Starmada campaign system

What's next?
pickledteak
Sub-Lieutenant
Sub-Lieutenant
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2010 9:18 pm

Re: Starmada campaign system

Postby pickledteak » Mon Jul 04, 2011 2:35 am

I really like being able to track individual ships in my games, but also appreciate having the option to track fleets for games that get a bit out of hand ship wise. If I had to choose one it would be individual ships with a ship cap per fleet.

One of the things I played around with in a starmada campaign system, was trying to tie things like supply to already existing rule mechanics in the game. Here's a snippet from one of my homebrew tests
---------------------------------------
Supply:
Fleets need to stay supplied to remain combat effective. Once a ship leaves player controlled space, during the end phase, a supply roll will need to be made for every ship within a fleet. To do this, players will count the number of hexes to the closest piece of friendly territory. This will be the target number. Each ship will then roll aiming to meet or beat that number. So if a ship is 3 hexes away from a friendly hex, every ship in the fleet will need to roll 3 4 5 or 6. This effectively limits fleets to a range of 6 hexes from friendly space. Freighters may be used to modify these rolls, even extending the range beyond 6. However including freighters in a fleet takes coveted warship slots.

Cargo:
Cargo can be used to give bonuses to a fleet operating away from controlled space. This is done by granting a +1 bonus for every 100 cargo in a fleet. This bonus can be applied to any ship before the rolls for supply are made. The Federation Police Cutters cargo does not count for these purposes, and is not calculated as part of its cost.

Unsupplied:
One ships within a fleet fail a supply roll, they gain the unsupplied status. This will need to be notated on the fleet management sheet. Once unsupplied and ships strategic speed is halved (rnd down) & they only have access to half of their consumables (drones, marines, shuttles probes);rounded down. Further more, Tactical engine ratings are reduced by 1. This engine “damage” is not considered damage.

If a ship is unable to supply for a second turn in a row, additional effects take place. All consumables are considered unusable during scenarios, and each weapon gains the “non-piercing” along with another stacking -1 to engine rating.

If a third turn in a row takes place and supply still has failed, then each ship must roll a number of d6's
equal to it's current damage control rating, during the end phase that the roll was failed. A ship must make a 5 or 6 or be removed from play.
--------------------------------
I ended up not tracking individual ships in a fleet, and went to tracking supplies for the entire fleet.

Using much the same mechanic as transporters use in Klingon Armada, it made it easy for the players I had try it to remember the rule. I would love to see a supply system for fleets that kept it simple and easy to resolve. I found my system to work fairly well, but I know it has some serious limitations and would probably switch to something official in a heart beat.

terryoc
Sub-Lieutenant
Sub-Lieutenant
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:00 am

Re: Starmada campaign system

Postby terryoc » Sat Jul 16, 2011 12:20 am

Supply is good, but I'd like to see it more abstracted. For example, if a fleet can trace an unobstructed (by enemy units) line no longer than 6 hexes (or whatever) to a friendly supply point, it's in supply. If not, it's out of supply. A friendly supply point could be a friendly planet, base, or supply fleet.

Basically, your dedicated staff officers are ensuring that your beans & bullets are getting where they need to be.

I also like node-based systems, like the VBAM default. If your universe has travel by jump points/gates (e.g. Vorkosigan universe, Niven/Pournelle CoDominium universe) it works well.

Blacklancer99
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
Posts: 815
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 1:36 am
Location: People's Republic of MA

Re: Starmada campaign system

Postby Blacklancer99 » Sat Jul 16, 2011 11:14 am

terryoc wrote:Supply is good, but I'd like to see it more abstracted. For example, if a fleet can trace an unobstructed (by enemy units) line no longer than 6 hexes (or whatever) to a friendly supply point, it's in supply. If not, it's out of supply. A friendly supply point could be a friendly planet, base, or supply fleet.


I always personally liked the idea that you had to have ships to keep other ships in supply, and ships to protect those ships were necessary if you want your supplies to reach their customers. I put something like this in the campaign system I hacked together because I like forcing myself and others to have to spend their campaign currency on "non-combat assets", just to make the decision making process more interesting. If I remember correctly VBAM had a rule that you needed to have Supply rated vessels placed on either end of a supply route and it was assumed that they were continuously moving back and forth to the supply depots as part of the supply chain.
Cheers,
Erik
Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are more pliable.
Mark Twain.

murtalianconfederacy
Admiral
Admiral
Posts: 1269
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:56 am

Re: Starmada campaign system

Postby murtalianconfederacy » Wed Jul 20, 2011 9:47 am

Well, not really--over restricted jump lanes you needed supply ships on both sides to enable a supply route to be tracked, and you could use supply ships to create extended supply routes if, for example, you were striking deep into enemy territory and hadn't conquered a system that would enable you to route supplies through it.
Staff Door at my local Waterstones:

"This door is alarmed"

:) :)

Alex Knight
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
Posts: 102
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:49 am

Re: Starmada campaign system

Postby Alex Knight » Wed Jul 20, 2011 10:13 pm

Blacklancer99 wrote:I always personally liked the idea that you had to have ships to keep other ships in supply, and ships to protect those ships were necessary if you want your supplies to reach their customers. I put something like this in the campaign system I hacked together because I like forcing myself and others to have to spend their campaign currency on "non-combat assets", just to make the decision making process more interesting. If I remember correctly VBAM had a rule that you needed to have Supply rated vessels placed on either end of a supply route and it was assumed that they were continuously moving back and forth to the supply depots as part of the supply chain.
Cheers,
Erik


Well, if you want to force people to spend curency on "non-combat assets" why not just levy a supply charge on fleets based on distance from the supply point and size of the fleet. Sure it's abstracted, but can represent fleets of supply ships. And an opponent can still run a supply raid to deny your fleet necessary resources... so you could spent more on supply assets to account for loss or for increased supply line defenses.

