Bay 12 Games Forum

Finally... => Forum Games and Roleplaying => Roll To Dodge => Topic started by: piecewise on July 17, 2013, 02:32:26 am

Title: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on July 17, 2013, 02:32:26 am
All released materials for the system.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/w8s1s4fqyalrslp/G44VXphe2z
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Remuthra on July 17, 2013, 02:37:46 am
Does the 180 degree rotation on the machine guns mean they can be turned 180 degrees inward and fired into the ship itself?
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Remuthra on July 17, 2013, 02:39:59 am
Name: Joe Bridger, Master Dodger
Strength: 2
Dexterity: 7
Intelligence: 1

Skills:
Cannon (dex)
Gun (dex) 5
Sabre (str)
Unarmed (str)
Engineering (int)
Piloting (int)

Red Team!
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Thearpox on July 17, 2013, 02:55:06 am
((Well, this sounds interesting. I also have a feeling I have just created something very unbalanced and useless, he he he.))

Name: Vlad
Team: RED (Actually rolled a die for this.)

Stats:
Strength:      2
Dexterity:      2
Intelligence:   6

Skills:
Cannon       0
Gun            1
Sabre          0
Unarmed      0
Engineering  1
Piloting        3


Questions:

Do we level up and how? Because I want to know if putting a 0 in something will put me at a major disadvantage for the next 8 months, or if I will eventually be able to rectify this.

Is there any reason for me to have points in Strength if I won't have any points in either Sabre or Unarmed?

How do we determine captains? Because I'd like to contend for that role, especially having taken courses in piloting.

How is piloting the ship done? Do we need to be there physically every turn, or can we tell it what to do telepathically, etc...

What setting are we going for? I understand the meaning of the word "Space Pirates," but seriously.
Can we even technically land?
Is it cold outside? What altitude are we flying at?
Will we have to climb outside to repair some stuff?
Can we potentially replace the cockpit glass window with something more sturdy and instead have a man telling the person piloting directions? (like how it was done on real ships.) In game?

Will that grid space be 3-D?

Why would we surrender?

Is there any reason you use MSPaint and not Photoshop with Illustrator?
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: piecewise on July 17, 2013, 03:39:16 am
Does the 180 degree rotation on the machine guns mean they can be turned 180 degrees inward and fired into the ship itself?
Means that they can rotate 90 degrees to the left and right of the forward facing position they're at in the blueprints. So no, you can't turn them around to fire back at your own ship.

((Well, this sounds interesting. I also have a feeling I have just created something very unbalanced and useless, he he he.))

Name: Vlad
Team: RED (Actually rolled a die for this.)

Stats:
Strength:      2
Dexterity:      2
Intelligence:   6

Skills:
Cannon       0
Gun            1
Sabre          0
Unarmed      0
Engineering  1
Piloting        3


Questions:

Do we level up and how? Because I want to know if putting a 0 in something will put me at a major disadvantage for the next 8 months, or if I will eventually be able to rectify this.

Is there any reason for me to have points in Strength if I won't have any points in either Sabre or Unarmed?

How do we determine captains? Because I'd like to contend for that role, especially having taken courses in piloting.

How is piloting the ship done? Do we need to be there physically every turn, or can we tell it what to do telepathically, etc...

What setting are we going for? I understand the meaning of the word "Space Pirates," but seriously.
Can we even technically land?
Is it cold outside? What altitude are we flying at?
Will we have to climb outside to repair some stuff?
Can we potentially replace the cockpit glass window with something more sturdy and instead have a man telling the person piloting directions? (like how it was done on real ships.) In game?

Will that grid space be 3-D?

Why would we surrender?

Is there any reason you use MSPaint and not Photoshop with Illustrator?


Questionwise:
No. Maybe in a complete game but this is just a test of a half finished system.

If you feel like lugging shells around or otherwise doing something that requires strength beyond that of a 98 pound weakling.

Whoever wants to be captain, really. Piloting experience would probably help but for the most part it's whoever wants to take the rather dangerous position of manning the helm.

You have to physically be there to make adjustments, but you could lock the ship at a set speed and on a set course and let it run.

Setting will be more steampunkish then space pirates, whenever it gets done, if this test proves successful.

For the sake of this, altitude only matters in that falling off will kill you. Cold, lack of oxygen, etc, not important. We're running bare bones here.

Depends if it's actually outside or not. I mean, you can patch a hole from inside but if the deck is on fire you'll probably have to go up on it to put it out.

Sure, but thats gonna have to be done in game. So you may end up welding in combat, if the other team decides to press the advantage.

For now, no. Finished, probably. But thats an entirely new level of complexity and more then I want to work with for a test.

I dunno, cowardice? Recognition of the other team's complete dominance?

Because I never got around to pirating and learning to use photoshop. And because I'm bad enough at art that it really probably wouldn't make a difference, even if I knew how to use it. Besides, lines are lines, I don't really have any use for smudge tools and layers.

Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Cheesecake on July 17, 2013, 03:43:31 am
Reserved.

Name: Sloan Waterfree
RED Team
Strength: 1
Dexterity: 6
Intelligence: 2

Skills:
Cannon (dex)
Gun (dex)
Sabre (str)
Unarmed (str)
Engineering (int) 3
Piloting (int) 2

Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: draco1234 on July 17, 2013, 06:09:26 am
Name:  Danath 
Stats:
Strength - 9
Dexterity - 1
Intelligence - 0

Skills:
Cannon (dex) - 0
Gun (dex) - 1
Sabre (str) - 4
Unarmed (str) - 0
Engineering (int) - 0
Piloting (int) - 0
Team - Red

((I'm basically up for boarding/fighting boarders, or lugging heavy stuff around.))
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Toaster on July 17, 2013, 07:56:18 am
New Piecewise RTD?  Instant in.

(Proof of concept status irrelevant)


Name:  Toastarrrrr

Stats:
Strength: 2
Dexterity: 7
Intelligence: 1

Skills:
Cannon (dex): 3
Gun (dex): 1
Sabre (str): 1
Unarmed (str): 0
Engineering (int): 0
Piloting (int): 0

Team:  BLUE  (because no one else is)



Does the "0 auto fail" rule count if stat+skill is zero or if either is zero?  If it's "either is zero", I'd like that 1 int moved to dex, please.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: DaveTheGrave on July 17, 2013, 08:24:36 am
Reserving a slot, gotta make teh sheet, blah blah.

Name: Steven Lutwah
Stats:
Strength - 4
Dexterity - 5
Intelligence - 1

Skills:
Cannon (dex) - 2
Gun (dex) - 0
Sabre (str) - 2
Unarmed (str) - 0
Engineering (int) - 0
Piloting (int) - 1

Team: Blue 4 lyf
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Powder Miner on July 17, 2013, 08:27:14 am
Consider me in.
I SHALL BOARD THE ENEMY!
For blue, that is.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Dansmithers on July 17, 2013, 08:29:59 am
Name: His Most Esteemed Hat-Wearing Gentlemanne
Strength:4
Dexterity:4
Intelligence:2

Cannon:0
Gun:3
Sabre:1
Unarmed:0
Piloting:0
Engineering:1
Team:Builders League United.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 17, 2013, 08:31:00 am
Spoiler: Pilate Shepherd (click to show/hide)

I'll be the Captain.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Powder Miner on July 17, 2013, 08:33:44 am
Name: Damien Kanaro, Sword Specialist
Strength: 5
Dexterity: 2
Intelligence: 3

Cannon (dex) 0
Gun (dex) 0
Sabre (str) 4
Unarmed (str) 0
Engineering (int) 1
Piloting (int) 0
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 17, 2013, 08:35:43 am
Can we fire swordsmen at the enemy?
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Dansmithers on July 17, 2013, 08:36:45 am
Can we fire swordsmen at the enemy?
I shalle make it mine topmost priority!
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Powder Miner on July 17, 2013, 08:38:06 am
So, uh, what team are you on, GWG? (because I don't want to get shot into an enemy ship and pokevolve into a fine red mist)
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 17, 2013, 08:52:38 am
Can we fire swordsmen at the enemy?
I shalle make it mine topmost priority!
Excellent!
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: draco1234 on July 17, 2013, 09:00:26 am
Can we fire swordsmen at the enemy?
I shalle make it mine topmost priority!
Excellent!

As a swordsman myself, I'm not sure I see the appeal of this plan :S
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Powder Miner on July 17, 2013, 09:26:24 am
No, seriously GWG are you on red or blue team?
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Toaster on July 17, 2013, 09:30:46 am
No, seriously GWG are you on red or blue team?

Since all other nine players have claimed a slot, I guess that makes him an evil red.

Oh wait, I miscounted.  Yeah, he can still pick a side.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: piecewise on July 17, 2013, 10:18:49 am
We got 4 in each and GWG the fence sitter. Hey GWG, pick a side before I get the american news media to call you a flip flopper and ruin your chances for reelection.

We still need one moooooore.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Dariush on July 17, 2013, 10:21:49 am
Name: Vowel;

Stats:
Strength - 3
Dexterity - 4
Intelligence - 3

Skills:
Cannon (dex) - 1
Gun (dex) - 1
Sabre (str) - 1
Unarmed (str) - 0
Engineering (int) - 1
Piloting (int) - 1

Team: in case I get to choose, blue.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: DaveTheGrave on July 17, 2013, 10:43:28 am
Let the games begin.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Caellath on July 17, 2013, 10:50:21 am
((Arrived a bit too late due to being both sick and busy. Well, posting to watch the mayhem.))
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: piecewise on July 17, 2013, 11:31:49 am
Let the games begin.

Indeed. It appears GWG's Pilates Goatnudger is defaulting to red.


((Arrived a bit too late due to being both sick and busy. Well, posting to watch the mayhem.))
Ah well. Feel free to join me in giving ridiculous sports commentator play by plays from up in the sky booth. You can be the world-weary one, I'll be the Drunk one.




Ok, lets gets started. Here are the folders of the ship diagrams for each team. Each crewman is represented as a colored dot; there's a key on the image for who is who. You're all on the main deck right now. I'd recommend getting your shit together quick, since I'm sure the other guys will.

RED (https://www.dropbox.com/sh/crkwpy8ncr964nc/OXOj85jZV2)
BLUE (https://www.dropbox.com/sh/wkg0tqud2tn282l/1dbwPyV1Yv)


And here is the grid for the sky right now:
Sky (https://www.dropbox.com/s/amkcy3fujb1fzqi/Sky.png)

I've indicated which direction the front of each ship is pointed and, on red, the difficulty scales for hitting at distances with the side cannons. They can only fire in straight lines away from the side of the ship like that, but the machine guns (using the same difficulty scale) can fire anywhere in that 180 degree range. Both ships are currently at zero speed, sitting dead in the air. What happens now is up to you.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Dansmithers on July 17, 2013, 11:35:15 am
Attempt to modify the engines for a SUPER SPEED BOOST!
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: draco1234 on July 17, 2013, 11:35:25 am
RED - Danath: Load normal shells into as many cannons as I can in a turn.

Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: DaveTheGrave on July 17, 2013, 11:36:11 am
Steven, Blue

Go down the ladder, Move to the second forward mounted machine gun (From left to right) and take aim while yelling.

"Take aim friends, for now we must fight, be prepared to fire!"

"Also someone start piloting this thing forward, ya doyps."
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Dariush on July 17, 2013, 11:59:45 am
It's time... to d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-horribly murder the differently-coloured guys. Sorry, I have a stutter.

Vowel: grab ammo, load the cannons, starting from the front right and going to the back.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Powder Miner on July 17, 2013, 12:08:52 pm
Damian will run over to aid in engineering.
"I may be a sword specialist, but I know one or two things about how to operate an engine! I mean, mostly how to effectively break them BUT STILL!"
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Toaster on July 17, 2013, 12:15:10 pm
That's a good question- do the cannons start loaded?


Toaster: Load a standard shell in the first available unloaded cannon.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: piecewise on July 17, 2013, 01:00:41 pm
cannons are UNloaded to begin with. The ammo dump contains 50 standard shells, 10 explosive ones. And the Machineguns have basically limitless ammo as long as their supplies down on the second deck don't get destroyed.


We're gonna wait and give people a little bit longer to post, but the turn is coming soon.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Remuthra on July 17, 2013, 01:05:14 pm
To the middle left machine gun! Begin strafing the main deck!
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Thearpox on July 17, 2013, 01:56:36 pm
((Can I just make a request that we put our team name before our post to make this easier? And also put your character's name when you post?

Cheat sheets for now, because I don't frakking remember who is who.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
))
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: draco1234 on July 17, 2013, 01:58:34 pm
((Can I just make a request that we put our team name before our post to make this easier? And also put your character's name when you post?))

Sounds like a plan.  I already put my team name, but i'll go back and add my name as well.  (I also coloured my post the colour I am on the map)
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 17, 2013, 02:01:48 pm
No, seriously GWG are you on red or blue team?
Blue, as I thought I said.

It appears GWG's Pilates Goatnudger is defaulting to red.
Dag nabit. Why couldn't this have been mentioned when I was at home?

Pilate: Get to the controls!
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Thearpox on July 17, 2013, 02:07:28 pm
((GreatWyrm, your character has the same exact stats as mine (except for a missing point in Str which I was going to do too actually). At the same time, the other team has no one with actual piloting skills.

It really does make sense for you to be in the Blue Team, but if you aren't, I don't think our team would benefit from dopplegangers.
Wanna change stats before game starts? Or maybe I should have to do it? Or should we just fight each other?))
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Thearpox on July 17, 2013, 02:16:14 pm
Red Team

Name: Vlad

Get up to the cockpit. Two speed ahead.

Something I forgot to ask. What is the range on macine guns, and on cannons?

CheatSheets
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 17, 2013, 03:08:47 pm
((GreatWyrm, your character has the same exact stats as mine (except for a missing point in Str which I was going to do too actually). At the same time, the other team has no one with actual piloting skills.

It really does make sense for you to be in the Blue Team,
((Why do you think I intended to be there?

And I think that if piecewise was going to let me change at this point, he'd have me change teams before stats. And that's what I'd prefer too, incidentally.))
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Thearpox on July 17, 2013, 03:23:26 pm
((I don't think this is going to be a problem if you find somebody on the blue team to change with.))
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 17, 2013, 03:30:50 pm
((Wouldja look at that, Blue has 5 people.

Any Blues want to switch teams so each team has one pilot?))
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: piecewise on July 17, 2013, 04:38:50 pm
Red team:
To the middle left machine gun! Begin strafing the main deck!
You run to one of the forward machine guns, a strange, dual barrel thing in a mount with a belt of ammo being fed up to it from a hole in the deck. You grab the handles and take aim, trying to spray fire onto the deck of the distant Blue team ship.
[Target number:13]
[12 rolled:5 successes]
You spray bullets like mad, building a little pile of shell casings beside you but otherwise doing nothing constructive.

Red Team

Name: Vlad

Get up to the cockpit. Two speed ahead.

Something I forgot to ask. What is the range on macine guns, and on cannons?

CheatSheets
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
You run to the lower cockpit and climb the ladder up to the cockpit proper. You take a seat at the controls, take a few moments to familiarize yourself with them, and then attempt to set the ship in motion.
[Target: 1]
[Rolled:9 Successes:3]
You press the throttle forward to 2 and the ship heaves into motion; it's engines roaring and sending a cloud of smoke and flame out behind it.

(Their range is technically unlimited, but the farther away the target, the harder the check. As seen above.)

RED - Danath: Load normal shells into as many cannons as I can in a turn.



Lets say that, for every two successes on a str check, you can load one cannon this turn.
[9R 6S]
You run down the stairs and into the cramped confines of the weapons deck. You turn the corner, throw open the double doors of the Ammo dump and start lugging heavy metal shells over to the right cannons. You manage to load the entire right side in record time. You reward yourself with a congratulatory flex of your rippling muscles.

No, seriously GWG are you on red or blue team?
Blue, as I thought I said.

It appears GWG's Pilates Goatnudger is defaulting to red.
Dag nabit. Why couldn't this have been mentioned when I was at home?

Pilate: Get to the controls!
You join Vlad in the control room, cowering to the side so you have some cover when the bullets start flying.





Blue team:

That's a good question- do the cannons start loaded?


Toaster: Load a standard shell in the first available unloaded cannon.
We'll give you the same check as the other guy got. 1 shell for every 2 successes.
[R2 S1]
You half carry, half drag one shell over towards the first cannon on the left, but can't quite lift it up into the thing. You finally sit it down next to the cannon and have a seat on top of it to catch your breath. Maybe this sort of thing is best left to that guy, Damien. He seemed like a strapping fellow.

Steven, Blue

Go down the ladder, Move to the second forward mounted machine gun (From left to right) and take aim while yelling.


"Take aim friends, for now we must fight, be prepared to fire!"

"Also someone start piloting this thing forward, ya doyps."
You run forward, grab the handles of the machine gun and take aim but...well...you don't think you're gonna be able to hit them from here. You're an alright gunner, but by no means a goddamn machine gun sniper.



Attempt to modify the engines for a SUPER SPEED BOOST!
You run down the stairs and then lower yourself through the hatch into the cramped engine deck. You squeeze through the bulkheads until you reach the engine itself. You give it a look over and think you might be able to squeeze more power out of it; but it won't be easy, and it will take time. Time during which the engine will have to be shut off.

 
Damian will run over to aid in engineering.
"I may be a sword specialist, but I know one or two things about how to operate an engine! I mean, mostly how to effectively break them BUT STILL!"
You join Gent down in the engine compartment and look over his shoulder as he inspects the engine. With the both of you together you'd have a better chance of pulling the modification off, but it would still take time.

It's time... to d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-horribly murder the differently-coloured guys. Sorry, I have a stutter.

Vowel: grab ammo, load the cannons, starting from the front right and going to the back.
[R3 S3]
You manage to get the shell Toaster is sitting on loaded as well as an extra one. 1/3rd of the cannons are loaded now, at least.









Red Team takes an early lead, rumbling into motion at half speed while Blue team remains dead in the air. Will blue ever get someone up to pilot? Will Vlad ever realize that most pilot rolls are dead easy until the ship becomes damaged and doesn't control well? We shall see.

Team Maps and Sky map updated.

RED (https://www.dropbox.com/sh/crkwpy8ncr964nc/OXOj85jZV2)
BLUE (https://www.dropbox.com/sh/wkg0tqud2tn282l/1dbwPyV1Yv)
Sky (https://www.dropbox.com/s/amkcy3fujb1fzqi/Sky.png)
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Remuthra on July 17, 2013, 04:41:56 pm
Switch to right forward gun, spray Steve full of bullets.

Thankfully, I am a machine gun sniper.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 17, 2013, 04:44:17 pm
Make the ship go forward faster!
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: draco1234 on July 17, 2013, 04:54:30 pm
Red - Danath

Load normal shells into the remaining cannons.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Thearpox on July 17, 2013, 04:58:18 pm
((Wait, does no one on our team has a point in cannons?  Also, currently the red team has 3 people with engineering and piloting skills. This is embarrasing.
This is going to go horribly wrong for us with this set of skills.

Also, I so much want this to be spiced with two commentators, you and Caellath together.))

Seeing as Shepberd looks very enthusiastic about controlling the ship, Vlad relinquishes control and goes down.

He also checks the ammo for the machine guns.

Edit: Use the loadstone to turn 45 degrees to the left.
(Wait, if Danath loaded the explosive rounds into the left cannons, should I turn right instead?)
Another Edit: If possible, instead of the above action, pull on the loadstones in such a way that our ship shifts one square left but keeps going towards the enemy.

"Anybody wants to talk strategy? Are we just going to ram them?"

Cheat Sheets
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: draco1234 on July 17, 2013, 05:01:13 pm
((Wait, does no one on our team has a point in cannons?  Also, currently the red team has 3 people with engineering and piloting skills. This is embarrasing.))

Seeing as Shepberd looks very enthusiastic about controlling the ship, Vlad relinquishes control and goes down.

He then takes a seat at one of the machine guns and tests his firing skills. He also checks the ammo for the machine guns.


"Anybody wants to talk strategy? Are we just going to ram them?"

Cheat Sheets
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

While we have no one with cannon skills, we do have a couple with high dex, which still counts towards it a great deal.  Though strategy wise, I vote going up alongside them, broadsiding them with explosive rounds which I will load into the left cannons, and then boarding them.  I think it's only an automatic fail if both the skill and it's attribute are 0.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Remuthra on July 17, 2013, 05:07:19 pm
((Wait, does no one on our team has a point in cannons?  Also, currently the red team has 3 people with engineering and piloting skills. This is embarrasing.))

Seeing as Shepberd looks very enthusiastic about controlling the ship, Vlad relinquishes control and goes down.

He then takes a seat at one of the machine guns and tests his firing skills. He also checks the ammo for the machine guns.


"Anybody wants to talk strategy? Are we just going to ram them?"

Cheat Sheets
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

While we have no one with cannon skills, we do have a couple with high dex, which still counts towards it a great deal.  Though strategy wise, I vote going up alongside them, broadsiding them with explosive rounds which I will load into the left cannons, and then boarding them.
As for me, I set my character up as a master gunner, so I should probably stay on the machine guns and suppress the enemy.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: piecewise on July 17, 2013, 05:08:21 pm
I should point out that explosive shells do less damage to metal plating then straight normal shells. They're great once you have a hole to fire into, but on their own their kind of like using a frag grenade on a tank.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: draco1234 on July 17, 2013, 05:09:18 pm
Hmm... scrap the explosive shells then, I'll just load normal ones in for now.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Remuthra on July 17, 2013, 05:11:34 pm
Once we get a hit on the enemy plating, can I penetrate the wood underneath with a deck gun?
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Thearpox on July 17, 2013, 05:18:18 pm
Do we have dynamite or something we can throw into their ammo dump after we break their plating?
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: draco1234 on July 17, 2013, 05:23:05 pm
I suppose we can either fire an explosive shell into it, or fire normal bullets into their explosive shells and try to set them off.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Thearpox on July 17, 2013, 05:24:55 pm
The reason I would want to use dynamite, is to allow our guys those precious few seconds to jump out back to our ship. Since it would seem that we would need to board it in order to hit the ammo pile.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: draco1234 on July 17, 2013, 05:29:09 pm
unless of course we could blow a hole in the side of the ship where the ammo pile is :P 

Anyway, we're all mad here.  I'm sure we'll have volunteers clamouring for a place on a suicide mission that results in a massive explosion.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 17, 2013, 05:30:42 pm
And this we discover another use for the swordsman-cannon.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Cheesecake on July 17, 2013, 05:50:26 pm
Dang. This all happened while I was asleep?

RED-Sloan

Make sure all guns and weapons work at top efficiency, and try to modify them to be able to shoot faster
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Powder Miner on July 17, 2013, 06:02:32 pm
Turn around and aid in loading the cannons.
"I don't think it's too smart to shut off the engine right now... but is anyone going to pilot? Can you pilot, Gentlemanne?"
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 17, 2013, 06:14:32 pm
((I really wish I had put my intended team on the sheet like I thought I had...))
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Thearpox on July 17, 2013, 06:18:07 pm
Attention, Blue Team. You may still be able to switch someone with Great Wyrm if you act now.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: draco1234 on July 17, 2013, 06:23:00 pm
((I really wish I had put my intended team on the sheet like I thought I had...))

Worst case scenario, if you can't swap you can come down to the cannon deck and help me there.  I say that because my dexterity + my cannon skill adds up to a grand total of 1, which probably gives me a 50/50 chance of either hitting the enemy airship at point-blank range, or exploding myself :P
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 17, 2013, 06:25:54 pm
Why are you gunner, then?
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: draco1234 on July 17, 2013, 06:26:46 pm
I'm not, I'm just loading the cannons due to my strength skill.  It's just everyone else seems to be busy.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Remuthra on July 17, 2013, 06:26:58 pm
He has strength to load the cannons, but we need someone with dexterity to fire them.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Thearpox on July 17, 2013, 06:45:41 pm
I too could help with firing the cannons, but I think that Sloan is the one best disposed to do that. Also, I feels very one-sided now because no one's on the blue team doing anything.

By the way, Piecewise. Now that I think about it, since this is a test, it may actually be better for you to run two tests of this simultaneously, albeir with different players. You won't have a problem finding ten more volunteers, and they in all likelihood will make different screw-ups then we did. In a different thread, obviously.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Dansmithers on July 17, 2013, 06:56:31 pm
Grab empty bottles, cloth scraps, and airship fuel, make Molotovs.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: draco1234 on July 17, 2013, 06:58:40 pm
Also, anyone on the red team want to swap their sabre for my pistol? I'm guessing 2 sabres are better than one, and with my firing skill I doubt I'll hit anyone with the pistol.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Remuthra on July 17, 2013, 07:02:04 pm
Is the pistol off of dexterity? If so, I will be happy to trade.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: draco1234 on July 17, 2013, 07:04:27 pm
Is the pistol off of dexterity? If so, I will be happy to trade.

I believe it is.

Once cannons are loaded (with normal shells), give my pistol to Remuthra, getting his sabre in return.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Toaster on July 17, 2013, 08:20:21 pm
Yes, pistols are dex.


Toastarrr Screw the loading- that's too heavy!  Take an unmanned front MG turret because I *AM* a machine gun sniper!


By the way, Dariush, I volunteer you as pilot.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: piecewise on July 17, 2013, 09:40:29 pm

RED TEAM
Switch to right forward gun, spray Steve full of bullets.

Thankfully, I am a machine gun sniper.
You switch guns, for whatever reason, and immediately begin firing at the distant shape of the approaching ship's prow.
[T 11. R 12. S 5]
You continue to build small piles of brass, spent shells clumping together before the wind collapses them and sends them rolling off the edge of the deck and down toward the distant green below. You continue not to hit anything though.

((Wait, does no one on our team has a point in cannons?  Also, currently the red team has 3 people with engineering and piloting skills. This is embarrasing.
This is going to go horribly wrong for us with this set of skills.

Also, I so much want this to be spiced with two commentators, you and Caellath together.))

Seeing as Shepberd looks very enthusiastic about controlling the ship, Vlad relinquishes control and goes down.

He also checks the ammo for the machine guns.

Edit: Use the loadstone to turn 45 degrees to the left.
(Wait, if Danath loaded the explosive rounds into the left cannons, should I turn right instead?)
Another Edit: If possible, instead of the above action, pull on the loadstones in such a way that our ship shifts one square left but keeps going towards the enemy.

"Anybody wants to talk strategy? Are we just going to ram them?"

Cheat Sheets
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I'm not really sure which of these actions are the real one...so I'm gonna go with the final edit.

[T 4. R9. S5.]
You let Pilate take the controls, since he seems so intent on it. However, as he takes up the helm, you make an adjustment to the lodestones. A strange hum fills the ship and you feel static prickle across your skin as the ship lists toward the left for several long seconds before righting itself.


Dang. This all happened while I was asleep?

RED-Sloan

Make sure all guns and weapons work at top efficiency, and try to modify them to be able to shoot faster
You head down to the cannon level and look them over as a hefty looking man flexes his muscles in a corner. The cannons look like they would fire pretty much as quickly as they could get shells into them, disregarding recoil which is only a few seconds...Really the best way to get these firing as fast as they can is just to get a good firing team down here loading and shooting efficiently.


Red - Danath

Load normal shells into the remaining cannons.

"24 INCH PYTHONS!"
[R9. S5]
You man handle two more shells into the cannons. You wipe sweat from your brow and watch the clouds drift through the firing ports and let the wind cool you down.




Make the ship go forward faster!
[T 1, R9, S5]
You grab the throttle and push it to full speed. The engines roar and the entire ship vibrates with their strength as it surges forward.

TEAM BLUE

Yes, pistols are dex.


Toastarrr Screw the loading- that's too heavy!  Take an unmanned front MG turret because I *AM* a machine gun sniper!


By the way, Dariush, I volunteer you as pilot.

You run up and hop on one of the unoccupied front machine guns, intent on spraying bullets into the distant Red ship on the horizon. They're still to far for you to possibly hit at this point, but they're getting closer every second. Come to think of it...why are they moving but your ship isn't?


Grab empty bottles, cloth scraps, and airship fuel, make Molotovs.
You run to the supply hold and start rummaging through it. You find some bottles, some cloth and some sort of chemical that has a big "DANGER: FLAMMABLE" warning on it. That will do!
[Engineering: Target 3. Danger 1 or less. Rolled 3. Successes: 2]
You can't figure out how to get the cloth to fit in and work as a usable wick, but luckily you also don't accidentally set the ship on fire. So..small victories.


Turn around and aid in loading the cannons.
"I don't think it's too smart to shut off the engine right now... but is anyone going to pilot? Can you pilot, Gentlemanne?"
You run back to the hatch and pull yourself onto the cannon level. You help load the cannons as fast as you can. You know full well that the other ship is coming straight for you.
[R3 S2]
You get a single shell loaded, into the final right side cannon.









Red Team is rocketing along, now almost fully loaded and on a course for a blisteringly fast flyby of Blue's still dead in the air ship. Blue's really gonna have to get moving and fast if it doesn't want to take a full broadside from literally inches away. It's exciting stuff Cal, I'm itching to know where the first shot is gonna land.

Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Powder Miner on July 17, 2013, 09:42:55 pm
Damien promptly runs up to the deck, and if the blue ship gets within inches of the red ship, jumps over to the red ship, sabre in hand. Damien is a sword specialist, after all.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Remuthra on July 17, 2013, 09:46:05 pm
Once we get closer, Joe performs a heavy strafe of the deck, catching anyone who might try to board with a pile of bullets. If we don't get there soon, he keeps trying to kill the enemy gunners with his sniping skills. If Damien comes up there, he gets bullets too.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Dansmithers on July 17, 2013, 09:47:42 pm
Empty standard shell, fill with flammable liquid.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Remuthra on July 17, 2013, 09:50:33 pm
Gun please, Danath?
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 17, 2013, 09:54:05 pm
Avoid any incoming shots. If none are coming, draw my pistol and shoot any visible enemy crew members.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Powder Miner on July 17, 2013, 09:55:07 pm
((OH BOY I CAN'T WAIT TO BECOME SWISS CHEESE))
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Remuthra on July 17, 2013, 09:56:42 pm
((OH BOY I CAN'T WAIT TO BECOME SWISS CHEESE))
((You know it's a danger because I can actually roll to attack from the other side of the map :P.))

Where's the updated maps?
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Thearpox on July 17, 2013, 09:58:29 pm
((The maps update automatically.

Also, can you amebas put your team names and character names before your actions already?
AND SPECIFICALLY FOR DAMIEN: DUDE, IF YOU MAKE YOUR ACTIONS BLUE WHILST THOU ART ON THE RED TEAM, AND YOU DON'T PUT WHICH TEAM YOU ARE ON, IT MAKES IT VERY CONFUSING. Ok, wrong guy. Sorry. This is all your fault, not mine.))

Red Team
Name: Vlad

Do we have dynamite or something we can throw into their ammo dump after we break their plating? If we don't,
Check the ammo piles of our machine guns.

Make Molotovs. Also, get down at least a level.


Cheat Sheet
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: piecewise on July 17, 2013, 10:02:35 pm
Assuming current conditions, three turns from now the ships will pass each other. So running out to the deck may be premature. It's just that the guns will start coming into range soon (still probably a turn before they get into reliable hitting range) and that the red ship is on course for a very close fly by.

Check the sky image and remember that the red ship is moving 3 squares a turn right now.

((OH BOY I CAN'T WAIT TO BECOME SWISS CHEESE))
((You know it's a danger because I can actually roll to attack from the other side of the map :P.))

Where's the updated maps?
Check the old links. Dropbox updates the images automatically as I edit them. I'll just throw the links in the OP too.

((The maps update automatically.

Also, can you amebas put your team names and character names before your actions already?))

Red Team
Name: Vlad

Do we have dynamite or something we can throw into their ammo dump after we break their plating? If we don't, make molotovs.

Cheack the ammo piles for our machine guns. Also, get down at least a level.


Cheat Sheet
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
No dynamite on board, though good idea for later. Really, firing a shell into the ammo dump is explosively effective as well. But Molotovs work too, if you can get them in. And get them made without burning the place down.

Also, not sure what you would check about the machine gun ammo. It's practically limitless and there's only one type. What are you gonna do with it?

Empty standard shell, fill with flammable liquid.
Standard shells are solid. They're like cannonballs. What you're describing though, is pretty much an Explosive shell, which you already have 10 of.

Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Toaster on July 17, 2013, 10:04:36 pm
Toastarrr: MORE DAKKA


Really, Dariush, get us moving please?
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Thearpox on July 17, 2013, 10:05:17 pm
((I didn't know it was limitless.))
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Powder Miner on July 17, 2013, 10:08:20 pm
((You're thinking of Danath, Damien's very coincidentally similar red team counterpart. I am Blue Team, hence the blue :P))
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: piecewise on July 17, 2013, 10:08:47 pm
((I didn't know it was limitless.))
I think I said something to that effect somewhere in here...maybe not. Oh well, for the sake of right now, just assume they can keep dakka'ing till the gun or ammo store is destroyed.

Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Thearpox on July 17, 2013, 10:18:09 pm
((You're thinking of Danath, Damien's very coincidentally similar red team counterpart. I am Blue Team, hence the blue :P))
((Screw you guys. Making similar names and stuff. Still would help if you would posted the team.))



Alright, so what's the plan? Right now, we're going for a close brush with their ship, emptying our cannons, and hoping to ignite something. But we can still decide to ram their front, or even turn and try to ram their broadside.

If we're going with what we're planning to do right now (should I make this visible to both teams? Should I put it in a spoiler? Should we just pm each other? Quicktopic?)
REDACTED DUE TO INDECISION
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Remuthra on July 17, 2013, 10:21:09 pm
I believe we were going to do a close pass and broadside them while I clear the deck.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Thearpox on July 17, 2013, 10:27:50 pm
When you say "broadside them" do you mean "ram" or "board them"?
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Remuthra on July 17, 2013, 10:30:01 pm
No, I mean blast them with all cannons and move away, then reload and come back around.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Toaster on July 17, 2013, 10:36:16 pm
Broadside (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadside)
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Dansmithers on July 17, 2013, 10:42:24 pm
Use EL SHELL EXPLOSIVO instead.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: DaveTheGrave on July 18, 2013, 02:09:51 am
Steven,Blue

Go help load the cannons for this turn.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Cheesecake on July 18, 2013, 03:27:42 am
Red-Sloan

Try to design upgrades for the cannons to make them more powerful.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: draco1234 on July 18, 2013, 03:52:20 am
Red - Danath

Give Remuthra my pistol, getting his sabre in return.  Once that's done, load the remaining cannon

Tactics wise, I'd say we should broadside them as we fly by, hopefully before they get most of their cannons loaded.  Once that's done we should make another pass and either fire explosive shells into the hole, or use the hole to jump across straight to their cannon deck and light up their ammunition.  ( I know the enemy team can see this but it's only a test anyway)

Also, the only cannon they have loaded so far is on the their right I think, so if we go to their left we should be safer.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: draco1234 on July 18, 2013, 03:56:12 am
Red-Sloan

Try to design upgrades for the cannons to make them more powerful.

A word of warning, as the engines had to be off to upgrade them, I think the cannons would have to be unloaded as well.

((Also, It's quite funny that me and Damien are very similar in name and ability.  I think I've found my nemesis...))
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Cheesecake on July 18, 2013, 04:04:41 am
Really? Oh well. Just design some upgrades to implement if we survive and get to a dock or something.
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Thearpox on July 18, 2013, 04:13:21 am
((That's hilarious, since my nemesis is GreatWyrm, and he's on my team. I want to strangle him so very huggy much.

Also, I don't think designing upgrades is a good idea, since we don't really have the time for that. Also, now that I think about it, it might be better to go not for the broadside, but with an angle where we can shoot them, and they can't shoot us. I mean, we're the team with the piloting skills, we should be using them to our advantage, instead of giving everyone equal shots. Like...
Piecewise, would you kindly number this grid?))

Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Cheesecake on July 18, 2013, 04:25:24 am
Fine then. Help pilot the ship and try to get accustomed to the controls.

Does our ship have a name?
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 18, 2013, 08:12:13 am
Also, now that I think about it, it might be better to go not for the broadside, but with an angle where we can shoot them, and they can't shoot us.
How? Unless we get behind them or spin the ship on its side and go over...them...

Hey, piecewise, can I get the airship to do a barrel roll over the enemy ship as we fire our broadside cannons into their deck? And do we have seatbelts?
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Dariush on July 18, 2013, 09:10:42 am
((Everything between the two updates was night for me. :())

Vowel: screw loading, time to pilot this beauty up. Get to the cockpit. If possible, turn left. If possible, speed up as far as possible (or AFAP).
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 18, 2013, 09:21:23 am
((Everything between the two updates was night for me. :())
((I feel your pain.))
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Powder Miner on July 18, 2013, 01:24:24 pm
((We're even both green on the minimap, draco.))
Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: piecewise on July 18, 2013, 02:56:20 pm
RED
Once we get closer, Joe performs a heavy strafe of the deck, catching anyone who might try to board with a pile of bullets. If we don't get there soon, he keeps trying to kill the enemy gunners with his sniping skills. If Damien comes up there, he gets bullets too.
Well, you actually have a better chance of hitting now, target is only 8 and you have 12 so...13% chance or so.
You hold both triggers on the machine gun and fight the recoil, trying to keep it centered on the Blue deck and its crew.
[T8 R12 S3. (You actually rolled 6 ones)]
You spray fire and hit no one and nothing in particular.

"MY TIME SHALL COME! Probably fairly soon, actually."

((The maps update automatically.

Also, can you amebas put your team names and character names before your actions already?
AND SPECIFICALLY FOR DAMIEN: DUDE, IF YOU MAKE YOUR ACTIONS BLUE WHILST THOU ART ON THE RED TEAM, AND YOU DON'T PUT WHICH TEAM YOU ARE ON, IT MAKES IT VERY CONFUSING. Ok, wrong guy. Sorry. This is all your fault, not mine.))

Red Team
Name: Vlad

Do we have dynamite or something we can throw into their ammo dump after we break their plating? If we don't,
Check the ammo piles of our machine guns.

Make Molotovs. Also, get down at least a level.


Cheat Sheet
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

You slide down the ladder, run across the deck, take the right stairs down to the cannon hold and then jump down the hatch to the engine compartment. From there you head to the Supply hold and begin work on moltovs.

[T3. R7. S7]
You make up a whole goddamn crate of moltovs. Then you jury rig an explosive device out of a barrel and plenty of flammable chemicals and add a fuse. This should get the party started.

Fine then. Help pilot the ship and try to get accustomed to the controls.

Does our ship have a name?
(You could give it a name.)

You run up and join  Pilate in the cockpit, intent on helping him if he should need it.

Red - Danath

Give Remuthra my pistol, getting his sabre in return.  Once that's done, load the remaining cannon

Tactics wise, I'd say we should broadside them as we fly by, hopefully before they get most of their cannons loaded.  Once that's done we should make another pass and either fire explosive shells into the hole, or use the hole to jump across straight to their cannon deck and light up their ammunition.  ( I know the enemy team can see this but it's only a test anyway)

Also, the only cannon they have loaded so far is on the their right I think, so if we go to their left we should be safer.
You exchange weapons and continue loading the cannons. Well, cannon.
[T2 R9 S4]
You finish loading the last cannon. The ship is ready to fire...but it still needs someone actually down here to do the job.

Avoid any incoming shots. If none are coming, draw my pistol and shoot any visible enemy crew members.
You take one hand off the controls and draw your pistol from it's side holster. You squeeze the grip and rest your finger on the trigger guard. Things are probably gonna get messy here real fast.



BLUE

Toastarrr: MORE DAKKA


Really, Dariush, get us moving please?
"DAKKA DAKKA DAKKA"
[T8 R8 S3]
You continue to horribly murder the air in the general vicinity of your opponent. You don't hit him though. Heavy forbid.

Steven,Blue

Go help load the cannons for this turn.

You head down to the cannon deck and start loading shells
[R4 S4]

You load two shells, working at t peak of your physical capacity. Perhaps it's your devotion to your ship. Perhaps the desire to win. Perhaps the desire not to be horribly and brutally murdered. Whatever it is, you've got it in spades.

Use EL SHELL EXPLOSIVO instead.
You run upstairs to the ammo dump and find one of the explosive shells. Now what do you want to do with it?


Damien promptly runs up to the deck, and if the blue ship gets within inches of the red ship, jumps over to the red ship, sabre in hand. Damien is a sword specialist, after all.

You take the stairs onto the upper deck and run to the right side railing. The Enemy ship is getting closer. You smile and tap on the railing with your sabre, the metal ringing to an ever increasing beat and you tap it over and over.

"Come on...Come on... Bring me your throats so that I might slit'em..."


((Everything between the two updates was night for me. :())

Vowel: screw loading, time to pilot this beauty up. Get to the cockpit. If possible, turn left. If possible, speed up as far as possible (or AFAP).
You run upstairs, across the deck and into the lower cockpit area. You take the ladder up to the cockpit proper and take your place at the controls.

[T2 R4 S2]
You crank the throttle to full and spin wheel hard left. The engine roars to life and the Lode stones shift with a static hum.

"We are under way!"








"Oh my what a turn around for Blue! They have, at the last second, pulled hard left and made it out of Red's path of attack."

"They did indeed but I can't help but feel like this was a loss for blue overall."

"Why is that tom?"

"Well, if you look at the map, You'll see his starting position was this, right?"
(http://i.imgur.com/Kg2GOeO.png)

"Sure was."

"Now, he turned left, turning the ship 45 degrees to the left, and moved at speed three to the position he's at now, where neither ship has a shot with its cannons."

"Cannons win battles, Tom."

"Yeah, sure.  But back to what I was saying, if he had moved at speed two, he would have ended up here, with a clear shot at red using his right guns. Like this."

(http://i.imgur.com/uKVrV1d.png)

"I see, I see."

"And if he would have gone at speed three to the right instead of left, he would have an even better shot."

(http://i.imgur.com/eWeFZA4.png)

"As it is now, Neither side can hit with their cannons, and blue can't use it's machine guns."

"But red can."

"It definitely can."

"Not looking good for blue."












Questions answered and a short piloting tutorial.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)


Title: Re: Proof of Concept game: Airship Combat
Post by: Remuthra on July 18, 2013, 03:00:27 pm
You know what that means, don't you?

Show them how DAKKA really works! Clear the deck!
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 18, 2013, 03:07:51 pm
Quote
Any questions?
((Maybe I know way to little about this, but is seems to me that turning on your side to face the enemy from is not the most efficient way to fire cannons, and is also very dangerous. First, because you will not be able to fire all of your cannons into their ship, just one or two. Second, because the front of the ship is the best defended part of the ship. For one thing, it is the opposite of flat, so the cannon-ball will simply slide off. It's like hitting a plate mail in the chest (absolutely pointless).

And thirdly, because the other ship will then ram you into the side, and totally mess you up.))
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 18, 2013, 03:15:07 pm
If we fired our cannons now, couldn't we hit the enemy as they pass by?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 18, 2013, 03:18:53 pm
I think it will be better overall for us to turn too and tail them instead. On the other hand, we can fire our cannons and then do that.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: DaveTheGrave on July 18, 2013, 03:20:23 pm
Steven,Blue

Get to the closest machine gun and strafe the enemy deck, whilst rapping at a high speed.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dansmithers on July 18, 2013, 03:21:07 pm
Fill it with fuel, load it into a cannon.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Sarzael on July 18, 2013, 03:23:32 pm
Name
Stats: 4 Strenght, 2 Dexterity, 4 Intelligence. 3 Sabre, 2 Engineering.
Team: Blue
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 18, 2013, 03:24:19 pm
I believe that would be a good idea. I'm not sure our cannons reach that far, but if we tail them I can keep shooting.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Powder Miner on July 18, 2013, 03:26:06 pm
Find cover when the deck gets machine-gunned; but once again, if the enemy ship comes close enough, board 'em.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 18, 2013, 03:27:29 pm
The cockpit and upper deck are both gunnable. I think you need to go down to the cannon deck to get cover.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: DaveTheGrave on July 18, 2013, 03:32:09 pm
We need to turn right. Then our canoneering will be guda cheese.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 18, 2013, 03:36:01 pm
Quote
Any questions?
((Maybe I know way to little about this, but is seems to me that turning on your side to face the enemy from is not the most efficient way to fire cannons, and is also very dangerous. First, because you will not be able to fire all of your cannons into their ship, just one or two. Second, because the front of the ship is the best defended part of the ship. For one thing, it is the opposite of flat, so the cannon-ball will simply slide off. It's like hitting a plate mail in the chest (absolutely pointless).

And thirdly, because the other ship will then ram you into the side, and totally mess you up.))
1.You can hit them with all of your cannons on that side. The cannons can only fire if you have your side lined up, but if you do they can all fire and hit the same place or fire and hit anything thats possible to hit from that position. They have some degree of aim.
2.The prow is the best defended exterior part, yes. But why not fire on their cockpit instead? It's in line with the front of the ship, just further back.
3.Angles aren't taken into account. For simplicity sake.
4.It's an example of a possible movement maneuver, not a recommendation of tactics.

