Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Aigre Excalibur]

Dry Test of turns:

Turn 1: Exploration phase

Scout for resources at coordinates (1, 1) (distance 1.412 km)
Dispatch 1 land crawler towing a drill.

Results: Exploratory excavations suggest that the rocks here have an average yield of 48% Total Rock to be Excavated is estimated at 20 million tons.

Turn 2: Deploy mine at (1, 1)
Dispatch all available land crawlers towing 2 BWE stripminers and other semi-static processing facilities.
Set up 1 ore sorters for common ore!
Set p 1 ore sorter for rare materials

Results:
Common ore production is estimated at 180 tons a day
Rare ore production is estimated at 0.2 tons a day


Combat:
Wild animals are spotted in the woods, it is unknown how hostile or dangerous they are. Exploratory missions should be sent.

Turn 3:
Design Phase Need Analysis:
We propose a hunting rifle be designed or an existing one be designated. The existing 5.56 Nato has poor performance against large animals.

Turn 4:
Design Phase: Conceptualization:
The not-reinventing the M14:
A magazine fed semi-automatic gas-operated rotating bolt battle rifle. Chambered for 7.62x51 Nato. Barrel Length 22 Inches, etc...

Dice rolls ensue, etc...

[Aigre Excalibur]

Now i'm thinking about how to model combat:

I see combat modelling as a split between quantifiable and non-quantifiable dimensions.

Theoretical firepower is quantifiable. As is things like standardized testing of fire-arm proficiency and fitness

Non-quantifiable aspects are things like morale, cohesion and other aspects of "training"

Theoretical firepower can also be matched against staying power. And staying power is often modeled as the elusive "hitpoints" quality or as a probability of incapacitation...

[Man of Paper]

For an arms race revolving around biohorrors in the same vein as resident evil which of the following does the public prefer?

Symmetrical: Both corporations are responsible for creating and fielding these monsters to cause fear in the public which nets the teams resources depending on who controls the sector and the level of fear. To counter fear, teams also deploy security forces to neutralize opposing biohorrors, or their own should a situation require it.

Asymmetrical: One side takes up creating and deploying biohorrors in an attempt to destabilize governments across the globe, netting Biomass for their actions. The other side is responsible for combating these horrors and tracking down and eliminating the lab. This would run similarly to an XCom arms race.


I have no preference either way, so I leave it to the public to decide which ruleset to focus on.

[dgr11897]

Asymmetrical: One side takes up creating and deploying biohorrors in an attempt to destabilize governments across the globe, netting Biomass for their actions. The other side is responsible for combating these horrors and tracking down and eliminating the lab. This would run similarly to an XCom arms race.

Personally, I like the asymmetrical version,

[Failbird105]

For an arms race revolving around biohorrors in the same vein as resident evil which of the following does the public prefer?

Symmetrical: Both corporations are responsible for creating and fielding these monsters to cause fear in the public which nets the teams resources depending on who controls the sector and the level of fear. To counter fear, teams also deploy security forces to neutralize opposing biohorrors, or their own should a situation require it.

Asymmetrical: One side takes up creating and deploying biohorrors in an attempt to destabilize governments across the globe, netting Biomass for their actions. The other side is responsible for combating these horrors and tracking down and eliminating the lab. This would run similarly to an XCom arms race.


I have no preference either way, so I leave it to the public to decide which ruleset to focus on.

I'd be okay with either, but Asymmetrical would make the two teams arsenals unique from eachother by its very nature.

Either way though I'd be tossing out Infectonator zombies.

[Rockeater]

I prefer symmetric

[Kashyyk]

I prefer symmetric

Me too.

[Failbird105]

Eh, I don't particularly mind. Having the two teams be symmetrical would be good as well. Of course the question is how would the designing and rolling aspects work. Like, would the teams get a design for both their bioterror and security team, or just one and they have to decide which to use it on?

[Man of Paper]

If it's symmetrical there'd be two actions a phase, one for the biohorror and one for the fireteams. I thought maybe make people pick, but then it could just call into asymmetric without the asymmetrically balanced ruleset

[FallacyofUrist]

The thing is if you do asymmetric nobody will join the biohorror side because they know I'm a part of it. So do symmetric. Unless you want a 3 person team.

[Man of Paper]

Though perhaps that'd draw more people to it, since it seems some people thrive on shooting down some of your more felid plans.

[Kashyyk]

I'd be okay with a 3 man team, means I could actually keep up with the discord, and my designs have a higher statistical chance of winning

[RoseHeart]

What is a good source material to reference (with details on how to run an arms race)?

[NUKE9.13]

What is a good source material to reference (with details on how to run an arms race)?

I mean, if you want to run an AR, I'd recommend participating in a bunch first, to build experience with the genre.

[RoseHeart]

I am not going to run an arms race.

I just want see that material.