Rules Discussion

[Marlin]

First glance? I dont like it. I think small factions will lose out again even if they are already advanced. ANd then they must pay immense amounts of RP to keep that status?

As I see it, it cements the powerbase of the only big provider that is the TH. New Interdiction rules are nice but the rest?

Big economy is needed to become the highest level (would make some sense) and in this writing to even stay Basic provider, and PFs are needed desperately (which most Clans dont have), besides at least 200 RP and an awesome amount of luck. And then another pile of RP to start the show.

I dont like it.

[Iron Mongoose]

There's a lot there, and I like some of the ideas, but as a whole I also don't care for it.

One worry is the need for so many ICs.  Many parts of the world now are out of range, so some factions would suffer just for showing up (the Taurian periphery, the FS outback, the DC's far north, the north west of the former LA).  That doensn't seem right.  I would echo this concern for periph hexes, as well.  Why hurt factions with long bourders with the periphery?  Some of them, such as the periph nations themselves, are some of the factions least in need of taking down a peg (others are most in need, but maybe that's just me).

More over, the recorse for that is to build IC, which disperporitionaly benifit Terra in most cases, or else are one of the Clan's big advantages in another.  So to fix a problem that didn't previously exist, you've got to give cash to the faction that least seems to need it.

I don't like the hyper expense of R and D. Before it was costly, but managable; it was more a function of luck than of bank roll, which is reasonable I think, since re working HPGs is more about cleverness than cash.  This will really limit who can do R and D, taking some that are presently doing it out of the picture, again solifying the place of a few key factions.

I do like the notion of help with reserch.  I do like the notion of blowing up ICs and chain reactions.  In principle, I even like the idea of having a big IC network that's trackable and can be interacted with.  I do worry that its going to be a record keeping nightmare, and if we were to address my other concerns we'd either have to give out free ICs or else up the range on them, which might make the idea less potent.  Worst of all, or perhaps best of all, since the Terrans run the perponderance of HPGs, it would be almost all on the GMs to keep most of the records, which might be bad since you've alrady got a lot to do.

I think we can keep thinking about how to improve these rules.  But upping costs I think is not it.

[Cannonshop]

First look:

If the Terrans hadn't started off with this, they'd be unable to afford it.  Further, nobody else can afford it either.  Second, it's a huge faction-sheild for the Terran Hegemony, and additionally, it's punishment for Graegor.  (See, his entire FACTION started OFF Interdicted.  once you go beyond 100%, you're in deficit.  Where do you suppose that deficit ends up hitting?)

When I examine a rule for "Intent" I look first and foremost at consequences.  The consequences here, are that anybody who didn't invest the last ten turns' exclusively to setting up their own, separate, HPG network? 
Yeah.  Guess what guys, you're not a sovereign state, because all Terra has to do, is turn off the transmitters and you're done as a viable faction-inside of one turn.

Further, the costs make it prohibitive for the CLANS to set up nets in their OZ's, prohibitive for anyone else to set up a small faction or be part of one, esp. if that faction isn't a client state and condom for the Terran Hegemony.

The reason is because not only is it cost-prohibitive for anyone but the biggest, most industrialized single faction (or alliance of biggest industrialized factions) to build a net for themselves, it's also cost-prohibitive for ANYONE  to help you out.

The PF requirement alone is enough to prevent smaller factions-see, not everyone has one, there's no method other than the GM staff saying "Yeah, You can have it" to get one...how many factions have been around since, oh, Turn ONE and still don't have one?  Clanners???

It's a solution seeking a problem that does not exist-unless the problem is player factions being dissatisfied with the Terran Hegemony-that problem is neatly solved-nobody who isn't the Terrans can afford to deal iwth an Interdiction under this ruleset.

[Iron Mongoose]

I will say, I think if I was still the FWL, I would tend to like this.  But I'm not, and I don't think that being right for one faction makes it right for all of them.

I know of at least one other faction doing HPG reserch, and another that wants to become a wider scale provider (that second should be easy to guess).  This rules would imedatly put the breaks on the first, and likely cripple the second as well.  I think that the role of rules changes in cases like this should be to open doors, incrsse the desirable things for factions to do, not to close them, to limit them, and in this regard these rules fall down.

[chaosxtreme]

First look:

If the Terrans hadn't started off with this, they'd be unable to afford it.  Further, nobody else can afford it either.  Second, it's a huge faction-sheild for the Terran Hegemony, and additionally, it's punishment for Graegor.  (See, his entire FACTION started OFF Interdicted.  once you go beyond 100%, you're in deficit.  Where do you suppose that deficit ends up hitting?)

