Forums of the Megaverse®

tarus wrote:
After reading the (almost nonexistent) rules for fighter to fighter combat I don't know what to do with weapon ranges.

Ninjas and Superspies has rules for jet fighter combat which are easily used in this setting, should you happen to have a copy.

tarus wrote:So these are my questions (I hope you can help me):

1) How do you determine combat distances? And what are the difficulties to strike for each one?

Simple. Make it up. If fighter A has weapons with a range of 5 miles, and fighter B only has weapons with a 2 mile range, then fighter A gets to wail on fighter B until B closes the distance. You could do the actual math and figure out how many attacks or melees it will take them to close the difference while going Mach 5, but I would just say: "Fighter A has better ranged weapons than you and opens fire. [rolls strikes] Make three dodges, then you'll be in range..."

tarus wrote:2) Fighters move very FAST and the weapon ranges are not very long. I don't know what are they for then? I mean, what is the issue of having a weapon with a 5 miles range if the other ship can also fire at you with its 2 miles-ranged weapon?

See above.

The effectiveness of space fighters in general is up for debate. However, after writing about them for months in my manuscript, a space fighters' main function is to be loaded up with cruise missiles, and sent out to blow big holes in enemy battleships. They are best used as a "missile bus". Enemy fighters will be trying to intercept these missile busses, and so dogfights occur in the space between combating fleets.

Also note that enemy fighters will be trying the exact same thing: attempting to drop anti-matter torpedoes on your mothership. So you better get out there and stop them...

tarus wrote:3) The BIG question is: how do you GM space fighter-to-fighter combat?

Pretty much as you would a fight between two guys with knives. Roll initiatives, strikes, and dodges. Use your piloting skill rolls!!! Use your bonuses from Read Sensors and Weapons Systems, and don't forget that missiles are +3 to strike.

Last one flying, wins.

tarus wrote:1) If the lone figher tries to keep the other two at a distance (because his weapons have a longer range) how can be determined if he succedes?

Speed will be the deciding factor. If the lone fighter can travel faster than the other two, he can stay out of reach. But if the other two can go faster, they will overtake him.

tarus wrote:2) Once involved in close combat (pretty much after the first or second round) is there any reason not to use the BIGGEST weapon you have?

No reason whatsoever... unless you are fighting so close that you risk getting caught in the blast radius of your own missiles (not likely to happen).

Although, using a cruise missile on a space fighter is a bit of a waste...

tarus wrote:Your first answers worries me the most: if a solo (and faster) ship can keep its enemies at bay whenever it wants... there's no combat! The characters (or their opponents) will always win!

Yeah, pretty much. Just like a guy with a polearm will always have a better reach in melee combat than a guy with a knife.

Eventually though, they will run into someone faster or more heavily armed than they are. Or they will bone a dodge roll and get creamed by point defense lasers or something...

Combat system gets out of hand when you start dealing with larger than transport type ships.

Ships that have a ton of MDC armor, and 1200 point Variable forcefields that regenerate 5% per round.


The SDF-1 is the only one that will basically be the one to run from or make combat easy in any circumstance.

Ship to ship combat is horridly wrong imho in rifts outerspace.

Something else to keep in mind: if people want to fight each other, they will.

If the two pilots of the space fighters want to kill one another, they will slow down to fighting sppeds, and blast away. But if one of them decides to run, it goes back to speed.

Here's my take on it. Yeah, invent you're own rules.

I ran some space combat not too long ago. The PC's have an ultra light freighter with moderate weapons. The Energy weapons are 2 miles, and then they have a single long range missile launchers. Well they were trying to escape a Kreeghor space station that was exploding thanks to a little FWC sabatage. Well the PC's got to their ship in time to get the hell out of dodge. Now this is a huge station a few hundred miles in size. Naturally a few Kreeghor fighters move to intercept the fleeing ship. The players on the bridge detect that they are trying to get a missle lock and they plunge the ship closer to the station and fly through the superstructure. Good move the fighters don't want to miss with their missiles. So they move into gun range, which is also the range of the PC energy weapons. Initivie is rolled with all the players and the fighters. While the pilot is flying evasive he gets the ocasional dodge roll. Now flying through the superstructure at their max speed I applied a -15% penalty to all pilot rolls. For the PC's if they failed the roll, their ship could not dodge (too busy avoid the space station) and if the fighters failed their roll they could not fire as they too were trying to avoid hitting the station. On successful rolls the fighters could fire and the freighter could dodge for the whole melee. So fighter A fails its roll and falls back as its avoids a collision. The freighter made its roll and the pilot is flying like a made man bobing and weaving with fighter B who made its roll hot on their tail. From there its normal attacks. Those in the turrets are firing on the fighter and the fighter returns fire or dodges as the case may be. I figured I wanted the combat to last for X melees at which point the PC's could go to FTL speeds or the fighter peels off. Or the fighter gets destroyed.

