Thursday, October 29, 2009

Simple Quadrant Conquest Reinforcement Rule

I started playing through the simple quadrant conquest, using the revised
simple combat "coin toss" single-player rule. I discovered a bit of a
balance issue. Here are the logs and results. I'll note after each whether
the "coin toss" was won or not.

(1009.25) k1-6 vs f1-6 f5-6 destroyed-k1-6 destroyed *lost toss

(1009.26) k1-6 vs f1-4 f1-4 destroyed-k1,2,5,6 destroyed *lost toss

(1009.26) k3,4 vs f1,2: k3,4 destroyed *lost toss

(1009.27) k1-6 vs f1 f1 destroyed, no damage to fleet. *lost toss

(1009.27) k1-6 vs f1-3 k6 destroyed, k5 damage 11/25, f1-3 destroyed. *won

(1009.28) k1-6 vs f1-4 k1,2 destroyed f1-6 destroyed *won toss

(1009.28) k1-6 vs f1-5 f1,2 destroyed. f3 damage 2/15. Klingon fleet
destroyed. *lost toss

(1009.28) k1-6 vs f1-5 f1-5 destroyed. No damage to Fleet. *win toss

(1009.28) k1-6 vs f1-5 k1-5 destroyed. F1,2,6 destroyed. *lost toss.

At this point, I decided to allow a Fleet Commander to request
reinforcements while in combat once numbers have dropped to three
friendlies. Three more will be dispatched. 1d6 to reveal how many volleys
wait until reinforcements arrive. And here are the results, against five

(1009.28) k1-6 vs f1-5 *lose toss: F1, as well as K1-3 were destroyed in a
devastating first volley. The surviving ships requested assistance. Three
more ships were dispatched with a wait-time of just one volley. The newly
arrived K1 and K2 were immediately lost in the next volley. The four
surviving KCA's destroyed the four surviving FCA's in the next volley, and
would, in the simple quadrant conquest, fortify their position by building a
shipyard. Any further reinforcements will come from shipyards.

So the reinforcement rule seems to be valid. Further playtest will validate


Ad eundum quo nemo ante iit

No comments: