RolePlay onLine RPoL Logo

, welcome to 2300 Great Game Command Center

05:49, 19th March 2024 (GMT+0)

Rules Discussions.

Posted by Co-GMFor group 0
Combat Cycle Ref
GM, 73 posts
Mon 28 Sep 2015
at 18:29
  • msg #29

Re: Rules proposal 20150915

>Does this include Motorized/Mechanized Infantry?
As I recall, it was confusion over this which is why a long time ago I took the word ‘Infantry’ out of the name for Motorized and Mechanized units.

I know you are right M, but there has to be some advantage to Infantry units else nobody would ever use them. My defense is, as always, that a unit is much more than just the tip of the spear, it includes every support unit that goes along with it. So an Infantry unit with Airborne ability includes Strykers ect, but with very little fuel supply and no maintenance depot etc; the kinds of things which I am declaring, for the purpose of our game because of our scope, make the difference between an Infantry and a Motorized unit.

>>> ASAT: <snip> Infantry units may not have this ability. See section 12.9.
>>Does this include Motorized/Mechanized Infantry?
> ASAT can find no refences to a man portable device that can reach orbit
A simpler solution would be to just get rid of ASAT ability, alter the balance of what happens in Air Defence (sec12.9) and who can attack what (sec 12.4). Remember, an attack does not have to come from special built weapons. An attack can be a scientific atmospheric sampling rocket that was dusted off and weaponized, a hacked weather satellite that was redirected to a crash course, a crewmember of the Spaceship that was contacted and blackmailed into sabotaging his own ship…. Does this mean that Infantry type units are going to be able to attack Spaceships in orbit, Yes, they are just going to really suck at it as per sec 12.9. Again, I know you are right M, but there has to be some advantage to Infantry/Ground units else nobody would ever use them. My defense is, as always, that a unit is much more than just the tip of the spear, it includes every support unit that goes along with it.

One of the great simplifiers of our game universe is that we are never going to have any truly low tech fighting high tech e.g. swords vs. Spaceships; at least not without GM permission for some extraordinary circumstance. Low tech to us is a world with very limited amounts of high tech stuff which would have to be re-purposed (badly) to do the job of a special built thing.
This message was last edited by the player at 19:06, Mon 28 Sept 2015.
Germany
player, 146 posts
Mon 28 Sep 2015
at 18:44
  • msg #30

Re: Rules proposal 20150915

Combat Cycle Ref:
One of the great simplifiers of our game universe is that we are never going to have any truly low tech fighting high tech e.g. swords vs. Spaceships; at least not without GM permission for some extraordinary circumstance. Low tech to us is a world with very limited amounts of high tech stuff which would have to be re-purposed (badly) to do the job of a special built thing.


Are you promising us that no hostile primitive natives will be found in other planets as we expand to space?

(just kidding)
Combat Cycle Ref
GM, 74 posts
Mon 28 Sep 2015
at 18:46
  • msg #31

Rules proposal 20150928

To my regret, I do not think we can move to Division sized units just yet. What sounds like a simple change actually involves a lot of re-balancing and rules questions which have to be very carefully thought of first. So I have decided to focus on some much more achievable simplifications to make this game easier to play.

What has changed:
-Got rid of Heavy, Light, SAM and ASAT abilities, they were underused, overly specific and caused a lot of complications. To compensate, Artillery gives better air defences vs. Air units, ICBM gives better air defences vs. Orbit hex attacks.
-Made uplift/downlift dependent upon technology; do not worry about doing the calculation for capacity yourself as I will update the budget spreadsheets to do it automatically. Got rid of Multi-stage Rockets and Space plane facilities; an unnecessary division after making uplift dependent upon tech level.
-Got rid of Launch Loop facilities; un-canonical to the 2300AD universe. FYI Skyhooks are canonical, they are part of the Mongoose publications.
Combat Cycle Ref
GM, 75 posts
Mon 28 Sep 2015
at 18:48
  • msg #32

