| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
Finally got my first taste of starship combat during an organized play event at a convention today.
All I can say is HOLY COW! It is SO much fun, and quite difficult to wrap one's head around.
Had two encounters, one against an equally powered ship in open space in which I played the gunner, and another in an asteroid field against a superior foe in which I was the pilot.
The first encounter was relatively straight-forward, but we quickly learned just how important positioning and firing arcs are! In the second encounter, we played tag around the asteroids, being very careful not to expose our aft, as it had no weapons and minimal shields. I could not believe just how much more the pilot could do! Having competent gunners is hella' important, but man, when you're the pilot, it sure seems like you're the focus, nevermind the captain, engineer, or science officer. They all help out, sure, but they all basically live or die based on your ability to pilot the ship into an optimal position every round.
I made tons of mistakes. There were at least two rounds in which I could have used evasive maneuvers, but I was so focused on where I was going to move and how I was going to move there, that I simply forgot to declare it until it was too late. One such round really cost us, as the enemy blasted us with their missiles, all of which would have missed if our TL was 2 points higher. :(
Ultimately, we hightailed it and ran from the enemy, which made us realize that we had superior range, so we kept our distance and sniped, forcing the enemy to take penalties to their attacks, giving us just enough edge to survive by the skin of our teeth.
It was so much fun. So exciting. The rules have a decent learning curve, and team work and communication are an absolute must, but we're starting to get the hang of it more and more.
If the gunners had missed their mark, if our engineer didn't keep the ship and shields together, if I didn't put the ship in place to fire our optimal weapons while protecting our weak spots, if the captain hadn't made certain checks possible, if any one person didn't do their part--well, I wouldn't be alive today to tell you about it. :D
No rules in ANY roleplaying game to date has made me feel more like part of a team than Starfinder's starship combat rules.
Thanks for the great experiences Paizo! Keep up the good work! :D
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Same fun experience with our group.
Everyone had a "role" and everyone made an impact.
The most hilarious was that my Rogue PC from Dark Sun basically had his mind transferred into an Android Outlaw for the Starfinder game (we retired one setting to start the other), so he was completely lost with jumping from Dark Sun to Space, yet he had the best piloting skills.
I'm from a magic-lean and technology non-existent world where metal is so rare a dagger makes you rich, yet I can hot dog around these stars better than any of you gits...
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What does everything think about Space Combat taking very long?
At first I thought the players weren't used to it, but later on (with the FAQ) I realized that the Engineer can keep healing the shields. That's basically a free fast-healing.
As a GM, I advice players to have two gunners even in small groups of 4, but I wish there was another good trick to shorten Space Combat.
My experience with low-tier ships slugging it out is that if both ships' engineers can keep restoring shields, combat grinds to a stalemate as neither ship's weapons can get through to the other's hull.
Multiple gunners can help with this IF a ship has multiple guns in an arc, which may not be the case for all arcs for a low tier ship.
And at tier 2, the SFS Drake especially suffers from running out of ammo for its one turret weapon too early in the battle.
Agreed on the starship combat. I've tried a couple systems before but having the whole group running the different parts of the ship and making everyones turn meaningful to the ships performance is really awesome.
I like how it showcases the abilities of some of the "non combat" classes too. I have a player who was disappointed by the engineers abilities in normal combat ("why cant I change the energy type of a gun as an action?"). Then he manages to save the entire ship from exploding with some key repairs and all issue went out the window ;)
As for early starship combat it feels like they didn't want ships just one shotting each other since it would be really easy to TPK. Also comparing the HP and shield levels of different ships it looks like the SFS Drake is heavily skewed towards survivability and outlasting the enemy vs the SFS Pegasus being a little more maneuverable and able to bring a bit more focus fire. Neither are appearing to be a "fighter". So it would make sense that the engineer on both ships would be able to keep the shields up.
Also don't forget that players can change roles between rounds, and none of the roles are required... if you thing your pilot can get you lined up for a great shot even your captain can take a gunner slot for a turn. It all just has to be declared at the beginning of the round.
It all just has to be declared at the beginning of the round.
