WC TacOps Game Manual v0.1 released

Sorry if the 'Sir' sounded formal, I'm British you see; brought up to think a sense of etiquette can sometimes be a good thing!

In any event, I have continued playtesting and working for the main systems in the game. Looking good, but some pretty major alterations are needed, and some big additions too. I do hope you won't mind me taking some time over this, the game has great potential and I really want to see it work!

I break down these into things to add, things to remove and some bigger issues (x3).


Things to add:

Dorkathi – Kilrathi have no ‘sports, and this really limits the games, especially in a campaign.

Rigakh – Kilrathi need something heavier than the Fralthra, and would add an extra dimension in a campaign.

Bengal OR Concordia – Confed could do with a mid-range carrier.

Confed have 5 fighters and Confed 4. Fine as it is, but would you consider adding a Gothri, or perhaps a Hriss? Maybe find a way to put a Strakha in?

The ability to fire AMGs at fighters. Sounds silly, but otherwise no-one is going to take destroyers given what a couple of torpedo-armed fighters will do to them. Make them highly inaccurate, obviously. See more below for Cap Ship armament questions!

Asteroid Marker (1 hex) :
Blocks Fire of guns and missiles, stops capital ships. Fighters may traverse, but on a dice roll of <4, take 20 damage. Modify the roll by Pilot Skill Target Roll characteristic. ie, Green pilots will take a hit on a roll of 3, Legendary Pilots never take a hit (Blair would never have died hitting a rock!)

Minefield Marker (1 hex) :
Blocks movement, ie no ship can traverse the hex, but guns and missiles may pass through normally.

Things to Remove:

Torpedo-carrying ability from Epee. Unnecessary, and open to abuse by spamming players!


Substantive Issue 1:

Fighter complement. This is going to be an absolutely critical part of the game. Infact, most battles at scenario or campaign level will depend on this somehow.

I know you wanted to keep the game as true to the original stats as possible, but leaving capacity as it is will make the game almost unplayable in terms of the sheer numbers of fighters involved. The Capacity of all Ships will therefore have to be changed, maybe to something like the following (see included my proposals for the ‘new’ ships)

Gilgamesh: 0
Waterloo: 12 / 2
Bengal or Concordia: 24 / 4
Confederation: 36 / 6

Supply Depot: 6 / 2
Star Base: 18 / 6
Sector Base: 30 / 6

Could call ‘squadrons’ as being 6 fighters maybe and then have 2 for a Waterloo, 4 for a Bengal etc.

Ralatha: 8 / 2
Fralthra: 16 / 4
Rigakh: 32 / 6

Supply Depot: 8 / 2
Sector Base: 40 / 6

Of course, Kilrathi would have 8 fighters per squadron – they use base 8 right?

I’d then have each carrying vessel, both Confed and Imperial, launch fighters in pairs, obviously the ‘wings’ that give the game the name (could do a tie in like this in the manual).

So each vessel could launch x-fighters, at any point in its movement phase. The number after the stroke would be this figure.

This would similarly apply to the recovery of fighters, ie. Recovery would count towards the second total. Recovered fighters would then be instantly repaired (if using the unseen component damage rules) and re-armed with missiles and torps. Then they must wait in the ‘queue’ to be launched again.

Thus, when buying a ‘fleet’, players are to purchase ships and fighters seperately. This will become relevant in the ‘crew and experience’ section below. No more fighters can be purchased than you have spaces in the fleet.
The EXCEPTION is the Confed Broadsword, which is jump-capable over short distances and so may be taken ‘deadfall’, ie. Without a carrier.

In a simple single battle, this costs an additional 1 point per ship.

In a campaign, this extra cost is not incurred as the ship is restricted to ‘2 jumps’. If the Broadsword is ‘left behind’ by capships while it has no jumps remaining, it will be "Endlessly drifting" along with any jump incapable fighters left behind.


Substantive Issue 2:

Pilot skills kill ratio. I'd change this to;

Green: 0
Regular: 2
Veteran: 6
Ace: 12
Legendary: 20

Much more suited to the type of medium-scale engagements that this game will turn towards.

However, this is still problematic. Unless playing a campaign, upgrades to skill ‘by kills’ are not really likely to matter. I suggest using the squadron system above, and tying in to points cost.

Skill level can be purchased per squadron on board. Default is ‘Green’. Pilots cannot be upgraded to ‘legendary’, and kills will start at 0 for the squadron if experience is ‘bought’, as better training is never truly equal to combat experience (Besides, better trained pilots should accumulate kills at a higher rate anyway). Ships can have a mixture of experiences within their squadrons.

