paizo.com Recent Posts in What do you think of the space combat in APs?paizo.com Recent Posts in What do you think of the space combat in APs?2019-03-12T19:00:18Z2019-03-12T19:00:18ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?BPorterhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#462019-03-30T18:47:09Z2019-03-30T18:47:09Z<p>Fleet battles would be the equivalent of mass combat, something that hasn't really followed the character-level combat of just about any RPG.</p>
<p>Legendary Games' Star Battles is about the only alternative currently available that I'm aware of.</p>Fleet battles would be the equivalent of mass combat, something that hasn't really followed the character-level combat of just about any RPG.
Legendary Games' Star Battles is about the only alternative currently available that I'm aware of.BPorter2019-03-30T18:47:09ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?Steve Geddeshttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#452019-03-30T00:14:37Z2019-03-30T00:13:53Z<p>I wonder if the linked weapons option should be more expensive (or maybe even struck off as an option). That might be a quick and easy house rule to limit starship effectiveness, especially those with small crews.</p>I wonder if the linked weapons option should be more expensive (or maybe even struck off as an option). That might be a quick and easy house rule to limit starship effectiveness, especially those with small crews.Steve Geddes2019-03-30T00:13:53ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?The Ragihttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#442019-03-29T23:13:30Z2019-03-29T23:13:30Z<p>I only roll the piloting and gunnery checks, everything else is pre-rolled and usually goes as planned.</p>
<p>That "free snap shot for everyone" homebrew might actually change ship building, since having extra guns for everyone might become more important than having only ridiculous turrets.</p>
<p>More broad arc options would come handy - not to mention having so many weapons fired might actually open up room for silly weapon, like EMP, tractor beams, spores, mystical, drones, etc, and new strategies.</p>I only roll the piloting and gunnery checks, everything else is pre-rolled and usually goes as planned.
That "free snap shot for everyone" homebrew might actually change ship building, since having extra guns for everyone might become more important than having only ridiculous turrets.
More broad arc options would come handy - not to mention having so many weapons fired might actually open up room for silly weapon, like EMP, tractor beams, spores, mystical, drones, etc, and new strategies.The Ragi2019-03-29T23:13:30ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?BigNorseWolfhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#432019-03-29T18:34:22Z2019-03-29T18:34:22Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">DM_Blake wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Ascalaphus wrote:</div><blockquote> Yeah so you guys are basically in agreement with me that it's too burdensome to do it by the book. You're saying that's not such a problem because you <i>don't</i> do it by the book. </blockquote><p>I didn't say that.
<p>I specifically said that the rules could (and probably should) be streamlined so this wouldn't be necessary. </blockquote><p>Really not seeing the difference thereDM_Blake wrote:Ascalaphus wrote: Yeah so you guys are basically in agreement with me that it's too burdensome to do it by the book. You're saying that's not such a problem because you don't do it by the book.
I didn't say that. I specifically said that the rules could (and probably should) be streamlined so this wouldn't be necessary. Really not seeing the difference thereBigNorseWolf2019-03-29T18:34:22ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?DM_Blakehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#422019-03-29T16:30:02Z2019-03-29T16:30:02Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ascalaphus wrote:</div><blockquote> Yeah so you guys are basically in agreement with me that it's too burdensome to do it by the book. You're saying that's not such a problem because you <i>don't</i> do it by the book. </blockquote><p>I didn't say that.
<p>I specifically said that the rules could (and probably should) be streamlined so this wouldn't be necessary.</p>Ascalaphus wrote:Yeah so you guys are basically in agreement with me that it's too burdensome to do it by the book. You're saying that's not such a problem because you don't do it by the book.
I didn't say that. I specifically said that the rules could (and probably should) be streamlined so this wouldn't be necessary.DM_Blake2019-03-29T16:30:02ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?yukongilhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#412019-03-29T14:00:42Z2019-03-29T14:00:42Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ascalaphus wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Yeah so you guys are basically in agreement with me that it's too burdensome to do it by the book. You're saying that's not such a problem because you <i>don't</i> do it by the book.</p>
<p>Sure, in a home game. But for SFS for example, but also for AP writing, that's a hindrance. If "by the book" doesn't work for fleet battles in practice, then you can't have scenarios with fleet battles. And we're condemned to 1:1 battles still.</p>
<p></blockquote><p>nothing in the books says you have to use an option. Like captain actions, the NPC crews don't need an additional +2/+4 to a skill check, cause they are already higher than any equal level PC, so you can more or less ignore that option. Fighters don't have engineers or science officers, so shields are just temp hp on that side, so you can ignore those phases as well. That leave's piloting and gunning, both pretty simple and run just like normal combat; move, hit, damage, be hit, record damage, wash/rinse/repeat until stardust.Ascalaphus wrote:Yeah so you guys are basically in agreement with me that it's too burdensome to do it by the book. You're saying that's not such a problem because you don't do it by the book.
