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 

Range 0 fire arc coverage?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Federation Commander Forum Index -> Rules Questions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mjwest
Commodore


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 3492
Location: Dallas, Texas

PostPosted: Thu Apr 23, 2009 4:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

In fact, writing that answer made me send an email to Steve asking that he expand (3B) (and link it to (3C6)) for the RRB.

The real issue is that, to anyone who has played wargames before, the issue of "firing arc" is fairly self evident. And the linkage between shields and firing arcs is hard and "obvious", but not directly stated. The problem is that what is "obvious" to someone who has experience with the concepts of a firing arc is not necessarily obvious to everyone.

This may be too late to include at this point, but I did ask. Hopefully, Steve will be able to sneak that in.
_________________

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


Joined: 24 Jul 2008
Posts: 1879

PostPosted: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Couple of questions for MWest:

As per my earlier post, what happens if the facing of the ships change afterwards (e.g a HET). Is the shield/facing still based on the facing/position just before entering the hex, effectively meaning that the subequent turn has no affect on the situation. I'd interpret it as move the ships with their current facing to where they were (ie totaly disregard the facing at the point of movement), reading your example I'm not sure whether you are saying that it is the facing of the ship as it enters the hex rather than the current facing.

Ships entering the hex at the 'same time', as per your example. By 'same time' do we mean same impulse or do we take into account the exact order of movement. From your example it sounds like same impulse as ships always move in some order but you still say they enter at the same time. I'm sure that when we've done this we have gone on move order- so if a speed 16 ship enters a hex then a speed 24 hex enters the hex in the same impulse it is the position of the ships as the speed 24 ship enters the hex, not before the speed 16 ship enters the hex.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mjwest
Commodore


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 3492
Location: Dallas, Texas

PostPosted: Thu Apr 23, 2009 11:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

storeylf wrote:
As per my earlier post, what happens if the facing of the ships change afterwards (e.g a HET). Is the shield/facing still based on the facing/position just before entering the hex, effectively meaning that the subequent turn has no affect on the situation. I'd interpret it as move the ships with their current facing to where they were (ie totaly disregard the facing at the point of movement), reading your example I'm not sure whether you are saying that it is the facing of the ship as it enters the hex rather than the current facing.

That one is a little trickier, but is addressed in that other topic Kang referenced.

Basically, you relative positions are always maintained. So, if, in the simple example, Ship B does an HET within the hex to directly face Ship A, it is rotated 60 degrees. Now Ship B has its #1 shield facing Ship A (instead of its #6). But, their relative positions have not changed. Therefore, Ship A's #1 shield is still facing Ship B.

So, a ship's facing can change as it does HETs (or TACs or "turns in place" using decelerations). However, their relative positions never change until the ships stop being in the same hex.

And, no, this isn't completely addressed in the rules. The problem is it would take several paragraphs to go through all of this.

Quote:
Ships entering the hex at the 'same time', as per your example. By 'same time' do we mean same impulse or do we take into account the exact order of movement. From your example it sounds like same impulse as ships always move in some order but you still say they enter at the same time. I'm sure that when we've done this we have gone on move order- so if a speed 16 ship enters a hex then a speed 24 hex enters the hex in the same impulse it is the position of the ships as the speed 24 ship enters the hex, not before the speed 16 ship enters the hex.

It means by sub-pulse, not impulse. But, order of movement does matter. So, if, in my last example above, Ship B was moving at a lower base speed than Ship A, or if they were moving the same base speed, but Ship B had the worse turn mode, then only ship A would be moved back. In that case, the final ship facing would match the first two examples.

I should have made that clear and I didn't. Sorry about that.
_________________

Federation Commander Answer Guy
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: Fri Apr 24, 2009 8:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You could be right Mjwest, I guess I was just taught that way. Incidently, I see no reason why a 23rd century Starship couldn't fire anything at a range of less than 10,000 KM, and see no mechanical issue.
_________________
"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
Kang
Fleet Captain


Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Posts: 1960
Location: Devon, UK

PostPosted: Fri Apr 24, 2009 9:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

USS Enterprise wrote:
You could be right Mjwest, I guess I was just taught that way. Incidently, I see no reason why a 23rd century Starship couldn't fire anything at a range of less than 10,000 KM, and see no mechanical issue.

