Adepticon Fleet Compositions

[afterimagedan]

Why not just have it this way:
"Escorts may join with Capital Ships in squadrons. When shooting at a squadron with escorts, use the gunnery chart and consider the escorts as Capital Ships for purposes of shooting. The closest vessel is damaged first unless a leadership is passed, in which case the firing player may choose the targeted ship. When shooting with a squadron with Capital Ships and Escorts combined, fire the vessels as normal. Ships that are in base contact may combine their firepower."

[Jimmy Zimms]

works for me.

[Brethren]

Hm, no. Doesn't work for me.

Ships that are in base contact may combine their firepower."

I don't know why you came up with this, because squadrons always add up their firepower before consulting the Gunnery Table, even when not in base contact.

Escorts may join with Capital Ships in squadrons. When shooting at a squadron with escorts, use the gunnery chart and consider the escorts as Capital Ships for purposes of shooting. The closest vessel is damaged first unless a leadership is passed, in which case the firing player may choose the targeted ship.

As for this part I see 3 changes to the actual rules.
- Escorts and capital ships can team up to use a better leadership.
- If you want to shoot at a chosen vessel in a squadron, that is hiding behind another ship/squadron unrelated to the target, you have to make 2 leadership tests instead of 1.
- The targeted escorts in a mixed squadron are easier to hit, because they count as capital ships on the Gunnery Table.

So a fleet with a good leadership rating has actually a easier time to finish off enemy escorts, if the opponent is stupid enough to mix them with capital ships.
And here I thought the basic idea was giving escorts the necessary ways to actually escort something by making them less vulnerable, when hiding behind cruisers. 

[Seahawk]

Other way around; escorts are still always supposed to die first, but they should be soaking up hits for the capital ships. That's escorting 101 when lives are expendable.

It should simply be:

- Battleship squadron: 2-3 Battleships, 0-6 Escorts.
- Cruiser squadron: 2-4 Cruisers, 0-4 Escorts.
- Squadron coherency rules as normal.
- Squadron leadership rules as normal; Escorts each roll their own as well.
- Squadron shooting rules as normal; treat the entire squadron as Capital ships (even escorts).
- Squadron ordnance rules as normal.

Done.

This way, Ld tests can't be made to bypass the escorts (otherwise what's the point, they might as well be as separate as they are now!), and the escorts do their job of protecting the important ships. Alternatively, you can protect the escorts for some strange reason by having them in the middle, so it appeases everyone. Nice, fluffy, sensible, and streamlined.

[Brethren]

@Seahawk:
So you basically came to the same conclusion as I did one page earlier. Welcome to the club. Nice to have some company.

[Thinking Stone]

Yea, I think that Brethren's ideas are the most practical solution. It is possible to make escort-capital squadrons with no modification of the rulebook rules but the problem is that escorts would never be shot at!

But I do think it would be a good time to maybe think about redoing the capital ship squadron rules. The combined squadrons are troublesome because some mechanics don't really share well between the two types of ship (e.g. 'damage overflow' make escort squadrons possible but don't really make much sense for capital ships when comparing to the non-squadronned rules). This is probably why there aren't any combined squadrons in the original rules .

The main points of contention that I observe with damage allocation in squadrons are these: (a) ships are really far apart (so only when in base contact is there a reasonably non-zero chance that firepower can hit two ships at once); and that (b) we must assume that the ships know how to allocate firepower such that they only shoot exactly enough guns at the first ship before using what is left over to shoot at the next ship. (a) reflects real life. (b) almost certainly won't happen during the time of the squadron's shooting.