Sure, in a home game. But for SFS for example, but also for AP writing, that's a hindrance. If "by the book" doesn't work for fleet battles in practice, then you can't have scenarios with fleet battles. And we're condemned to 1:1 battles still.
nothing in the books says you have to use an option. Like...yukongil2019-03-29T14:00:42ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?Ascalaphushttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#402019-03-28T23:46:07Z2019-03-28T23:46:07Z<p>Yeah so you guys are basically in agreement with me that it's too burdensome to do it by the book. You're saying that's not such a problem because you <i>don't</i> do it by the book.</p>
<p>Sure, in a home game. But for SFS for example, but also for AP writing, that's a hindrance. If "by the book" doesn't work for fleet battles in practice, then you can't have scenarios with fleet battles. And we're condemned to 1:1 battles still.</p>Yeah so you guys are basically in agreement with me that it's too burdensome to do it by the book. You're saying that's not such a problem because you don't do it by the book.
Sure, in a home game. But for SFS for example, but also for AP writing, that's a hindrance. If "by the book" doesn't work for fleet battles in practice, then you can't have scenarios with fleet battles. And we're condemned to 1:1 battles still.Ascalaphus2019-03-28T23:46:07ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?DM_Blakehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#392019-03-28T16:06:55Z2019-03-28T16:06:55Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ascalaphus wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">yukongil wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Ascalaphus wrote:</div><blockquote><p> I think the NPC side of ship combat is needlessly complex - why is the GM simulating a whole crew with captain encouraging other crew members and all that? Monsters are simplified and use other rules than PC building; why would NPC starships be built exactly the same way as PCs?</p>
<p>Rather I'd like to see NPC ships being designed in such a way that a GM can easily without a lot of bookkeeping run a swarm of them. That would probably mean weedwhacking at NPC officer roles, shield quadrants, and critical hits to things like NPC sensors - all kinds of bookkeeping you don't want when running 5 enemy ships.
<br />
</blockquote>I've never encountered this problem and like I've previously mentioned, I've only run large multi-ship combats (biggest so far were 15 enemy swarm fighters). The crews are built off of the NPC charts, so I assume all that stuff is taken into account, as no 2nd Tier PC ship has a +12 gunnery check </blockquote><p>So suppose I had five NPC ships (not just single person fighters). That would mean:
</p>
• Five captains rolling to see if they assist 5 other people in their ship.
<br />
• Five ships that could each be taunted by the PCs once for 1d4 rounds.
<br />
• Five captains that could each taunt the PCs once for 1d4 rounds. That could be different roles on the ship being taunted for different time spans simultaneously.
<br />
• Five pilots rolling initiative.
<br />
• Five pilots succeeding or failing to Evade.
<br />
• Five engineers diverting power to things.
<br />
• Five science officers fiddling with shields or target-locking.
<br />
• 5x4 shield ratings to track.
<br />
• 5 sets of hull points to track
<br />
• 5 ships that can each have critical hits in 4 main ship sections and 4 weapon acts in 3 degrees of severity.
<br />
• 5 ships each expending limited fire weapons at different amounts per turn</p>
<p>That's quite an increase in bookkeeping. I wouldn't want to run that. The lack of abstraction makes it unattractive to have the PCs fight against multiple proper ships just because it's too much fuss for the GM to track. </blockquote><p>You <i>could</i> keep track of all that. If you're a rules lawyer, you <i>should</i> keep track of all that.
<p>Me, in the one multi-ship battle I've run, I already abstracted a bunch of that stuff.</p>
<p>I did roll initiative separately. It's too important not to. I made assumptions about captain assists or science officer fiddling with shields or other crew skills - mostly I just assumed they made the rolls because the PCs almost never fail so I figure the NPCs should be similar. Then I treated it like a permanent buff unless in some round I felt they should change that to a different buff. I combined shield and hull into an abstract single number and treated shield balancing like I treat regeneration in a Pathfinder game. Critical hits I treated like any other debuff and removed the debuff after a round or two (assuming a crew member fixed it).</p>
<p>My players had no idea I did that. They thought I actually was tracking all that stuff and they were suitably impressed that I kept it all straight without slowing the game. </p>
<p>Saved me all kinds of headache, kept the game running smoothly, and the player experience was unchanged, so it was a win/win/win.</p>
<p>On a side note:</p>
<p>If a GM can abstract 2/3 of a complex system with no outward indication that he's doing that, then the system is probably overly-complex in the first place - it suggests that the actual game could have the rules rewritten to abstract all of that in the first place.</p>Ascalaphus wrote:yukongil wrote: Ascalaphus wrote:I think the NPC side of ship combat is needlessly complex - why is the GM simulating a whole crew with captain encouraging other crew members and all that? Monsters are simplified and use other rules than PC building; why would NPC starships be built exactly the same way as PCs?