If we fired our cannons now, couldn't we hit the enemy as they pass by?
Technically, you could have. But there was no one down with the cannons, ready to fire them as the ship passed. Movement in this is so far a bit screwy, it happens AFTER the turn's actions. However, when it comes to cannons and passing shots, we're gonna fudge it a bit and say that if you have someone down with the cannons, on the right side, ready to fire, then they'll get their shot.

Steven,Blue

Get to the closest machine gun and strafe the enemy deck, whilst rapping at a high speed.
You can't. The machine guns won't turn that far. Theres a part under the turn that says that and has diagrams  as to why it can't.

Fill it with fuel, load it into a cannon.
Why? The explosive shells already create fire. All you'd be doing is the equivalent of replacing one explosive with another.

Name
Stats: 4 Strenght, 2 Dexterity, 4 Intelligence. 3 Sabre, 2 Engineering.
Team: Blue
Little late. And we don't have a wait list...But after this fight we're gonna have another, so feel free to sign up then.




Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 18, 2013, 03:39:15 pm
Can we do things in three dimensions, despite the current lack of mechanics for it?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: DaveTheGrave on July 18, 2013, 03:41:48 pm
Steven,Blue
change mind and move to the middle right cannon, If there is a possible line of fire on the cockpit, attempt to shoot said cannon at said enemy cockpit.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 18, 2013, 03:42:04 pm
((I understand that this tactic would work with the game mechanics. I'm just saying that the above-mentioned tactic is stupid and really really dangerous. Sorry about that, and I don't usually call you out like that. However, it's also important to not give people wrong ideas about what would work, and what wouldn't. i.e.: The problem of modern entertainment.

By the way, my secret idea to tie ropes to us and swing into their ship, igniting everything, will have to be discarded because if the ships are moving, we won't really have enough time to do anything.))

Red Team
Name: Vlad

Vlad hands out several (3 if I have enough) molotovs to everyone. He then takes a position at the cannons, and will help aim anybody who decided to fire them. He will not fire the cannons if he is the only one there.

Cheat Sheet
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dansmithers on July 18, 2013, 04:03:45 pm
FINE THEN!
Strap some explosive shells together, add fuse. If possible, construct catapult.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 18, 2013, 04:12:25 pm
Oh, you crazy mask guy.

Turn right and then fly forward, continuing at Speed 3 and trying to get the enemy ship in our cannons' sights. At the closest point of our trajectories this turn, fire a shot at any crewmembers I can see.

Would it be too much to ask for a link to the map at the bottom of each turn? I keep forgetting where it is.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 18, 2013, 04:19:06 pm
Can we do things in three dimensions, despite the current lack of mechanics for it?
Not yet. Next battle though, you can.


Speaking of which; this battle is really about introducing people to mechanics and testing damage systems as well as working out mechanical kinks. Next battle will include vertical movement and Some degree of customization for the ships. As such, if anyone has weapons, systems, items or the like they would like to suggest as possible for next round, feel free. Things I've already got are

Man and ship based flame throwers
Harpoon like guns for spearing and attaching to the other ship and boarding
single man fighters and landing strip
enclosed cockpit and viewing system
etc.

Oh, you crazy mask guy.

Fly forward, continuing at Speed 3 and trying to get the enemy ship in our cannons' sights. At the closest point of our trajectories this turn, fire a shot at any crewmembers I can see.

Would it be too much to ask for a link to the map at the bottom of each turn? I keep forgetting where it is.
Currently it's in the op, but I can throw it at the bottom too.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 18, 2013, 04:24:23 pm
-Airskiffs. For skirmishing and boarding attempts.
-A 360 degree deck gun on top of the cockpit, similar to the larger gun on a submarine.
-More ammo types for different guns. As an example, grapeshot shells, and disruption shells.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 18, 2013, 04:38:01 pm
Oh. I kept looking for the turn it was originally posted in. Silly me.

Anyways, I think that "drop-pods" (things you stick people into) as cannon ammo would be neat. Oh, and as a suggestion for 3D: Could you have each ship's position just be represented as triple coordinates, and each ship's direction as a similar velocity?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 18, 2013, 04:57:55 pm
GreatWyrm, I was thinking we could also turn (while going at this speed) the ship, and begin tailing them immediately after we fire our cannons. What do you think?

Also, I don't think your gun reaches that far. It's actually probably really close range.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 18, 2013, 05:02:23 pm
I'd like a bit of a better idea of what you have in mind, but it sounds pretty good.

I'm not sure, we'd only be two or three tiles away. How big are tiles, anyways?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: DaveTheGrave on July 18, 2013, 05:04:50 pm
What's the time frame on turns going by?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 18, 2013, 05:07:45 pm
I believe the tiles are more or less abstract for now.

And my idea is simply that with us behind them, our machine gun will hit them, while they won't be able to hit us with anything.
Suggestion! Poison Gas Barrels to throw behind ship if tailed. And we will probably be farther away then we are now regardless of what we do.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 18, 2013, 05:09:18 pm
Hm...if you want a little extra work to do, remote-controlled or homing drones packed with explosives would be fun.

Incidentally, piecewise, this has had me imagining some stuff in the back of my head. I'd be willing to collaborate with you on the advanced rules.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dansmithers on July 18, 2013, 05:26:55 pm
Personally, I want Jetpacks.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Powder Miner on July 18, 2013, 05:39:39 pm
A sabotage weapon would be nice.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Cheesecake on July 18, 2013, 05:56:53 pm
Sloan-RED

Keep on co-piloting. Nvm.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 18, 2013, 05:57:35 pm
Is it possible to manually turn the lodestones further than normally possible?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: draco1234 on July 18, 2013, 06:08:13 pm
Red - Danath

So, what are we doing, movement wise? 

Get up on deck, and get ready to jump across if an opportunity presents itself.  If it doesn't, man one of the machine guns and shoot at something.

Edit:  More importantly, WHO IS FIRING THE CANNONS?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 18, 2013, 06:09:46 pm
((We're not getting into boarding range. Also, Sloan should probably be helping with the cannons, not just chilling out on the cockpit.))
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Cheesecake on July 18, 2013, 06:10:45 pm
Well, I'll just fire the cannons I guess.

Aiming and firing cannons require DEX instead of STR right?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 18, 2013, 06:11:08 pm
I could help out with the cannons, but I have a very busy gunshoot schedule to attend to.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 18, 2013, 06:16:52 pm
((Nah, you sit tight with the your machine gun. I think me and Sloan can manage it.

Cheesecake: I would help if you crossed out the action you are not going to do. And yes, it is Dex.))
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 18, 2013, 06:17:47 pm
Is it possible to manually turn the lodestones further than normally possible?
Could be, for faster turns, but doing so would cause damage to the ship itself. I track the health of the sections, so it would weaken them to damage later.

-Airskiffs. For skirmishing and boarding attempts.
-A 360 degree deck gun on top of the cockpit, similar to the larger gun on a submarine.
-More ammo types for different guns. As an example, grapeshot shells, and disruption shells.
The fighters would come in different types, so boarding skiffs are possible.
Different kinds of mounted guns are definitely in there. The only reason these guns have the limit is to force maneuvering and other things.
Different ammo types work well too.

Oh. I kept looking for the turn it was originally posted in. Silly me.

Anyways, I think that "drop-pods" (things you stick people into) as cannon ammo would be neat. Oh, and as a suggestion for 3D: Could you have each ship's position just be represented as triple coordinates, and each ship's direction as a similar velocity?
Human cannon ammo is possible but..well it would have a high tendency to kill it's riders.

I'd like a bit of a better idea of what you have in mind, but it sounds pretty good.

I'm not sure, we'd only be two or three tiles away. How big are tiles, anyways?
Like DF it is Unspecific, but assume your pistol would only work on the tile your in and maybe the  tiles directly adjacent.

Hm...if you want a little extra work to do, remote-controlled or homing drones packed with explosives would be fun.

Incidentally, piecewise, this has had me imagining some stuff in the back of my head. I'd be willing to collaborate with you on the advanced rules.
Trying to keep this semi-steampunk/alternate WWI style, mostly because just spending all your money on 50 drones is probably effective but very boring. I want mid air machine gun battles, cannons firing, men fighting on the decks of enemy vessels. You know, that sort of thing.

If you have ideas, feel free to pm me. I may or may not use them, at least in their entirely or original form, but I'm always open for suggestions.

What's the time frame on turns going by?
unspecific, really, for the sake of not slowing everything down or forcing some actions to be unreasonably fast. If it seems like it would take a long time though, I'll split it across turns.

Personally, I want Jetpacks.
Jump pack, maybe, for short flights, but nothing long range. Should be fairly risky too. Jetpacks are kinda outside the range of the setting I had in mind, but maybe something steamboy-ish.

A sabotage weapon would be nice.
Not really sure what you mean. Something more specific?

Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Powder Miner on July 18, 2013, 06:24:45 pm
Something I could use when boarding to deal damage to the enemy ship.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 18, 2013, 06:25:51 pm
Edit:  More importantly, WHO IS FIRING THE CANNONS?[/b]
I could fire the cannons, but I'm busy at the helm.

Anyways, I think that "drop-pods" (things you stick people into) as cannon ammo would be neat. Oh, and as a suggestion for 3D: Could you have each ship's position just be represented as triple coordinates, and each ship's direction as a similar velocity?
Human cannon ammo is possible but..well it would have a high tendency to kill it's riders.
Not with proper cushioning! Or some other stuff.

Quote
Trying to keep this semi-steampunk/alternate WWI style, mostly because just spending all your money on 50 drones is probably effective but very boring. I want mid air machine gun battles, cannons firing, men fighting on the decks of enemy vessels. You know, that sort of thing.
Neat.

Quote
If you have ideas, feel free to pm me. I may or may not use them, at least in their entirely or original form, but I'm always open for suggestions.
Let me know what you need ideas for.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 18, 2013, 06:30:18 pm
If this is WW1, can we get some bolt action rifles? In addition, does that mean we could have some biplanes to dogfight in?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 18, 2013, 06:30:57 pm
If this is WW1, can we get some bolt action rifles? In addition, does that mean we could have some biplanes to dogfight in?
((Facepalm))
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 18, 2013, 06:38:54 pm
If this is WW1, can we get some bolt action rifles? In addition, does that mean we could have some biplanes to dogfight in?
((Facepalm))
:P
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: mastahcheese on July 18, 2013, 08:18:17 pm
I was actually considering making an airship based combat game myself, but I think Piecewise is by far better at this sort of thing.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: draco1234 on July 18, 2013, 08:31:49 pm
Two quick questions.  Are the decks metal plated as well? Or can we throw molotovs onto the top and set it on fire?  Also, does throwing molotovs use strength or dexterity?  Or both?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 18, 2013, 08:46:02 pm
Two quick questions.  Are the decks metal plated as well? Or can we throw molotovs onto the top and set it on fire?  Also, does throwing molotovs use strength or dexterity?  Or both?
Decks are wood. These things are tinderboxes really. And throw depends on stuff. Probably str for just lobbing at a large thing; dex thrown in there for precision  aiming.

Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 18, 2013, 08:47:22 pm
If the deck is wood, could I shoot through it into the lower regions of the ship?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 18, 2013, 09:04:20 pm
If the deck is wood, could I shoot through it into the lower regions of the ship?
Next round, when you can fly over, sure. Right now...no. Working on underhanging guns specifically for such things.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Fr0stByt3 on July 18, 2013, 10:06:13 pm
PTW
Oh HELL YES! This is gonna be awesome!
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 18, 2013, 10:11:01 pm
"Oi!  Line me up a shot!"

Toastarrr:  Get to the red-facing cannons and prepare to fire when able!  Aim for their guns.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 19, 2013, 02:27:48 am
...I honestly did not expect to be able to do all three actions in one turn. I think we should limit acceleration/deceleration to a single level per turn (so it is possible to go 0-1-2-3, but no 0-3).

Also, how can reds hit us with machineguns? We're not even close to three tiles needed for them to hit us.

Also x2, what's the cannon range? I can't find it anywhere.

Also x3, what are the numbers next to the rolls? And how does piloting skill influence, well, piloting?

Also x4, please add ship customization to the finished version. ^_^

Vowel: facepalm. Turn right. Put engines down to 2. Sing inspiring songs, forgetting I have 0 in singing.

And Toaster, don't you mean rightside cannons?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 19, 2013, 02:42:33 am
Answers:

Also #1: Machine guns have unlimited range. I don't know where you got the three tiles from, but we've been shooting at you fromturn 1.

Also #2: Unlimited, but harder to hit at long distances.

Also #3: "T" stands for target. It is how many successes to need to succeed. The next thing stands for dice available (stats+skills). The next thing stands for how many successes you rolled.

Also #4: It was already confirmed.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Person on July 19, 2013, 05:30:19 am
How about mortar weapons on the deck as an alternative/in addition to machine guns? Seems theme appropriate.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 19, 2013, 08:02:37 am
Herp and derp.  It's easy to mix up port and starrrboard.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Caellath on July 19, 2013, 08:20:44 am
((The flu has apparently decided to divorce from me and I am catching up on all I've missed. I accept the commentator spot if that is still open.))
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: draco1234 on July 19, 2013, 08:45:14 am
Red

As for our movement, I'd advise we move 45 degrees right and three forward, as we will have a perfect shot to their back, and they wont be able to hit us with anything.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 19, 2013, 09:14:29 am
Excellent idea! Now where's my action?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: draco1234 on July 19, 2013, 09:29:56 am
Uh, GreatWyrmGold...  In your action you said turn left, not right.  That would take us even further away :S
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 19, 2013, 10:02:26 am
It looks left on the map!
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 19, 2013, 11:21:20 am
...I get a strong feeling that our movement in this game will be limited to circling around each other, since turning away from the enemy would be catastrophic and turning to the enemy will prompt the same reaction from him.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: draco1234 on July 19, 2013, 11:26:11 am
Well, that will probably be our movement until either side gets injured or decides to pull an awesome manoeuvre.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 19, 2013, 11:33:59 am
Which reminds me of an idea I had: Different types of airships.

Balloons, for instance, would be smaller but more easily moved. I think they'd need some engines or something, as well as guns of course, but the concept should work. They'd likely be cheap due to not needing expensive components like lodestones, but would be slow (as noted) and fragile due to the unprotected envelope.
To go more with the WWI idea, little biplane fighters that could be launched off the decks of the big airships would be neat. They'd be in between balloons and airships in maneuverability (maybe up to 90 degrees of turns per turn?) and faster than either, but they can't hover and don't have more than one gun. They'd also be limited to one or maybe two crewmembers, and of course no cannons. Oh, and they'd go down with a strong hit. Good for bigger airships.
A modification of the drop-pod idea might be boarding rockets, which would have space for a pilot and a few "marines". Speed comparable to or greater than the planes but minimal maneuverability, probably needing to roll to turn 45 degrees.

Of course, some of these might need to wait until we had enough players to have massive battlestars fighting small fleets or something like that.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 19, 2013, 02:41:56 pm
...I get a strong feeling that our movement in this game will be limited to circling around each other, since turning away from the enemy would be catastrophic and turning to the enemy will prompt the same reaction from him.

Once ships start having different arrangements of guns, and guns on swivel mounts, things will get more interesting.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 19, 2013, 03:16:46 pm
Suggestion to all pilots! We use coordinates instead of left/right!


Red

As for our movement, I'd advise we move 45 degrees right and three forward, as we will have a perfect shot to their back, and they wont be able to hit us with anything.
That's kind of what I have been saying to GreatWyrm. I don't know why he didn't do it before.

Also, Baloons suck in combat. The only reason for their existance, is to gain range and view for the ground troops. Once you have other (stable) aircraft, there is no reason to have them.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: draco1234 on July 19, 2013, 06:03:31 pm
An idea for customisation would be reinforced plates.  So for example you could add reinforced plates to the left side, meaning that the successes of anyone shooting it are one less (so they need one more success to do the same thing) but to make up for this, you need one more success than normal when piloting due to the increased weight.  You could also do the opposite and put lighter armour on certain sides, meaning you are weaker on that side, but it's easier to fly.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 19, 2013, 07:24:46 pm
Red

As for our movement, I'd advise we move 45 degrees right and three forward, as we will have a perfect shot to their back, and they wont be able to hit us with anything.
That's kind of what I have been saying to GreatWyrm. I don't know why he didn't do it before.
I wasn't sure what you meant.

Quote
Also, Baloons suck in combat. The only reason for their existance, is to gain range and view for the ground troops. Once you have other (stable) aircraft, there is no reason to have them.
Airships, let alone wooden ones, aren't exactly practical either...besides, the baloons would be more support craft.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 19, 2013, 07:48:59 pm
RED

You know what that means, don't you?

Show them how DAKKA really works! Clear the deck!
[T4.R12.S3]
You spray machine gun fire like a crazy man, humming the "Ride of the Valkyries". Somehow, you manage to nearly every shot, sweeping streams of rounds a dozen feet over the deck and worthlessly pinging them off the Blue ship's metal hull. You keep firing, even as the shells tear into your ship and your cannons return fire.

((I understand that this tactic would work with the game mechanics. I'm just saying that the above-mentioned tactic is stupid and really really dangerous. Sorry about that, and I don't usually call you out like that. However, it's also important to not give people wrong ideas about what would work, and what wouldn't. i.e.: The problem of modern entertainment.

By the way, my secret idea to tie ropes to us and swing into their ship, igniting everything, will have to be discarded because if the ships are moving, we won't really have enough time to do anything.))

Red Team
Name: Vlad

Vlad hands out several (3 if I have enough) molotovs to everyone. He then takes a position at the cannons, and will help aim anybody who decided to fire them. He will not fire the cannons if he is the only one there.

Cheat Sheet
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

You run to the hatch up and pull yourself up. Danath is there, pacing back and forth, looking anxious. You hand him a few unlit moltovs as you pass by and are half way up the stairs when the first shell hits. You find yourself on your stomach, halfway up the stairs, covered in splinters of wood and metal. You look back to see Danath trying to pull himself up, blood covering his face. You turn and run up to the deck, but dive to the ground as a second round slams into the cockpit ahead of you.

Red - Danath

So, what are we doing, movement wise? 

If we are getting into cannon range, find somewhere secure to hide behind until we get close, preferably close to the cannons so I can reload them.

If we are getting into boarding range, get up on deck, ready to jump across.

Edit:  More importantly, WHO IS FIRING THE CANNONS?

You pace back and forth, wanting something to do. You can load shells, you can fight, but you can't fire these cannons. You're grinding your teeth with frustration at your uselessness when Vlad comes up. He hands three moltovs, tells you to be careful with them. You nod, and turn to look back as he walks away. The Blue ship is there, cannons aligned with you. You try to duck, dodge away, but you're not fast enough.

The shell hits the right forward gun, almost drives straight down the barrel but is a little too high. Instead it hits and tears half way down the length of the gun and rips it from it's housing, taking a fairly large chunk of deck with it. You end up against the left wall, vision blurry, ears ringing, blood on your face. You wipe your your eyes and cringe as you try to stand up. You've got your fair share of gashes, but the worst is a 4 inch shard of metal embedded in your shin. As you consider whether or not you should pull it out, Sloan runs by and fires one of the remaining right cannons.

Now you've got something to load.


Well, I'll just fire the cannons I guess.

Aiming and firing cannons require DEX instead of STR right?
You leave the cockpit, sliding down the ladder and running out on deck. You're halfway to the stairs when the first shell hits the cannon deck and the entire ship shudders. You nearly lose your footing but you keep going. You pass Vlad and are halfway down when the next shell, the one that hits the cockpit, lands.

You jump over the wreckage of the forward right cannon and take up position at the middle one.
[T4. R6. S2]
You fire, the recoil of the gun pushing you back despite its bindings to the deck. You don't see it hit; you don't see the shell hit the blue ship. You must have missed. You move to the next gun.
[T4. R6. S3.]
Another miss. You pound your fists on the cannon.


Oh, you crazy mask guy.

Turn right and then fly forward, continuing at Speed 3 and trying to get the enemy ship in our cannons' sights. At the closest point of our trajectories this turn, fire a shot at any crewmembers I can see.

Would it be too much to ask for a link to the map at the bottom of each turn? I keep forgetting where it is.
[T2. R9. S4]
You turn the helm right, keep the speed at three, giving chase. The Blue ship turns too, and for a second, it's guns get a clean shot at you. The first hits the gun deck; ship lists  to the side a bit but you keep it on target. The second round catches the side of the cockpit and sets the entire room ringing. The right side wall bows in, the wood cracking as the metal armor breaks away.


BLUE



"Oi!  Line me up a shot!"
Toastarrr:  Get to the red-facing cannons and prepare to fire when able!  Aim for their guns.
You run down to the cannon level  and grab the first cannon on the right. You aim down the barrel at the cannons of the red ship.
[T3.R10.S6]
You watch your shot hiss through the air, a black ball arcing across the blue until it silently slips into the cannon port on the side of the red ship, taking one of the cannons with it.

"Gotcha."

Steven,Blue
change mind and move to the middle right cannon, If there is a possible line of fire on the cockpit, attempt to shoot said cannon at said enemy cockpit.
As Toaster takes up position on the first right gun, you take the middle cannon, aiming for the cockpit.
[T3.R7.S6]
You grit your teeth as the cannon fires and run to the open cannon port to watch it fly. The shell hits dead center on the side of the red cockpit.
"HA!"

FINE THEN!
Strap some explosive shells together, add fuse. If possible, construct catapult.
[T3. R3. S1]
You can't figure out how tape works. You spend the better part of several minutes trying everything from speaking to it in Chinese to wearing it as a hat. Nothing seems to work.

Find cover when the deck gets machine-gunned; but once again, if the enemy ship comes close enough, board 'em.
You run and hide behind the cockpit tower as machine gun fire screams over the deck. You press your back against the wall and feel your teeth shake as the ships cannon's fire.



...I honestly did not expect to be able to do all three actions in one turn. I think we should limit acceleration/deceleration to a single level per turn (so it is possible to go 0-1-2-3, but no 0-3).

Also, how can reds hit us with machineguns? We're not even close to three tiles needed for them to hit us.

Also x2, what's the cannon range? I can't find it anywhere.

Also x3, what are the numbers next to the rolls? And how does piloting skill influence, well, piloting?

Also x4, please add ship customization to the finished version. ^_^

Vowel: facepalm. Turn right. Put engines down to 2. Sing inspiring songs, forgetting I have 0 in singing.

And Toaster, don't you mean rightside cannons?
[T2. R4. S3]
You pull the ship right and set the engines to 2. You whistle a sky shanty while the ship's cannons fire.

"What do we do with a drunken airman? What do we do with a drunken airman? What do we do with a drunken airman EEEEAAAARRRLY in the morning!"






(You guys should probably use north, south, east,west for the directions, to have something absolute.)



Blue, the underdogs, have come back with a stunning double hit, ruining one of Red's cannon's and stripping the armor on the right side of their cockpit. That pilot had better watch out; that wood skeleton isn't gonna protect him from another shell or machine gun fire. What do you think Cael, is Red gonna run for it and lick their wounds or are we gonna see an attempt at immediate retaliation?



Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 19, 2013, 07:52:37 pm
Keep them off the guns!

Sometimes my existence is so simple. Shoot things, then shoot more things. Don't worry about trying to outmanoeuvre, just keep shooting.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 19, 2013, 08:05:19 pm
((Okay, I call shenanigans. The Blues had to turn 45 degrees in order to fire at us. That is supposed to take up an entire turn. I can accept that they were able to fire at us for the purpose of keeping this turn-based, even if real-time they would not have been able to. But at the same time, we didn't need to turn as we were passing them. Exactly how were they able to fire first?!
By the way, another suggestion. When we are turning and moving, it would be neat if our movement path was an arc, not turn and then move.

Also, it's kind of hard to use W/E/N/S when turning. If we were squares, sure, but not as ships.))



Red Team

Name: Vlad

Perhaps we should begin turning a different direction now, that one of our sides is badly damaged. That way we will be able to fight on equal footing again.

Check if Danath is okay. Administer care. (I hope my intelligence will help here.)

Also, if we get another turn before tomorrow night, Remuthra can take charge of my character.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 19, 2013, 08:28:57 pm
"Dammit! Why didn't you idiots fire the cannons?!?"
Shout at the crew. Slow down to Speed 2 and turn right more. I'd be going west at that point. Prepare to dodge cannonfire by leaping down the ladder if anything shoots at me somehow.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Caellath on July 19, 2013, 08:29:18 pm
Skybooth - Cael the Commentator

"I am not sure Team Blue actually knew they'd get such an opportunity so soon or if they saddled Lady Luck and called her their property, but the results are still looking good, Wise.

Judging by their reactions, I believe that after the mandatory moments of flailing, the Red Team will try a very likely clumsy comeback - with their trigger happy machine gun sniper being at a good spot to try and actually hit something now that the enemy's in range, though I agree their pilot may soon become less of a man after losing several body parts due to his unprotected position. "
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 19, 2013, 08:42:34 pm

((Okay, I call shenanigans. The Blues had to turn 45 degrees in order to fire at us. That is supposed to take up an entire turn. I can accept that they were able to fire at us for the purpose of keeping this turn-based, even if real-time they would not have been able to. But at the same time, we didn't need to turn as we were passing them. Exactly how were they able to fire first?!
By the way, another suggestion. When we are turning and moving, it would be neat if our movement path was an arc, not turn and then move.

Also, it's kind of hard to use W/E/N/S when turning. If we were squares, sure, but not as ships.))



Red Team

Name: Vlad

Perhaps we should begin turning a different direction now, that one of our sides is badly damaged. That way we will be able to fight on equal footing again.

Check if Danath is okay. Administer care. (I hope my intelligence will help here.)

Also, if we get another turn before tomorrow night, Remuthra can take charge of my character.

Here are the lines where they took the shots. Blue line up first. Doesn't really matter though, even if Red had fired first, the result would have been the same.
(http://i.imgur.com/fgvs1Qc.png)
NWES for turning. Turn north. Turn south. etc.
Also, Curves don't really work for grids,unless you're moving lots of squares at a time. The fact that you only move 45 degrees at a time is to make it so that the ship has turning circles. Such as:
(http://i.imgur.com/uiRdu4x.png)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 19, 2013, 08:43:12 pm
((Okay, I call shenanigans. The Blues had to turn 45 degrees in order to fire at us. That is supposed to take up an entire turn. I can accept that they were able to fire at us for the purpose of keeping this turn-based, even if real-time they would not have been able to. But at the same time, we didn't need to turn as we were passing them. Exactly how were they able to fire first?!

I don't claim to fully understand everything, but what turns the ship and what propels the ship are two entirely different systems.  One can be operated independently of the other, so I assume the hard turn was swung while the ship was already in motion, giving a quick shot at the ship.



"Arr har har!  Come back and have at ye!

Toastarrr:  Help reload shells!  If there's any way in hell I can get a shot off from a cannon, take it instead!
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Cheesecake on July 19, 2013, 08:46:48 pm
SLOAN

MORE DAKKA! MORE BOOM! FIRE! FIRE!
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 19, 2013, 09:44:43 pm
Skybooth - Cael the Commentator

"I am not sure Team Blue actually knew they'd get such an opportunity so soon or if they saddled Lady Luck and called her their property, but the results are still looking good, Wise.

Judging by their reactions, I believe that after the mandatory moments of flailing, the Red Team will try a very likely clumsy comeback - with their trigger happy machine gun sniper being at a good spot to try and actually hit something now that the enemy's in range, though I agree their pilot may soon become less of a man after losing several body parts due to his unprotected position. "

"Oh, it appears the #3 Red, Vlad, is trying to call a foul on physics. We'll get a  referee in there just as soon as the shooting stops."

"You know Cael, I think that cannon shot from the blue ship should actually have hit that cockpit glass instead of the side. Maybe Vlad is on to something..."


(yeah, I actually should have had that hit the glass, I mixed up the angles for that shot. My bad. Reds good fortune.)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 19, 2013, 09:47:37 pm
((I'm not worried at the moment. They're not going to be at an angle to shoot at us juust yet...))
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Caellath on July 19, 2013, 09:56:18 pm
"Oh, it appears the #3 Red, Vlad, is trying to call a foul on physics. We'll get a  referee in there just as soon as the shooting stops."

"I believe Physics hates us all and shows it through the little things, Wise. What I know is that when the guns resume roaring, we'll get an insight on human anatomy via bloody chunks unless everyone begins shooting like seizure-riddled labyrinthitic lab rats."
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 19, 2013, 10:00:04 pm
PW:  I'm curious about the roll system- does exceeding the required number of successes increase the success you get?  I think it does, from a couple things I've seen, but I just want to ask to be sure.


Too bad that cannon shot of mine wasn't explosive.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 19, 2013, 10:52:43 pm
"Oh, it appears the #3 Red, Vlad, is trying to call a foul on physics. We'll get a  referee in there just as soon as the shooting stops."

"I believe Physics hates us all and shows it through the little things, Wise. What I know is that when the guns resume roaring, we'll get an insight on human anatomy via bloody chunks unless everyone begins shooting like seizure-riddled labyrinthitic lab rats."

"Anything is possible Cael. Pass the bottle, good buddy."

PW:  I'm curious about the roll system- does exceeding the required number of successes increase the success you get?  I think it does, from a couple things I've seen, but I just want to ask to be sure.


Too bad that cannon shot of mine wasn't explosive.
The rolls do have some degree of gray area around their targets. Going over by a lot will be better then just hitting it, going under by just a little might have a lesser effect.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Powder Miner on July 19, 2013, 10:57:49 pm
Chance way missed, Damien instead books it down to Engineering, to make sue things are going well.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dansmithers on July 19, 2013, 11:18:07 pm
Tell the captain to ram, ready my saber.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Caellath on July 19, 2013, 11:22:56 pm
"Anything is possible Cael. Pass the bottle, good buddy."

"Here. How drunk can you actually get? Your liver should have probably committed suicide by now."
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: draco1234 on July 20, 2013, 03:10:48 am
Red- Danath

Wait as Vlad tries to fix my leg.  Help if possible.  Once that's done, reload the cannons, ready to fire again.

Also Cheesecake, I would advise specifying a target, like the engines or the back of the cockpit, not just boom boom :S
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: DaveTheGrave on July 20, 2013, 03:25:30 am
Steven,Blue

Reminisce in the awesome shot while reloading the cannon.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 20, 2013, 05:17:56 am
You jump over the wreckage of the forward right cannon and take up position at the middle one.
[T4. R6. S2]
You fire, the recoil of the gun pushing you back despite its bindings to the deck. You don't see it hit; you don't see the shell hit the blue ship. You must have missed. You move to the next gun.
[T4. R6. S3.]
Another miss. You pound your fists on the cannon.
Uhhh. Why did he shoot twice?

Also, what about my suggestion about limiting speed change to a single level per turn?

Vowel: realize the effect of my singing on morale. Try to take out another point out of singing (for a total of -1) and put it into piloting. Also, turn left aka NW and speed up to 3.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 20, 2013, 06:53:27 am
"I am not ramming, and if I wanted to I couldn't!"
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 20, 2013, 01:02:53 pm
You jump over the wreckage of the forward right cannon and take up position at the middle one.
[T4. R6. S2]
You fire, the recoil of the gun pushing you back despite its bindings to the deck. You don't see it hit; you don't see the shell hit the blue ship. You must have missed. You move to the next gun.
[T4. R6. S3.]
Another miss. You pound your fists on the cannon.
Uhhh. Why did he shoot twice?

Because you can shoot all three guns on a side in one single turn.  Two blueites said they'd fire the cannon, so we each took one loaded gun and shot up Red.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 20, 2013, 03:35:09 pm
RED
Keep them off the guns!

Sometimes my existence is so simple. Shoot things, then shoot more things. Don't worry about trying to outmanoeuvre, just keep shooting.

You try to turn the gun to face the other ship but it won't reach that far. You spend the next several seconds banging away uselessly, trying to turn the gun farther then it's designed to.

"COME ON, CAP' YOU TOOK THEM OUT OF DAKKA RANGE!"

((Okay, I call shenanigans. The Blues had to turn 45 degrees in order to fire at us. That is supposed to take up an entire turn. I can accept that they were able to fire at us for the purpose of keeping this turn-based, even if real-time they would not have been able to. But at the same time, we didn't need to turn as we were passing them. Exactly how were they able to fire first?!
By the way, another suggestion. When we are turning and moving, it would be neat if our movement path was an arc, not turn and then move.

Also, it's kind of hard to use W/E/N/S when turning. If we were squares, sure, but not as ships.))



Red Team

Name: Vlad

Perhaps we should begin turning a different direction now, that one of our sides is badly damaged. That way we will be able to fight on equal footing again.

Check if Danath is okay. Administer care. (I hope my intelligence will help here.)

Also, if we get another turn before tomorrow night, Remuthra can take charge of my character.

You scramble back down the stairs and over to Danath, who is still laying against the wall.
[T4. R6. S4]
You pull the shrapnel from his leg and bandage the wound shut with some cloth torn from your shirt. It looks like it will hold and should stop the bleeding.

SLOAN

MORE DAKKA! MORE BOOM! FIRE! FIRE!
You watch as the Blue ship drifts away. It gets close, but you can't get a line of fire on the blasted thing! GOD DAMN IT ALL, YOU MUST HAVE BLOOD! YOU MUST HAVE DEATH! BLUE MUST BURN!

Red- Danath

Wait as Vlad tries to fix my leg.  Help if possible.  Once that's done, reload the cannons, ready to fire again.

Also Cheesecake, I would advise specifying a target, like the engines or the back of the cockpit, not just boom boom :S

Vlad helps you to your feet and you immediately begin loading the cannons again.
[R9. S4]
You reload the two available cannons, carrying one shell with each hand. The ship is fully loaded again, ready to fire.



"Dammit! Why didn't you idiots fire the cannons?!?"
Shout at the crew. Slow down to Speed 2 and turn right more. I'd be going west at that point. Prepare to dodge cannonfire by leaping down the ladder if anything shoots at me somehow.
[T2. R9. S4]
You adjust the throttle and the ship's heading, constantly ready to dive head first down that ladder. Better maimed then dead.


BLUE

((Okay, I call shenanigans. The Blues had to turn 45 degrees in order to fire at us. That is supposed to take up an entire turn. I can accept that they were able to fire at us for the purpose of keeping this turn-based, even if real-time they would not have been able to. But at the same time, we didn't need to turn as we were passing them. Exactly how were they able to fire first?!

I don't claim to fully understand everything, but what turns the ship and what propels the ship are two entirely different systems.  One can be operated independently of the other, so I assume the hard turn was swung while the ship was already in motion, giving a quick shot at the ship.



"Arr har har!  Come back and have at ye!

Toastarrr:  Help reload shells!  If there's any way in hell I can get a shot off from a cannon, take it instead!
[R2. S2]
An opportunity to shoot never presents itself, but you manage to get a single shell loaded in the mean time. You return to your position at the cannon afterwards.


Steven,Blue

Reminisce in the awesome shot while reloading the cannon.
[R4. S1]
You get the shell out of the ammo dump and roll it over to the cannon, but can't manage to lift it up and into the barrel. You eventually set it back down and spend a few moments resting and thinking back to the shot you made. God, that was a good goddamn shot. You hope someone was standing behind that cannon. You hope it freaking crushed them.

Tell the captain to ram, ready my saber.

You run up to the cockpit and begin demanding that the captain "Prepare for ramming speed.", insinuating that if he didn't he was "A spineless sack of baby hearts without the courage required of a captain."

Chance way missed, Damien instead books it down to Engineering, to make sue things are going well.
You climb your way down to the third deck and look around. Everything seems to be running smoothly; the engine is running hot enough to turn the entire lower deck into a steamy, 120 degree mechanical hell hole; but at speeds like these you have to expect such things.


You jump over the wreckage of the forward right cannon and take up position at the middle one.
[T4. R6. S2]
You fire, the recoil of the gun pushing you back despite its bindings to the deck. You don't see it hit; you don't see the shell hit the blue ship. You must have missed. You move to the next gun.
[T4. R6. S3.]
Another miss. You pound your fists on the cannon.
Uhhh. Why did he shoot twice?

Also, what about my suggestion about limiting speed change to a single level per turn?

Vowel: realize the effect of my singing on morale. Try to take out another point out of singing (for a total of -1) and put it into piloting. Also, turn left aka NW and speed up to 3.
[t2 R4 S3]
You change heading and keep singing, drowning out the threats from the man beside you.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 20, 2013, 03:44:27 pm
Changelog:

From now on, speed changes by 1 per turn regardless of your engine setting. ie, crank your engine from 0 to 3 and it will take 3 turns to reach top speed. Drop it from 3 to 0 and it will take three turns to stop.

Dev progress:
Still working on ship stuff, thinking of new weapons and items for the ship and players. It's gonna work like this, when it comes to the next round:

1.Team select: 5 people on each team.
2. Character stats: Those 5 people then stat their characters (To prevent whole teams full of pilots etc.)
3. Design your ship: Currently this is a sort of paper doll format. You have a blank ship of 3 decks and a folder full of parts and weapons to buy and then to place in however you like (Following a few rules).
4. Arena is randomly selected: Next turn will have arenas with actual stuff in them. Obstacles and environmental stuff.
5. FIGHT


More info on long term goals later.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 20, 2013, 03:58:48 pm
How about someone help me finish loading?  Gotta be ready for broadsides and all that.  Remember- their right side is weaker.


Toastarrr:  Keep on loading standard shells.  Take a shot if it presents itself.


"Arrr, these be heavy, cap'n!"
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 20, 2013, 04:01:45 pm
They're within dakka range! Commence dakka!
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: DaveTheGrave on July 20, 2013, 04:04:35 pm
Steven, Blue

Scream "TURN LEYFT" while reloading the canon
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: draco1234 on July 20, 2013, 04:23:14 pm
Red - Danath

Hide somewhere nice and safe until the cannons need to be loaded again.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Powder Miner on July 20, 2013, 05:02:07 pm
Stay just outside engineering to prevent issues with the heat and my burnable flesh, but if I hear things breaking, go back inside.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 20, 2013, 09:32:06 pm
Hm. This stuff is hard when I don't have any idea what the opponent is doing.

Maintain speed 2 and turning right, preparing to bail down the ladder if they shoot at me.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 20, 2013, 09:45:45 pm
((Yay for effective medicine.))

Any change for a switch from squares to measurements? Or hexes?

Also, I think it would be better if we did not know what the other team was doing, only what their ship was doing. You know, keep the tactics secret, create a suspense of what is really happening on their ship. Maybe have each side their own secret topic, and only post the things known to everyone here? And then when the battle is done we could reveal these secret topics.


Red: Vlad

Also, GreatWyrm, we really should continue turning while keeping our speed at two. They won't be able to shoot us, and we'll not be giving up our positioning advantage. I also seem to be bad at explaining to him my ideas. Can somebody (Remuthra?) rephrase it better maybe?

Finish handing out molotovs. Then hide on the Upper Desk. Help Pilate with the controls if he needs it

Cheat Sheet
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 20, 2013, 09:51:18 pm
Alright.

Going faster doesn't actually help us here. We want to outmanoeuvre the enemy, so we want to match their pace and keep them from shooting us while we try to line up shots on them. Two speed gives us sharper turning, which means we can match their turn and keep them from heading us off.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dansmithers on July 20, 2013, 10:59:27 pm
How far can I jump?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 20, 2013, 11:00:44 pm
Which team are you on, again?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dansmithers on July 20, 2013, 11:04:41 pm
Which team are you on, again?
BLU.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 20, 2013, 11:05:55 pm
If he jumps, can I shoot him with my pistols as he's flying?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dansmithers on July 20, 2013, 11:06:28 pm
If he jumps, can I shoot him with my pistols as he's flying?
If I jump, can I throw my saber at him?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 20, 2013, 11:09:08 pm
If he jumps, can I shoot him with my pistols as he's flying?
If I jump, can I throw my saber at him?
Um, guys. I'm pretty sure that you can't jump from one ship to the other unless they are un adjacent squares. Our ships are probably hundreds of meters apart right now.

Also, thanks, Remu. (if it's fine to call you that.)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dansmithers on July 20, 2013, 11:10:32 pm
Rule Of Cool. (Also RTD Physics)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 20, 2013, 11:12:16 pm
Also, thanks, Remu. (if it's fine to call you that.)
Yeah, it's fine. It's kind of hard for some people to spell, honestly.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 20, 2013, 11:21:00 pm
Rule Of Cool. (Also RTD Physics)
Doesn't work with Piecewise. Although he usually asks you if you reeeaaaly want to do it. And the death descriptions are pretty funny.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 20, 2013, 11:27:32 pm
Any change for a switch from squares to measurements? Or hexes?

Also, I think it would be better if we did not know what the other team was doing, only what their ship was doing. You know, keep the tactics secret, create a suspense of what is really happening on their ship. Maybe have each side their own secret topic, and only post the things known to everyone here? And then when the battle is done we could reveal these secret topics.

Maybe to hexes, if I can figure out a way to do that well. I realize that hard 45 degree turns may be a bit weird, and that some naval wargames- wargames in general- use measurements and protractors and other such things, but to be completely honest, I would prefer to abstract some things. Tracking 10 directions of movement and rotation through a 3d space and the interactions of different weapons and systems plus ship damage and simplified momentum is a pretty good in my mind. What I lack in perfect simulation I hope to make up with other aspects.

Rule Of Cool. (Also RTD Physics)
Leaping to one thats adjacent is already kind of Rule of Cool, leaping any farther isn't gonna happen. Least not till we get the steam jet packs or Spring-heeled Jack boots in... But yeah, if you had two guys on two decks they could totally leap across to the opposite deck, slashing at each other mid-flight and then turn and shoot at each other the moment after they land. Thats a thing that can happen.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dansmithers on July 20, 2013, 11:30:49 pm
Fashion hang glider.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 20, 2013, 11:31:50 pm
Fashion hang glider.
If within turning range, dakka. If not, pistolsnipe him.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 20, 2013, 11:34:24 pm
What is the range on our pistols, since I just assumed it would be like 10m-30m, but apparently people left and right are trying to use them as sniper rifles?

Quote
Leaping to one thats adjacent is already kind of Rule of Cool, leaping any farther isn't gonna happen. Least not till we get the steam jet packs or Spring-heeled Jack boots in... But yeah, if you had two guys on two decks they could totally leap across to the opposite deck, slashing at each other mid-flight and then turn and shoot at each other the moment after they land. Thats a thing that can happen.
That reminds me of something... of something... of something... Oh yes! Minecarts!

Remember when Toady had a devlog in which a dwarf jumped out of the minecart onto the planks to fight with the goblin? That was pretty fun.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 20, 2013, 11:35:48 pm
I'm the most min-maxed for guns, so I'm obligated to try.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 21, 2013, 02:45:29 am
Aww, no fourth-wall-breaking minmaxing. I am disappoint.

Vowel: demote this sack of uselessless straight down the stairs and tell him to get to work. Also turn left aka west and slow down to 2.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 21, 2013, 07:16:55 am
Which team are you on, again?
BLU.
You can jump two, three tiles. Maybe more. Just give it a shot.

Oh, idea for the next game: Rifles. And maybe small, man-portable artillery like mortars or something.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 21, 2013, 07:21:20 am
Which team are you on, again?
BLU.
You can jump two, three tiles. Maybe more. Just give it a shot.
...
...
...???
...
Rule Of Cool. (Also RTD Physics)
Leaping to one thats adjacent is already kind of Rule of Cool, leaping any farther isn't gonna happen. Least not till we get the steam jet packs or Spring-heeled Jack boots in... But yeah, if you had two guys on two decks they could totally leap across to the opposite deck, slashing at each other mid-flight and then turn and shoot at each other the moment after they land. Thats a thing that can happen.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 21, 2013, 07:22:35 am
Why do you think I asked for Dan's team?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 21, 2013, 07:26:06 am
There's a subtle difference between subtly encouraging bad decisions and blatantly contradicting the words of our GM. Unless you were trying to be funny. In which case I suppose I just have a different sense of humor.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 21, 2013, 07:33:23 am
I was hoping that making it clear that this advice was given to him because he was a member of the opposing team, and encouraging him to do it, would clue him in.

And once you get the joke set up...you kinda want to complete it. Darn biological need for sleep...
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 21, 2013, 07:40:09 am
It was less of me worrying that you would fool Dansmithers, and more of me worrying whether you had at all read the previous page. And it also might have deluded somebody three months from now, who would be looking to join in and was skimming the threads. And then we'd have to explain to him that it was a joke. From three months ago. That we have all but forgotten about.

