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 

Proposed changes to cloaking
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Federation Commander Forum Index -> General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mjwest
Commodore


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 3474
Location: Dallas, Texas

PostPosted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 4:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

m1a1dat wrote:
Or bring back pseudo plasma!

Uh, no. Nothing in the game can be so bad to make that necessary.
_________________

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: 1842

PostPosted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 8:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mjwest wrote:
m1a1dat wrote:
Or bring back pseudo plasma!

Uh, no. Nothing in the game can be so bad to make that necessary.


Agree with that, the lack of secrecy is the really nice thing about this game IMO.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kang
Fleet Captain


Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Posts: 1950
Location: Devon, UK

PostPosted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 9:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

storeylf wrote:
mjwest wrote:
m1a1dat wrote:
Or bring back pseudo plasma!

Uh, no. Nothing in the game can be so bad to make that necessary.


Agree with that, the lack of secrecy is the really nice thing about this game IMO.

<like>
[Edit] I have to amplify this by stating that one of my favourite things about FC is the way in which very few things are hidden. When PPTs were introduced in SFB, it was one of the things that spoiled the game for me. There's nothing as honest as a good clean fight, and that's what FC gives you. Love it Smile
_________________


Last edited by Kang on Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:03 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Wolverin61
Commander


Joined: 16 Nov 2008
Posts: 497
Location: Mississippi

PostPosted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 7:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mjwest wrote:
m1a1dat wrote:
Or bring back pseudo plasma!

Uh, no. Nothing in the game can be so bad to make that necessary.


Just launch a plasma torp & say it's psuedo Wink
_________________
"His pattern indicates two-dimensional thinking."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Monty
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 23 Aug 2007
Posts: 231

PostPosted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 11:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mike, have you talked with Steve about any of the proposed cloak changes?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
mjwest
Commodore


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 3474
Location: Dallas, Texas

PostPosted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 12:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Monty wrote:
Mike, have you talked with Steve about any of the proposed cloak changes?

Actually, yes. However, right now has been pretty busy for them, so I doubt he has had a chance to fully evaluate.
_________________

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


Joined: 11 Jan 2007
Posts: 382
Location: Thornbury, Gloucestershire

PostPosted: Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mike,

I haven't been keeping up with my staffwork recently, so is there a single post that details the rule changes that are currently being considered?
_________________
Nothing is quite as persuasive as a disruptor pistol on slow burn and a rotisserie......
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ncrcalamine
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Posts: 228

PostPosted: Sat Dec 15, 2012 7:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mike West May 16 2012 712 pm

I am not implicitly (or explicitly) promising anything here. However, I am curious how a particular set of changes would work:
- Voiding doesn't affect the damage modifier. All other protections are still removed.
- Voiding only lasts for one impulse, regardless of cause. (Note that a tractored ship will still be re-voided every impulse.)
- Entering a web hex merely voids the cloak, though it is re-voided every impulse it remains in the hex.
- On the impulse the ship becomes fully cloaked, all seeking weapons targeted on the ship are removed from play, subject to its speed: Speed 0 (or Stopped) removes all seeking weapons; Speed 8 removes all seeking weapons farther than 4 hexes; Speed 16 removes all seeking weapons farther than 8 hexes.
- If a cloaked ship performs emergency deceleration, all seeking weapons still tracking it are removed.
- No other changes to the cloak rules.

Would that make it worth using? Could that be playtested?

Again, no promises. But I do agree that the cloak in FC isn't worth the cost as it currently exists.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mjwest
Commodore


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 3474
Location: Dallas, Texas

PostPosted: Sat Dec 15, 2012 8:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bigger explanation ...

First, I fully admit that I am inherently predisposed to rules changes. I will still listen to what is said and why, but, as a general position, I do tend toward leaving things as is. Why? Because changing a rule on an established game is a great way to unintentionally unbalance things and send the whole thing on the path to spinning out of control. However, even with that predisposition, I can be convinced to lobby for a rules change when I can see that the lack of a change hurts the game more than a potential change will.

In the case of the cloak, I think it is obvious that it needs changing. In the above post from Nicole, there are actually three proposed changes:
- Damage modifier (50% reduction) always applies.
- Reduce all voiding to one impulse.
- A mechanism to lose seekers when fully cloaked.
I want to take the first two items first and the last one second.

For the first two changes, I believe they have to be made. Those two changes will bring the FC cloaking rules more into line with the SFB rules (in a good way). I haven't gotten feedback from the Steves yet, but I view the first two as absolutely necessary at this point.

