|
|
Post by Ketara on Nov 13, 2009 15:16:23 GMT -5
I wanted to see what everybody thought about this run of the game, since at least 80% of you have now played in multiple runs, and probably 20% of you have played in all five of them. OYW versions 3, 4 and 5 were all designed for about 50 members, but this is the first time we've actually had that many from the start, although both 3 and 4 came close at the peak of their running.
Now that we've been RPing and planning for a month and making actions for 3 weeks, we're going to have a discussion/survey.
I'm wondering what people think about the way the rules work primarily, and if there are any glaring errors or if anything doesn't seem fair, but I also want to know if people are having fun and if there is anything that I can do to make people have more fun. Suggestions are always welcome.
For my own part, there are three things that I'd to see from the rules and from the way I've handled the game so far. First, I think that Overwatch is too abusable on ships and needs to carry some sort of penalty. Second, I think that there needs to be more of a penalty for attacking or being attacked many days in succession while on ships. And third, I think I should get around to actually posting scouting reports on the side boards when scouting actions are successful, that would be fun.
Feel free to argue and discuss here, but I want the argument to remain healthy and not turn into flame-fests. Any super good ideas may well be implemented.
Also as a note, this is the last time I am going to potentially alter the rules, unless something horribly grievous has been overlooked (doubtful.) We're about a month in now, and we've had enough time to work the kinks out, as it were.
|
|
sean
Full Member
Posts: 271
|
Post by sean on Nov 13, 2009 15:39:14 GMT -5
As for overwatch, you shouldn't be able to repair and over-watch simultaneously.
Overwatch sort of implies sitting ... and watching with guns ready.
Repairing is NOT a combat ready stance, you have people, panels, parts and bits all undone and incomplete.
Other than that bit I think, in general the rules are pretty square. With the number of people in game, fleets have gotten off the ground faster than ever and it seems a little restricting considering the scale of combat.
But I'm happy. ;p
|
|
Feyd
ZMF Officer 
Major
Your favorite Tin Cod now with more GUNDAMU
Posts: 1,911
|
Post by Feyd on Nov 13, 2009 16:48:35 GMT -5
I think things are going great so far aside from a few minor complaints:
-I like Sean's argument about overwatch, it is sort of abused in it's current state.
-I think the VP for spars should be lowered from 6/4 to 4/3. It doesn't seem right that you can win a friendly paintball duel and get 6VP and 1 day damage while you could lose an ambush, actual live combat against an enemy who wants to kill you, and get 6 VP and 3 days damage.
-Tin Cods have not been written as having slightly longer range missiles than Dopps (Correct me if I'm wrong on this, I got it from the blurb in the EF shop)
|
|
|
|
Post by goufcustom on Nov 13, 2009 17:27:24 GMT -5
I think I'm enjoying this run the most so far.
It might be because I'm RPing better than I have in a while.
It might also be I'm easily distracted and forget things like the degree of fun I had in others.
|
|
Frenzy
ZMF Officer
Commander
Could be Ramsus.
Posts: 2,152
|
Post by Frenzy on Nov 13, 2009 17:36:48 GMT -5
One thing that's always confused me is that Jiccos and Jukons are both stated to be on the stealthy side, and yet neither are listed as such. I can understand Jukons, but Jiccos are fairly small.
And what would this penalty for attacking/being attacked from ships be? I ask because this could adversely effect people in space since you pretty much need a ship/a fleet to do anything significant in space.
Also, what about adding a rule that allows Zeon space fleets to support some Zakus or Gattles much like the Federation does for Balls? Tugboats that could ferry MS/Fighters do exist within Zeon's forces.
Though this is just my view, I think that the Prototype Gundam is a little too strong for a PC to be using, considering it's nigh-invincible. If it truly is a prototype, then shouldn't it have some kind of flaw or a nerf?
Other than that, I'm having fun so far.
|
|
|
|
Post by on Nov 13, 2009 18:34:25 GMT -5
Main item I would like reviewed are MS teams. It works well and does it's job but it is an outdated system most likely made over 5 years ago before the use and consideration of Aircraft, Armored Vehicles, and even infantry were involved. 3 MS slots, it really doesnt give much versatility to those aircraft, vehicle, or infantry PCs who would likely aim to field like weaponry but are held back from it by simply having MS teams being a 1 to 1 slot.
Should a Tin Cod be able to field more in his team? Four Tin Cods against 4 Doms. It seems like it should be given review.
Also attrition warfare should be displayed in the RPG. I thought attacks like the U-99's missile barrage were smart since they would have that effect or keeping the crew tired and weak without a break to repair. However would this be in depth? Would enlisted civilians crack before Grizzles Vets?
Jukons are indeed not very stealthy, the whole completely underwater thing is negated in the fact it is a ship in patrol rolls, so it's something but I figured it would do better.
|
|
|
|
Post by flippmoke on Nov 13, 2009 22:35:36 GMT -5
Assuming you were to go into enemy territory ships are almost required to break the patrols otherwise you face them alone. Doing so means you will likely be stuck in enemy territory for a while as you also need ships to make assaults on bases. Unless you have Odessa sized forces and just mine the whole first 6 weeks you really need the safety of a ship. I would call fatigue a bad thing. Nagging attacks already prevent assualts and not being on a ship in the OK state can get you raped.
