Fighters/Gunboats again

[StarTytalan]

Since the database seems to have lost half our conversation I decided to restart it.

I’m going to post this in multiple parts because it’s seem my last attempted post killed the database.

First I’ve been continuing my research in SSF Fighters/ Gunboats and I have found something misleading That does help with the balance so I’m posting the issue here. Table AA10.02 list the SRW mod and the LRW mod while table G4.01 talks about Internal and External Ordnance. I can find no were it states that LRW are External Ordnance or the SRW are internal Ordnance also fG which are External Ordnance would use the LRW mod for it use. I think this confusion can be easily fixed by changing table AA10.02 to Internal Mod and External Mod or something similar like maybe IWS and EWS, internal weapon system/external weapon system. This would also let more technologies that fill one or the other locations make sense.

[StarTytalan]

This is another case were the SSF is not clear at all

“G7.04 states LRW attacks cause 1d10 LRW hits vs. ships or Squadrons. these hits are interceptable by point defense as a normal LRW and each hit causes 1 point of damage if not intercepted. “. Straight and to the point but we also have Table G7.04 LRW Attack Modifiers which has no explanation as to its purpose does it modify a to hit roll? Does it modify the number of hits? There is absolutely no explanation for this chart. I think it modifies the number of hits but that is a assumption on my part.

Better wording if I’m right would be: LRW attacks cause 1d10 LRW, modified by table G7.04, hits vs Ships or Squadrons.

I’m finding things like this all throughout this document. Examples or not the Document needs to make sense.

[PracticalM]

There is a typo thread if that is what you really want to do.

Or if you really want to make fighters and gunboats work the way you want them do, write up a set of rules, playtest them and then publish them here with the supporting evidence.

[StarTytalan]

How was anything in this post about changing rules? I posted this on the typo thread but it’s not really a typo is the way the whole rule set is written. The rules are very RAI when they should be RAW. This causes conflict and confusion when the game is played

[Antares]

If this is a question in not understanding how to use the table, you might want to work through the SRW example (Example G7.05 - Squadron Combat, in section FF) as SRW attacks use a very similar table to LRW attacks. The calculations included in the example should help in learning how to use it.

If this is a comment that the rules could be clearer, I agree.

I don't understand how this rule is written differently than intended. Perhaps you could explain?

[Cralis]

First I’ve been continuing my research in SSF Fighters/ Gunboats and I have found something misleading That does help with the balance so I’m posting the issue here. Table AA10.02 list the SRW mod and the LRW mod while table G4.01 talks about Internal and External Ordnance. I can find no were it states that LRW are External Ordnance or the SRW are internal Ordnance also fG which are External Ordnance would use the LRW mod for it use.

Table G4.01 lists all of the ordnance and which location (internal or external) that it is slotted into. It also lists the category (SRW or LRW) so you know which one each is. fG are clearly marked here as SRW that go into the External Ordnance location.

G4.03 lists the major difference between internal and external ordnance; chiefly that internal ordnance is installed during construction and cannot be changed without refitting the squadron. It is generally true that expendable munitions go into the external ordnance location and non-munitions go into the internal ordnance location.

I think this confusion can be easily fixed by changing table AA10.02 to Internal Mod and External Mod or something similar like maybe IWS and EWS, internal weapon system/external weapon system. This would also let more technologies that fill one or the other locations make sense.

For the next version, we thought about moving the table to the AA.Smcft rules, but decided that it is much better in Section G, which is the small craft rules. We are trying to move rules out of AA## section because players don't look there for rules, they look in the section that is related to what they are looking for.

This is another case were the SSF is not clear at all

“G7.04 states LRW attacks cause 1d10 LRW hits vs. ships or Squadrons. these hits are interceptable by point defense as a normal LRW and each hit causes 1 point of damage if not intercepted. “. Straight and to the point but we also have Table G7.04 LRW Attack Modifiers which has no explanation as to its purpose does it modify a to hit roll? Does it modify the number of hits? There is absolutely no explanation for this chart. I think it modifies the number of hits but that is a assumption on my part.

Better wording if I’m right would be: LRW attacks cause 1d10 LRW, modified by table G7.04, hits vs Ships or Squadrons.

You would be using G3.03 which explains it the same way you did. Although it seems obvious to me, you're right, it does not appear to explicitly state that the modifiers are applied against the result and could make it more clear. I will mark it for edit.

I’m finding things like this all throughout this document. Examples or not the Document needs to make sense.

I'll take the hit for some of the presumptive rules. I was a player for a decade before I started helping Marvin. Then I took a 6 year break when I went into military service. When I came back out and started the Solar Starfire project, Marvin was unavailable and he gave me permission to start this project. As a new designer I didn't immediately discover that it was all-too-easy to know how something works and not transcribe it exactly into the rules. I've become more aware with experience. But the primary way to find those areas that seem obvious to me - but not to a new player - is to have more eyes on the rules. We are getting that and it's been helping a lot.

