Jump to content


Replying to Phoenix Rising's Understanding of the Galactic Civil War


Post Options

    • Can't make it out? Click here to generate a new image

  or Cancel


Topic Summary

Kaleb Graff

Posted 17 December 2009 - 08:08 PM

Sometimes I play the d20 version. I've tried d6, but since I don't have hardcopies, it usually doesn't get anywhere.

Pellean

Posted 17 December 2009 - 07:54 PM

Roger. I love Attack Vector. It is a great attempt at a really difficult gaming problem. I disagree in detail with some of the game's assumptions and I don't think that engagements between fusion torch equipped human starships will be the sorts of maneuver battles that the game depicts. But I've got to hand it to Ad Astra: they stuck with their assumptions and made the game that followed from them.


Hmm- I'll have to take a look at that.

I wanted to say thank you to PR for providing the link to the archive site of WEG sourcebook PDFs. I have owned the Imperial Sourcebook for years (I purchased it without knowing about the RPG) and I hugely enjoyed reading it. WEG and Zahn pretty much sum up what I accept as canon. Now I even try gamemastering a bit. Does anybody else still play this game?

Kaleb Graff

Posted 16 December 2009 - 04:25 PM

I agree too. It's amazing how realisic it is. It may not be accurate to what will happen, but it's a lot closer than anything else I've seen.

feld

Posted 16 December 2009 - 01:40 PM

What I want to see is a physically realistic space combat system for an RPG. It's possible, as I have a very good realistic 3D wargame.

That wouldn't happen to be Ad Astra's Attack Vector by any chance, would it?

v/r
feld

Indeed it is. I got it recently, and am bemoaning the lack of more ships.

The conversion rules say that in larger ships divide the batteries by two because of the lack of facing. I don't like that, as it seems too subjective.


Roger. I love Attack Vector. It is a great attempt at a really difficult gaming problem. I disagree in detail with some of the game's assumptions and I don't think that engagements between fusion torch equipped human starships will be the sorts of maneuver battles that the game depicts. But I've got to hand it to Ad Astra: they stuck with their assumptions and made the game that followed from them.

v/r
feld

Kaleb Graff

Posted 16 December 2009 - 03:26 AM

What I want to see is a physically realistic space combat system for an RPG. It's possible, as I have a very good realistic 3D wargame.

That wouldn't happen to be Ad Astra's Attack Vector by any chance, would it?

v/r
feld

Indeed it is. I got it recently, and am bemoaning the lack of more ships.

The conversion rules say that in larger ships divide the batteries by two because of the lack of facing. I don't like that, as it seems too subjective.

Phoenix Rising

Posted 15 December 2009 - 09:38 PM

Yeah, I don't like the new RPG Sourcebooks either, not because I'm a gamer, but because I would like to see them give stats that make sense, and not that stupid battery thing.

You can multiply batteries by gunners to get the actual gun count. At least that's usually the case, I think it gets inconsistent with bigger ships (that they don't want to blow your tiny player transport out of the water), but I've used it for stat conversions before.

I liked their idea of tactical fire, although not necessarily for the RPG, since I don't play it. Right after Saga SotG came out, I wanted to use it for unit abilities in PR, but I quickly realized that EaW wasn't flexible enough to do that. Another concept for the modder's garbage bin.

feld

Posted 15 December 2009 - 12:27 PM

What I want to see is a physically realistic space combat system for an RPG. It's possible, as I have a very good realistic 3D wargame.

That wouldn't happen to be Ad Astra's Attack Vector by any chance, would it?

v/r
feld

Kaleb Graff

Posted 15 December 2009 - 03:52 AM

Yeah, I don't like the new RPG Sourcebooks either, not because I'm a gamer, but because I would like to see them give stats that make sense, and not that stupid battery thing.

That system, is, unfortunately, a holdover from the d20 future starship combat system. That was just plain bad, and I didn't understand why they did it. They seem to have a fascination with making everything work just like character combat. What I want to see is a physically realistic space combat system for an RPG. It's possible, as I have a very good realistic 3D wargame.

anakinskysolo

Posted 14 December 2009 - 02:59 AM

Yeah, I don't like the new RPG Sourcebooks either, not because I'm a gamer, but because I would like to see them give stats that make sense, and not that stupid battery thing.

Kaleb Graff

Posted 13 December 2009 - 12:24 AM

It's odd that I came into Star Wars after the prequel trilogy began, but I definitely prefer the older stuff. Honestly, I like the WEG-style sourcebooks, when half was setting, much better then the recent stuff. I guess there are two problems now: 1. Wizards is used to doing stuff for D&D, where they want to leave a lot of flexibility, and 2. There's so much more being published.

And on P-cannon not being real, I say we revolt and bring down the people who brought us "The Clone Wars" TV series, and put PR as the ruler of Star Wars in their place.

Review the complete topic (launches new window)