I think that (a) must be sacrificed in favour of (b) when dealing with escorts because otherwise the rules make games too cumbersome.
I assure anyone who is worried about accuracy, though, that from a scientific model perspective this is okay! We sacrifice a mostly insignificant part of our described 'reality' (of course BFG is real... isn't it? Well, even though it isn't, it makes a fun and pseudo-believable game/universe ) to make our model actually work at all.
The only issues that might arise are the extreme cases where the first two escorts to die might be 30 cm apart but still in the same squadron.... This is reasonably hard to do in a normal battle (unless one was trying...) but to remedy it I would say hits can only overflow from the initial target to the ship nearest the initial target. (To protect the defending player, they may choose which ship is hit if there are two nearest targets... it makes gaming the system less unpleasant if this boundary is in place).

However, I think that we cannot ignore (a) for capital ships. They are too large and important in even small numbers.
So I would propose that for ALL squadrons, firepower can overflow FROM escorts onto the nearest ship. However, firepower can ONLY overflow from capital ships onto ships in base contact.
With all of the bonuses for being in base contact, it provides a nice counter-point by increasing the danger a little.

Anyway, food for thought,
Thinking Stone

[Thinking Stone]

Hmm, read 333 times .

Also, concerning 2-shield escorts, Seahawk:

2-Shield Escorts and Massed Shielding: Maybe they should be upgraded to heavy escorts which can't squadron with capital ships... (sneaky eyes).

I think 2-shield escorts are on the edge of what this model can cope with too: the gameplay doesn't really seem designed around a 2:1 shield to hit ratio. Because of the generally low damage output of ships over a turn, attrition damage is the major killer (making it different to other games like WH40K where killing a dude reduces a squad's firepower immediately), meaning that 1:4 shield to hit ratios are more in tune with the capabilities of ships.
Although, a question: how does an escort mount a shield generator the quality of a cruiser? A comparison from Star Wars would be a Corellian blockade runner mounting the two large domes of a Star Destroyer (which are about 1/2 the size of a blockade runner anyway).... One would need all that shielding to survive with such a ship . I also assume that the other deflector shield generators a Star Destroyer mounts would be superfluous for a small ship like the corvette.

Thinking Stone, dreaming of Corellian blockade runners with Star Destroyer quality shields....

[AndrewChristlieb]

Well Q ships sacrifice large amounts of storage (well ok all of it) for the extra power generators for the shields an weapons. For the others Im sure theres something to be said for it (alien tech, largeer ships built with poor materials, etc...) I think the route BFG-R went with 2 hit escorts makes more sense although I dont believe we changed any of the 2 shield escorts (Q ship maybe?)

[Mogwai_with_Mohawk]

Hello there everyone,

I really like the idea of escorts finally escorting, so I might as well join in the conversation  .

@ Escorts with 2 hits or 2 shields - in general a nice idea btw.:
I do not think that they should be considered in this thread, at least not to determine the "basic escorting" rules. After all they are more like the special-kids and not the norm. Guess they should be discussed more in detail later on, probably just exclude them form these rules, not sure ...

@ Massing shields:
Bad idea, bad idea, go back in your corner idea and stay there till I call you  . No seriously this would brake with current game mechanics in a rather big scale and could shift balance a lot. To much impact for a nice little addition.

Also it does not make any sense to me  . So shields are a bubbles, o.k., but where does it say they can be extended to such a degree (escorts protecting battleships), or combined with one another? Apart from that: if I was a cruiser captain I would not be pleased by the idea of an escort vessel, being really close, exploding within my shields  .

@ Topic:
I fully support brethrens rules so far, because I am the bfg-buddy he discussed them with  .

Escorts are simply added (2:1) and then treated as other capital ships regarding the gunnery table, hit overflow and so on. Because these rules are a as-simple-as-can-be addition to the current game mechanics and do not require to change / add lots of new special rules. Yet they allow for all the fun:

- Valuable escorts can be protected by bigger ships.

- Bigger ships can be protected by escorts, at the cost that escorts have to slow down to cruiser-speed and maneuver into the line of fire to "sacrifice themselves". As bigger ships determine the column in the gunnery chart for the whole squadron, makes therefore sense to me.