Generally, in my book, it is best to avoid jokes that have a potential to delude players about game mechanics. Unless you're playing Mao. But yeah, might have been funnier if Piecewise hadn't replied.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 21, 2013, 07:46:56 am
BTW, is several teams (or several ships per two teams) a possibility for the future game? I'd definitely like to see that.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 21, 2013, 07:49:31 am
It was less of me worrying that you would fool Dansmithers, and more of me worrying whether you had at all read the previous page.
Not only had I, I had guessed the answer last night.

Quote
And it also might have deluded somebody three months from now, who would be looking to join in and was skimming the threads. And then we'd have to explain to him that it was a joke. From three months ago. That we have all but forgotten about.
That seems an improbable situation for several reasons, such as "who would rely on this information," "this might well be addressed better in the new system," and "the GM told us the real answer already".

BTW, is several teams (or several ships per two teams) a possibility for the future game? I'd definitely like to see that.
Indeed. I'm considering starting something like that.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 21, 2013, 11:12:52 am
Quote
Larger teams, more ships?
Possible. 5 vs 5 crew, one on one ship will probably be the standard, however once everything is worked out I'll probably create the templates for larger ships that will hold larger crews, as well as multi-ship battles. Also possible are battles with only 5 people on each side but with NPC ships to fill out the ranks. I'm Cautious of including too many active players, just so I don't get overwhelmed by having to track 30 people over the maps.

In fact, it might be a good time to tell you guys what I'm thinking of for the finished product here.

Quote
A rough Idea of the finished game

I don't know if any of you have heard of the game "Hammerfight"; it's a game about helicopters fighting with swords and maces. It's as awesome as it sounds and I suggest you look into it if you haven't; but the reason I'm bringing it up is that it had an arena mode. You would fight opponents in various locales, earn money, buy new weapons and rise amongst the ranks until you're a glorious champion draped in flowing banners, heralds and the skulls of your opponents.

Thats pretty much what I want to do here.

It basically works out like this: When players create a character they're placed into the world with a set amount of money (the exact number is determined randomly, but there are upper and lower limits). From there they can do pretty much whatever they want. They can gamble on the airships, set up a surfa-scav shop and sell to other players, work for npc's or players, run an assassin's guild, etc. The big draw, however, would probably be to crew an airship.

To do this, players will form teams. These teams are like professional sports teams. They're more then just the five man crew of the ship; they're little corporations  that can include the crew, backup crews, maintenance men, non-fighting financial backers, etc. Player created teams can, with time, rise from a 5 man crew cobbling together a junker in one of the underhang slum hangers to a professional organization with several ships, living the good life in the cloudline estates.

What I'm trying to do is create a world and then allow the players to live in it and to try to advance and make their living however they like. Mechanically, this means that a good deal of the game will actually be without rolls, or with few rolls. The actual arena combat will be the most mechanically intensive part of the game, while a seperate thread will deal with life outside the arena. This way I can have, theoretically, pretty much as many players as want to join, but still not overwhelm myself with mechanical minutiae.






Speaking of Mechanical Minutiae, I've been thinking about the way we're gonna handle melee in this game. The idea goes like this.

There are three types of weapons, Strength based, Speed based, and Dex based. They have a sort of rock paper scissors relationship, where strength beats dex, dex beats speed and speed beats strength. Actually, beats is a bad word, "has an advantage over" is more accurate; a man with a dex weapon can still beat a str weapon if he's skilled, it's just harder.

When you actually get in a fight, it's handled like this; you chose a stance and then you take your dice pool and divide it into two, an attack pool and a defense pool. These pools can be divided in any way you want (pool of 9, 5 in attack, 4 in defense, 3 in attack, 6 in defense, etc) and simulate how you want to fight, the level of aggressiveness you want to bring. How it works is that both players roll their attack dice, and whoever gets the most successes gains an opportunity to strike. The number of successes that won that opportunity then becomes the target number for the attacked player's defense roll.  In this way, it becomes a tactical decision; more attack dice means a better chance to hit, but if they beat you, it leaves you with less to defend yourself.  And if you're taking on two people at a time, you have to split your dice between them, so fighting any more then one on one is very tricky; just like in real life.

I'm taking today off -as I do every sunday- to continue working on the game; so if you have any questions or ideas, feel free to throw them out. Best time to bring things up is when I'm actively working on the system, after all.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 21, 2013, 12:17:39 pm
What I'd like to see:
- a greater diversity of roles beyond piloting, shooting and boarding. For example, some sort of single-person 'fighter' boats that separate from the main ship and harass the enemy.
- a sort of crafting system for the engineers - they take resources (both material and magical) from the supply hold and create situational improvements, such as anti-boarding spikes, improved sights for the pistols or whatever they decide to.
- a wind and sails system (sails can be put in one of the four directions - parallel to the ship length, perpendicular and two diagonals) and depending on their position they transfer a different portion of the wind speed to the ship (so if a sail is perpendicular to wind, it pushes the ship additional two tiles in the corresponding direction, if it's at 45 degrees, one tile, if it's parallel or folded, no effect).
- a limit on weapon range and/or a penalty to the roll depending on the speed of both ships (because it's harder to shoot a moving target, and doubly harder to shoot a moving target from a moving ship).
- more skills, several of which affect different aspects of the same occupation. For example, a separate ballistics skill that reduces the above moving penalty, aiming skill that generally improves accuracy and maybe some magic to steer the cannonball while in flight.
- more personalization. That means perks (bonuses to rolls in specific conditions, optionally with tradeoffs (example: mathematician: when firing cannons, improves accuracy, but lowers firing rate)), equipment, wounds and so on.
- more different weapons. Floating mine balloons, slow-moving torpedoes, sniping rifles, fireballs, what have you.
- optionally, fog: crew can only see, let's say, five tiles away. To see any further, you need a separate mechanism that fires laser beams and detects what they reflect off. However, turning it is slow and the enemies can see where the laser came from and calculate the position. Also floating debris that may cause a false positive.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 21, 2013, 01:30:07 pm
What I'd like to see:
- a greater diversity of roles beyond piloting, shooting and boarding. For example, some sort of single-person 'fighter' boats that separate from the main ship and harass the enemy.
- a sort of crafting system for the engineers - they take resources (both material and magical) from the supply hold and create situational improvements, such as anti-boarding spikes, improved sights for the pistols or whatever they decide to.
- a wind and sails system (sails can be put in one of the four directions - parallel to the ship length, perpendicular and two diagonals) and depending on their position they transfer a different portion of the wind speed to the ship (so if a sail is perpendicular to wind, it pushes the ship additional two tiles in the corresponding direction, if it's at 45 degrees, one tile, if it's parallel or folded, no effect).
- a limit on weapon range and/or a penalty to the roll depending on the speed of both ships (because it's harder to shoot a moving target, and doubly harder to shoot a moving target from a moving ship).
- more skills, several of which affect different aspects of the same occupation. For example, a separate ballistics skill that reduces the above moving penalty, aiming skill that generally improves accuracy and maybe some magic to steer the cannonball while in flight.
- more personalization. That means perks (bonuses to rolls in specific conditions, optionally with tradeoffs (example: mathematician: when firing cannons, improves accuracy, but lowers firing rate)), equipment, wounds and so on.
- more different weapons. Floating mine balloons, slow-moving torpedoes, sniping rifles, fireballs, what have you.
- optionally, fog: crew can only see, let's say, five tiles away. To see any further, you need a separate mechanism that fires laser beams and detects what they reflect off. However, turning it is slow and the enemies can see where the laser came from and calculate the position. Also floating debris that may cause a false positive.

-Yeah, don't worry about that. This really simple stat system you see now is only a place holder. The system that ends up being used will allow for more variety. Also single person fighters of two types are already in. As is a boarding skiff.

-Crafting is pretty much already planned for as well. You'll have to go buy the parts (magic probably won't play a part in this, at least not magic in the way you're thinking) specifically, but you can craft pretty much whatever you want. Though that will probably be before you get out on the Ship. And there will be limits. I can't have people just buy some shitty engine and then roll engineering at it till it's top of the line. At least not without significant investments of money and time.

-I've thought about wind and sails and...well they don't make sense in the world. Sails make more sense for balloon  like craft. I mean, the ships are already hovering for god sake, I would hope that they could scrape together a propeller. Wind might play a roll for some things, but not sails.

-Weapon range is pretty much limited already, simply by the limits of character ability. I will, however, probably throw some hard limits in there and aggressively mess around with the difficulty of rolls for distances with different weapons. Sniper rifles have to have longer ranges and easier shots then pistols. Movement penalties would be fairly simple too; for instance, just add one more needed success for every speed unit difference between the shooter and target. two ships going 3, passing each other at high speed, gets a +6 to the difficulty. Two ships, same direction, one at 3 the other at two, +1 to the target. etc.

-What I'll probably do is a branching skill system, where you take the basic skill first and then can specialize into other ones. It's not going to be as in depth as your example (god forbid I have to keep track of 10 different skills for doing different aspects of a single action slightly better) but it will offer specialization none the less.

-Of course there's gonna be more personalization. Not really a fan of perks and bonuses, if only because they become annoying to track and are often either unbalanced and lead to minmaxing and metagaming or are mostly useless. However things like personal equipment and possessions, wounds, tattoos, fame and influence, are all things I'd very much like to do and will do.

-Got plenty of different weapons so far. Mines are one I still need to make up, we'd probably be using rockets instead of torpedoes (sky ships and all) but yeah, I'm adding as many weapons, ship systems, and player items as I can think of or have suggested to me.

-Laser beams are a bit out of place in the setting, but I get your point. Don't worry, things like clouds and thunderstorms as well as floating debris and towers and other environmental hazards will play a part. A part that will probably entail separate, private maps, at least for the hiding in fog/clouds sections.

Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 21, 2013, 01:45:17 pm
I like the way you're thinking. :D

-I've thought about wind and sails and...well they don't make sense in the world. Sails make more sense for balloon  like craft. I mean, the ships are already hovering for god sake, I would hope that they could scrape together a propeller. Wind might play a roll for some things, but not sails.
But can't you modify the way the world works a liiittle bit to add a bit of depth to the navigation? So that, for example, lodestones serve to actually hover the ship (destroying one means less stability and lower attitude (thus more difficult aiming rolls and easier shots by the enemy), destroying two is a crash), engines propel it (or turn, if they're situated at correct angles to the hull) and the sails turn?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 21, 2013, 10:54:46 pm
Aren't the lodestones turners? And even if not, the engines could turn at rates like what we've got now.

For turning, I think "parachutes" would be a better way to think of it than "sails," although they may look more like the latter, and it hardly seems like it would be effective enough to be the main steering method.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 22, 2013, 03:45:10 am
Hm, then maybe only use sails as an auxiliary propellent (in addition to the engine), as I originally suggested?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 22, 2013, 08:59:57 am
That would require strong winds for the sails to act as a propelling system and not a braking system.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 22, 2013, 10:52:50 am
That would require strong winds for the sails to act as a propelling system and not a braking system.
And god help you if you end up against the wind. Enjoy tacking for 12 turns to get anywhere.


Anyways; Currently it seems that the final game will be using ACIDSPEW (Agility, charisma, intelligence, dexterity, strength, Perception, Endurance, Willpower) along with 12 major skills, 41 specialized skills.

It will include balloons (though airships in the arena should probably use something else, seeing as how fragile they are), fixed wing craft (the fighters and skiffs) and a third, rather interesting option.

A turn is coming soon, once I'm done with the ER posts.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 22, 2013, 11:06:39 am
Cool on several levels.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 22, 2013, 11:31:03 am
You ever thought of writing and publishing a game book? Because this is approaching an actual commercial level of complexity.

Maybe even have it be a compilation of your systems (ER, Perplexicon, and Airships).
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 22, 2013, 11:51:14 am
Airletteicon!
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 22, 2013, 11:53:43 am
I hear Kickstarter is great for stuff like that.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 22, 2013, 12:24:54 pm
Maybe. Although, to be honest, it would probably have to be a compilation. I mean, ER is a very simple system when you think about the basics of it. Perplexicon is even simpler; it's basically just that word list. The fact that Toaster can run a game of it with nothing but my half finished notes shows that. This system, however, is more complex and might be worth bundling up in a file and at least internet publishing. "The End is Near" and "Poison" were the two systems I have in the works that I actually started with the intent of dispersing the rules, so they might work better.

I hear Kickstarter is great for stuff like that.
It is, though I wonder how much I could really ask; and how many people would actually put money towards it. And exactly what I would give as incentives/rewards for different amounts of donations.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 22, 2013, 12:34:52 pm
That...is an excellent question.

Yeah, Poison+TEiN+this would probably be better than ER+Perplexicon+this.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 22, 2013, 12:47:57 pm
Well, when I was thinking of ER, I wasn't honestly thinking of rules. I was thinking of lore. Stories about the world. Possible modifications, laws, anomalies (especially anomalies!), etc. That kind of stuff, mainly to inspire roleplaying and interesting situations.

And Perplexicon would basically be that list of charts and tables, with possible word combinations, and some advice on how to create these combination. And with a lot of optional stuff like rooms, possible world-saving quests, and other optional ideas.

And then this would be more rules and strategy heavy. So having these system be in a compilation, but have very different approaches to them. That could be fun. Although you can have more than three, wink wink.


Also, the thing about Toaster, is that he had the benefit of being a member of the original Perplexicon, and had plenty of exposure to you. The challenge isn't to teach one of your veteran players how to run your game. (although that's nice.) It is to allow to play someone who has never been to Bay12.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 22, 2013, 12:51:54 pm
The Perplexicon book would also need to include advice on generating your own words and what new words could be.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 22, 2013, 12:53:07 pm
The Perplexicon book would also need to include advice on generating your own words and what new words could be.
Yeah, so basically:   

Sci-fi World vs Procedural Generation vs Strategy Game

I think you can guess which one I like the most.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 22, 2013, 02:06:03 pm
Everyone loves procedural generation!


I must agree that it'd be much harder to run the game if I hadn't at least thoroughly read the thread- playing it pretty much from start to finish helped quite a bit as well.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 22, 2013, 04:54:59 pm
RED
They're within dakka range! Commence dakka!
[T6 R12 S6]
You spray machine gun fire at the blue ship, peppering the back of it's cockpit with rounds and sending streams of hot lead hissing over the deck. You don't do any real damage, but you make sure no one can cross the deck.

((Yay for effective medicine.))

Any change for a switch from squares to measurements? Or hexes?

Also, I think it would be better if we did not know what the other team was doing, only what their ship was doing. You know, keep the tactics secret, create a suspense of what is really happening on their ship. Maybe have each side their own secret topic, and only post the things known to everyone here? And then when the battle is done we could reveal these secret topics.


Red: Vlad

Also, GreatWyrm, we really should continue turning while keeping our speed at two. They won't be able to shoot us, and we'll not be giving up our positioning advantage. I also seem to be bad at explaining to him my ideas. Can somebody (Remuthra?) rephrase it better maybe?

Finish handing out molotovs. Then hide on the Upper Desk. Help Pilate with the controls if he needs it

Cheat Sheet
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
You hand 3 moltovs to Sloan, and then head up to the deck and set 3 next to Joe, who seems too preoccupied with shooting to take them from you. Then you make your way up to the cockpit and give three to Pilate  before taking up a spot in the corner; away from the window.

Red - Danath

Hide somewhere nice and safe until the cannons need to be loaded again.

You limp into the ammo dump. Its got metal walls and a heavy pair of doors, so you should at least be safe from the shrapnel. Maybe even a straight hit or two.

Hm. This stuff is hard when I don't have any idea what the opponent is doing.

Maintain speed 2 and turning right, preparing to bail down the ladder if they shoot at me.
[T2. R9. S6]
You spin the wheel toward the right and whistle a jaunty tune. Everything is going great, for now. Vlad even gave you some moltovs! Besides almost dying, today is shaping up to be great!


BLUE



How about someone help me finish loading?  Gotta be ready for broadsides and all that.  Remember- their right side is weaker.


Toastarrr:  Keep on loading standard shells.  Take a shot if it presents itself.


"Arrr, these be heavy, cap'n!"
[R2. S1]
You manage to wiggle the shell into the cannon. No shots can be taken, but at least you manage to load a shell.

Steven, Blue

Scream "TURN LEYFT" while reloading the canon
[R4 S2]
You load another cannon while screaming at no one in particular.

Fashion hang glider.
You slide down the cockpit ladder, intent on crossing the deck and heading down to the supply room to get the parts necessary to build a hang glider. Unfortunately this proves impossible, or at least unwise, seeing as someone is machine gunning the goddamn deck right now. You suppose you could make a run for it, but that seems rather dangerous.

Stay just outside engineering to prevent issues with the heat and my burnable flesh, but if I hear things breaking, go back inside.
You stand around, waiting for something to break. And for your chance to say "I'm giving it all she's got."

Always wanted to say that.

Aww, no fourth-wall-breaking minmaxing. I am disappoint.

Vowel: demote this sack of uselessless straight down the stairs and tell him to get to work. Also turn left aka west and slow down to 2.
[t2 R4 S2]
You keep your head down, steering with your finger tips while you listen to bullets ping off the the wall behind you.





My doctor says I've got critical liver cirrhosis and that if I don't stop drinking, I'm going to die. Well, I told him that If I can't drink, I'm gonna kill myself. And personally, if I get to chose how I die, I prefer a Gin and Tonic to a buckshot cocktail. That shut the bugger up.

Anyways, Seem's like Red's gunner has finally managed to hit something. Not do any damage, but hit something at least.


Everyone loves procedural generation!


I must agree that it'd be much harder to run the game if I hadn't at least thoroughly read the thread- playing it pretty much from start to finish helped quite a bit as well.
I may write up a preplexicon manual and explanation. Host it somewheres. Maybe throw up a donate link for the heck of it.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: mastahcheese on July 22, 2013, 04:57:11 pm
Man, I hope you end up ok, piecewise. I'm sure we all do.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 22, 2013, 04:57:22 pm
((The liver thing was the announcer, right?))

Turn left and accelerate. Again, abandon the post if they soot.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 22, 2013, 05:03:20 pm
The drinking thing is the announcer. I don't even drink. I survive via absorption of magnetic fields.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 22, 2013, 05:05:44 pm
I thought so, good, I don't think that's physically possible.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: draco1234 on July 22, 2013, 05:14:32 pm
Red - Danath

Continue to hide, ready to spring into action if necessary.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 22, 2013, 05:18:53 pm
((Say, if someone's shooting machine guns, could someone appear on the deck and get shot down (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=121807.msg4426802#msg4426802)?))
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 22, 2013, 05:20:34 pm
Keep up the suppression. Try to see if I can strafe the deck. Focus on the enemy gunner.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: DaveTheGrave on July 22, 2013, 05:31:22 pm
Steven,Blue

If possible shoot at enemy machine gunner with a cannon, if not, move to a machinegun with the ability to spray them, and return suppressive fire.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: mastahcheese on July 22, 2013, 05:40:10 pm
Oh, ok. 
Don't care about the announcer.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dansmithers on July 22, 2013, 05:41:43 pm
ENGAGE MATRIX MODE!
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 22, 2013, 06:22:21 pm
The drinking thing is the announcer. I don't even drink. I survive via absorption of magnetic fields.
((Thank god. You had me worried for a moment.))


Red, Vlad

Wait, so if we turn left and accelerate, does it mean we will end up in I9, or E12? And I've forgotten which one of our sides is damaged. The one in the upper right of the square, or the lower left of our square? Sorry, but I am really bad at this.

Since Pilate is doing two piloting actions this turn, help him. Then go back into hiding.
Drink something. Oh wait. Don't drink my molotov! God damn it. It's too late now.

Update: If there's something I can repair as an engineer, do that.


Cheat Sheets
Spoiler (click to show/hide)


To below: Example? I remember reading that loadstones took the entire turn. Also, since I don't have much to do, there is really no reason for us to increase the chances of us failing to pilot this.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 22, 2013, 06:24:59 pm
((I've been able to turn and alter speed before, I thought.))
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Caellath on July 22, 2013, 07:14:33 pm
Skybooth - Cael the Commentator

"Spraying his love probably got the machine gunner's rocks off. Too bad it didn't even tickle anyone from Blue. And we keep watching and waiting for something slightly more exciting as the ships keep moving in a rough reproduction of a brain damaged ballet."
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 22, 2013, 09:13:10 pm
Dariush:  Turn us left and slow us to speed 1.  We'll get some shots off (At the front, but it's still a shot.)

Anyone:  Load up that port (left) cannon!

Me:  Toastarrr:  Fire the cannons at the ship!  Shoot at the cockpit till it's hit, then aim for the MGs/MGers on deck
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 23, 2013, 01:48:44 am
Dariush:  Turn us left and slow us to speed 1.  We'll get some shots off (At the front, but it's still a shot.)
Shush, I know what I'm doing.

Vowel: turn left (SW), keep speed.

"If you blue... uh... blueberrylubbers don't hit with at least one shot, I'll LOAD THE CANNONS WITH YOUR BODYPARTS. This applies specifically to Damien, whose bodyparts I'll load while he's still alive. And the bodyparts are still attached. Get moving, is what I'm saying. And aim at the cockpit and its nice glass wall. And man the machineguns while you're at it."
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 23, 2013, 03:24:46 am
Quote
Wait, so if we turn left and accelerate, does it mean we will end up in I9, or E12? And I've forgotten which one of our sides is damaged. The one in the upper right of the square, or the lower left of our square? Sorry, but I am really bad at this.
I know nobody answered my question and the blue have already posted their action, but we should be aiming for E12. Or not? Probably even if it puts us damaged side towards the enemy.

And yes, I know that they are turning and going to shoot us right now. PS: This is why having us make the piloting actions secret probably makes sense.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 23, 2013, 04:05:55 am
This is why having us make the piloting actions secret probably makes sense.
I agree completely.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 23, 2013, 08:10:09 am
I would agree if this wasn't a test thread.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 23, 2013, 09:55:45 am
If you guys feel like PM'ing your pilot actions, I'm fine with that.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Caellath on July 23, 2013, 10:19:07 am
((I also imagine the reason the pilot's actions aren't secret is due to the fact it is a test thread.))
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 23, 2013, 10:22:47 am
What's the point of a test if it's not going to be representative of the final product?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 23, 2013, 10:24:00 am
Grrrr. To all who replied, I know it's a test thread. I was trying to justify giving an advice on where we should go after the other team had already posted an action. Given that GreatWyrm and Dariush share different time zones, it would basically give us the advantage to do that. And yes, I do happen to know this is a test.

But here's a question: Are there any disadvantages to standing completely still, and slowly rotating your cannons to face the enemy?

Also, the thing about having two threads I mentioned earlier.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Caellath on July 23, 2013, 10:49:49 am
((I pointed out I imagine. Aside from that, piecewise gave you the green light, so that's something.))
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 23, 2013, 11:26:38 am
But here's a question: Are there any disadvantages to standing completely still, and slowly rotating your cannons to face the enemy?

The other ship could move behind you and match your turn, then just unload its shells into your rear end all day every day.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 23, 2013, 01:30:32 pm
But here's a question: Are there any disadvantages to standing completely still, and slowly rotating your cannons to face the enemy?
Oooh, let's have airstrikes that hit a specified tile let's say two turns from now.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 23, 2013, 03:42:04 pm
RED
Keep up the suppression. Try to see if I can strafe the deck. Focus on the enemy gunner.
[T3. R12. S9]
You spray machine gun fire at the deck and, to your surprise, see someone trying to make a break across the deck to the stairway. You jerk the gun around and zero in on him. He goes down, shredded apart in a burst of red. You have just long enough to smile before you see the blue ships cannons lining up on you.

[T5. R7. S5]
You leap off the gun and flatten yourself on the deck as a shell strikes it dead on and reduces it to scrap metal.

The drinking thing is the announcer. I don't even drink. I survive via absorption of magnetic fields.
((Thank god. You had me worried for a moment.))


Red, Vlad

Wait, so if we turn left and accelerate, does it mean we will end up in I9, or E12? And I've forgotten which one of our sides is damaged. The one in the upper right of the square, or the lower left of our square? Sorry, but I am really bad at this.

Since Pilate is doing two piloting actions this turn, help him. Then go back into hiding.
Drink something. Oh wait. Don't drink my molotov! God damn it. It's too late now.

Update: If there's something I can repair as an engineer, do that.


Cheat Sheets
Spoiler (click to show/hide)


To below: Example? I remember reading that loadstones took the entire turn. Also, since I don't have much to do, there is really no reason for us to increase the chances of us failing to pilot this.
You attempt to back seat drive with Pilate, who shoos you away.

"Really, I've got this. Everything is gonna be fine."

And then the cockpit explodes. A shell punches in, straight through the windshield, and hits the bank of controls in front of Pilate. You shield yourself with your arms, but still catch a shower of glass shards that leaves you badly cut and bleeding, some of the larger pieces still stuck in you. You lower your hands and see Pilate still standing there, almost exactly where he was a second ago; missing his left arm from the elbow down. He seems like he's in shock. You grab him and drag him down the ladder to the cockpit lower, leaving bloody handprints the whole way.

Red - Danath

Continue to hide, ready to spring into action if necessary.
You can feel the ship shake as shells strike it, but none of your cannons fire back. You hold your position, nursing your leg.

((The liver thing was the announcer, right?))

Turn left and accelerate. Again, abandon the post if they soot.
[T2. R9. S2]
You spin the wheel and turn the ship left, all the while fending off advances from Vlad, who seems to think you need help piloting. By the time you finally talk him off you and look back to what you're doing, there's little time to react. The blue ship has it's cannons aimed at you, You can see the shell coming in, a black speck, like a gnat on the wind shield. You just enough time to step to the right before it hits. The next seconds are a blur. You remember standing there, in the wind. The Windshield is gone, the control panel looks like it's been cut in two. Your arm is gone and there's blood in your face from the cuts on your head.

Vlad grabs you and forces you down the ladder. You keep trying to grab with a hand that isn't there, bashing the stump against the ladder. It's strange; it doesn't hurt.



BLUE


Dariush:  Turn us left and slow us to speed 1.  We'll get some shots off (At the front, but it's still a shot.)

Anyone:  Load up that port (left) cannon!

Me:  Toastarrr:  Fire the cannons at the ship!  Shoot at the cockpit till it's hit, then aim for the MGs/MGers on deck
There are only two loaded cannons, so you take one and Steven takes the other. You aim at the cockpit, aiming for the windshield at a 45 degree angle.
[T3. R10. S3]
You fire and move, sidestepping the cannon's recoil as you go to watch the shell fly. You catch a glimpse of it just as it hits and the windshield explodes into a million tiny, sparking fragments. You can see people inside scattering and heading below. Seems like you failed to kill the pilot. Oh well, the controls are dead, and that's almost as good.


Steven,Blue

If possible shoot at enemy machine gunner with a cannon, if not, move to a machinegun with the ability to spray them, and return suppressive fire.
You take the other left cannon and take aim at the center right machine gun of the other craft.
[T3. R7. S5]
Your shot flies true, an the machine gun shatters into pieces as the shell tears through it. The gunner seems to have survived though; you can see him crawling away.

ENGAGE MATRIX MODE!
You run out onto the deck, sprinting for the stairs down.
[T9. R4. S2]
There's no real time for recognition of whats happening; not with bullets this big and this numerous. You feel yourself suddenly pushed forward, there's a burst of red, and then everything goes black before you can even hit the deck.

GENTLEMANE IS DEAD

Dariush:  Turn us left and slow us to speed 1.  We'll get some shots off (At the front, but it's still a shot.)
Shush, I know what I'm doing.

Vowel: turn left (SW), keep speed.

"If you blue... uh... blueberrylubbers don't hit with at least one shot, I'll LOAD THE CANNONS WITH YOUR BODYPARTS. This applies specifically to Damien, whose bodyparts I'll load while he's still alive. And the bodyparts are still attached. Get moving, is what I'm saying. And aim at the cockpit and its nice glass wall. And man the machineguns while you're at it."
You turn the ship west and smile as you feel the shudder of her cannons fire. The news of their successful hits is tinged with regret as you watch Gentlemane fall in a burst of red mist. 








"And it looks like we have our first fatality, Cael. Gentlemane tried to imitate Keanu Reeves and end up just as soulless. But despite the loss of one of their crew, Blue did some serious damage of their own, destroying red's controls and injuring both their pilots. Without those controls, the Red ship is gonna stay on it's last heading, turning left at speed 3. Unless red manages to do something, they're literally going to be going in circles. "


But here's a question: Are there any disadvantages to standing completely still, and slowly rotating your cannons to face the enemy?
Oooh, let's have airstrikes that hit a specified tile let's say two turns from now.
Thats basically what mortars are. Fire them at a specific tile and they fall there on the next turn. They have great range but require a good degree of predictive work to use.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 23, 2013, 03:50:28 pm
Good trade.   Maybe?

Dariush, they'll be at B-15 next turn since they can't move steer, so move accordingly.  Remember to PM your teammates if you PM in the movement (much less important now since they're totally boned, what with being unable to steer.)

I say we turn in behind them and totally MG strafe everything they know and love.

Piecewise:  What happens if someone tries to go off the map?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 23, 2013, 03:50:55 pm
Pilots, get down to the lodestones! There's more than one way to turn a ship!

Man the rightmost gun; fill the enemy cockpit with bullet holes.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 23, 2013, 04:05:14 pm
Good trade.   Maybe?

Dariush, they'll be at B-15 next turn since they can't move steer, so move accordingly.  Remember to PM your teammates if you PM in the movement (much less important now since they're totally boned, what with being unable to steer.)

I say we turn in behind them and totally MG strafe everything they know and love.

Piecewise:  What happens if someone tries to go off the map?
Right now, I'd basically just shift you all over to the center of the map; keeping your relative positions. Later, when this is real, they'll probably hit something and either scrape against it or just slam to a stop.

Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 23, 2013, 04:43:07 pm
((Who else thinks we may be screwed?))

"What's...they het the cntrols...huh. Why isn't my hand grabbing stuff?"

Head down the ladder and see if I can help somewhere, possibly the cannons. Avoid getting killed by a traitorous idiot, violently if need be.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dansmithers on July 23, 2013, 04:44:15 pm
Dohohoho.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: DaveTheGrave on July 23, 2013, 04:47:22 pm
Steven,Blue
Change to the loaded canon, and attempt to hit the machinegunner on the deck. Then think "Why am I so good at shooting cannons? I don't even know how I got here!"

If there is no loaded cannon, switch to a machinegun and strafe their deck, tryign to hit that pesky machinegunner.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 23, 2013, 04:53:51 pm
((The best part is that I have 7 dexterity, making me very good at dodging :D.))

Don't get hit. If someone tries to strafe me, strafe them instead of the cockpit.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: draco1234 on July 23, 2013, 05:05:07 pm
Red - Danath

Well, there are two things we need to do here.  we need to try and fix the controls, and we need to MAN THE GODDAMN CANNONS!

Continue to be useless baggage.  If the enemy ship gets close enough, attempt to board.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 23, 2013, 05:07:35 pm
"Alright..."

Try to help man the cannons.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Powder Miner on July 23, 2013, 05:19:19 pm
Go help load the cannons.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: draco1234 on July 23, 2013, 05:28:20 pm
"Alright..."

Try to help man the cannons.

which part should we fire at?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 23, 2013, 05:52:31 pm
"Alright..."

Try to help man the cannons.
which part should we fire at?
The control part?
My character is still in shock, he's probably not going to be helping a lot with the planning right now.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 23, 2013, 05:55:39 pm
((Okay, this is official. I do not understand how time works here, because this is the second time I have posted an action that led me to being shot at. I thought helping Pilate, especially if he didn't need it, would take maybe half-a-square of movement. But we were hit 2.5 out of three squares in, and I still managed to be there. :())

"Pilate's in shock! Their shots hit the cockpit square on! I'll be taking over piloting now. With the way we are going, we are either going to be in range with the cannons very soon, or we will ram them. Sloan, get to the cannons. Danath, see if you can help him. Don't try to board yet, you need Dex for that."

He the leans over to the Pilate and whispers. "I know you don't understand it yet pal, but you're pretty much dead. I've got cuts of my own to take care of, and without an arm or care... you don't stand a chance. Trust me, I'm doing you favor. Goodbuy."

If Pilate is able to stand up without problems and even walk on his own, abandon the next action. If he's not, place one of my hands over Pilate's mouth. If he's able to resist even semi-effectively, abandon the next course of action. If he's not, cut his throat. Drink his blood, and let it invigorate me. Then take his Saber and pistol. (This, is an example of am action, that in my opinion, should not take a lot of time compared to the next one.)

Once I'm done with Pilate one way or another, get up once again, ignoring my own cuts, and see if I can repair or otherwise make function the controlls. Either by controlling the ship directly from the wiring, or maybe Vlad has knowledge that allows him just to go to the upper engine housing and load stones and controll the ship from there. (or maybe even an the hover core and engine itself.)

PS: Try not to get in the way of bullets.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 23, 2013, 06:33:45 pm
Oh, you were done with that action. The only reason you didn't get hurt worse was because you were hiding in the corner. When that glass breaks, if you're in the room you're gonna get some in you, but you avoided the shell itself.

I think the problem is that you probably meant to hide down below, where you are now, where as I assumed you wanted to hide back where you were before, where I ended your last turn and said you were hiding. So your turn was completed, but you were still in the room.

In general, if you want to be safe, always say where you want to be hiding specifically, and always get your ass to a different room if you think someone is aiming at you. As long as they don't have the shot from the very beginning of the turn, you'll probably be able to run to another area.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 23, 2013, 06:43:17 pm
Place one of my hands over Pilate's mouth, and cut his throat. Drink his blood, and let it invigorate me. Then take his Saber and pistol.
What the heck?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 23, 2013, 06:44:26 pm
Place one of my hands over Pilate's mouth, and cut his throat. Drink his blood, and let it invigorate me. Then take his Saber and pistol.
What the heck?
You're dead? I'm giving you a mercy killing before you start to scream and be anoying.

To Piecewise: That's where I ended up my last turn? Huh. Okay, I'll try to remember that in the future.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 23, 2013, 06:45:14 pm
I'm not dead, I'm bleeding.

Murderer.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 23, 2013, 07:18:20 pm
Place one of my hands over Pilate's mouth, and cut his throat. Drink his blood, and let it invigorate me. Then take his Saber and pistol.
What the heck?
You're dead? I'm giving you a mercy killing before you start to scream and be anoying.

To Piecewise: That's where I ended up my last turn? Huh. Okay, I'll try to remember that in the future.

Quote
You hand 3 moltovs to Sloan, and then head up to the deck and set 3 next to Joe, who seems too preoccupied with shooting to take them from you. Then you make your way up to the cockpit and give three to Pilate  before taking up a spot in the corner; away from the window.

Yep, I double checked, just to make sure.







Devlog:
Currently working on the two different types of power for the conventional ships, as well as weight and energy usage. I'm working it so that, with any luck, the system can be applied to ships of any size and make up with relative ease and that damaging engines-or just not having enough to begin with-will result in slower ships. I'm also creating some weapons and systems that are available only to one or the other type of power, along with the more general weapons.

Before you ask, yes I have included a stupidly large, incredibly powerful, forward mounted "main cannon" for those of you who subscribe to the Death Star school of ship design. 
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 23, 2013, 07:28:12 pm
((Since you double-checked, I also did so.))

Red: Vlad

Finish handing out molotovs. Then hide on the Upper Desk. Help Pilate with the controls if he needs it
You hand 3 moltovs to Sloan, and then head up to the deck and set 3 next to Joe, who seems too preoccupied with shooting to take them from you. Then you make your way up to the cockpit and give three to Pilate  before taking up a spot in the corner; away from the window.
And yes, I have misspelled "Deck" as "Desk". But I believe that's still the machine gun level.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 23, 2013, 07:33:32 pm
((Since you double-checked, I also did so.))

Red: Vlad

Finish handing out molotovs. Then hide on the Upper Desk. Help Pilate with the controls if he needs it
You hand 3 moltovs to Sloan, and then head up to the deck and set 3 next to Joe, who seems too preoccupied with shooting to take them from you. Then you make your way up to the cockpit and give three to Pilate  before taking up a spot in the corner; away from the window.
And yes, I have misspelled "Deck" as "Desk". But I believe that's still the machine gun level.

Well, technically the cockpit is the upper most level. The main deck is the deck. Well, whatever, just run with it, it's not like you're crippled or anything, just cut up a bit.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 23, 2013, 07:40:28 pm
I can run with it, sure, no probs here. But then it's still labeled incorrectly: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/crkwpy8ncr964nc/OXOj85jZV2#f:Main%20deck%20above%20view.png
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 23, 2013, 08:17:51 pm
I can run with it, sure, no probs here. But then it's still labeled incorrectly: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/crkwpy8ncr964nc/OXOj85jZV2#f:Main%20deck%20above%20view.png
Hmm. Image is called "Main deck above view" but the deck itself is labelled upper. Hmm. Well, whatever, lets call it Main deck and the upper most one the cockpit.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 23, 2013, 08:19:47 pm
Will the next test be with the modular design?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 23, 2013, 08:38:50 pm
Will the next test be with the modular design?
Yep. I should have everything ready by the time one of you dies. Won't have all the stuff for the final game ready, but I'll have enough to let you start building ships.

Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 23, 2013, 08:45:33 pm
Modularrrr design.


Ah hah harrr!  Ye landlubbers don't stand a chance!

Toastarrr:  Wait for the left hand cannons to be loaded, then shoot out their engines.  If no one is loading cannons, do so myself, while cursing them for missing an opportunity.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 24, 2013, 05:34:37 am
Right now, I'd basically just shift you all over to the center of the map; keeping your relative positions. Later, when this is real, they'll probably hit something and either scrape against it or just slam to a stop.
I think we should keep relocating even in the 'real' game. Looks more realistic this way.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 24, 2013, 07:05:09 am
Right now, I'd basically just shift you all over to the center of the map; keeping your relative positions. Later, when this is real, they'll probably hit something and either scrape against it or just slam to a stop.
I think we should keep relocating even in the 'real' game. Looks more realistic this way.
Unless we have realistic reasons to have map limitations. Maybe not always square ones.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Caellath on July 24, 2013, 07:34:15 am
Skybooth - Cael the Commentator

"Despite losing their resident McGyver wannabe, Blue Team is still the one which has actual chances of winning. Red has to pray for a miracle - or more realistically, for a case of mass retardation to spread amidst Blue."
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Cheesecake on July 24, 2013, 08:08:18 am
Fire cannons.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 24, 2013, 08:19:18 am
Skybooth - Cael the Commentator

"Despite losing their resident McGyver wannabe, Blue Team is still the one which has actual chances of winning. Red has to pray for a miracle - or more realistically, for a case of mass retardation to spread amidst Blue."
((I've got it!
We need to hijack their ship, crash it, and then get back to our own ship! BRILLIANT!))
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 24, 2013, 08:51:05 am
Skybooth - Cael the Commentator

"Despite losing their resident McGyver wannabe, Blue Team is still the one which has actual chances of winning. Red has to pray for a miracle - or more realistically, for a case of mass retardation to spread amidst Blue."
((I've got it!
We need to hijack their ship, crash it, and then get back to our own ship! BRILLIANT!))

It can't possibly fail.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 24, 2013, 08:55:24 am
Skybooth - Cael the Commentator

"Despite losing their resident McGyver wannabe, Blue Team is still the one which has actual chances of winning. Red has to pray for a miracle - or more realistically, for a case of mass retardation to spread amidst Blue."
((I've got it!
We need to hijack their ship, crash it, and then get back to our own ship! BRILLIANT!))
Actually, if I had several ranks in speech, I wouldn't kill you. I'd convince you to board the other ship and be a suicide bomber with all the molotovs. It'd be great! I have this mental image on a one-armed man with a molotov in hand getting on board.

Fire cannons.
Idiot defense activated! Remote contol mode activated: Do not fire the cannons if the other ship's not in line of fire.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 24, 2013, 09:38:47 am
Actually, if I had several ranks in speech, I wouldn't kill you. I'd convince you to board the other ship and be a suicide bomber with all the molotovs. It'd be great! I have this mental image on a one-armed man with a molotov in hand getting on board.
One Molotov in hand, another clenched in teeth and the third held between the thighs. DO IT.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 24, 2013, 09:46:59 am
Actually, if I had several ranks in speech, I wouldn't kill you. I'd convince you to board the other ship and be a suicide bomber with all the molotovs. It'd be great! I have this mental image on a one-armed man with a molotov in hand getting on board.
One Molotov in hand, another clenched in teeth and the third held between the thighs. DO IT.
Well, we don't exactly have any speech or willpower stats yet, and if I'm doing something like this, I want to accomplish it fairly. Using Int just feels like going too far. So no, maybe in another game. Besides, I like my current action too, so I am loth to change it.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 24, 2013, 09:56:35 am
Actually, if I had several ranks in speech, I wouldn't kill you. I'd convince you to board the other ship and be a suicide bomber with all the molotovs. It'd be great! I have this mental image on a one-armed man with a molotov in hand getting on board.
One Molotov in hand, another clenched in teeth and the third held between the thighs. DO IT.
Well, we don't exactly have any speech or willpower stats yet, and if I'm doing something like this, I want to accomplish it fairly. Using Int just feels like going too far. So no, maybe in another game. Besides, I like my current action too, so I am loth to change it.
Er, I was actually suggesting that course of action to GWG. It's not like he is going to be of any use to you, being maimed for life and suffering from severe blood loss. At least this way he'll go out in style and will be guaranteed to not inflict any harm on our team.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: draco1234 on July 24, 2013, 09:59:06 am
Actually, if I had several ranks in speech, I wouldn't kill you. I'd convince you to board the other ship and be a suicide bomber with all the molotovs. It'd be great! I have this mental image on a one-armed man with a molotov in hand getting on board.
One Molotov in hand, another clenched in teeth and the third held between the thighs. DO IT.
Well, we don't exactly have any speech or willpower stats yet, and if I'm doing something like this, I want to accomplish it fairly. Using Int just feels like going too far. So no, maybe in another game. Besides, I like my current action too, so I am loth to change it.
Er, I was actually suggesting that course of action to GWG. It's not like he is going to be of any use to you, being maimed for life and suffering from severe blood loss. At least this way he'll go out in style and will be guaranteed to not inflict any harm on our team.

I agree with Dariush.  GWG should go out in (hilarious) style, not have his throat cut.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 24, 2013, 10:02:05 am
If he agrees and roleplays it, I'll change the action.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 24, 2013, 10:34:45 am
You could always toss him in a cannon.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: DaveTheGrave on July 24, 2013, 10:38:14 am
You could always toss him in a cannon.
theyd have to pray for some jesus level rolls for the shot, flying, trajectory,landing, and hope he doesnt pass out.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 24, 2013, 10:54:40 am
You say that like it's a problem.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 24, 2013, 11:07:03 am
It sort of is.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 24, 2013, 11:15:02 am
You say that like it's a problem.
Didst you really think I'd fall for your trap, you swine?! We shall not succumb to your trickery, you random enemy whom I never met and whose name I never knew and don't remember! You think you can defeat me by whispering those lies from across half-a-kilometer of airspace that I can't really hear you from anyway?! No! No! And Triple No!!!
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 24, 2013, 11:20:41 am
Can too.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 24, 2013, 11:24:28 am
Can too.
Somebody give this man a shot to the head.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 24, 2013, 11:25:22 am
If he agrees and roleplays it, I'll change the action.
Roleplay convincing me to do it.
...And come up with a way that won't involve me falling for several turns before exploding on the ground far below.
Oh, and a pistol would be nice.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 24, 2013, 11:28:30 am
Can too.
Somebody give this man a shot to the head.

I'll have single malt scotch, please.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 24, 2013, 11:30:52 am
If he agrees and roleplays it, I'll change the action.
Roleplay convincing me to do it.
...And come up with a way that won't involve me falling for several turns before exploding on the ground far below.
Oh, and a pistol would be nice.
Nope. The suicide bomber thing was just a cool alternative to me doing what I am doing now. As I've said before, I've already chosen my action, and I'd prefer to stick with it. If you don't want the alternative, I'll just carry on.
PS: The way it could work, was if we rammed/were adjacent to the ship. Then you could jump on. Of course, we have no idea how difficult it would be.


Can too.
Somebody give this man a shot to the head.
That's your job.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 24, 2013, 11:32:53 am
I'm not sure if you've noticed, but I'm not agreeing with your current course of action.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 24, 2013, 11:34:36 am
Can too.
Somebody give this man a shot to the head.
That's your job.
I'm working on it.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 24, 2013, 11:40:24 am
I'm not sure if you've noticed, but I'm not agreeing with your current course of action.
And your point is? I don't have to do what you want me to do. Ultimately, we're different people roleplaying different characters. I don't feel like I'm doing anything wrong in that department. (Besides, it's not like Pilate's a year-old character with an interesting personality and I'm killing off a significant investment on your part.) And if Pilate really doesn't want to get killed:

You can choose to resist me. (Good luck on that). OR
You can try to roleplay yourself out of it. (Something that has a far better chance of succeeding.)

