhaps, to make Space rules more realistic, there could be a 3-D aspect where the ships could be anywhere from 1'' to 5" above the battle, witch would help evade some bottom mounted weapons. However, a ship has to be 2" or less from the surface to use Bombardment. All ships start at 3", and can use one inch of acceleration to raise/lower their height by 1". However, the are kindof complex, so would be an optional addition.

Also, if a ship was two inches above an enemy ship, they could use a bombardment on them.

jifel

Post by **tahthing** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 7:40 pm

that gives a lot of avatages to side mounted weapons that hinge up and down, i don't like the bombade onto enoughter ship thing though since it removes the point in the height thing since everyone will go max hight to avoide it.

Post by **Theblackdog** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:10 am

jifel wrote:TBD: Perhaps, to make Space rules more realistic, there could be a 3-D aspect where the ships could be anywhere from 1'' to 5" above the battle, witch would help evade some bottom mounted weapons. However, a ship has to be 2" or less from the surface to use Bombardment. All ships start at 3", and can use one inch of acceleration to raise/lower their height by 1". However, the are kindof complex, so would be an optional addition.

Also, if a ship was two inches above an enemy ship, they could use a bombardment on them.

jifel

The problem here is that you would have to tilt the ship's vector up and down to preserve the game physics. It's just not feasible.

Post by **jifel** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:44 am

Why not? some of my bases already do that, and its easy to MoD on. However, it is a little complicated in an un-Brikwarsy manner, so it probably wont be used. It was just an idea anyway.

And people wouldnt just be at maximum altitude because you have to be close to the surface to Support your Ground forces, and that may be where it is decided.

jifel

Post by **Theblackdog** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 4:25 pm

Also, you would need like 3 million stand pieces to place the ships at different heights, and overview photography would become difficult because you would need to be able to show the battlefield from multiple angles.

Post by **jifel** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 4:30 pm

Or just MS paint the height next to them. Its geting too complicated now though, so nevermind.

jifel

Post by **tahthing** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 5:19 pm

I've just made a large ship to micro scale it doesn't fit with the rules since its engines are the size of frigates, what class should this be im thinking cruiser or something like that. the problem is the fact that it has two bases to support both ends since it middle doesn't have points for connection should i put a plate betren the bases and mark the middle or what, in fact since most guns carnt fire from one end of it to the other should it be unused.

Post by **jifel** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 7:24 am

That should probably be a battleship, something that isn't official yet, but I am asking TBD for it.

jifel

Post by **tahthing** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 3:39 pm

my creation is aculey weak in battle since it can't cover its tail(yet) since it doesn't have enougth weapons, though with its massive engines i don't think i needs to worry about defence.

Post by RJ » Wed May 27, 2009 12:41 pm

shouldn't big ships have component damage

like in starwars you here them going - sheilds are down, engines are down, primary weapons are down, etc are down

Post by **Theblackdog** » Thu May 28, 2009 6:51 am

Rule 1 of space combat: If you want to imagine realistic space combat, imagine everything being the opposite of Star Wars.

You CAN destroy components on enemy ships, but it increases the necessary Accuracy roll for the weapons, so it's more feasible just to do structure damage.

Post by **tahthing** » Thu May 28, 2009 8:35 am

i would use component damage for small ships, but it would be done by using acuracy rolls and scatter dice(i got 1 from where i got a warhammer dice cube so i don't have to raid boardgames).
you might miss the weapon your aiming for but hey you hit the one next to it.

also I've come up with an idea for representing how many fighters are in a group. how you do it is by putting markers on the stand, i make mine from 2x2 modified plate clips.

Post by **Theblackdog** » Thu May 28, 2009 9:02 am

tahthing wrote:i would use component damage for small ships, but it would be done by using acuracy rolls and scatter dice(i got 1 from where i got a warhammer dice cube so i don't have to raid boardgames).
you might miss the weapon your aiming for but hey you hit the one next to it.

The problem there is that the weapons, engines, etc. represent a tiny fraction of any ship's surface area. You're most likely to hit the ship's hull, smash through some living quarters (which would be abandoned in a battle) or fuel tanks (which would affect the ship's performance in the long term but not over the course of the battle) and do structural damage than you are to hit a specific weapon. Maybe a critical success to accuracy would allow you to choose a specific component to disable if you were firing for structure damage. But most of a spacecraft's volume is fuel tanks, so you're not likely to hit anything immediately important.

Besides, why are we talking about this? This is a thread about spacecraft MOVEMENT. It says MOVEMENT in the subject line. If you want to calculate damage this way, do so in your own space battles.

Post by **tahthing** » Thu May 28, 2009 9:10 am

Theblackdog wrote:
tahthing wrote:i would use component damage for small ships, but it would be done by using acuracy rolls and scatter dice(i got 1 from where i got a warhammer dice cube so i don't have to raid boardgames).
you might miss the weapon your aiming for but hey you hit the one next to it.
The problem there is that the weapons, engines, etc. represent a tiny fraction of any ship's surface area. You're most likely to hit the ship's hull, smash through some living quarters (which would be abandoned in a battle) or fuel tanks (which would affect the ship's performance in the long term but not over the course of the battle) and do structural damage than you are to hit a specific weapon. Maybe a critical success to accuracy would allow you to choose a specific component to disable if you were firing for structure damage. But most of a spacecraft's volume is fuel tanks, so you're not likely to hit anything immediately important.

depends on what your firing a bullet fired from a rail-gun might make the fuel explode if its explosive (which for the sake of destruction should).

also this add realism since you are unlikely to hit the weapons/control center since they are the smaller part.