This came up during our games at the convention: Does a gunner have to declar WHICH gun and/or arc he is on at the beginning of the round? Or does he just have to declare that he is A gunner?
Also, does a gunner on a turret have to choose which arch the turret is facing at the start of each round, or when he goes to fire it?
I've been going with just declaring A gunner, when I run. Nothing I've seen says they have to declare which one, and if people can switch roles every round, I've been seeing it as relying on being able to slave terminals to different controls, not always running to the far end of the ship.
Seems to make more sense to me. But I have no textual support in either direction.
|
It all just has to be declared at the beginning of the round.This came up during our games at the convention: Does a gunner have to declar WHICH gun and/or arc he is on at the beginning of the round? Or does he just have to declare that he is A gunner?
Also, does a gunner on a turret have to choose which arch the turret is facing at the start of each round, or when he goes to fire it?
No, the rules just state that a character declares the role. Noting about what arc or anything like that.
Additionally, now that I go back to it, the Fire At Will gunner action lets you fire any two weapons, regardless of arc, as one action.
So the idea that you have to select a weapon or arc at the start of the round holds no water at all.
Then what's the point of turrets?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
HammerJack just means Fire At Will allows you to select two weapons in different arcs, so the idea that a gunner has to select a weapon or arc doesn't hold water.
Turrets, and the arcs of weapons, are still important. If you have two ships to fore and aft, Fire at Will allows you to fire at both, despite being in different arcs. You can still only target them with the respective fore- and aft-arc weapons, or turrets.
The issue with recharging shields goes even worse when the players realize that just by getting a huge power core and better shields as an upgrade the engineer can make the ship invulnerable to same level balanced ships. 200 PCU power source gives 10 points of shields every turn, in the AP book 3 the pirate ship never got a single shot through their Tier5 ships shields.
Then what's the point of turrets?
Why did battleships transition from guns mounted on the side of the hull to turrets? Why did tanks do the same? There are technical advantages like weight or cost savings, or reducing the number of gunners, but I think one of the biggest advantages is tactical flexibility.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Then what's the point of turrets?
I think you are getting too far into the weeds here. The computer, with input from the gunner, points the turret. At least that is how I visualize it. The gunner is sitting at the console and directs the weapon the to fired from it. I don't see a gunner sitting in a turret cockpit like on the Falcon. I see gunners more like those on Star Destroyers controlling the action of a weapon remotely.
The intent is to make space combat fun and flow quickly. If a player has decide what weapon to fire at the beginning of a round it will only slow down the combat.
Ultimately, we hightailed it and ran from the enemy, which made us realize that we had superior range, so we kept our distance and sniped, forcing the enemy to take penalties to their attacks, giving us just enough edge to survive by the skin of our teeth
Was not one manning the Science Officer Station? Did you not scan them to see their weaponry?
A good Mechanic can do both jobs in a pinch switching roles at the top of the round.
Ultimately, we hightailed it and ran from the enemy, which made us realize that we had superior range, so we kept our distance and sniped, forcing the enemy to take penalties to their attacks, giving us just enough edge to survive by the skin of our teethWas not one manning the Science Officer Station? Did you not scan them to see their weaponry?
A good Mechanic can do both jobs in a pinch switching roles at the top of the round.
We only had four PCs during the second encounter, not enough to fill all the ship roles. There was already a lot of switching going on too, but manning the sensors seemed like the least priority at the time.
|
|
We only had four PCs during the second encounter, not enough to fill all the ship roles. There was already a lot of switching going on too, but manning the sensors seemed like the least priority at the time.Ultimately, we hightailed it and ran from the enemy, which made us realize that we had superior range, so we kept our distance and sniped, forcing the enemy to take penalties to their attacks, giving us just enough edge to survive by the skin of our teethWas not one manning the Science Officer Station? Did you not scan them to see their weaponry?
A good Mechanic can do both jobs in a pinch switching roles at the top of the round.
A good roll one time will get you enough information. Always considering this so you can get the basic info on your enemy.
Finally got my first taste of starship combat during an organized play event at a convention today.