If you really don't like what I'm doing, I don't get why you're doing neither of these things. Unless it's all OOC.
Althought I really don't know what you'd expect to happen even if I left you alone.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: draco1234 on July 24, 2013, 11:47:32 am
I'm not sure if you've noticed, but I'm not agreeing with your current course of action.
And your point is? I don't have to do what you want me to do. Ultimately, we're different people roleplaying different characters. I don't feel like I'm doing anything wrong in that department. (Besides, it's not like Pilate's a year-old character with an interesting personality and I'm killing off a significant investment on your part.) And if Pilate really doesn't want to get killed:

You can choose to resist me. (Good luck on that). OR
You can try to roleplay yourself out of it. (Something that has a far better chance of succeeding.)

If you really don't like what I'm doing, I don't get why you're doing neither of these things. Unless it's all OOC.
Althought I really don't know what you'd expect to happen even if I left you alone.

I still don't see why you are doing what you are doing.  Killing him is completely pointless, if you are so determined to have him die either suicide bomb him or put him on deck as machine gun bait, so he may be of some use.  We're already losing without wasting precious manpower, despite his injuries.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 24, 2013, 11:49:41 am
Check my action. (I thought I edited it after you posted the trying-to-kill-me bit, but I didn't, so I edited it in earlier today.)

I'd expect my contributions to be greater as a living person than someone who is a corpse.

And I'd roleplay you trying to kill me, except I'm trying to convince you not to try and kill me, and it would be extremely weird to roleplay my trying to talk you out of trying to kill you if I wasn't, so I'm not going to try until I'm certain I can't convince you that killing an ally for no reason is a stupid idea.

Ninja'd.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: draco1234 on July 24, 2013, 11:53:27 am
((Also, quick question.  Is boarding success governed by strength, dexterity, or both?))
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 24, 2013, 11:54:46 am
Why I am killing him? Because I don't want his screaming to be annoying when the shock kicks in. It might also have something to do with lowering the number of people I'd have to share the loot with.

Check my action. (I thought I edited it after you posted the trying-to-kill-me bit, but I didn't, so I edited it in earlier today.)

I'd expect my contributions to be greater as a living person than someone who is a corpse.

And I'd roleplay you trying to kill me, except I'm trying to convince you not to try and kill me, and it would be extremely weird to roleplay my trying to talk you out of trying to kill you if I wasn't, so I'm not going to try until I'm certain I can't convince you that killing an ally for no reason is a stupid idea.

Ninja'd.
Your Action still says to man the cannons. I have no idea what you're talking about.

And your third paragraph is nearly incomprehensible to me with the run on sentence and triple negatives. Sorry.
PS: The only thing I can say, is that Vlad might have a different opinion of this than I do if you try.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 24, 2013, 11:59:48 am
I've posted two actions.
I should probably consolidate them.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 24, 2013, 12:24:28 pm
Still don't see the edits OR the second action.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 24, 2013, 12:25:14 pm
((Who else thinks we may be screwed?))

"What's...they het the cntrols...huh. Why isn't my hand grabbing stuff?"

Head down the ladder and see if I can help somewhere. Avoid getting killed by a traitorous idiot.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 24, 2013, 12:32:19 pm
Of course you had to put it before my action to cut you. No wonder I didn't see it. If you're able to function, I'll leave you alone.

Action Edited.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 24, 2013, 12:40:51 pm
Wait, you only changed your action after I quoted my changed action? Me saying I had after expressing the opinion that I didn't want to be killed multiple times didn't do it?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 24, 2013, 12:44:39 pm
Ummm... Yes? Character and player separation, dude? You can praise me or you can curse me, but if your character doesn't open his lips, it's outside the game. Vlad didn't know you were bitching. Pilate didn't know you were bitching. I suppose we just have different standards of playing?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 24, 2013, 12:48:24 pm
You didn't believe me when I said I'd changed my action? Why would I lie about that?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 24, 2013, 12:52:25 pm
Of course I believed you. I couldn't find the damn action! What the hell are even arguing about anymore? How am I supposed to edit my own action, if I can't see what you are doing to guide myself?

Okay, if you've got anything more to say on this, please take it pm. Because we're beginning to clog up the thread, and this is increasingly becoming pointless. Unless of course, the issue is resolved, in which case I'm happy.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 24, 2013, 12:54:46 pm
It's not resolved, but I don't see the point of trying.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: draco1234 on July 24, 2013, 01:45:17 pm
Ummm... Yes? Character and player separation, dude? You can praise me or you can curse me, but if your character doesn't open his lips, it's outside the game. Vlad didn't know you were bitching. Pilate didn't know you were bitching. I suppose we just have different standards of playing?

This is a test thread.  It doesn't have to be perfectly RP, it's mostly to playtest the functions.  So there is no need to get so picky over whether it is 'in-game' or not.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 24, 2013, 02:23:26 pm
I'm doing the post here in a bit guys. Everyone calm your collective butts, take a deep breath and figure out who is murdering who, and how.

Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 24, 2013, 02:25:32 pm
I am murdering everyone blue with a machine gun, preferably without being killed by a cannon blast. My existence is infinitely simpler than that of a pilot.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 24, 2013, 04:06:37 pm
I am trying not to get murdered whilst trying to help people murder blues with a cannon, should I be capable of doing so.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: draco1234 on July 24, 2013, 04:10:12 pm
I'm... not doing much, really.  If the ships get closer then I will be murdering blues with my two sabres.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 24, 2013, 06:27:09 pm
RED
Pilots, get down to the lodestones! There's more than one way to turn a ship!

Man the rightmost gun; fill the enemy cockpit with bullet holes.
You switch guns, but the blue ship breaks off, and your ship continues it's turn. Your target escapes your aim.

((Okay, this is official. I do not understand how time works here, because this is the second time I have posted an action that led me to being shot at. I thought helping Pilate, especially if he didn't need it, would take maybe half-a-square of movement. But we were hit 2.5 out of three squares in, and I still managed to be there. :())

"Pilate's in shock! Their shots hit the cockpit square on! I'll be taking over piloting now. With the way we are going, we are either going to be in range with the cannons very soon, or we will ram them. Sloan, get to the cannons. Danath, see if you can help him. Don't try to board yet, you need Dex for that."

He the leans over to the Pilate and whispers. "I know you don't understand it yet pal, but you're pretty much dead. I've got cuts of my own to take care of, and without an arm or care... you don't stand a chance. Trust me, I'm doing you favor. Goodbuy."

If Pilate is able to stand up without problems and even walk on his own, abandon the next action. If he's not, place one of my hands over Pilate's mouth. If he's able to resist even semi-effectively, abandon the next course of action. If he's not, cut his throat. Drink his blood, and let it invigorate me. Then take his Saber and pistol. (This, is an example of am action, that in my opinion, should not take a lot of time compared to the next one.)

Once I'm done with Pilate one way or another, get up once again, ignoring my own cuts, and see if I can repair or otherwise make function the controlls. Either by controlling the ship directly from the wiring, or maybe Vlad has knowledge that allows him just to go to the upper engine housing and load stones and controll the ship from there. (or maybe even an the hover core and engine itself.)

PS: Try not to get in the way of bullets.

Pilate seems alive, for the moment, so you climb back up the ladder and look at the console. It's toast; smashed to shrapnel. But...but you might be able to pilot the ship by directly manipulating the lodestones. You'd need someone down next to the engine to manipulate speed, but you could at least control the turning.

You run down to the lodestones and prepare to attempt to alter the ship's path.

Fire cannons.

I'll assume this means "Fire if you get a shot." Since you have no shot, I'll assume you don't want to seriously menace the air.

Red - Danath

Well, there are two things we need to do here.  we need to try and fix the controls, and we need to MAN THE GODDAMN CANNONS!

Continue to be useless baggage.  If the enemy ship gets close enough, attempt to board.

More cowering. More hiding. God you wish that someone would just ram someone else. You just want to freaking stab someone for god sake.

((Who else thinks we may be screwed?))

"What's...they het the cntrols...huh. Why isn't my hand grabbing stuff?"

Head down the ladder and see if I can help somewhere, possibly the cannons. Avoid getting killed by a traitorous idiot, violently if need be.

You head down to the engine room, Cauterize your stump against the furnace and take your place at the engines, ready to manually adjust them.


BLUE



Modularrrr design.


Ah hah harrr!  Ye landlubbers don't stand a chance!

Toastarrr:  Wait for the left hand cannons to be loaded, then shoot out their engines.  If no one is loading cannons, do so myself, while cursing them for missing an opportunity.
Welp, can't get a shot, so lets load us some cannons. Or at least try.
[R2 S1]
You roll a shell out to the cannon but again, can't lift it. Damn these tiny arms.

Steven,Blue
Change to the loaded canon, and attempt to hit the machinegunner on the deck. Then think "Why am I so good at shooting cannons? I don't even know how I got here!"

If there is no loaded cannon, switch to a machinegun and strafe their deck, tryign to hit that pesky machinegunner.

You run up to the main deck and take up a place at the left, forward machine gun. You can't get a shot with a cannon or a machine gun though. Oh well.

Go help load the cannons.
[R5 S4]
You load the two left hand cannons, leaving only the last left cannon.

Right now, I'd basically just shift you all over to the center of the map; keeping your relative positions. Later, when this is real, they'll probably hit something and either scrape against it or just slam to a stop.
I think we should keep relocating even in the 'real' game. Looks more realistic this way.
I'm assuming that the PM I got was the directions. In the future, make sure that the directions are obvious and that you post an action in the tread to quote.
[t1 R4 S3]
Right turn, Speed 2. Executed successfully.









Here's an example of a level of one of the modular ships. It comes as a empty frame on a grid and you then put modules in. The one pictured has a flame thrower,a poison gas dispenser, a buzz blade launcher, two heavy cannons, 4 wing mounted engines and an ammo dump. It's powered by a Mainspring. The blue lines indicate power transfer, the red indicate control. As you can see, the buzz blade requires power to function, while the cannons do not.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/by112p06jpeymdn/example.png

I'm continuing to work on more weapons and modules, so if you have ideas that have not been stated, let me know.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 24, 2013, 06:30:14 pm
360 degree high-caliber deck gun. Heaven for deck gunners.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 24, 2013, 06:46:14 pm
Cool. Mind if I suggest some sort of "Ship Status" spoiler for when the ships are so different? It could describe the systems, their capabilities, and their damage.

-----

"Ow! ...Huh. My hand's gone. I should probably be concerned about that."

Wait behind the other starboard cannon and fire if the enemy is in sight. Wonder if I could get a reasonably-priced prosthetic arm somewhere.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 24, 2013, 06:48:38 pm
See if I can't take a machine gun and take it out of the deck mount, so I can shoot from another part of the ship, Halo style.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: draco1234 on July 24, 2013, 06:55:48 pm
Red - Danath

As GWG has wandered away from the engine room, go there myself and get ready to adjust the speed (assuming I don't need any intelligence skill just to do as i'm told)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: DaveTheGrave on July 24, 2013, 07:34:41 pm
Steven,Blue
Use my man strength to load the shit out of some cannons.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 24, 2013, 08:14:38 pm
((Wait, we continued turning? I don't think anyone predicted that. Also, which one of our goddamn sides is the damaged one? Because I know I can't pilot a ship when I don't even know that.

Also, surprised that Pilate was just able to shrug it off. But, meh.))

Gonna be pm'ing piloting actions. As soon as I figure out the answer to the question above.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 24, 2013, 08:54:17 pm
((Wait, we continued turning? I don't think anyone predicted that. Also, which one of our goddamn sides is the damaged one? Because I know I can't pilot a ship when I don't even know that.

If it makes you feel better, Dariush missed it too.

"Without those controls, the Red ship is gonna stay on it's last heading, turning left at speed 3. Unless red manages to do something, they're literally going to be going in circles. "
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 24, 2013, 09:29:42 pm
((Wait, we continued turning? I don't think anyone predicted that. Also, which one of our goddamn sides is the damaged one? Because I know I can't pilot a ship when I don't even know that.

Also, surprised that Pilate was just able to shrug it off. But, meh.))

Gonna be pm'ing piloting actions. As soon as I figure out the answer to the question above.
Check the red folder. It has your ship schematics in there. The damage is: the right side first cannon, the right side armor on the cockpit, the loss of the cockpit window and controls, the loss of the forward, right machine gun.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 24, 2013, 09:33:55 pm
((Wait, we continued turning? I don't think anyone predicted that. Also, which one of our goddamn sides is the damaged one? Because I know I can't pilot a ship when I don't even know that.

Also, surprised that Pilate was just able to shrug it off. But, meh.))

Gonna be pm'ing piloting actions. As soon as I figure out the answer to the question above.
Check the red folder. It has your ship schematics in there. The damage is: the right side first cannon, the right side armor on the cockpit, the loss of the cockpit window and controls, the loss of the forward, right machine gun.
I know our damage. I just don't know where it is in relation to the sides facing enemy.

Update: Okay, fine. Figured it out.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Rolepgeek on July 24, 2013, 09:36:24 pm
Any slots left? :D
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 24, 2013, 09:37:19 pm
Not this game, but when this finishes there will be another test game.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 24, 2013, 10:06:27 pm
Any slots left? :D
For the next test, sure. I'm gonna have to find a way to make sign ups for that fair...Maybe a lotto.


That sound fair to you guys? Leave sign ups open for a while and then randomly pick the contestants?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 24, 2013, 10:12:23 pm
Sounds fine.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 25, 2013, 02:50:40 am
...Why not simply use a three-ship free-for-all if too many people sign up?

Also, why didn't we get a shot? By my calculations, we should have gotten one when we turned (because they were quite obviously between the lines of fire we could have gotten before and after turning).
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I DEMAND JUSTICE

Also x2, why did T2 for normal piloting actions suddenly change to T1?

Vowel: pound the control panel in a rage against the heavens.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 25, 2013, 03:13:41 am
If you haven't noticed, the game is currently pretty rough in that it only works in straight lines for cannons. I suppose if you had said "Turn as many degrees as necessary to him them with our cannons as they go." it would have been different. But currently, the turning with the load stones is instantaneous.

And honestly, stop demanding justice, because there's a bunch of things that happened that I can too demand justice for.
For starters, if your side could hit us with your cannons, we could hit you too. For more than this turn, if you haven't noticed.
There was this whole thing with me getting shrapnel. And a bunch of other stuff. So demanding justice is... naive?


About sign ups, I think time zones are actually fairly important in this game. Much more so than in ER. So I would also recommend that the entire team shares similar time zones.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 25, 2013, 08:53:03 am
...What Thearpox said.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 25, 2013, 12:20:32 pm
...Why not simply use a three-ship free-for-all if too many people sign up?

Also, why didn't we get a shot? By my calculations, we should have gotten one when we turned (because they were quite obviously between the lines of fire we could have gotten before and after turning).
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I DEMAND JUSTICE

Also x2, why did T2 for normal piloting actions suddenly change to T1?

Vowel: pound the control panel in a rage against the heavens.
Piloting action is t1 because you only performed one action. T1 for changing direction, T2 for changing direction and speed. (I'm aware this hasn't been enforced very well.)

Also, like Thearpox said, the sweep of the cannons as you turn isn't factored in, For the same reasons that you turn at 45 degree angles and start your turn already facing the direction you're turning. It's abstraction caused partially by the grid setup and partially just to make it easier for me. If you want I can start factoring that it, though it seems strange that the sweep would happen only during that first square.... How about this:
We take the firing line of the cannons where you started and where you ended and anything within that sweep can be hit. Like this:

(http://i.imgur.com/1k7Tczv.png)


Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 25, 2013, 12:41:59 pm
That looks... really weird. Please don't do this, Piecewise. I would love to have a full simulation with measurements. I'm okay with squares (although hexes are far superior). But this... just begs so many questions. Like: How can we get an arc for cannons, while the ship is moving in a completely straight line? It's no longer an easy to understand abstraction, and neither is it a simulation, taking the worst from both worlds (complex and unrealistic). In other words, no.

PS: That said, it would be cool to have an 90 degree arc in from of our ships, extending 3 hexes forward. And we would be able to choose any of those hexes to end up on, not just three directions. (Taking into account the speed changes limits, of course.)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 25, 2013, 12:50:40 pm
Out of curiosity, is there any reason for squares over hexes besides "It's easier to draw"? (That's a perfectly acceptable answer, mind you.)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 25, 2013, 01:14:25 pm
And honestly, stop demanding justice, because there's a bunch of things that happened that I can too demand justice for.
YOUR MISINTERPRETATION OF ALL CAPS THAT WAS INTENDED TO LOOK HUMOROUSLY OVERBLOWN AS ACTUALLY OVERBLOWN HAS BEEN NOTED

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
But isn't the final result almost identical to what would happen if you only calculated the sweep before turning? I don't really care which of the two schemes is used (since the difference between them is negligible), but I'd really like to see one used. Having the ship magically teleport from facing southwest to facing west without ever facing anything in between seriously damages realism.

Also, have you thought about scrapping the grid entirely and just placing ships on a plain board, with two separate values for linear and turning speed? That should get rid of any physics inconsistencies.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 25, 2013, 01:21:36 pm
And honestly, stop demanding justice, because there's a bunch of things that happened that I can too demand justice for.
YOUR MISINTERPRETATION OF ALL CAPS THAT WAS INTENDED TO LOOK HUMOROUSLY OVERBLOWN AS ACTUALLY OVERBLOWN HAS BEEN NOTED
Your misunterpretation of my interpretation of your humor, of which you gave no indication of, and which would look exactly the same if it was not humor, but which I still interpreted correctly and decided to give a serious answer to because I actually found your point whether humorous or not to be interesting, was noted.

Quote
But isn't the final result almost identical to what would happen if you only calculated the sweep before turning? I don't really care which of the two schemes is used (since the difference between them is negligible), but I'd really like to see one used. Having the ship magically teleport from facing southwest to facing west without ever facing anything in between seriously damages realism.
Either that, or what we have now. The reason I'm okay with what we have now, is that I imagine it would be really difficult to aim cannons as the ship is rapidly turning. You kind of want to have some stable view as you aim.

Quote
Also, have you thought about scrapping the grid entirely and just placing ships on a plain board, with two separate values for linear and turning speed? That should get rid of any physics inconsistencies.
Yes, he already answered it. It's because measuring everything is more difficult and time-consuming than grid space.

Quote
Out of curiosity, is there any reason for squares over hexes besides "It's easier to draw"? (That's a perfectly acceptable answer, mind you.)
3-D space, mostly. Hexes are a bit harder in 3-D than 2-D. Also because this started as a completely random inspiration, and wasn't planned out very well (note: "very well" is relative) in advance.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 25, 2013, 01:32:37 pm
The reason I'm okay with what we have now, is that I imagine it would be really difficult to aim cannons as the ship is rapidly turning. You kind of want to have some stable view as you aim.
Huh. I was under the impression that we were more or less constantly turning (except when going in straight lines, obviously) and that going in straight lines in between turns on two consecutive turns was merely an abstraction.

Quote
Also, have you thought about scrapping the grid entirely and just placing ships on a plain board, with two separate values for linear and turning speed? That should get rid of any physics inconsistencies.
Yes, he already answered it. It's because measuring everything is more difficult and time-consuming than grid space.
But there's only one distance to be measured (the distance between ships). Everything else (such as moving distance) can be used merely by drawing a sector in front of the ship to indicate how far it is possible to move and turn.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 25, 2013, 01:43:00 pm
The reason I'm okay with what we have now, is that I imagine it would be really difficult to aim cannons as the ship is rapidly turning. You kind of want to have some stable view as you aim.
Huh. I was under the impression that we were more or less constantly turning (except when going in straight lines, obviously) and that going in straight lines in between turns on two consecutive turns was merely an abstraction.
It's an abstraction, but that doesn't change the fact that we turn and then move straight. If it makes any sense, I take it as an abstraction on one level, but a reality on another. ... To put in another way, it is conceptually an alternative to constant turning, but the game rules don't treat it that way in any way, shape, or form, except for the part where our ship continued turning after having the controls busted.


Quote
Also, have you thought about scrapping the grid entirely and just placing ships on a plain board, with two separate values for linear and turning speed? That should get rid of any physics inconsistencies.
Yes, he already answered it. It's because measuring everything is more difficult and time-consuming than grid space.
But there's only one distance to be measured (the distance between ships). Everything else (such as moving distance) can be used merely by drawing a sector in front of the ship to indicate how far it is possible to move and turn.
Actually, there's also the machine gun arcs which will have to be measured. The gun and cannons ranges, and how their difficulty increases with range. It gets even more interesting with obstacles, when they are added into the game. And god save you from having to determine if a cloud/smoke/special effect covers only half of a ship. So if Piecewise says it's too much for him, I an taking his word.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 25, 2013, 01:48:47 pm
The reason I'm okay with what we have now, is that I imagine it would be really difficult to aim cannons as the ship is rapidly turning. You kind of want to have some stable view as you aim.
Huh. I was under the impression that we were more or less constantly turning (except when going in straight lines, obviously) and that going in straight lines in between turns on two consecutive turns was merely an abstraction.
It's an abstraction, but that doesn't change the fact that we turn and then move straight. If it makes any sense, I take it as an abstraction on one level, but a reality on another. ... To put in another way, it is conceptually an alternative to constant turning, but the game rules don't treat it that way in any way, shape, or form, except for the part where our ship continued turning after having the controls busted.
The game rules are an abstraction. They also don't implement, for example, us having internal organs, but that doesn't mean we don't have them.
Quote
Also, have you thought about scrapping the grid entirely and just placing ships on a plain board, with two separate values for linear and turning speed? That should get rid of any physics inconsistencies.
Yes, he already answered it. It's because measuring everything is more difficult and time-consuming than grid space.
But there's only one distance to be measured (the distance between ships). Everything else (such as moving distance) can be used merely by drawing a sector in front of the ship to indicate how far it is possible to move and turn.
Actually, there's also the machine gun arcs which will have to be measured. The gun and cannons ranges, and how their difficulty increases with range. It gets even more interesting with obstacles, when they are added into the game. And god save you from having to determine if a cloud/smoke/special effect covers only half of a ship. So if Piecewise says it's too much for him, I an taking his word.
The ranges would be indicated either by sectors (for MGs) or by straight lines (for cannons). Is the enemy ship inside this sector? If yes, it can be fired upon. Pretty easy, if you ask me.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 25, 2013, 01:53:13 pm
Quote
The game rules are an abstraction. They also don't implement, for example, us having internal organs, but that doesn't mean we don't have them.
Doesn't change the way it feels. Currently it feels very separated. And when you have rules contradict the feel of the game, without changing the reason for why it feels that way, immersion suffers.

Quote
The ranges would be indicated either by sectors (for MGs) or by straight lines (for cannons). Is the enemy ship inside this sector? If yes, it can be fired upon. Pretty easy, if you ask me.
You forgot the difficulty increase as the range does and the special effects and the obstacles.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 25, 2013, 01:57:40 pm
For the record, the instant turns are (semi?-)justified by the Lodestones. I can believe that they could turn nearly instantly, or rather close enough to prevent aiming of cannons during a turn. It makes as much sense as anything else that lets us turn that fast.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 25, 2013, 02:06:01 pm
For the record, the instant turns are (semi?-)justified by the Lodestones. I can believe that they could turn nearly instantly, or rather close enough to prevent aiming of cannons during a turn. It makes as much sense as anything else that lets us turn that fast.
You forget about inertia.
Quote
The game rules are an abstraction. They also don't implement, for example, us having internal organs, but that doesn't mean we don't have them.
Doesn't change the way it feels. Currently it feels very separated. And when you have rules contradict the feel of the game, without changing the reason for why it feels that way, immersion suffers.
Wait, weren't you advocating for a square grid just now?
Quote
The ranges would be indicated either by sectors (for MGs) or by straight lines (for cannons). Is the enemy ship inside this sector? If yes, it can be fired upon. Pretty easy, if you ask me.
You forgot the difficulty increase as the range does and the special effects and the obstacles.
I still entirely fail to see the problem. More range = larger sector. Obstacles = ...uh, it's easier to draw.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
So what is the problem?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 25, 2013, 02:08:42 pm
How did I forget inertia?

Also, you're forgetting the most important reason, again.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 25, 2013, 02:11:54 pm
Screw Newton.


45 degree turns would be lost if we switched to hexes, so ships would almost certainly need to start turning faster (60 degree turns instead.)  Whether this is a good or bad thing is up for debate.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 25, 2013, 02:13:36 pm
Hm...hypothetically, we could also do 30 degree turns, if we had the inclination.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 25, 2013, 02:30:00 pm
Quote
The ranges would be indicated either by sectors (for MGs) or by straight lines (for cannons). Is the enemy ship inside this sector? If yes, it can be fired upon. Pretty easy, if you ask me.
You forgot the difficulty increase as the range does and the special effects and the obstacles.
I still entirely fail to see the problem. More range = larger sector. Obstacles = ...uh, it's easier to draw.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
So what is the problem?
Okay, I'm done here with this particular problem. I'll let Piecewise answer.

Quote
The game rules are an abstraction. They also don't implement, for example, us having internal organs, but that doesn't mean we don't have them.
Doesn't change the way it feels. Currently it feels very separated. And when you have rules contradict the feel of the game, without changing the reason for why it feels that way, immersion suffers.
Wait, weren't you advocating for a square grid just now?
Hexes to be precise, but yes. I am advocating for them. I just want the rules to be consistent with the feel of the game.
PS: If we would change to measurements, I would of course support a normal cannon arc.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 25, 2013, 02:58:12 pm
For the record, the instant turns are (semi?-)justified by the Lodestones. I can believe that they could turn nearly instantly, or rather close enough to prevent aiming of cannons during a turn. It makes as much sense as anything else that lets us turn that fast.
You forget about inertia.
Quote
The game rules are an abstraction. They also don't implement, for example, us having internal organs, but that doesn't mean we don't have them.
Doesn't change the way it feels. Currently it feels very separated. And when you have rules contradict the feel of the game, without changing the reason for why it feels that way, immersion suffers.
Wait, weren't you advocating for a square grid just now?
Quote
The ranges would be indicated either by sectors (for MGs) or by straight lines (for cannons). Is the enemy ship inside this sector? If yes, it can be fired upon. Pretty easy, if you ask me.
You forgot the difficulty increase as the range does and the special effects and the obstacles.
I still entirely fail to see the problem. More range = larger sector. Obstacles = ...uh, it's easier to draw.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
So what is the problem?

The problem is this:

"Turn right 22.5 degrees, tilt up 15 degrees, reduce speed by 1."

So then I have to translate a sector upwards across several levels of 3d space as represented by 2d planes. And I have to do that while taking into account the 3d grid movement of the other ship, laying in their plane transversing movement sectors and looking to see if, at any time during this simultaneous but uneven speeded movement, one or more lines of fire intersect. And lets not forget momentum, modifiers for difficulty of hitting while moving, and a dozen other things that will inevitably come up.

Thats not the game I want to create and it's not a game I want to run. I'm not aiming for warhammer, if anything I'm aiming for something more like Dust Tactics. I want something that is satisfying but is also relatively simple. I do not want this to devolve into people fighting spreadsheets with a 50 page list of tables to consult.





And thearpox, would you mind showing me what you want movement and shooting to look like on a hex grid? Because Moving north in a straight line seems like a problem.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 25, 2013, 03:02:52 pm
Quote
And thearpox, would you mind showing me what you want movement and shooting to look like on a hex grid? Because Moving north in a straight line seems like a problem.
Fair enough. I just want somebody moving North to be moving North faster than somebody moving NorthWest. That's my main problem with the square grid. Do you have any ideas on how to fix it?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 25, 2013, 03:03:24 pm
Or possibly west, depending on orientation.

I've got a couple ideas, just let me see if I can find some kind of hex-grid pictures to base them off of...
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 25, 2013, 03:09:22 pm
Octagons? Magically ignore the empty squares and just move through the big ones?
https://www.google.com/search?aq=f&sugexp=chrome,mod%3D0&q=octagons&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=I4XxUb__Jojo8gSeh4GIAw&biw=1280&bih=923&sei=JYXxUb2fM5OE9QTexYDIDA#um=1&hl=en&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=octagons+grid&oq=octagons+grid&gs_l=img.3...6544.12414.0.12620.9.7.2.0.0.0.230.873.2j4j1.7.0....0...1c.1.22.img..5.4.362.inZDKZPE2F4&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.49784469%2Cd.eWU%2Cpv.xjs.s.en_US.MpiVkF51mpA.O&fp=53a021071fbac8c0&biw=1280&bih=923&facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=fWzgElg0TJCI2M%3A%3BZrCk3F5Wb8_y9M%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fforum.profantasy.com%252Fextensions%252FInlineImages%252Fimage.php%253FAttachmentID%253D2376%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fforum.profantasy.com%252Fcomments.php%253FDiscussionID%253D3490%3B400%3B297

The reason I'm including a full url for this, is just because of how hilariously and needlessly long it is. Obviously it's not supposed to be copied.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 25, 2013, 03:12:23 pm
The next link over is to a page with the totally apt title "Making Wargames More Complicated." (http://www.quadibloc.com/other/bo02.htm)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 25, 2013, 03:14:46 pm
Only the one picture is actually needed, despite my thoughts that the other couple I prepared would be.

Straight-line on the hexes would be obvious. Most turns should be obvious. The only tricky bit is when you need to go 30 degrees off the obvious paths.
(http://i39.tinypic.com/2le2ekh.jpg)
This is easy for even-numbered movement. Odd-number requires a bit of fiddling, I suppose. It's not ideal...

Another option is to have a "momentum" like that one spaceship game had: The ship is going at a rate of two spaces west and one northwest, for instance. Only issue here is that facing is a bit of an issue.

And even if you don't want to do those, ask yourself: Is not being able to go north or south really that much worse than not being able to go north-by-northeast?

Ninjas.

Octagons? Magically ignore the empty squares and just move through the big ones?
https://www.google.com/search?aq=f&sugexp=chrome,mod%3D0&q=octagons&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=I4XxUb__Jojo8gSeh4GIAw&biw=1280&bih=923&sei=JYXxUb2fM5OE9QTexYDIDA#um=1&hl=en&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=octagons+grid&oq=octagons+grid&gs_l=img.3...6544.12414.0.12620.9.7.2.0.0.0.230.873.2j4j1.7.0....0...1c.1.22.img..5.4.362.inZDKZPE2F4&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.49784469%2Cd.eWU%2Cpv.xjs.s.en_US.MpiVkF51mpA.O&fp=53a021071fbac8c0&biw=1280&bih=923&facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=fWzgElg0TJCI2M%3A%3BZrCk3F5Wb8_y9M%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fforum.profantasy.com%252Fextensions%252FInlineImages%252Fimage.php%253FAttachmentID%253D2376%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fforum.profantasy.com%252Fcomments.php%253FDiscussionID%253D3490%3B400%3B297

The reason I'm including a full url for this, is just because of how hilariously and needlessly long it is. Obviously it's not supposed to be copied.
Equivalent to squares with diagonals allowed.
Also: http://forum.profantasy.com/extensions/InlineImages/image.php?AttachmentID=2376

The next link over is to a page with the totally apt title "Making Wargames More Complicated." (http://www.quadibloc.com/other/bo02.htm)
Amusing.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 25, 2013, 03:22:23 pm
Quote
Equivalent to squares with diagonals allowed.
Except that the diagonals actually have you moving less, and someone going in a straight line can catch up to someone going diagonally. That's all I want.

And I like octagons better than forcing the ships to turn.

The next link over is to a page with the totally apt title "Making Wargames More Complicated." (http://www.quadibloc.com/other/bo02.htm)
I love the part when he makes map with different square rules, combining hexagons and octagons, to make the inconsistencies cancel each other out.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 25, 2013, 03:34:27 pm
That dude has put way too much thought into board game design.  Some bits of that are thick as molasses.  I'm sure he's pretty smart, but it's hard to tell.


EDIT: Here is his 3D gamespace idea. (http://www.quadibloc.com/other/bo0204.htm)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 25, 2013, 03:49:48 pm
That dude has put way too much thought into board game design.  Some bits of that are thick as molasses.  I'm sure he's pretty smart, but it's hard to tell.


EDIT: Here is his 3D gamespace idea. (http://www.quadibloc.com/other/bo0204.htm)
((Hey, if he run a forum campaign for me, I'd jump in. As long as he bore the brunt of the explanation. (Did you actually read his stuff?)
But honestly, I think this stuff would translate really well into a turn-based computer strategy game.

Also, it's a bit like reading Moby Dick. Now I want a story based around explaining those concepts, like Moby Dick is an excuse to explain whaling to the masses. That would be awesome.))
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 25, 2013, 03:52:38 pm
Quote
Equivalent to squares with diagonals allowed.
Except that the diagonals actually have you moving less, and someone going in a straight line can catch up to someone going diagonally. That's all I want.
Common solution: Diagonals cost double.

Quote
And I like octagons better than forcing the ships to turn.
...Better than what?

Quote
The next link over is to a page with the totally apt title "Making Wargames More Complicated." (http://www.quadibloc.com/other/bo02.htm)
I love the part when he makes map with different square rules, combining hexagons and octagons, to make the inconsistencies cancel each other out.
Indeed.

That dude has put way too much thought into board game design.  Some bits of that are thick as molasses.  I'm sure he's pretty smart, but it's hard to tell.

EDIT: Here is his 3D gamespace idea. (http://www.quadibloc.com/other/bo0204.htm)
If his stuff is hard to follow and makes sense, it's probably genius.

Probably.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 25, 2013, 03:57:20 pm
That dude has put way too much thought into board game design.  Some bits of that are thick as molasses.  I'm sure he's pretty smart, but it's hard to tell.


EDIT: Here is his 3D gamespace idea. (http://www.quadibloc.com/other/bo0204.htm)
((Hey, if he run a forum campaign for me, I'd jump in. As long as he bore the brunt of the explanation. (Did you actually read his stuff?)

Until my eyes crossed and the words all ran together, yeah.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 25, 2013, 04:17:39 pm
I looked into his 3d game thing.

Nope.

Also his wargame thing, the grid part at least, seemed designed a lot more around terrain then anything else. And I have no idea why he would favor the combination octagon-hex board. The rule changes behind such a thing would be horrible; changing depending on what type of grid you're on, unable to move in a straight line without weaving like a drunk through extra hexes and squares. I've read it over and it seems like he's more interested in perfect statistical and geometric spreads then actually being something that makes sense and is easy to use. But maybe thats just my impression.

The octagon board might work though. I'll look at it. Though, to be honest, I don't see how it's different from right now. We're moving and shooting in 8 directions now anyways.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 25, 2013, 04:22:57 pm
The difference?

Octagonal >> 2 sq NorthEast = 1 sq North, 1 sq East.

What we have now >> 1 sq NorthEast = 1 sq North, 1 sq East.


Also, I loved the combination Octagon-Hex board. Not because it is usable in any way, but because of how hilarious it is. Especially with all the different colors.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 25, 2013, 04:27:24 pm
Oddly enough, I made a suggestion for how to counter that: Take the commonly-used route of making diagonals cost double.

Incidentally, that's farther from real math than diagonals being one space--the square root of two is a bit over 1.41, which is closer to 1 than 2.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 25, 2013, 04:29:53 pm
The problem with making stuff cost double is odd movement.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 25, 2013, 04:35:12 pm
And how is that not a problem for the octagonal thing suggested by whatsitsface? The guy clearly said you weren't to stop on squares.

And, as noted, another issue is that it's farther from reality that diagonals being 1.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 25, 2013, 04:43:56 pm
The difference?

Octagonal >> 2 sq NorthEast = 1 sq North, 1 sq East.

What we have now >> 1 sq NorthEast = 1 sq North, 1 sq East.


Also, I loved the combination Octagon-Hex board. Not because it is usable in any way, but because of how hilarious it is. Especially with all the different colors.
Oh, so you count the squares as a movement but you can't stop on them...That leads to the problem that all movement values have to be even. If not you're either going to end up on squares, or you're not gonna be able to use all your movement points
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 25, 2013, 04:44:26 pm
And how is that not a problem for the octagonal thing suggested by whatsitsface? The guy clearly said you weren't to stop on squares.

And, as noted, another issue is that it's farther from reality that diagonals being 1.
?? You skip the squares. Yes. You don't skip the octagons.
When you play square grid, an odd movement consting double does not work.

As for them being closer to one, that is true, but two is better for a strategy game (unless you can find some 1.5 grid  :-\) for one simple reason. It is while being less realistic, also less exploitable. If not being able to catch up to a person running away diagonally and fire your cannons at him is not a major design flaw, then I don't know what is. Doubling movement may cause you to be a little more sluggish, but it beats the alternative.

The difference?

Octagonal >> 2 sq NorthEast = 1 sq North, 1 sq East.

What we have now >> 1 sq NorthEast = 1 sq North, 1 sq East.


Also, I loved the combination Octagon-Hex board. Not because it is usable in any way, but because of how hilarious it is. Especially with all the different colors.
Oh, so you count the squares as a movement but you can't stop on them...That leads to the problem that all movement values have to be even. If not you're either going to end up on squares, or you're not gonna be able to use all your movement points
I seriously don't understand what's so hard to understand here. You skip the squares and you don't count them for movement.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 25, 2013, 04:48:18 pm
Hm. Now that I think about it, the octagonal grid does have the same problems as the square one, except that the straight movement paths are basically the diagonals. Actually... maybe give an extra space of movement in diagonals if you're moving two or more spaces?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 25, 2013, 04:58:02 pm
Hm. Now that I think about it, the octagonal grid does have the same problems as the square one, except that the straight movement paths are basically the diagonals. Actually... maybe give an extra space of movement in diagonals if you're moving two or more spaces?
Basically what 3.5 D&D does?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 25, 2013, 05:27:48 pm
The difference?

Octagonal >> 2 sq NorthEast = 1 sq North, 1 sq East.

What we have now >> 1 sq NorthEast = 1 sq North, 1 sq East.


Also, I loved the combination Octagon-Hex board. Not because it is usable in any way, but because of how hilarious it is. Especially with all the different colors.
Oh, so you count the squares as a movement but you can't stop on them...That leads to the problem that all movement values have to be even. If not you're either going to end up on squares, or you're not gonna be able to use all your movement points
I seriously don't understand what's so hard to understand here. You skip the squares and you don't count them for movement.
Whats hard to understand is:

Octagonal >> 2 sq NorthEast = 1 sq North, 1 sq East.

What we have now >> 1 sq NorthEast = 1 sq North, 1 sq East.

I was thinking in terms of movement not absolute relative location. I was wondering why you were saying that moving 2 squares north east would require you to move one north, then one east, rather then just moving 2 in the NE direction. I just misunderstood the context of what you were saying.



Now, in terms of this:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ta2hyjsaxc64grm/arc.png

The reason I suggested it was because, as you can see, it somewhat simulates the turning arc of the cannons as the ship transitions across 45 degrees. Basically, if the ship is turning slowly as it moves along it's path, then it's cannons should sweep and allow shots from any of these angles. That way, even though, movement wise the ship is just going in straight lines, the cannons still turn when the ship turns, in an abstract way. Oh well.




I think I'll stick with a grid, but I'll fool around and try to figure out how to do it better.

Unless of course the whole "arcs" thing isn't something people like and they'd prefer just the straight lines and sharp movement, even though it's more abstract.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 25, 2013, 05:28:12 pm
Toastarrr:  Finish cannon loading.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 25, 2013, 05:40:00 pm
I'm okay with a sharp arc as the ship turns. I'm okay with what we have now. The problem I have with what you're proposing is that it's hard to see at a glance where the borders are. Even after you clarified it, I am still not sure if their ship would hit ours. Also, the drawing looks awful. I can stomach ships that look like peanuts, but Paint is definitely not prepared to do arcs.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 25, 2013, 05:49:14 pm
I'm okay with a sharp arc as the ship turns. I'm okay with what we have now. The problem I have with what you're proposing is that it's hard to see at a glance where the borders are. Even after you clarified it, I am still not sure if their ship would hit ours. Also, the drawing looks awful. I can stomach ships that look like peanuts, but Paint is definitely not prepared to do arcs.
It's not the program, it's just me.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 25, 2013, 05:53:17 pm
I'm okay with a sharp arc as the ship turns. I'm okay with what we have now. The problem I have with what you're proposing is that it's hard to see at a glance where the borders are. Even after you clarified it, I am still not sure if their ship would hit ours. Also, the drawing looks awful. I can stomach ships that look like peanuts, but Paint is definitely not prepared to do arcs.
It's not the program, it's just me.
I'm trying to be nice, okay?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 25, 2013, 07:04:01 pm
RED
See if I can't take a machine gun and take it out of the deck mount, so I can shoot from another part of the ship, Halo style.
[T4 R1 S0]
NOOOOPE

No changes to turning. Speed down to two.

Try to treat myself, with the glass shards and all.
You yell down instructions to Draco about how to adjust the engines.
[T4 R7 S3]
Unfortunately you accidentally reverse two processes. No harm done, but the ship stays on it's course.
[T2 R6 S3]
You do however manage to pick the glass out of your arms and bandage the bigger gashes. Everything is good again.

Red - Danath

As GWG has wandered away from the engine room, go there myself and get ready to adjust the speed (assuming I don't need any intelligence skill just to do as i'm told)
You follow Vlad's instructions to the letter. Too bad his instructions were wrong, eh?

Cool. Mind if I suggest some sort of "Ship Status" spoiler for when the ships are so different? It could describe the systems, their capabilities, and their damage.

-----

"Ow! ...Huh. My hand's gone. I should probably be concerned about that."

Wait behind the other starboard cannon and fire if the enemy is in sight. Wonder if I could get a reasonably-priced prosthetic arm somewhere.

You run up to the rear, right cannon and get ready to fire...if the ship ever manages to lazily turn back in that direction.

BLUE

Toastarrr:  Finish cannon loading.
[R2 S1]
You manage to barely load that last shell.


Steven,Blue
Use my man strength to load the shit out of some cannons.
[R4 S0]
Good thing there's no more cannons to load. I probably would have had you drop an explosive shell at your feet.

Slow down to 1, turn left.
[T2 R4 S2]
You slow down to speed 1 and turn left, chasing after the red ship.








Overall, not the best or most exciting turn, eh?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 25, 2013, 07:10:44 pm
Keep watching the Blue ship and fire the cannon if it comes in line...
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 25, 2013, 07:13:37 pm
The next turn won't be much better. And the turn after that. Mayyybe the turn after that, but probably not. If anything, and especially if we're interested in expediently finishing the test, I'd just say to fast-forward the next few turns until one side can potentially get a shot at the other. Probably will have to be done at night, when Daruish comes online.

Is there anything I can repair? If yes, get busy on that.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 25, 2013, 07:17:45 pm
https://www.dropbox.com/s/3klmi9auq261zvi/stuff.png

List of ship modules so far. Anything missing you can think of?

The next turn won't be much better. And the turn after that. Mayyybe the turn after that, but probably not. If anything, and especially if we're interested in expediently finishing the test, I'd just say to fast-forward the next few turns until one side can potentially get a shot at the other. Probably will have to be done at night, when Daruish comes online.

Is there anything I can repair? If yes, get busy on that.
We can just end the test now, give me a bit to get everything ready for the next part and then start that, if you guys want. I think this has helped me work things out pretty well, brought up the issues and such.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 25, 2013, 07:20:59 pm
https://www.dropbox.com/s/3klmi9auq261zvi/stuff.png

List of ship modules so far. Anything missing you can think of?
Instructions on how to look at those would be nice, I guess.
Maybe some kind of ram?

Quote
We can just end the test now, give me a bit to get everything ready for the next part and then start that, if you guys want. I think this has helped me work things out pretty well, brought up the issues and such.
I am ambivalent towards this option.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 25, 2013, 07:22:46 pm
I don't know. I still want us to ram the other side, but if you feel like the test has served it's usefullness, I'm okay with it.

That said, if we don't fast-forward, the next few days can be a little dull.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 25, 2013, 07:24:47 pm
https://www.dropbox.com/s/3klmi9auq261zvi/stuff.png

List of ship modules so far. Anything missing you can think of?
Instructions on how to look at those would be nice, I guess.
Maybe some kind of ram?

Quote
We can just end the test now, give me a bit to get everything ready for the next part and then start that, if you guys want. I think this has helped me work things out pretty well, brought up the issues and such.
I am ambivalent towards this option.
Oh, don't worry there's gonna be instructions and data for everything. I'm just showing off what exists and asking if there's more you want.




I don't know. I still want us to ram the other side, but if you feel like the test has served it's usefullness, I'm okay with it.

That said, if we don't fast-forward, the next few days can be a little dull.


I can just move both ships close together, on a collision course if everyone is ok with that. I just don't want to jump you two together and then piss off people for doing so.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 25, 2013, 07:28:32 pm
Quote
Oh, don't worry there's gonna be instructions and data for everything. I'm just showing off what exists and asking if there's more you want.
Smoke shells? Set fuse, explode in air, can't see anything through a square.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: DaveTheGrave on July 25, 2013, 08:33:48 pm
https://www.dropbox.com/s/3klmi9auq261zvi/stuff.png

List of ship modules so far. Anything missing you can think of?
Instructions on how to look at those would be nice, I guess.
Maybe some kind of ram?