Re: Rules proposal 20150915

In reply to Germany (msg # 30):

>Are you promising us that no hostile primitive natives will be found in other planets as we expand to space?
No promises. I am just saying that such encounters will come under the heading of 'GM discretion'.
Germany
player, 147 posts
Mon 28 Sep 2015
at 18:52
  • msg #33

Re: Rules proposal 20150915

Combat Cycle Ref:
In reply to Germany (msg # 30):

>Are you promising us that no hostile primitive natives will be found in other planets as we expand to space?
No promises. I am just saying that such encounters will come under the heading of 'GM discretion'.


Well, perhaps not so kidding in fact. IIRC, the Ebers are TL 4-5 in 2300AD setting...
Germany
player, 148 posts
Mon 28 Sep 2015
at 18:57
  • msg #34

Re: Rules proposal 20150915

Combat Cycle Ref:
>Does this include Motorized/Mechanized Infantry?
As I recall, it was confusion over this which is why a long time ago I took the word ‘Infantry’ out of the name for Motorized and Mechanized units.


Then I understand only leg infantry can be airborne in our game (see that the US have several airborne mech units).

As you're talking about simplifying, I keep advocating to unify Infantry and motorized units. In fact, I guess in nowdays world the differences are minimal, even the poorest infantry units use to have enough motorpool (even if requested civilian one) to be treated as motorized...
Germany
player, 149 posts
Mon 28 Sep 2015
at 19:00
  • msg #35

Re: Rules proposal 20150928

Combat Cycle Ref:
-Got rid of Heavy, Light, SAM and ASAT abilities, they were underused, overly specific and caused a lot of complications. To compensate, Artillery gives better air defences vs. Air units, ICBM gives better air defences vs. Orbit hex attacks.


Then all carriers would be the same?

See that the main use (for now) of the Heavy ability was for carriers, as it allowed them to carry an extra unit...

Suggestion: either to keep the ability for them or to make Heavy carriers as another unit
Japan
GM, 53 posts
Mon 28 Sep 2015
at 21:44
  • msg #36

Re: Rules proposal 20150928

Combat Cycle Ref:
What has changed:
-Got rid of Launch Loop facilities; un-canonical to the 2300AD universe.

How do you feel about other non-canon stuff? After todays news Mars terraforming comes to mind...
China
player, 10 posts
Tue 29 Sep 2015
at 00:01
  • msg #37

Re: Rules proposal 20150928

Combat Cycle Ref:
What has changed:
-Got rid of Heavy, Light, SAM and ASAT abilities, they were underused, overly specific and caused a lot of complications. To compensate, Artillery gives better air defences vs. Air units, ICBM gives better air defences vs. Orbit hex attacks.
-Made uplift/downlift dependent upon technology; do not worry about doing the calculation for capacity yourself as I will update the budget spreadsheets to do it automatically. Got rid of Multi-stage Rockets and Space plane facilities; an unnecessary division after making uplift dependent upon tech level.
-Got rid of Launch Loop facilities; un-canonical to the 2300AD universe. FYI Skyhooks are canonical, they are part of the Mongoose publications.

Okay No real issues here simplified (no real difference between a launch loop or an elevator in the end and I would suggest that an elevator be a possible upgrade to a skyhook as both need an orbital counterbalance) Okay so there will be further changes to military no worries. No issues with Infantry having some ASAT ability ( I am assuming it will be TL depnedant so a TL-6 infantry has a really hard time taking out a TL-9 Rocket)

Bummer on Brigade to division but I may just start the reorganizing of the Chinese Military to comply (and place certain Brigades to gather so when the swith comes it will be less painfull)
China
player, 11 posts
Tue 29 Sep 2015
at 00:21
  • msg #38

Re: Rules proposal 20150928

In reply to China (msg # 37):

Just looked thru the New interface rules only see one issue ..Rockets should not require an OT ..  something is required to get that OT up there...
Germany
player, 150 posts
Tue 29 Sep 2015
at 07:46
  • msg #39

Re: Rules proposal 20150928

China:
In reply to China (msg # 37):

Just looked thru the New interface rules only see one issue ..Rockets should not require an OT ..  something is required to get that OT up there...


