Recommend
4 
 Thumb up
 Hide
62 Posts
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 

Star Wars: X-Wing Miniatures Game» Forums » Variants

Subject: [Rules] Capital Ship Rules (v2) rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Michael Ptak
United States
Livermore
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Hi All,

I've been working on this for a while and I thought it was ready to share because I want to test it soon with a Space Platform template I've been making up.

I would like to eventually do a 'base assault' event pitting a Rebel strike force against an Imperial base. It helps to have a second set of eyes though and feedback to see if everything is working.

The most modern rules have been posted to the Geek, but I am in the process of polishing and testing them. Right now a Modified Corvette is available for players to use with these rules.




The intent of these rules is to be a generic catch-all set for all ships larger than the Large ships produced by FFG, using ships from the X-Wing and TIE Fighter flight simulators as a performance model. This is not intended to create a soft ship-battle-simulator, but instead interesting targets for the starfighters to destroy or evade during larger scenarios and campaigns.

I will be posting ships configurations which I feel best fit for performance, but players are free to create their own templates and ships based on what I've started with.

Enjoy!
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh Wilson
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: [Rules] Large Craft Rules (Draft)
I hesitate to write this since it's nitpicky, but since you are drafting rules, you have to be nitpicky. The official game already has rules for "Large" ships starting in wave 2. The Falcon and Slave 1 are "Large."
You should come up with a different term. "Capital" ships, or something.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bryce K. Nielsen
United States
Elk Ridge
Utah
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: [Rules] Large Craft Rules (Draft)
The Falcon and Slave 1 are actually "medium" sized crafts.

-shnar
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Henning
Sweden
flag msg tools
Re: [Rules] Large Craft Rules (Draft)
Norsehound wrote:

I still need to add rules for docking and landing platforms, but there isn't much too it other than "go to this location on the template, spend a turn stationary, you're docked".
Any thoughts?


I have some rules thought out already, you may use them if you wish:
Carrier Compartment
Some large ships may have a Carrier Compartment upgrade. Each carrier compartment may have up 2 small ships in its dock.

A friendly small sized ship that has just performed a green maneuver and is at range 1 from the carrier compartment may dock with it as an action. The docked ship is removed from the game board along with any action tokens. The ship is then placed next to the Carrier Compartment upgrade card to indicate that it is docked.

The ship with the Carrier Compartment may spend an action to perform 1 of the following on 1 of the docked ships:
×Regain 1 shield.
×Flip 1 faceup damage card facedown.
×Remove 1 facedown damage card.
×Reload 1 used proton torpedo or missile upgrade (the ship must have previously equipped and used the upgrade card in order to reload it).
×Launch the ship; immediately perform a straight 2 maneuver with the starting end of the maneuver template between the guides (two small lumps) on the Carrier Compartment. The ship cannot perform any actions this round and may not perform an attack in the combat phase.

Up to 2 small sized ships may start the engagement docked with each Carrier Compartment.

Any docked ships are also destroyed if the Carrier Compartment (or the ship itself) is destroyed.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh Wilson
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: [Rules] Large Craft Rules (Draft)
shnar wrote:
The Falcon and Slave 1 are actually "medium" sized crafts.

-shnar


That is a persistent rumor, but it is not true. If you look at both the pre-release description for these ships, and the rules included in the boxes, you will see these are LARGE ships, as I have been saying here and on the FFG forums for some time.

According to "hothie" the winner of the Falcon from the FFG Worlds tournament, the Falcon rules say the following:

"Large ships: The Millenium Falcon has a ship base that is larger than those found in the X-wing core set. Such ships are classified as large ships and use the following rules:......"

So my point stands. Take it or leave it.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Ptak
United States
Livermore
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Re: [Rules] Large Craft Rules (Draft)
I probably will change it to "Capital ships", because I'm in agreement with your point. I doubt FFG will officially release ships larger than this.

Henning... I did not think the scale of the game would permit repairs. If anything it would be reloading... thus enabling a DX-9 to 'dock' with a starfighter and give it reloads, but only as an option enabled by the scenario. Docking for these capital rules would only be to permit scenario-driven spacecraft to complete their objectives, like dropping off VIPs or moving out of a hangar to escape.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Henning
Sweden
flag msg tools
Re: [Rules] Capital Ship Rules (Draft)
Norsehound wrote:
Henning... I did not think the scale of the game would permit repairs. If anything it would be reloading... thus enabling a DX-9 to 'dock' with a starfighter and give it reloads, but only as an option enabled by the scenario. Docking for these capital rules would only be to permit scenario-driven spacecraft to complete their objectives, like dropping off VIPs or moving out of a hangar to escape.