Quote
We can just end the test now, give me a bit to get everything ready for the next part and then start that, if you guys want. I think this has helped me work things out pretty well, brought up the issues and such.
I am ambivalent towards this option.
Oh, don't worry there's gonna be instructions and data for everything. I'm just showing off what exists and asking if there's more you want.




I don't know. I still want us to ram the other side, but if you feel like the test has served it's usefullness, I'm okay with it.

That said, if we don't fast-forward, the next few days can be a little dull.


I can just move both ships close together, on a collision course if everyone is ok with that. I just don't want to jump you two together and then piss off people for doing so.
Heres an idea, consider eveything in teh past a ranged test. And auto-ram us together. and begin a melee/CQC test.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 25, 2013, 08:51:49 pm
I could do this:

Team picks their designated pilot. I roll them against each other, whoever wins is the rammer, and loser is ramme. I put you one turn out from hitting-give everyone time to get ready, grab what they want, etc.- and then we hit and shit goes nuts.

Show of hands?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 25, 2013, 08:57:32 pm
Abstain.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: DaveTheGrave on July 25, 2013, 10:05:56 pm
I could do this:

Team picks their designated pilot. I roll them against each other, whoever wins is the rammer, and loser is ramme. I put you one turn out from hitting-give everyone time to get ready, grab what they want, etc.- and then we hit and shit goes nuts.

Show of hands?
Sounds like fun to me.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 25, 2013, 10:40:06 pm
Whatever's fine with me.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 25, 2013, 10:51:38 pm
Welp, suggest your pilots. Lets get this literal shipwreck going.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Powder Miner on July 25, 2013, 11:00:45 pm
In the event of ramming, can I be topdeck on the opposite side of the ramming side, to board?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 25, 2013, 11:04:57 pm
Dariush is the only blue pilot.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 25, 2013, 11:21:36 pm
In the event of ramming, can I be topdeck on the opposite side of the ramming side, to board?
Well, right now we're picking pilots. Best roll becomes the rammer. You'll have one turn before you hit to fuck about how you please to get ready.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 26, 2013, 12:40:36 am
Suggest myself, since I am already de facto Red Pilot.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 26, 2013, 02:39:00 am
Daruish
ARGHBLARGHWhy is it so hard for people to not make mistakes in my name? It's just seven letters, no unpronounceable combinations. WHYYYYY

I could do this:

Team picks their designated pilot. I roll them against each other, whoever wins is the rammer, and loser is ramme. I put you one turn out from hitting-give everyone time to get ready, grab what they want, etc.- and then we hit and shit goes nuts.

Show of hands?
So... we can totally be rammed by a ship with demolished controls? Heeeeeeeeeeell no. Let's just instead simulate boarding.

Also, since the need of sleep in no way means I withdraw my argument, regarding gridless space: maybe completely remove 3D and do plain free 2D? How is the third dimension currently used, anyway?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Lenglon on July 26, 2013, 02:54:34 am
ARGHBLARGHWhy is it so hard for people to not make mistakes in my name? It's just seven letters, no unpronounceable combinations. WHYYYYY
"It's because you didn't drink your blood this morning sweetie. You need it to make your aura big and strong. Look at my aura, people almost always get my name right, and mine's seven letters too. Now be a good boy and drink up so you'll make a good last impression on your new playmates today!"
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 26, 2013, 03:32:06 am
ARGHBLARGHWhy is it so hard for people to not make mistakes in my name? It's just seven letters, no unpronounceable combinations. WHYYYYY
"It's because you didn't drink your blood this morning sweetie. You need it to make your aura big and strong. Look at my aura, people almost always get my name right, and mine's seven letters too. Now be a good boy and drink up so you'll make a good last impression on your new playmates today!"
To be fair, I always read your name as "Lengnon", he he he.

To Darius: Putting "i" and "u" together is a bad idea. Almost as bad as "s" and "c". Don't do it. Also, "sh?" Really?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 26, 2013, 08:10:07 am
ARGHBLARGHWhy is it so hard for people to not make mistakes in my name? It's just seven letters, no unpronounceable combinations. WHYYYYY
"It's because you didn't drink your blood this morning sweetie. You need it to make your aura big and strong. Look at my aura, people almost always get my name right, and mine's seven letters too. Now be a good boy and drink up so you'll make a good last impression on your new playmates today!"
I don't drink any blood, and despite my name being thirteen letters in length people get it right.
Unless they refer to me as a large, metallic annelid.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Rolepgeek on July 26, 2013, 10:32:54 am
Technically, no one ever gets your name, right, since no one ever wants to write out the hole thing. GWG is a lot easier to type. My name, though, is memorable, but also is rarely gotten correct forthe same reasons as GWG.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 26, 2013, 12:03:42 pm
Daruish
ARGHBLARGHWhy is it so hard for people to not make mistakes in my name? It's just seven letters, no unpronounceable combinations. WHYYYYY

I could do this:

Team picks their designated pilot. I roll them against each other, whoever wins is the rammer, and loser is ramme. I put you one turn out from hitting-give everyone time to get ready, grab what they want, etc.- and then we hit and shit goes nuts.

Show of hands?
So... we can totally be rammed by a ship with demolished controls? Heeeeeeeeeeell no. Let's just instead simulate boarding.

Also, since the need of sleep in no way means I withdraw my argument, regarding gridless space: maybe completely remove 3D and do plain free 2D? How is the third dimension currently used, anyway?

It's not currently used, but an airship game without vertical movement seems kinda...lacking to me. That and sectors are a hell of a lot easier to do on a physical board with physical sector things, rather then in mspaint. Even If I switch to Paint.net (I hate more powerful image editing programs because they get increasingly obtuse in menu design) so I can freely rotate the sector, it's still gonna be somewhat annoying. Mostly because I'm not sure how players will show specifically where they want to go in the sector without having to edit the image themselves and adding a mark.

Not to mention the sectors thing makes everything else massively more complex as well. I mean, right now, I can say "Ok, this weapon's target roll increases by X for every grid space it moves through." while sectors would either require pixel measurements or special sectors for each and every weapon to demarcate range and such.

I know the system you're talking about here, I've watched a few Warhammer games, but it seems like that system would be MUCH more at home either in real life with miniatures and physical sectors to place down and move around, or  with specialized computer software.

I'm just going to guess but is that basically where you're getting this idea, from games like warhammer? Or maybe just Warhammer.






Also, I could just have the two ships pull along side each other. I'm just looking for a way to have a final confrontation since several people post inconsistently and it seems like some people are getting bored of chasing and never shooting.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 26, 2013, 12:28:54 pm
I've never played Warhammer or anything even remotely similar (well, Mark of Chaos on PC doesn't really count :P).

It's not currently used, but an airship game without vertical movement seems kinda...lacking to me.
Then why implement it if you have no use for it?

As for the sectors: the shitty diagram I made took me about 20 seconds in Paint: I drew a circle and then erased the unnecessary part. It could probably be done with an arc, but that was the first time I used Paint in W7 and I didn't want to experiment. I don't see any problem there.

As for the measurements, just make notches down the side of the sectors, with distance between two notches being equal to one 'tile'. It should be visually obvious into which subsector the target falls.

As for the targeting, I envisioned there just being a straight like coming out of the front of the ship and players stating a rough offset in degrees and the direction of the offset. I doubt anyone will want divisions more complex than 'halfway between the center line and the right side of the sector', anyway.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 26, 2013, 12:59:44 pm
I've never played Warhammer or anything even remotely similar (well, Mark of Chaos on PC doesn't really count :P).

It's not currently used, but an airship game without vertical movement seems kinda...lacking to me.
Then why implement it if you have no use for it?

As for the sectors: the shitty diagram I made took me about 20 seconds in Paint: I drew a circle and then erased the unnecessary part. It could probably be done with an arc, but that was the first time I used Paint in W7 and I didn't want to experiment. I don't see any problem there.

As for the measurements, just make notches down the side of the sectors, with distance between two notches being equal to one 'tile'. It should be visually obvious into which subsector the target falls.

As for the targeting, I envisioned there just being a straight like coming out of the front of the ship and players stating a rough offset in degrees and the direction of the offset. I doubt anyone will want divisions more complex than 'halfway between the center line and the right side of the sector', anyway.
We have uses for it in the coming game, underhang guns, bomb bays for fly overs, drop pods, etc. It's just not used now. Also, that sector you made works great...until you need to rotate it at odd angles, Try making a really good sector with everything laid out and then using an image editor to rotate it 15 degrees and watch everything get distorted.  Besides, we may not have sectors but we do kind of have movement that, if you plot the possible end points, end up looking a lot like a sector.

From starting at speed 3, north, end points can be as follows:
(http://i.imgur.com/WJiE6IR.png)

Also wasn't this originally about making cannon sweeps a thing?  Because if you just want to have that sort of "anything that gets within that 45 degree sweep as you first start moving" thing be a thing, thats a lot more doable.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 26, 2013, 02:36:49 pm
(http://i.imgur.com/WJiE6IR.png)

Also wasn't this originally about making cannon sweeps a thing?  Because if you just want to have that sort of "anything that gets within that 45 degree sweep as you first start moving" thing be a thing, thats a lot more doable.
Like that picture.

Also, is anybody else still in this? Because I think that in the endless arguing we've pretty much lost everyone.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 26, 2013, 02:42:31 pm
Here. I just haven't had anything to say.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 26, 2013, 04:38:48 pm
Yeah, we seem to have lost people. Oh well. Test was successful enough. I shall continue work on modular systems and return shortly with the build your own airship battles.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Rolepgeek on July 26, 2013, 05:20:09 pm
I will love this very much. Very, very much.

Build your own anything that fights is always amazing.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dansmithers on July 26, 2013, 06:31:50 pm
In for airship building
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 26, 2013, 06:33:34 pm
So am I.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Caellath on July 26, 2013, 06:55:24 pm
In for continuing as a commentator for as long as the tests continue.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: draco1234 on July 26, 2013, 07:03:36 pm
Same, it will be great.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 26, 2013, 09:24:26 pm
Back in!  This looks quite enjoyable!
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: syvarris on July 26, 2013, 10:00:06 pm
Been lurking, in for the next game.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: DaveTheGrave on July 26, 2013, 10:02:18 pm
Most Definetly IN.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Rolepgeek on July 26, 2013, 11:06:57 pm
Just to make sure, so I wasn't misunderstood or anything, I am

IN
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dansmithers on July 26, 2013, 11:08:54 pm
Me too.

IN!
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: mastahcheese on July 26, 2013, 11:46:43 pm
In
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 26, 2013, 11:56:00 pm
I'll keep you guys updated on how it's going.


Dev log:
Module "art" done. It's...it's a thing. Working on documentation and figuring out weight, cost, damage etc. and player items.

Oh, and Man Cannon.

(http://i.imgur.com/e0XVS9p.png)

It shoots Pods. Pods with a man inside it. 
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Empiricist on July 27, 2013, 01:06:54 am
Oh, and Man Cannon.

(http://i.imgur.com/e0XVS9p.png)

It shoots Pods. Pods with a man inside it. 
Definitely IN
((*goes off to start thinking up of ways to weaponize man cannon pods*))
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dansmithers on July 27, 2013, 02:00:51 am
Oh, and Man Cannon.

(http://i.imgur.com/e0XVS9p.png)

It shoots Pods. Pods with a man inside it. 
Definitely IN
((*goes off to start thinking up of ways to weaponize man cannon pods*))
Fill em' with explosive shells. And fuel. And bullets. And HORRIBLE BURNING PAIN!
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 27, 2013, 02:50:49 am
The man cannon is designed to get boarders onto opponent ships. It's rather expensive to just use it as a standard cannon, considering big cannons with explosive shells are already a thing. They're a thing in 10 different flavors.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Empiricist on July 27, 2013, 02:52:37 am
The man cannon is designed to get boarders onto opponent ships. It's rather expensive to just use it as a standard cannon, considering big cannons with explosive shells are already a thing. They're a thing in 10 different flavors.
Exactly. No one will suspect that we will use the specialized man cannon to deliver explosives in lieu of a regular cannon. So they'll rush towards it, expecting to fight whoever pops out, but instead, the pod will violently detonate :D
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 27, 2013, 03:17:26 am
We have uses for it in the coming game, underhang guns, bomb bays for fly overs, drop pods, etc. It's just not used now.
Well, okay. But we don't really need to turn the ship vertically to use any of those things, do we?
Also, that sector you made works great...until you need to rotate it at odd angles, Try making a really good sector with everything laid out and then using an image editor to rotate it 15 degrees and watch everything get distorted.
Why not simply redraw it?
Also wasn't this originally about making cannon sweeps a thing?  Because if you just want to have that sort of "anything that gets within that 45 degree sweep as you first start moving" thing be a thing, thats a lot more doable.
Cannon sweeps are a must. Gridless space is a want. :)

If you are so vehemently pro-grid, maybe at least switch over to hexes? Pleeeease? ^_^

Also, definitely re-in.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 27, 2013, 03:29:31 am
We have uses for it in the coming game, underhang guns, bomb bays for fly overs, drop pods, etc. It's just not used now.
Well, okay. But we don't really need to turn the ship vertically to use any of those things, do we?
Also, that sector you made works great...until you need to rotate it at odd angles, Try making a really good sector with everything laid out and then using an image editor to rotate it 15 degrees and watch everything get distorted.
Why not simply redraw it?
Also wasn't this originally about making cannon sweeps a thing?  Because if you just want to have that sort of "anything that gets within that 45 degree sweep as you first start moving" thing be a thing, thats a lot more doable.
Cannon sweeps are a must. Gridless space is a want. :)

If you are so vehemently pro-grid, maybe at least switch over to hexes? Pleeeease? ^_^

Also, definitely re-in.

Why would you want hexes? Their movement is even sharper and you lose two possible directions. Also makes moving in straight lines more difficult.

Also, I don't want to redraw it every turn because I don't want to spend 10-20 minutes carefully measuring out pixels when the same degree of movement is replicated using a simple grid.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 27, 2013, 05:06:40 am
Why would you want hexes? Their movement is even sharper and you lose two possible directions. Also makes moving in straight lines more difficult.
Because 1) It would make turning a full circle take only six turns and not eight and 2) it gets us rid of the diagonals-on-the-square-grid problem. And it only makes movement more difficult to north and south, but why would that matter?

Alternately, if you're dead set on sticking with squares, consider making each tile span two abstract 'units' orthogonally and three units diagonally, with speed being expressed as multiples of six units. Thus, the minimum speed of 6 would allow one to move either two tiles diagonally or three tiles orthogonally, second speed of 12 is four/six and so on. What do you think about this?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Jatha on July 27, 2013, 09:23:07 am
I would like to join the next game!

Also, will fighters make an appearance this round? Because if they are, then that is going to change my plans for my character's stats...
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 27, 2013, 10:46:06 am
Why would you want hexes? Their movement is even sharper and you lose two possible directions. Also makes moving in straight lines more difficult.
Because 1) It would make turning a full circle take only six turns and not eight and 2) it gets us rid of the diagonals-on-the-square-grid problem. And it only makes movement more difficult to north and south, but why would that matter?

Alternately, if you're dead set on sticking with squares, consider making each tile span two abstract 'units' orthogonally and three units diagonally, with speed being expressed as multiples of six units. Thus, the minimum speed of 6 would allow one to move either two tiles diagonally or three tiles orthogonally, second speed of 12 is four/six and so on. What do you think about this?
I wasn't aware there was a problem with diagonals. They seem to function just fine. Whats the problem with them?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: syvarris on July 27, 2013, 01:46:30 pm
I'm pretty sure the issue is that you travel just as far north if you head north-east rather than heading directly north.

Personally, I think it's a silly thing to worry about, but if it's really an issue I'd use D&D 3.5e's system: Going diagonal costs 1.5 times as much as going horizontal/vertical, rounded down.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 27, 2013, 02:19:40 pm
I'm pretty sure the issue is that you travel just as far north if you head north-east rather than heading directly north.
This. It is the main problem with the square grid.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 27, 2013, 02:29:34 pm
I'm pretty sure the issue is that you travel just as far north if you head north-east rather than heading directly north.

Personally, I think it's a silly thing to worry about, but if it's really an issue I'd use D&D 3.5e's system: Going diagonal costs 1.5 times as much as going horizontal/vertical, rounded down.
When your top speed is 3 squares, there's rarely a difference.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 27, 2013, 03:32:56 pm
https://www.dropbox.com/s/mdd59h9f0hmqxsw/possible%20end%20positions.png

Thats what the new possible end positions would be, if diagonals cost more. But 3 isn't gonna be top speed forever.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 27, 2013, 06:46:38 pm
Devlog:

Harpoons are complex man. I'm writing up the rules for it now. Basically, using the harpoon creates a length of chain between the two ships. Attempting to go beyond that length means taking damage as the harpoon tears through the walls of the ship. It also means the two speeds of the ships are linked, as are their headings.  For instance, Blue hits red in passing. They're both going 2 on headings like so.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/o7shdcg7ipqxz4e/heading1.png

However, rather then actually making it there, the red ship loses three sections of wall and both ships are yanked to this configuration and their speed reduced to 1.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/82o4608arcqb63r/heading%202.png

And yeah, the rules for all that are kinda complex.



Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Person on July 27, 2013, 06:51:04 pm
I'm !!IN!!. If there's still room.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 27, 2013, 06:52:15 pm
Harpoons sound Fun.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: mastahcheese on July 27, 2013, 06:53:29 pm
Harpoons sound Fun.
Yes, they do.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 27, 2013, 07:02:04 pm
I should point out that those harpoons actually have a built in threshold where if you go too fast it just tears the whole gun off your deck, taking the deck and any walls that are in the way with it.

Anywhoo, currently everyone who volunteers will be put in the drawing for the actual testers once these rules are finished. Only 10 are going in for the next test though. But its not like that will be the end of it, so don't worry if you don't get chosen for this round.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: mastahcheese on July 27, 2013, 07:28:09 pm
If the gun gets ripped off, can we hold on to it and climb up to the enemies' deck?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 27, 2013, 07:42:48 pm
If the gun gets ripped off, can we hold on to it and climb up to the enemies' deck?
If you manage to survive the superhuman feats of holding on as it's ripped out and then climbing up the chain, then yeah, you could. It's not something I would recommend though.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Rolepgeek on July 27, 2013, 09:17:40 pm
If the gun gets ripped off, can we hold on to it and climb up to the enemies' deck?
If you manage to survive the superhuman feats of holding on as it's ripped out and then climbing up the chain, then yeah, you could. It's not something I would recommend though.
I don't think it's all that superhuman, but it'd be difficult. Climbing up the chain isn't superhuman, certainly. Not letting go depends on how fast the thing rips off; if you cling to it with arms and legs at the back, you should be able to do it, though the tearing apart of walls could give you splinters. Still wouldn't recommend it, especially since you'd be by yourself.

You could simply climb the chain across to their deck.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 27, 2013, 10:55:59 pm
If the gun gets ripped off, can we hold on to it and climb up to the enemies' deck?
If you manage to survive the superhuman feats of holding on as it's ripped out and then climbing up the chain, then yeah, you could. It's not something I would recommend though.
I don't think it's all that superhuman, but it'd be difficult. Climbing up the chain isn't superhuman, certainly. Not letting go depends on how fast the thing rips off; if you cling to it with arms and legs at the back, you should be able to do it, though the tearing apart of walls could give you splinters. Still wouldn't recommend it, especially since you'd be by yourself.

You could simply climb the chain across to their deck.
It getting torn off means that you basically have to have two ships going opposite directions at maximum speed. It would be a bit like trying to hold on to a fridge that accelerates from 0 to 60 because its being pulled by a speeding train. A fridge that is then pulled through a 5 inch thick wooden wall and the metal plating beyond it.

Splinters are the least of your worries.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Rolepgeek on July 27, 2013, 11:07:39 pm
Well, that's part of my question; is a ship at speed three going 30 mph then?

Because, also, realistically, it'll jerk and there'll be moment as it the chain goes taut, then stuff starts ripping and tearing, chain goes to one side, and the harpoon gun gets ripped out. And then decelerates quickly, as it falls, and starts swinging like a pendulum(or, depending on the weight, ripping the holder out)

Though, actually, realistically, it would just tear out of their ship completely before the harpoon would come loose, if the people who made it had a semblance of intelligence.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 27, 2013, 11:23:53 pm
Well, that's part of my question; is a ship at speed three going 30 mph then?

Because, also, realistically, it'll jerk and there'll be moment as it the chain goes taut, then stuff starts ripping and tearing, chain goes to one side, and the harpoon gun gets ripped out. And then decelerates quickly, as it falls, and starts swinging like a pendulum(or, depending on the weight, ripping the holder out)

Though, actually, realistically, it would just tear out of their ship completely before the harpoon would come loose, if the people who made it had a semblance of intelligence.
Can't give you a definite speed. Mostly because if I do, I fear people can back calculate the size of the squares and find out they're something stupidly large and people are making cannon shots from 6 miles or something.

Yeah, it's much more a gameplay thing then a reality thing. Like with a lot of things, I skew reality a bit for the sake of fun. Really, when it reaches that point it will tear out and so will the harpoon on the other ship. It will rip them both free. But I've decided that if someone is fool enough to hang on to that gun end when it happens, I'm gonna give'em that chance to survive and climb up.



Anywhoo, Devlog for today: I've made good progress getting the weapons set up, only a few left to stat out and then I can move on to the systems and such. Things are progressing quickly and hopefully I can have the entire thing ready within the next few days, barring unforeseen delays. Worked on the map for the next test as well. It's fairly simple, more proof of concept then anything, but it's much larger then the past one, spanning 10 vertical layers and incorporating physical obstacles.

I'm also working on getting ship design condensed into a easy to understand format. Hopefully it will make sense and let people do what they want.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 27, 2013, 11:26:24 pm
You'd also need to define how long a turn is. And making cannon shots from 10 miles away isn't so bad if the cannons are more like modern artillery.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on July 27, 2013, 11:31:22 pm
But then you need muzzle velocities and Newton's Third Law and people wanting to do silly things like strafing via firing all the guns like that and no just no.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 28, 2013, 12:26:46 am
I leave for the day and the next thing I see is a bunch of people saying "In" for the next game, in the absense of any Piecewise's request for signups yet. Why would that happen?

Anyway, I think I'll sit this one out. But I'll still join the actual game, or the third test, if we need it.


Since the harpoons have a potential to be a cheap turning mechanism, what are the possibilities for latching harpoons on to terrain? And then we could detach the chain from the ship once it's served it's purpose.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Empiricist on July 28, 2013, 01:19:50 am
Would we be able to modify a harpoon to fire the other end separately so that we can tether ships to landforms or other ships?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 28, 2013, 02:33:10 am
Actually, I was thinking about downscaling everything in such a way that the top speed is 9 tiles orthogonally, 6 tiles diagonally. Obviously, the map would be somewhat larger.

Alternately, go hexes. Everyone loves hexes.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Spinal_Taper on July 28, 2013, 03:19:15 am
Waitlist. If there is such a thing.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: draco1234 on July 28, 2013, 04:50:06 am
You don't need to put your skills, as they are now decided after teams are, so teams don't have three pilots and two engineers for example.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Parsely on July 28, 2013, 05:36:10 am
PTW
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: miauw62 on July 28, 2013, 05:39:06 am
IN IN IN IN IN
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 28, 2013, 09:48:31 am
I leave for the day and the next thing I see is a bunch of people saying "In" for the next game, in the absense of any Piecewise's request for signups yet. Why would that happen?

Anyway, I think I'll sit this one out. But I'll still join the actual game, or the third test, if we need it.


Since the harpoons have a potential to be a cheap turning mechanism, what are the possibilities for latching harpoons on to terrain? And then we could detach the chain from the ship once it's served it's purpose.
Sure, I don't see why not. I'll just have write a rule for that, which is simple enough.

Would we be able to modify a harpoon to fire the other end separately so that we can tether ships to landforms or other ships?
I suppose you could attach the chain from one to the chain of another and fire the second one into a second target, effectively attaching them together.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 28, 2013, 09:55:26 am
Sounds Fun. I wonder what the difficulty would be to modify a harpoon gun to be meant to do that by default...
*starts mentally sketching plans for a double-barreled harpoon gun*
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 28, 2013, 10:41:14 am
Sounds Fun. I wonder what the difficulty would be to modify a harpoon gun to be meant to do that by default...
*starts mentally sketching plans for a double-barreled harpoon gun*
In the next test, you're not gonna be able to change the guns like that. Final game, sure, next test, not so much.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on July 28, 2013, 11:31:19 am
Uh, isn't the whole purpose of test games to test stuff you're going to implement in the final game?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Rolepgeek on July 28, 2013, 11:39:36 am
I think he means the final test game.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 28, 2013, 11:56:28 am
Modifying the guns like that in the final game is fine, but will require actually going out, buying the parts, spending some time modifying, etc. Not the sort of thing you can really do in a straight combat test like this.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 28, 2013, 03:04:58 pm
Ah, did I miss the next game?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 28, 2013, 03:06:47 pm
Ah, did I miss the next game?
Nope, it's a lottery. So you can still sign up and hope.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 28, 2013, 03:11:11 pm
(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRHzc_RT73QaB7U_CJQUcSw6hy7llKk3bdppphLkwCeAQ50edIhJg)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 28, 2013, 04:18:03 pm
And Guns is dones. Ammo too. Explosions are a bit wonky right now; Mortars will punch holes straight down through several levels (Note to self, add metal plating options for decks) and giant explosions can completely destroy the walls and structures in an area but leave floors and ceilings undamaged. That will be worked out in the final game, once I get the explosions working as 3d damage spheres, but it will work as it is for now. Currently working on the systems and structures part. After that it's weight and pricing for everything, then explanations of how things work. Power draw may or may not be a thing this round, when it comes to the power source. Will be in the finished game, may not be for now. It is coming along.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: syvarris on July 28, 2013, 08:26:57 pm
I leave for the day and the next thing I see is a bunch of people saying "In" for the next game, in the absense of any Piecewise's request for signups yet. Why would that happen?

Probably because all of Piecewise's games are Awesome, so any possible chance of getting in one is sufficient reason to post "in".
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 28, 2013, 08:34:08 pm
Everything is stat'd with costs and Weight now. Time to do a little calculating to see how strong these engines should be...

Things are growing close to being ready. I'm taking a break from Ship building and starting to put together the Crew manual right now. It will contain the stats and skills lists as well as an explanation of the piloting system. It, and the ship builder's guide, will be posted as two separate pdf's once they're done. They will include information from the finished game that may change/be non-applicable to the next test. When the time comes I'll point out what things you don't want to pick for now, but it should be fairly common sense. Ie don't pick fucking charisma and speech based things for a test of the combat system.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 28, 2013, 09:28:18 pm
Quote
Ie don't pick fucking charisma and speech based things for a test of the combat system.
i.e: Part of the reason I'll be skipping it. Playing a Charisma character is simply more involving than "Hit guy with sword," or "Load Cannons, Fire Cannons". No offense to people playing those types of characters. Although being a pilot and having to predict other's actions is always fun.
 
I leave for the day and the next thing I see is a bunch of people saying "In" for the next game, in the absense of any Piecewise's request for signups yet. Why would that happen?

Probably because all of Piecewise's games are Awesome, so any possible chance of getting in one is sufficient reason to post "in".
No matter how retorical a question is, someone will always answer it. Now why would that happen?  Now don't you dare fucking answer this, you, who pressed "quote" on this post. The beauty of retorical questions, is that they are best left unanswered.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Rolepgeek on July 28, 2013, 09:33:01 pm
Probably, at least this time, because you kinda literally asked for it.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on July 28, 2013, 09:33:11 pm
Idea: Weapons-grade megaphones that amplify and direct voices enough to carry demoralizing taunts to other ships!

A bit silly, but if you've got high enough Charisma and Taunt scores...
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Empiricist on July 28, 2013, 09:34:19 pm
Ie don't pick fucking charisma and speech based things for a test of the combat system.
Is charisma and speech anything like ER's charisma and speech system? You know, where it results in speech vs will rolls.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 28, 2013, 09:44:15 pm
Ie don't pick fucking charisma and speech based things for a test of the combat system.
Is charisma and speech anything like ER's charisma and speech system? You know, where it results in speech vs will rolls.
Pretty much. But trying to talk a guy out of a berserker rage is a bit harder then talking him into getting you a sandwich.

Quote
Ie don't pick fucking charisma and speech based things for a test of the combat system.
i.e: Part of the reason I'll be skipping it. Playing a Charisma character is simply more involving than "Hit guy with sword," or "Load Cannons, Fire Cannons". No offense to people playing those types of characters. Although being a pilot and having to predict other's actions is always fun.
 
I leave for the day and the next thing I see is a bunch of people saying "In" for the next game, in the absense of any Piecewise's request for signups yet. Why would that happen?

Probably because all of Piecewise's games are Awesome, so any possible chance of getting in one is sufficient reason to post "in".
No matter how retorical a question is, someone will always answer it. Now why would that happen?  Now don't you dare fucking answer this, you, who pressed "quote" on this post. The beauty of retorical questions, is that they are best left unanswered.
You should like that there is literally a category of skills called "Skullduggery"
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 28, 2013, 09:54:21 pm
Quote
You should like that there is literally a category of skills called "Skullduggery"
Yay! I am very happy to hear this. We'll see how it goes.

We'll see if anyone will be able to match Jack Sparrow level of "Skullduggery".
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 28, 2013, 09:55:46 pm
Has gun skill been split up?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: syvarris on July 28, 2013, 09:57:05 pm
I leave for the day and the next thing I see is a bunch of people saying "In" for the next game, in the absense of any Piecewise's request for signups yet. Why would that happen?
Probably because all of Piecewise's games are Awesome, so any possible chance of getting in one is sufficient reason to post "in".
No matter how retorical a question is, someone will always answer it. Now why would that happen?  Now don't you dare fucking answer this, you, who pressed "quote" on this post. The beauty of retorical questions, is that they are best left unanswered.

Probably because it's difficult to tell you meant it as rhetorical since it's just text. Why wouldn't I?  That's half the fun of rhetorical questions!Also, rhetorical is correct.  Not retorical. *Eye twitch*
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 28, 2013, 10:15:18 pm
Has gun skill been split up?
Yes it has. Specifically gun skills fall under the ranged category, but the stat they use is dependent on the type of weapon. This way guns are not restricted solely to Dex characters. As it is, Agility gets small guns like pistols and revolvers, Dexterity gets larger guns like rifles, and Strength gets sprayers, like flame throwers.

So someone could charge into battle wielding a great ax and a flame thrower, or a Rapier and a pistol, or a katana and a bolt action rifle.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on July 28, 2013, 10:17:20 pm
What stat are my precious deck guns associated with?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: syvarris on July 28, 2013, 10:22:18 pm
Are there high-caliber man-portable anti-materiel rifles?  And if so, do they use strength (Because they're heavy) or dexterity (Because they're used as sniper rifles)?

Sorry, I just love playing sniper characters.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: mastahcheese on July 28, 2013, 10:23:26 pm
So if you used a rocket launcher, it would be strength based, I assume?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 28, 2013, 10:28:27 pm
What stat are my precious deck guns associated with?
Your deck guns are actually an entirely different thing. Under the Gunnery umbrella thats used to cover all the ship based weaponry, like cannons, missiles and the like. It's dex based.

Are there high-caliber man-portable anti-materiel rifles?  And if so, do they use strength (Because they're heavy) or dexterity (Because they're used as sniper rifles)?

Sorry, I just love playing sniper characters.
Dexterity.

So if you used a rocket launcher, it would be strength based, I assume?
It's not under ranged. It's actually under explosives. But yeah, it's strength based.

Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 28, 2013, 10:58:52 pm
Having different guns fall under agility, dexterity, and strength feels really weird. It's a completely artifial distinction, and also locks you into the weapon combinations.

Maybe instead of that have things like "aiming," "eyesight," "steady hands," and "quick reactions"? So heaving a rocket launcher would need a certain Strength (+steady hands), low levels of which would subtract from the aiming skill (Dexterity), etc. And "eyesight" would then be important for firing it at a longer range. And having a low explosives skill could cause the stuff to blow up in the air or in your face. Although I don't understand why a rocket launcher would be under "explosives". It's not dynamite, and you're not really setting a fuse. You're just firing it like a gun.

Sorry if the last paragraph was a bit unclear, kind of hard to create examples without an actual system.

Anyway, or we could just choose 1/2/3 weapons to benefit from our "prefered weapons" skills. And then choose 2 more to benefit from "secondary weapons skills". It may make a little less sense (now that I think about it, it probably actually makes more sense) than having it be directly Str/Dex related, but it will help people avoid being locked in to stuff like Rapier/Pistol combinations.

PS: And actually, the most important skill during melee combat is neither Strength nor Dexterity, but Endurance. That, and knowing what you're doing. Experience, in other words. As the masters say, strength and speed are fasle gods. I demand being able to exhaust my enemies!

PPS: This is getting to the point of being silly, but it would also be cool to be able to invest points in reserves of fat. Being fat is good.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Rolepgeek on July 28, 2013, 11:56:13 pm
Quote
You're just firing it like a gun

Good luck with that. Not like it has a back-blast so you can't brace it in the same way as a rifle, shotgun, machine gun, revolver, pistol, or carbine. Not like it has a projectile on the end that's larger than the 'barrel'. Not like it fires slower projectiles than most any projectile weapon that uses gunpowder.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 29, 2013, 12:04:16 am
Quote
You're just firing it like a gun

Good luck with that. Not like it has a back-blast so you can't brace it in the same way as a rifle, shotgun, machine gun, revolver, pistol, or carbine. Not like it has a projectile on the end that's larger than the 'barrel'. Not like it fires slower projectiles than most any projectile weapon that uses gunpowder.
Not like it still has more in common with guns than setting up mine fields. Not like firing a rocket launcher requires no actual knowledge of how to make or set up explosives. Not like you're making the shells yourself.

Am I making myself clear? Honestly, if you want to argue that a rocket launcher does not fire like a gun, I can agree. But in that case might as well lump it together with flamethrower, not explosives.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Jatha on July 29, 2013, 12:04:43 am
I think my post was buried, so I'll ask again: will there be fighter planes in the next test game?

Also, IN!!!
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 29, 2013, 08:56:24 am
Having different guns fall under agility, dexterity, and strength feels really weird. It's a completely artifial distinction, and also locks you into the weapon combinations.

Maybe instead of that have things like "aiming," "eyesight," "steady hands," and "quick reactions"? So heaving a rocket launcher would need a certain Strength (+steady hands), low levels of which would subtract from the aiming skill (Dexterity), etc. And "eyesight" would then be important for firing it at a longer range. And having a low explosives skill could cause the stuff to blow up in the air or in your face. Although I don't understand why a rocket launcher would be under "explosives". It's not dynamite, and you're not really setting a fuse. You're just firing it like a gun.

Sorry if the last paragraph was a bit unclear, kind of hard to create examples without an actual system.

Anyway, or we could just choose 1/2/3 weapons to benefit from our "prefered weapons" skills. And then choose 2 more to benefit from "secondary weapons skills". It may make a little less sense (now that I think about it, it probably actually makes more sense) than having it be directly Str/Dex related, but it will help people avoid being locked in to stuff like Rapier/Pistol combinations.

PS: And actually, the most important skill during melee combat is neither Strength nor Dexterity, but Endurance. That, and knowing what you're doing. Experience, in other words. As the masters say, strength and speed are fasle gods. I demand being able to exhaust my enemies!

PPS: This is getting to the point of being silly, but it would also be cool to be able to invest points in reserves of fat. Being fat is good.

Yes, it's artificial, but it's like that so that people don't, or at least don't have to, dump all their points into one stat just to use one type of weapon. It's designed to allow people to be competent with multiple things, rather then really good at one thing and strangely terrible at everything else.

Also, endurance is a thing. It's just not the thing used to determine damage in combat. Fights that go on for more then two or three rounds will start having end rolls of increasing difficulty. Failing those end rolls means temporarily losing dice from the pool you're fighting with. In other words, you can tire out and become weaker as the fight progresses.



I think my post was buried, so I'll ask again: will there be fighter planes in the next test game?

Also, IN!!!
Yep. 2 kinds actually. Two different ways to get horribly shot and killed.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 29, 2013, 09:15:16 am
I was actually more/just as concerned about people getting locked in into a weapon combination. To quote you: "great ax and a flame thrower, or a Rapier and a pistol, or a katana and a bolt action rifle".
So can someone who wants to fight with a rapier and a bolt action rifle be just as menacing as somebody who goes Rapier and a pistol?

Also, I don't understand how
Quote
Maybe instead of that have things like "aiming," "eyesight," "steady hands," and "quick reactions"? So heaving a rocket launcher would need a certain Strength (+steady hands), low levels of which would subtract from the aiming skill (Dexterity), etc. And "eyesight" would then be important for firing it at a longer range.
would lead to
Quote
dump all their points into one stat just to use one type of weapon.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 29, 2013, 09:40:23 am
I was actually more/just as concerned about people getting locked in into a weapon combination. To quote you: "great ax and a flame thrower, or a Rapier and a pistol, or a katana and a bolt action rifle".
So can someone who wants to fight with a rapier and a bolt action rifle be just as menacing as somebody who goes Rapier and a pistol?

Also, I don't understand how
Quote
Maybe instead of that have things like "aiming," "eyesight," "steady hands," and "quick reactions"? So heaving a rocket launcher would need a certain Strength (+steady hands), low levels of which would subtract from the aiming skill (Dexterity), etc. And "eyesight" would then be important for firing it at a longer range.
would lead to
Quote
dump all their points into one stat just to use one type of weapon.
I should explain that skills offer more dice to the pool then stats, and that stats are not wildly differentiated in this game, at least not at the beginning. You all start with a few points in each stat and none in skills and then have points to distribute as you want. You can sink all your points into dex and still use strength weapons perfectly fine as long as you put a point or 3 into the skills.

As per your Aiming, Eyesight, etc thing, it wouldn't cause over specialty, but I fear that those would lead to even more artificial distinctions; like weapons that use one of those skills much more then others or confusion over exactly what the difference between them is. Also, it would inevitably end with speed being the god stat. Because it would probably be like "Roll quick reactions to see who gets their shot in first" and then no one would ever be able to beat someone who just sunk a bunch of points in speed. And I've been trying to get away from that for a while now.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on July 29, 2013, 09:57:13 am
Well, if you watch Westerns, speed is the god stat. If you hit of course. Or he isn't out of range. Or if your gun doesn't jam. And he doesn't happen to wear armor. Or he didn't throw a smoke or a flash grenade before appearing. Or if he didn't happen to sneak up on you. And if he doesn't just ignore the pain and fire back. And kill you.
These things only really become god stats if you let them. The devil's in the details.

But anyway, I'm not sure I agree with your conclusions, but I don't think I can really convince you without doing a test with the system that I am thinking of. Or writing 50 pages of crap no one will ever read. And since we're doing a test anyway, might as well do yours. Since it's your game.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on July 29, 2013, 10:02:48 am
Well, if you watch Westerns, speed is the god stat. If you hit of course. Or he isn't out of range. Or if your gun doesn't jam. And he doesn't happen to wear armor. Or he didn't throw a smoke or a flash grenade before appearing. Or if he didn't happen to sneak up on you. And if he doesn't just ignore the pain and fire back. And kill you.
These things only really become god stats if you let them. The devil's in the details.

But anyway, I'm not sure I agree with your conclusions, but I don't think I can really convince you without doing a test with the system that I am thinking of. Or writing 50 pages of crap no one will ever read. And since we're doing a test anyway, might as well do yours. Since it's your game.
Yeah, if it doesn't work I'll change things. There is a bit of a thing to give speed an advantage sometimes though. Eh, you'll see when the manual is finished.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on August 05, 2013, 10:14:41 am
Bump.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on August 05, 2013, 08:20:54 pm
Devlog;

Man, it's been a while. Fear not, I am still actively working on this. I've handled all the skills, I've got the systems for melee and ranged ready, which includes dual wielding rules for ranged, melee and a combination. Rules for fighting multiple opponents, rules for taking and moving between cover, rules for assassination and critical blows etc.

Currently, I'm working on the wounding system and then onto the player items. After that it's pretty much done, mechanically.

I mean, I'll still have to create a bunch more ship items and the world maps and figure out exactly how the fleshers raise those newts...but we can worry about that after this test! Soon friends,soon.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on August 05, 2013, 09:33:49 pm
Quote
Man, it's been a while. Fear not, I am still actively working on this. I've handled all the skills, I've got the systems for melee and ranged ready, which includes dual wielding rules for ranged, melee and a combination. Rules for fighting multiple opponents, rules for taking and moving between cover, rules for assassination and critical blows etc.
((Are you sure this isn't just Assasins Creed 4, The Forum Game?

Also, what do you mean by a "flesher," and what is a "newt"?))
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: DaveTheGrave on August 05, 2013, 09:47:33 pm
Pmed actions
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on August 05, 2013, 09:51:48 pm
Pmed actions
Yes, there will be. In fact, combat kind of relies around it.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on August 05, 2013, 09:53:58 pm
Can we take a point in Linguistics so we can taunt our enemies in a language they can't understand?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on August 05, 2013, 10:07:13 pm
Can we take a point in Linguistics so we can taunt our enemies in a language they can't understand?
No. But the speech skill does have a "Intimidation" specialization. So you could literally specialize in trash talk.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on August 05, 2013, 10:59:49 pm
Quote
Also, what do you mean by a "flesher," and what is a "newt"?))
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dansmithers on August 05, 2013, 11:07:26 pm
I know what newts are (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=newt).
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 05, 2013, 11:14:14 pm
Yes, because that's definitely the kind of newt piecewise meant, and it definitely fit the context...
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: mastahcheese on August 06, 2013, 12:00:13 am
Can we take a point in Linguistics so we can taunt our enemies in a language they can't understand?
No. But the speech skill does have a "Intimidation" specialization. So you could literally specialize in trash talk.
This
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on August 06, 2013, 12:34:02 am
Quote
Also, what do you mean by a "flesher," and what is a "newt"?))
I'm not saying~

Feel free to guess.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on August 06, 2013, 12:36:41 am
Quote
Also, what do you mean by a "flesher," and what is a "newt"?))
I'm not saying~

Feel free to guess.

Is it a kind of metal alloy?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dansmithers on August 06, 2013, 12:37:54 am
Yes, because that's definitely the kind of newt piecewise meant, and it definitely fit the context...
Yes, yes it is.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on August 06, 2013, 12:46:58 am
Quote
Also, what do you mean by a "flesher," and what is a "newt"?))
I'm not saying~

Feel free to guess.
((Aww, now I will have to go on 4chan and start a campaign to crack your computer so we can see the files. :P))
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dansmithers on August 06, 2013, 12:55:48 am
I plan to specialize in RAMMMING SPEED! CANNONS ARE ACCESSORIES TO THE BOW THAT IS FOR RAMMING!
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on August 06, 2013, 01:00:51 am
I plan to specialize either in dakka or ranting.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: mastahcheese on August 06, 2013, 02:13:44 am
I plan to specialize in RAMMMING SPEED! CANNONS ARE ACCESSORIES TO THE BOW THAT IS FOR RAMMING!
Why not just mount all cannons to face forward? Then you can Ram your dakka plates into them at full auto.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dansmithers on August 06, 2013, 02:16:55 am
I plan to specialize in RAMMMING SPEED! CANNONS ARE ACCESSORIES TO THE BOW THAT IS FOR RAMMING!
Why not just mount all cannons to face forward? Then you can Ram your dakka plates into them at full auto.
(http://emotibot.net/pix/1073.jpg)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: mastahcheese on August 06, 2013, 02:34:55 am
I don't think that word means what you think it means.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: miauw62 on August 06, 2013, 03:57:01 am
I think we're going to have teams that consist solely of pilots and trash talkers and this game will just devolve into a bigass rap battle. That's just my prediction, tough :P
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dansmithers on August 06, 2013, 04:00:31 am
I think we're going to have teams that consist solely of pilots and trash talkers and this game will just devolve into a bigass rap battle. That's just my prediction, tough :P
YO, WE'Z GONNA GET DOWN WIV DA BEETZ!
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on August 06, 2013, 10:49:39 am
I plan to specialize in RAMMMING SPEED! CANNONS ARE ACCESSORIES TO THE BOW THAT IS FOR RAMMING!
Why not just mount all cannons to face forward? Then you can Ram your dakka plates into them at full auto.
((This is too funny to not answer seriously. The problem with that idea, is that you are going to have a very flat front, which will pretty much defeat the point of ramming, and if the opponent simply turns to face you, it will inflict more damage on you than on the opponent. Additionally, all the cannons you mounted this way are going to be destroyed when you faceplant into him.))