For the last change, it is an attempt to reflect the fact that, in SFB, the cloaking device *can* force seeking weapons to go away. What was proposed was a combination of a couple other ideas people game put into a combination that I thought would be easiest to get the effect of SFB without have to deal with "lock on" rolls, or any rolls for seeking weapons. (I really didn't want to have to roll for each seeking weapon all the time, potentially with speed modifiers. For FC, I really think this mechanism needs to be diceless.)

I have sent it off to Steve and I don't think he has had a chance to discuss it with Petrick yet. Once they do that, we will know more.
_________________

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: 1842

PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 11:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yet another question on when does void end. That came up in a game tonight, and was potentially very important.

If you void a cloak during movement (be it via HET or moving 3 hexes or through asteroids or whatever) does the void end during the 'cloak phase' of this impulse or the 'cloak phase' of next impulse.

Does it last less than 1 impulse (preventing a launch) or more than 1 impulse (giving 2 fire chances).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Monty
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 23 Aug 2007
Posts: 231

PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2012 1:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If no fix is implemented can a Romulan player opt to uninstall the cloak and take the BPV difference?



Monty
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
storeylf
Fleet Captain


Joined: 24 Jul 2008
Posts: 1842

PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2012 1:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Had a replay of the Orion vs Rom match with Nicole. The new rules did directly come into play this time, namely the voiding part of the new rules, and in doing so also resulted in a key rules debate.

After bolting everything at me at Range 8 the Roms started cloaking but they had to HET to avoid me getting carronade range before the cloak kicked in. One of the ships voided the cloak doing that, and that resulted in the question asked above - I was charging on the Roms hoping one of them would void and I would catch it for phasers/carronades assuming the void would last until the cloak part of the next impulse. The Roms were thinking the void lasted till the cloak part of the same impulse. One way gave me a shot against an voided ship, the other against a fully cloaked ship. We went with my interpretation in the end.

Nicoles HETs went the opposite to last game and he failed all the subsquent HET breakdown rolls which eventually lost the game when his Vulture randomly rotated to face directly away from me at range 1!


I was also thinking about our last game, where we said the new cloak rules made little difference. But I was wondering about that.

Nicole, if we had been playing without the new cloak rules would you still have cloaked at range 12ish. I was wondering whether the difficulty of uncloaking against a plasma armed force would have kept you out of cloak altogether, irrespective of how safe cloaking was at the specific point you did it? I'm not so sure I would have been keen to cloak against plasma under the existing rules, even where the range I cloak is safe.

PS. I have just been reading back over the thread, and noticed that the voided ship should still have been taking half damage. Ouch! I totally forgot/missed that one, that really makes void a pretty minor disadvantage except in a couple of scenarios.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ncrcalamine
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Posts: 228

PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes i have question under the new proposed cloak rules when the void ends. I think it should end in the repair phase of the impulse when the cloak voided .
This gives a full impulse of shooting and launching which unless I am mistaken which is possible was the intent of the new proposed voiding rules.
Alternatively it could end in the same part of the next impules as it was voided in in this impulse.

When does a cloak end under the current rules. Suppose you void the cloak by moving in impulse x. Does it end in impulse x+3 other functions phase giving 4 attack phases and 3 launch phases, or x+4 giving 5 attack phases and 4 launch phases. The rules say it will be voided for 4 impulses but is the voiding impulse impulse 1 or is the next impulse impulse one.

In answer to the question about if I would have cloaked in the first game, the answer is yes. Plasma f as a plasma torp are not scary as long as you are more than two impulses of moves from them.

Nicole
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mjwest
Commodore


Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 3474
Location: Dallas, Texas

PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Under the current rules, the cloaking ends at the end of the Other Functions Phase of the fourth impulse of voiding. So, if it is voided in impulse X, the voiding ends in X+4. So that means that if it was triggered in the movement phase of X, then the voiding actually lasts for a little more than four impulses.

Similarly, with the dust cloud exception, the voiding is triggered in impulse X, but the voiding doesn't end until the Other Functions phase of X+1.

Given how the current rule is written, and my desire for the changes to be as minimal as possible, that means all voiding would work like the dust cloud exception. Voiding on impulse X means that the voiding ends on impulse X+1 in the Other Functions phase.
_________________

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


Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 524

PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 5:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The changes sound viable. I stopped playing Roms because of the FC cloak rules. With these proposed changes, the cloak is more useful.
_________________
Speed is life; Patience is victory

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 -> General Discussion All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next
Page 9 of 12

 
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