- Also to attack "hidden/protected escorts behind a cruiser", pure escort-squadrons in themselves might become popular. Who else is better suited to jump to the other side of the cruiser and make short work of the "protected" escorts. So even more escorts, yay!

- This leaves but one problem: different armor values. However that is a given squadron mechanic right now and should be kept for the moment.

Please note:
Of course I am well aware that some things do not feel real in this game, but then again: the rules are more an approximation of reality and the current squadron-rules do not help to make it feel more real. However using these rules (with as little abbreviation for escorts) seems to be the best way to come up with a at least "ready to go" test version.

[Seahawk]

- Valuables escorts can be protected by bigger ships.

I still think this concept is utterly preposterous, both in RL tactics and in the game. I truly don't know what escort is ever more valuable than a capital ship. Escorts escort their parent ships, not the other way around.


Unless said escort is carrying the grand admiral for some wacky reason. Maybe attack craft? But then that's what massing turrets is for, especially when you can add on like a carrier or something.

[AndrewChristlieb]

I would say it would be more of a give and take. The capitols protect the vulnerable escorts from long range fire while approaching then the escorts bolster their fire upclose and can take some of the brunt of a really bad salvo and save the larger vessel if needed.

Maybe it should be something like only the cruisers can be targeted by enemys (why wouldnt they target the larger ship anyway?) which would automatically exempt escorts from any roll over damage or lower armor hits, but allow for the escorts to "Look out sir!" basically take the damage instead.



Same example, the Torment is targeting a mixed squadron composed of the Agrippa, Iron Duke, and elements of Omega Squadron. The Torment is forced to fire at the Iron Duke as it take priority (closest capitol ship in the squadron). Any hits scored are applied solely to the Iron Duke unless it is destroyed then any roll over damage goes onto the Agrippa, Omega squadron once again cannot have any hits applied to it because they are a harder target to hit.

Now heres the twist. Before the Torment rolls any dice for damage Omega squadron's controlling player may elect to have them intercept the fire, this is an automatic action representing the escorts speed and willingness to defend their charges and no rolls are required. Any hits scored against the Iron Duke are instead applied to any ships of Omega squadron in range and fire arc, with roll over going to the Iron Duke, and finally the Agrippa.


Fairly simple way to defend both escorts and their capitol ships when needed.

[Brethren]

- Valuables escorts can be protected by bigger ships.

I still think this concept is utterly preposterous, both in RL tactics and in the game. I truly don't know what escort is ever more valuable than a capital ship. Escorts escort their parent ships, not the other way around.

You're missing the other side of the coin.
Destroyers (back in the 40's) were ships that had to intercept things too fast for a Battleship to handle. But they certainly weren't used to swallow shells if an enemy Battleship arrived. So the relationship between classes is kind of symbiotic.

I would say it would be more of a give and take. The capitols protect the vulnerable escorts from long range fire while approaching then the escorts bolster their fire upclose and can take some of the brunt of a really bad salvo and save the larger vessel if needed.

Maybe it should be something like only the cruisers can be targeted by enemys (why wouldnt they target the larger ship anyway?) which would automatically exempt escorts from any roll over damage or lower armor hits, but allow for the escorts to "Look out sir!" basically take the damage instead.

Same example, the Torment is targeting a mixed squadron composed of the Agrippa, Iron Duke, and elements of Omega Squadron. The Torment is forced to fire at the Iron Duke as it take priority (closest capitol ship in the squadron). Any hits scored are applied solely to the Iron Duke unless it is destroyed then any roll over damage goes onto the Agrippa, Omega squadron once again cannot have any hits applied to it because they are a harder target to hit.

Now heres the twist. Before the Torment rolls any dice for damage Omega squadron's controlling player may elect to have them intercept the fire, this is an automatic action representing the escorts speed and willingness to defend their charges and no rolls are required. Any hits scored against the Iron Duke are instead applied to any ships of Omega squadron in range and fire arc, with roll over going to the Iron Duke, and finally the Agrippa.