I think we're going to have teams that consist solely of pilots and trash talkers and this game will just devolve into a bigass rap battle. That's just my prediction, tough :P
((Trash talking does not mean, and does not equal a rap battle. Oh you silly modern people with an incredibly narrow perspective on this.))
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: miauw62 on August 06, 2013, 11:07:56 am
I assume rapping falls under intimidation, tough.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on August 06, 2013, 11:17:13 am
I assume rapping falls under intimidation, tough.
Technically any form of communication used to intimidate would fall under this, from your momma jokes to rude gestures.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 06, 2013, 11:34:05 am
Quote
Also, what do you mean by a "flesher," and what is a "newt"?))
I'm not saying~

Feel free to guess.
If we guess right, will you tell us?
If so, does that apply for both or just one?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Dariush on August 06, 2013, 01:29:09 pm
Well, I probably already said so, but in case I didn't, IN.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: mastahcheese on August 06, 2013, 05:42:09 pm
I plan to specialize in RAMMMING SPEED! CANNONS ARE ACCESSORIES TO THE BOW THAT IS FOR RAMMING!
Why not just mount all cannons to face forward? Then you can Ram your dakka plates into them at full auto.
((This is too funny to not answer seriously. The problem with that idea, is that you are going to have a very flat front, which will pretty much defeat the point of ramming, and if the opponent simply turns to face you, it will inflict more damage on you than on the opponent. Additionally, all the cannons you mounted this way are going to be destroyed when you faceplant into him.))
I'm sure there's even more things wrong with it if we kept trying, but yes, on a scale of 0 to 10 of bad ideas, it has 4 digits.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on August 06, 2013, 08:59:13 pm
Wounds in this game are going to be pretty harsh in that they're gonna be realistic. And that they'll impact stats. For instance, if you lose one arm, you effectively lose 1/4 of your strength points. Shooting someone in the leg will cripple their speed to greater and lesser degrees depending on the injury and the person's end roll. After I finish this up what I'm gonna do is post the pdf and then ask two people to make up quick, throwaway, pure combat characters to test it with me real quick.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Rolepgeek on August 06, 2013, 09:36:30 pm
The only problem with realistic wounds is that they screw with the balance when dealing with two groups of a few highly elite people.

When you have 50 people on a ship and 5 of them lose 1/4 of their strength, not a big deal.
When you have 10, and the primary strongman loses 1/4 of his strength? It's a big deal.

That said, I still like realism. But if we're going to be only a few people, we should have the 'FIGHT THROUGH THE PAIN' magic all elite people get.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on August 06, 2013, 09:41:48 pm
The only problem with realistic wounds is that they screw with the balance when dealing with two groups of a few highly elite people.

When you have 50 people on a ship and 5 of them lose 1/4 of their strength, not a big deal.
When you have 10, and the primary strongman loses 1/4 of his strength? It's a big deal.

That said, I still like realism. But if we're going to be only a few people, we should have the 'FIGHT THROUGH THE PAIN' magic all elite people get.
Or maybe we should just have creative ways to strike back? I actually like realistic wounds, and in regards to a ship losing it's strongman, I would actually maintain that we should have benefits to surrendering instead of dragging out the conlict. If the other ship is able to handily defeat you, than good. Nothing wrong with having a short match.

That said, I very very much prefer crafty ways to catch up to your opponents, than having everyone be a bullet sponge.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Toaster on August 06, 2013, 09:43:32 pm
Or, to put it another way, to have your sharpshooter aim for the pilot and incapacitate him is a rewarding task, even if he can only shoot him in the arm.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on August 06, 2013, 09:45:46 pm
Would it be possible to make a bullet sponge? That might be interesting to play, as a character which serves the crew by stepping in front of enemy fire.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on August 06, 2013, 09:55:01 pm
Would it be possible to make a bullet sponge? That might be interesting to play, as a character which serves the crew by stepping in front of enemy fire.
A bullet sponge as in you can get hit, but be able to carry on? Absolutely, you can buff up your Endurance stats. Also, I am sure that there will be different armors and other stuffs available in the final version. The thing to remember with Piecewise, is that if you have a creative idea that fits in the setting, he will usually implement it.

Actually stepping in front of a machine-gun and soaking up the bullets? I very much doubt it. Unless you do it in a smart and creative way, (ie, dexterity and trickery based, not pure fat,) it just seems ridiculous.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on August 06, 2013, 10:55:47 pm
Would it be possible to make a bullet sponge? That might be interesting to play, as a character which serves the crew by stepping in front of enemy fire.
With armor or a ballistic shield, sure. It would take damage and couldn't do it forever, but yeah that would work. But without it, no, you can't stat a man who specializes in being shot. Well, you could make someone very tough so that they take it better, but not just sit there and bounce bullets off your abs.

Or, to put it another way, to have your sharpshooter aim for the pilot and incapacitate him is a rewarding task, even if he can only shoot him in the arm.
I'd still aim for the head though.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 07, 2013, 12:52:11 am
Would it be possible to make a bullet sponge? That might be interesting to play, as a character which serves the crew by stepping in front of enemy fire.
With armor or a ballistic shield, sure. It would take damage and couldn't do it forever, but yeah that would work. But without it, no, you can't stat a man who specializes in being shot. Well, you could make someone very tough so that they take it better, but not just sit there and bounce bullets off your abs.
Oh, darn, I'll have to play a character who does something.
Another problem comes into play like it does for Captain America's shield: Why would they shoot at you?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on August 07, 2013, 09:37:49 am
Would it be possible to make a bullet sponge? That might be interesting to play, as a character which serves the crew by stepping in front of enemy fire.
With armor or a ballistic shield, sure. It would take damage and couldn't do it forever, but yeah that would work. But without it, no, you can't stat a man who specializes in being shot. Well, you could make someone very tough so that they take it better, but not just sit there and bounce bullets off your abs.
Oh, darn, I'll have to play a character who does something.
Another problem comes into play like it does for Captain America's shield: Why would they shoot at you?
Unlike Captain America, shields and armor aren't fool proof. They offer passive defensive bonuses but it's still possible for attacks to get through them. Plus they take damage every time they block attacks, so it's possible to just drill your way through them with enough damage.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 07, 2013, 09:42:10 am
Not quite my question. My question was: Why would the enemy shoot at the bullet sponge and not, say, the ship? Or the pilot?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on August 07, 2013, 10:04:44 am
Not quite my question. My question was: Why would the enemy shoot at the bullet sponge and not, say, the ship? Or the pilot?
Oh, well that I don't know. Maybe because the bullet sponge is charging at them, swinging a lead pipe over his head? I never attempt to decipher the machinations of players.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Rolepgeek on August 07, 2013, 10:21:48 am
Not quite my question. My question was: Why would the enemy shoot at the bullet sponge and not, say, the ship? Or the pilot?
Probably because anti-personnel weapons will do jackshit to the ship?and the bullet sponge is standing in between them and the pilot, while everyone else is belowdecks?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Thearpox on August 07, 2013, 10:46:13 am
Not quite my question. My question was: Why would the enemy shoot at the bullet sponge and not, say, the ship? Or the pilot?
Easy to hit, and lack of knowledge of him being a bullet sponge.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: piecewise on August 10, 2013, 12:46:32 am
So here is the incomplete Airman's manual.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/9bhv3vmknnotxu1/Airship%20Crew%20Manual.pdf
It contains only information about the player mechanics, with nothing about the ship stuff. That comes in the next part. Right now, this should be enough to let you consider what kind of character you want to make. Tomorrow, assuming I shake this massive headache, I'll be taking 2 people to do a pvp test. In case you want to figure out what your character would be if you're chosen for that quick test, quick and dirty is as follows:

8 points for skills, 8 points for stats.
1 ranged weapon, 1 melee weapon.

Keep in mind that for this test, the weapons won't have any negatives or bonuses attached to them, so don't bother being too specific in the exact make and model of gun or anything.

Oh and do me a favor and post if you want to take part in this. Or if you see any glaring omissions or confusing sections in the text. Oh and download the pdf, otherwise the tables might not show up right. At least it doesn't on my pc.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Remuthra on August 10, 2013, 12:48:48 am
>Join Test
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Dansmithers on August 10, 2013, 01:10:07 am
Finished my sheet (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1T-Mhdqm9PACxpTd6jlnA61T4EbQ747tqSgr2mug0at8/edit)
Gentlemen.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: DaveTheGrave on August 10, 2013, 01:29:04 am
>I'll join, Making a character right now:

Stats:
Dex:4
Agi:2
Chr:0
Int:0
Str:0
Per:2
End:0
Will:0

Skills:
Dual Weilding (ranged) - 5
Stealth - 3
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Remuthra on August 10, 2013, 01:39:52 am
Moe Ridger

Stats:
Dex: 0
Agi: 0
Chr: 0
Int: 0
Str: 2
Per: 0
End: 6
Will: 0

Skills:
Crushing and Hacking 8

Items Desired:
Sledgehammer
Flamethrower

What are the rules for two-handers?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: piecewise on August 10, 2013, 09:10:49 am
Stats:
Dex: 0
Agi: 0
Chr: 0
Int: 0
Str: 2
Per: 0
End: 6
Will: 0

Skills:
Crushing and Hacking 8

What are the rules for two-handers?
There aren't any special ones right now, other then equip load which isn't mentioned in this text because I haven't gotten to the items. It's assumed that, unless you're dual wielding, you're using both hands. So there's no bonuses or anything to it, except being able to carry heavier weapons.

I'm gonna give the sign ups till this evening so people have a chance to show up. Then I'll randomly draw the players, stick them in an arena and let them duke it out.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: miauw62 on August 10, 2013, 09:15:19 am
If thesee characters are only for the arena, I'll pass for now.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: piecewise on August 10, 2013, 10:08:12 am
Yeah, I'm just putting the combat system through it's paces for now. Then we'll put the custom air combat into practice. And then the full game; hopefully with a simultaneous full rulebook release. Fingers crossed. 
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Toaster on August 10, 2013, 01:09:47 pm
Sure.

Toastarrr

(Anything not listed is 0)

Stats:

Dex: 4
Agi: 2
End: 2

Skills:

Stabbing/Piercing: 3
Hand Guns: 5

I'll take a rapier and a SMG.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: piecewise on August 10, 2013, 03:27:12 pm
So far toaster is the only one to actually say what kind of weapons he wants. Bravo toaster.

I'm currently taking a break from the more in depth and mindnumbing aspects of the game (Explaining the minutiae of building a ship and stating items- acid sprayers anyone?) to work on the flesher stuff a bit. They've got enough mechanics that I could build a game around just their stuff.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Remuthra on August 10, 2013, 03:28:55 pm
So far toaster is the only one to actually say what kind of weapons he wants. Bravo toaster.
Check my application again :P.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Rolepgeek on August 10, 2013, 04:05:22 pm
Raalup

Stats:
Agi: 5
Dex: 1
End: 2

Slashing and Cutting 5
Rifle 3

Items:
Sword
Rifle

Tada!

You said not to be specific...
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Octobomb on August 10, 2013, 04:30:19 pm
Take my money. All of it. On second thoughts I might have a stroke from the sheer awesome of this, so I'll just write you into my will.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: piecewise on August 10, 2013, 04:45:30 pm
Raalup

Stats:
Agi: 5
Dex: 1
End: 2

Slashing and Cutting 5
Rifle 3

Items:
Sword
Rifle

Tada!

You said not to be specific...
Yeah, I meant specific as in don't tell me you want an M1 Garand with expanded ammo capacities, a modified firing mechanism for full auto fire, a laser dot scope and attached bayonet, etc. You know, go full gun nerd on me and then get annoyed when it doesn't matter for this test.

Take my money. All of it. On second thoughts I might have a stroke from the sheer awesome of this, so I'll just write you into my will.
This is high praise. Are you talking about the idea in general or the recently released rules? I assume the idea in general.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Octobomb on August 10, 2013, 04:54:53 pm
Well... Both. I've seen professionally written rule sets that handle things a lot worse than what you have. Plus my emotions tend to handle a bit like a sledgehammer - I'm not very emotionally subtle, so to speak. Anyways, IN.

Dave Stevens

Stats:
Dex: 0
Agi: 3
Chr: 0
Int: 0
Str: 1
Per: 1
End: 3
Will: 0
Skills:
Ranged Weapons:1
    Handguns:2
    Rifles?:2
Medical:1
    First aid:1
Melee:1
Preferred weapons:
Shotgun
Uzi
I think I got that right.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: piecewise on August 10, 2013, 05:22:54 pm
Well... Both. I've seen professionally written rule sets that handle things a lot worse than what you have. Plus my emotions tend to handle a bit like a sledgehammer - I'm not very emotionally subtle, so to speak. Anyways, IN.

Dave Stevens

Stats:
Dex: 0
Agi: 3
Chr: 0
Int: 0
Str: 0
Per: 2
End: 3
Will: 0
Skills:
Handguns, 3, Rifles? 3, Assassination 1 and First aid 1
Preferred weapons:
Shotgun
Uzi
I think I got that right.

Almost,not quite though. I'm gonna post something from the skills section that I think pretty much everyone either forgot or just missed.

Quote
General skills must be taken at least once before before specialized skills of the same type can be taken. You have five (8 for this test) points to spend on increasing skills and no more then 3 points can be put into any one skill, general or specialized.

So to take any of the melee skills, you first have to put a point in the general "Melee" skill. The big, page wide boxes that top every series of specialized skills are General skills. The smaller ones are the specialized ones. And there's also that skill limit of 3 in any skill (Not counting the "combat skills" skills).

So yours would be
Ranged:1
     Handguns:X
     Rifles: X
Skullduggery:1
     Assassination:X
Medical:1
     First aid:X

It may seem sort of strange, but it lets someone become decent in lots of skills vs becoming really good in one.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Rolepgeek on August 10, 2013, 05:27:58 pm
Raalup

Stats:
Agi: 5
Dex: 1
End: 2

Melee 1
Slashing and Cutting 3
Ranged 1
Rifle 3

Items:
Assault Rifle
Longsword

This better then?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: piecewise on August 10, 2013, 05:30:39 pm
Raalup

Stats:
Agi: 5
Dex: 1
End: 2

Melee 1
Slashing and Cutting 3
Ranged 1
Rifle 3

Items:
Assault Rifle
Longsword

This better then?
Perfect.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Octobomb on August 10, 2013, 05:43:59 pm
Consider it fixed. Possibly.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: piecewise on August 10, 2013, 05:51:48 pm
Consider it fixed. Possibly.
Yep yep. Out of curiosity, why did you put a point in melee if you have no melee weapons? Unless you intend to use your ranged weapons as clubs; which would make them strength weapons. Because shooting in melee still uses the ranged skills.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Octobomb on August 10, 2013, 06:11:50 pm
General flexibility, really. Because I WILL be in melee range at some point due to my dumb tactics, so a better chance of blocking or simply inserting shotgun butt into guts before a shot to the head is useful n stuff. That said, I'll just change my stats...

Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 10, 2013, 06:27:24 pm
Cromwell Jackson

Stats:
Dex: 3
Agi: 2
Str: 3

Melee 1
-Crushing/Hacking 1
Ranged 1
-Sprayers/Explosives 3
Fighting Opposites 2

Items:
Halberd
Rocket Launcher
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: piecewise on August 10, 2013, 06:52:28 pm
Cromwell Jackson

Stats:
Dex: 3
Agi: 2
Str: 3

Melee 1
-Crushing/Hacking 1
Ranged 1
-Sprayers/Explosives 1
Gunnery 1
-Missiles/Rockets 1
Fighting Opposites 2

Items:
Halberd
Rocket Launcher

Is this good?
You might want to move stuff out of gunnery, since that applies only to ship based weapons. You can stick them in sprayers and explosives instead. Also, keep in mind that rocket launchers are gonna have minimum attack dice, since they're big and slow. But they do damage over an area and use the explosive wound chart, so they're kinda awesome when it comes to using them against fleshy targets.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 10, 2013, 06:56:28 pm
Changed it, is that looking better?

But they do damage over an area and use the explosive wound chart, so they're kinda awesome when it comes to using them against fleshy targets.
My thoughts exactly.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: piecewise on August 10, 2013, 08:21:10 pm
I've been putting it off a while, mostly for fun, but I'll tell ya about the Fleshers now.


 They're the alternative to clockwork or steam ships, living airships and flying mounts. They're kinda neat in that you actually grow them; raising them from an egg and effecting their stats and physical characteristics using injected chemicals and proteins as they grow.

The fleshers themselves are a faction within the game, a secretive and almost cult-like organization that makes use of esoteric surface tech and reveres the planet encompassing meta-organism they call "The Worm". They're responsible for archiving what broken bits of knowledge remain from the days when man dwelt on the surface of the earth, and for keeping the floating machine city that the game takes place on airborne. They are often feared by the lower classes and ignored by the higher, but their influence is wide reaching and their effects on society are great. Players who start as one of them in the final game will find themselves playing very differently then players who decide to start from a more normal point; they have a lot of resources, but they're also very strict. You may find yourself doing patrols of the outer shell for a while before you manage to get hold of an Egg of the Worm and start raising your future mount.

Changed it, is that looking better?

But they do damage over an area and use the explosive wound chart, so they're kinda awesome when it comes to using them against fleshy targets.
My thoughts exactly.
Looks fine to me. Gonna give people a few more hours and then I will randomly select our fighters.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 10, 2013, 08:49:53 pm
Sounds neat, flying worms and all.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: piecewise on August 10, 2013, 09:02:17 pm
Sounds neat, flying worms and all.
If you'd like a preview of what raising them will be like, I recommend Horse Master (http://noncanon.com/HorseMaster.html#1r).

It's very different from what you think. Try it.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 10, 2013, 09:02:28 pm
I'd best get to work...
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 10, 2013, 09:10:33 pm
Wow. That is a pretty complete rulebook.

Spoiler: Pilate the Pilot (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Remuthra on August 10, 2013, 10:22:02 pm
Wow. That is a pretty complete rulebook.

Spoiler: Pilate the Pilot (click to show/hide)
This is the pvp test :P.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Thearpox on August 11, 2013, 01:12:08 am
I've been putting it off a while, mostly for fun, but I'll tell ya about the Fleshers now.


 They're the alternative to clockwork or steam ships, living airships and flying mounts. They're kinda neat in that you actually grow them; raising them from an egg and effecting their stats and physical characteristics using injected chemicals and proteins as they grow.

The fleshers themselves are a faction within the game, a secretive and almost cult-like organization that makes use of esoteric surface tech and reveres the planet encompassing meta-organism they call "The Worm". They're responsible for archiving what broken bits of knowledge remain from the days when man dwelt on the surface of the earth, and for keeping the floating machine city that the game takes place on airborne. They are often feared by the lower classes and ignored by the higher, but their influence is wide reaching and their effects on society are great. Players who start as one of them in the final game will find themselves playing very differently then players who decide to start from a more normal point; they have a lot of resources, but they're also very strict. You may find yourself doing patrols of the outer shell for a while before you manage to get hold of an Egg of the Worm and start raising your future mount.
((Oh god. Way to hype this up, Mr. Molyneux. Was ER your first DM'ed game? Because I think we will see a definite progression as you become more experienced. I so want to try out the different options and character builds now, a shame we will only have a single game going at once, with each of us playing a single character.))
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 11, 2013, 01:14:16 am
At least until some indie game developer contacts piecewise for the right to his ideas.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Thearpox on August 11, 2013, 01:20:00 am
At least until some indie game developer contacts piecewise for the right to his ideas.
You mean Toady? :P

I think we've seen pretty well that it's the DM who makes the game, not some random indie developer. But if Piecewise ever decides to develop and publish this, I definitely want to be in the loop and contributing.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Remuthra on August 11, 2013, 01:26:02 am
I've been putting it off a while, mostly for fun, but I'll tell ya about the Fleshers now.


 They're the alternative to clockwork or steam ships, living airships and flying mounts. They're kinda neat in that you actually grow them; raising them from an egg and effecting their stats and physical characteristics using injected chemicals and proteins as they grow.

The fleshers themselves are a faction within the game, a secretive and almost cult-like organization that makes use of esoteric surface tech and reveres the planet encompassing meta-organism they call "The Worm". They're responsible for archiving what broken bits of knowledge remain from the days when man dwelt on the surface of the earth, and for keeping the floating machine city that the game takes place on airborne. They are often feared by the lower classes and ignored by the higher, but their influence is wide reaching and their effects on society are great. Players who start as one of them in the final game will find themselves playing very differently then players who decide to start from a more normal point; they have a lot of resources, but they're also very strict. You may find yourself doing patrols of the outer shell for a while before you manage to get hold of an Egg of the Worm and start raising your future mount.
((Oh god. Way to hype this up, Mr. Molyneux. Was ER your first DM'ed game? Because I think we will see a definite progression as you become more experienced. I so want to try out the different options and character builds now, a shame we will only have a single game going at once, with each of us playing a single character.))
Perhaps in the full game we could have multiple characters, and choose one to use for a specific mission?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Thearpox on August 11, 2013, 01:33:45 am
I've been putting it off a while, mostly for fun, but I'll tell ya about the Fleshers now.


 They're the alternative to clockwork or steam ships, living airships and flying mounts. They're kinda neat in that you actually grow them; raising them from an egg and effecting their stats and physical characteristics using injected chemicals and proteins as they grow.

The fleshers themselves are a faction within the game, a secretive and almost cult-like organization that makes use of esoteric surface tech and reveres the planet encompassing meta-organism they call "The Worm". They're responsible for archiving what broken bits of knowledge remain from the days when man dwelt on the surface of the earth, and for keeping the floating machine city that the game takes place on airborne. They are often feared by the lower classes and ignored by the higher, but their influence is wide reaching and their effects on society are great. Players who start as one of them in the final game will find themselves playing very differently then players who decide to start from a more normal point; they have a lot of resources, but they're also very strict. You may find yourself doing patrols of the outer shell for a while before you manage to get hold of an Egg of the Worm and start raising your future mount.
((Oh god. Way to hype this up, Mr. Molyneux. Was ER your first DM'ed game? Because I think we will see a definite progression as you become more experienced. I so want to try out the different options and character builds now, a shame we will only have a single game going at once, with each of us playing a single character.))
Perhaps in the full game we could have multiple characters, and choose one to use for a specific mission?
40*3... oh dear. I don't think that would work. Not to mention the obvious metagaming that would be happening. Easier to have several games running, if it comes to that. Maybe if Piecewise quits his job, but I don't think that is possible.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: piecewise on August 11, 2013, 01:40:13 am
Finished my sheet (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1T-Mhdqm9PACxpTd6jlnA61T4EbQ747tqSgr2mug0at8/edit)
Gentlemen.
I can't access that so...Nope.


>I'll join, Making a character right now:

Stats:
Dex:4
Agi:2
Chr:0
Int:0
Str:0
Per:2
End:0
Will:0

Skills:
Dual Weilding (ranged) - 5
Stealth - 3
I'll assume we put 1 into skullduggery and then 2 into stealth so that actually works.


Sure.

Toastarrr

(Anything not listed is 0)

Stats:

Dex: 4
Agi: 2
End: 2

Skills:

Stabbing/Piercing: 3
Hand Guns: 5

I'll take a rapier and a SMG.
Same with you. I'll assume 1 into melee, 1 into ranged, 3 into hand guns and 3 into stabby-pierce

Raalup

Stats:
Agi: 5
Dex: 1
End: 2

Slashing and Cutting 5
Rifle 3

Items:
Sword
Rifle

Tada!

You said not to be specific...
And again.


Well... Both. I've seen professionally written rule sets that handle things a lot worse than what you have. Plus my emotions tend to handle a bit like a sledgehammer - I'm not very emotionally subtle, so to speak. Anyways, IN.

Dave Stevens

Stats:
Dex: 0
Agi: 3
Chr: 0
Int: 0
Str: 1
Per: 1
End: 3
Will: 0
Skills:
Ranged Weapons:1
    Handguns:2
    Rifles?:2
Medical:1
    First aid:1
Melee:1
Preferred weapons:
Shotgun
Uzi
I think I got that right.
Looks ok.


Raalup

Stats:
Agi: 5
Dex: 1
End: 2

Melee 1
Slashing and Cutting 3
Ranged 1
Rifle 3

Items:
Assault Rifle
Longsword

This better then?

Oh, there you are...That looks better. Good.

Cromwell Jackson

Stats:
Dex: 3
Agi: 2
Str: 3

Melee 1
-Crushing/Hacking 1
Ranged 1
-Sprayers/Explosives 3
Fighting Opposites 2

Items:
Halberd
Rocket Launcher
Senor Carlos Danger and his rocket launcher. Good and good.



Alright, lets see thats...5 people. Rolling...2 and 4...thats...Toastar and Octobomb! Now lets just....



https://www.dropbox.com/s/at7b9lfflwh8ld3/octobomb%20sheet.png

https://www.dropbox.com/s/9f13cyw0e09qlbp/toaster%20sheet.png

And

https://www.dropbox.com/s/lmicujen70afgak/test%20arena.png

Toaster is Red, Octo is Blue. Light gray is low cover, Dark is high. Light has 5 hp, gray has 10. And at this point neither of you have a shot at the other.  So you can either post your action here or PM it if you want to get a drop on the other guy. If you have any questions, feel free to ask them.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 11, 2013, 01:42:47 am
Those are the coolest looking character sheets I've ever seen.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Thearpox on August 11, 2013, 01:44:21 am
Those are the coolest looking character sheets I've ever seen.
Not the coolest, but astronomically better compared to ER. Where'd ya get them? Or Paint?

Also, not Toasterrr, bit Toastarrr

PS: Any ideas for how to make the values in the character sheets match vertically? Copypasting the numbers from Excel might work, or have a vertical line to match them off. Alternatively, maybe someone on this forum can make a program for these. It shouldn't be too hard.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: piecewise on August 11, 2013, 01:50:01 am
At least until some indie game developer contacts piecewise for the right to his ideas.
You mean Toady? :P

I think we've seen pretty well that it's the DM who makes the game, not some random indie developer. But if Piecewise ever decides to develop and publish this, I definitely want to be in the loop and contributing.
I intend to, once it's all put to paper, throw it up somewhere like Drivethrurpg as a "Pay what you want". Of course by that point it will probably consist of 3 booklets like this, one for standard player stuff, one for the ship building and related items, and one for the GM which would include world stuff like lore, roll tables, maps of the Cloudbearer, etc. Not sure how far off that is, but I'm working my way there, slowly.

Those are the coolest looking character sheets I've ever seen.
MSpaint. Not normally called "Cool".

Those are the coolest looking character sheets I've ever seen.
Not the coolest, but astronomically better compared to ER. Where'd ya get them? Or Paint?

Also, not Toasterrr, bit Toastarrr
Made'em. And I'll change that if toaster actually cares. If not, I'll go take a nap.

Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 11, 2013, 02:02:23 am
MSpaint. Not normally called "Cool".
I call it cool, it's all I know how to use.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: DaveTheGrave on August 11, 2013, 02:31:07 am
You should definetly sell this game, it could totally become more popular then DnD.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: miauw62 on August 11, 2013, 03:48:08 am
You could also post about it in other places, like /tg/ or so.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 11, 2013, 06:11:20 am
Wow. That is a pretty complete rulebook.

Spoiler: Pilate the Pilot (click to show/hide)
This is the pvp test :P.
It is?
...
Dangit. I forgot weapons too. Well, don't do this kind of thing late at night...new character incoming. Except that the test is starting.

You should definetly sell this game, it could totally become more popular then DnD.
I doubt it. It has great potential, though.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Octobomb on August 11, 2013, 06:29:57 am
Your move, Toastarr. Sent my pm, but will probably end up dying or something. Anyway, PM sent!
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Remuthra on August 11, 2013, 12:59:34 pm
Moe Ridger

Stats:
Dex: 0
Agi: 0
Chr: 0
Int: 0
Str: 2
Per: 0
End: 6
Will: 0

Skills:
Crushing and Hacking 8

Items Desired:
Sledgehammer
Flamethrower
Clerical errors have it in for me :/.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Toaster on August 11, 2013, 01:50:25 pm
I'd actually prefer one point in stabby moved to general ranged, but it's not really a huge deal for the test.

PM sent.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: piecewise on August 11, 2013, 02:20:20 pm
Currently working on the airship design documents. Basic body design continues to advance; with the current system you can create ships of any size or shape and the system should be able to deal with them. Damage models may require a bit of abstract thought though; what with having to mentally "stack" the different levels of blueprints to see the whole in your head.

Preliminary tests with the indomitable doughnut ship are looking positive. Powerful cannonballs punch through multiple walls, buzzblades ricochet around inside the structure and the Ultra cannon's explosive shell plows straight through the thing so fast that it doesn't even have time to detonate. Next we test the "Snake" a ship, a ship that looks sort of like a sin wave, undulating up and down across several vertical levels and requiring many sets of stairs.

Now, on to that melee...





Toastarrr and Dave begin their dual with an immediate sprint to cover, the central high cover blocking any chance they have to shoot at each other until the very instant they reach their destinations and dive behind cover. Toastarrr decides to hold his fire; technically he could take potshots at Dave's hiding place, but Dave seems to be hunkered down and not showing himself, giving Toastarrr no chance to hit.


https://www.dropbox.com/s/lmicujen70afgak/test%20arena.png
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Octobomb on August 11, 2013, 04:30:47 pm
Oh, yeah, PM SENT I think.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Toaster on August 11, 2013, 08:48:18 pm
Ditto

Insert obligatory trash talk here
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: piecewise on August 11, 2013, 10:21:25 pm
Dave Atk 4 (Full Auto) Def 2
Toastarrr Atk 5, Def 1

[Dave Atk:0 successes (Wow, bad luck)]
[Toastarr atk:1 success]
[Dave def:2]

Toastarrr and Dave, perhaps a little bit too excited about their dual to the death, fire with reckless abandon. Dave underestimates the recoil of his uzi and ends up seriously menacing the ceiling with a barrage of full auto fire. Toastarrr is a bit better, managing to actually aim, but Dave dives down behind his cover and the shot plinks off without doing damage.



https://www.dropbox.com/s/lmicujen70afgak/test%20arena.png

https://www.dropbox.com/s/at7b9lfflwh8ld3/octobomb%20sheet.png
https://www.dropbox.com/s/9f13cyw0e09qlbp/toaster%20sheet.png

Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 11, 2013, 10:30:39 pm
More Dakka!
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Remuthra on August 11, 2013, 10:31:26 pm
Joe Bridger observes the pitiful dakka. He disapproves.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 11, 2013, 10:33:23 pm
Senor Carlos Danger demands more explosions.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: piecewise on August 12, 2013, 12:37:30 am
Hmm. Maybe I should take on two other people and have two deathmatches running...Hmm I'll think about that. If you guys feel like joining, you could fill out your sheets like Octo's and Toaster's, since thats fairly easy and saves me a bit of time. I'll make the weapons cards if you fill out the sheets.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 12, 2013, 12:39:28 am
Hmm. Maybe I should take on two other people and have two deathmatches running...Hmm I'll think about that. If you guys feel like joining, you could fill out your sheets like Octo's and Toaster's, since thats fairly easy and saves me a bit of time. I'll make the weapons cards if you fill out the sheets.
Yeah, we could do that.
In my deathmatch game, I think I have.... 4 fights going on right now?

Is this good?
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: piecewise on August 12, 2013, 01:12:45 am
Looks good to me. Now we wait for your opponent.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Remuthra on August 12, 2013, 02:10:02 am
I would make one, but I'm too tired to coherently set up a sheet until morning :P.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Octobomb on August 12, 2013, 08:58:28 am
Since neither of us have genders I'm going to assume we're asexual humanoids - so can I try and seduce my opponent?
PM sent
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: piecewise on August 12, 2013, 09:07:36 am
Since neither of us have genders I'm going to assume we're asexual humanoids - so can I try and seduce my opponent?
I suppose? Though it would be a speech roll, a deception roll I assume, and you've got 0 in that. And only 3 in charisma. Though...he does only have 3 in willpower...hmm


Also, silly me, I've been completely forgetting to add the bonuses for fighting opposites, Toastarrr should be getting bonuses for using his dex based smg against your agility based uzi. Though you can negate that by using your shotgun, since it's dex based too.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Thearpox on August 12, 2013, 02:21:02 pm
Quote
Also, silly me, I've been completely forgetting to add the bonuses for fighting opposites, Toastarrr should be getting bonuses for using his dex based smg against your agility based uzi. Though you can negate that by using your shotgun, since it's dex based too.
That is the one part of the rules that just seems very arbitrary and... gamey to me. I just can't even remotely imagine how that would work.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Toaster on August 12, 2013, 02:31:35 pm
I will say one thing- unless I'm derping and missing something stupid, the splitting your dice pool bit will be hard to manage when you potentially will have no idea how many you should be getting, given you may not know your opponent's stats.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: miauw62 on August 12, 2013, 02:48:16 pm
The str dex agi triangle only makes sense in melee, really.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: mastahcheese on August 12, 2013, 04:40:44 pm
Quote
Also, silly me, I've been completely forgetting to add the bonuses for fighting opposites, Toastarrr should be getting bonuses for using his dex based smg against your agility based uzi. Though you can negate that by using your shotgun, since it's dex based too.
That is the one part of the rules that just seems very arbitrary and... gamey to me. I just can't even remotely imagine how that would work.
The str dex agi triangle only makes sense in melee, really.
That's why I put 2 points in fighting opposites, to circumvent that whole debacle.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: Dansmithers on August 12, 2013, 05:47:49 pm
So far toaster is the only one to actually say what kind of weapons he wants. Bravo toaster.

I'm currently taking a break from the more in depth and mindnumbing aspects of the game (Explaining the minutiae of building a ship and stating items- acid sprayers anyone?) to work on the flesher stuff a bit. They've got enough mechanics that I could build a game around just their stuff.
my weapons are on the bottom of my sheet.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 12, 2013, 06:07:41 pm
So far toaster is the only one to actually say what kind of weapons he wants. Bravo toaster.

I'm currently taking a break from the more in depth and mindnumbing aspects of the game (Explaining the minutiae of building a ship and stating items- acid sprayers anyone?) to work on the flesher stuff a bit. They've got enough mechanics that I could build a game around just their stuff.
my weapons are on the bottom of my sheet.
Well, you didn't post it in the thread, you posted to a different page that we don't have access too.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Remuthra on August 12, 2013, 06:08:41 pm
Could you post a template sheet to work off of, piecewise? The sheets were taken down already.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Grid-based man-shoots and People Stabs.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 12, 2013, 06:11:17 pm
Could you post a template sheet to work off of, piecewise? The sheets were taken down already.
You could open up mine with paint, edit it as needed, and save it under your name. That how I made mine.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Remuthra on August 12, 2013, 07:09:43 pm
My sheet application is finished. The font size is a bit wonky, but it works.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: mastahcheese on August 12, 2013, 07:16:04 pm
Your skills aren't right.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Remuthra on August 12, 2013, 07:18:25 pm
Your skills aren't right.
How so? I have eight points distributed, as instructed.

EDIT: I'm not sure what's with the stats, though. We were only instructed to distribute eight, and you have far more than that allocated.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: mastahcheese on August 12, 2013, 07:21:43 pm
Stats start at 3, then you increase them

You have to have a point in a general skill before you can get specific skills.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Remuthra on August 12, 2013, 07:29:03 pm
Alright, fixed again.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: mastahcheese on August 12, 2013, 08:46:12 pm
Hey, I think that works now.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Remuthra on August 12, 2013, 09:04:00 pm
Yay!
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: mastahcheese on August 12, 2013, 09:10:42 pm
And since  we both have 2 points in fighting opposites, piecewise won't have to worry about calculating them.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Thearpox on August 12, 2013, 09:13:35 pm
And since  we both have 2 points in fighting opposites, piecewise won't have to worry about calculating them.
Kind of defeats the point of having the rule, don't you think? If everyone just takes the same damn skill.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Remuthra on August 12, 2013, 09:18:02 pm
And since  we both have 2 points in fighting opposites, piecewise won't have to worry about calculating them.
Kind of defeats the point of having the rule, don't you think? If everyone just takes the same damn skill.
It's irritating to have to use a specific weapon against a certain enemy, so if we're given a way out we'll take it.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Thearpox on August 12, 2013, 09:25:57 pm
And since  we both have 2 points in fighting opposites, piecewise won't have to worry about calculating them.
Kind of defeats the point of having the rule, don't you think? If everyone just takes the same damn skill.
It's irritating to have to use a specific weapon against a certain enemy, so if we're given a way out we'll take it.
Pretty much. And irritating systems should be avoided whenever possible. I would prefer just to have some weapons usually strike first, or penetrate armor better, and so on.

Speaking of, can anybody explain to me the difference between an Uzi and an SMG? I'm not much into firearms, so I am a little clueless here.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Remuthra on August 12, 2013, 09:28:25 pm
And since  we both have 2 points in fighting opposites, piecewise won't have to worry about calculating them.
Kind of defeats the point of having the rule, don't you think? If everyone just takes the same damn skill.
It's irritating to have to use a specific weapon against a certain enemy, so if we're given a way out we'll take it.
Pretty much. And irritating systems should be avoided whenever possible. I would prefer just to have some weapons usually strike first, or penetrate armor better, and so on.

Speaking of, can anybody explain to me the difference between an Uzi and an SMG? I'm not much into firearms, so I am a little clueless here.
An uzi is a specific model of smg, debatably more of a machine pistol.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Thearpox on August 12, 2013, 09:32:36 pm
And since  we both have 2 points in fighting opposites, piecewise won't have to worry about calculating them.
Kind of defeats the point of having the rule, don't you think? If everyone just takes the same damn skill.
It's irritating to have to use a specific weapon against a certain enemy, so if we're given a way out we'll take it.
Pretty much. And irritating systems should be avoided whenever possible. I would prefer just to have some weapons usually strike first, or penetrate armor better, and so on.

Speaking of, can anybody explain to me the difference between an Uzi and an SMG? I'm not much into firearms, so I am a little clueless here.
An uzi is a specific model of smg, debatably more of a machine pistol.
So it's like one person using Acetic Acid, and the other person using Normal Acid. Figures.

Is there any difference between these two guns in the gameplay besides Agility and Dexterity? Because while I agree with Piecewise that we shouldn't turn this into gun porn, I feel like we can come up with legitimate differences between the different weapons people will weild.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Remuthra on August 12, 2013, 09:36:50 pm
And since  we both have 2 points in fighting opposites, piecewise won't have to worry about calculating them.
Kind of defeats the point of having the rule, don't you think? If everyone just takes the same damn skill.
It's irritating to have to use a specific weapon against a certain enemy, so if we're given a way out we'll take it.
Pretty much. And irritating systems should be avoided whenever possible. I would prefer just to have some weapons usually strike first, or penetrate armor better, and so on.

Speaking of, can anybody explain to me the difference between an Uzi and an SMG? I'm not much into firearms, so I am a little clueless here.
An uzi is a specific model of smg, debatably more of a machine pistol.
So it's like one person using Acetic Acid, and the other person using Normal Acid. Figures.

Is there any difference between these two guns in the gameplay besides Agility and Dexterity? Because while I agree with Piecewise that we shouldn't turn this into gun porn, I feel like we can come up with legitimate differences between the different weapons people will weild.
An uzi, among other things, fires very quickly and is quite inaccurate, and is smaller and more designed for one-handed wielding. It also is used less in burst fire than an smg.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: mastahcheese on August 12, 2013, 09:42:29 pm
I personally like the way the advantage triangle works, but I can see where it would be annoying, and the reason it's there, as far as I can tell, is so that people who branch themselves out into multiple attack skills will be rewarded, to counteract the people who specialize in one thing.
For me, I dislike people who only use one tactic, because I feel like there's no point in making a lot of rules in a game to give it more depth and tactics if half the people are only going to use 1/4 of the rules.
I like people who branch out, and myself personally, I like to multi-class in RPG style games because of it.
Right now I'm only using one tactic, but this is only a test, and I took that skill anyway so it doesn't matter.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Remuthra on August 12, 2013, 09:44:30 pm
As far as ranged weapons go, what about thrown melee weapons? If I throw an axe, for example, what skill does it use?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: mastahcheese on August 12, 2013, 09:46:29 pm
As far as ranged weapons go, what about thrown melee weapons? If I throw an axe, for example, what skill does it use?
I'd assume the same as if you swung it.
But losing your weapon is generally a bad thing.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Remuthra on August 12, 2013, 09:55:46 pm
As far as ranged weapons go, what about thrown melee weapons? If I throw an axe, for example, what skill does it use?
I'd assume the same as if you swung it.
But losing your weapon is generally a bad thing.
I figure I can bring a couple of throwing axes as my ranged weapon.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: mastahcheese on August 12, 2013, 10:02:03 pm
Actually that sounds pretty cool.

Once piecewise sees all this I'm shooting your face.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Remuthra on August 12, 2013, 10:04:18 pm
Once piecewise sees all this I'm shooting your face.
Why do you think I put six points in endurance? I will parry your bullets with my face and keep coming.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: mastahcheese on August 12, 2013, 10:06:40 pm
Once piecewise sees all this I'm shooting your face.
Why do you think I put six points in endurance? I will parry your bullets with my face and keep coming.

Why do you think I put six points in endurance? I will parry your bullets with my face and keep coming.

I will parry your bullets with my face and keep coming.

I will parry your bullets

bullets

You sir, do not know of Senor Carlos Danger.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Remuthra on August 12, 2013, 10:10:55 pm
Once piecewise sees all this I'm shooting your face.
Why do you think I put six points in endurance? I will parry your bullets with my face and keep coming.

Why do you think I put six points in endurance? I will parry your bullets with my face and keep coming.

I will parry your bullets with my face and keep coming.

I will parry your bullets

bullets

You sir, do not know of Senor Carlos Danger.
Rockets are only really big bullets that explode, really. I wonder if you could deflect a rocket?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Thearpox on August 12, 2013, 11:46:07 pm
I personally like the way the advantage triangle works, but I can see where it would be annoying, and the reason it's there, as far as I can tell, is so that people who branch themselves out into multiple attack skills will be rewarded, to counteract the people who specialize in one thing.
For me, I dislike people who only use one tactic, because I feel like there's no point in making a lot of rules in a game to give it more depth and tactics if half the people are only going to use 1/4 of the rules.
I like people who branch out, and myself personally, I like to multi-class in RPG style games because of it.
Right now I'm only using one tactic, but this is only a test, and I took that skill anyway so it doesn't matter.
That's what a bad system ends up being like. I'm not saying we shouldn't have some weapons have advantage over others. I just think that those advantages should be tactical rather than hard-coded.

To elaborate, a sword should beat an axe, but an axe should be better at penetrating any sort of armor. A sword should also beat rapier, but only in open space. In close quarters, rapier beats sword. An axe can also be thrown easier.
So I'm not against these sorts of triangles. I just want them to make sense, and limiting them to Str, Agi, and Dex, makes them not make sense. And I think we all concur that a straight up advantage doesn't make sense in ranged combat.

As far as ranged weapons go, what about thrown melee weapons? If I throw an axe, for example, what skill does it use?
Exactly what I'm talking about. Any unconventional use of weapons breaks the system. And using the same stats as swinging it doesn't really make sense.

Quote
Rockets are only really big bullets that explode, really. I wonder if you could deflect a rocket?
If you want to do that, you should probably play ER. Amps and all.

Quote
An uzi, among other things, fires very quickly and is quite inaccurate, and is smaller and more designed for one-handed wielding. It also is used less in burst fire than an smg.
So an Uzi can be one-handed, it should be harder to hit with an Uzi than an SMG. And it should have negatives to burst fire.
I do not however understand why someone weilding an SMG would be getting bonuses against someone weilding an Uzi. If anything, someone with an SMG should be easier to hit because of the whole two-handed having to stand up kind of thing.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: piecewise on August 13, 2013, 02:28:13 am
Disclaimer: I just spent several hours arguing with ISP people on the phone about my internet suddenly being cut off. I am a bit annoyed.

Could you post a template sheet to work off of, piecewise? The sheets were taken down already.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ioqw0vxlfw8vhjm/character%20sheet.png

I will say one thing- unless I'm derping and missing something stupid, the splitting your dice pool bit will be hard to manage when you potentially will have no idea how many you should be getting, given you may not know your opponent's stats.
Their stats don't really matter...but what I should do is make it so that switching weapons takes a turn, so that you'll know any bonuses you will or won't have. We'll just ignore the triangle for ranged now.

Really, it's just a matter of adding up the stat and skill and then subtracting for range, unless you're in melee, which is when the opposites thing will come into play. But in that case it's just gonna be a static percentage that is easily calculated. Other then the weapon type the person is using and potentially their combat skills, their stats don't effect your pool at all.

And since  we both have 2 points in fighting opposites, piecewise won't have to worry about calculating them.
Kind of defeats the point of having the rule, don't you think? If everyone just takes the same damn skill.
Not everyone will. And if they do, then they do. I added that skill specifically for people who wanted to specialize in one type of weapon but also didn't want to deal with penalties for fighting their opposites.

