Subtopic	Posts		Updated
	Archive through June 19, 2002	25		06/19 01:11pm
	Archive through June 27, 2002	25		06/27 12:38am

In a way, what MJC is designing here is PERFECT for PBEM, perhaps in a simplified form. Simply preplot everything and don't allow breaks or conditional orders. Have a break every 4 impulses say, you could even set it so you plotted 4 (or some other number) impulses in advance (plot 8-12 on impulse 4 say).

Easy, straight forward, captures most of the flavour and for PBEM it would be reasonably fast.

Cat (Moderator of Fog of War #2 - which uses something vaguely similar, although conditional orders are allowed and we don't plot in advance).

P.S. If MJC wants to design these rules, and play this including his 'crew allocation' rules and damage repair rules in a 12 ship a side 2000 BPV fleet action set near a wormhole - more power to him. I might call him silly and advise him not to (because he'll never finish) but he has every right to try.

Besides - where else should he share these ideas? This seems the perfect forum to me.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, June 27, 2002 - 08:28 am: Edit

D.C.:

I fear the "Om my mark..." order may well cause the PBEM to fall into a one impulse at a time resolution but I hear you.

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Thursday, June 27, 2002 - 09:00 am: Edit

What? You mean PBEM isnt that way already
It took 5 breaks just to get through the movement portion of 2.2. As well as a couple of more by IMP5.

By Stuart C. Brennen (Evlstu) on Thursday, June 27, 2002 - 03:26 pm: Edit

When I was talking about "snapshots", I meant that the energy buildup gives away any and all chance of the enemy surprising you. You know he is going to shoot the question is "Is he going to shoot at 70,000m or 60,000m ?" You have the time to decide if you will return fire and with how many weapons. You may have already decided this in your head but I see no need to further complicate an already complicated game.
In my opinion it would destroy the game and 99.99% of the players would stop playing the game all together. If you don't like the idea of your opponent doing the "me to fire" thing then you are going to have to MANUEVER your vessel(s) in such a way that he CAN'T fire at you.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, June 27, 2002 - 09:46 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

When I was talking about "snapshots", I meant that the energy buildup gives away any and all chance of the enemy surprising you. You know he is going to shoot the question is "Is he going to shoot at 70,000m or 60,000m ?" You have the time to decide if you will return fire and with how many weapons. You may have already decided this in your head but I see no need to further complicate an already complicated game.
In my opinion it would destroy the game and 99.99% of the players would stop playing the game all together. If you don't like the idea of your opponent doing the "me to fire" thing then you are going to have to MANUEVER your vessel(s) in such a way that he CAN'T fire at you.

---

By Adam James Villatorio (Merlinfmct87) on Wednesday, May 05, 2004 - 04:37 am: Edit

This rule just needs a few bonuses.

Take Pre-Plotted Movement. Unless I missed something, you can do a *lot* more if you pre-plot your movement than if you just decide it impulse-by-impulse. Maybe you should reflect that the gunner has the ability to get a better aim on the enemy if he knows in advance who the captain wants to shoot next, or with what and when. Maybe the Helmsman can optomize the engines to endure the HET the captain is going to want in 5 minutes, i.e. less breakdown chance. It might also free up time that was going to be used firing phasers to do something else(i.e. gunner programmes the orders into computer and focuses on countering ECM or somesuch.)

Pre-plotting always takes more thought and time. But it also let's you use your starship in a MUCH better way, if you do it right.

Just some thoughts,

Adam