Fully agreed. The main advantage of the MSR was that they didn't need OT (so making them the only ones able to uplift it, as Michael says)
This message was last edited by the player at 18:02, Tue 29 Sept 2015.
Combat Cycle Ref
GM, 76 posts
Wed 30 Sep 2015
at 22:19
  • msg #40

Re: Rules proposal 20150928

In reply to Germany (msg # 39):

>>Heavy, Light, SAM and ASAT abilities
>>Then all carriers would be the same?
No, they are not the same. As I have said before, Quality level is much more than just training, Quality Level can be many things *including availability of reserves*. So a Veteran Carrier, yes, may be a single ship with better trained crew, or it may be 2 ships with normally trained crews, or it may be 1 super carrier also with a normally trained crew; it is all the same to us. We have such a broad definition of what is Quality Level there is no need for Heavy and Light special abilities.

>.Rockets should not require an OT ..  something is required to get that OT up there...
Oh fugrumblemublegrumble. Originally Multistage rockets did not require an O/T but Rockets did, deleting MSR made it seem like all rockets would always require an O/T. <ugh!> This is one of the reasons why I am so hesitant to go to division sized units. Even the smallest bloody change can be like that one extra snowflake which touches off an avalanche; you can never think of all the little consequences. Imagine the chaos which will result when we make a huge change like division sized units.
This message was last edited by the GM at 22:59, Wed 30 Sept 2015.
Germany
player, 152 posts
Thu 1 Oct 2015
at 10:32
  • msg #41

Re: Rules proposal 20150928

Combat Cycle Ref:
In reply to Germany (msg # 39):

>>Heavy, Light, SAM and ASAT abilities
>>Then all carriers would be the same?
No, they are not the same. As I have said before, Quality level is much more than just training, Quality Level can be many things *including availability of reserves*. So a Veteran Carrier, yes, may be a single ship with better trained crew, or it may be 2 ships with normally trained crews, or it may be 1 super carrier also with a normally trained crew; it is all the same to us. We have such a broad definition of what is Quality Level there is no need for Heavy and Light special abilities.


Yes, I understand that, but I meant if now all the carriers will have a capcity of 2 air units (plus helo), instead of the or 3 if heavy (see that this was the main use of the heavy ability).
China
player, 12 posts
Thu 1 Oct 2015
at 12:28
  • msg #42

Re: Rules proposal 20150928

In reply to Combat Cycle Ref (msg # 40):

Then dont change to division sized units ..its only a few more turns before the gulf is breached to the stars.. and worrying about division sized units is not that big a deal. (for a while it will be battalion sized units out there) iron out the rules with the changes you have made and let them ride a couple of turns and see how they really work ..(we have had far more rules sets than turns so far) ..and all this fighting on earth will mean little once folk start building core worlds out there.
Referee
GM, 88 posts
Thu 1 Oct 2015
at 17:37
  • msg #43

Re: Rules proposal 20150928

China:
In reply to Combat Cycle Ref (msg # 40):

Then dont change to division sized units ..its only a few more turns before the gulf is breached to the stars.. and worrying about division sized units is not that big a deal. (for a while it will be battalion sized units out there) iron out the rules with the changes you have made and let them ride a couple of turns and see how they really work ..(we have had far more rules sets than turns so far) ..and all this fighting on earth will mean little once folk start building core worlds out there.

GM Andreas says: Well said!
Germany
player, 153 posts
Thu 1 Oct 2015
at 18:40
  • msg #44

Re: Rules proposal 20150928

Referee:
China:
In reply to Combat Cycle Ref (msg # 40):

Then dont change to division sized units ..its only a few more turns before the gulf is breached to the stars.. and worrying about division sized units is not that big a deal. (for a while it will be battalion sized units out there) iron out the rules with the changes you have made and let them ride a couple of turns and see how they really work ..(we have had far more rules sets than turns so far) ..and all this fighting on earth will mean little once folk start building core worlds out there.

