Rules Updates for turn 42

[Dave Baughman]

For now, this is a placeholder until I can get some free time.

Key topics:

• Clearly defined posting deadlines
• Intel rules overhaul
• Further discussion of commtech draft (including side-by-side comparison with current rules)

[Dave Baughman]

A normal turn runs from the 5th of the month to the 25th, providing only 20 calendar days to resolve all orders. The following deadlines are structured to prevent long posting delays from derailing a combat operation and forcing GM-directed simple resolution at the very end of the turn.

• Players have five calendar days from the turn's orders deadline to initiate any combat operations (either making the combat post, or making the first hostile/allied transit post as required)*. Failure to initiate an operation within this timeframe will result in the operation being cancelled.
• Hex owners have three calendar days to reply to posted hostile/allied movement requests*. Failure to respond within this timeframe means the transiting forces successfully pass through the system.
• Defenders have three calendar days to reply to combat operations posts*. Failure to respond within this timeframe means the GMs may opt to roll simple resolution if they deem it neccessary to ensure adequate time to resolve the thread within the turn's time period.
  
  
  
  *Exceptions may be approved on a case-by-case basis by the GMs. Particularly favorable consideration will be given to players who have posted in advance in the main Away Thread that they will be unavailable.
  

[Iron Mongoose]

I might say four days, rather than three, or else count some days difrently than others.  Three days can be a long weekend, for example, or it can be three (or four, or five) days of blistering OT at work, or any other thing.  That's the danger I feer in tight deadlines.  Yes, we want to make the turn move quickly, but this game is a secondary or terteriary or less consideration for all of us (or at least it probably should be) so I tend to be gun shy about such hard rules that put pressure on players to be on and checking in so frequently.  I suppose the other option is just a very buisey away thread.

[LittleH13]

The whole point in a deadline is to not have someone posting combat threads 15 days after orders are due. That puts even more pressure on people to rush to get that new thread completed.

[GreyJaeger]

Yeah, I know I am sounding like a broken record, but I think R&D needs to be addressed. Some of us have next to no chance of getting a favorable result, i.e. only a 12 on the 2d6, and no way of improving that chance.

[Cannonshop]

Yeah, I know I am sounding like a broken record, but I think R&D needs to be addressed. Some of us have next to no chance of getting a favorable result, i.e. only a 12 on the 2d6, and no way of improving that chance.

Yup.  Tell me about it.   

[Dave Baughman]

R&D is being worked on, but I don't have a draft that is complete enough to post yet. Here is a summary of the plan though:

• General R&D will still be present, but will work more like the random events in Flashpoint. Basically, paying for general R&D (or not, on a free turn) will get you something, ranging from trivial to good to possibly bad.
• The function of PFs is going to totally change, acting more like MFs and SYs by providing "capacity" for R&D projects rather than just giving a huge bonus to those factions lucky enough to have 3 of them.
• Player-direction R&D is going to be greatly expanded with more projects and options. Many results currently only on the general R&D table will be moving to player-directed projects.

The intelligence overhaul will contain an opportunity for factions to obtain more PFs, also, so some of the groundwork is already being laid out. Likewise, Commtech has a slightly higher priority for review because the current version is badly in need of streamlining and provides the TH with a greater advantage then I believe was intended when the rules were written.


Having said that, I don't want to rush the R&D rules before they are ready, since this is one of the major balance points in the game, and skewing it too hard one way or another could cause damaging ripple effects that could potentially persist for many many turns (see: +50% trade bonus).

[Fatebringer]

I think the issue I had with PF's regarded there being no criteria for approval to create one. I kept petitioning for a PF at Lum to represent an elite Naval Academy, but never got a response from the GMs.

I look at the map and see PFs representing backwater training academies on IS worlds without any in game production...

Then I look back to my planet with over 10 of my own facilities, 2/3rds of my population, and a place other factions come to train ... and I feel like a sad panda. ... we need a sad panda smiley.

[Dave Baughman]

If you've spent any money in the last 21 turns on intelligence rating improvements, chances are you'll be able to get that PF you've been wanting for Lum.

[Fatebringer]

I'll send you a PM about this then.

[Dave Baughman]

Current Commtech rules vs. Draft revision

When I posted the draft revision to the commtech rules on July 20th, it generated some pretty intense negative feedback that has caused me to go back through the material and re-assess to make sure its not overpowered. After reviewing the draft to make sure I didn't screw up the math or otherwise make it unintentionally skewed towards the TH in any one area, I suspect part of the problem may have been the disorganized way I posted the material and the lack of contrast with the current rules. So, I've broken down the rules point by point and contrasted them with the current rules. Please give this a second look and provide feedback.

When reading the proposed draft, please also bear in mind that the goal here is not to make Commtech R&D easy or to completely undermine ComStar and WOB's strength with regard to leveraging their control over IS comms; rather the goal is to downshift the R&D portion of the rules from "impossible" to "difficult" and to eliminate the most onerous and obnoxious parts of the interdiction ability without completely pulling its teeth.

I've attached the comparison to this post. Please take a look and provide feedback. One thing I found particularly interesting was the way the R&D costs worked out for advancing HPG status.

[LittleH13]

Dave to me this clearly shows that these new rules would benefit all player controlled factions and make it so the TH can have it's income affected. I like it.

[Marlin]

If you've spent any money in the last 21 turns on intelligence rating improvements, chances are you'll be able to get that PF you've been wanting for Lum.

Heh, I spent Int Rating too. I want a PF too... *bounce and runs in circles, trying to catch his own tail*




Seriously, is there a chance for other Clans too, if the Marians can have 4 PFs, there should be some for the Clans as well..

[Cannonshop]

Well...I see a lot of stuff that will make the bigger factions happy, and a lot of punishment for small factions, and those that don't have PF's of any kind (nor the RP income to get one by increasing their Intel ratings...)

[GreyJaeger]

One issue I remember seeing was the having to have an IC every four hexes. Now first of all, does that mean the biggest gap between ICs being four hexes, or every four hexes there needs to be an IC? Secondly, this is quite short and there is going to be a massive issue with several Clans losing their provider status. I do not think any Clan has an IC every four hexes, especially in between the homeworlds and the DP.