Confed:
Upgrade to Regular Squadron: 3 pts
Upgrade to Veteran Squadron: 6 pts
Upgrade to Ace Squadron: 12 pts

Kilrathi:
Upgrade to Regular Squadron: 4 pts
Upgrade to Veteran Squadron: 8 pts
Upgrade to Ace Squadron: 16 pts

Crews can be shifted from one fighter to another in mid battle, but both crews must be onboard the same carrier at the same time, ie. both 'waiting' or just landed. This is done in the end phase.

You may want to remind players to keep a note of all the fighters they have, by squadron and by individual fighter. Otherwise no-one will ever kill their way to glory, even if they are gifted in combat. It might be quite fun to do anyway, give a squadron name and number or callsign to each pilot/crew!


Substantive Issue 3:

Turret positioning on Capship armament. If you’re allowing fire vs. fighters, this would make it much more interesting!:

B: Bow Arc, P: Port Arc, S: Stbd Arc, A: Aft Arc

Gilgamesh: 1x B/P, 1x B/S
Waterloo: 1x B; 1x B/P/A; 1x B/S/A; 1x All Round
Concordia: 2x B; 1x B/S; 1x B/P; 1x P; 1x S; 2x A (P-TC = straight line ahead only)

Ralatha: 1x B/P; 1x B/S
Fralthra: 1x B/P; 1x B/S; 1x All Round


And that's it. A lot, I know. But this game is brilliant and deserves time and effort being spent upon it.

Best wishes;

KvK
 
Hey Ironduke, I'm a long time wargamer who's recently rediscovered my love of Wing Commander. I'm really interested in your project- once I have the chance to read over the rules in detail I'll have some feedback, but they look good so far. If you're interested, the place to discuss tabletop starship gaming is at www.star-ranger.com/forum . I've already linked to this thread when I first found it, but if you posted it yourself looking for feedback I'm sure people would be willing to offer it.

-Will
 
@Kavok:
Wow - I can see you already put a lot of effort in writing this down. I'll take the time and answer in detail:

* Additional Dorkathi, Rigakh, Gothri/Hhriss, Strakha:
Apart from the Rigakh, I already got the stats done for all ships from WC1 and WC2, including some Armada, Privateer and WC3 craft. These will be published as Marc finishes more of his excellent 3D models - I'd personally like to see the Dorkathi finished next, but since it's Marc's time and effort we're talking about here, I really don't want to rush him.
The Strakha also belongs to the definite top-five of my personal "most wanted." ;)

* Additional Bengal, Concordia:
These are completely done, along with some other vessels from different eras. I guess I'll upload them, although I'm not entirely content with the naming (cf. Ranger, Tallahasse and Sheffield).

* Asteroids/Mines:
I don't have a marker for mine fields, but I got some nice asteroids. The rules will be a bit different, since there will be asteroids of different sizes doing different amounts of damage. Nebulae, draining shields and irritating sensors (double-blind rules?), will also be included.

* Torpedo-carrying Epee:
What about a compromise: While I won't completely remove it from the game, I'll split the Epee into two versions: One with the "bomber-loadout," and one with the standard armament. The torpedo-carrying Epee will probably cost 4 points instead of 3.

* Fighter complements:
Please keep in mind that you haven't seen the campaign rules of the game yet... :) I'm afraid I currently don't have the time to enhance the current version of the manual, but a great portion of the advanced rules are already jotted down, waiting to be rewritten for use in the game manual.
Larger engagements take place on a squadron-level instead of the "single fighter-level" described in the basic rules. However, I like the idea of limiting fighter launches and recoveries depending on the size of a ship's fighter bay(s).
(I learned that Confed squadrons consist of 10-15 fighters, btw.)

* Pilot skill (simple):
If we really decide to lower the required kills, I'd prefer to stay with WC's "ace" and "ace of aces" rating (5 and 25 kills). Something along the line of "Regular" (2), "Ace" (5), "Veteran" (15), "Legendary" (25).

* Pilot skill (point cost):
I've already created a chart where all point costs for ships and their respective crew skill levels are displayed. Again, that's something I haven't released yet, but it exists. ;)

* Pilot skill (campaign level):
Now that's another story. Here I'd like to use an "RPG-like" approach: Each pilot gets Promotion Points, which he can use to specialize in a certain class of fighter (light fighter, medium fighter, heavy fighter, bomber) or raise his proficiency in one of these skills. (There will also be other skills, like specializing in specific maneuvers or gun types).

* Capship armament:
I thought about fire arcs for capships, but ultimately dumped the idea - as I did with front/left/right/aft armor for all ships. I think it would hinder the game flow considerably, and I'd like to keep small-scale scenarios finishable in no more than 30 minutes, at least with the basic rules.