As far as ranged weapons go, what about thrown melee weapons? If I throw an axe, for example, what skill does it use?
Thats not quite been worked out yet, but generally it would involve strength determining the distance (Compared to the weight of the object somehow, so heavy things are thrown shorter distances) and the combat pool used in the same way it would be for any ranged weapon.

I personally like the way the advantage triangle works, but I can see where it would be annoying, and the reason it's there, as far as I can tell, is so that people who branch themselves out into multiple attack skills will be rewarded, to counteract the people who specialize in one thing.
For me, I dislike people who only use one tactic, because I feel like there's no point in making a lot of rules in a game to give it more depth and tactics if half the people are only going to use 1/4 of the rules.
I like people who branch out, and myself personally, I like to multi-class in RPG style games because of it.
Right now I'm only using one tactic, but this is only a test, and I took that skill anyway so it doesn't matter.
That's what a bad system ends up being like. I'm not saying we shouldn't have some weapons have advantage over others. I just think that those advantages should be tactical rather than hard-coded.

To elaborate, a sword should beat an axe, but an axe should be better at penetrating any sort of armor. A sword should also beat rapier, but only in open space. In close quarters, rapier beats sword. An axe can also be thrown easier.
So I'm not against these sorts of triangles. I just want them to make sense, and limiting them to Str, Agi, and Dex, makes them not make sense. And I think we all concur that a straight up advantage doesn't make sense in ranged combat.
Problematically, this leads to massive and unweildly rules bloat. This thing is already complex without me drawing up another massive table of weapon interactions. Also, problematically, classification like that leads to fractal complexity problems. Rapier beats sword. Ok. Does a Foil beat a sword too? What  about an Estoc? What about an estoc vs a shotel? You have the potential to end up with infinitely nested categories all interacting. And even then it's still hard coded.

I realize this system is a bit gamey, but I'm attempting to have a degree of tactics while still being simple enough as to not require too big a system.

My sheet application is finished. The font size is a bit wonky, but it works.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Could you post a template sheet to work off of, piecewise? The sheets were taken down already.
You could open up mine with paint, edit it as needed, and save it under your name. That how I made mine.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Ok, you two will be the second participants.  I'll get your sheets set up tomorrow, it's 1am here. You can tell me what weapons you guys want again, if that's changed.  You'll both be in the same kind of arena as toaster and Octo.



Still waiting for toaster's post; He has 6 dice to use. 7 from dex, 1 from ranged, -2 from range.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Dansmithers on August 13, 2013, 02:29:37 am
Yo, I fixed my sheet
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Thearpox on August 13, 2013, 03:56:30 am
Quote
Problematically, this leads to massive and unweildly rules bloat. This thing is already complex without me drawing up another massive table of weapon interactions. Also, problematically, classification like that leads to fractal complexity problems. Rapier beats sword. Ok. Does a Foil beat a sword too? What  about an Estoc? What about an estoc vs a shotel? You have the potential to end up with infinitely nested categories all interacting. And even then it's still hard coded.
There's a solution to this problem. Don't have Foils and Estocs! Or rather, have the differences be cosmetic.

Also, technically speaking, the later era weapon beats an earlier one. So yes, Estoc beats "Longswords".

But seriously speaking, what is a foil? Besides being a highly stylized descendand of "real weapons."? Closer to Rapier than Longsword. Have it be identical to any other rapier.
Similarly, what is an Estoc? A cross between a longsword and a greatsword. I'd call it a Greatsword, because of it's grip. But whatever. Just have it listed as a longsword, and have it be identical to all longswords.

No need to go into sword porn (says me :-\). As for shotels... why would anyone have a bloody shotel? And following the above-stated philosophy, we can just classify it as a scimitar. And ya know... deal with these weapons as they come up. Because they probably won't. Unless you have all the NPC's wear Estocs for some reason.And honestly, looking at scimitars, they aren't that different from katanas, except for the fact that they were primarily a horseback weapons.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Thearpox on August 13, 2013, 04:47:48 am
Okay, I finally sat down with the Manual and read it. Here's my notes. Note that I didn't spell-check it, so I probably have a lot of spelling mistakes in critical places, as I tend to do. Should be a bit better now.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: miauw62 on August 13, 2013, 06:14:25 am
The thing is, especially with medical, you need a point in the general skill before you can have the others, and the general skill already gives a +1 bonus. The sub-skills are mainly specialization. If somebody has 1 point in, say, clockwork, and one in repair, (s)he still knows how to operate mechanisms, but (s)he is just specialized in repairs instead of operating it.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Toaster on August 13, 2013, 07:29:34 am
Still waiting for toaster's post; He has 6 dice to use. 7 from dex, 1 from ranged, -2 from range.

Could have sworn I sent it...
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: piecewise on August 13, 2013, 09:24:23 am
Okay, I finally sat down with the Manual and read it. Here's my notes. Note that I didn't spell-check it, so I probably have a lot of spelling mistakes in critical places, as I tend to do.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
You don't appear to like anything in the entire book.

Listen Thear, It's 6 am. I'm not feeling great and I've still got 3 pages of ER to respond to, plus those weapons to make and this combat stuff to run, then pages of explanation in the construction manual to write. If you've got such massive, overarching complaints about the entire system, from the way skills are handled to the very way they're arranged on the page and the cover image, then maybe this game isn't for you.
I'll look through the post and make changes where they seem good, but I don't think it's ever going to be what you want it to be. Thats fair, some games just aren't for some people. I would suggest that perhaps you create your own game; you've clearly got a lot of ideas for how you want things to work, you should put them into use.


How about the rest of you, do you have any of the same or similar concerns?

(combat stuff here after ER posts)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Remuthra on August 13, 2013, 11:32:44 am
If thrown weapons are allowed, I'll take a maul (Two-handed Sledgehammer) and throwing axes.

If not, I'll take grenades as a ranged weapon.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Thearpox on August 13, 2013, 01:05:24 pm
Quote
You don't appear to like anything in the entire book.

Listen Thear, It's 6 am. I'm not feeling great and I've still got 3 pages of ER to respond to, plus those weapons to make and this combat stuff to run, then pages of explanation in the construction manual to write. If you've got such massive, overarching complaints about the entire system, from the way skills are handled to the very way they're arranged on the page and the cover image, then maybe this game isn't for you.
I'll look through the post and make changes where they seem good, but I don't think it's ever going to be what you want it to be. Thats fair, some games just aren't for some people. I would suggest that perhaps you create your own game; you've clearly got a lot of ideas for how you want things to work, you should put them into use.
Nah, it's okay. It's just not ideal, and yes, I do have ideas for how to improve it. Whether you listen to those ideas is up to you.

I understand why you don't want to deal with such a long annotation, but I've got things from simple clarifications and confirmations, to cosmetics, to what I consider an actual design problem, to something that just didn't make sense for me like assasinations, to something that is functional but I just have thoughts about.

This is a test of a just created home-baked rule system. It's bound to have imperfections, and it's bound to cause misunderstandings. Do you want feedback? I gave you feedback. Do you have to change all of it to my tastes? Not unless you me. But I don't think, especially regarding some misunderstandings and questions, that they are going to go away, but rather that they will get asked by other people eventually. It's just that I have thrown them all at you at once.

Do you have to reply and read through all of this today? At 6 am? No, why would you do that?
But here's the thing regarding the statement that maybe this game is not for me. For me, DM'ing trumps Setting trumps Rules (unless they're very restrictive). Do I have any interest in Sci-Fi? No, not really. Steampunk? To heavens, I don't like Steampunk. I greatly prefer the Middle and earlier Ages, including traditional fantasy. Do I really care? No! Because a good author can still deliver something good, and that's what matters. (Unless he starts going into the designs of clocks and steam engines, the same way Moby Dick went into whaling and Le Miserables into... everything. Not really gonna enjoy a Moby Dick in Steampunk.)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Remuthra on August 13, 2013, 01:20:58 pm
Okay, I finally sat down with the Manual and read it. Here's my notes. Note that I didn't spell-check it, so I probably have a lot of spelling mistakes in critical places, as I tend to do.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
You don't appear to like anything in the entire book.

Listen Thear, It's 6 am. I'm not feeling great and I've still got 3 pages of ER to respond to, plus those weapons to make and this combat stuff to run, then pages of explanation in the construction manual to write. If you've got such massive, overarching complaints about the entire system, from the way skills are handled to the very way they're arranged on the page and the cover image, then maybe this game isn't for you.
I'll look through the post and make changes where they seem good, but I don't think it's ever going to be what you want it to be. Thats fair, some games just aren't for some people. I would suggest that perhaps you create your own game; you've clearly got a lot of ideas for how you want things to work, you should put them into use.


How about the rest of you, do you have any of the same or similar concerns?

(combat stuff here after ER posts)
It's just constructive criticism. The players are pointing out anything they feel could be better, and how it could be better, to help you make the best possible game. It's unproductive and against the spirit of the effort to react in a hostile manner to it. It's not a disparagement of your work; it's a tool to help you in developing the game. You don't have to listen to or use it, but reacting negatively is simply an unwise move. We're just trying to help make the game, and the only way it will get better is if it is picked apart and the flaws carefully scrutinized and pointed out, which is the whole point of playtesting in the first place.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Caellath on August 13, 2013, 01:49:56 pm
While suggestions are good, do note I suppose it is less about the criticism itself and more about how it is presented.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Thearpox on August 13, 2013, 01:58:24 pm
While suggestions are good, do note I suppose it is less about the criticism itself and more about how it is presented.
Care to elaborate? How was I supposed to present it?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: piecewise on August 13, 2013, 02:09:08 pm
Okay, I finally sat down with the Manual and read it. Here's my notes. Note that I didn't spell-check it, so I probably have a lot of spelling mistakes in critical places, as I tend to do.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
You don't appear to like anything in the entire book.

Listen Thear, It's 6 am. I'm not feeling great and I've still got 3 pages of ER to respond to, plus those weapons to make and this combat stuff to run, then pages of explanation in the construction manual to write. If you've got such massive, overarching complaints about the entire system, from the way skills are handled to the very way they're arranged on the page and the cover image, then maybe this game isn't for you.
I'll look through the post and make changes where they seem good, but I don't think it's ever going to be what you want it to be. Thats fair, some games just aren't for some people. I would suggest that perhaps you create your own game; you've clearly got a lot of ideas for how you want things to work, you should put them into use.


How about the rest of you, do you have any of the same or similar concerns?

(combat stuff here after ER posts)
It's just constructive criticism. The players are pointing out anything they feel could be better, and how it could be better, to help you make the best possible game. It's unproductive and against the spirit of the effort to react in a hostile manner to it. It's not a disparagement of your work; it's a tool to help you in developing the game. You don't have to listen to or use it, but reacting negatively is simply an unwise move. We're just trying to help make the game, and the only way it will get better is if it is picked apart and the flaws carefully scrutinized and pointed out, which is the whole point of playtesting in the first place.
I have no problem with criticisms, and I do listen to them. I am reading through his post and thinking about what he's saying. If I came off as hostile, thats my fault and the fault of it being early and me not feeling great.  I was just saying that he seemed to dislike the mechanics on a very basic level, so if that's going to be a big annoyance to him, this might not be a game he'll enjoy. I mean, if you dislike generic fantasy and d20 rolls, then D&D isn't for you, plain and simple. If you want complex melee systems that lean toward the realistic and skill sets that have a whole lot of skill interplay, then this system is not the one to deliver it.  I don't want to give him the impression or false hope that things would change to be different enough as to address all the things he doesn't like. I'm not trying to be dismissive, I'm just trying to be honest: A lot of the things he's talking about aren't going to be "fixed" because I don't see them as broken; just as a different system from the one he's got in his head. If that makes sense.

And I suggested he create his own game not as some sort of "If you think you're so good, why don't you do it." sort of thing, though it may come off as such. I was telling him that he should create a system like the one he's talking about, because fully fleshed out I'm sure it would work great.

Quote
You don't appear to like anything in the entire book.

Listen Thear, It's 6 am. I'm not feeling great and I've still got 3 pages of ER to respond to, plus those weapons to make and this combat stuff to run, then pages of explanation in the construction manual to write. If you've got such massive, overarching complaints about the entire system, from the way skills are handled to the very way they're arranged on the page and the cover image, then maybe this game isn't for you.
I'll look through the post and make changes where they seem good, but I don't think it's ever going to be what you want it to be. Thats fair, some games just aren't for some people. I would suggest that perhaps you create your own game; you've clearly got a lot of ideas for how you want things to work, you should put them into use.
Nah, it's okay. It's just not ideal, and yes, I do have ideas for how to improve it. Whether you listen to those ideas is up to you.

I understand why you don't want to deal with such a long annotation, but I've got things from simple clarifications and confirmations, to cosmetics, to what I consider an actual design problem, to something that just didn't make sense for me like assasinations, to something that is functional but I just have thoughts about.

This is a test of a just created home-baked rule system. It's bound to have imperfections, and it's bound to cause misunderstandings. Do you want feedback? I gave you feedback. Do you have to change all of it to my tastes? Not unless you me. But I don't think, especially regarding some misunderstandings and questions, that they are going to go away, but rather that they will get asked by other people eventually. It's just that I have thrown them all at you at once.

Do you have to reply and read through all of this today? At 6 am? No, why would you do that?
But here's the thing regarding the statement that maybe this game is not for me. For me, DM'ing trumps Setting trumps Rules (unless they're very restrictive). Do I have any interest in Sci-Fi? No, not really. Steampunk? To heavens, I don't like Steampunk. I greatly prefer the Middle and earlier Ages, including traditional fantasy. Do I really care? No! Because a good author can still deliver something good, and that's what matters. (Unless he starts going into the designs of clocks and steam engines, the same way Moby Dick went into whaling and Le Miserables into... everything. Not really gonna enjoy a Moby Dick in Steampunk.)
Sorry if it came off angry or annoyed or anything. I didn't mean it to be.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: piecewise on August 13, 2013, 02:33:52 pm
I'm setting up the next characters right now. Turn soon. Also, example of possible ship soon, for giggles.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: Thearpox on August 13, 2013, 02:44:26 pm
((Sorry to hijack your announcement, Piecewise. Kind of awkward to have both tests and discussions going on at the same time.))

Quote
I mean, if you dislike generic fantasy and d20 rolls, then D&D isn't for you, plain and simple.
Unless you are DM'ed by Chris Perkins.

Quote
If you want complex melee systems that lean toward the realistic and skill sets that have a whole lot of skill interplay, then this system is not the one to deliver it.
I am always pushing for skill interplay because that is the best way to deal with min-maxing. ER is actually pretty good at this.

Quote
And I suggested he create his own game not as some sort of "If you think you're so good, why don't you do it." sort of thing, though it may come off as such. I was telling him that he should create a system like the one he's talking about, because fully fleshed out I'm sure it would work great.
Maybe someday.

Quote
The thing is, especially with medical, you need a point in the general skill before you can have the others, and the general skill already gives a +1 bonus. The sub-skills are mainly specialization. If somebody has 1 point in, say, clockwork, and one in repair, (s)he still knows how to operate mechanisms, but (s)he is just specialized in repairs instead of operating it.
Still, if I take one point in general, and two in repair, I will end up with 5 rolls to repair something, and one to use it. It's just that generally, one has to know how to use something in order to repair it. Fundamentally, it's the same exact skillset. You have to know what a button does before you know it's broken.
Same with constructing. What is the best way to learn how to build watches? Take one apart and put it back together. Do that ten times, and you might be able to build one from scratch.

The issue is much less pronounced in Medical profession, where surgery and less intensive care are actually different things. And a surgeon is probably worse at First Aid than a nurse.

I just had another idea. Maybe for medical profession have each of the sub-skills add one half of a dice whenever rolling for that skillset? So if you have two in surgery, and one in first aid, you roll two dice whenever you do first aid, and 4 or 5 (depending if rounded up or down) when doing surgery. Plus the general.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Looking for one more challenger
Post by: piecewise on August 13, 2013, 05:06:09 pm
So here's a highly experimental ship body we've been working with for damage dealing tests It's called "Bathos".

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Yep. This is just an example of how you can basically have a ship body of any shape you want. Although, the larger it is, the more it costs.


Toaster vs Octo

Toastarrr: holds position, 4 attack, 2 defense.
Dave Atk 4 (Full Auto) Def 2
Toaster atk: 3 successes
Dave atk:2
Dave def:0
Location:1
Wound:6

Dave leaps up out of cover, ready to unleash a withering barrage of fire on Toastarrr. But Toastarrr is already standing, his weapon aimed and a smile on his face. He fires a single shot. It catches Dave in the palm of his outstretched right arm and proceeds to drill it's way through his hand, into his wrist and then up along the length of his arm until it clips his elbow and explodes into pieces of lead and metal jacket shrapnel that explode out of his upper arm. His ruined arm drops to his side, blood running freely from the horrible stigmata hole in his hand.
[end:T8 R6 S4]

Dave drops down back into cover, screaming in agony as his lifeblood drains out of the pulped sausage that used to be his arm.




Cromwell and Moe, you can both start. The character sheets for everyone, as well as the maps and templates are all here, in this folder:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/32eq50gnxyiubf9/ZAGDfDQc7v


Title: Re: Airship Combat: Ouch.
Post by: Dansmithers on August 13, 2013, 08:35:50 pm
Did you get my new sheet (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1T-Mhdqm9PACxpTd6jlnA61T4EbQ747tqSgr2mug0at8/edit?usp=sharing)?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Ouch.
Post by: Toaster on August 13, 2013, 08:42:21 pm
I found it mightily hilarious to pop open that spoiler and be sworn at in great big letters.


Also that sounds painful
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Ouch.
Post by: piecewise on August 13, 2013, 09:02:52 pm
Did you get my new sheet (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1T-Mhdqm9PACxpTd6jlnA61T4EbQ747tqSgr2mug0at8/edit?usp=sharing)?
It works now, yeah. I'll throw you in vs whoever kills their opponent first.

I found it mightily hilarious to pop open that spoiler and be sworn at in great big letters.


Also that sounds painful
I was gonna go with "Fuck the police" for the ultimate gangsta airship, but I was lazy. That ship is funny but is also horribly designed since if that lower section gets severed half of it is just gonna fall off and become "FU".




Anyways, the basic documentation for ship making is almost done. There's lots of rules left to get together for under the hood stuff like how ramming and crashing is handled or certain status effects like fire or electricity, and how weight effects engines etc, but I should have something that will let you guys start thinking about how you want your ships to be here soon enough.

Title: Re: Airship Combat: Ouch.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 13, 2013, 09:15:39 pm
Oh, sweet, I can kill remuthra now.

Sending PM.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Ouch.
Post by: Remuthra on August 13, 2013, 09:17:14 pm
Oh, sweet, I can kill mastahcheese now.

Sending PM.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Ouch.
Post by: Octobomb on August 14, 2013, 04:05:24 am
PM sent.
The Random Number God hath cursed me.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Ouch.
Post by: miauw62 on August 14, 2013, 04:37:19 am
Wait, we can build our own ships eventually?
>.>
<.<
I'm totally not gonna build a dickship.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Ouch.
Post by: piecewise on August 14, 2013, 12:14:38 pm
Wait, we can build our own ships eventually?
>.>
<.<
I'm totally not gonna build a dickship.
This is totally possible.


But it is only acceptable if you then place the largest possible cannon so that it fires out of the front.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Ouch.
Post by: Nicholas1024 on August 14, 2013, 01:04:18 pm
So, what's the likely ratio on ships built for combat vs ships built for amusement?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Ouch.
Post by: Empiricist on August 14, 2013, 01:05:52 pm
Combat to Amusement ratio is probably 0:0^-1
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Ouch.
Post by: piecewise on August 14, 2013, 01:13:03 pm
So, what's the likely ratio on ships built for combat vs ships built for amusement?
Depends. Amusing ship designs could be common, but ones that actually get built? Probably very few. Teams have budgets, so sinking 25,000 into that dickship isn't something I foresee a winning team doing.

Unless of course the dickship is also very well designed and armed to the teeth. So to speak.


Anyways, I've given the current, incomplete Manual to Cael, who is looking it over for me and going to be playing around with creating his own ships. The manual is 36 pages long-a lot of space is taken up by pictures and diagrams, as well as the listing of modules and ammo at the bottom- and covers everything the players need to know about creating a ship. It lacks documentation of many rules, such as how crashing and ramming works, details about how damage is handled and the like, but it's enough to let you make your own ships. It should soon be available to the general public after a bit of proof-reading by my fellow skybox announcer.


Combat turns coming after ER posts. Judging by the pm's I've got; I expect there to be blood.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Ouch.
Post by: Remuthra on August 14, 2013, 01:18:27 pm
Depends on the pragmaticism of the team. If they're practical, the first ship will be for actual fighting, and everything else will be for amusement. If they're less practical, the first ship will also be for amusement.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Now with More, probably hard to follow, Tutorials
Post by: Urist Mc Dwarf on August 14, 2013, 01:27:46 pm
https://www.dropbox.com/s/3klmi9auq261zvi/stuff.png

List of ship modules so far. Anything missing you can think of?

The next turn won't be much better. And the turn after that. Mayyybe the turn after that, but probably not. If anything, and especially if we're interested in expediently finishing the test, I'd just say to fast-forward the next few turns until one side can potentially get a shot at the other. Probably will have to be done at night, when Daruish comes online.

Is there anything I can repair? If yes, get busy on that.
We can just end the test now, give me a bit to get everything ready for the next part and then start that, if you guys want. I think this has helped me work things out pretty well, brought up the issues and such.

Bomber plane and drop plane

Bomber is self explanatory, drop plane can drop people safely on to other airships. Also, could we get modules for planes? If so, I would suggest some decoy type modules, like chaff, and some kinnd pod to make it look like your going down. 
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Ouch.
Post by: Dansmithers on August 14, 2013, 01:49:15 pm
36 pages!?

When we're done with this, you could probably publish this.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Ouch.
Post by: piecewise on August 14, 2013, 04:25:46 pm
Oh, sweet, I can kill remuthra now.

Sending PM.
Oh, sweet, I can kill mastahcheese now.

Sending PM.

Welp, Moe isn't very fast so he doesn't get too far. Cromwell gets farther, up to the center high cover. Not much happens, really.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/thchlbvrtfzxxvf/redcromwell%20vs%20bluemoe.png


PM sent.
The Random Number God hath cursed me.
I found it mightily hilarious to pop open that spoiler and be sworn at in great big letters.


Also that sounds painful

(Octo, normally, if this would happen, where he flanks you, you would just get the attack dice you had but no defense; so if you didn't hit him first, he'd hit you. But since you're trying to switch weapons and shoot in the same turn and the whole "it takes a turn to switch weapons" this wasn't explicitly said, I'm gonna have you switch and try to sprint to cover. It's better then just being gunned down. )


Toastarrr runs north, the central high cover obstructing Dave's line of fire, around his low cover and then out to the north side of the center high cover. He slinks along the side and then leans out of cover, flanking Dave and unloading his SMG at the injured man.

Dave, seeing Toastarrr's movement, switches to his shotgun and moves south, running for cover.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Dave manages to scramble around to the south side of his cover, bullets hissing by as he runs. He slumps down behind the low cover, holding his shotgun in his good hand and breathing hard. The blood loss is really getting to him; his vision is going dim and the sounds all seem distant, his hand is shaking uncontrollably and he feels very sluggish.

(Bloodloss has effected Dave's dex, per and agi. This stats were chosen randomly. Every turn he bleeds, he will continue to lose stats. If all stats reach an effective 0, he has bled out.)



Everything
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/32eq50gnxyiubf9/ZAGDfDQc7v
Title: Re: Airship Combat: A Bad Day for Dave.
Post by: piecewise on August 14, 2013, 11:23:00 pm
Well Senor Rocket lawnchair forgot to divide up his combat pool into attack and defense, so I'm gonna put it all in attack.

[Lawnchair:Rocket R13 (Jesus) S10 (Double jesus)]
[Hammerman:Agility r3 s2]

Moe sees what Cromwell is up to. Hard not to, he's got a goddamn rocket launcher pointed  pointed right at his head. He tires to move, tries to run and hide. Unfortunately  Moe is a very slow man. And Cromwell is very good with his rocket launcher.

[Ex wound roll:4]
[Location:4]

Moe makes it exactly one square to the side, and he does that carried on the blast wave of a rocket detonating against the wall right beside him. He lands, smoldering, on the ground. His left leg is gone, just gone, a stump of ragged meat like a torn sausage with a hunk of shattered bone in the center. It spurts blood with every quickly weakening heart beat, a pool of red forming on the ground around him.

Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Remuthra on August 14, 2013, 11:25:51 pm
Hah, just a flesh wound. Now come here, ya weakling!
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Thearpox on August 14, 2013, 11:26:19 pm
(Looks at two Piecewise posts in a row.) And that is the problem with PM'ing everything. The thread is practically dead.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Rolepgeek on August 14, 2013, 11:41:12 pm
Well, I would post in the thread, if I was in the match. But I'm not. :(

I WANT FIGHTS
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 14, 2013, 11:46:42 pm
Well, I would post in the thread, if I was in the match. But I'm not. :(

I WANT FIGHTS
Fill out a character sheet and I'll throw you in vs whoever wins.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 15, 2013, 02:18:27 am
So far that's looking like me.

I'm considering just waiting to see how long it takes for him to bleed out at this point. He doesn't have any points in medicine.

Sending PM.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Urist Mc Dwarf on August 15, 2013, 07:29:13 am
question aboout modular airship test. Will we just have infinite parts?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Toaster on August 15, 2013, 08:46:34 am
Delicious blood.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Octobomb on August 15, 2013, 10:55:47 am
Oh dear. Well, PM sent.

Regarding weapons, I have come up with my own system and thought you might be interested - weapons are organized into very broad classes, eg. Pistol SMG Shotgun Chaingun etc, then each weapon has a certain number of modification slots, each modification is different, such as 50% larger clip, Auto fire, etc. Just 2 cents on how to keep customisation high and complexity low.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 15, 2013, 12:45:05 pm
question aboout modular airship test. Will we just have infinite parts?
Yes and no. Your only limit is your money. Everything has a cost but there are no limits on parts, you can have as many of any part as you can afford. It will become clearer once the manual is put up. Cael's been busy, so I'm still waiting on his input before I post something incomplete.

Oh dear. Well, PM sent.

Regarding weapons, I have come up with my own system and thought you might be interested - weapons are organized into very broad classes, eg. Pistol SMG Shotgun Chaingun etc, then each weapon has a certain number of modification slots, each modification is different, such as 50% larger clip, Auto fire, etc. Just 2 cents on how to keep customisation high and complexity low.
Hmm. Well, that seems like it would be good for weapon modification, something that hasn't come up yet, but in terms of the skill system I'm not sure. I mean, I could split the skills up further; ie what is just crushing and hacking now becomes Axes, cleavers, hammers,clubs, maces, etc. But they would all still be strength weapons and doing that could result in overspecialization; characters that are really good with say an ax but terrible with everything else. That we end up with melee and ranged just becoming singular stat skills and then people would end up pigeon holed.

See, the reason this is set up as it is, is because I've tried several different combat systems before and they always had the problem of either forcing people into a narrow stat focus or creating god stats. Agility, for instance, since it determined who attacked first and if you could dodge. Or forcing someone to stat heavy into dex just so they could use any ranged weapons. I like this system because it lets people have long and short range capacities with a variety of skills and none of them stand out as massively better then the others. I'm rambling.


If the current system really bugs people I can just change it to be something more traditional; an Agi for who goes first, dex for aiming, strength for damage in melee, etc. sort of thing. Or split the weapons skills up further.  Although, I'd like to see it perform in melee before I scrap it.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Thearpox on August 15, 2013, 02:10:30 pm
Quote
Although, I'd like to see it perform in melee before I scrap it.
You want people to melee, you have to give people incentive to melee. Currently, it means sacrificing a shooting turn, and running into your opponent.

And that's probably exactly the way it will perform in game. i.e.: not be used much. Mind you, I'm not anti-gun. It's just that this is not a JRPG, and people aren't going to use swords when they can use guns. Unless you give them reasons that is.

I'll shut up about the rest of what you said since you already heard a lot of me. Maybe I'll start speaking again on the topic after several days.

Quote
after all, most weapons share the same features
... :(
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Octobomb on August 15, 2013, 02:22:38 pm
Oh no, I like the combat system! For melee, just have the the str dex and agi weapons generalized into 3 categories - after all, most weapons share the same features - str hits slow but hard, etc. Then you name them on a case by case basis and change anything required.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 15, 2013, 03:51:19 pm
If you want players to be melee, give them incentives. Swords can't hit enemies on nearby ships, not ones across your ship, or really anywhere very far from arm's reach, but if you add charging mechanics or something people might take up the sword.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Rolepgeek on August 15, 2013, 03:59:15 pm
http://i.imgur.com/THNPX31.png
My character.

I'd like a Longsword and a Revolver, if I can. Revolver is dex, right?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Thearpox on August 15, 2013, 05:15:08 pm
By the way, are the any disadvantages to using a rifle butt as a strength weapon, compared to a hammer?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 15, 2013, 08:46:23 pm
Oh, I wasn't saying I want to force or even encourage it. I just want to see how the system handles it. I'm curious. Anyways:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Toastarrr sidles along the wall and pops out around the corner as Dave tries to run north. The bullet catches Dave straight in the throat; it tears through his larynx and clips his carotid artery. He stumbles forward, into the high cover of the wall, gurgling blood through the hole in his throat.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Toaster on August 15, 2013, 08:54:56 pm
Too bad I don't have a dagger, or I'd put my move as "Cut out his small intestine and jump rope with it."


Full auto finish him off, 6/2
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 15, 2013, 11:40:02 pm
So....

https://www.dropbox.com/s/whrcss5cnw0cbk2/Airship%20Construction%20Manual.pdf


Modules
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/b0qn9m3ql2aiepj/xOIYmKG_Q8
Build a ship.

(Note this module list is not the complete one. More will be added later. Same with materials.)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Rolepgeek on August 15, 2013, 11:45:05 pm
I sure hope it's not the complete one...A box with a band-aid! That's ridiculous!
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 15, 2013, 11:58:18 pm
I sure hope it's not the complete one...A box with a band-aid! That's ridiculous!
....wat
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 15, 2013, 11:59:15 pm
Has remuthra sent his orders yet?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 16, 2013, 12:01:09 am
Has remuthra sent his orders yet?
Nothing yet.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 16, 2013, 12:02:06 am
Couldn't you just have him try to bandage himself? I mean, bleeding over the floor is hardly something that one can just ignore.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Thearpox on August 16, 2013, 12:04:58 am
Quote
And then reconnect the grid lines. Make sure to do this...
Or just use the advanced "layers" tech of Illustrator. :P

But seriously, where are the cover pictures coming from?

PS: I've got a number of questions, but most importantly, are the module pictures missing intentionally? Because it is a work in progress?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Remuthra on August 16, 2013, 12:06:06 am
Has remuthra sent his orders yet?
Nothing yet.
You didn't get my PM? Well, resend time I guess.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 16, 2013, 12:16:00 am
Quote
And then reconnect the grid lines. Make sure to do this...
Or just use the advanced "layers" tech of Illustrator. :P

But seriously, where are the cover pictures coming from?
I Build my system for paint. Because everyone has paint and everyone, even someone like me, can use it.

Also, the images are pictures of a zeppelin being constructed.

Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Thearpox on August 16, 2013, 12:17:24 am
Quote
I Build my system for paint. Because everyone has paint and everyone, even someone like me, can use it.
I know. Doesn't make it any less funny.

I've got a number of questions, but most importantly, are the module pictures missing intentionally? Because it is a work in progress I understand, but still wondering.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Remuthra on August 16, 2013, 12:18:19 am
Quote
And then reconnect the grid lines. Make sure to do this...
Or just use the advanced "layers" tech of Illustrator. :P

But seriously, where are the cover pictures coming from?
I Build my system for paint. Because everyone has paint and everyone, even someone like me, can use it.

Also, the images are pictures of a zeppelin being constructed.
Actually, I do not have Paint. Only Windows users get it.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Thearpox on August 16, 2013, 12:20:03 am
Quote
And then reconnect the grid lines. Make sure to do this...
Or just use the advanced "layers" tech of Illustrator. :P

But seriously, where are the cover pictures coming from?
I Build my system for paint. Because everyone has paint and everyone, even someone like me, can use it.

Also, the images are pictures of a zeppelin being constructed.
Actually, I do not have Paint. Only Windows users get it.
Now I'm actually laughing. What do Mac users get?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Remuthra on August 16, 2013, 12:23:41 am
Quote
And then reconnect the grid lines. Make sure to do this...
Or just use the advanced "layers" tech of Illustrator. :P

But seriously, where are the cover pictures coming from?
I Build my system for paint. Because everyone has paint and everyone, even someone like me, can use it.

Also, the images are pictures of a zeppelin being constructed.
Actually, I do not have Paint. Only Windows users get it.
Now I'm actually laughing. What do Mac users get?
I don't know, but Linux users get GIMP. I don't like GIMP, so I use an online tool called Pixlr.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 16, 2013, 12:30:06 am
I use gimp for turning my paint images into gifs, but otherwise I hate it.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 16, 2013, 12:30:54 am
Quote
I Build my system for paint. Because everyone has paint and everyone, even someone like me, can use it.
I know. Doesn't make it any less funny.

I've got a number of questions, but most importantly, are the module pictures missing intentionally? Because it is a work in progress I understand, but still wondering.
Could have sworn I put that link in the thing...Oh well
Modules
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/b0qn9m3ql2aiepj/xOIYmKG_Q8


Quote
And then reconnect the grid lines. Make sure to do this...
Or just use the advanced "layers" tech of Illustrator. :P

But seriously, where are the cover pictures coming from?
I Build my system for paint. Because everyone has paint and everyone, even someone like me, can use it.

Also, the images are pictures of a zeppelin being constructed.
Actually, I do not have Paint. Only Windows users get it.
Paint.net might work.  I'm sure there's something similar regardless of if you're on Linux or Chrome or even mac.



 
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Remuthra on August 16, 2013, 12:33:27 am
Quote
And then reconnect the grid lines. Make sure to do this...
Or just use the advanced "layers" tech of Illustrator. :P

But seriously, where are the cover pictures coming from?
I Build my system for paint. Because everyone has paint and everyone, even someone like me, can use it.

Also, the images are pictures of a zeppelin being constructed.
Actually, I do not have Paint. Only Windows users get it.
Paint.net might work.  I'm sure there's something similar regardless of if you're on Linux or Chrome or even mac.
Is Chrome an OS now? Google thinks of everything.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 16, 2013, 01:19:15 am
Masta:Just wait behind my cover and switch to my halberd.
Pull out a cigarette and smoke while I wait to see if I even need to move anymore.

Remuthra:The great Moe Ridger can not be brought down by a minor scratch like a lost leg! Moe Ridger limps to Cromwell Jackson and attempts to bash him with his hammer again!

Cromwell slings his rocket launcher on his back and pulls his halberd out. He leans against the wall and smokes a cigarette while Moe slowly crawls his way toward him. Why Moe, with his one leg and one agility, has decided to try and charge Cromwell, is beyond me. Especially when he has a perfectly good flamethrower.

Well, the blood loss has now officially rendered moe Immobile, so it looks like he'll have to rely on ranged combat. Unless of course Cromwell decides to walk over and try to finish him off.


Quote
And then reconnect the grid lines. Make sure to do this...
Or just use the advanced "layers" tech of Illustrator. :P

But seriously, where are the cover pictures coming from?
I Build my system for paint. Because everyone has paint and everyone, even someone like me, can use it.

Also, the images are pictures of a zeppelin being constructed.
Actually, I do not have Paint. Only Windows users get it.
Paint.net might work.  I'm sure there's something similar regardless of if you're on Linux or Chrome or even mac.
Is Chrome an OS now? Google thinks of everything.
My girlfriend's mom has a Netbook that runs chrome. It's basically useless though; can't run exe's or flash or java or pretty much anything.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 16, 2013, 01:24:27 am
PM sent.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Dansmithers on August 16, 2013, 01:46:43 am
OMG SHIPBUILDING IS COMPLICATED! I think I'll leave that to pros/ people who have more time on their hands.

BTW: A premade grid/ grid section would be nice. 
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 16, 2013, 02:28:20 am
BTW: A premade grid/ grid section would be nice.
How's this?
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Dansmithers on August 16, 2013, 02:50:51 am
BTW: A premade grid/ grid section would be nice.
How's this?
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3ALwKeSEYs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3ALwKeSEYs)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 16, 2013, 02:57:18 am
Sometimes I wish my computer would permit the viewing of youtube videos.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Octobomb on August 16, 2013, 03:10:51 am
Place Shotgun barrel under chin. Gurgle "Toaster, I am your father! Search your feelings, you know it to be true." Then pull my loaded shotgun's trigger. If I can't talk, pull the trigger anyway. Then have my ghost gleefully inform him of it
Just read the construction manual. Holy-freaking-moley.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 16, 2013, 03:46:44 am
YO! Hey Piecewise, would this be considered a valid ship?

Spoiler: Bottom Deck (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Mid Ship (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Top Deck (click to show/hide)

Behold the powers of insomnia!
No clue on the cost of that thing, by the way.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 16, 2013, 07:56:20 am
Care to guess what mu first idea was?

If you guessed "making an Airship Enterprise", you were right!

What all needs power and such?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: miauw62 on August 16, 2013, 08:19:08 am
I will forever be known as the man that built the dickship. IT IS MY MISSION
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Toaster on August 16, 2013, 10:19:56 am
You need a good name, of course.

Phlying Phallus?
Penis Plane?
Helicockter? 

I'll stop now.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Toaster on August 16, 2013, 10:38:51 am
Reading the manual now, so I'm putting things here as I see them.

Only two types of engines?  I wouldn't mind seeing high speed low weight "racer" engines or the reverse "freight" engines.

Remember- if your ship is hit by bolas, aim for the balls.

Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 16, 2013, 10:40:55 am
There's a little of that dynamic with the Wing and Rear engines.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 16, 2013, 10:47:45 am
YO! Hey Piecewise, would this be considered a valid ship?

Spoiler: Bottom Deck (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Mid Ship (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Top Deck (click to show/hide)

Behold the powers of insomnia!
No clue on the cost of that thing, by the way.

It looks pretty good. Though there are a few minor things:
 
1.Don't run walls through modules, like ya did with the constriction bola and the engines and such.

2.The hovercore and lodestones don't need power

3. You have a lot of ammo dumps. Right now, you really only need one. In the finished game you'll probably need more, depending on the amount of ammo you have, but for now one will do.

4. The constriction bola needs to be powered. If you look in the modules section it should say which pieces need power somewhere in their description or under "Special"

Other then that, with a quick look, it looks fine. Good job.

Care to guess what mu first idea was?

If you guessed "making an Airship Enterprise", you were right!

What all needs power and such?
The things that need power should say so. For instance, the constriction bola says it requires power under the "special" section of it's description. Beyond weapons; engines mostly.


Reading the manual now, so I'm putting things here as I see them.

Only two types of engines?  I wouldn't mind seeing high speed low weight "racer" engines or the reverse "freight" engines.

Remember- if your ship is hit by bolas, aim for the balls.


Yeah, I intend to add more types of engines. Like I said when I posted this; this module list is far from complete. It's just enough to let you guys build ships for the test.


By the way, I'm considering how much to give you guys for the test. I'm thinking about 60,000-70,000 money to construct your ships. 
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 16, 2013, 02:29:05 pm
Alright. Let's get this party started.

The Airship Combatprize is comprised (hah!) of four sections and two connector thingies. These connect the two Engine Sections to the Engineering Section and are composed of a single level of a single space with a single ladder in each.
The Combatprize is composed entirely of metal.

Spoiler: Plans: Blueprint (click to show/hide)
Given the wonders of mental math, some may be off.
Spoiler: Plans: Budget (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 16, 2013, 05:32:20 pm
Alright. Let's get this party started.

The Airship Combatprize is comprised (hah!) of four sections and two connector thingies. These connect the two Engine Sections to the Engineering Section and are composed of a single level of a single space with a single ladder in each.
The Combatprize is composed entirely of metal.

Spoiler: Plans: Blueprint (click to show/hide)
Given the wonders of mental math, some may be off.
Spoiler: Plans: Budget (click to show/hide)

Some problems, with just the blueprint.

1.I need the layers split up into separate images. I can't use an alpha numeric grid if all the levels are on the same image. 

2. I'm not sure exactly how these images stack up. From what I can tell you have a giant circular section here that you say is the cockpit area, but it's practically as big as the airstrip, contains an edited cockpit module that's missing it's walls, which you're not supposed to do.

3. The engine section, which is done incorrectly, has it's engines inside it's walls. So they're basically functioning as nothing but giant fans right now. Giant fans dangerously close to that ladder.

4.I'm assuming that airstrip is on the top most level, which means that the hover cores are too. Which means that they're sitting on the deck, completely exposed.

5. Your ammo dumps are hanging off the edge, which isn't allowed either.

6.Also, ammo dumps explode when they are destroyed, so putting them on the upper most level; next to missile launchers which also explode when they're destroyed may be a bad idea. That and they're both next to the hover cores.

I haven't checked the other stats and stuff, but you might want to change up the design before I do. Take a look at mastahcheese's blueprints; they're pretty much correct, minus a few small errors.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 16, 2013, 07:11:37 pm
1. Sorry about the blueprints. If I ever intend to make it seriously, I'll do that, but I don't particularly care at this point as more than a vague drawing board.

2. I didn't intend to remove the walls. And if I care enough about this I'll make sure the proportions work.

3. Oh. Noted.

4. I was imagining the skiff flying out the front...which is blocked by that Tesla arc. Huh.
Are any craft capable of landing in a covered hangar of some kind?

5. I was intending for them to be within the ship, being on enough floor for the dumps to be on.

6. When did I say I was intending this for a serious battle? If it gets used and explodes in a glorious fireball, all the better.
...Can you include rules for unusually massive explosions damaging nearby airships?

I'll do so when I make a ship more polished in concept and such than "Ship shaped kinda like the USS Enterprise".
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 16, 2013, 10:28:39 pm
Actually, with the talk of exploding rockets, one of the things I realized about my ship design was that, what with all the unneeded ammo dumps next to rockets, if a single mortar shell burst through the wooden top deck and onto the middle deck before it exploded, it'd be the Hindenburg Part 2.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Rolepgeek on August 16, 2013, 11:19:24 pm
Hmmmm...

I have so many ideas to make it more complex/more customizable! Damn you brain!

A calibur system for cannons. A rotating module that weapons can be placed on top of, but takes up space on the floor below. Cannons that have multiple barrels like the artillery guns we see on ships today. More types of engines. More uses for clockwork or steam power. 'Crystal' power. A docking system for really big airships to carry smaller airships inside of them. Etc.

On another note, the format the modules are listed in is very clumsy. Just doing each of them as a paragraph may be easier to read, with the stats below them.

I'm still trying to work out the calibur system, right now. I'm trying to make it so that larger cannons are slightly more efficient in terms of DPS, but tend to be shorter ranged, easier to damage(due to size and all), etc.

I WANT TO MAKE ALL OF THE GAMES ARGH
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 17, 2013, 08:27:15 am
1. Sorry about the blueprints. If I ever intend to make it seriously, I'll do that, but I don't particularly care at this point as more than a vague drawing board.

2. I didn't intend to remove the walls. And if I care enough about this I'll make sure the proportions work.

3. Oh. Noted.

4. I was imagining the skiff flying out the front...which is blocked by that Tesla arc. Huh.
Are any craft capable of landing in a covered hangar of some kind?

5. I was intending for them to be within the ship, being on enough floor for the dumps to be on.

6. When did I say I was intending this for a serious battle? If it gets used and explodes in a glorious fireball, all the better.
...Can you include rules for unusually massive explosions damaging nearby airships?

I'll do so when I make a ship more polished in concept and such than "Ship shaped kinda like the USS Enterprise".
Yeah, you could have any of the planes land inside the ship as long as you leave a hole in the wall for them to take off and land through. It would be harder for your pilots, but at least their planes wouldn't get shredded on deck.

Point 5, yeah, thats what I figured. But if you want to do that you'll have to have a wall around it somehow. It could be right up against it, but it's still gotta be there.

Sorry, I think I took your ship a bit too seriously. I didn't realize you were just posting a rough, experimental creation rather then a finished product.


Hmmmm...

I have so many ideas to make it more complex/more customizable! Damn you brain!

A calibur system for cannons. A rotating module that weapons can be placed on top of, but takes up space on the floor below. Cannons that have multiple barrels like the artillery guns we see on ships today. More types of engines. More uses for clockwork or steam power. 'Crystal' power. A docking system for really big airships to carry smaller airships inside of them. Etc.

On another note, the format the modules are listed in is very clumsy. Just doing each of them as a paragraph may be easier to read, with the stats below them.