GM Andreas says: Well said!


Agreed, but the issue of the rockets needs to be fixed, and, if you forgive me to insist, the one about passenger modules for starships too.

As said in post 19 this smae thread, in practice you need TL 9.3 to be able to build them. As Stutterwarp is TL 9.0 (+ event) we could find ourselves with the capability to explore the extrasolar space long before we can colonize Mars, something against most SF settings (incluiding 2300 AD).
Germany
player, 154 posts
Fri 2 Oct 2015
at 16:11
  • msg #45

Re: Rules proposal 20150928

Just a curiosity I found wile reviewing old discussions about rules in the (no longer used) forum:

  • Version 20130430: downloaded 37 times
  • Version 20130515: downloaded 32 times
  • Version 20130815: downloaded 33 times
  • Version 20131215: downloaded 29 times
  • Version 20140115: downloaded 25 times
  • Version 20140415: downloaded 476 times (this was the one that caught my attentiion)
  • Version 20140501: downloaded 27 times
  • Version 20140503: downloaded 18 times
  • Version 20140606: downloaded 18 times
  • Version 20140901: downloaded 19 times
  • Version 20140915: downloaded 18 times
  • Version 20141030: downloaded 25 times
  • Version 20141215: downloaded 22 times
  • Version 20110115: downloaded 21 times
  • Version 20150215: downloaded 11 times
  • Version 20150330: downloaded 12 times
  • Version 20150427: downloaded 10 times
  • Version 20150602: downloaded 7 times


See that in a little more 5 of years we've had 18 versions (since 06/2015 they are no longer posted in the forum, and I cannot find how many downloads they have had in the HP), and as they have always been downloaded more times than players we are, it seems there was some interest on it...
This message was last edited by the player at 16:27, Fri 11 Dec 2015.
Germany
player, 155 posts
Sat 10 Oct 2015
at 10:54
  • msg #46

Re: Rules proposal 20150928

In reply to Combat Cycle Ref (msg # 40):

Another issue I've just realized.

9.8.2 (page 42):

quote:
-Catapult (Cat): A large, usually a linear electromagnetic, accelerator used for hurtling robust products up to the Orbit hex at great speed. Can launch items from the surface up to the Orbit hex or to the Orbit hex of any other satellite in the same Star System at no extra cost. The local O/T serves as the ‘catch’ facility in orbit. Because of the hyper accelerations it subjects the cargo to it can only ship Food Units (and even then, I hope you like your tomatoes pureed!), Raw Material Units, Tantalum Special Resource Units, and Supply Units. Supply Units count as 5 000 Tonnes each for uplift because of the lower power and extra packaging required to protect them against damage during the boost phase.


Cannot a catapult be used to uplift built modules to an orbital facility (be it an Assembly Yard or a Shipyard)?

See that this further limits the usefulness of those facilities, as Shipyards can only build 5 modules/turn (something you know I don't like), so they depend on surface built modules to build ships if yo want them to be built in a reasonable time...
China
player, 13 posts
Tue 13 Oct 2015
at 23:32
  • msg #47

Re: Rules proposal 20150928

In reply to Germany (msg # 46):

Took me a moment but this is more a clarification than a correction this formula

Base Uplift/Downlift X 10( Colony Space Infrastructure tech level-5)/2

as written does not work ... ie we get into divide by zero on catapult

However restated in the way I think it was ment

(Base Uplift or Base Downlift) x 10 ( Colony Space Infrastructure tech level-5)/2
China
player, 14 posts
Tue 13 Oct 2015
at 23:38
  • msg #48

Re: Rules proposal 20150928

Germany:
In reply to Combat Cycle Ref (msg # 40):

Another issue I've just realized.