I can see what you mean, but we already have several astromech units that can allow in-flight repairs so I do not think it is very far-fetched to allow a docked ship to be repaired. But do as you wish, you can use all, none or parts of my proposal.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Ptak
United States
Livermore
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Re: [Rules] Capital Ship Rules (Draft)
That is a good point... I just didn't want to bog down players in hangar logistics. If it came to hangar transitions what I would have suggested is something in the scenario description like "The Platform has two Rookie X-Wing pilots on standby for backup. They may be called in as reinforcements." The player can sacrifice some of his scenario score to call them up, whereupon they would transition from storage to the landing pad, then take off the turn after that.

On the opposite hand, mission completion might be when a transport safely enters a platform hangar. Even if it makes it to the landing pad and settles on it, the attacking player might have a few shots in the turn before it's towed into the enclosed hangar and ends the scenario.

About the only thing that would happen 'in' the hangar is embarking/debarking of the cargo. That cargo could be VIPs, or stormtroopers. The former is an important step for scenario progression, while the latter can capture a capital ship.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ralf Schemmann
Germany
Siegen
NRW
flag msg tools
www.der-ringkrieg.de
badge
www.der-ringkrieg.de
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: [Rules] Capital Ship Rules (Draft)
Great work on these rule so far, I love your ideas!

I do have one point in mind, please bear with me:
Quote:
When a subsystem is attacked, it does not roll agility dice for any reason. The primary means of defense in a capital ship is the heavier armor of each subsystem component and the composite nature of a capital ship.


I can see the reasoning behind this and would agree from a "realism" point of view. But from a gameplay point of view, I find it important that the defending players has something to do when being attacked - especially if the capital ship is a major part of his forces. Just sitting there and seeing the attacking player roll his dice (and hoping for the best) could be a bit frustrating.

We saw this in our last game (The Redeemer mission), where the Rebel player had a chance to negate the Empire's hits by rolling one defense die for the corvette's engine. Those were some of the most exciting moments of the game, and having the one defense die available was crucial for that.

Just my 2 cents.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave Weiss
United States
South Dakota
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: [Rules] Capital Ship Rules (Draft)
magadizer wrote:
shnar wrote:
The Falcon and Slave 1 are actually "medium" sized crafts.

-shnar


That is a persistent rumor, but it is not true. If you look at both the pre-release description for these ships, and the rules included in the boxes, you will see these are LARGE ships, as I have been saying here and on the FFG forums for some time.

According to "hothie" the winner of the Falcon from the FFG Worlds tournament, the Falcon rules say the following:

"Large ships: The Millenium Falcon has a ship base that is larger than those found in the X-wing core set. Such ships are classified as large ships and use the following rules:......"

So my point stands. Take it or leave it.


It's not so much a rumor, but more poor PR on FFG's part. Their early PR on the Falcon and Slave-1 actually referred to them as medium ships. This was then spread around the interwebs parroting the use of the term 'medium'. People then assumed since these were medium, there must be large ships coming. FFG then went back and ret-conned their website and started using the term 'large' as they indicated that they never intended to do capital ships in this game.
An early mistake on FFGs part is what created this medium vs large debate that is still floating around.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh Wilson
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: [Rules] Capital Ship Rules (Draft)
kmanweiss wrote:
magadizer wrote:
shnar wrote:
The Falcon and Slave 1 are actually "medium" sized crafts.

-shnar


That is a persistent rumor, but it is not true. If you look at both the pre-release description for these ships, and the rules included in the boxes, you will see these are LARGE ships, as I have been saying here and on the FFG forums for some time.

According to "hothie" the winner of the Falcon from the FFG Worlds tournament, the Falcon rules say the following:

"Large ships: The Millenium Falcon has a ship base that is larger than those found in the X-wing core set. Such ships are classified as large ships and use the following rules:......"

So my point stands. Take it or leave it.


