Re: [GZG] Multi-level rules sought.
From: emu2020@c...
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 22:36:26 +0000
Subject: Re: [GZG] Multi-level rules sought.
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lRob
,
I really like this approach and think you are spot-on on all the points
made. Treating each "even" as a highlight to the overall conflict is
great.
-Eli
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Robert Mayberry" <robert.mayberry@gmail.com>
> I think the best way to handle it would be a critical incident kind of
> approach. In other words (example)
>
> Ryan is raiding Rob's research colony in a system to acquire some hot
> new weapons technology. This constitutes an event in their ongoing
> campaign. You then pick the game you want to play and decide how that
> exemplifies the turning point in the event. The two of them could:
>
> Play a FT game: Ryan inserts forces planetside. Rob tries to stop him.
> If Ryan wins, we assume his forces land successfully and conduct the
> raid.
>
> Play a DS game: Ryan attacks the colony. Here we assume forces landed
> successfully. If he can take the research complex and get infantry
> there, we assume the rest goes according to plan.
>
> Play a SG game: Rob makes a commando raid on Ryan's deployment area to
> kill his technical intelligence team. If he succeeds, Ryan's whole
> raid was for nought. If he fails, the raid is successful.
>
> Either way, we use success in whatever game is played as a microcosm
> for the battle as a whole. Either it's a critical turning point, or
> it's simply considered typical of the success of the entire mission.
>
> You end up playing the games you want to play-- which in a big group
> where not everyone has an equal love of each system is important.
> You're never FORCED to play a particular system. Even a deep space
> encounter (which considering the relative velocities involved should
> be vanishingly rare) could be modelled with SG as that boarding action
> you were talking about that was the tipping point for a larger battle.
>
> An integrated game like you're discussing could be really cool,
> though. I simply haven't ever tried anything nearly that complicated.
> I'll bet where it really shines is in a convention setting, where you
> have multiple players on the same team.
>
> Rob
>
> On 4/30/08, Adrian1 wrote:
> > I want to give priority to the Stargrunt end of the game. If I have
a
> > company of experienced stargrunt troops that have a good bit of
history to
> > them, I want them to be able to compete in the upper levels without
their
> > entire existance relying on the roll of one die.
> >
> > At Dirtside level, the company could be tasked with taking or
guarding a
> > village while the rest of the army fights all over the field. When
others
> > are dealt with normally, I would like to zoom in on my company to
Stargrunt
> > it, so to speak.
> >
> > At Full Thrust level, they could be tasked with a boarding action.
While
> > the fleets clash normally, you zoom in on the company action using
deck
> > plans, etc so they can take or lose the ship in a more personal
level.
> >
> > I can see major problems with this idea since it would require you
to stop
> > the higher level game while you ran a skirmish level game, however
I'm sure
> > a GM could make something work.
> >
> > I don't have a problem with losing troops or PCs at skirmish level
since
> > that is part of the game, howvever losing a full company to a single
die
> > roll irritates me). I would opt to convert a Dirtside armoured
battalion
> > to Stargrunt level and let my company get wiped out that way since
at least
> > they have some chance.
> >
> > I know it makes for a complicated game but its not like I'm in a
rush.
> >
> >
> > J L Hilal wrote:
> > --- Adrian1 wrote:
>
>
> > What I'm looking for is someones attemp at comnbining the three
levels
> of
> > GZG universe rules.
>
> I would like to know what relationship there is between
> > full Thrust,
> Dirtside and Stargrunt units so I can engage in a
> > "role-playing"
> campaign where a company of stargrunt troops try not to get
> > obliterated
> by an unlucky die roll in Full Thrust.
>
> While I could probably
> > do it myself, I'd rather leave it to "the
> committee" so there is some kind
> > of average.
>
>
>
> > The answer to that depends on exactly what you are asking. If you
are
> > asking
> specifically for the GZG-universe, then that is already available in
> > the
> conversion rules in More Thrust. If, on the other hand, you are
looking
> > for
> something more generic, either for your own setting or for something
> > else like
> B5, SW, ST(any), BSG, HH, or whatever, then you have to be aware
> > that the GZG
> setting (and conversion system) has really tiny space ships (1
> > MASS = 100t).
> Ground fores (and fighters) therefor take up a lot of MASS in
> > the published
> conversions. The GZG background is designed around really
> > small ground forces
> The sample Assault Transport in FB1 has a total of 32
> > MASS for both troops and
> vehicles.
>
> For example, a modern US LHD or LPD
> > amphib would be a TMF 350-400 FT ship based
> on tonnage, and use 40 MASS just
> > to barrack its 2000 marines, not including the
> LCACs, AAVs, helicopters,
> > Harriers, Ospreys, or ground vehicles like tanks and
> LAVs. Similarly, a
> > Nimitz-type supercarrier converts to TMF 900-1000.
>
> For Sci-fi examples, the
> > MT conversion is barracks for 50 troops = 1 MASS. The
> B5 episode "Gropos"
> > had 25,000 troops (500 MASS for barracks) plus vehicles,
> VTOL gunships,
> > assault shuttles, etc. on 1 Nova-class destroyer and 5
> > transport
> ships.
>
> Conversion based on tonnage makes Kirk's Enterprise
> > (movies) ~ TMF 2000, and
> Enterprise-D ~ TMF 50,000
>
> Conversion based on
> > tonnage makes Honor Harrington LACs ~ TMF 400, DDs ~ TMF
> 800, and SDNs ~ TMF
> > 80,000. Havenite Longstop-class fast assault transport ~
> TMF 60,000.
>
> Try
> > building (FB system) a Star Destroyer including the ground legion
> > (10,000
> troops, 20xAT-AT, 30xAT-ST), assault transports, assault shuttles,
> > etc.
>
> Obviously, these settings need a different conversion factor, perhaps
> > 1 MASS =
> 1000t, 2000t, 5000t, or 10,000t, and then multiply the ground
> > troops conversion
> by a corresponding factor (x10, 20, 50 or 100). This will
> > allow you to pack
> more troops onto your
> > transports.
>
> J
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gzg-l
> > mailing
> > list
> Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
> http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l
>
>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Gzg-l mailing list
> > Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
> >
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l
> >
>
>
> --
> Robert Mayberry
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gzg-l mailing list
> Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
> http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l