Mobile Frame Zero: Dog Fight

Post and discuss your custom / house rules for the MFZ: Rapid Attack.
Forum rules
This is a game - This is fun - All of your posts should reflect this.

Mobile Frame Zero: Dog Fight

Postby VitorFaria » Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:21 pm

Work in Progress

I've been toying with the idea of developing a dog fighter game out of MF0, so here are my first ideas:

Movement


You need to allocate a green or white die to move, the higher the number, the more maneuvers you can use.

The maneuvers are separated into six groups, grouped by how much each maneuver "costs".

Image

Each maneuver is only shown to the right, but the leftward equivalent is, of course, also available.

Examples:
With a six you can choose whatever maneuver you want, with a three all from top row, with a one, just the first group.

Each fighter is forced to move at least one unit forward each turn. Even if no die is allocated to movement.

The blue hinges are the "zeroth" markers, marking the place the fighter would end last turn.

Red hinges marks places where a fighter can optionally move 180 degrees after traveling, costing its spotting abilities for the turn.

Fighters fly on top of 4x4 bases. Facing matters. Example:

Image

After a maneuver is chosen, the player must declare it and perform it completely, as long as the fighter isn't blocked by other object. Clarification: fighters can pass completely through each other and through Space Debris if possible, the blocked state happens only if the end of the maneuver is impossible without overlapping.

A fighter can be blocked by Space Debris or other fighters. In that case, it can't attack the object it is touching, and it loses the ability to spot for that turn.

Engagement and Attack Systems

Using the three main ranged weapon types, each fighter may only attack on its forward arc (90º V shape in front of it, can be measured with a ruler).

Forward arc, ranged weapon types:
  • 0 to 2 units, burst-fire range, hits 4 to 6 on damage dice.
  • 2 to 8 units, direct-fire range, hits 5 to 6 on damage dice.
  • 8 above, support range, hits 5 to 6 on damage dice.

A fighter can mount a new ranged weapon system type, the turret, it can strike 360 degrees, medium range (2 to 8 units), but each attack can cause only one damage if it hits (5 to 6 on damage dice). Example: a fighter throws four damage dice after a turret strike, it results on [3, 6, 5, 2], despite scoring two hits, the opposing fighter only loses one system.

Optional rule suggested by Joshua: Turrets can hit more than once, like the other weapons, but only on a 6 on damage dice. Example: Result [3, 6, 5, 2] is one damage, [1, 1, 6, 3, 6, 5, 6] is two damages.

SSRs are just like RA, but may only strike on the forward arc.

Every fighter is implied to carry a concealed, low yeld, burst weapon somewhere, so they can all strike at burst range with white dice.

Systems: General

All playable pieces will be conventionally called Fighters in this document, but they don't need to be represented by something actually looking like a fighter craft.

Fighters can only mount up to three systems, but get a free green d6. There's no green d8 for using only close range weapons.

System powers are just like RA, except having a dedicated green system (beyond the free green die), which cancels the negative effects of touching other fighters or Space Debris. You can have a second movement system beyond that, totaling three green d6, but having that grants no extra effect.

All powers that involve the text "one unit" in its RA ruling can have it replaced by "two units". Example: Double blue fighters can protect allies two units away from themselves.

Fighters can spot regardless of facing, following RA rules.

Cover and deployment

Cover and deployment rules from IO, replacing "assault range" with "four ruler units" for the placement of Space Debris.

All cover pieces will be conventionally called Space Debris in this document, but they don't need to be represented by something actually looking like space debris.

Turn Order

Like RA, except that movement must happen before attacking.

Station Capture

Static stations, like in RA, but can be captured from two units away, instead of one.

Everything not explicitly stated to be different, can be assumed to be just like RA.
"For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love." Carl Sagan
User avatar
VitorFaria
Mod Team
 
Posts: 2486
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:21 am
Location: Belo Horizonte, Brazil

Re: Mobile Frame Zero: Dog Fight

Postby schoon » Wed Sep 12, 2018 11:34 am

What a great concept!

Of course, I immediately think of WWII dog fighting as opposed to the IO variety.

Hmmm... How small CAN I make a WWII fighter aircraft in LEGO...
User avatar
schoon
Site Admin
 
Posts: 576
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:57 pm
Location: Oakland, CA

Re: Mobile Frame Zero: Dog Fight

Postby VitorFaria » Wed Sep 12, 2018 12:50 pm

Thanks a lot, schoon! Nice to see you around again!