Rather I'd like to see NPC ships being designed in such a way that a GM can easily without a lot of bookkeeping run a swarm of them. That would probably mean...DM_Blake2019-03-28T16:06:55ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?yukongilhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#382019-03-28T14:31:50Z2019-03-28T14:31:50Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ascalaphus wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">yukongil wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Ascalaphus wrote:</div><blockquote><p> I think the NPC side of ship combat is needlessly complex - why is the GM simulating a whole crew with captain encouraging other crew members and all that? Monsters are simplified and use other rules than PC building; why would NPC starships be built exactly the same way as PCs?</p>
<p>Rather I'd like to see NPC ships being designed in such a way that a GM can easily without a lot of bookkeeping run a swarm of them. That would probably mean weedwhacking at NPC officer roles, shield quadrants, and critical hits to things like NPC sensors - all kinds of bookkeeping you don't want when running 5 enemy ships.
<br />
</blockquote>I've never encountered this problem and like I've previously mentioned, I've only run large multi-ship combats (biggest so far were 15 enemy swarm fighters). The crews are built off of the NPC charts, so I assume all that stuff is taken into account, as no 2nd Tier PC ship has a +12 gunnery check </blockquote><p>So suppose I had five NPC ships (not just single person fighters). That would mean:
</p>
• Five captains rolling to see if they assist 5 other people in their ship.
<br />
• Five ships that could each be taunted by the PCs once for 1d4 rounds.
<br />
• Five captains that could each taunt the PCs once for 1d4 rounds. That could be different roles on the ship being taunted for different time spans simultaneously.
<br />
• Five pilots rolling initiative.
<br />
• Five pilots succeeding or failing to Evade.
<br />
• Five engineers diverting power to things.
<br />
• Five science officers fiddling with shields or target-locking.
<br />
• 5x4 shield ratings to track.
<br />
• 5 sets of hull points to track
<br />
• 5 ships that can each have critical hits in 4 main ship sections and 4 weapon acts in 3 degrees of severity.
<br />
• 5 ships each expending limited fire weapons at different amounts per turn</p>
<p>That's quite an increase in bookkeeping. I wouldn't want to run that. The lack of abstraction makes it unattractive to have the PCs fight against multiple proper ships just because it's too much fuss for the GM to track. </blockquote><p>no I'm saying you can ignore all that because NPC ships behave just like NPCs out-of-ships. When it comes to large groups of enemies in normal combat, are you keeping track of all of their options, or just pew pewing? Probably pew pewing. Well that's what you do with ship combat. Their increased skill levels as compared to PCs can be considered to already figure in all the options; again no 2nd level PC has a +12 gunnery, piloting, etc check.
<p>Now shields are a bit annoying to keep track of, until you make you up a handy-dandy system to ease the pain (dry erase markers and page protectors are your friend!), otherwise you focus on the pew pew. Just like mooks in a typical brawl. You rarely care to heal such fodder, or make Perception checks to see if they notice the weaknesses of the PCs.</p>
<p>Now if you run big ships, that's a different story, as that's probably a much more narratively meatier encounter, but then you're probably not running multiples of those attacking the PCs, but even if you are, it's again no different than running a fully fleshed out NPC squad (Operative, Mechanics, Technomancer, or Mystics have similar book-keeping)</p>Ascalaphus wrote:yukongil wrote: Ascalaphus wrote:I think the NPC side of ship combat is needlessly complex - why is the GM simulating a whole crew with captain encouraging other crew members and all that? Monsters are simplified and use other rules than PC building; why would NPC starships be built exactly the same way as PCs?
Rather I'd like to see NPC ships being designed in such a way that a GM can easily without a lot of bookkeeping run a swarm of them. That would probably mean...yukongil2019-03-28T14:31:50ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?Ascalaphushttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#372019-03-28T10:00:47Z2019-03-28T10:00:47Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">yukongil wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Ascalaphus wrote:</div><blockquote><p> I think the NPC side of ship combat is needlessly complex - why is the GM simulating a whole crew with captain encouraging other crew members and all that? Monsters are simplified and use other rules than PC building; why would NPC starships be built exactly the same way as PCs?</p>
<p>Rather I'd like to see NPC ships being designed in such a way that a GM can easily without a lot of bookkeeping run a swarm of them. That would probably mean weedwhacking at NPC officer roles, shield quadrants, and critical hits to things like NPC sensors - all kinds of bookkeeping you don't want when running 5 enemy ships.