Blacklancer99
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
Posts: 815
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 1:36 am
Location: People's Republic of MA

Re: Starmada campaign system

Postby Blacklancer99 » Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:51 pm

Alex Knight wrote:
Blacklancer99 wrote:I always personally liked the idea that you had to have ships to keep other ships in supply, and ships to protect those ships were necessary if you want your supplies to reach their customers. I put something like this in the campaign system I hacked together because I like forcing myself and others to have to spend their campaign currency on "non-combat assets", just to make the decision making process more interesting. If I remember correctly VBAM had a rule that you needed to have Supply rated vessels placed on either end of a supply route and it was assumed that they were continuously moving back and forth to the supply depots as part of the supply chain.
Cheers,
Erik


Well, if you want to force people to spend curency on "non-combat assets" why not just levy a supply charge on fleets based on distance from the supply point and size of the fleet. Sure it's abstracted, but can represent fleets of supply ships. And an opponent can still run a supply raid to deny your fleet necessary resources... so you could spent more on supply assets to account for loss or for increased supply line defenses.


Sounds good for a Starmada type campaign system, but I wouldn't have a reason to waste hours and hours designing auxiliaries ;)
Erik
Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are more pliable.
Mark Twain.

evanmiller70
Midshipman
Midshipman
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 2:36 pm

Re: Starmada campaign system

Postby evanmiller70 » Thu Aug 25, 2011 3:42 am

i was thinking today. one of the first things is the campaign the game or does it exist to give you game scenarios? i would like a campaign game.

squirrelboy38
Midshipman
Midshipman
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 7:52 pm

Re: Starmada campaign system

Postby squirrelboy38 » Wed Aug 31, 2011 10:45 am

I never got to play the original Sovereign Stars so hopefully this will be valued input. also agree with having ships being tracked individually, but it might be nice if there was options for integrating it with Fleet Ops if people wanted. Fleet Ops may not be the main focus, but it might be nice to have the possibility of having epic endgame battles. For campaign play thoughts I have done a little bit here and there myself. I'll put what I have right now in and add more in later when I can find my other notes. If anyone has ever done the Solaris 7 stuff for mech warrior dark ages way back when it was good in the beginning that was kind of my idea and feel. In that being able to repair, modify, upgrade, downgrade my fleet along with being able to modify my base/spacestation etc. Another clarification I should add for fleet ops is that perhaps this could reflect more team based play. My ships are my fleet. For epic battles my fleet is my portion of the team.

These are my campaign notes I have on me right now for Admiral:

Enhanced Auxiliary Services:

Cargo -
This is still on a 1 for 1 SU basis materials are effected by tech levels. Bulky materials have -1 level while Compact materials have +1.

Hospital -
A hospital allows for use of the Damage Control option, and being able to reclaim up to 100% or your marines. You can only keep up the the same percentage of marines that your hospital can support. In otherwords the hospital acts as a performance cap. A hospital with SUs that is only 40% of your total marines SUs can only reclaim up to 40% at once.

Transport -
This can now carry both vehicles and ground units. Ground units are .5 SU and vehicles a 1 SU.

Science -
This is a side note really. I can't remember the specifics anymore, but Science allowed minor ability for a ship to increase its tech levels.

Market Sales & Purchases:

Market Purchase Environment (affects the SU total)-
Cheap = x .99 or less
Average = x 1
High Quality = x 1.1 - 1.49
Restricted = x 1.5 or more

Market Sell/Trade Environment (affects the SU total)-
Favorable = x .75 or more
Average = x .5 - .74
Unfavorable = x .25 - .49
Hostile x .24 or less

evanmiller70
Midshipman
Midshipman
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 2:36 pm

Re: Starmada campaign system

Postby evanmiller70 » Thu Sep 01, 2011 1:03 pm

youve got to decide ifems that the campaign is the game or does it exist to generate scenarios. i have seen some
systems that you keep your armed forces the same thruo tught out but count victories and losses as a point system.
these syystems are primarily a system for generating scenarios. where if you are trying to win the campaign you will generate the uneven battles that happen in real life. The desperate battle to knock out a base to force a break thruogh
or the decision to build a lot of cruisers to patrol a large area or that super deathstar battleship.

Nomad
Commander
Commander
Posts: 306
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 6:15 pm

Re: Starmada campaign system

Postby Nomad » Sat Sep 03, 2011 5:22 pm

Agreed on tracking individual ships. We had one campaign game in the last campaign that I ran (which died more to scheduling than rules) where a pretty hefty fleet (fleet carrier, battleship, and a couple of escorts) jumped into a system to take it and got utterly mauled by a much inferior fleet (two light cruisers) due to poor tactics; they lost all of their fighters and all of their escorts, and accidentally crashed their battleship into a moon... the carrier cloaked and hyperdrove out. It was exactly the type of interestingly unbalanced scenario that campaigns should generate. I have a really ugly draft of the rules we used up here; the economics are based on the diminishing returns math from Master of Orion, but much stripped down.


Return to “Game Design”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest