Quote from: taustin;665129

• Having no provision for tracking ammunition, because


• No matter how long the running gun fight continues, including running naked through the swamp for days, you always have enough ammo
  
  
• Unless the GM says otherwise, which he could just as easily do before the gunfight actually starts

This is an odd change to make to the game, without at least some attempt to meet a middle ground.

Regarding ammunition, there is a rule in Dogs of War that I was thinking of bringing over to my first edition Traveller.  If a character rolls snake eyes and that would have been a miss (it is possible to roll two and hit with the right extreme modifiers) the character has run out of ammunition for the weapon or the weapon has jammed.  The character must get more ammunition from either an ally or some location (fallen enemy, ammunition case in stores, etcetera).  Snake eyes only for this effect, without further fumble type effects.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;665150Me too.  And it progressed into Car Wars.  Trying to get an RPG character like me into the car.

That one could use sighting as an edge.  I could see bros playing a game that has that aspect that would never play a standard strategy/tactical game.

Quote from: Kuroth;665151If a character rolls snake eyes and that would have been a miss (it is possible to roll two and hit with the right extreme modifiers) the character has run out of ammunition for the weapon or the weapon has jammed.  The character must get more ammunition from either an ally or some location (fallen enemy, ammunition case in stores, etcetera).  Snake eyes only for this effect, without further fumble type effects.

That's elegant.  You don't want to know what slapped-on kludge players are proposing to handle that in T5.

One cool option in Star Fleet Battles is a classic sub hunt, of a sorts.

If you have a third player acting as a judge, there is a system called tactical intelligence (I think that is what it is called)

The judge would track the positions of cloaked ships, fake plasma torpedoes, and manage the information each combatant is collecting baout the other side.

For example, you needed to be at a certain range to tell exactly what type of ship variant you were up against.

Did a Romulan vs ISC fleet battle that was amazing.

the ISC were in that truly epic fail "Echelon Formation" they favored, and the Romulan Fleet (that was smaller) was allowed to uncloak all over their Echeloned Ass.

It took forever but was amazing with the 'gm' keeping track of things that should be hidden.

Quote from: Kuroth;665147That the players can use their actual physical talents as an edge in the game is sort of cool.  You see, this is how I get drawn into one of these games! ha

Yeah, it was actually fun watching him do that at a convention, playing with complete strangers who thought they were good at the game. Before that, I was sure he was using the 12" floor tiles in his kitchen to cheat, but the convention tables were completely blank. It was scary, even when we were on the same side.

(I suspect it's a side effect of his dyslexia. So does he.)

Quote from: Kuroth;665151This is an odd change to make to the game, without at least some attempt to meet a middle ground.

Like the absence of rules for designing small craft, I suspect it's a matter of incompleteness rather than a deliberate choice. Despite the years of development and extensive beta testing, there's stuff missing. At least some of it because Marc Miller made a committment to the print version being under 700 pages.

Quote from: Kuroth;665151Regarding ammunition, there is a rule in Dogs of War that I was thinking of bringing over to my first edition Traveller.  If a character rolls snake eyes and that would have been a miss (it is possible to roll two and hit with the right extreme modifiers) the character has run out of ammunition for the weapon or the weapon has jammed.  The character must get more ammunition from either an ally or some location (fallen enemy, ammunition case in stores, etcetera).  Snake eyes only for this effect, without further fumble type effects.

Even that can be too often, I suspect[1]. Plus, it doesn't allow for the well prepared character. The guy who sticks a half loaded pistol in his pants pocket is as likely to run out of ammo as the guy who carries a backpack full of pre-loaded clips. Though it is better than the apparent official rules.

[1]But not nearly as bad as Mercenaries, Spies and Private Eyes, where, IIRC, an automatic weapon jammed on any roll of 5 or less on 3d6. We had one character that was convinced that a Mac 10 was the most useless weapon ever built, because, literally, every single time he fired one, it jammed on the second or third bullet. One time to the point where it required the skills of a professional gunsmith to fix. The gunsmith ran several clips through it without a problem, and handed it back. On the 2nd bullet, it jammed again. A game's gotta work at it to be less realistic than Top Secret.

Quote from: taustin;665129Which word don't you understand?

I know what the words mean but not in this sentance structure.

Quote from: taustin;665011"It's not a roleplaying game, it's a toolkit."

So far, the greatest amusement value is watching the fanwank trying to admit it isn't badly broken.

"trying to ADMIT it isn't badly broken"  Sorry What?

Quote from: David Johansen;665272I know what the words mean but not in this sentance structure.

Perhaps Google can suggest a good remedical course in remedial english.

You should try that immediately then.

Quote from: Bill;665050Does it attempt to apply real physics?

No, it actually applies real physics.  Ranging from three dimensional combat and movement using a chart to figure distances to heat radiators being one of the most crucial systems on a ship.

Quote from: David Johansen;665272I know what the words mean but not in this sentance structure.

Quote from: taustin;665273Perhaps Google can suggest a good remedical course in remedial english.

:rotfl:

Quote from: David Johansen;665276You should try that immediately then.

I know you are, but what am I?

(I understood it perfectly.)

No opinion on Traveller, just a translation.

David, Taustin is saying that in his opinion, T5 is badly broken as a game system, to the point where he gets more entertainment out of watching Traveller fans try to claim the system is not broken, then he gets from the game itself.

One of the more perceived complex AD&D games I played was a campaign in a sophisticated political world, with mostly thief and magic using classes as characters, integrating battle system fully into the campaign where it was the default for the appropriate scenario.  The combination of a politically charged world, sneaky/tricky characters (Edit: bright players too, of course) and strategy war game for powers on the move made a big game.

Quote from: CRKrueger;665312No opinion on Traveller, just a translation.

David, Taustin is saying that in his opinion, T5 is badly broken as a game system, to the point where he gets more entertainment out of watching Traveller fans try to claim the system is not broken, then he gets from the game itself.

But that's not what he wrote at all.

Anyhow, I'm not denying T5 is a mess.  I think if you go back and look at all my posts on the subject I've been very critical of how Marc handled things even though I'm enthusiastic for the game itself.

I think the game says a great deal about what Marc feels is important in terms of structure and design.  But yes, it's a mess and he handled the beta and the kickstarter poorly.  I've repeatedly pointed to the kickstarter as the worst one I've ever seen.  I think his paranoia about illegal downloads and sneak peaks of an unfinished game has been the main cause of problems but I can't stress enough that his private circle of yes men / alpha testers have been like a millstone around his neck.

Even so, I am stoked to play it.  We'll see how no ammo tracking works in play.  IRRC Mega Traveller and T4 had it as an option.

Quote from: David Johansen;665344But that's not what he wrote at all.

But that's the specific sentence you said you didn't understand.

And you've now demonstrated why I didn't bother to explain it further.