Recommend
4 
 Thumb up
 Hide
10 Posts

Gunship: First Strike!» Forums » Variants

Subject: Disposition of Fighters rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
The Jigsaw Man
United States
Goose Creek
South Carolina
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So, the original game components has fighter squadrons displayed as four groups of three fighters on a single card, and the entire squadron moves as a group. The new tokens appear to be four separate tokens, each depicting a flight of 3.

For consideration: since the tokens are now separated, let each flight maneuver and act independently, rather than requiring that all 12 fighters be in the same space. This would permit me to either concentrate my fighter deference into a critical spot, or to spread it out to lightly cover more space.

Having reviewed the rules, I can't see any significant changes that would be required to permit this. Roll dice and take damage based only on the number of fighters any any given spot.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Wood
United States
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Gunship: First Strike! A hit on Kickstarter and soon available as a PreOrder!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Well, let's run it up the flagpole and see who salutes.

I personally will want to keep my Fighters together until we get to more complicated scenarios but you guys will be free to play around with them and create house rules.

If it seems like things are going well, my website will have a new set of Advanced Rules!

Does not help that I do not yet have a set of the new tokens, either. And I think cutting them out with an Exacto is going to give me carpal tunnel! So I will wait alongside the rest of you.

Steve
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brook Gentlestream
United States
Long Beach
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Seems like a decent idea when it comes time to test out expansions. A mini fighter board released with the interceptors and bombers might work out, and give you plenty of time to playtest it.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stuart Stockton
United States
Colorado Springs
Colorado
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
I like the idea of being able to split the fighters up, and think it would make for a fun addition to the advanced rules once all the changes needed to the basic fighter rules are tested.

With the tokens for the fighters it just feels natural... though you would need a way to keep track of which token belongs to which grouping on the fighter board where you're tracking losses of individual fighters(add numbers or symbols?).

3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason Webster
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
vaporwolf wrote:
I like the idea of being able to split the fighters up, and think it would make for a fun addition to the advanced rules once all the changes needed to the basic fighter rules are tested.

With the tokens for the fighters it just feels natural... though you would need a way to keep track of which token belongs to which grouping on the fighter board where you're tracking losses of individual fighters(add numbers or symbols?).



I would just keep it simple. For every 3 fighters, in a zone, roll 1 die.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stuart Stockton
United States
Colorado Springs
Colorado
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
Dnasearchr wrote:

I would just keep it simple. For every 3 fighters, in a zone, roll 1 die.


I may be overcomplicating, or missed something in the current rules, but here are two examples of what I think could come up with separated tokens:

1. A fighter token enters a zone where a dogfight is already in progress. Are they forced to join the dogfight or would they be free to pass through?

2. All of your tokens enter a zone where there are fewer enemy fighter tokens (4 vs 1 for example). Are all your tokens forced to engage in the dogfight? Or could you simply break off an equal number of fighters to engage in the dogfight while allowing the rest of your tokens to contine?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Wood
United States
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Gunship: First Strike! A hit on Kickstarter and soon available as a PreOrder!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
These are exactly why I currently do NOT support splitting them up.

That, and the extra record keeping

I'm not saying I have a closed mind about it but it will need some development.

Steve
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Charlie Theel
United States
St. Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The boardgame Eclipse has a rule called "Pinning" where a single ship pins one other ship.

Applied to the Fighter example above, if you moved 4 fighters into a space with 1 enemy fighter - you would have to leave at least 1 Fighter behind. The other 3 could then keep moving.

This seems simple and elegant and opens up strategy.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Matecha
United States
Florence
New Jersey
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I like the pinning rule - seems like it will work.

However I'd rather not complicate the base game, I'd rather see that in the advanced,optional rules.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
The Jigsaw Man
United States
Goose Creek
South Carolina
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
vaporwolf wrote:
With the tokens for the fighters it just feels natural... though you would need a way to keep track of which token belongs to which grouping on the fighter board where you're tracking losses of individual fighters(add numbers or symbols?).


I would simply add a number or letter right in the center of the token, and another on the fighter board.

fallow wrote:
I like the pinning rule - seems like it will work.


I like that too. One fighter group dogfights one fighter group.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
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.