<br />
</blockquote>I've never encountered this problem and like I've previously mentioned, I've only run large multi-ship combats (biggest so far were 15 enemy swarm fighters). The crews are built off of the NPC charts, so I assume all that stuff is taken into account, as no 2nd Tier PC ship has a +12 gunnery check </blockquote><p>So suppose I had five NPC ships (not just single person fighters). That would mean:
</p>
• Five captains rolling to see if they assist 5 other people in their ship.
<br />
• Five ships that could each be taunted by the PCs once for 1d4 rounds.
<br />
• Five captains that could each taunt the PCs once for 1d4 rounds. That could be different roles on the ship being taunted for different time spans simultaneously.
<br />
• Five pilots rolling initiative.
<br />
• Five pilots succeeding or failing to Evade.
<br />
• Five engineers diverting power to things.
<br />
• Five science officers fiddling with shields or target-locking.
<br />
• 5x4 shield ratings to track.
<br />
• 5 sets of hull points to track
<br />
• 5 ships that can each have critical hits in 4 main ship sections and 4 weapon acts in 3 degrees of severity.
<br />
• 5 ships each expending limited fire weapons at different amounts per turn</p>
<p>That's quite an increase in bookkeeping. I wouldn't want to run that. The lack of abstraction makes it unattractive to have the PCs fight against multiple proper ships just because it's too much fuss for the GM to track.</p>yukongil wrote:Ascalaphus wrote:I think the NPC side of ship combat is needlessly complex - why is the GM simulating a whole crew with captain encouraging other crew members and all that? Monsters are simplified and use other rules than PC building; why would NPC starships be built exactly the same way as PCs?
Rather I'd like to see NPC ships being designed in such a way that a GM can easily without a lot of bookkeeping run a swarm of them. That would probably mean weedwhacking at NPC...Ascalaphus2019-03-28T10:00:47ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?yukongilhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#362019-03-28T16:54:06Z2019-03-27T16:41:29Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ascalaphus wrote:</div><blockquote><p> I think the NPC side of ship combat is needlessly complex - why is the GM simulating a whole crew with captain encouraging other crew members and all that? Monsters are simplified and use other rules than PC building; why would NPC starships be built exactly the same way as PCs?</p>
<p>Rather I'd like to see NPC ships being designed in such a way that a GM can easily without a lot of bookkeeping run a swarm of them. That would probably mean weedwhacking at NPC officer roles, shield quadrants, and critical hits to things like NPC sensors - all kinds of bookkeeping you don't want when running 5 enemy ships.
<br />
</blockquote><p>I've never encountered this problem and like I've previously mentioned, I've only run large multi-ship combats (biggest so far were 15 enemy swarm fighters). The crews are built off of the NPC charts, so I assume all that stuff is taken into account, as no 2nd Tier PC ship has a +12 gunnery checkAscalaphus wrote:I think the NPC side of ship combat is needlessly complex - why is the GM simulating a whole crew with captain encouraging other crew members and all that? Monsters are simplified and use other rules than PC building; why would NPC starships be built exactly the same way as PCs?
Rather I'd like to see NPC ships being designed in such a way that a GM can easily without a lot of bookkeeping run a swarm of them. That would probably mean weedwhacking at NPC officer roles, shield...yukongil2019-03-27T16:41:29ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?Ascalaphushttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#352019-03-28T18:25:26Z2019-03-27T09:35:35Z<p>I think the NPC side of ship combat is needlessly complex - why is the GM simulating a whole crew with captain encouraging other crew members and all that? Monsters are simplified and use other rules than PC building; why would NPC starships be built exactly the same way as PCs?</p>
<p>Rather I'd like to see NPC ships being designed in such a way that a GM can easily without a lot of bookkeeping run a swarm of them. That would probably mean weedwhacking at NPC officer roles, shield quadrants, and critical hits to things like NPC sensors - all kinds of bookkeeping you don't want when running 5 enemy ships.</p>
<p>I also think we need a LOT more going on than "ship combat is about who gets defeated/chased off the map". If the normal game was only about combat we'd get complaints that it's boring murderhobo stuff. Why are we doing so little in space except shooting?</p>I think the NPC side of ship combat is needlessly complex - why is the GM simulating a whole crew with captain encouraging other crew members and all that? Monsters are simplified and use other rules than PC building; why would NPC starships be built exactly the same way as PCs?