I kind of feel in this run defense is the key on earth. Don't punish offense it's pretty well balanced. Allowing services in enemy territory would be an interesting thought too just limit it to one and double the price.
Put up a rogue market where they can sell things to the sides members and they appear at the players location once purchased.
Provide a Retreat roll table for players. Make requirements for the retreat so they can leave a ship or base and make it out alive from enemy territory. Suggested roll table:
1, Roll on escape table take result
2 - 6, Escape failed caught off guard
7 - 12, escape failed normal battle
13 - 15, damage taken escape successful must retreat to closest allied base
16 - 18, escape succeeds player must retreat to closest allied base
19 - 20, escape succeeds move outside enemy territory
this action would only work in enemy territory or from bases in contested territory.
|
|
|
|
Post by deadguydrew on Nov 13, 2009 22:45:36 GMT -5
I think that spars should be reduced VP, and that there needs to be relatively higher gains for ambushes, and true duels. The way the system is set up now, I would get more VP for sparring twice in a week, than dueling, and live combat is also less fruitful, but this is offset by there being more of an advantage for ambushing someone in RPG terms.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ketara on Nov 13, 2009 22:56:15 GMT -5
I really don't understand your "retreat" stuff Jojo.
|
|
|
|
Post by on Nov 13, 2009 23:23:15 GMT -5
Provide a Retreat roll table for players. Make requirements for the retreat so they can leave a ship or base and make it out alive from enemy territory. Suggested roll table: 1, Roll on escape table take result 2 - 6, Escape failed caught off guard 7 - 12, escape failed normal battle 13 - 15, damage taken escape successful must retreat to closest allied base 16 - 18, escape succeeds player must retreat to closest allied base 19 - 20, escape succeeds move outside enemy territory this action would only work in enemy territory or from bases in contested territory. Can you clarify this idea? It was discussed in chat but I'm still unsure of how or why it would be implemented. I will attack names to try to make this easier. Are you saying that a group of EF, who would take over RF-2 in Zeon controlled central asia would have the option of making a roll while on the base to move directly to Belfast instead of risking moving into the Central Asia province again and risking a run in with the Black Tri Stars? Immediatly moving them from RF-2 to that base which would normally require 3 days of movement? I am sorry, I don't know what you are going for with the idea but the fact is it seems like a horrible idea. The game is supposed to involve tactics, back up plans, multiple forces, ect. So far this run seems to have a flavor of player death which is unfortunate, but just requires more caution on the sides of the players. If you move to attack a base, or if you move into a patrolled area, you will likely be attacked. There are reasons behind this that can be explained if you want. Anyways. You will be attacked, if you want to leave by not going into that land, buy Pegasus class ships or a spaceport. |
|
kuriboh
ZMF
Registered Newtype
Is Miang. Maybe.
Posts: 1,738
|
Post by kuriboh on Nov 13, 2009 23:43:40 GMT -5
I think he means rolling to sucessfully bail from an enemy territory without being stopped by a patrol. Attacked, yes, but to keep moving afterwards.
I think.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ketara on Nov 13, 2009 23:55:51 GMT -5
I'd like to see this discussion continue, but as for the sparring vs. ambushes deal, I recently got on our WRITING STAFF for being too generous with repairs.
2 days repairs should be reasonable for a spar, but I think I'm the only person who's ever given more than 1 for sparring.
There are other differences as well. Normally in a spar, your MS team does not level. Secondly, if you are attacked while sparring the results can be disastrous, since you won't have live ammunitions when attacked. Thirdly, sparring over and over will result in reduced VP gain.
|
|
|
|
Post by on Nov 14, 2009 0:07:49 GMT -5
I think he means rolling to sucessfully bail from an enemy territory without being stopped by a patrol. Attacked, yes, but to keep moving afterwards. I think. Patrols only take effect when entering enemy territory. Of course if you are on a base trying to enter so you can move back to a safe haven you would have to face them, and the patrol roll should not be replaced by an escape roll with no modifiers. |
|
|
|
Post by MING on Nov 14, 2009 0:10:53 GMT -5
Cid gave me three days for a spar, you reduced it to two.
I dunno, being in the 20% that has been in every OYW (from the start each time, no less), I can't say there are any rules I'm unclear on. Of course, I'm playing much, much more hands off this time around compared to every run by the second.
I think I agree with the 3 MS = 6 tanks/aircraft = 12 infantry though. It makes sense, and does help to even out the shortcomings of the non-mobile suit players. Of course, the problem with this is.. it'd have to be reflected in the composition of the patrols. And that could be messy. Though, it would also mean tougher patrols.
But yeah... overall, I got no complaints, but nothing to really add either. Maybe after I've done more than spar twice.
|
|
Feyd
ZMF Officer
Major
Your favorite Tin Cod now with more GUNDAMU
Posts: 1,911
|
Post by Feyd on Nov 14, 2009 0:19:08 GMT -5
I may be a bit biased but I like the enlarged MS team ideas for vehicles/infantry.
As it stands now, a typical air patrol is 6 fighters and a detector, meaning that even with a full MS team I'm still outnumbered by roughly 50% making it difficult to justify the risk of attacking.
|
|