In Na'vi terms: "I see you."

But I'm asking myself the question if there's a need for additional rules to get there.
Roll over damage simply is out there and if a cruiser breaks apart its escorts simply are in the line of incoming fire, like any other ship in a squadron.
As for the lower armour hits... they still are a minor case.
1.) You'll need a lot of dice, or a really lucky roll to pass enough hits to an escort to kill it.
2.) In cases of 6+prows (IN/Orcs) one just needs to set the escorts abeam to prevent any roll over or armour value damage at all. (...not true, lance shot still can roll over) Once the cruiser and the escorts are abeam to the enemy the drawback vanishes.
3.) I somewhat don't like the idea, that your approach allows escorts to choose which enemys fire they soak. Think of a cruiser besides the Torment that also targets the squadron. And somehow the escorts can halt the fire from the cruiser, but hide themselves from the blows of the Torment?
That really feels strange. Either you're in the line of fire or you're not.

Most of the things you just try to adapt are already working. Protecting one vessel with another is simply a matter of positioning and movement.
Plus always shooting at the capital ships kills the fun to flank a squadron with something fast like light cruisers or an escort-only-squadron to hunt for juicy ships that try to hide. 

[Mogwai_with_Mohawk]

Damn two hours of pc fixing and now brethren was faster in answering, well I will just post it anyhow ...

Ok first of all:

- Valuables escorts can be protected by bigger ships.

I still think this concept is utterly preposterous, both in RL tactics and in the game. I truly don't know what escort is ever more valuable than a capital ship. Escorts escort their parent ships, not the other way around.


Unless said escort is carrying the grand admiral for some wacky reason. Maybe attack craft? But then that's what massing turrets is for, especially when you can add on like a carrier or something.

Ja I said that wrong and there is a typo in my text.  It does somewhat seem strange, but it is far from preposterous. E.g. take escorts with supporting special rules, or those bought to primarily support with their turrets. Another example: a battleship with escorts is attacked by a random no-name cruiser, will the escorts play lemmings and die, or will the battleship man up and let its four shield protect its youngling. What I am trying to say here is: it can be a valid option although it may not seem reasonable at first.

Btw. in RL this is actually a very valid thing to do, of course depending on the different vessel types. But a battleship will most certainly not send its dedicated AAA-support ships ahead towards an enemy battleships and "seek cover behind them". Certain ships have certain tasks in a real life fleet and who ever is needed is just right there "in the front row". This has nothing to do with size or value - unless a cheap sacrifice has to be made. I guess you know where this is going 

Secondly ....

Now heres the twist. Before the Torment rolls any dice for damage Omega squadron's controlling player may elect to have them intercept the fire, this is an automatic action representing the escorts speed and willingness to defend their charges and no rolls are required. Any hits scored against the Iron Duke are instead applied to any ships of Omega squadron in range and fire arc, with roll over going to the Iron Duke, and finally the Agrippa.

Well I am fairly certain that would work too, but I am not really a fan of it because it implies that escorts magically jump in the line of fire no matter where they are. (Even an agile escort has limitations when it comes to moving in the enemys shooting phase  .) To clarify: In the picture omega squadron is close to the iron duke and even closer from the torments point of view, but what if omega squadron was actually 15 cm behind the iron duke  ? Guess those escorts jumping in from the background could become very annoying and I personally think maneuvering your ships is way to important in this game to allow for such "free" moves/ actions.

After all what brethren proposed does allow to protect the capital ship, but only if you manage to get the escort to actually be in between. Something that requires you to plan ahead but should not be too hard.  However that means that escorts are exactly where they are located on the field, just like every other ship, no "imaginary jumping around"  . In addition: treating them like normal cruiser type ships is much more simple and straight forward because there are no new rules.

[AndrewChristlieb]

You also get even more dice to damage the escorts tho when you treat them like cruisers and theyre already fragile enough as is.

[Seahawk]

The fair price of playing meatshield for the big boys.