Too much fidling?

While i like the idea of ammount differences of tiles per game. The fact that more cards are to be included is more or less a no go. What we get is a double randomness. And sure, it is possible that one player gets all the bad stuff around. I plan to make as much as possible to be a double sword.

A double randomness can create more balance to a game. But it is too fidly i think.

I also would like to have a clear limit on certain tiles. This in order to reduce imbalance.

Note 1: exploration as a double edged sword. Has been noted. As result...The more powerful player will get out hunting? I don't know how other space game designers think about this.

Note 2: what if i leave the wandering objects to just 1 out of a maximum of 6?
The die roll determines which object.
Then if it wanders.
Then what direction.

And if anything is in a gravity well. Again a roll of if it falls. And this chance will be less than the gravity well changing location.
There are no orbits. The thing about wandering is that something is in an unstable location.
Also, if a homeplanet starts to die. It is up to the player to move to a colony and make that the new homeplanet.

If i use a deck. I could ask the players to have 2 decks shuffled. 1 contains the dark hole and more than half of the pirates, the other one does not. The safe deck will be used first.

No, there is a hyrachy of what happens. Dark hole will swallow anything and start atrackting stuff. Stars don't wander unless the dark hole comes near. But anything to close to a star will be swallowed. Anything heavier than what it wanders into, will destroy it. Anything lighter than what it wanders into, will be destroyed by it. Fleet is intelligent. And will not be destroyed by planets, nor debris once the location is known. Stars are always known from the start, you simply don't go close to them. Unless you move really fast.

It will take a long time until your homeplanet is taken by the dark hole. And I am considering protection for the weaker. Where if a player has the least ammount of planets. The wandering object goes in the exact opposite direction.

The deck should be designed in such way. That the dark hole will only appear after all players managed to get at least 1 colony. Or at least had the option for a longer period of time.

To make things more interesting. However, it doesn't have too be included. Then again. I thought that if a dark hole is discovered. It would just sit there for the rest of the game.... Everything else is in use. Unless I add 2 dark holes. And they are connected as a fast travel. Technology is required for this.

Clearly the whole wandering idea originates from objects on the map. Having no other use than just being there if not used.

Stars: their distance to planets changes resource managment for that planet. You are not supposed to get too close with certain ships.
Astroids: provide cover and minerals. First time exploration will destroy a part of the fleet.
Comets: provide cover and water. First time exploration will destroy a part of the fleet.
Planets: provide a defence platform, home base, minerals/water/carbon/silicon???? First time exploration will not do anything since a gravity well warned the fleet.
Dark holes: first time exploration destroys the fleet. So, today i decided that if wandering is not the case. The dark hole would be the least usefull.

If object would wander, the whole map would be in chaos. That is why I already decided that only up to 6 object have a chance to wander.
A die roll.
Then a direction.
A die roll.
Then a distance depending on the object.
A die roll.

And see what the concequences are.
If a gravity well is there.
A die roll if another object close would start falling.

So a dark hole would be the most dangerous object in the game. But is discovered at a late stage. Almost as if the dark hole is alive and awoken by the fleet discovering it.

No can do....
I did have an idea with drawing cards and then use a card that is linked to a players planet. Thus no board on the table. But the combat mechanic requires a 2d field.
If the 2d field is removed, then the game would become entirely a card game. Now, the fleet can have numerous units with the tracking that I had in mind. But as I attempted before, a card game based combat mechanic is pretty damn hard to achieve. Solely talking about the movement and weapon range effects.

How should I do those???

Either way, I am not trying to get a FOW between players. Only the map and objects in it. If there is no map, it will become a card game instead. Where the fleet numbers are tracked on a mat.

I noticed how the balance was scaling on a 19. Meaning this was too hard.
If I shorten a salvo to only 2. The scaling is 5.

Ok, that was something with a lot of math sumarized. Lets just say I only have 3 types of weapons.

Burst: 1-0
Salvo: 1-1
Charge: 0-1

The weight values are 3, 5 and 2.
Or, 60%, 100% and 40%
The accuracy roll is 50% here.
Since normal ships have a double weight for their weapons. I was thinking about a secondary 50% roll. Which is, for example, removed for bombers.

To make things more interesting. I am thinking about having a set of possible weapons for certain ships. The weapons are different, but cost the same. It is either accuracy or projectiles or accuracy*projectiles

Class 6:
2-0
0-3

Class 12:
4-0
2-3
0-6

Class 9:
3-0
1-3

Class 30:
10- 0 (2 of 5/6th)
8- 3 (2 of 4/6th followed by 3/6th)
6- 6 (1 followed by 1)
4- 9 (4/6th followed by 3 of 3/6th)
2-12 (2/6th followed by 2)
0-15 (0 followed by 5 of 3/6th)
0-15 (0 followed by 3 of 5/6th)

Just to name some examples...
It would kinda be funny to let the players design the ships.

No doubt, bodies can have several weapons. If I keep the costs separate, this would be easy.

Let us begin with how in RTS games, the cooldown and charging of weapons balance the game.