There is no mechanical issue apart from the seriously inconvenient problem of parts of the hull getting in the way. Assuming the crew don't want to fire through their own ship to hit the target, of course Wink

Seriously, though, this is what determines the fire arcs - it's the placement of the weapons on the hull - that, and that some weapons require more rigid mounts than others because of the firing shock. And it matters little what the range is for the purposes of whether a target can be hit from a certain weapon's position, be it 10,000 or 100,000km away. To take an extreme example, the tail guns of a Lancaster or B-17 are never going to hit a target that's right in front of the aircraft, no matter what the range.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Kang
Fleet Captain


Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Posts: 1960
Location: Devon, UK

PostPosted: Fri Apr 24, 2009 9:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

USS Enterprise wrote:
You could be right Mjwest, I guess I was just taught that way.

Enterprise, could this perhaps be a throwback in your mind to the close-in maneuvering rules in Star Fleet Battles? Because, in that game, when a fighter is close-in maneuvering in the same hex as its target, any weapons on the ship can shoot at it - firing arcs are ignored. Perhaps this is where the idea came from? Or perhaps the friend who taught you the game was thinking of that....
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Scoutdad
Commodore


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

PostPosted: Fri Apr 24, 2009 9:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So, if the Klingon cruiser K'Tinga is only 5,000 kilometers away from the Federation command cruiser, Kongo; but sitting 4,000 kilometers above the Kongo... then the Kongo can fire every wepon it has atthe K'tinga... even the phaser emitters located on the bottom of the secondary hull?

OK, that example was all in good fun since elvation doesn't come into play in Fed Comm; nut I must take exception to your last comment. I can still see why (even in the 23rd centure) some weapons located on the off-sides of a 3D solid object might have their fire arcs blocked by the object itself.
_________________


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


Joined: 27 Feb 2009
Posts: 376
Location: Vulcan

PostPosted: Fri Apr 24, 2009 9:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've never played SFB and the person who taught me the game hasn't played it in years.

Personally, its kinda annoying at Range 0 trying to figure out the shield hit and it sometimes is hard to figureout the firing arc. At the end of the day, its just easier to say 0 hits all, even if it isn't logical.
_________________
"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
Kang
Fleet Captain


Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Posts: 1960
Location: Devon, UK

PostPosted: Fri Apr 24, 2009 9:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sure, you can adopt that as a house rule. But if you ever play a) in tournaments, or b) against players from another group, then you may well have to learn the 'correct' way of doing things.

For myself, I like to place duplicate counters on a 'giant' hex I have, to help me visualise the relative positions. The giant hex came from a spare piece of floor covering, btw Smile

Dunno if that helps you - I hope it does - but to me visualisation is key. Once I can see it, I understand it.
_________________
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: Fri Apr 24, 2009 9:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Which I see no issue with Kang.
_________________
"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
Mike
Captain


Joined: 07 May 2007
Posts: 1556
Location: South Carolina

PostPosted: Sat Apr 25, 2009 2:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Or, instead of a giant hex, a small smattering of just a few adjacent hexes might be helpful.

Duplicate counters could be placed in relation to one another just as they were before moving into the same hex on the real map. Think of it as a tactical display.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Kang
Fleet Captain


Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Posts: 1960
Location: Devon, UK

PostPosted: Sat Apr 25, 2009 6:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mike wrote:
Think of it as a tactical display.

That's a good way of looking at it Smile

Mike wrote:
Or, instead of a giant hex, a small smattering of just a few adjacent hexes might be helpful.


Well actually it's a smattering, as you say, of giant hexes. It was quite a big piece of spare floor covering....
_________________
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: 3073

PostPosted: Sat Apr 25, 2009 5:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's so fundamentally wrong that I cannot see it being easier. There would be a five-hour argument with miniatures and protractors every time you tried that.
_________________
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: 1960
Location: Devon, UK

PostPosted: Sat Apr 25, 2009 6:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Steve Cole wrote:
It's so fundamentally wrong that I cannot see it being easier. There would be a five-hour argument with miniatures and protractors every time you tried that.


...'it' being...?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Mike
Captain


Joined: 07 May 2007
Posts: 1556
Location: South Carolina

PostPosted: Sun Apr 26, 2009 1:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

SVC, are you referring to every weapon being able to fire at range 0...

OR the tactical display idea?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
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, 4, 5  Next
Page 2 of 5

 
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