For fighter to fighter I might run it like this assuming no space debris or obstacles. The fighter with the longest range weapons can fire first. Now you can do the math and say they get X attacks in before the other fighter is in range, or just make it simple and guess Once each fighter is in range they will each joky for the best position. I would have each roll their piloting rolls with the lowest roll getting the better position. From there its likely that the guy that got the better position is in a kill zone, and the other guy is trying to dodge and evade. I would roll piloting rolls each melee. The lowest roll winning. so if the attacker won he is still hot on the other guys tail. If the defender wins the fighter break off and can again jocky for position. Start over again.

I think thats how I would run it. I also try and use as many of the skills as possible. People can fire using their Weapons System bonuses, but if they spend an attack and roll a successful Sensory Operation, then the next attack I'll give them full bonuses from the ship or what ever else is available. For missiles I'll combine all the bonuses including the missiles on the first shot only. If they miss, or the defender dodges, then the missile is back down to its normal bonuses.

Hope this helps,

Carl

Well I was just doing a pursuit style battle. Since the freighter was a lot bigger the fighters were concentrating on the rear shields. Since the fighter was a lot smaller and presumably jinking back and forth I was having the players roll a D6 to see which of the fighters shields were hit, ignoring a 6. It took them a melee or two, but they finally concentrated fire on a single shield by aiming for it. Plus the missles helped too.

For shields I figure there has to be some kind of program in place to help balance out the shields. So I let them balance them, but it takes an attack to do so. Same for the fighters, so while they're balancing they're not firing, unless they have a co-pilot.

My freighter crew had 4 PC's and two NPC's. Here is how they were spread out on the ship.

PC - Pilot and thats all he was doing.
NPC - co-pilot. If the pilot blew his pilot roll I would give him a recovery roll. If that failed the co-pilot would get one recovery roll to keep the ship from crashing.
PC - sensor op, shield control and missile control
PC- Gunner
PC - Gunner
NPC - engineer, trying to keep the ship together.


Tarus feel free to ask all the questions you want. It makes for an interesting discussion on how the various GM's handle things. Oh and welcome to the boards

Carl

Carl brings up some really good points and a great reminder that there is always a reason or scenario why you are getting into combat:

1, deep space battle. The one on one fight (maybe two on one) Likely pirates or a bounty hunter has caught up to the player party. These are the least common type of space battles as space is big and the likelihood of running into another ship is pretty limited. This battle is a simple chase/fight situation. The party can choose to fight or run. If they are faster they get away if not they must fight. Ship-to-Ship combat rules apply even for the big ships although a large ship is likely to have turrets and will be able to fire from any position. Movement of the two ships for the best firing position and limitation of your opponents weapon systems wins the battle.

2. The big space battle. PC's will probably be in fighters or power armor. You will be doing one of two things, attacking the enemy ship or defending your ship. You will be using the dog fighting rules presented in the PW book on page 152. Using shields like a parry when necessary (cost one action) fastest ships win as you will be chasing your opponents all around the battlefront. Remember to use obstacles and other ships as a shield if you are being chased. Don't forget your buddies can intercept a faster fighter because you will bring the at fighter to him. When all the fighters/power armor on one side is defeated send in your fighters to deploy your cruise missiles.

3. Running the Blockade (suicidal in my opinion unless you are using stealth) typically will be multiple fighters and ships attacking you. Role play the destruction as eloquently as you can.

Yeah we all have our styles of running. I do try to keep all the players involved as much as possible. I know the rules you're talking about in the Phase World book. I guess I look at it more from a theatrical point of view. I don't worry so much about the rules, just about what works and how to make it fun for the players. I already knew in advance that I wanted a cool space chase. The rest I played by ear.

So from this I take it english is not your first language?

But this is the first time that I decide to participate in this forum... when I was younger my knowledge of english was just good enough to read the books.

What corner of the globe do you call home if you don't mind answering? I never would have guessed that english was not your native language.

Carl

A lot of the space combat depends on how realistic you want things to be. To me, there are three levels of realism, Kitsune's Inertial based combat, Inertia-less combat, and cinematic combat. Most folks here tend to go with cinematic combat because it is the simplest. Not knocking it, I'm just saying... If some of the people I game with had their way, we'd probably use the Inertia-based system for ultimate reality. I on the other hand like things simple, but just real enough that the hardcore geeks in my various groups don't give me a hard time about something not "making sense". So I go with the Inertia-less system, with my own twists on things. You can see the details here, but what it really comes down to is: as long as a ship/fighter has power to their engines, it will move in whatever direction the pilot wants it, for as long as the pilot wants it. Intentionally turn the power off, and it will stop; have it turned off by other means and the ship will drift.

So what does this mean for you? Suppose you have two fighters going head to head, both with their shields doubled front. The system makes it possible for one pilot to make an attempt to fire a missile or guns at a section of the shield that isn't doubled (provided they make a piloting skill roll). The defending pilot can either dodge or attempt an opposing skill roll to position the doubled area in line with the shot (whoever succeeds by the highest percentage wins).

There are lots of other things we did to make ship-to-ship and fleet battles quicker: missiles can be shotdown with a flat opposing roll versus rolling a dodge for every volley; ships have a set number of actions they can take (versus every gun firing up to their maximum times per round); evasive action actually does something now; expanding tilt dodge; and lots of other stuff.

Check it out.

I usually run the cinematic for my players. Although I have tried the inertial with a select group it is very nice.

tarus wrote:Hmm... I'm lucky to have a wife that likes to play RPGs almost as much as I... ... but we have recently begun to play with two other couples (one of them new to "the vice"). I've found that a lack of rules can sometimes make things difficult for them: they just don't know WHY it takes them 3 rounds to reach the enemy, and not 2 or 4, or what can they do during a fight (or chase, or whatever) to make things more interesting.

I know that's not very important for people like us, that have been playing RPGs for years. But there are a lot of people "out there". Shouldn't we try to make things easier for them?

Exactly. For us, it is fine to say, "Oh, this will take 5 rounds to travel a certain distance, or do something." But for most folks encountering it for the first time, they are going to want a certain degree of realism, "Why?" If you can't answer that "Why?" both in the context of the game and real life physics, you are going to lose them. Why? Because if you don't have a basis in fact, your answer comes out as "Just Because". That doesn't sit well because that means reality can change on GM fiat, and most folks just don't like that.

Look, I'm not saying that you have to show them all the math (that gets boring fast), but in the back of your mind (or preferably printed out where everyone can see it) you should have a firm idea of how long it takes something to go a certain distance over a certain period of time. Then stick to that basis. That's why in the Space Movement section of the page listed above, I have everything listed both in realistic terms and in terms directly from the game. You generate a lot of goodwill and trust if you make something as seemingly complex as space movement simple in the very beginning. With that trust it is a lot easier to introduce a more cinematic gamestyle as your players become more experienced.

In a lot of ways, I guess what I'm really trying to say is that if you hit them with the hard numbers at the very beginning, and stick with them til they become second nature, you won't need them in the long run.
"Do your homework."

if you're running a space combat, you're going to have to increase ranges
tremendously...

Hmmmm.... varies according to play-style, Gadrin.

If you want to have Star Trek action with lots of colored, visible lasers being fired at stone throwing distance... leave it as it is.

If you want to play "hard science" space opera, like in the books by Dan Simmons, where ships have weapons with ranges measured in AU... then you will have to brew some house rules.


Me, I pretty much run it as is, because a) combat of this type doesn't come up a lot yet, since all my players are on one ship, and b) I only have a grade 11 General math credit.

Braden, GMPhD wrote:

if you're running a space combat, you're going to have to increase ranges tremendously...

If you want to play "hard science" space opera, like in the books by Dan Simmons, where ships have weapons with ranges measured in AU... then you will have to brew some house rules.

I don't think he's going for "hard science". It's more about increasing the ranges for internal consistancy's sake. Robotech, where most of the space combat rules come from, has ships with a MUCH long range than the pea shooters in Phase World. If PW stuff is supposed to be more advanced than Robotech stuff, then it should at least have the same ranges for equivalent weapons.

I agree wholeheartedly about running playtests. My players and I usually run a short combat sim before every other session to make sure that everyone understands what is going on, and to make sure everything works. There have been quite a few rules we've thrown out or tweaked due to these sessions.

tarus wrote:Hmm... that certainly sounds interesting.

Could you share those changes with us?

Sure, I'll go down the list for for the most important ones in general.
1) Module System (by David Olsen): Split each round into 3 5-second modules. Split the characters' and npcs' actions evenly among the three modules. Any remaining actions are "floaters", they can be used as dodges and rolls and such. Using modules makes combat quicker since when a person's turn comes up (by initiative) they take all their actions for the module at one time, then it's the next person's turn.

2) Eliminate rolling dodges for Smart Missiles and a straight difficulty roll for shooting down missiles. The base roll is a 10, with the base going higher depending on the bonus the missile has to dodge. So a Smart Missile is base 14 to hit. This change eliminates a whole lot of dice rolling and number tracking, especially if you are running large battles.

3) The change we made that has the biggest difference is we gave each starship a set number of actions it could take per round. Under the standard rules, each ship can fire each of its weapons a certain number of times each round. Even doing volley fire, this can bog battles down immensely, especially if you have more than 3 ships in a battle. We decided to give each ship a set number of actions based on the number weapons it has:
1. 1 action for Main Cannon systems. If the ship has a weapon described as a Main Gun (like a Reflex Cannon, Rift Cannon, or Energy Lance), the ship gets one action (no matter how many barrels or individual cannons the system has).
2. 1 action per every 3 secondary energy or projectile turrets (round up to nearest multiple of 3). Every 3 turrets (not barrels) gives the ship 1 action.
3. 1 action per every 10 missile turrets. Round up to nearest multiple of 10.

Example: The CAF Warshield would have 11 actions per round. 1 action for the Main Laser, 8 actions for the secondary turret weapons (24 total), and 2 actions for the missile turrets (14 total).

Giving ships a set number of actions and eliminating missile dodging made the biggest differences in our space battles. You can see the other changes here.

I just jumble everything together. If seven people are shooting at you only need to make one dodge roll, if you dodge one chances are your no longer in the other six's sights. But since the other six never shot they still have all of their attacks. That cuts down on the rolling, along wih doing all the damage in one or just taking the straight average damage of a weapon