9.8.2 (page 42):

quote:
-Catapult (Cat): A large, usually a linear electromagnetic, accelerator used for hurtling robust products up to the Orbit hex at great speed. Can launch items from the surface up to the Orbit hex or to the Orbit hex of any other satellite in the same Star System at no extra cost. The local O/T serves as the ‘catch’ facility in orbit. Because of the hyper accelerations it subjects the cargo to it can only ship Food Units (and even then, I hope you like your tomatoes pureed!), Raw Material Units, Tantalum Special Resource Units, and Supply Units. Supply Units count as 5 000 Tonnes each for uplift because of the lower power and extra packaging required to protect them against damage during the boost phase.


Cannot a catapult be used to uplift built modules to an orbital facility (be it an Assembly Yard or a Shipyard)?

See that this further limits the usefulness of those facilities, as Shipyards can only build 5 modules/turn (something you know I don't like), so they depend on surface built modules to build ships if yo want them to be built in a reasonable time...

As to building 5 moduals per turn ..then up the size of your OT ..ie create an expansion section ..if you want an OT that looks like the 1967 startrek starbases thats going to take over 100 OT's and several dozens of moduals

Mike
Germany
player, 156 posts
Wed 14 Oct 2015
at 00:15
  • msg #49

Re: Rules proposal 20150928

In reply to China (msg # 48):

But we're talking about a shipyard, a specialized module to build ships, and can only build 5 modules per turn. As the freude (once upgraded) has 39 modules (of wich 10 are the hull alone), it would take a shipyard 8 turns (40 years) to build this small cargo ship, and 2 full turns (10 Years) to build just the hull (in fact 4 turns, so 20 years, as the hull is streamlined and this represents 10 more modules).

Of course, you can build the modules elsewhere and take them to the shipyard, but if the catapult cannot be used for this, this only difficults more their use (and limits their utility)
China
player, 15 posts
Thu 15 Oct 2015
at 12:42
  • msg #50

Re: Rules proposal 20150928

In reply to Germany (msg # 49):

Then build more yards to represent larger yards...Simple its in the rules to do so Luis ..just as we can set a pile of power plants and industries in a single hex we can expand shipyards and industries in our "orbital hexes" And yes it means adding Habitation modulas, Power moduals and more "OT's" to represent the growth ..I have yet to see a restriction on this except initial uplift ..once you are getting your raw materials from space and processing them in space then it goes FASTER...

Mike
Germany
player, 157 posts
Thu 15 Oct 2015
at 16:04
  • msg #51

Re: Rules proposal 20150928

In reply to China (msg # 50):

OK, I install 8 shipyards so that  I can build the 39 modules a 10000 tonnes (quite small) Freude ship needs in a single turn. I only need (aside from paying for them) to uplift 160 RMUs (so 3200000 tonnes) per turn...

As they are now, civilian shipyards are only useful as prerequisites for military ones (so that you can build armored or armed ships) and to build ships larger tan 10000 tonnes, but they cannot build their modules at any speed, so you need to build the modules by planetary industries. Off course, that means that you need to uplift them, and, if you cannot do so with catapults, you need quite a developed interface facilities, that need quite a lot of OTs by themselves...

Frankly, IMHO most of last changes in space rules have worsened the game (the last change in interface being the main exception, once the problem with rockets requiring OTs is solved). As rules stand now:

  • Shipyards do not build ships, only build a small part of them (the heavier parts, is assumed) and assemble them.
  • Even so, shipyards need 20 RMU (400000 x G toones) uplift to be operative, os catapults are needed (even shipyards being half a TL lower than catapults).
  • Ship modules cannot be uplifted by catapult to shipyards, so requiring large interface facilities to be uplift the ground industry built ones
  • Interface requires OTs, so many of them are needed to have this same interface infrastructure
  • Passenger modules need larger ships than can be built in surface, so you cannot move population until cataputls are developed (at least farther tan Moon)