@wminsing:
I'll keep it in mind, although I'm not sure if the game is "presentable" to such a community in its current, rather unfinished, state. :confused:
 
UPDATE

Finally a few more goodies for anyone who wants to take WC: TacOps for a spin... :D

Terran Warships Pack:
  • 3x Sheffield-class destroyer
  • 1x Durango-class heavy destroyer
  • 1x Tallahassee-class cruiser
  • 1x Ranger-class light carrier
  • 1x Concordia-class fleet carrier
  • 1x Bengal-class strike carrier
Download Set: Terran Warships Pack

Damage Markers:
Assorted damage markers, ranging from 1 to 500 damage points.

Download Damage Markers

Missile Markers:
  • 18x DF missile marker
  • 9x HS missile marker
  • 11x FF missile marker
  • 11x IR missile marker
  • 9x torpedo marker
Download Missile Markers

Ship Markers:
A compilation of all ships currently featured by Wing Commander: Tactical Operations.
  • 4x Ferret patrol fighter
  • 2x Epee light fighter
  • 4x Rapier II medium fighter
  • 2x Sabre heavy fighter
  • 2x Broadsword bomber
  • 3x Clydesdale transport
  • 3x Sheffield-class destroyer
  • 1x Durango-class heavy destroyer
  • 1x Gilgamesh-class destroyer
  • 1x Talahassee-class cruiser
  • 1x Waterloo-class cruiser
  • 1x Ranger-class light carrier
  • 1x Concordia-class fleet carrier
  • 1x Bengal-class strike carrier
  • 1x Confederation-class dreadnought
  • 1x Refinery
  • 1x Confed supply depot
  • 1x Confed sector base
  • 6x Sartha light fighter
  • 6x Drakhri medium fighter
  • 2x Jalkehi heavy fighter
  • 2x Grikath bomber
  • 2x Kamekh-class corvette
  • 2x Ralatha-class destroyer
  • 2x Fralthra-class cruiser
  • 1x Kilrathi supply depot
  • 1x Kilrathi sector base
Download Ship Markers
 
I'll try and get the game to the other members of the Iowa State University Wargamers and Roleplayers Guild. There is a group that plays table-top wargames every weekend, and are always on the lookout for good, homebrewed systems. They will give honest responses.

One question I have is how are you going to deal with the changes in armour and weapons from one "era" of Wing Commander to another? According to all the ship documentation the Wing Commander 1 era ships have a lot less armour than their Wing Commander 3 versions and such. Me personally, I can't wait to see the Scimitar (yes, I'm probably in the extremely large minority there)
 
Love the game, just reading the rules now.

Question though, on the Ship cards the Durango is listed as having no fighters, despite the hanger deck. Maybe allowing 1 fighter to the ship?
 
One question I have is how are you going to deal with the changes in armour and weapons from one "era" of Wing Commander to another? According to all the ship documentation the Wing Commander 1 era ships have a lot less armour than their Wing Commander 3 versions and such. Me personally, I can't wait to see the Scimitar (yes, I'm probably in the extremely large minority there)
Actually, the WC3 ships fit in quite nicely. Their WC3 stats just represent the most "modern" variant at that time, yet we know the Hellcat and Arrow have been around a long time before their appearance in WC3. (We already saw one version of the Arrow in Armada, for example.)

The Scimitar will be really outdated, I can promise you that. It's official retirement was more than two decades ago, so the only Scimitars in WCTO would be found in Landreich and Border World fleets. (Just to give you a hint: Shields 8, Hull 22. Apart from the missile armament, a Ferret will outperform the good old Scim in every aspect in 2667.)

Question though, on the Ship cards the Durango is listed as having no fighters, despite the hanger deck. Maybe allowing 1 fighter to the ship?
The major problem here is: The ship depicted as being a Durango heavy destroyer is, in "reality," the BWS Intrepid - with its bridge already razed. (The Border Worlds basically took the TCS Delphi and improvised a flight deck.)
I don't think we've ever seen a "real" Durango, so WCTO's Durango is more or less a "bonus ship." You might still say the Durango only carries a shuttle in the visible part of its hangar. ;) (Honestly, though, it's one of the flaws I'm not exactly proud of - as with the naming of the Ranger, Sheffield and Tallahassee "classes.")
 
I'll keep it in mind, although I'm not sure if the game is "presentable" to such a community in its current, rather unfinished, state.

Don't worry about that- there's a game development section on the boards devoted to works-in-progress. And your presentation already looks pretty good, better then many other 'finished' freebie rules sets I could name.

-Will
 
UPDATE

As you might have noticed, Marc released his brand new Dorkathi model. That's why I updated WCTO's "Ship Markers" archive with the Kilrathi 'sport (see download link above). It also features prominently in the freshly added "Kilrathi Escort Pack," which is now available for download.