All I can say is HOLY COW! It is SO much fun, and quite difficult to wrap one's head around.
Our first experience with starship combat was a little underwhelming, but I can see huge potential there and I'm looking forward to the next one.
Especially since there isn't a huge amount else for the Engineer role to do before you've taken fire. Sure, you *can* overcharge someone else's action, but sensors are so much better.
Couldn't sensor scans tell you where the shield points are being distributed on an enemy ship during combat as they take damage so you could maximize your positioning?
Especially since there isn't a huge amount else for the Engineer role to do before you've taken fire. Sure, you *can* overcharge someone else's action, but sensors are so much better.Couldn't sensor scans tell you where the shield points are being distributed on an enemy ship during combat as they take damage so you could maximize your positioning?
Yes, but most opponents will put their shield points where you're probably going to shoot them, so that's of limited utility. The best reason to scan early is preliminary digging, so you always start your Scan with Defenses or better (if the enemy SO hasn't reset your Scan with Balance Shields).
How good Divert is on the ship's weapons depends on their damage die - Coilguns get a much better buff than Plasma Cannons.
d4: 10% more damage
d6: 4.76% more damage
d8: 2.78%
d10: 1.81%
d12: 1.28%
I'm gathering that the intention is to have the party in a single ship, but I'm wondering has anyone gamed it out to see how things play out if those same types were all in their own ships, like fighters?
Not sure if they would get their full CL each for purpose of BP, but even if so, would having 4-6 snubfighters lead to more deadly results (presumably due to lesser pilot scores when spread out among individual party) and 'can't really do repairs' stuff? Generally speaking does the 'one target, but broader abilities' balance out vs 'numerous smaller targets, but with lesser abilities'?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The biggest problem with fighters (as I've gathered from reading stuff) is that, since they typically have only one person, and each person can only have one role, you have very limited actions per round. The typical round for a one-man fighter is probably going to be either "Glide and Shoot" or "Fly and Snap Shot". If you try to do any other action, you're either a sitting duck or don't get to shoot that round, since you can only take one Minor Action per round. Can it work? Maybe. Is it advisable? Definitely not.
You can have a system which tries to give every PC on their ship a job to do, or you can have a system which encourages fighters. Starfinder does the first.
I've seen suggestions like adding together the CRs of the PCs ships (in the usual way for CRs) so that you might start at level 1 with 4 CR 1/4 ships, for example, or at level 10 have 4 level 6 ships.
A good roll one time will get you enough information. Always considering this so you can get the basic info on your enemy.
Exactly. Just look at how much you can get with one or two good Science rolls to scan the enemy. Weapon loadouts and facings, shields, cargo and add ons.
On round one and two most mechanics can go Science Officer to get that critical data and then switch to Engineer to start doing re balancing/repairs/weapon and shield boost/etc.
I think the easiest way to bring fighters more into the fold is allow for certain roles (predominately Captain and Science) to be applied to a squadron from one person at the head/in the carrier rather than individually. Maybe an add-on that replaces the normal scanners?
I like that idea (Captain bonus applied to entire squadron and/or data shared by Science officer). You could have a big ship that deploys 1 or more smaller fighters.
But for Engineer role in smaller, 1-man shipds, such as repairing shields and such, a droid could work. An example is R2D2 and BB8 in Star Wars. The droids basically handle the repairs done in the Engineer's turn.
|
|
A good roll one time will get you enough information. Always considering this so you can get the basic info on your enemy.Exactly. Just look at how much you can get with one or two good Science rolls to scan the enemy. Weapon loadouts and facings, shields, cargo and add ons.
On round one and two most mechanics can go Science Officer to get that critical data and then switch to Engineer to start doing re balancing/repairs/weapon and shield boost/etc.
Also, keep in mind that Scan rolls are cumulative. Once you learned something, you get more information on the next roll, not just the same stuff again. Unless you wanted that info again.
Further, fighter chassis ships scale terribly and become screaming metal death traps for whoever's in it as you climb the levels.
I keep hearing this, but wonder if it's really true, or just a bunch of armchair theorizing.
Has anyone tried running a smaller craft in an actual game?
Further, fighter chassis ships scale terribly and become screaming metal death traps for whoever's in it as you climb the levels.
I keep hearing this, but wonder if it's really true, or just a bunch of armchair theorizing.
Has anyone tried running a smaller craft in an actual game?
While I haven't, I like that small starships and below can't be targeted by capital weapons, but I don't think fights against capital ships is all that common.
I did some futzing and saw that even if you threw 800 points into a fighter or interceptor, you still run into hard limits on your damage output (due to size), shield output due to power and power output due to size.
If I recall you're going to be hard stuck at like 200 power.
It sounds like you would need large swarms of small fighters to do damage to larger ships.
What would be the effect of allowing starship weapons to do double damage on critical strikes? Might this substantially shorten starship combat in an agreeable way? What would the downsides be?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I personally think you should try it out...not in SFS. I know I will.
In a home game it would be interesting to have a main ship and 1 or 2 small fighters. Also scaling isn't a huge obstacle if your not a rules lawyer. What does a fighter need to compete? A reasonably damaging gun? Some more shields? You got it. With equivalent weapons and maybe a little less shields a small fighter is still inhibited by actions. PLUS, when a ship reaches 0 HP it is disabled not destroyed, so you don't have to get overly much about killing players.
I can say from experience that there is very little excitement with a 1 v 1 ship combat without asteroids or something environmental to steer around.
I'd like to see some squadron rules someday; rules that would allow the GM to throw swarms of little weak ships at the PCs, but have them grouped up so that each squadron acts more like a single larger, more threatening ship--kind of like the tie fighter squadrons in Star Wars.
I have a custom tiny frame with a single expansion bay and two crew as well as a shuttle that my PCs will be using in lieu of the single explorer that the SFS adventure provides next week. I was looking at the combat that they will be completing and it should be a tough fight. With the lower HP and shields that the individual ships end up with it's likely that I will end up disabling one of the two ships. I will be sure to post how it goes in practice.
Having run my second session of starship combat now, I must say I have to echo the sentiments of the OP. Holy cow, this was fun.
I think there were some important preconditions:
- My session involved a kind of warm-up encounter with little real threat that allowed us all to acclimatise better to how turn orders in starship combat work.
- I had enough lead time to work up "action cards" for players in Roll20 that incorporated the adjusted DCs of various actions from the errata, making it unnecessary to flip back and forth through the rules.
- I was also able to work up macros in Roll20 that automated the piloting contest in each round at the click of a button and reminded us visually how turn order worked.
- Our main starship combat encounter involved a crowded Star War-style "clashing rocks" asteroid field that their enemy (who "knew the ground" better) tried to use to periodically run them onto -- or into -- the rocks. There was lots of dodging around for advantage and critical use of Piloting Stunts by both sides. The enemy was tactically acute and used the weapon in its arsenal that best exploited the hero ship's weakness (a comparatively lower TL).
- Our enemy ship was alone, but of matched tier to the players, making it a Hard encounter in CR-balancing terms and making it genuinely dangerous, thus upping the stakes of their rolls. There was in particular a clutch use of Flyby which it became clear to the players they needed to pull off to have the best chance of surviving (especially since they'd been battered by various navigational hazards on the way into the encounter and their Engineer was constantly battling just to keep the ship together).
- All the crew's actions mattered tremendously, as every possible edge counted even with the adjusted action DCs.
It all added up to a thrilling encounter in which the players weren't the ones who got blown up... though they certainly could've been. I sensed the starship combat rules had possibilities; I'm glad to see that sense was right, although that said, I'll be hesitant to throw the players into an encounter this high-risk too often.
(I did not, as it happened, wind up allowing starship weapons to do double damage on critical strikes, as it proved unnecessary and nobody critted in this particular combat anyway. I'm not ruling this out for the future, though.)
So I have run two starship combats. The first was fun, tense, and enjoyable. The second was a bit of a slog, with the party falling into set patterns trying to bludgeon the enemy into submission before they got disabled. I'm not sure why the difference.
Any suggestions on running space ship combat effectively? At-the-table procedures that might help?