Rather I'd like to see NPC ships being designed in such a way that a GM can easily without a lot of bookkeeping run a swarm of them. That would probably mean weedwhacking at NPC officer roles, shield quadrants, and...Ascalaphus2019-03-27T09:35:35ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?SuperBidihttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#342019-03-26T16:11:19Z2019-03-26T16:09:41Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">DM_Blake wrote:</div><blockquote><p> To put that last post into context of this thread, we haven't encountered even one ship in the Dead Suns AP where the enemy pilot was even close to the PC pilot. The PCs win about 70-80% of the initiative rolls, only failing when their pilot rolls badly and the enemy simultaneously rolls well.</p>
<p>Which means the PCs are routinely blowing away the enemy's weakest shield and then hull points while the enemy is frantically trying to rebalance shields each round, just to stay alive. </blockquote><p>I've seen a lot of maxed Dexterity Ace Pilot Operatives. But we are speaking as the most incredibly maximized characters when it comes to ship combat.
</p>
As soon as your pilot is just a guy with an above average Dexterity, maxed piloting and no class, race or theme bonus, the Dead Suns AP enemies have a far more interesting piloting level.</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">yukongil wrote:</div><blockquote>I also firmly believe that space ship combat should never be about two ships trading blows.</blockquote><p>I strongly agree. And I don't know why it's always the case... It would at least be an easy way to make a little bit of variation in ship combats.DM_Blake wrote:To put that last post into context of this thread, we haven't encountered even one ship in the Dead Suns AP where the enemy pilot was even close to the PC pilot. The PCs win about 70-80% of the initiative rolls, only failing when their pilot rolls badly and the enemy simultaneously rolls well.
Which means the PCs are routinely blowing away the enemy's weakest shield and then hull points while the enemy is frantically trying to rebalance shields each round, just to stay alive.
...SuperBidi2019-03-26T16:09:41ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?yukongilhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#332019-03-25T21:13:17Z2019-03-25T21:13:17Z<p>In addition to letting anyone snap shot, I also increased fixed-weapon damage, BP and PCU cost, making them more attractive and thus making positioning and piloting checks more relevant. </p>
<p>I also firmly believe that space ship combat should never be about two ships trading blows. I want a swarm of fighters/interceptors zipping around, creating a chaotic mess of laser and missile fire. I've played Elite Dangerous, I know that just two ships comes down to resources; who has the better shields and weapons. Numbers smooth that out and make it more interesting.</p>
<p>I've had four or five ship combats in my game so far and each one has been a nail biter.</p>In addition to letting anyone snap shot, I also increased fixed-weapon damage, BP and PCU cost, making them more attractive and thus making positioning and piloting checks more relevant.
I also firmly believe that space ship combat should never be about two ships trading blows. I want a swarm of fighters/interceptors zipping around, creating a chaotic mess of laser and missile fire. I've played Elite Dangerous, I know that just two ships comes down to resources; who has the better shields...yukongil2019-03-25T21:13:17ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?DM_Blakehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#322019-03-25T19:20:19Z2019-03-25T19:20:19Z<p>I agree with previous posters that PCs who aren't flying or shooting need more to do. Sure, they have stuff to do, but it has little or no impact and feels like busy-work. "Here, lemme roll this die to give you a small bonus to your roll. I'm done."</p>
<p>I also agree that it's far, FAR too easy to optimize a flying death ray of doom that can wipe out every ship in the APs, but yet the APs never include a ship encounter with even remotely the same level of optimization. We might not even want that much NPC optimization - could be too easy to disable/destroy the PCs' ship too often. Which means we probably need to restrict the opportunity for massive over-optimization. Raise the cost of turrets and guns compared to the cost of other systems. Make it advantageous, or better yet on par, to add things like armor, shields, computers, scanners, engines, drift engines, etc.</p>
<p>Balance those things and combat might be much more interesting, especially with AP under-optimized ships.</p>I agree with previous posters that PCs who aren't flying or shooting need more to do. Sure, they have stuff to do, but it has little or no impact and feels like busy-work. "Here, lemme roll this die to give you a small bonus to your roll. I'm done."
I also agree that it's far, FAR too easy to optimize a flying death ray of doom that can wipe out every ship in the APs, but yet the APs never include a ship encounter with even remotely the same level of optimization. We might not even want that...DM_Blake2019-03-25T19:20:19ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?DM_Blakehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#312019-03-25T19:12:07Z2019-03-25T19:12:07Z<p>To put that last post into context of this thread, we haven't encountered even one ship in the Dead Suns AP where the enemy pilot was even close to the PC pilot. The PCs win about 70-80% of the initiative rolls, only failing when their pilot rolls badly and the enemy simultaneously rolls well.</p>
<p>Which means the PCs are routinely blowing away the enemy's weakest shield and then hull points while the enemy is frantically trying to rebalance shields each round, just to stay alive.</p>To put that last post into context of this thread, we haven't encountered even one ship in the Dead Suns AP where the enemy pilot was even close to the PC pilot. The PCs win about 70-80% of the initiative rolls, only failing when their pilot rolls badly and the enemy simultaneously rolls well.