It's not so much a rumor, but more poor PR on FFG's part. Their early PR on the Falcon and Slave-1 actually referred to them as medium ships. This was then spread around the interwebs parroting the use of the term 'medium'. People then assumed since these were medium, there must be large ships coming. FFG then went back and ret-conned their website and started using the term 'large' as they indicated that they never intended to do capital ships in this game.
An early mistake on FFGs part is what created this medium vs large debate that is still floating around.


Call it what you want. I can neither confirm nor deny the origin of the "medium" ship idea. Nevertheless, the "debate" should be over. These are the large ships.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter Thompson

Pennsylvania
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: [Rules] Capital Ship Rules (Draft)
It think capital ship rules are good to work on, but I think this should be created using some of the specific capital ships that have been created.

The Flight of the Redeemer scenerio is excellent and the ship works very well. I would use this CR90 Corvette as the model for all of this development. The combination of systems and how they work together really works per my playtesting. If you lay the cards out right, the cards even take the shape of the ship.

The scenerio can be found here:
http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/860628/custom-mission-the-re...

The only other thing I would add to this discussion is movement rules on and around a capital ship. For the CR90 Corvette, I use the Kenner Rebel Blockade runner seen here:



For my trials, the CR90 ship is used as a sight blocker so that spacecraft on eiher side can't see each other. For movement, you can go through the CR90 as long as you make it completely across. If you do not, then it is as if you overlapped bases and you stop, losing your actions. I believe this is the most consistent approach based on the rules (alternately this could be handled as an asteroid and have to roll for damage).

For the 3D Star Destroyer seen below, I have the movement from level to level as normal movement as long as you successfully have your full base on the next level. If not, the movement ends as if you overlapped bases on the original level you were on (losing actions). This represents the pilot having to be focused on not hitting the Star Destroyer and not be able to do furter options other than flying. Several surfaces on the model are treated as hard surfaces (like and asteroid), and you roll for damage if you hit them (such as the vertical walls of the bridge). For line of sight and measurement, if two models are on different levels, I change the measurement rule from base to base, to model to model.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven Simmons
United States
Tennessee
flag msg tools
Re: [Rules] Capital Ship Rules (Draft)
The Falcon and the Slave 1 are actually medium sized ships.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh Wilson
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: [Rules] Capital Ship Rules (Draft)
Sammo21 wrote:
The Falcon and the Slave 1 are actually medium sized ships.


Thanks for the input. Please read the above thread.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Ptak
United States
Livermore
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Re: [Rules] Capital Ship Rules (Draft)
Enough of this, Josh is correct. Falcon and Slave 1 are "Large" ships and I agree with him. I neglected to change the wording of this rules set because I didn't think people would get hung up on it. I posted this because I was more interested in what people thought of the content of the rules, not the title of the document.

Peter, while I thank you for bringing up the rules for the CR90 as a comparison and I do intend on testing the CR90 with the rules, the primary intention of this set is to re-create the XQ space platforms and capital craft from TIE fighter by mimicking their capabilities.

This is a point because I think flight disruption by being over the template is going to be problematic with XQ platforms as they are much wider than the CR90. Moreover I feel Capital ship and Space Platform movement is much more predictable than the asteroids, so I don't see collisions happening and I don't want it to cause problems when the attackers are going after a Platform. I do find the obstruction rules agreeable though and mayfold them back into the rules, given the mass of capital ships.

I also disagree with the level-to-level issue for weight on player processing during the game and binding the rules to some degree of 3D movement. X-Wing is abstract in the Z-axis and I don't see how level distinction helps this. Plus, players may present different models for these capital ships. I intend on writing the rules with the presumption that all templates are flat.

Ralf, Operating capital ships is a different experience from flying Fighters. When operating one you will have to accept that your ship will be taking hits- you're a huge slow-moving torpedo magnet of a target. On the other hand you have a higher amount of shields and weapons than starfighters and you can't be killed in one shot. I feel the sacrifice of agility dice is acceptable- though I may change my mind with testing.