When I examine a rule for "Intent" I look first and foremost at consequences.  The consequences here, are that anybody who didn't invest the last ten turns' exclusively to setting up their own, separate, HPG network? 
Yeah.  Guess what guys, you're not a sovereign state, because all Terra has to do, is turn off the transmitters and you're done as a viable faction-inside of one turn.

Further, the costs make it prohibitive for the CLANS to set up nets in their OZ's, prohibitive for anyone else to set up a small faction or be part of one, esp. if that faction isn't a client state and condom for the Terran Hegemony.

The reason is because not only is it cost-prohibitive for anyone but the biggest, most industrialized single faction (or alliance of biggest industrialized factions) to build a net for themselves, it's also cost-prohibitive for ANYONE  to help you out.

The PF requirement alone is enough to prevent smaller factions-see, not everyone has one, there's no method other than the GM staff saying "Yeah, You can have it" to get one...how many factions have been around since, oh, Turn ONE and still don't have one?  Clanners???

It's a solution seeking a problem that does not exist-unless the problem is player factions being dissatisfied with the Terran Hegemony-that problem is neatly solved-nobody who isn't the Terrans can afford to deal iwth an Interdiction under this ruleset.

Well the FWL has dumped a lot of money into the old rules for HPG. We HAVE been setting up our own HPG network and spending a lot of money getting almost nowhere.

And I can honestly say I do like this new plan and I can honestly see in 6-10 months real life time the FWL competing with the Terrans for HPG service contracts...in other states.

Also how many factions have been around since Turn 1 and have a lot? The Marians have more PF's then the Capellan Empire, a couple of clans have a few PF's too as well.

At the same time this rule change is very beneficial.

While I see the problems for the Adder Commonwealth I also see how easily solved their problems are.

#1) The Adders would only need to take one hex to connect the two networks and run it like one network. Since the Adders are providing via the RP Thread the HPG's for the Add Commonwealth anyway this would be the first merger.

#2) Building that many HPG's now becomes possible. Not easy but POSSIBLE.  Under the old rules while I started building HPG's...which is slow, multiple turns whatever. You just plump down cash and you get X # of HPGs.

#3) Interdiction hurt's but its no longer prevents you from playing the game at all. Before interdiction meant you can't RP, you can't fight MM you can't do anything but sit there and be completely passive. Which can be interesting if someone up and jumps out at you. But is boring as all get out if people ignore your interdicted self.

#4) Ok Ill say it...I don't see it as a big handicap for the Adders. If they do nothing to abrogate the interdiction. The worst thing that happens to the Adder Com is it doesn't build anything new for two turns. Thats with NO money or effort put into reversing the interdiction and just "living with it". As someone who has BEEN interdicted that is ALL kinds of awesome. Also it eventually bottoms out and yes losing half your money is bad. But its not OMG I can not continue the fight bad.

[Dave Baughman]

For the record, the intention of these rules wasn't to faction shield the TH or to shaft any one particular faction. In fact, the upkeep requirements and the increased impact of network disruptions were directly intended to make life tougher for the TH.

"Daring Clan Commands destroy T.H. Network Hub - ComStar in Chaos!" anyone?

Having said that, it looks like there is at least some consensus that these rules are not ready for deployment as-is. Please continue to voice your concerns and discuss, as I'm reading all of these posts and using them as feedback to determine what sort of changes/balances need to be made.

Having said that to be fair I should say that no matter what form they take, the rules are still going to be structured in such a way that it is hard to advance HPG status. The goal here is to change Comm status advance ment from "expensive and impossible" to "expensive and difficult."

[DisGruntled]

I think some form of the interdiction recovery rules does need to be implemented.  Pretty much everyone but the TH only being able to build one HPG a turn is rough.  The added cost and limits on building ship HPGs doesn't help much either.

[JediBear]

I think in order to take the teeth out of a Comstar interdiction, it really needs to be easier to make the generators ourselves. Many of our factions consider HPGs to be everyday technology, even a little old-fashioned. I realise they're expensive in universe, but I'm not sure why my factories can't crank out a dozen of them in a turn, considering what else they can build.

Advancing HPG tech needs to be hard, but by the same token, it should provide greater benefit for those of us who already have it. If the UIW wants to contract with the RasDom for HPG service, that needs to be a remotely plausible option. If the FWL wants to run its own comm network so it can control its own destiny, that needs to be possible short of doomsday.

I've also got some ideas about how to revise those rules to try to make them a little more even-handed. I'll see if I can't get them worked out a little better and then post them here.

[Fatebringer]

Tamar gave us a good chance to look at the deployment of nukes.

Nuclear Weapons

Units eligible to carry nuclear tokens are:
Mobile aerospace flotillas

I propose that this be amended so that a unit be required to be at least as powerful as the weapon it's carrying? Tamar and the 7 x .25 FP Mobile Floatillas really points out the flaw to leaving this undefined and sets a precident.

