Alternating turns rather than IGOUGO?

[Tastyfish]

Having played AI and Epic:A for a little while before returning to BFG, we thought it would be interesting to see what the game would be like with an alternating turn structure (so the turn swaps between ships/squadrons, rather than after one side has moved their whole fleet) since the model count is certainly low enough to make it easy to keep track of.

Worked really well, only fiddle we had to make was to have Ordnance move at the same time the ship controlling it did and then again after all the ships have moved (the same time transports in a convoy mission move too). Anyone else given this style a go? We've only had a fairly short campaign with it so far (and also used Andy Chamber's 2nd rules replacing the Firepower tables with 'to-hit rolls'), so are there any issues that you think would come up with this system that would be good to address before they come up?

[andrewchristlieb]

Do not apply damage effects until the end of the phase for that player. So if player one shoots first and cripples/destroys/crits another ship allow that ship to finish its shooting phase before the damage takes effect.

The same would apply for any damage/crit/etc during each phase.

[fracas]

Asa LotR player I am definitely interested in changing BFG to something like sbg

[Tastyfish]

Do not apply damage effects until the end of the phase for that player. So if player one shoots first and cripples/destroys/crits another ship allow that ship to finish its shooting phase before the damage takes effect.

The same would apply for any damage/crit/etc during each phase.

Seems like it would add a bit of extra book keeping, and remove a tactical element from the game with every ship being able to get it's shots in regardless. I can also see it messing with the points as far as range goes - 15cm guns are normally hard to use, but if you can get a move in anyway after someone has fired their longer ranged things, then they're a lot easier (likewise it knocks out the benefit of 45cm shots).

Though thinking about it, allowing an 'overwatch' type shot when a ship goes on brace for impact could be interesting and not break the flow too much. I've been trying to restrain from adding in that many new rules though, and the fact that the alternating turns means that the target vessel's supporting ships will be able to get involved should prevent one ship from getting victimised too much. Plus the fact that a lot of ships will struggle to cause significant damage on their own (BFG has always struck me as a game where you need to try to engineer a situation where you are bringing two of your guys against one of his)

[andrewchristlieb]

For two ships that are moving/shooting at the same time tho it makes sense. As far as book keeping goes that would be identical, write down damage taken crits received ect just dont apply them till the end of the phase. Maybe something simpler would just be to have each ship have an initive, something like leadership + fleet attack rating + d6, determined each turn. Then the ships go in initive order. This would eliminate the problem of damage taken etc becausr that ship was actually hit before it could react. If two or more ships end up with the same initive for a turn find some kind of mutual way to work out who goes first.

[IncrediSteve]

also used Andy Chamber's 2nd rules replacing the Firepower tables with 'to-hit rolls'

I've been away from BFG for awhile, where might these rules be found?

As for IGOUGO, I always wanted to try it, but getting in normal games of BFG is feat enough unfortunately.

[sunnyside]

I'm still not that experienced with BFG, but I can tell you in general that alternating turns adds a lot of book keeping and confusion. How brace for impact lags around for a while beyond immediate effects making an extra complication potentially. Ultimately I think your biggest enemey is going to be time. BFG games already can last quite a while and that limits playability. In principle alternating doesn't have to be slower, it just tends to be much slower.

However I think it that structure might fit well with BFG in that it features a small number of elements (squadrons/capital ships) that are supposed to be a big deal.

The downside I see is that IGOUGO adds a chesslike strategy to the game in that you need to consider multiple moves. Superiour tactics are shown in flanking moves, traps, and whatnot that occur precisely because of the low granularity of the game and the failing of your opponent to consider the sum of what you can do on your turn.

Alternating games can descend into just a dicefest that is won or lost before the models are even set on the gaming table. Though presumably you're keeping some granularity so you can still fly past a ship, turn partway around, and shoot them from behind.

[horizon]

Alternating move/shoot system: sure.

Replacing the gunnery table with a to-hit roll system etc-> crap idea by Andy. I even told him this on the Red Star Forum he once had.

Basically this was:

A Murder class has 10 batteries:

Roll 10 dice:
hit = 4+ (iirc)

target under 15cm = -1 (so 3+ needed).
target above 30cm +1
behind blastmarker +1

All dice that hit are rolled vs target armour.

Gunnery Table is so much more elegant.

[Tastyfish]

We were going with 3+ closing, 4+ moving away, 5+ abeam with -1 for escorts and/or blast markers (i.e to your dice roll, would be +1 to the value you need to beat, I just find that having penalties being negative modifiers feels right) with range/sun modifiers on top of that. Though this was largely sparked by having a rubbish printer and the card tables in another house.

[Xyon]

I dont think you would apply damage after the shooting phase ends. The games I know of that use the system of you move one ship, i move one ship, and then you shoot one, i shoot one, apply damage as it happens not at the end. Works for those games, I think it would work for BFG.

[fracas]

Lotr: determine priority, winner move, loser move, winner shoot (and apply damage), loser shoot, both fight ( for BFG ordnance?)
Spartan games: determine priority, winner activates one squadron (move and shoot), loser activates one squadron, alternate till all squadron activated

[andrewchristlieb]

So there needs to be a priority system (initative).

[fracas]

that would be best imo

[Xyon]

I think an interesting thing to do, would be to have an AT stat for each ship, Activation Timer. The lower the AT the more often a ship gets to act. It would require more book keeping than the current game, but you could get a bit more dynamic with movement. And I suppose some way to determine initiative between players for ships that activate on the same timer. I suppose you could even have ATM for movement and ATS for shooting to show that while some ships may move more often/dynamically (escorts), some ships will shoot more frequently (battleships)

Just an idea to throw out there, maybe some other games have done something similar but my 'naval simulation' game experience is limited to a call to arms: star fleet, and battlefleet gothic so I really don't know if its been done before.