Kilrathi Escort Pack:
  • 3x Dorkathi-class transport
  • 1x Kamekh-class corvette
  • 2x Sartha light fighter
  • 2x Drakhri medium fighter
Download Set: Kilrathi Escort Pack
 
I don't think we've ever seen a "real" Durango, so WCTO's Durango is more or less a "bonus ship." You might still say the Durango only carries a shuttle in the visible part of its hangar. (Honestly, though, it's one of the flaws I'm not exactly proud of - as with the naming of the Ranger, Sheffield and Tallahassee "classes.")

We do see a real Durango -- the BWS Tango, in WC4. There's no raised bridge, just windows where there's charring on the Intreid model. Here's a picture: https://www.wcnews.com/ships2/images/4views/wc4durango2.png

(... also, don't despair, I believe we may have official names for the WC3 classes very soon;))
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Any more news on this project sir?
You bet! And great news, indeed: Mike-L is currently working on a C++ port for WC TacOps. He already sent me a preliminary version where the most basic functions were implemented (adding/deleting units, moving and rotating ships, scrolling...). I hope he gets to finish this project, because what I've seen so far was really looking good!

It'll be a multi-player game (via IP) with nice gimmicks such as parallax scrolling. While there won't be an AI, it'll come with a scenario editor which lets players create their own skirmishes.

As for the advanced rules: I guess I'll release some of these after I got some feedback from the PC game. I'd like to do a little more basic balancing before making the rules too confusing for the casual player. Of course, you're still welcome to playtest the tabletop variant with the basic rules in the meantime... ;)

@LOAF: Hm, never noticed the BWS Tango... Thanks for mentioning! But does that mean the Durango has a flight deck after all...? :eek:

(... also, don't despair, I believe we may have official names for the WC3 classes very soon;))
Are you alluding to WC Arena or is there anything else I missed? ;)
 
@LOAF: Hm, never noticed the BWS Tango... Thanks for mentioning! But does that mean the Durango has a flight deck after all...?

Oh, no, the Tango was another carrier conversion... it just lets us see that there's no "conning tower" bridge missing from the Intrepid (as some early fan art suggests).

Are you alluding to WC Arena or is there anything else I missed?

Oh, nothing you missed... I'm alluding to something Arena-related that people don't know about yet. :)
 
Oh, nothing you missed... I'm alluding to something Arena-related that people don't know about yet. :)
You're making me curious, and you darn well know it...! ;)

As for WCTO, you can expect to get a glimpse of what Mike-L is working on in the next 2-3 weeks.
 
Screenshot

Here's a glimpse of what I've been working on lately. I of course mean the computer version of WCTO. I'm nearly finishing the map editor and the major part of game engine at the same time. As soon as I fix some bugs in the editor, I'm going to release it to the public as a tech demo. Still there remains much to be done.
anyway here's a screenshot :

wcto.gif


All GUI elements were made in a hurry and there are to be replaced so please don't complain on that menu and font style yet (btw that box in right upper corner is a minimap) ;) More info coming soon.

edit : besides It's no an April Fool's Day joke , I'm really going to finish it ;)
 
Yes, I'm using mingw32 C++ compiler (one that comes together with DevC++ IDE) and SDL library (Simple Directmedia Layer) for graphics/mouse/keyboard support. SDL might not be top-performance but it's rather simple to use and it does it's job well. After all, running a 2D strategy game is not very demanding for the system. What is more it's a cross-system library so I'll be able to compile versions for Linux and MacOS as well.
 
Been looking this over, and I have a few questions.

(1) I'd thought mass drivers outranged neutron guns, particularily during the WC1-2 era.

(2) Is there a quick-n-easy conversion guide out there, for converting ships? I'm already craving adding ships from WC1 or Privateer; I've got some scenarios in mind...

(3) Campaign rules! Please!
 
Been looking this over, and I have a few questions.

(1) I'd thought mass drivers outranged neutron guns, particularily during the WC1-2 era.

(2) Is there a quick-n-easy conversion guide out there, for converting ships? I'm already craving adding ships from WC1 or Privateer; I've got some scenarios in mind...

(3) Campaign rules! Please!
(1) Yes, you're absolutely right, mass drivers had an effective range of 3,000 mrrs, while neutrons just shot as far as 2,500 mrrs. I took the freedom of rounding up the neutron gun's range since, in the concept of a hex game, you have to draw a line somewhere. You'll also notice that the Rapier II's speed is 5 in the hex game, while its actual max speed was 450 kps in WC2. Both are examples of compromises I had to accept while designing WCTO.

(2) Quick and easy: no. Quick and dirty: Perhaps. ;) However, I already converted all WC1 and Privateer ships to WCTO's stats, so I wouldn't worry too much about that. I can offer the stats as they are, but since I don't have renders of those ships, I haven't balanced them at all so far. (No point cost values given.)

(3) Yeah, I know... They're in my head, but that's that. Real life is sucking up my free time right now... Very sorry! :(
 
Back
Top