This is said to be a galactic 4X game, but we're Earthbound (at most able to colonize Moon, as rockets may reach it with population) for a while. As rules stand, until at least TL 9.5 (so about another 8 turns mínimum, if someone can ressearch all the needed fields each turn, more likely quite more).
This message was last edited by the player at 23:41, Thu 15 Oct 2015.
Germany
player, 158 posts
Sat 17 Oct 2015
at 14:33
  • msg #52

Re: Rules proposal 20150928

More clarifications asked:

11.1 Spaceship Construction (page 61):

quote:
Spaceships can be assembled from their component Modules at a Spaceport facility if all Modules are available on the surface of the satellite. Spaceships can be assembled in the Orbit hex from their component Modules at an ‘Assembly Yard’ facility if all Modules are available in the same Orbit hex. If the mass of a Spaceship being constructed is greater than 10 000 Tonnes then a ‘Civilian Shipyard’ facility is also required. If the Spaceship being constructed has M or H hull Modules or more than 1 Weapons type Module then a ‘Military Shipyard’ facility is also required.


Does that mean that an assembly yard can assamble a 20000 tonnes ship, as long as there is a shypyard in the same orbit hex?

Same with M or H hulls or armed ships (more tan one weapons type module), if there is a Military shipyard in the same hex?

Same about spaceports, should the needed shipyards be in orbit of its satellite.

Can ground based industry build H or H hulls (that can only be assembled if there's a military shipyard), or they can only be built in Military Shipyards?
Combat Cycle Ref
GM, 78 posts
Thu 10 Dec 2015
at 22:32
  • msg #53

Rules proposal 20151210

The first couple of Turns we were doing well just to have a comprehensive set of rules, by Turn 3 we had that. By Turn 4 the rules had been improved enough that they worked tolerably well for the current situation, but after a while I think things would slowly fall apart. Pretty clearly our original GMs never really expected us to go beyond Earth's atmosphere and many of the choices in the game reflected that. This fall I have had a long time to think about what I expect will be needed to take us to the stars.

What has changed
-Altered the 'Nations' file to be 'Settlement List'. Taking some inspiration from the World Generation rules of Traveller, making the file clearly suitable for non-Earth settlements and be clearly incorporated into the rules.

-Looking ahead, made some changes just to make it easier to do the book-keeping: A unique unit number is clearly mandatory. Changes to exactly how cutting edge technology is researched to make it easier to represent on our budget spreadsheets. As Spaceships can move anywhere in a Turn, Supply Units for Spaceships need only be brought to any O/T, not the nearest. Just one way of representing units, the way in section 12.1. Colony income for facilities is determined by number of population units, not facilities; one less thing to track. ODI facilities do not upgrade, they automatically have a Fighter component upon the right tech level. Rewrote the options for dealing with Oil SRU shortfall to be generic SRU shortfall, to not just oil. Got rid of the different toll to mass capacities from various interface facilities for different cargo types. Removed minimum cost to developing a new item. Except for what needs to be brought to the Orbit hex, Interface and Orbital facilities on a Core World do not have an SU requirement.

-Got rid of the remnants of an earlier time when we thought we could have a much more detailed game than we now realize would be a fun and playable thing to do:Got rid of Fuel Bases; they were originally intended to be a ‘hidden base from which to conduct raiding’ sort of thing but various rules changes along the way made them surprisingly useless and largely a duplicate of Naval Bases&Military Rank. Intolerable hexes may not be entered or used; the universe is capable of creating some really nasty real estate which even in 2300AD are inaccessible to facilities and units. Got rid of Naval Base Modules, folding their duties into O/Ts with which they overlapped with extensively anyways. Got rid of Fighter Modules as they could be incorporated into Weaponry Modules. Got rid of Assembly Yards, originally they were intended to be a forward repair station, but over time mutated into something much more complex. Got rid of Coal Gasification option, merged with Alternative Infrastructure.
Sign In