Re: [FT] Replacement Boarding Rules v1.0b

On Mon, 8 Feb 1999, Jared E Noble wrote:

> >On Fri, 5 Feb 1999, Jared E Noble wrote:
> 
> >> On Thu, 4 Feb 1999, Tom wrote:
> >>
> >> That's an interesting idea, but if 'boarding parties' are still
part of the
> crew
> >> (which comes free and takes no dedicated mass) then what is the
extra cost
> >> incurred in making some of them boarding parties?
> >
> >points, just like extra DCPs. sorry, i wasn't being clear here.
> 
> OK, I feel silly now.  I haven't been keeping track of things, and
completely
> spaced off the fact that extra DCP's in MT were massless additions!

aah. suddenly, everything is clear.

> >> It seems to me that in order
> >> to add an ability that you would not otherwise have, you should
have to pay
> for
> >> it somehow.  Do you want to simply make the crew more expensive to
reflect
> this
> >> ability?  That may work, but I still think that some MASS will be
involved -
> >> call it a gut feeling.
> 
> >well, i can't argue with gut feeling! just bear in mind that extra
DCPs -
> >which are really just extra training and equipment - do not take up
mass.
> >i would argue that boarding parties are also just extra training and
> >equipment.
> 
> See above...

right. well, if you revise your marine parties to be DCP-like, i'll drop
my boarding party amendment.

> >> So help fill in the holes in understanding your proposal-
> 
> >rephrase:
> >
> >Defence Parties: Mass 0, Cost 0, number = crew / 2, 1 for defence
> >
> >> BPs (yours): Mass ?, Cost ?, 1 for defense or ?offense?
> >
> >Mass 0, Cost <same as DCPs? or 3 pts?>, 1 for defence or offence
> 
> Extra DCPs are 10 pts each - What about 6 for BPs? limited to the
number of
> Defense teams, or crew units at most.

sounds about right. or use your conversion idea later - rather than
one-job specialist marines, we're looking at RCN-style boarders or
RN-style marines, where the boarding crew has ordinary naval stations
too.
thus, defence parties can be upgraded to boarding / marine parties. note
that this kind of marine is great for ship-ship work, but not much cop
for
landings. no vehicles or owt.

> >> Marines (yours): Mass 1, Cost 3, 2 for defense or offense.
> 
> The trouble I have with the combat factor of 2 is that once you got
your
> boarding units (offensive or defensive) into combat, each unit would
be cleanly
> represented by one die.

hmm, good point. well, if the uncrossing of wires here has removed the
need for BPs, the problem goes away.

> >> I cannot see any warship
> >> that does not have Damage control teams as an integral part of the
crew.  I
> do
> >> not envision _every_ warship in the future carrying specialized
boarding
> >> parties, though.
> 
> >i agree completely - this is just what i was thinking. all ships get
> >built-in DCPs, and can have extras. no ships get built-in BPs, but
all can
> >buy extras.
> 
> >of course, if you're playing Klingons or some such, perhaps your
ships do
> >get built-in BPs.
> 
> hmmm...Rather than buying extra no-mass boarding parties, what about a
cost to
> convert your crew-based defense factors into boarding parties to cover
these
> situations?

this sounds like a great idea. so, how about:

defence party - one per crew factor - roll 1 die in defence only
boarding party - upgrade from defence party for 5 pts - roll 1 die at +1

in attack or defence

plus rules for ground troops fighting.

> This way you could spend points to supplement the ability of your
> crew-mustered forces, but if you want to expand beyond what your crew
muster can
> support you then need to dedicate the extra mass for more forces (be
they naval
> or marine specialists.)

right. and the extra-mass marines could essentially be handled as
carried 
troops (fresh, not deep-frozen), with a special dispensation that allows
them to fight effectively on ship. maybe this dispensation should cost
extra points. maybe this is getting a bit too much.

> so spend an extra 6 pts per crew unit and your defense
> teams are now Boarding parties.

essentially, yes. i thought 5, as you're losing a defence party, but
yes.

> >> When I refer to 'Boarding
> >> Parties' per se, I mean the guys that can pull on the specialty PA,
fire off
> >> thier boosters to cross the space inbetween the ships, set thier
hull
> breaching
> >> explosives, enter and engage in CQB with the defenders.
> 
> >ahh, good point. i imagine this type of boarding as being carried out
by
> >small craft, such as shuttles, carrying boarding teams. thus, my
proposed
> >BPs can do it, even though marines can do it much better. the DPs
can't,
> >because they lack the training.
> 
> Small craft are also reasonable - The reason Schoon and I tried
hashing out the
> details for a boarding cutter.  But it was also intended to enable the
> 'projection' of boarding forces - enabling boarding actions while the
action is
> still hot, rather than relying on your opponent already being crippled
> swiss-cheese.  Since these necessitate mass, (2, so 3 in a standard
fighter
> bay), we figured on keeping the powered-armor with maneuvering jet
idea for
> standard boarding actions (within 6", course within 1, speed within 1)

fair enough. i always picture starships as carrying a few small
auxiliary
craft, of the type which could be used for boarding, anyway, although i
suppose the Tuffleyverse ships don't have these.

Tom