Units eligible to carry nuclear tokens are:

No more than five tokens can be carried by any one unit at a time.

This kind of ties into the above. Would each .25 FP mobile unit be able to carry up to 5 Nukes?

Secondary effects of nuclear warfare

Each nuclear token used in the current turn: +1 modifier on roll (cumulative)

Each token used or Each token "Succesfully" used? Only 4 of the 7 Nukes on Tamar hit.

Adjusted roll of...

Just to make sure, we should assume results are based on a 2D6 roll plus modifiers?

[Iron Mongoose]

I think that the new TROs comming out really put our need for more generious R+D rules into prospective.  We really need to look at rules that offer factions new designs really quite often, at least every few turns, and tech advances as well.  I have a great table in mind, by my son just deleated it, so I'll post it later, but its basicly a new mech or a new veriant down to some low numbers.

We can do some options for non-mechdesign resualts, if we really want, but really, we need to see R and D as a way to get battle tech into the game, not new farming implements and trading pacts.  Or at least I think so.

[Daemonknight]

I'm in no hurry to have mech tables for the FGC. And I honestly think that getting a few new designs is less useful than the currents fruits of a successful R&D check. I mean, ok, so you have a new design every few turns: that matters only for the infrequent MM games, and the new TRO isn't in MM yet, is it?

I dunno... I'd rather see other things happen than introducing new mech designs. But I'm not big on MM, so new designs have little to no impact on my gameplay anyways.

[Dave Baughman]

Tamar gave us a good chance to look at the deployment of nukes.

Nuclear Weapons

Units eligible to carry nuclear tokens are:
Mobile aerospace flotillas

I propose that this be amended so that a unit be required to be at least as powerful as the weapon it's carrying? Tamar and the 7 x .25 FP Mobile Floatillas really points out the flaw to leaving this undefined and sets a precident.


The rules deliberately didn't include any FP limits. Did you have any specific ideas in mind? To me, one light fighter squadron based off a Leopard CV (0.25 FP or so) could easily deploy multiple nukes. I follow that there is an argument that can be made purely in game balance terms, but to some extend nukes are a fundamentally unbalancing technology, which is why historically they eventually fell out of use by mutual agreement -- only after the successor states nuked themselves into near-oblivion though.

Units eligible to carry nuclear tokens are:

No more than five tokens can be carried by any one unit at a time.

This kind of ties into the above. Would each .25 FP mobile unit be able to carry up to 5 Nukes?

Under the rules as written, yes. Though it would be kind of silly to risk 125 RP of nuclear arms on such a small formation unless they were on a one-way suicide mission or something... just hope they don't get caught in a blockade or something.

Secondary effects of nuclear warfare

Each nuclear token used in the current turn: +1 modifier on roll (cumulative)

Each token used or Each token "Succesfully" used? Only 4 of the 7 Nukes on Tamar hit.

Each token used. That the warship survived doesn't neccessarily mean the nuke missed, just that it wasn't a kill.

Adjusted roll of...

Just to make sure, we should assume results are based on a 2D6 roll plus modifiers?

Intended to be 2d6+mods.

[Dave Baughman]

I think that the new TROs comming out really put our need for more generious R+D rules into prospective.  We really need to look at rules that offer factions new designs really quite often, at least every few turns, and tech advances as well.  I have a great table in mind, by my son just deleated it, so I'll post it later, but its basicly a new mech or a new veriant down to some low numbers.

We can do some options for non-mechdesign resualts, if we really want, but really, we need to see R and D as a way to get battle tech into the game, not new farming implements and trading pacts.  Or at least I think so.

A major overhaul of R&D is currently being worked on, combining the good parts of the FGC R&D system with ideas that have been used successfully in Flashpoint.

Part of the rules under development are a complete overhaul of the custom design rules.

[Dave Baughman]

I'm in no hurry to have mech tables for the FGC. And I honestly think that getting a few new designs is less useful than the currents fruits of a successful R&D check. I mean, ok, so you have a new design every few turns: that matters only for the infrequent MM games, and the new TRO isn't in MM yet, is it?

I dunno... I'd rather see other things happen than introducing new mech designs. But I'm not big on MM, so new designs have little to no impact on my gameplay anyways.

Ground forces equipment tables are not currently a high priority for integration. Its something tha tI want to do eventually, and not just for force regulation - the tables make it much easier to keep tabs on what units are deployed where and allow for some (in my opinion) much-needed reforms to how the arms trade works, but that in turn is dependant on making some substantial changes to other parts of the rules that have higher priority.

[Fatebringer]

To me, one light fighter squadron based off a Leopard CV (0.25 FP or so) could easily deploy multiple nukes

Damn you spheroids and your cheap PoS Dropships! (j/k) I find your explaination adequate.