DITL Battles rules review

[Sionnach Glic]

Okay, I think our first game went smoothly enough. But before we start up the second match, does anyone have any concerns about the rules as they now stand? Are there any suggestions to new rules, or for changes to existing rules?

[Mark]

I'd like to see some rules included for effecively using tractor beams, transporters, other seconday systems in combat.

Also, to clear this up, is Staplic's ship the Defiant herself? (with cloaking device) or Defiant class (without one)?

That's all I can think of at the moment anyway

[Captain Seafort]

I'd like to see some rules included for effecively using tractor beams, transporters, other seconday systems in combat.

I don't think it's worth it - after all, how many times have we seen such tactics used in Trek. Very, very rarely - one transporter use ("Dark Frontier") and two tractor beams ("The Battle" and "Way of the Warrior"), not counting the Borg. This suggests that (understandably) they're massively situation-dependant.

[Sonic Glitch]

I'd like to see some rules included for effecively using tractor beams, transporters, other seconday systems in combat.

Also, to clear this up, is Staplic's ship the Defiant herself? (with cloaking device) or Defiant class (without one)?

That's all I can think of at the moment anyway

Or mayhaps even a Defiant class, with an illegal one.

[Mark]

I disagree, and here's why;

A tractor beam COULD be used to hold an enemy ship in position while pounding them (Starfleet Command I,II,&III).....or if you reverse the polarity and turn then into repeller beams, you could use them to deflect incoming torps.

Transporters may not be the best choice, but by beaming over a security contingent, you could effect some temporary penalties as the crew is distracted dealing with the "internal problems"

Shuttles could be used to draw an enemy's fire for a couple of rounds, or even be slightly effective against an unshielded section.

I do agree however, that it would lend another level of complexity to the game masters job. I don't know if Rochey, or Staplic later would WANT to implement these rules.

[Captain Seafort]

A tractor beam COULD be used to hold an enemy ship in position while pounding them (Starfleet Command I,II,&III).....or if you reverse the polarity and turn then into repeller beams, you could use them to deflect incoming torps.

In theory, yes. How many times have we see tractors used like this though? Once. Against an eighty-year-old heap of scrap, by the most powerful ship in the fleet, when they knew exactly what it was going to do.

Transporters may not be the best choice, but by beaming over a security contingent, you could effect some temporary penalties as the crew is distracted dealing with the "internal problems"

Two problems:

1) You've got to knock out the shields first, after which the enemy ship is a sitting duck to be pounded into scrap.

2) You then need to get your bording parties out before your opponent blows up.

Shuttles could be used to draw an enemy's fire for a couple of rounds, or even be slightly effective against an unshielded section.

This I agree with. It's not much firepower, given how weak they are, but drawing enemy fire would be very useful.

[Sionnach Glic]

Presumably, the presence of jamming would stop transporters functioning. Hence why we never see them working. It'd be easy enough, I suppose, to make up rules for boarding actions nonetheless.
For example: X% of the ship's crew compliment are marines that can be used to board an enemy ship. Roll 1D3, this is how many times its number the boarding party kills on the enemy ship before being killed themselves. On the roll of a 6, the boarding party slaughter the defenders and take over a part of the ship for the duration of the next turn, at which point they're rooted out and killed. Transporters can't be used unless the shield section facing the enemy ship and the opposing shield section facing you are down.

I suppose we could make up rules for tractors. Eg, "fired" similar to phasers, allows the ship with the highest momentum (mass X speed) to tow the other at, say 1/4 full speed. Though I see little real use for such rules.

I see little use for such things. That said, it wouldn't be much of a burden to implement these rules. The tractor beam would just fall under the heading of another weapon, and the transporters would just require me to keep a tally of the crew numbers on both ships (easy enough). So if you really want, we can throw these rules in.

Perhaps we could make two rule sets. One which is just the set we had originaly (basic ship to ship combat), and one "advanced" set, including transporters, cloaks, tractors, etc.

And Staplic's ship is just a generic Defiant class.

[Tsukiyumi]

I'd like to propose as a future rule, any ship with more than double the maneuverability of the other should receive a -1 to hit bonus. We've seen the Defiant, Delta Flyer, and a lot of smaller vessels dodge fire on a number of occasions against larger ships.

The max should be -2 to hit, I think, for ships with more than three times the maneuverability.

[Sionnach Glic]

I'd agree with that.

[Mikey]

For the sake of ease of use, I'd leave out tractors and auxiliary craft. The benefits will probably be far overwhelmed by the unwieldiness of using them in game terms.

[Teaos]

I wouldnt bother with any of that extra stuff, to much trouble with to little reward.

[Lt. Staplic]

my rule change which I propossed to Rochey earlier, is to have a sort of tierd system for calculating phaser damage:

below 1000TW multiply damage by 3

between 1000 and 10,000 TW multiply damage by 2

over 10,000 TW just does it's damage.

This should allow weaker phasers to actually have an effect, while keeping stronger ones from becoming god-like in power.

[Mikey]

But that negates a pretty important fact, which is that for a given shield strength, a 10,000 TW phaser should do 10x as much damage as a 1,000 TW phaser.

[Lt. Staplic]

the only time that's a necesity is if you have two differnt tiers like that. In wich case go with the lower ones multiplyer.

i.e. if you have two between 1000 and 10000 then it wouldn't matter that thier tired. it only matters if you have one person with 3000 TW and another one with 11000 TW, in which case go with the lower ones multiplyer, and multiply both of them by two when calculating damage.

[Mikey]

If you're going to use the same multiplier for both, why bother with a multiplier at all? You're still going to have the same relative efficacy.