So I do appreciate that you are pointing out things that don't make sense to you. It helps us make the document a lot better. And now is good timing since we are working on the next version.

[StarTytalan]

The point I was trying to make about LWR and SRW is that it never states that the LWR modifier is used for all external weapons and the SRW modifier is used for all internal weapons. If you change the modifiers to internal and external you clear up the issue and table G4.01. Because they way the two tables look and interact fG’s are Externally mounted and use the SRW modifier are one shot by changing table AA10.02 to say external ordnance modifier and Internal Ordnance modifier you clear 5his up so fG’s are both externally mounted and use the greater modifier which makes sense since they are even shorter range than other SRWs. Changing table AA10.02 also makes more sense since table G4.01 already lists the category of the weapon the change also gives more options for future tech. To hopefully clear things up a Fb with fG installed would fire its internal laser at a +1 modifier and its fG’s +1 modifier (with range limit of short or medium, intercept-able by point defense and one shot) this makes no sense at all but it’s how the charts read together by changing AA10.02 the same Fb would fire its internal laser with a +1 modifier and flush its external mounted fG with a +3 modifier this makes sense.

[StarTytalan]

“ I'll take the hit for some of the presumptive rules. I was a player for a decade before I started helping Marvin. Then I took a 6 year break when I went into military service. When I came back out and started the Solar Starfire project, Marvin was unavailable and he gave me permission to start this project. As a new designer I didn't immediately discover that it was all-too-easy to know how something works and not transcribe it exactly into the rules. I've become more aware with experience. But the primary way to find those areas that seem obvious to me - but not to a new player - is to have more eyes on the rules. We are getting that and it's been helping a lot.

So I do appreciate that you are pointing out things that don't make sense to you. It helps us make the document a lot better. And now is good timing since we are working on the next version.”


Cralis that a common mistake when writing anything even when you read it you will often read what you intended to write instead of what you actually wrote. The key to preventing it is to have someone else who didn’t write it prof read the document. One of the things onyx path does with its Kickstarter supporter is we are given a prepublication pdf and a link to report typos and errors like these.

[Cralis]

The point I was trying to make about LWR and SRW is that it never states that the LWR modifier is used for all external weapons and the SRW modifier is used for all internal weapons.

That's because it's not true. fG in particular are externally mounted, but are considered SRW.

If you change the modifiers to internal and external you clear up the issue and table G4.01.

We don't want to do that because there are some weapons that don't fit that mold.

Because they way the two tables look and interact fG’s are Externally mounted and use the SRW modifier are one shot by changing table AA10.02 to say external ordnance modifier and Internal Ordnance modifier you clear 5his up so fG’s are both externally mounted and use the greater modifier which makes sense since they are even shorter range than other SRWs.

We already have this information in Table G4.01. Also I'm not sure what you are referring to with "Table AA10.02" because AA10 does not have any tables. It doesn't even have a rule AA10.02.

Are you talking about AA.sw.02? Don't worry, the update we are building for the next version has already moved that table into Section G along with some of the rules so that they are all in one location.

Changing table AA10.02 also makes more sense since table G4.01 already lists the category of the weapon the change also gives more options for future tech. To hopefully clear things up a Fb with fG installed would fire its internal laser at a +1 modifier and its fG’s +1 modifier (with range limit of short or medium, intercept-able by point defense and one shot) this makes no sense at all but it’s how the charts read together by changing AA10.02 the same Fb would fire its internal laser with a +1 modifier and flush its external mounted fG with a +3 modifier this makes sense.

Ok I think I understand what you are saying. Currently G7.04 and G7.05 are treating all weapons as nearly the same, with only some modifiers in the list below. But you aren't applying all of the modifiers. So if an FQb with fL internally and fG externally fired at a target at short range, it would get the following modifiers for the weapons:

fL: +1 for short range and -1 for being L. Then it would possibly have +1 for "b" generation (if your empire has developed Lb). So either +0 or +1

fG: +1 for short range, +2 for being fG. Then it would possibly have +1 for "b" generation (if your empire has developed Gb) So either +3 or +4.

The differences are there, they are just in the modifiers below the table. That said, we are completely changing a lot of this in the next version, so we'll discuss your suggestions and how they might help the new tables.

Cralis that a common mistake when writing anything even when you read it you will often read what you intended to write instead of what you actually wrote. The key to preventing it is to have someone else who didn’t write it prof read the document. One of the things onyx path does with its Kickstarter supporter is we are given a prepublication pdf and a link to report typos and errors like these.

And that is why we have several members of the SDS and several playtesters to help us do that. Each of us has a different perspective and we generate the bulk of this board's traffic in internal discussions. SSF is a large document and sometimes we get used to thinking in a certain way, so when someone like you comes along and thinks differently then we get a different perspective.

I'm not disagreeing with anything you've said. We already do a lot of it. It just seems that your approach is quite a bit different from most Starfire players. That's ok... in fact, that's great. So we'll use your input to improve the document where we can