When a weapon is fired. It often needs time to cooldown or reload if you will. This time can be different for all weapons. More so, there are weapons in some games that wait, before firing.
Due to this, the damage output is different. And over time will cause an imbalance if not treated properly.
The differences in weight value for a weapon are depending on how long it takes for a weapon to fire. And also how long it takes for a weapon to fire again.

It has a lot to do with the health/damage ratio.
When a H/D ratio is 3, this means that for every damage, you have 3 health points that are the same in worth.
And it takes 3 turns on average for a soldier to die by its own weapon.

When a weapon takes time to charge up. The same unit might already be receiving damage. Eventually soldiers will die on that side. Every turn that it waits, the damage is actually worth less in the exact: H/D ratio divided by (H/D ratio plus 1).

The cooldown of a weapon works the same as a weapon that is charging. But will already have shot once. The higher a cooldown, the stronger the burts.

1 damage per turn is different then 2 damage every 2 turns.
Also, if the first turn is 2 damage and you have to wait for 2 turns. This is different than having to wait 2 turns until the 2 damage is done.

In my prototype wargame. I had 3 weapons of a value of 600 (expensive unit). In order to explain the differences.
21-0
12-12
0-28

The 21-0 would be a burst weapon, where the unit could deal 21 points of damage. It all happens at once. And only then the weapon cannot be used for another turn. So it is a burst. It is an english term, used a lot among RTS gamers of the new generation.
A famous example would be a cannon.

The 12-12 is a weapon that deals 12 damage every turn.
While only 2 turns. It is firing continue. Seeing as how this weapon can do this every round. It is considered a salvo.

The 0-28 is a weapon that doesn't shoot right away. But has to charge up. Or has to be aimed properly. Once fired, it will be dealing the maximum damage possible for this balance. The word charging comes from the Obelisk Of Light, which charges up its weapon before dealing massive damage. IT ALWAYS will allow other weapons to shoot first.

Now, how to related to these 3 weapons? The game these 3 belong too, would have an unit that has 36 health as a balance.

However, only a graph would show the beauty of the balance.
Where this burst weapon deals the most total damage at the first, third and fifth turn.
The charge weapon would deal the most total damage at the second, fourth and sixth turn.
At the 7th turn, all 3 weapons would be dealing the same total damage. And beyond this point, the charging weapon would win.
Now, remember that the H/D ratio is 3. Thus this means that every 3 turns, units would die. The burst weapon is the best in this, and the salvo would suffer a bit. The charge would suffer even more.

The space game, I would like the H/D ratio to be 2.
This means that the 2nd damage output is worth 2/3th that of the first.
If we set the burst damage on 1, this could weight 3.
This automatically means that the charge on 1, weights 2/3th that of 3. Which is 2.
The salvo that does 1 and 1, would be the burst + charging. Thus 5 in total.

In order to have a proper balance. And no health tracking. The H/D ratio can also be an accuracy by inverting this number. D/H is damage per health. 50% means 1 damage per 2 health. If an unit has 1 hit point. Then the damage has to be 50%, or 0.5. This can be done with a die roll.

If I design weapons, I am thinking of having the costs share in the class number. Kinda like how cannons in C&C use an APDS number on relating to how much damage they do. It is a hint from the game designer to the player on how much the weapons differ. While in that game, body and weapon wheren't mentioned separately. Many games do this tbh.

Remember how I said that the burst could have a weight of 3. Yet the second number would only have a weight of 2?
The 2-0 costs just as much as the 0-3.
3*2 + 2*0=6
3*0 + 2*3=6

These are all examples. Of course there is a factorial reason behind this.
3*A + 2*B = T
If T remains the same and A and B have to remain round numbers.
For every A=2 we have B=3.
Subtract 2 from A, and add 3 to B.
The bigger T is, the more A and B can exchange value's.

yes.

It is all part of the combat mechanic. And before people are going to tell me again, that players won't understand this.

What players see is:

Fighter:
1 Armor.
Primairy fire: 1 of 1 damage.
Secondairy fire: 1 of 1 damage.

Assault Fighter:
1 Armor.
Primairy fire: 2 of 1 damage with an accuracy of 5.
No secondairy fire.

The rules of combat:
During combat, all ships will first release their primairy fire. A die is rolled for each projectile. If the roll is 3 or less, it will be a hit.
If there is any extra accuracy roll, these too will be rolled before the projectile is deemed to be a hit.

All hits are sorted with their corresponding damage. Then this damage is allocated among the enemy ships. If a ship has sustained enough damage, it is removed from the pool.
If a projectile does more damage than the enemy ship has in armor, this damage is lost.

Once the ships that have been destroyed are removed.
Any left over damage is going to be added to the next fire. It is possible that some overkill is being kept in order to target another ship in the secondairy fire.

Now all ships will release their secondairy fire. The same rules are applied as with the primairy fire. Keep in mind, ships that are destroyed, cannot release their secondairy fire.

