Note: SO = Special Order. AC = attack craft. BFI = Brace For Impact special orders. BFG = Battlefleet Gothic. Sorry about length,
bold bits are most important.
@Phthisis:
Here are my ideas. I like your efforts to make BFG more 'elegant' but I think that there may be better ways to do it than some of yours—your stimulation of discussion is good! I've just read the whole thread, so I'm going to neglect quoting because it will take too long.... I understand if you think that's unacceptably lazy, please tell me.
Realsim versus Gameplay: I believe that wargame gameplay should be derived from realism! This is a model of a real-life system, afterall: would it make sense to remove key elements of realism and leave an abstract game behind? Sometimes, yes. But many of the BFG rules are already abstracted a great deal and many of the elements of realism are key to represent (admittedly not-so-life-like) space opera battles in space. So, if it is likely that a lucky event can change the winner of a battle in real life, doesn't that add to your tactical acumen if you can overcome it? Or did you perhaps 'waste' your ships early on and not leave enough reserves for that critical roll? In my experience with Warhammer based games, it is rare that a single roll changes an obvious win into an obvious loss; it is usually a series of poor decisions or rolls.
I do agree, however, that it should be possible for the player's tactical acumen to overcome bad luck in all but the most fargone situations. In my opinion, the War of the Ring is a game system where this is far more possible than in Warhammer Fantasy or 40K. A key example in BFG seems to be the 'first-turn-shot' problem, where the turn order is the main factor in who gets off a devastating first salvo. This 'honour' should go to the fleet with the longest range, so perhaps some modification to the resolution of shooting should be done.
The problem with just having manouevring and no luck is that every game would end up the same. E.g. Eldar versus Chaos. Eldar (for sake of the example) move around the back and shoot. Chaos keep together and shoot their batteries at the Eldar at range. Eldar can change which way they move around the back: excitement ensures! While I'm sure your group do not want to make it this ridiculous, I hope to have illustrated the dangers of removing the luck. Chess works very well in its limited environment, but BFG offers much more in the way of allowing different results to influence the game, so that the game is not the same every time.
I like the store of SOs idea, but the command chain is one of those characteristics that makes BFG special. Perhaps some modifications? Interesting BFI idea, also (although I think they are better now. If critical damage and hit damage were swapped, yours would be better. I started a thread on this). Are SOs really so necessary, though? Should the game depend on them, so that you need them to play: it seems from your experiences that we need SOs to 'snatch victory regardless of the situation'. If so, then perhaps every ship should have SOs but with different restrictions and limitations, following the Epic model. This solves the problem of modern crews being able to do special orders (a question I've pondered also). But, in light of this, why should they be limited? Overall, I think SOs are a test of the crew in the heat of battle that this represents. What if, after suffering damage, a crewman causes a torpedo to be dropped and explode?
Is there a way to combine the store of SOs with the current Ld. based system? Perhaps there are some that are automatic and some that are not? I think this is a really nice way to represent command ability.
Turret Suppression: The World War tactics theme does come up quite often, but in BFG the situation is quite different: firstly, we are in space; secondly, the distances are much greater; and thirdly, the weapons are much more deadly. These points already make a close comparison with aircraft battles tenuous except when used as inspiration; I think it is better that we stick with the abstract version that exists today, where fighters can confuse and overwhelm the widespread turrets on a larger ship. If you take a look at the Escorts in BFG topic, you'll see my thoughts on escorts being changed to a more anti-AC role, in addition to their current role; turret suppression reinforces the vulnerability of large ships to small vehicles without ridiculously large numbers of point defence turrets, but my suggestion for escorts allows them to counteract this weakness.
horizon, to save us here, what are your (concise) feelings about AC? I've forgotten... Uni.... Boarding: if a ship is so supremely better at boarding that it has an excess of dice from boarding values, why should they fight as if they are the same strength as the ship they are fighting against? E.g Emperor battleship against Cobra destroyer: Emperor rolls a 1 and Cobra rolls a 6. 5 hits damage to Emperor. If you had 2 Cobras, you could cause 10 damage! Do I misunderstand the system? Discarding the excess dice would only work if the modifiers were changed to allow ships to show their superior boarding modifiers. Victors can suffer criticals.
I think we should redo the whole system, perhaps differently to your idea though. Hit and run: I think that you should roll 2D6 and choose the one you want all of the time. This does add some nice tactical decision to the game. It seems that many of your group's ideas are interesting but do not necessarily make the game any better than the current rules: they are more of an alternative, rather than an improvement. Of course, if your group prefers it, then it's an improvement for you! I agree that simpler rules are better but I have this concept of 'elegance': where a rule can be optimally simple but still convey the perhaps complex situation trying to be emulated.
Engine Explosion: Admittedly, for me and my bunch there are few situations where a great number of ships are in range of the explosion, and few more where ordnance are in range, so I don't think changing this would make a great difference. If not rolling a 4+, you need 1 die per strength otherwise this would be too complex. I understand your sentiments on using the armour value, though. This is sensible, unless we assume that spaceship engines are so massive that armour does not protect them.
I think we should keep the rubber stamp out of it. If Pthisis is lucky enough to have friends that support his revolutionary ideas, I think that is approval enough. Not everyone is so lucky.... Let's keep it civil, please. I like this forum because of its niceties and manners and we're not around to make people feel bad, especially about a game. Besides, it makes you look better if you're nice and use good grammar. @horizon
I think that elegance will win people over. Good (= simple, = nice or whichever applies) rule, realistic effect. I have been pondering this, but I think that this is the essence of 'elegance'. Though not stated elegantly...
I like the roll a die for SOs idea, he he he. But I think that some officers might notice that going on BFI when 90 cm (however far that is in real life) away is a little, er, silly. There would be disciplining....