Which means the PCs are routinely blowing away the enemy's weakest shield and then hull points while the enemy is frantically trying to rebalance shields each round, just to stay alive.DM_Blake2019-03-25T19:12:07ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?DM_Blakehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#302019-03-25T19:09:26Z2019-03-25T19:09:26Z<p>I think the "I go last so you lose" system is bad. It puts way too much advantage on the best piloting skill. </p>
<p>I would prefer to alternate moves: Lowest initiative moves one hex, next ship moves one hex, next ship moves one hex, etc. Might be slower, but just about anything has to be better than having the fastest ship always shooting the enemy's weakest shield while keeping its best shield toward the enemy. </p>
<p>There's probably a reason we don't handle personal combat that way in Pathfinder or Starfinder. Imagine characters having facing in combat and armor can be damaged and broken but only in one facing at a time, and then the elf always hits the orc in the weakest armor while keeping his own best armor facing the orc...</p>
<p>Probably gives the most advantage to ships with the fastest engines, but that might be reasonably fair. That's like giving a personal combat advantage to the character with the item that gives him Haste - if you invest in the item, it should be beneficial. (Note: my PCs often choose not to fly their full speed - they only need enough to get a firing solution to the enemy's weakest shield anyway.)</p>
<p>Piloting would still be useful, especially if we made more interesting maneuvers for pilots and more reason to use them.</p>
<p>If it's too slow, then let them each move 1/3 or 1/4 of their total hexes on their turn for 3 or 4 turns.</p>I think the "I go last so you lose" system is bad. It puts way too much advantage on the best piloting skill.
I would prefer to alternate moves: Lowest initiative moves one hex, next ship moves one hex, next ship moves one hex, etc. Might be slower, but just about anything has to be better than having the fastest ship always shooting the enemy's weakest shield while keeping its best shield toward the enemy.
There's probably a reason we don't handle personal combat that way in Pathfinder or...DM_Blake2019-03-25T19:09:26ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?Vexieshttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#292019-03-22T22:59:23Z2019-03-22T18:23:13Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Garretmander wrote:</div><blockquote><p> I think the key is to make sure the PCs ship isn't optimized in the first place.</p>
<p>It still doesn't solve my problem of one or two PCs contributing very little to a starship combat that might drag on for a while.</p>
<p>I think for number of players >= 4, two ships and rebalanced encounters is the way to go to keep all players engaged. </blockquote><p>My group is 6 and as they say it all varies dependent on group. I imposed a 3 upgrade per tier limit with each upgrade only being able to be increased up to current lvl +2 in the case of systems with multiple levels like engines or shields. Expansion Bays & security systems do not count.
<p>That seemed to fix the grossly over powered compared to NPC ships issue. As for 2 PCs not having much to do I never see this with my group but they really get into the Star Trek kinda feel with ship combat and like the banter, scanning, engineering shenanigans and what not and I try to feed them plenty of fluff actions to keep things interesting. I think its really all what you make of it but Ive had no complaints from my non pilot, non gunner players so far.</p>Garretmander wrote:I think the key is to make sure the PCs ship isn't optimized in the first place.
It still doesn't solve my problem of one or two PCs contributing very little to a starship combat that might drag on for a while.
I think for number of players >= 4, two ships and rebalanced encounters is the way to go to keep all players engaged.
My group is 6 and as they say it all varies dependent on group. I imposed a 3 upgrade per tier limit with each upgrade only being able to be...Vexies2019-03-22T18:23:13ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?Garretmanderhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#282019-03-21T12:30:38Z2019-03-21T12:30:38Z<p>I think the key is to make sure the PCs ship isn't optimized in the first place.</p>
<p>It still doesn't solve my problem of one or two PCs contributing very little to a starship combat that might drag on for a while.</p>
<p>I think for number of players >= 4, two ships and rebalanced encounters is the way to go to keep all players engaged.</p>I think the key is to make sure the PCs ship isn't optimized in the first place.
It still doesn't solve my problem of one or two PCs contributing very little to a starship combat that might drag on for a while.
I think for number of players >= 4, two ships and rebalanced encounters is the way to go to keep all players engaged.Garretmander2019-03-21T12:30:38ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?Ascalaphushttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#272019-03-21T10:02:12Z2019-03-21T10:02:12Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">The Ragi wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Once the players master the "flying death turret with a crappy ship attached to it" build, it's time for the GM to upgrade the enemy's ships as well.</p>
<p>Either bump its tier one or two levels, or redistribute the same BP into more turrets and more missiles.</p>
<p>And the most important thing: give the NPC gunners some resolve points for the Broadside action. Having 6 weapons fired at them (combined with flyby stunts) will put some fear in the player's hearts. </blockquote><p>I agree that when players catch on to the way starship optimization works, out of the book ships don't cut it anymore to challenge them.
<p>However, giving the enemies more guns doesn't really make things better I think, because it just turns space battle into "in two rounds, one of these ships will be the first to be shot to bits". Enemy ships with the same firepower as a PC optimized ships just turn the space battle into a risky coin flip, not into the sort of deep tactical fight that we're looking for.</p>The Ragi wrote:Once the players master the "flying death turret with a crappy ship attached to it" build, it's time for the GM to upgrade the enemy's ships as well.
Either bump its tier one or two levels, or redistribute the same BP into more turrets and more missiles.
And the most important thing: give the NPC gunners some resolve points for the Broadside action. Having 6 weapons fired at them (combined with flyby stunts) will put some fear in the player's hearts.
I agree that when...Ascalaphus2019-03-21T10:02:12ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?Vexieshttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#262019-03-19T15:34:52Z2019-03-19T15:34:52Z<p>Starship combat needs serious balancing. My group finds it fun but I had to impose a lot of restrictions on ship upgrading so that it kept enemy ships in APs relevant. Once I did that things went much more smoothly. IF not then yes its oh look a ship, dakka, dakka, dakka.. boom! what ship? and it becomes a yawn fest.</p>
<p>I hope to see a expanded ship book out with proper rails for construction. While the rules work perfectly well for making ships not having any limitations on what they can upgrade, how they upgrade or how much they can upgrade leads to imbalanced ship encounters immediately.</p>
<p>My group loves the RP possibilities and the interaction of scanning, captain giving orders, hailing the ship and all that. If you handle it like any other encounter and spice it up beyond just a combat session they can be loads of fun but yeah it needs balancing badly.</p>Starship combat needs serious balancing. My group finds it fun but I had to impose a lot of restrictions on ship upgrading so that it kept enemy ships in APs relevant. Once I did that things went much more smoothly. IF not then yes its oh look a ship, dakka, dakka, dakka.. boom! what ship? and it becomes a yawn fest.
I hope to see a expanded ship book out with proper rails for construction. While the rules work perfectly well for making ships not having any limitations on what they can...Vexies2019-03-19T15:34:52ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?The Ragihttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#252019-03-19T10:43:06Z2019-03-19T09:54:30Z<p>Once the players master the "flying death turret with a crappy ship attached to it" build, it's time for the GM to upgrade the enemy's ships as well.</p>
<p>Either bump its tier one or two levels, or redistribute the same BP into more turrets and more missiles.</p>
<p>And the most important thing: give the NPC gunners some resolve points for the Broadside action. Having 6 weapons fired at them (combined with flyby stunts) will put some fear in the player's hearts.</p>Once the players master the "flying death turret with a crappy ship attached to it" build, it's time for the GM to upgrade the enemy's ships as well.
Either bump its tier one or two levels, or redistribute the same BP into more turrets and more missiles.
And the most important thing: give the NPC gunners some resolve points for the Broadside action. Having 6 weapons fired at them (combined with flyby stunts) will put some fear in the player's hearts.The Ragi2019-03-19T09:54:30ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?DM_Blakehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#242019-03-18T20:46:42Z2019-03-18T20:46:42Z<p>My players modified the Sunrise Maiden to have two turrets with the best guns they can mount. They keep upgrading those turret-mounted guns as they level up the ship. Other systems like engines and shields are still fairly low. They quickly destroy all enemies in the AP. Piloting doesn't matter much because they can aim everywhere and balance their shields, but their pilot usually wins initiative so they rarely get hit in the same shield twice - that's why they can afford to have weak shields.</p>
<p>Even so, it still seems to take an hour or two and most of the players spend that time looking at their cell phones rather than at the Starfinder game.</p>
<p>In book 5, I added extra copies of the enemy ships just to challenge them and I finally managed to inflict hull point damage on them before they won, and half of the challenge was that their gunner rolled a ridiculous number of terrible attack rolls. It was the only time that space combat even woke them up and got their eyes off their cell phones for a few minutes, but it also extended the fight to well over two hours.</p>
<p>I'm not a fan of how most players have so little to do. "I balance the shields. Rolled a 21. Done." 5 or 6 times in a 90 minute battle is not at all engaging.</p>
<p>I'm not a fan of how easy it is to "game the system". Have turrets? Yay, auto-win. Don't have turrets? Bummer, I sure hope your enemy is just a clueless or else, boo, auto-lose. Or, have a very high pilot skill? Yay, auto win. Else, boo... </p>