If a player has 12 Fighters OR 12 Assault Fighters.
The primairy damage both groups do is:
12 * 1 * 50% = 6
12 * 2 * 50% * 83% = 10
Then what remains are:
6 Assault Fighters and 2 Fighters
The 2 Fighters still can shoot once more.
2 * 1 * 50% = 1
The result is: 5 Assault Fighters and 2 Fighters.

Now, if these 2 groups would have to fight a bigger target without being destroyed in the proces.
Fighters:
12 * 1 * 50% + 12 * 1 * 50% = 12
Assault Fighters:
12 * 2 * 50% * 83% = 10

Instead of being 3 damage behind, the Fighters are now 2 damage ahead.

PS. Not that many dice are rolled. Players can roll a die for sets of projectiles as well. 1, 3, 9 etc. Because if the enemy isn't destroyed right away, why bother?
Bucket'o'dice only happens when dealing with fodder.

You can attack anything that is part of the opposing force.
But I decided that some ships will be "fast".
These ships can get out the way or in the way of enemy fire. It depends on the defender.

The weight value is +50% for the body points. This allows me to make a little bit more designs. And the designs can now either be meat/fodder or support.

The cruiser is the first and best example in this. It can be the first with more armor than the previous tiers. And it can be a support ship.

---> Should I allow these ships to take damage and move out of the way at the last minute? Thus reducing the incomming hits in the bigger picture? The only down side is, this effect doesn't work well for ships with only 1 armor. Then again, higher tier weaponry can still easily destory a higher tier armor once it hits

***

I need a list of ship names and defence names. I don't really like copying other games in that regard.

Anyone any idea's?

- Ship name
- Description
- Most optimal target(s)

Example:

Behemoth Cruiser
The Behemoth Cruiser is the next tier of the empire class cruisers. Again equiped with pin point mini warp engines for a fast burst of movement within the fleet. Due to the next tier of armor, it can act as a shield for other ships. But if destruction is imminent, it can just as easily move out of harms way.
The most optimal targets are the Heavy Fighters. This due to the weaponry being most optimal on their armor class. But also due to the fact that the Behemoth Cruiser is able to fire all projectiles in a short burst.

Might as well post here.

While I removed the board. And rather not go space.
What remains are:

The cards, chips and dice.

Now, the cards can have plenty of designs.
And I am keeping the burst/salvo/charging effect.

To make things clear in regards of RPS.
Every x2 in costs means x3 in damage/armor.
A weapon that requires 2 dice of tier 1, costs the same as 1 die of tier 2.
But... the average damage of 2 dice of tier 1 is 2, or 2 kills of tier 1 armor.
While the average damage of 1 die of tier 1 is 3, or just 1 kill of tier 2 armor.

If the weapon is a burst, it will be 120% in value.
If the weapon is a charging, it will be 80% in value.
Meaning that a charging weapon will be doing 50% more damage than a burst. However, it will have to wait.

This 50% on top of the 2 damage would mean 3 damage, or 3 kills of tier 1 armor, or 1 kill of tier 2 armor. But... the card might have been destroyed before even firing.
Thus while charging makes a weapon almost a higher tier. It does come at a cost as well.

***

The burst and charging will be used to simulate some effects by ranged weapons as well.
But I am pondering about the mix weapons. Should I simply treat them as a mid range? It does make sense, right?

While the weight of a set of 2 goes like this:
3+2=5

The set of 3 goes like this:
9+6+4=19

And a set of 4 goes like this:
27+18+12+8=65

I went for a basic set of 2 for a clear and simple approach.

Not sure, but should I allow different sets?
And simply have something comming in later being cheaper??

If all weapons are basicly a 1 shot.
Then a set of 2 shots is basicly worth 2 shots is what one might think.
But the second shot is worth 67% than that of the first.
A burst can't exist anymore with this logic... Because cooldown is impossible with different sets.

2 damage costs 200%
2 damage, then 0 damage costs 200%
1 damage, then 1 damage costs 167%
0 damage, then 2 damage costs 133%
1 damage costs 100%
1 damage, then 0 damage costs 100%
0 damage, then 1 damage costs 67%

And it was:
2 damage, then 0 damage costs 240% (200%)
1 damage, then 1 damage costs 200% (167%)
0 damage, then 2 damage costs 160% (133%)
1 damage, then 0 damage costs 120% (100%)
0 damage, then 1 damage costs 80% (67%)

At least I can have something like this:
Weapon A;
4 damage
Weapon B;
0 damage, then 6 damage
Weapon C;
0 damage, then 0 damage, then 9 damage
All 3 costing the same: "400%"

This can be used to have cheap units waiting for their turn, then dealing massive damage on a tank. After all, a threshold needs to be met.

***

In my board games, I always have short range going first. Longer range comes in later. But.... a longer range can shoot plenty of times in 2D land. While a card game is 0D.

I rather have the attribute [Ranged] added to the game. Where defences are kinda unaible to shoot back unless they have [Ranged] as well.

[Fast] will be able to either dodge or come in to the resque.

[Block] will be able to be used with whatever makes use of it.

So, 1D land goes through attributes. And the burst/charging effect will not.

Your thoughts?