Re: [GZG] FMAS Thrust

It might make for an interesting game, but I don't think I'd enjoy it
nearly as much as Full Thrust.	Part of Full Thrust's enjoyment value
for me has always been the sheer level of variety of tactics you can use
while still keeping the game mechanics simple.	You can pretty easily
model almost anything you can see in science fiction without having to
add house rules to the game.  Death Star?  Check, and there's even more
than one way to do it.	Battlestar?  Check.  Star Trek?  Check.  Babylon
5?  Check.  Pirates in space?  Check.  Yamato?	Check.	If you can
imagine it, you can pretty much do it, and the tactics can completely
change based on what you're doing and what's in front of you, and if you
don't get too wound up in trying to "keep a certain fleet style" you can
make basically all of them work without horribly violating your themes,
no less.  About the only real tactical requirement the game mechanics
force on you is that you have to either (a) be prepared for a very
  serious fighter attack or (b) enforce a fleet book aesthetic that
deliberately de-emphasizes the use of fighters.

FMA, on the other hand, is more about trying to play a "realistic" game.
 It's simply aiming for a different thing at its core.	It does it very
well, and models quality of forces very well also, and maybe some
elements of it could potentially be borrowed in a Full Thrust like game
(in fact, quality of fighters would probably be a good thing if it could
be done well), but the whole "mission kill" thing is something I don't
find as enjoyable as the space opera like setting that Full Thrust
provides.  You could just as easily model it by making your own house
fleet book with all fragile hulls and minimal armor.

E

-----Original Message-----
>From: Damond Walker <damosan@gmail.com>
>Sent: Jul 8, 2010 8:06 AM
>To: gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
>Subject: [GZG] FMAS Thrust
>
>Has anyone tried to mash the FMAS mechanics into a starship combat
>game?	I've been thinking of several approaches over the last few days
>and I think it'd work for large fleet battles.  My goal is to use FMA
>style mechanics and not rely on a time consuming order phase or
>thresholds for damage.
>
>Using the standard d4-d12 scale I'd have statistics for Crew, Thrust,
>Offenses (ability to hit), Defenses (ability to evade, jink, ECM,
>CIDS, etc.), Weapons (actual guns and missles), and Hull.
>
>Using alternate movement the ships would move up to Thrust MU.  You
>could combat move a ship (ala All Ahead Flank) or run silent.	These
>movement types would provide a +/- 1 shift to defenses depending on
>movement type.
>
>Combat would be comparing the high roll of Crew and Offenses vs. Crew
>and Defenses.	If the attacker beats the defender a hit was scored.
>
>Damage is computed by rolling Damage vs. Hull.  If he attacker beats
>the hull roll the target ship is given a debris token.  If they beat
>by double the target is disabled.  If they beat by three the target is
>mission killed.  Beat by four and the target explodes Star Wars
>style...
>
>Debris tokens follow the damaged ship and each will give a -1 shift to
>weapons, offenses, and defenses...
>
>Each activation will consist of 2 or 3 actions (undecided though
>probably 2 actions) with one action always being a move order while
>the second (or third) may be shooting or repairing damage (removing
>debris or disabled tokens).
>
>A points system, of sorts, would simply be adding up the die facings
>of the various ratings and multiplying it by the crew.
>
>Other options include flotilla/group moves and firing, transferring
>actions, etc.
>
>Anywho that's what I'm thinking about at the moment.  Has anyone tried
>this before and care to relay your experiences?
>
>Damo
>_______________________________________________
>Gzg-l mailing list
>Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
>http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l