Yeah, absolutely, WWII dog fighting dynamics is what this is supposed to evoke! I know it's not necessarily the most realistic approach, but it is the one most movies and video games I grew up with use, so I can't help it!

That being said, changing the maneuver set, one could adapt this into other movement conventions quite easily.
"For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love." Carl Sagan
User avatar
VitorFaria
Mod Team
 
Posts: 2486
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:21 am
Location: Belo Horizonte, Brazil

Re: Mobile Frame Zero: Dog Fight

Postby Francisco Duarte » Wed Sep 12, 2018 1:08 pm

Greta concept! I have been thinking of something similar myself, albeit set in 1970's Cold War.

Originally I was mostly interested in using IO's movement rules and adapt the construction rules, but this may provide me some options. I really like it.
Francisco Duarte
Chatty
 
Posts: 81
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2018 5:47 pm

Re: Mobile Frame Zero: Dog Fight

Postby David Artman » Wed Sep 12, 2018 1:25 pm

Neat ideas here!
Suggestion: Allow SSRs to fire into the rear 90º V-arc as well. Not both front and rear; only one or the other, declared as part of loadout.
User avatar
David Artman
Talkative
 
Posts: 142
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2012 12:17 pm
Location: Durham, NC, USA

Re: Mobile Frame Zero: Dog Fight

Postby VitorFaria » Wed Sep 12, 2018 6:50 pm

Thanks a lot, folks!

Back firing SSRs is an interesting suggestion, may I ask what inspired you to make this suggestion?
"For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love." Carl Sagan
User avatar
VitorFaria
Mod Team
 
Posts: 2486
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:21 am
Location: Belo Horizonte, Brazil

Re: Mobile Frame Zero: Dog Fight

Postby David Artman » Thu Sep 13, 2018 11:06 am

VitorFaria wrote:Back firing SSRs is an interesting suggestion, may I ask what inspired you to make this suggestion?

I was imagining scenarios like blockade running, where one would favor speed and defense and have a 'back'-up SSR in case someone gets too close on your 6.
User avatar
David Artman
Talkative
 
Posts: 142
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2012 12:17 pm
Location: Durham, NC, USA

Re: Mobile Frame Zero: Dog Fight

Postby VitorFaria » Thu Sep 13, 2018 7:24 pm

David Artman wrote:I was imagining scenarios like blockade running, where one would favor speed and defense and have a 'back'-up SSR in case someone gets too close on your 6.


I see, it totally makes sense! I was thinking about introducing some kind of bomb mechanic but that may suffice!
"For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love." Carl Sagan
User avatar
VitorFaria
Mod Team
 
Posts: 2486
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:21 am
Location: Belo Horizonte, Brazil

Re: Mobile Frame Zero: Dog Fight

Postby Francisco Duarte » Sat Sep 15, 2018 11:13 am

Yeah, I think I will base my own fighter simulation mod on these rules. They are really neat and way more mature than what I had in mind.

One thing that I may do different for movement is the influence of the extra green systems. I was thinking that if you have one movement system you would be allowed to either make a 90º turn at the end of the movement assuming you have moved at least 3 units, or make a snap shot which allows you to strike any unit in front of the fighter (everything on the side of the table forward of where the fighter stands and not just the 90º cone in front of it). If you have two movement systems you can do both things (first the 90º turn and then the snap shot).

I have other things in mind. Given time i'll probably just make my own post, but I'm glad you came with this first, gives me something to build from for what I have in mind.
Francisco Duarte
Chatty
 
Posts: 81
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2018 5:47 pm

Re: Mobile Frame Zero: Dog Fight

Postby VitorFaria » Sat Sep 15, 2018 3:58 pm

Thanks again, Francisco!

Can't wait to read your version!

I had similar ideas, but I want to test the bare basics before considering adding more complexity. If all goes as planned I'm going to perform my first tests tomorrow!
"For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love." Carl Sagan
User avatar
VitorFaria
Mod Team
 
Posts: 2486
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:21 am
Location: Belo Horizonte, Brazil

Re: Mobile Frame Zero: Dog Fight

Postby VitorFaria » Mon Sep 17, 2018 9:10 pm

"For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love." Carl Sagan
User avatar
VitorFaria
Mod Team
 
Posts: 2486
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:21 am
Location: Belo Horizonte, Brazil

Re: Mobile Frame Zero: Dog Fight

Postby VitorFaria » Wed Sep 26, 2018 6:02 pm

Updated the cover rules slightly, so more Space Debris can be placed on the table.
"For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love." Carl Sagan
User avatar
VitorFaria
Mod Team
 
Posts: 2486
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:21 am
Location: Belo Horizonte, Brazil

Re: Mobile Frame Zero: Dog Fight

Postby Joshua A.C. Newman » Wed Sep 26, 2018 6:46 pm

Why not just make turrets hit on a 6? Results are gonna be really similar, but without adding a new rule structure.

Shouldn’t an Immelmann/half loop require less forward motion, not more? Perhaps you have to have the whole way clear, but wind up facing backward only halfway along the ruler.

Since you have facing, you can have a rudimentary relative motion rule. If you’re facing someone’s tail, hits are 4+. Facing their face, 5+. At Burst range shooting at the side (the only time you’ll be unequivocally facing the side), 6+.

I suggest making the green a required system, not a free die. That way, you can take engine damage. That can work with this rule: when you move 0, you stall. That means you lose a white die for the next round. It also means you can do the thing where someone in hot pursuit jams by you.

What these rules are missing is a way to fool your opponent. Dogfighting is about knowing where your opponent is going to be next, and you can only outguess someone if they can hide their intentions. Wings of War and X-Wing handle this to different degrees. X-Wing makes it 10% simpler for a 50% reduction of fun strategy. Wings of War, on the other hand, is the most perfect dogfight game I’ve ever played.
User avatar
Joshua A.C. Newman
MFZ:RA Game Designer
 
Posts: 1571
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 12:16 pm

Re: Mobile Frame Zero: Dog Fight

Postby VitorFaria » Wed Sep 26, 2018 7:10 pm

I'm honored to read from you here, Joshua!

Here are some clarifications:

Joshua A.C. Newman wrote:Why not just make turrets hit on a 6? Results are gonna be really similar, but without adding a new rule structure.


I didn't want to make a turret destroying a fully loaded fighter in one shot unlikely, I wanted to make it utterly impossible. I will post a more detailed commentary about that later.

Joshua A.C. Newman wrote:Shouldn’t an Immelmann/half loop require less forward motion, not more? Perhaps you have to have the whole way clear, but wind up facing backward only halfway along the ruler.


Your green dice number is not an abstraction of forward motion, but of luck, skill, spatial awareness, etc. A 6 maneuver is not supposed to be necessarily harder than a 1 maneuver. That also explains why every sideways move is 4 or lower.

Basically, with a higher number you have more options, but I didn't want all the "good" options to be way too hard to achieve.

Also, turning around is not necessarily an Immelmann here. You can use your imagination to wonder whatever crazy move the ship made to get there, the rules only really "care" about the end position anyway, I love to imagine some crazy Battlestar Galactica style "actually turning around out of nowhere which is actually slightly more newtonianly correct but looks cool anyway" type of move myself.

Joshua A.C. Newman wrote:Since you have facing, you can have a rudimentary relative motion rule. If you’re facing someone’s tail, hits are 4+. Facing their face, 5+. At Burst range shooting at the side (the only time you’ll be unequivocally facing the side), 6+.


I'm trying to keep things simpler for now, but that's an interesting suggestion.

Joshua A.C. Newman wrote:I suggest making the green a required system, not a free die. That way, you can take engine damage. That can work with this rule: when you move 0, you stall. That means you lose a white die for the next round. It also means you can do the thing where someone in hot pursuit jams by you.


I wanted to make fighters more fragile, so I gave them one less "life point". I guess I could do that and make the whole game "shootier" to compensate.

Joshua A.C. Newman wrote:What these rules are missing is a way to fool your opponent. Dogfighting is about knowing where your opponent is going to be next, and you can only outguess someone if they can hide their intentions. Wings of War and X-Wing handle this to different degrees. X-Wing makes it 10% simpler for a 50% reduction of fun strategy. Wings of War, on the other hand, is the most perfect dogfight game I’ve ever played.


I shifted where the hidden variable is, but it's still here. Your opponent know where your ship is, but they won't know if they will have enough green to make the exact maneuver to counter yours.