Bear in mind that I see Capital ships as a scenario necessity. A player would not be choosing a Capital ship for a casual pickup match. They would be available if players want to play a specific scenario or host an event where a large capital ship was part of the scenario conditions (like a space platform for base attacks). For instance if and when I get the X-Wing event I want to do off the ground, I would be the platform operator while I let the guest players fly the starfighters.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh Wilson
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: [Rules] Capital Ship Rules (Draft)
You might want to make collisions to be an option in some cases. I'm thinking of the scene of the A-wing flying through the bridge of the Star Destroyer in ROTJ.
This might be scenario or ship specific though. I think that peterparkerh who made the table-sized cardboard star destroyer made collision rules for moving along the various levels of the ship.
Of course, with a ship THAT big, which is really more of a terrain than a ship, there is no movement for it, either.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter Thompson

Pennsylvania
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: [Rules] Capital Ship Rules (Draft)
Norsehound wrote:
Peter, while I thank you for bringing up the rules for the CR90 as a comparison and I do intend on testing the CR90 with the rules, the primary intention of this set is to re-create the XQ space platforms and capital craft from TIE fighter by mimicking their capabilities.

This is a point because I think flight disruption by being over the template is going to be problematic with XQ platforms as they are much wider than the CR90. Moreover I feel Capital ship and Space Platform movement is much more predictable than the asteroids, so I don't see collisions happening and I don't want it to cause problems when the attackers are going after a Platform. I do find the obstruction rules agreeable though and mayfold them back into the rules, given the mass of capital ships.

I also disagree with the level-to-level issue for weight on player processing during the game and binding the rules to some degree of 3D movement. X-Wing is abstract in the Z-axis and I don't see how level distinction helps this. Plus, players may present different models for these capital ships. I intend on writing the rules with the presumption that all templates are flat.


Norsehound,
Part of the experience of X-Wing is the beauty of this game and the ships. Honestly, you could play this game without the miniatures at all and still use the bases. What's the fun in that?

I have played on flat templates,played on three dimensional surfaces, and with three dimensional Capital Ships. I have done the Death Star trench, the Rebel Blockade Runner, and the Star Destroyer all in 3D. The 3D surfaces have been far more fun (and better looking). The added difficulty really adds something to the game. Timing the drop into the Death Star Trench or navigating the Star Destroyer trying to not slam into the bridge is a ball to play. I'm even working on a scenerio to add to the Star Destroyer scenerios where the partially damaged CR90 comes in and gets to do one attack run on the Star Destroyer.

I'm just trying to help this process using my experience as well (since I have an over 6 foot long Star Destroyer to try these rules out). You can take the advice or leave it, but just try to keep an open mind before dismissing all the suggestions out of hand.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Ptak
United States
Livermore
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Re: [Rules] Capital Ship Rules (Draft)
Peter I'm not trying to suggest players can't use their 3D models for ship representation... but not all of us can spend a lot of money to buy or build these extravagant ships. Designing for 2D templates makes it simpler for everyone I feel.

Moreover, for the scenarios I'd like to make, not everyone would be interested in making or owning these models. Who else likes the XQ platforms as much as I do? System patrol craft? The various freighters and cargo ferries? Containers? Easier to print them out as flat templates and stow them for scenario requirements.

If players want to use their 3D models to represent the ships, that's great! For the rules though I don't feel I should make a distinction between 3D and non-3D starships.

Josh... Collisions like Arvel Crynyd's starfighter I think are special exceptions. If it's intended in the scenario, provide special rules for it. If I wrote it in I would have to say something like, "If a fighter was shot down within 1 of a subsystem, roll attack and defense dice equal to the starfighter's last speed. Apply that damage to the nearest system."

Regardless, these rules are a suggestion. They are for players who want to put in capital ships without a ton of work in the special rules area or want a base to tweak and modify to their needs. For myself these rules are intended to simulate XQ platforms, Correllian corvettes, and the occasional large starship that needs special rules to play in the scenario (things like Scout craft, System Patrol craft, and so on).

They are also not intended for capital-v-capital battles since like TIE fighter, they don't make accurate representations of what these capital ships are really capable of.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter Thompson

Pennsylvania
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: [Rules] Capital Ship Rules (Draft)
Norsehound wrote:
Peter I'm not trying to suggest players can't use their 3D models for ship representation... but not all of us can spend a lot of money to buy or build these extravagant ships. Designing for 2D templates makes it simpler for everyone I feel.

Moreover, for the scenarios I'd like to make, not everyone would be interested in making or owning these models. Who else likes the XQ platforms as much as I do? System patrol craft? The various freighters and cargo ferries? Containers? Easier to print them out as flat templates and stow them for scenario requirements.

If players want to use their 3D models to represent the ships, that's great! For the rules though I don't feel I should make a distinction between 3D and non-3D starships.

Josh... Collisions like Arvel Crynyd's starfighter I think are special exceptions. If it's intended in the scenario, provide special rules for it. If I wrote it in I would have to say something like, "If a fighter was shot down within 1 of a subsystem, roll attack and defense dice equal to the starfighter's last speed. Apply that damage to the nearest system."

Regardless, these rules are a suggestion. They are for players who want to put in capital ships without a ton of work in the special rules area or want a base to tweak and modify to their needs. For myself these rules are intended to simulate XQ platforms, Correllian corvettes, and the occasional large starship that needs special rules to play in the scenario (things like Scout craft, System Patrol craft, and so on).

They are also not intended for capital-v-capital battles since like TIE fighter, they don't make accurate representations of what these capital ships are really capable of.


I understand all of that. I was just suggesting that we start with a specific ship to try out these ideas rather than debating rules without the specifics. I'm also suggesting we start with the CR90 and the Flight of the Redeemer Breakdown (and 2D Cut Out that is already available). This is a great one to start with since most would have an interest in a New Hope specific ship, there is a model you can get if you want it, there is already a 2D cut out, and someone has put the effort already in to breaking up the subsystems. This is my main suggestion. The ship plays pretty cool and just needs some help on movement and some tweaking of the subsystems.

On a side note, the Star Destroyer cost me $13 in cardboard and some paint. You just need access to an overhead projector or computer projector. The blockade runner cost me less than a core set on ebay.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James Motz
United States
Minneapolis
Minnesota
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: [Rules] Capital Ship Rules (Draft)
Nice job with these rules. Two things to consider:

Do you want to even bother moving the capital ships? I mean, the scale of movement is so ridiculously small compared to the fighters that I just figured you could just ignore it. That also makes it easier by not having to deal with moving something that big and knocking around the other miniatures.

If you need them to "move" just abstract it and replace with a turn counter or something.

The opposite thing to consider is the scale of combat range. Rather than just saying "can't hit outside of range 3" why not give them the chance but grant another defense die to the targeted ship? I mean the range available to a turbolaser (standard capital ship armament) vs a regular fighter weapon is like 3 times greater.

I know the model looks cool on a table... but I think for gameplay purposes, the template is the way to go. I don't want to fly around or "bump into" a big ship - I want them to fly on top.

Anyway, I think this is a really cool side project for this game because I can't think of X-Wings and NOT think about the big ships playing some part in a battle. Can't wait to see other designs.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Ptak
United States
Livermore
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Re: [Rules] Capital Ship Rules (Draft)
I've already made an XQ station proxy that I intend to use, but I also want to print out that CR90 template and see if that works. One can test Docking (XQ), and the other can test movement (CR90).

When I have the time I want to take a look at the turret stats listed for the CR90 in that scenario. What I want to do is create some standardized weapons that can be picked and placed on ships in accordance with their stats. So when making a Container Transport for instance, all that's needed is one sheet for Light turbolasers and keep track of the three or so that are on the ship.

Right now the stats I have in mind for 'standard' weapons are:

Light Turbolaser
Omnidirectional
2 Attack
1 Hull

Heavy Turbolaser
Rotational (turns in housing mount to face new targets)
3 Attack
4 Hull

Warhead launcher
Omnidirectional
1 Hull

Bear in mind that the starfighters have to get past a significant amount of shields (10+) before they can hit these systems.

So a CR would have one heavy turbolaser, four small turbolasers, a Radar array (granting Target locks for free), and maybe a missile launcher. CR90s in TIE fighter were only armed with two turbloaser turrets after all.

The XQ-1 is armed with three heavy turbolasers, six small turbolasers, and a missile launcher. The "canonical" XQ is heavier armed, but the platform might be enough for a Rebel Y-Wing squadron already. Needs testing obviously.

Attacking beyond effective range is certainly possible though I figure it's so remote that it's not even worth checking for it since the bolts are easily dodged. However it's something to think about if two capital ships are going at one another, or a Cap ship is attacking a platform.

On moving... I feel it's more of a problem to force ships to be static than it is to give them some form of movement rules. In some scenarios it could be a timer... like a Correllian Corvette advancing on a disabled senator shuttle with the intent of destroying it. The players would be trying to bomb out the Corvette before it could reach the transport and with engines un-target-able, there's no way to disable the corvette and fudge the scenario without needing to destroy the ship (Ion interactions would have to be ironed out... maybe forbidden from such a scenario).