<p>Have both? OK, let's save ourselves 90 minutes or so and I'll narrate: "It's a short battle, over in just a minute or two of your characters' lives. A few heavy salvos from your turrets disable all the enemy ships who never really had a chance with their poorly designed ships (no turret weapons) and their poorly-trained pilots."</p>
<p>I'm not a fan of how it's all-or-nothing. I don't dare try too hard to win (which hasn't mattered as the fights have never even been close, even with me trying). Especially when they got out far away from the pact worlds. No help in sight, better win the fight. Sure, I can save them if they lose, but they'll know I saved them. Maybe once or twice I could get away with it (enemy doesn't blow them up but boards them and now they capture the enemy ship, or they escape to a nearby planet and find and repair a derelict ship, or whatever). Too often and it's just silly/obvious. How many times did Kirk or Picard lose their ship? A couple, which was actually cool, but only a tiny fraction of their encounters.</p>
<p>I'm not a fan of how the players are encouraged to blow up or ignore the enemy ships (try to rescue/salvage/board and that's when really bad things happen like self-destruct, for example) but then in one fight in one AP, a fairly significant amount of treasure can only be had by boarding - my players blew it all up without even trying.</p>
<p>I'm not a fan of how the whole thing seems to be reduced down to, "If you're close enough to fight, you too close to run away, so now it's a fight to the death." My villains can't escape, the PCs couldn't escape if they needed to. By the time it's going so badly that a ship decides to run away, it takes too many rounds to actually break off combat - they'll certainly be destroyed before they escape. That may also be true for ground combat, but at least enemies have lairs with traps, secret doors, hidden allies just down the hall, or any number of other diversion and distraction that help them get away, none of which work very well in space. Or they can just teleport out or use lots of other magic to break off and escape, none of which seems plausible in space. </p>
<p>None of my players are fans of it either. I guarantee if I ask them "OK, space combat time. Want to just skip it?" that they would unanimously agree, instantly, without reservation. They are definitely enjoying the campaigns and their characters are having fun exploring worlds and fighting bad guys on the ground, but nobody is having fun in space.</p>My players modified the Sunrise Maiden to have two turrets with the best guns they can mount. They keep upgrading those turret-mounted guns as they level up the ship. Other systems like engines and shields are still fairly low. They quickly destroy all enemies in the AP. Piloting doesn't matter much because they can aim everywhere and balance their shields, but their pilot usually wins initiative so they rarely get hit in the same shield twice - that's why they can afford to have weak
...DM_Blake2019-03-18T20:46:42ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?Xenocrathttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#232019-03-18T17:01:55Z2019-03-18T17:01:55Z<p>Also, while the range of weapons is 10 increments, the range of sensors is somehow only five, so pay attention to that as the most common limiting factor.</p>Also, while the range of weapons is 10 increments, the range of sensors is somehow only five, so pay attention to that as the most common limiting factor.Xenocrat2019-03-18T17:01:55ZRe: Forums/Starfinder Adventure Path: General Discussion: What do you think of the space combat in APs?SuperBidihttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs42i3t?What-do-you-think-of-the-space-combat-in-APs#222019-03-18T16:28:31Z2019-03-18T16:28:31Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">BPorter wrote:</div><blockquote>#1 - Being able to shoot at that range and hit at that range are 2 different things. Also, if you're going to take that literal an interpretation of range & escape, you'll have to also take it for initial detection and closing. Both of which would be resolved via a few checks at my table but if you want to adhere to those kinds of scenarios, the PCs should have ample time to assess/scan foes and disengage before combat starts.</blockquote><p>You've got a point.
</p>
Hitting at range is not the issue when you have dozens of round to try. You'll get a few criticals along the way. But it's true that you may consider the players are out of scanners at some point.</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">BPorter wrote:</div><blockquote>If it does, I suspect TPKs and frequent introduction of new characters is a commonplace occurrence, so starship combat doesn't alter that.</blockquote><p>Yes, of course. If the players lose a personal combat, they are all dead. But it nearly never happens, as personal combats are not binary, so you can just drop one character or two to scare your players, and they will feel the challenge.BPorter wrote:#1 - Being able to shoot at that range and hit at that range are 2 different things. Also, if you're going to take that literal an interpretation of range & escape, you'll have to also take it for initial detection and closing. Both of which would be resolved via a few checks at my table but if you want to adhere to those kinds of scenarios, the PCs should have ample time to assess/scan foes and disengage before combat starts.
You've got a point.
Hitting at range is not the...SuperBidi2019-03-18T16:28:31Z