I'm still trying to work out the calibur system, right now. I'm trying to make it so that larger cannons are slightly more efficient in terms of DPS, but tend to be shorter ranged, easier to damage(due to size and all), etc.

I WANT TO MAKE ALL OF THE GAMES ARGH
Yeah, cael talked to me about how my text needs better formatting. really, I just keep things in tables to keep them nice and neatly separated, but I'll redo it later. Hell, I'll even post examples of ways to do it and you guys can pick which looks best.

A lot of the things your saying are possible with more modules, which I'll add.  Like I said, this isn't the final list, this is just a small group for the purposes of testing. There will be more uses and more of everything in the finished version. In fact, after the airship test I'm going to open things up for suggestions about what you guys want to see in terms of more modules.

The rotating mount was something I considered too, but it would basically need to come in a variety of sizes and take multiple levels, especially for the bigger guns. I don't want somebody just sticking the giant cannon on a tiny little mount and then murdering everyone.

Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 17, 2013, 09:09:17 am
While I consider a more serious, less flawed plan for a ship:'

Have you considered my suggestion of large explosions affecting nearby (possibly just adjacent) ships?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 17, 2013, 09:38:20 am
While I consider a more serious, less flawed plan for a ship:'

Have you considered my suggestion of large explosions affecting nearby (possibly just adjacent) ships?

I'll look into it, but it seems like a perfectly valid suggestion. It would make sense that something big enough would throw debris out that could hit nearby ships. I'll just need to think of a way to do it where people won't just be weaponizing it. Make a ship thats just a bunch of ammo dumps on the end of sticks, using the explosion to hurl shrapnel at their attackers.

Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 17, 2013, 09:39:25 am
I'd say that deliberately exploding your ship to hurt enemy ships should be its own consequence.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 17, 2013, 11:40:08 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Moe fires a gout of flame over towards Cromwell, but Cromwell just stands safely behind cover and continues to smoke, changing from halberd back to rocket launcher.





Too bad I don't have a dagger, or I'd put my move as "Cut out his small intestine and jump rope with it."


Full auto finish him off, 6/2

Place Shotgun barrel under chin. Gurgle "Toaster, I am your father! Search your feelings, you know it to be true." Then pull my loaded shotgun's trigger. If I can't talk, pull the trigger anyway. Then have my ghost gleefully inform him of it
Just read the construction manual. Holy-freaking-moley.
Toastarrr and Dave both fire at the same time; succeeding in their dual goal of making Dave a very dead man. However, dave's shot wins for sheer splatter factor.


Hey toaster, you up for another round of combat against a new challenger or do you want to bow out and let two new people fight?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Toaster on August 17, 2013, 01:51:44 pm
I'd be up for more, but I'll let someone else go ahead if they're ready.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Remuthra on August 17, 2013, 01:53:47 pm
Moe points out Cromwell was listed as only having a single rocket as ammo.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Toaster on August 17, 2013, 02:16:28 pm
He can still slap you with it.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Octobomb on August 17, 2013, 03:34:39 pm
Well done Toaster. I should have fired my shotgun at you, but I want to go out in an awesome fashion. Brain splatter + Darth Vader: Search your feelings. You know it to be cool.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 17, 2013, 05:16:25 pm
Moe points out Cromwell was listed as only having a single rocket as ammo.
Actually, I thought that as well, but that only means I have only one shot in the tube.
I can reload as many times as I want.

That said, reload
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Remuthra on August 17, 2013, 05:22:42 pm
Well, might as well keep plugging.

Melt his cover.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 17, 2013, 05:26:31 pm
By the way, could we get a look at the new map? I want to see how badly I messed it up.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: syvarris on August 17, 2013, 10:09:53 pm
Can I still get in on the combat fun?

If so:
Spoiler: syvarris (click to show/hide)

Question for PW: Can you use the fleshing skill on a normal human to "improve" them, a la The Doctor?  Or is it just limited to creatures born of the worm?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 17, 2013, 10:19:56 pm
Wait, which Doctor?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 17, 2013, 10:21:04 pm
Wait, which Doctor?
This made me laugh so hard when I read it.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 17, 2013, 10:24:44 pm
I'm serious. The first "The Doctor" (or, alternatively, the first dozen or so) would not have been engaging in bio-augmentation, at least not that I've heard of. I expect it to happen about the time he's a ginger.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: syvarris on August 17, 2013, 10:27:15 pm
I don't think you should be confused by that statement.

Unless Doctor Who has been secretly using the TARDIS to modify Rose into becoming an enormous flying organic blimp.  If that's the case, maybe I should watch more episodes.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 17, 2013, 10:27:48 pm
Which "The Doctor" were you referring to?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: syvarris on August 17, 2013, 10:29:02 pm
...

You're serious?

You know, I think I won't answer that.  I'm curious where this goes.

EDIT:

Ahh, finally found a good quote:

"We're running out of space on that body of yours." The doctor says, looking you over. "Do you need those legs?"
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Thearpox on August 17, 2013, 10:32:26 pm
Which "The Doctor" were you referring to?
I'm laughing too right now. These Doctors should meet.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 17, 2013, 10:43:42 pm
Well, there are a lot of Doctors. It's hard to know for sure if you meant Who, the ER one, some other character typically referred to by title, or pretty much any character with medical knowledge or a PhD.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 17, 2013, 10:48:35 pm
Well, there are a lot of Doctors. It's hard to know for sure if you meant Who, the ER one, some other character typically referred to by title, or pretty much any character with medical knowledge or a PhD.
The reason I said I was laughing was because I was thinking of Doctor Who, and how often they ask him to be more specific on him being a "Doctor".

I am also unsure of the exact doctor being referenced in this discussion.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: syvarris on August 17, 2013, 10:49:23 pm
True, but there's not too many who use medicine intended for eldritch abominations on people to "improve" them.  And are addressed as "The Doctor".

Mastahcheese, click the quote.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Remuthra on August 17, 2013, 10:50:03 pm
Well, there are a lot of Doctors. It's hard to know for sure if you meant Who, the ER one, some other character typically referred to by title, or pretty much any character with medical knowledge or a PhD.
Or he could mean Doctor Insertcornyvilliannamehere
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 17, 2013, 10:52:06 pm
Mastahcheese, click the quote.
Yeah, I'm familiar with that one. Now I get it.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Rolepgeek on August 17, 2013, 11:00:24 pm
Maybe he was asking which Doctor, as in which generation.

All I can think of, anyway. Or a brain-fart.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Nahere on August 17, 2013, 11:39:28 pm
A ramming focused cheap and cheerful ship:
Spoiler: Bottom Deck (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Middle Deck (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Top Deck (click to show/hide)

Out of curiosity, I decided to make a rough model in Sketchup and see what it looked like. I assumed that each square was about one square meter (Which seems a little too small now I look at it) and that each deck was two meters high (a standard room is about 2400mm, so this seemed right considering that extra space is a luxury in most ships, let alone aircraft). I got this:
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: miauw62 on August 18, 2013, 04:35:45 am
Don't you have two guns on the side on the middle deck?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 18, 2013, 06:41:29 am
I would have guessed each tile being closer to 1.5 or 2 meters across, actually.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Twi on August 18, 2013, 12:16:42 pm
While I doubt I'll ever seriously work up the commitment to actually play this, there is something I'm curious about regarding the airship construction.

Aside from redundancy, is there any reason to have more than 1 hover core or 4 lodestones? Can you get different rates of turning/climbing?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 18, 2013, 12:21:18 pm
For starters, you're not screwed when the enemy hits your only hovercore.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Twi on August 18, 2013, 12:21:52 pm
For starters, you're not screwed when the enemy hits your only hovercore.
Aside from redundancy

Redundancy is a cool thing, mind. I, too, enjoy not being screwed. But that's not the point here. :P
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 18, 2013, 12:45:13 pm
I missed those helpful words.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Nahere on August 18, 2013, 02:03:21 pm
Don't you have two guns on the side on the middle deck?
I somehow missed this when modelling it. :P
Chalk it up to me being distracted while doing it, I guess.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: syvarris on August 18, 2013, 09:59:22 pm
Just read through the ship construction manual. I think I'll design a extremely heavily armored carrier type ship... tomorrow.

Spoiler: A few questions (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Rolepgeek on August 18, 2013, 11:02:33 pm
For the last question, the answer is 5 before being stopped by the next one.

Unless it's Hardened metal, in which case 0.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 19, 2013, 12:41:32 pm
Quick question: Who among you would like to move on to full scale airship testing? Because as far as I'm concerned, I can select our players and divide them into teams right now, if we're ready to try this for reals.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Dansmithers on August 19, 2013, 12:45:58 pm
Quick question: Who among you would like to move on to full scale airship testing? Because as far as I'm concerned, I can select our players and divide them into teams right now, if we're ready to try this for reals.

YES! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3ALwKeSEYs)
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Rolepgeek on August 19, 2013, 12:58:12 pm
I still want to try and create a long range bombardment airship with one side covered by hardened metal.

But designing it on the blueprint looks extremely time-consuming and difficult, especially if you mess up.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 19, 2013, 01:20:55 pm
Quick question: Who among you would like to move on to full scale airship testing? Because as far as I'm concerned, I can select our players and divide them into teams right now, if we're ready to try this for reals.
Can I use someone else's design? I still haven't had any great ideas.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Toaster on August 19, 2013, 01:38:41 pm
Sure, whatever.  It'll probably be easier to build a ship collaboratively.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 19, 2013, 02:17:28 pm
It will be teams of 5, so you guys can all collaborate on your designs. Basically, I'll randomly choose the players and then you can split into teams and build your ships, then create your characters. I still need to get the player items made...but that shouldn't take too long.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 19, 2013, 02:19:54 pm
Quick question: Who among you would like to move on to full scale airship testing? Because as far as I'm concerned, I can select our players and divide them into teams right now, if we're ready to try this for reals.
Yes, I'll see if I can find time to put up some ship designs later.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: miauw62 on August 19, 2013, 02:23:18 pm
I'll upload the unfinished dickship schematics tomorrow.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 19, 2013, 02:38:27 pm
It's only one ship per a team too, by the way.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Rolepgeek on August 19, 2013, 02:43:55 pm
Piecewise, could you collect all of your fabulous pdfs and images and put them in the OP please?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 19, 2013, 03:15:06 pm
Piecewise, could you collect all of your fabulous pdfs and images and put them in the OP please?

Done
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: syvarris on August 19, 2013, 04:13:44 pm
What are the parameters like money?  What type of stuff can the players have?

Also, because it's important to my ship idea:

Just read through the ship construction manual. I think I'll design a extremely heavily armored carrier type ship... tomorrow.

Spoiler: A few questions (click to show/hide)

The design I'm planning is pretty much a big ball of armor with a semi-internal runway, five fighters, and no engines.  Anyone interested in taking out other people's deathstars?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Rolepgeek on August 19, 2013, 04:49:21 pm
How do I use Layers on Paint?

I want to be able to just make the black lines above the modules above the background.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Thearpox on August 19, 2013, 04:52:47 pm
How do I use Layers on Paint?

I want to be able to just make the black lines above the modules above the background.
Paint doesn't have layers. Everything else does. That's why I'm making so much fun of it.

PS: If want suggestions on using drawing software, it's probably easier just to Google it than ask here. You'd get faster, and more in-deph results.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Octobomb on August 19, 2013, 05:01:45 pm
I'm in, by the way.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 19, 2013, 05:43:00 pm
What are the parameters like money?  What type of stuff can the players have?

Also, because it's important to my ship idea:

Just read through the ship construction manual. I think I'll design a extremely heavily armored carrier type ship... tomorrow.

Spoiler: A few questions (click to show/hide)

The design I'm planning is pretty much a big ball of armor with a semi-internal runway, five fighters, and no engines.  Anyone interested in taking out other people's deathstars?
The parameters are that you have 70,000 money. Thats basically it. You can buy any modules you want in any number you want and build your ship as big as you want, as long as you have the money for it, ammo for the guns and then money for your own gear.   But worry about that later, once the teams are created and And I actually have the list of player items Out. As per those questions:

1. I don't know. It shouldn't be able to shift forward, since that would remove the need for engines, and shifting backwards seems a bit strange, but I suppose it's reasonable.

2.Of those ship modules, no. But you could buy some player items like poison gas bombs or explosives and just drop those. I suppose I'll throw in a section of items for players to attach to/use with their planes.

3. No. Fighters fire basically straight forward, but they can turn 180 degrees at a time and move much faster, so it's not that big of a deal.

4. Depends. High speed directly toward someone gives squat. But high speed away or sideways in relation makes it harder to hit you.

5. The steam cannon can be either in standby or charging mode. It's a switch that can be turned on and off. Once on, it will continue to charge until fired or it explodes.

6. Depends on placement. But it's made of hardened metal; so a pretty damn good amount.

7. It can get through 5 and deal damage to the 6th.





3.
 
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: HFS on August 19, 2013, 06:06:25 pm
Ooh, designing things. I don't think I'll participate, but I like designing things. Anyone mind if I come up with a few ships? Anyone can use them.

*Goes to read the pdf*
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Rolepgeek on August 19, 2013, 06:06:35 pm
So, I just realized something;

If you don't care about weight efficiency, just cost, use decorations. They have a 20:3 Health to cost ratio, unlike the 10:1 of Wood and metal or the 12:1 of Hardened Metal.

How many wing engines can be placed on one side?

I think there should be a Shutter module thing cannons/weapon ports. With Tracks maybe, to haul it back in between reloads. That is, if having weapons poking out does bad stuff to armor. How do portholes and the like affect armor and damage anyway?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: syvarris on August 19, 2013, 07:05:06 pm
There's an error with your math there.  Since decorative stuff's second part is a three, you need to multiply all the things you compare it with by three.  Which means...

Wood/metal has a ratio of  30:3
Hrdnd metal has a ratio of  36:3
Decorations have a ratio of 20:3, making it weaker.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Rolepgeek on August 19, 2013, 08:41:25 pm
...

No.

You want the cost to be lower.

36 Cost Units for 3 Health is worse than
30 Cost Units for 3 Health which is worse than
20 Cost Units for 3 Health.

For 600 Cost Units, if I do Hardened Metal, I could get one unit, and 50 HP, weighing 20 Weight Units.
For 600 Cost Units, if I do Metal, I could get four units, and 60 HP, weighing 40 Weight Units.
For 600 Cost Units, if I do Wood, I could get twelve units, and 60 HP, weighing 60 Weight Units.
For 600 Cost Units, if I do Glass, I could get sixty units, and 60 HP, weighing 60 Weight Units.
For 600 Cost Units, if I do Decorations, I could get thirty units, and 90 HP, Weighing 120 Weight Units.

Like I said. For the Cost, Decorations are the best health.
Meanwhile, Hardened Metal is the best Health to Weight Ratio, Glass is the best Coverage to Weight/Cost Ratio, and Metal has decent everything except coverage; Wood has decent everything except Health:Weight.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 19, 2013, 09:16:04 pm
Decorative reduced to 1 hp so we don't have people flying around in ships made entirely of gold leaf, mosaics and figure heads.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Rolepgeek on August 19, 2013, 09:32:32 pm
Aw. Now there's zero point to using Decorative at all.

It's only use will be on NPC ships or to represent valuable but fragile cargo.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 19, 2013, 09:40:09 pm
Or, you know, because it's cool.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 19, 2013, 10:14:39 pm
Aw. Now there's zero point to using Decorative at all.

It's only use will be on NPC ships or to represent valuable but fragile cargo.
Decorative is there to be Decorative. We don't plate our tanks in oil paintings, do we?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 19, 2013, 10:15:46 pm
Maybe if the oil was made out of carbon nanotubes...
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Rolepgeek on August 19, 2013, 11:26:23 pm
Well, if one wall of wood is 50, and one wall of decoration is 20...

I think it's more like it's made of chalk/other-soft-cheap-stone-thing.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 20, 2013, 12:06:51 am
We don't plate our tanks in oil paintings, do we?
Sigged.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Hapah on August 20, 2013, 12:15:12 am
Aw. Now there's zero point to using Decorative at all.

It's only use will be on NPC ships or to represent valuable but fragile cargo.
Decorative is there to be Decorative. We don't plate our tanks in oil paintings, do we?
On Bay12, we just might.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: miauw62 on August 20, 2013, 02:46:33 am
Can harpoon cannons turn around?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Octobomb on August 20, 2013, 07:01:45 am
Aw. Now there's zero point to using Decorative at all.

It's only use will be on NPC ships or to represent valuable but fragile cargo.
Decorative is there to be Decorative. We don't plate our tanks in oil paintings, do we?
On Bay12, we just might.
On Bay12 we just might make our tanks OUT of oil. Actually, that's quite a good idea. Build out a section on the front of your ship, fill it with ammo dumps, coat it in DU, then detonate. 6m Depleted Uranim frag anyone? Works on the exact same principles as a real one, Just able to emit hundreds of several inch shards each capable of slicing into a tank and possibly out the other side.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 20, 2013, 07:14:01 am
First, the rules about exploding ships hurting nearby ones needs to be implemented.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: syvarris on August 20, 2013, 01:02:32 pm
I see.  I confused cost and HP, probably because cost is listed first in the manual his post, and he said "Health-to-cost".  Oops.

Edit: Typo.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Rolepgeek on August 20, 2013, 05:37:36 pm
How many wing engines can be placed on one side?

How do portholes and the like affect armor and damage anyway?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 20, 2013, 06:11:38 pm
How many wing engines can be placed on one side?

How do portholes and the like affect armor and damage anyway?
1. As many as fit. The system doesn't really have anything about balancing the thrust yet, so you could hypothetically put 10 on one side and be good. Though you'd be fucked if they got a good shot at that side.

2. Depends on how big they are, where they're placed and the angle that a shot is coming in from. Generally, if they're fairly small, it won't effect too much. Having a big hole in your ship leading to its squishy innards is probably a poor idea, though.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 20, 2013, 06:31:36 pm
Though you'd be fucked if they got a good shot at that side.

Having a big hole in your ship leading to its squishy innards is probably a poor idea, though.
Challenge considered!
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Rolepgeek on August 20, 2013, 06:35:16 pm
I mean for cannons and things, sticking out of walls.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: The Ensorceler on August 20, 2013, 06:38:07 pm
I'm up for the custom airship test, two questions though: one, can we use doors as external hatches (for cannons); and two, are ships harder to hit based on cross-section?

Edit: The shipbuilding grid mastahcheese provided is ~43 pixel squares. Can you give us an official one with the correct 50 pixel grid Piecewise?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 20, 2013, 09:31:37 pm
I'm up for the custom airship test, two questions though: one, can we use doors as external hatches (for cannons); and two, are ships harder to hit based on cross-section?

Edit: The shipbuilding grid mastahcheese provided is ~43 pixel squares. Can you give us an official one with the correct 50 pixel grid Piecewise?
When I open mine with paint, it's 50.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: The Ensorceler on August 20, 2013, 10:33:56 pm
That's weird... wait, what are the total dimensions on the picture? Resizing it to the actual dimensions might reset the grid squares so they no longer blur and stuff.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 20, 2013, 10:53:40 pm
That's weird... wait, what are the total dimensions on the picture? Resizing it to the actual dimensions might reset the grid squares so they no longer blur and stuff.
1200 x 1000 pixels.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Rolepgeek on August 21, 2013, 12:00:04 am
http://i.imgur.com/AEMlzqY.png

1250 x 1000 for 25 squares by 20 squares.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 21, 2013, 10:22:54 am
An official grid has been added to the released materials folder on the OP.

http://i.imgur.com/AEMlzqY.png

1250 x 1000 for 25 squares by 20 squares.

Your squares seem to be 52X50. They also have some sort of weird transparency effect; where none of the lines are hard black. Is that something caused by whatever program you used?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 21, 2013, 10:28:11 am
In other news, I've added the section on how to fly a ship, and am now working on the portion about how damage is meted out. I am also currently working on the player weapons. Here's an example:

Quote
Name: S&A-66 Hunter
Ammo:10
Type: Agility (pistol)
Wound Modifier: None
Weight: 3
Minimum attack dice: NA
Melee Modifier: NA
Bonuses:NA
Range: 0-3:0
   4-5:-1
   6-8:-3
   9-10:-5
   11 on: NA
Environmental Damage:1
Description: Spring and Arbor's top selling pistol. Carried by every penniless thug in the lower districts. Carries S&A's Trademark Bronze color and stylized gear insignia.
Cost:

Name: Bishop-Keller Model 8
Ammo: 6
Type: Agility (revolver)
Wound Modifier:+1
Weight: 4
Minimum attack dice:NA
Melee Modifier:NA
Bonuses:NA
Range:0-2:0
   3-4:-1
   5-7:-3
   8-9:-5
   10 on: NA
Environmental Damage:2
Description: A popular weapon amongst those who can afford to pay Bishop-Keller's prices. Black metal with silver etching of various kinds. It's quality if far from merely cosmetic; like all BK weapons, it is considered to be the elite of standard arms.
Cost:

Name: Sansoon 83 “Buzzbox”
Ammo:20
Type: Agility (Machine Pistol)
Wound Modifier: NA
Weight: 4
Minimum attack dice: NA
Melee Modifier:NA
Bonuses: Full Auto (If used Causes 1d4 wounds, but attack pool is reduced by 1/3)
Range: 0-2:0
   3-4:-1
   5-7:-3
   8-9:-5
   10 on: NA
Environmental Damage: 1
Description: A rare example of a Non-clockwork Sansoon. It bears their trademark red and gold detailing and the high rate of fire they're famous for.
Cost:

Name: Bishop-Keller-505 “Bodyguard”
Ammo:35
Type: Agility (Small Submachine gun)
Wound Modifier:+1 within 4 range.
Weight: 5
Minimum attack dice: NA
Melee Modifier:0
Bonuses: Full Auto (If used Causes 1d4 wounds, but attack pool is reduced by 1/3)
Range: 1-4:0
   5-8:-2
   9-10:-4
   11-12:-6
   13 on :NA
Environmental Damage:2
Description:Marketed as the weapon of choice for private bodyguards and well to do Airmen, the 505 is small enough to be easily concealed but still powerful and packing a large magazine. The first run of these firearms carried a distinctive silver ivy etching which gained them the popular moniker of “Nightshade”.
Cost:

Name: S&A Underhang Special
Ammo:23
Type: Submachine gun (Dexterity)
Wound Modifier: NA
Weight: 7
Minimum attack dice:NA
Melee Modifier:-3
Bonuses: Full Auto (If used causes 1d4 wounds, but attack pool is reduced by 1/3)
Range: 1-4:0
   5-6:-3
   7-9:-5
   10-12:-7
   13 on: NA
Environmental Damage:2
Description: A favorite of  underhang and lower level gang enforcers, ductmen, and similarly unscrupulous individuals. It's not particularly powerful or accurate, especially considering it's size as a full sized submachine gun, but it's cheap and readily available.
Cost:

Name: CA-IDW 4
Ammo:30
Type: Submachine gun (Dexterity)
Wound Modifier: NA
Weight: 7
Minimum attack dice: NA
Melee Modifier:-2
Bonuses:Full Auto (If used causes 1d4 wounds, but attack pool is reduced by 1/3)
Range:1-5:0
   5-8:-2
   9-11:-4
   12-15:-6
   16 on NA
Environmental Damage:1
Description:The Cloudcutter Arsenal's Interior Defense Weapon MK 4. A standard on many airships, carried by crewmen patrolling tight interior spaces.
Cost:


Cost will be added after everything is complete, so I can balance it more easily. The list of gun types I've been working with so far is:
Pistol/revolver
Machine Pistol
Submachine gun
Assault rifle
Single shot rifle/carbine
Sniper rifle
Shotgun
Minigun
Grenade Launcher
Rocket Launcher
Flame Thrower

If you guys can think of anything I'm missing, let me know.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Octobomb on August 21, 2013, 10:40:21 am
I don't think you're missing anything... Do you have anything with multiple fire modes? Usually select fire and full auto, but sometimes a multi round burst too.
Weapons look good though, and I approve of the flavour text greatly.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: syvarris on August 21, 2013, 01:34:51 pm
You're missing normal machine guns.  I'm not sure if that's intentional, but I'd think miniguns wouldn't be the only large suppression-style gun.

And I really like what you're doing with the guns.  What with the company names, and the stats you have for them.  Makes a gun nut like me squeal in delight! :P  How are you going to handle ammunition?  Just "Subgun ammo, Pistol ammo, Rifle ammo", or "5.7x28, 9mm, 5.56"?  And are you going to have special cartridges, like incendiary?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Thearpox on August 21, 2013, 02:02:13 pm
You're missing normal machine guns.  I'm not sure if that's intentional, but I'd think miniguns wouldn't be the only large suppression-style gun.

And I really like what you're doing with the guns.  What with the company names, and the stats you have for them.  Makes a gun nut like me squeal in delight! :P  How are you going to handle ammunition?  Just "Subgun ammo, Pistol ammo, Rifle ammo", or "5.7x28, 9mm, 5.56"?  And are you going to have special cartridges, like incendiary?
You know what I would fine hilarious, and what would probably be for many tantamount to dancing on the graves of their ancestors? If for the purposes of simplicity, the ammunition sizes would be put only in whole numbers.

So instead of 5.56 we'd just have 5mm, 9mm would be unchanced, et cetera. I hope I'm being clear enough, he he he.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 21, 2013, 02:37:25 pm
You're missing normal machine guns.  I'm not sure if that's intentional, but I'd think miniguns wouldn't be the only large suppression-style gun.

And I really like what you're doing with the guns.  What with the company names, and the stats you have for them.  Makes a gun nut like me squeal in delight! :P  How are you going to handle ammunition?  Just "Subgun ammo, Pistol ammo, Rifle ammo", or "5.7x28, 9mm, 5.56"?  And are you going to have special cartridges, like incendiary?

Thats one of the things I was considering. I want to have varied ammo types, such as Hollow points that do no environmental damage but have boosted wound damage, thats for sure. But I'm not sure if I should go with either Specific ammo types like 9mm or 5.56" or if I should just simplify with "Pistol ammo: HP, incendiary, Armor Piercing. Revolver ammo: HP, Incendiary, armor piercing, etc."
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: syvarris on August 21, 2013, 05:15:21 pm
Now that I re-read what I said, I realize it looks more like I just wanted the really detailed names.  I actually intended to ask if certain calibers could be used in multiple gun types, or certain gun types could have multiple calibers within them.  For example, Some SMGs use 9mm, some use .45, and some use .22.  All of which are also used in pistols, and a few carbines.

Mostly this would be nice because then a person could have both a pistol and SMG, in the same caliber.  It would simplify ammo management for multiple weapons, and would prevent situations where you're out of ammo for your SMG, but not for your pistol.  Granted, those could create fun situations.

IMO, if you're just going to have each category have a single caliber all to itself, then it would be silly to give the calibers real-ish names.  Just SMG ammo works, and is way less confusing to the vast majority of people.

Although... Thear, why is "5mm" better than "5.56"?  It's just one character less.  Granted, it does have a double, but still.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Thearpox on August 21, 2013, 05:46:54 pm
Although... Thear, why is "5mm" better than "5.56"?  It's just one character less.  Granted, it does have a double, but still.
More like 2.5 five characters. 5 vs 5.56.  Come On! We have to save RAM space, and wasting bytes is no way to behave!

And besides, whole numbers are always better for comprehension. Taking out $1 is always easier than $0.95.
And why doesn't the 5.56 have mm at the end? How do I know it's mm and not inches? Why make it 5.56 and not 6, isn't 6 bigger? Isn't bigger=better?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 21, 2013, 06:06:20 pm
5.56 is a caliber, not a measurement. To be more specific, the 5.56 is short for 5.56X45, or 5.56 NATO, who specified the caliber. Meanwhile, the 5 mm bullets are five millimeters...wide, I think.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: syvarris on August 21, 2013, 07:41:31 pm
Both of you are correct.   The full name is 5.56x45mm NATO.  5.56 millimeters wide, 45 long.  There's two reasons it's not confusing to call it 5.56- one, that's common shorthand for the round.  Two, 5.56 inches would be more tank sized, and it would be easy to tell that it isn't that from context. 

Also, if you're going to play the "Confusing" card, 5mm is more confusing and inaccurate.  First, there's actual rounds which are called 5mm.  Second, it isn't five millimeters, it's 5.56.  Third, if you do that to 5.56, then you have equal reasoning to call every other 5.x round a 5mm, like a 5.7.  And the difference between those two is big, but not enough you could tell which someone is talking about just from context.

Why do I feel like I'm just feeding a troll...
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on August 21, 2013, 07:48:08 pm
You're feeding one guy passing on trivia learned from a friend and one guy who I assume is confused.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Toaster on August 21, 2013, 07:53:06 pm
Since hand-to-hand combat isn't the focus of the game,  I'd minimize the ammo calibers.  "Pistol Ammo" may fit pistols, revolvers, SMGs, and Uzis.  "Rifle Ammo" would fit everything larger.  That way, if you have three types (standard, hollow point, incendiary or something) then you still only have 6 gun ammos.  Probably best to keep it simple here.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Thearpox on August 21, 2013, 08:07:11 pm
Both of you are correct.   The full name is 5.56x45mm NATO.  5.56 millimeters wide, 45 long.  There's two reasons it's not confusing to call it 5.56- one, that's common shorthand for the round.  Two, 5.56 inches would be more tank sized, and it would be easy to tell that it isn't that from context. 

Also, if you're going to play the "Confusing" card, 5mm is more confusing and inaccurate.  First, there's actual rounds which are called 5mm.  Second, it isn't five millimeters, it's 5.56.  Third, if you do that to 5.56, then you have equal reasoning to call every other 5.x round a 5mm, like a 5.7.  And the difference between those two is big, but not enough you could tell which someone is talking about just from context.

Why do I feel like I'm just feeding a troll...
And why do I always have this sinking feeling in my chest when someone decides to seriously answer one of my jokes. Really.

You know what I would find hilarious...
If this wasn't a clear indication enough, this: "Come On! We have to save RAM space, and wasting bytes is no way to behave!" , and this: "Isn't bigger=better?" should have ticked you off.


     But to answer you on a semi-serious note,:
Calling it 5mm instead of 5.56 would still make it less confusing to someone who's never played a shooter, seen a round, and somehow avoided all knowledge of firearms and ammo. So this:
Quote
Also, if you're going to play the "Confusing" card, 5mm is more confusing and inaccurate.  First, there's actual rounds which are called 5mm.  Second, it isn't five millimeters, it's 5.56.  Third, if you do that to 5.56, then you have equal reasoning to call every other 5.x round a 5mm, like a 5.7.  And the difference between those two is big, but not enough you could tell which someone is talking about just from context.
is irrelevant, because why have any rounds that are not full inches milimiters in this game? It doesn't matter if they exist or not in the real world. Just don't add them to the game! And yes, having it weapon-bound makes more sense.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: syvarris on August 21, 2013, 09:28:10 pm
I think that's the third time I've read one of your joke posts and taken it seriously.  I should probably work on my detection skills, because I parsed those as more insulting than joking.  But still, could you please put a [/sarcasm] or something in?  For the less perceptive of us?

In general I just have trouble with not answering a question when it's about something I'm knowledgeable about obsessed with.

Anyways, this argument is going nowhere fast, so I think I'll just drop it.  It's really a matter of preference, and most people would probably prefer that we use generic ammo names.  I have no idea how I managed to get in an argument about something so minor to begin with...
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Thearpox on August 21, 2013, 10:17:56 pm
I think that's the third time I've read one of your joke posts and taken it seriously.  I should probably work on my detection skills, because I parsed those as more insulting than joking.  But still, could you please put a [/sarcasm] or something in?  For the less perceptive of us?

In general I just have trouble with not answering a question when it's about something I'm knowledgeable about obsessed with.

Anyways, this argument is going nowhere fast, so I think I'll just drop it.  It's really a matter of preference, and most people would probably prefer that we use generic ammo names.  I have no idea how I managed to get in an argument about something so minor to begin with...
It was kinda both. The idea was a joke. The argument is behind it is serious.

As for why we got into it, was because I always found it funny how a game (not giving examples) could be insultingly inaccurate historically, have a story written in a drunken stupor, a "drew it between classes" art design, broken gameplay, and yet have proper ammo sizes. I mean, the one thing the creator bothered researching for his game were the ammo sizes. And not just sizes, but to the hundredth inch! milimeter! Seriously.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 22, 2013, 11:16:10 am
So I'm thinking of ways to work this so that it is relatively simple, but also realistic in a sense that the ammo types seem to come from somewhere in the game world. That they seem real, not just some number on a piece of digital paper. There are a few ways that I could do this.

The first was kindly provided by Cael:

Have a sort of Universal ammo-the "pistol ammo" "Revolver ammo" "Rifle ammo, thing- with different effects, but also have smaller groupings of ammo that work with just a few specific weapons. Ammo made by the weapon makers or by deals between weapon makers and smaller ammo producers. This way, you can have a standardized ammo for people who don't want to fuck around but still options for people who want to shop around a bit.

OR

I build backwards. Start by making up the manufacturers and the rounds they make. Assign some common sizes among them and then say what kind of sizes of ammo each gun can take on the gun itself. Ie We have sizes 1-8. Revolvers take 1-3, pistols take 1-2, rifles take 3-5. Shotgun takes 6.  etc.

What does the gun nut think?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 22, 2013, 11:29:01 am
I like the second idea, then you could also add in the different manufacturers to the storyline, and possibly even make them unique in some way. Or at least identifiable.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: The Ensorceler on August 22, 2013, 12:57:00 pm
   Are you thinking of implementing the different techs with drastic differences in their ammunition? For example, a paintball style hopper would be an easy way to supply a steam-tech machinegun with pellets, which would be cheaper and than bullets because they don't have primers or shell casings, but tend to be less accurate and do less damage individually (plus the incomatibility across techs). On the other end, you could have clock-tech needleguns, with long, skinny projectiles taking the opposite route.
   There could even be differences within a given tech (the weapon manufacturers?) ranging from more traditional (that clockwork repeater) to less traditional firearms, like straight steamblast shotguns which act like a really hot blunt impact instead of firing actul projectiles.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Thearpox on August 22, 2013, 12:59:04 pm
Not sure I understand the second idea. So you're just grouping all ammo according to size, and then having different kinds of guns accept different sizes? No more depth to it?

If so, I like Cael's idea better. Easier to understand, more familiar, makes more sense. And if the idea behind the second one is to be able to use the same ammo for different weapons, I seriously question that it would come into play. Unless you make ammo forbidingly expensive. (Which once again would make melee weapons viable.)

PS: If we're going for the whole techs competition and conflict, making it be different between techs sounds awesome. So I'll second Ensorceler.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: syvarris on August 22, 2013, 06:04:36 pm
I'm the gun nut, right?

First idea is fine.  It's simple and quick, and not at all confusing.  Second idea is also good, assuming you don't mean ALL revolvers can take any of three type.  Between them, I guess I'd prefer the second

My preference would be similar to the second, but there's only three main sizes.  Pistol, intermediate, and rifle is what they're called in the real world.  Within each size are two or three types that most guns of that size use, and each of those types has a basic description of it's traits.  Those traits don't actually need to affect the bullet.  It's just a number and name, and possibly a weight.  The guns would actually have the stats.  So a person can look at ".22 SMGs" and find a bunch of guns that have the traits of a .22.

Now you have me thinking about this...  If you want, I could easily write up a short list of calibers, each with those traits. 


I like the idea of ammo being very expensive.  As Thear said, it gives a better reason to use melee weapons.  It also makes things like "This type of ammo is cheap" more important.


Oh, and irrelevant to whatever you choose, I suggest you have proprietary ammo that's used in only one or two guns, is extra expensive, and is better than most other guns in that category in some way.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 22, 2013, 08:30:09 pm
I'm the gun nut, right?

First idea is fine.  It's simple and quick, and not at all confusing.  Second idea is also good, assuming you don't mean ALL revolvers can take any of three type.  Between them, I guess I'd prefer the second

My preference would be similar to the second, but there's only three main sizes.  Pistol, intermediate, and rifle is what they're called in the real world.  Within each size are two or three types that most guns of that size use, and each of those types has a basic description of it's traits.  Those traits don't actually need to affect the bullet.  It's just a number and name, and possibly a weight.  The guns would actually have the stats.  So a person can look at ".22 SMGs" and find a bunch of guns that have the traits of a .22.

Now you have me thinking about this...  If you want, I could easily write up a short list of calibers, each with those traits. 


I like the idea of ammo being very expensive.  As Thear said, it gives a better reason to use melee weapons.  It also makes things like "This type of ammo is cheap" more important.


Oh, and irrelevant to whatever you choose, I suggest you have proprietary ammo that's used in only one or two guns, is extra expensive, and is better than most other guns in that category in some way.

A list of calibers and such would be great. I have some books on guns; particularly a book about guns for authors, but I would prefer a first hand account, as it were.


As per expense, your "standard" gun, the one powered by an expansion of gas from the rapid combustion of some sort of chemical, will be somewhat expensive. Enough that spray and pray will be non-viable unless you've got a trust fund. Basically, as it goes, there are several categories of ranged weapons.

Clockwork: The cheapest. Fires fast and works great vs unarmored opponents but is worthless against objects and armor. Tends to use bladed discs, barbs or similar.

Standard: A weapon for the middle class. It's the sort of gun you're used to. Good balance.

Steam: Weapon of the upper class. Most of them are chargeable and get good armor penetration. Don't cause much bleeding (tend to cauterize wounds with red hot bullets) but they take big chunks out of ya.

Organic: Weapons of the fleshers. Rather unique (http://helablog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/bone_guns_art_1.jpg) in that they tend not to do that much straight damage but they are loaded with status effects like burning acid or poisons and they generate their own ammo over time. Provided you feed them.

Surface tech: Weapons from the age long past, scavenged from the ruins of the surface world by the junk dealers and shit-skiff captains of the lower levels and sold to the Elite. Massively powerful and dangerous but also extremely rare and expensive. You could build a whole ship for the price of one of these guns. Then again, maybe that pistol that fires homing microton missiles is worth it. If you can afford the ammo too.

Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Thearpox on August 22, 2013, 08:31:27 pm
Quote
a book about guns for authors
Ahem? Name?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: mastahcheese on August 22, 2013, 08:38:36 pm
Those organic guns sound kind of like Tyranid weaponry from Warhammer 40K.

Where can I get one?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Thearpox on August 22, 2013, 08:42:39 pm
Those organic guns sound kind of like Tyranid weaponry from Warhammer 40K.

Where can I get one?
I assume that in order to get flesher guns you need to be a flesher. Seems to be shaping up to be a pretty big choice that will set "us" (players) apart for the rest of the game.


I do question whether it should be such a linear progression that it appears to be for different techs. I'm talking about:

Clockwork << Standard << Steam << Surface (With Organic to the side.)

I mean, especially when we're talking about sinking a lot of character skills into one of these specializations, and I would expect we would pick one or at the most two to specialize in. Since we're not sure yet how the game is going to run, and what exactly we're going to be doing in it, I can't really go into too much detail. But would it really be fair to have someone put points into something (Clockwork) that will see heavy use in the first few months of the game, but then will rapidly become useless as people are able to afford "better" techs?
Of course, once again, I may be wrong on this account. But that's what it looks like to me right now.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: syvarris on August 22, 2013, 08:55:49 pm
Quote
a book about guns for authors
Ahem? Name?
I would be interested as well.

So, I wrote up a list of eight normal cartridges already, because it was actually sort of fun.  They're semi-based on reality.


Quote from: Quick and dirty


Spoiler: BK .232(Light Sniper): (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: .350(Medium sniper): (click to show/hide)

Also, I've only now noticed you only really have four important stats for guns.  Size, clip size, range, and damage.  And I doubt most people will care about the first two.  I suggest adding accuracy, at the very least.  Say, some guns start their range increments at +2, or -2.  Also, maybe different ranks of automatics?  The "Buzzbox" for example says it has a high rate of fire, but it's the exact same as every other SMG.

Now that you mention all the tech levels, I think this would be too much.  I wrote this assuming it would be built for thirty or so guns (Based off the number of SMGs you already have).  But if there's four tech levels, this would just lead to way too much bloat.  Four or five cartridges, max, would be what I suggest now.


Also, that bit about the steam weaponry cauterizing the wound is really silly.  Most bullets in normal guns are pretty much liquid by the time they leave the barrel already, and they don't really cauterize anything.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: piecewise on August 22, 2013, 09:01:59 pm
Quote
a book about guns for authors
Ahem? Name?
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/089879370X/ref=oh_details_o00_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Those organic guns sound kind of like Tyranid weaponry from Warhammer 40K.

Where can I get one?
You'd have to be either a flesher, or get one second hand. Which has it's fair share of dangers.


As per Tyranid's I don't know enough about 40k to know for sure. But my influences could be described as more Cronenbergian (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQKkCMDaN54)

Those organic guns sound kind of like Tyranid weaponry from Warhammer 40K.

Where can I get one?
I assume that in order to get flesher guns you need to be a flesher. Seems to be shaping up to be a pretty big choice that will set "us" (players) apart for the rest of the game.


I do question whether it should be such a linear progression that it appears to be for different techs. I'm talking about:

Clockwork << Standard << Steam << Surface (With Organic to the side.)

I mean, especially when we're talking about sinking a lot of character skills into one of these specializations, and I would expect we would pick one or at the most two to specialize in. Since we're not sure yet how the game is going to run, and what exactly we're going to be doing in it, I can't really go into too much detail. But would it really be fair to have someone put points into something (Clockwork) that will see heavy use in the first few months of the game, but then will rapidly become useless as people are able to afford "better" techs?
Of course, once again, I may be wrong on this account. But that's what it looks like to me right now.
Using a clockwork weapon doesn't use a clockwork skill. It uses the weapon skill. Knowledge of the specific technologies will deal more with repairing or creating or using non-weapon technology. Plus the game world should be such that regardless of what you chose, you should find work, make money and be useful.

Besides, the way that skill and stat advancement works is such that you could literally just tinker around with the tech and gain an understanding of it. You advance skills and stats by succeeding at skill and stat checks that are above your current average (average number of successes = number of dice rolled/2) So if you work with the tech, you'll learn to use it.

That and the progression isn't perfectly linear. That list was of cost, not of effectiveness. No matter how heavily armored, you can kill a man with the weakest of clockwork pistols. It will just be harder. They're good at different things; the only ones that are really far and away better then any others are the surface tech. And they're like that for a reason.

Quote
a book about guns for authors
Ahem? Name?
I would be interested as well.

So, I wrote up a list of eight normal cartridges already, because it was actually sort of fun.  They're semi-based on reality.


Quote from: Quick and dirty


Spoiler: BK .232(Light Sniper): (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: .350(Medium sniper): (click to show/hide)

Also, I've only now noticed you only really have four important stats for guns.  Size, clip size, range, and damage.  And I doubt most people will care about the first two.  I suggest adding accuracy, at the very least.  Say, some guns start their range increments at +2, or -2.  Also, maybe different ranks of automatics?  The "Buzzbox" for example says it has a high rate of fire, but it's the exact same as every other SMG.

Now that you mention all the tech levels, I think this would be too much.  I wrote this assuming it would be built for thirty or so guns (Based off the number of SMGs you already have).  But if there's four tech levels, this would just lead to way too much bloat.  Four or five cartridges, max, would be what I suggest now.


Also, that bit about the steam weaponry cauterizing the wound is really silly.  Most bullets in normal guns are pretty much liquid by the time they leave the barrel already, and they don't really cauterize anything.
Yeah, the steam thing is really just a way to explain how they do less damage organics then clockwork. Then again, clockwork fires miniture circular saws so I guess even normal bullets would do less damage.  Ah well.

Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: syvarris on August 30, 2013, 07:24:03 pm
Umm.  Bump?  Any progress on this, Piecewise?  I was really looking forwards to this game...
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: mastahcheese on September 12, 2013, 04:22:22 pm
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Thearpox on September 12, 2013, 04:34:33 pm
If anyone doesn't realize, this isn't getting updated before the next mission in ER gets in swing. And I personally hope that Piecewise will finish the Perplexicon book first, before getting into this again.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on September 12, 2013, 08:31:19 pm
And I personally hope that Piecewise will finish the Perplexicon book first, before getting into this again.
Me too, actually.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: mastahcheese on September 12, 2013, 08:32:44 pm
Ah, ok.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Parsely on September 13, 2013, 12:12:04 am
Me too, actually.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: The Ensorceler on September 13, 2013, 01:16:05 pm
My ship is close to being finished, and I think it could actually beat that monstrosity from a few posts ago. It's going to be called the En Passant, if you want a hint to its design.
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on September 13, 2013, 01:18:14 pm
...It will be used to capture pawns who have moved two spaces, despite how this moves them just outside of your threat range?
Title: Re: Airship Combat: Rocket man.
Post by: Rolepgeek on September 13, 2013, 07:22:41 pm
It's probably meant to run past you while shooting you. And then go directly away whilst shooting you.