In the games you mentioned, you have magically perfect flying pilots that can fly where they want pretty much always, but have to guess where their opponent will go. Here we have flawed pilots that have a pretty good idea of where their opponents are going.

I'm not here to claim one is better or more realistic than the other, but the later is easier to implement on top of RA, so here we are.
"For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love." Carl Sagan
User avatar
VitorFaria
Mod Team
 
Posts: 2486
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:21 am
Location: Belo Horizonte, Brazil

Re: Mobile Frame Zero: Dog Fight

Postby Joshua A.C. Newman » Wed Sep 26, 2018 7:43 pm

Any principled design decision is stronger than most game design decisions!
User avatar
Joshua A.C. Newman
MFZ:RA Game Designer
 
Posts: 1571
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 12:16 pm

Re: Mobile Frame Zero: Dog Fight

Postby VitorFaria » Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:16 pm

Thanks, Joshua!

I decided to give your suggestions some more time to digest.

About the turret thing, I have played RA enough times to know that, with good enough spotting and low enough defense, having 9+ damage dice is not that rare, and I wanted turrets to be unable to capitalize on that, and actually avoid being spent on way too high damage dice throws.

The direct-fire weapon is still supposed to be the work-horse weapon, and I don't want turrets to outshine it. And frankly, I played enough X-Wing to know that a "turret first meta" can be somewhat frustrating.

Still, your "hit on 6" suggestion might offer some interesting variance, so I'll add as an optional rule.

I also thought deeply about your "green can be damaged" suggestion, and despite loving the idea of representing engine damage, had to decide against it, since it clashes with a future rule expansion I'm planning on (which you had no way of knowing, of course). If you absolute must represent engine damage, throw some extra green systems in!
"For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love." Carl Sagan
User avatar
VitorFaria
Mod Team
 
Posts: 2486
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:21 am
Location: Belo Horizonte, Brazil

Re: Mobile Frame Zero: Dog Fight

Postby Francisco Duarte » Thu Oct 04, 2018 9:50 am

One thing I've always contemplated regarding the '68 mod is that the first white damage is the engine, and the second one the structure, meaning that when you only have one white die you're gliding in that last few seconds before the plane disintegrates. I do like the floating green d6, though, as I think it works well conceptually.

I do like the stall idea, though, as it would be one way to either fool your opponent or shuffle your options a little. I would add that if you decide not to move at all you won't be able to attack in that turn either, on top of losing one white die on the next turn for that model.

However, Vitor, I would urge you to avoid adding too many rules, or at least make them organically fit the general rule set and be easily understood, as I think that is one of the great advantages of MFZ - it is easy to understand and play, but challenging to master.

Just my two cents. I still adore the initiative (wouldn't be making my own take on it if I didn't).
Francisco Duarte
Chatty
 
Posts: 81
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2018 5:47 pm

Re: Mobile Frame Zero: Dog Fight

Postby VitorFaria » Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:41 pm

Francisco Duarte wrote:One thing I've always contemplated regarding the '68 mod is that the first white damage is the engine, and the second one the structure, meaning that when you only have one white die you're gliding in that last few seconds before the plane disintegrates. I do like the floating green d6, though, as I think it works well conceptually.


That makes sense, I like this line of reasoning!

Francisco Duarte wrote:I do like the stall idea, though, as it would be one way to either fool your opponent or shuffle your options a little. I would add that if you decide not to move at all you won't be able to attack in that turn either, on top of losing one white die on the next turn for that model.


Frankly I don't like it all that much, I don't want players to abuse such rule to turtle over cover, fighters should be always moving at least one unit, in my book. Without that it kinda kills the illusion that they're flying, but I know this is a subjective opinion.

Francisco Duarte wrote:However, Vitor, I would urge you to avoid adding too many rules, or at least make them organically fit the general rule set and be easily understood, as I think that is one of the great advantages of MFZ - it is easy to understand and play, but challenging to master.

Just my two cents. I still adore the initiative (wouldn't be making my own take on it if I didn't).


Thanks! Don't worry, I'll keep it simple for now, at least until I'm super confident that the base game works I won't start adding too much complexity over it.
"For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love." Carl Sagan
User avatar
VitorFaria
Mod Team
 
Posts: 2486
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:21 am
Location: Belo Horizonte, Brazil


Return to Fan Created Rules

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest