Federation Commander Forum Index Federation Commander
A NEW fast paced board game of starship combat!
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

DAC and fighters
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Federation Commander Forum Index -> Rules Questions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Mike
Captain


Joined: 07 May 2007
Posts: 1529
Location: South Carolina

PostPosted: Wed Jun 03, 2009 5:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mike West:

Was this rule modified in a CRUL or the Rev. 5 ruleset?

The way it reads to me, it is saying that any player can elect to take a Frame any time there is a skip in the damage allocation procedure.

Example: Suppose a player's ship takes damage and incurs a skip in the damage allocation. He takes the skip on the first run through a DAC, but there are still more hits to allocate. The next time through a DAC, he sees that there will be a skip for the last hit to allocate, but the next column is something he does not want to lose, so he takes a Frame instead of the skip. The damage has been fully allocated and the one system he did not want another hit to be scored on was protected.

In this example, a player used both options: once he skipped and took the damage normally while another time he took a Frame instead of the skip.

This seems correct to me. Am I right on this?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
USS Enterprise
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 27 Feb 2009
Posts: 376
Location: Vulcan

PostPosted: Wed Jun 03, 2009 5:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As far as I know, you're correct.
_________________
"The good of the many outweighs the good of the few"

"Since my customary greeting would seem entirely self serving, I will simply say good luck."

"Live long and Prosper."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mjwest
Commodore


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 3463
Location: Dallas, Texas

PostPosted: Wed Jun 03, 2009 6:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mike,

That is a completely reasonable and correct application of the rules. (BTW, that probably is enough for a tactical note. Write it up and submit it!)

To the best of my memory (and that is all I have to go on at the moment, since I am still on the road and my old rule books are at home), this has always been in the rules.

There has been clarifications for using it to protect the "last system" (where you can't make yourself blow up) and for directed damage (where the skipped points are lost before they can be applied to frame damage). But the base rule has been there from the start.
_________________

Federation Commander Answer Guy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Kang
Fleet Captain


Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Posts: 1937
Location: Devon, UK

PostPosted: Wed Jun 03, 2009 6:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mjwest wrote:
The main point was that, if all players agree, you can all decide to take the option away and make it a requirement to apply any skipped damage points to frame damage. This will result in much quicker games with a lot more 'warp core breaches'. Removing the option from the rule is what requires the agreement of all of the players.

Geez. Never thought of it like that. Woohoo!
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Steve Cole
Site Admin


Joined: 11 Oct 2006
Posts: 3046

PostPosted: Thu Jun 04, 2009 3:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I wish somebody had mentioned that rule so I would have remembered to delete it from Revision 5. It warps the game.
_________________
The Guy Who Designed Fed Commander
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Kang
Fleet Captain


Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Posts: 1937
Location: Devon, UK

PostPosted: Thu Jun 04, 2009 3:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Steve Cole wrote:
I wish somebody had mentioned that rule so I would have remembered to delete it from Revision 5. It warps the game.

Well to be honest I can't really imagine someone using it unless they're desperate. I don't really think of it as warping the game; it doesn't really get used that often.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
USS Enterprise
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 27 Feb 2009
Posts: 376
Location: Vulcan

PostPosted: Thu Jun 04, 2009 4:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I do it all the time. Usually whenever I'm gonna lose a weapon or later on a power box.
_________________
"The good of the many outweighs the good of the few"

"Since my customary greeting would seem entirely self serving, I will simply say good luck."

"Live long and Prosper."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mjwest
Commodore


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 3463
Location: Dallas, Texas

PostPosted: Thu Jun 04, 2009 4:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Steve Cole wrote:
I wish somebody had mentioned that rule so I would have remembered to delete it from Revision 5. It warps the game.

I am not sure which aspect of the rule you dislike. Either way, I don't think it really is a big deal.

To do what Scoutdad suggested require the agreement of all of the players. No one player will do it on their own because it puts them at a tremendous disadvantage. In effect, it is a "house rule" (like using photons and cloaks on Klingons) and should not affect the evaluation of the rule. To be clear, what Scoutdad suggested is NOT actually in the rule. It is simply an unconventional application of that rule.