But I think a scenario would be limited to 2 capital ships maximum for a realistic, playable event or scenario. Really running one would be the equivalent of a player running 1-2 squadrons of starfighters. It would give something for an event runner to do while all the players are having fun flying their starfighters. Or it could be the basis for an 'Ogre' scenario where the Imperial player flies a corvette and three other players in X-Wing have to stop him.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Ptak
United States
Livermore
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Re: [Rules] Capital Ship Rules (Draft)
Some progress on this, thought I'd make a test with my mockup space platform. Pit a full flight group of Y-Wings (Grey squadron pilots), armed with Ion cannons, full load proton torpedoes, and a generic R2 unit even though I wouldn't be doing anything fancy. Decided to fly the Y-wings in a straight line just against the platform to see what a torpedo run would do.

The XQ platform has two light turbloasers on the edge of each platform with a center ring of three heavy turbolasers and a concussion missile launcher at the center. While starfighters have to select a subsystem on the template to attack, damage is first absorbed by the shields before individual subsystems were targeted.

This was important, because the Y-Wings (flying in a straight line in wall formation) were able to target one of the outlying light turbolasers and let fly at the Platform's shields with a torpedo volley.

I didn't use the XQ's concussion missile launcher fully, but within two turns or so the Y-Wings were able to bring down the Platform's shields and were moving in for close kills, using the second shot of torpedoes and their ion cannons to elliminate the center turrets. Since the platform was at initiative 0, they couldn't really harm the Y-Wings once they were within range. The platform only managed to damage one of the incoming Y-wings before I ended the scenario since the outcome was obvious.

On one hand I'm satisfied with this performance. If left alone, a Y-Wing squadron could destroy a platform from far range without reprisal from the platform itself just like the fighters did in the computer game. This means the platform is required to have a patrol of fighters to protect it from far-range bombers, while the Platform could provide fire support for the ensuing dogfight.

On the other hand, once the Y-Wings were close enough to the platform some of them should have been shot to death. They were within firing range of the hub and the only damage inflicted was on one Y-Wing loosing it's shields and gaining one hit point.

So one change I'm thinking about is allowing capital ship turrets to fire twice during the turn- at the beginning and at the end. This might make Lancers and other big anti-fighter capital ships overpowered, but it will make such ships dangerous to fight against. Alternatively the stats could be tweaked for each of the weapons systems as well.

On a final note it seems that deciphered point system doesn't apply to situations like this. The platform was "rated" at 253 points... and was squashed by a ~130 squadron of Y-Wings.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stew
United Kingdom
Co. Durham
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: [Rules] Capital Ship Rules (Draft)
For capital ship movement, when going at slow speed for example, do you mean the ship is moved the 1 distance, ie put it infront of the ship and move the ship so that the front is now touching the end of the 1, or that you put the 1 infront of the cvapital ship and move it so its rear is the end of the 1?

The first seems right to me as they are very slow, but nothing in xwing moves like that so just wanted to ask.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Ptak
United States
Livermore
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Re: [Rules] Capital Ship Rules (Draft)
It doesn't matter either way does it? Pick a point on the ship, move it forward by that distance. Pick a pivot point, swing the ship along that distance too while holding down the template at the pivot point.

I figured it seemed simple enough to give ships some movement, but not go into details with velocity and turning points. Just enough to get them strollin'.

Now, since the platform Talca missions have been posted, I feel I should at least post my working templates so other players can use them.



You will need three of these:


Red is the attack value of each subsystem, yellow is the hit points. All weapons are range 3 maximum, conferring the usual penalties and modifiers. The warhead launcher has special rules and a concussion missile card is provided for reference. Enjoy!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Ptak
United States
Livermore
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Re: [Rules] Capital Ship Rules (Draft)
Some might have noticed the completed platform model in the gallery. In practice it was too easily disabled and destroyed... so I will be editing the stats of the platform itself and revising the excess damage rule. Instead of being transferred to another subsystem (and weakening other turrets to be destroyed), the excess damage is accumulated on another track. If this track is exceeded, the ship is destroyed.

I intend on running this scenario at the upcoming Dundracon in San Ramon, California. I also intend on getting the scenario (and these rules) more toughly tested by the time it hits the table for that event. I'll be updating this thread if there are any major changes to the operating rules as I'm submitting them.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.