For what Mike mentioned, it really isn't a whole lot different that the "protect the last of your systems" rule. I admit it is gaming the DAC somewhat, but there are already tactical notes that game the DAC far more than this. And this particular gaming of the DAC is really only good for a single point or two.
_________________

Federation Commander Answer Guy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
madpax
Lieutenant JG


Joined: 31 May 2009
Posts: 49
Location: France

PostPosted: Thu Jun 04, 2009 5:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As I said, although I like this DAC, I prefer a more random way to allocate damage. I remember using a deck of cards for SFB, which I have no more. You draw ten cards, applying damage according to the cards, and excess aka frame when a particular number of skipped hits were drawn.
I wonder if this deck of cards is still sold?

Marc
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Scoutdad
Commodore


Joined: 09 Oct 2006
Posts: 4468
Location: Middle Tennessee

PostPosted: Thu Jun 04, 2009 5:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ADB had two sets of card based DAC systems.

Battle Damage: Code Red was the first and came out when the Commanders edition was being sold. I still have that one at home, but it produced some "wacky!" results.

SFB: BattleCards was reduced later. It contained two full sets of cards (one for each player in a 2-player game). Shuffle them up, draw ten cards and apply damage as indicated. After ten, re-shuffle ad re-draw until damage was resolved. Or, you could combine both sets into one really big set and draw 20 cards at a time.

It worked much better. You still got the occasional weird result, but overall it worked well... and fairly rapidly, as well.

Neither set is currently being sold, although the occasional set of Battlevcards does show up on ebay every now and then, but it usually goes for much more than I think it's worth. Then again, I managed to obtain4 complete sets while they were still being sold... so I really don't need another set.
_________________


Scoutdad's minis photos here!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
madpax
Lieutenant JG


Joined: 31 May 2009
Posts: 49
Location: France

PostPosted: Thu Jun 04, 2009 5:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

IIRC, I had the first one (code red), but my deck was flawed, as I had twice the same sheet, and one of that sheet of cards repaced one other sheet. But I was able to retreive the 'lost' cards.
But what do you mean by 'whacky' results?

Marc
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pinecone
Fleet Captain


Joined: 03 May 2008
Posts: 1865
Location: Earth

PostPosted: Fri Jun 05, 2009 12:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

With the frame damage rule, two barrages will be almost certain death.
_________________
Doomed to live in secret since discovering that the Air Force Tapes were a fantasy... Embarassed

"Your knowledge of my existence must be punished" Twisted Evil
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
madpax
Lieutenant JG


Joined: 31 May 2009
Posts: 49
Location: France

PostPosted: Fri Jun 05, 2009 11:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Of course, that would need a bit of tweaking.
For example, no more alternate, but after x (4, for example) skipped damage in a row, score one frame.

Marc
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hod K'el
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Posts: 301
Location: Lafayette LA

PostPosted: Fri Jun 05, 2009 2:53 pm    Post subject: Frame Damage Rules Reply with quote

pinecone wrote:
With the frame damage rule, two barrages will be almost certain death.


Battlegroup Acadiana plays with the 'if you don't have it to take the hit, take a frame hit' rule. This usually requires four to five 'barrages'. And I have to assume you mean alpha strikes.

This rule speeds up the game and gives a more realistic play view. If you die from taking too many frame hits, you stayed in the battle too long and were a bad Captain. It teaches you when to 'run away and live to fight another day'.
_________________
HoD K'el
IMV Black Dagger
-----------------
Life is not victory;
Death is not defeat!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
terryoc
Captain


Joined: 07 Oct 2006
Posts: 1378

PostPosted: Fri Jun 05, 2009 3:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

IIRC Battle damage: Code Red let you take damage on Marines in some circumstances, and didn't recreate the SFB DAC properly.
_________________
"Captain" Terry O'Carroll, fourteen papers published including six best of issue
"Man, Terry, you are like a loophole seeking missle!" - Mike West
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Federation Commander Forum Index -> Rules Questions All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group