Tactics???

**Kronok** · 10-01-2002, 03:47 AM

What is "Tactics(Space)" and when would you use it? And while we are here, Tactics(Federation) vs. let's say Tactics(Romulan)?

Any examples would be cool.

**Lt Cmdr Matt** · 10-01-2002, 04:45 AM

Maybe as strategic operations officer, you might roll to see what tactics the Romulans might be using. If you pass you can say something like: They are going to attack, well maybe something more complicated but still

**Lancer** · 10-01-2002, 04:49 AM

Disclaimer: This is just my personal POV, so as always YMMV.

Tactics(Species X) would be used when rolling the initiative in a fight against a ship from species X. You know, things like "Looks like he is trying to pull the Babble maneuver on us, but I know just the way to avoid it."

Tactics (own species) could be used for any checks to execute a Command maneuver of your own ship.

Tactics(Space) sounds like a catch-all category that includes all of the above. Used as such it becomes rather silly IMHO - a Specialization that can be used for everything.

Rather than that I would used this Specialty for theoretical knowledge, i.e. someone who has studied space combat tactics (but lacks actual combat experience/training) would have this Specialty in my games.
Or you could look at it as a Specialty encompassing all kinds of maneuvers and tactics that are similar between (almost) all species, i.e. the underlying principles of space warfare. As such it would give you a good knowledge of what to do in a space battle, but not necessarily how to do it.

**Kronok** · 10-01-2002, 05:33 AM

Thanks guys.

Any chance of an "Official" answer from the PTBs???

**Doug Burke** · 10-01-2002, 06:23 AM

Lancer is pretty close to the mark in my estimation. Although I would say that Tactics (Space) would be a combination of his two different versions. Training in the intricacies of space combat and usable in place of other Specialties, but nowhere near as detailed as the other individual Specialties.

That would be my call as a narrator...

**Publius** · 10-01-2002, 08:37 AM

So how would you use it in actual practice? Keeping in mind the golden rule of course that any specific Narrator can choose to adjudicate the issue however they want without the Coda-Police crashing down their door.

Quote from Doug Burke
Training in the intricacies of space combat and usable in place of other Specialties, but nowhere near as detailed as the other individual Specialties.
(emphasis added)

In descending order: If it is 'usable for other specialities' is this a catch-all for other specializations, then why would you take the other specializations? If it is 'nowhere as detailed' does the Tactics (Spac) specialization only give a +1 to your skill? Is it only useful as a source of information but has no game effect on ship combat? Would you require this specializations to have any of the others? For Example: In order to get Cardassian or Romulan specializations you have to have Tactics (Space) or Tactics (Ground) to acquire the 'basics' for each.

**Lancer** · 10-01-2002, 08:38 AM

Doug, carefull with words like "useable in place of other Specialties".
This is just what some players are looking for to justify to their poor, overworked Narrators that "I have a Space Tactics Specialty, so I get to add +2 to any Tactics check during starship combat."

**Kronok** · 10-01-2002, 09:27 AM

Could the (Tactics) be another error that was missed when the "pre-game" changed? Similar to how the (Computer Invasion) was changed to (Hacking)?

**StyroFoam Man** · 10-01-2002, 09:27 AM

This message has been removed on request by the
poster

**qerlin** · 10-01-2002, 01:07 PM

Originally posted by StyroFoam Man
Captain Troi: Tactical Genuis!

How 'bout no, you crazy plastic bastard!

**Ensign Arrgh** · 10-01-2002, 01:19 PM

The advantage with specific species tactics could be deeper knowledge of that specie's tactic. DWS could be a good guide to specific naval tactics of other powers. I doubt a tactician with only space tactics and no specific knowledge of Romulan tactics would know what are the Mordet or Chel-Apek manoeuvers, but he could still have a slight chance of guessing approximately what they are up to due to his knowledge of Space tactics...

My two cents...

**StyroFoam Man** · 10-01-2002, 01:19 PM

This message has been removed on request by the
poster

**Ensign Arrgh** · 10-01-2002, 01:24 PM

The objective of the Troi manoeuver is basically to have the opponent completely distracted by making them laugh their ass off on their bridge due to the fact that the Federation's flagship is being commanded by a counsellor who doesn't even wear a uniform in service, while there is plenty of command personnel available around (btw, is it the crash landing in Generations, it's the only movie I haven't seen...)

**Doug Burke** · 10-02-2002, 06:26 AM

Publius, Lancer: It's more a matter of degree. The game effect may be somewhat similar, but the flavor is what counts. This is where what information the Narrator gives out comes in. Compare these descriptions:

Tactics (Space): "It looks like he will come around in an arc, firing weapons as they bear."

Tactics (Klingon): "He's in the opening stages of a classic Koloth's Hammer maneuver, which will bring him around closer so that all his weapons can pound the enemy until his his ground to dust!"

Same maneuver, different description. Which would you rather hear as a player?

A small sidenote: Personally, I feel that you should either have Tactics specialties by "terrain" (Ground, Space, etc.) or by "nationality" (Federation, Klingon, etc.), but not both. The only reason I try to rationalize having both is that in the NG, all the series characters who have the Tactics skill have Tactics (Space) and not any "national" specialties, yet the rules talk about using the "national" specialties in Starship Combat.

**Publius** · 10-02-2002, 07:51 AM

So I get a +2 either way, but a better description from one of them?

The problem then is scope. +2 for all space combat versus a +2 from combat with a specific race only. You are right in that the description is better, but that is entirely up to the Narrator and some have a flat style regardless of your specialties (especially as one sometime Narrator in our group has a more seat-of-the-pants style with little or no prep). I wonder which I'll choose as a player?

Thank you for the official word, I prefer to stick with the system rules but I am also a fanatic for balance. I also appreciate that you have taken the time out to comment Doug. However, there seems so little advantage to the race specialty that it makes the skill specialization effectively worthless. I think that I will have to institute a House Rule and either:

(A) Eliminate the "Space/Ground" terrain Specialties in my games completely as being too general; I'd eliminate the race specialties instead, but this provides greater variation between characters and is thus important.
(B) allow a total bonus of +3 to the base skill for having both the appropriate Racial and Terrain specialties; This just pushes the numbers higher.
(C) provide some other advantage for the Racial Specialties, such as a bonus manuever usable once per combat if they can win an opposed Tactics test at a dramatically appropriate point in combat (if the other side has the appropriate Federation/PC Crew specialty it would be much more even test of course).

My preference would actually be toward "C" as it adds an element of randomness to Ship Combat above and beyond what is already there. As this is a separate test, you might be on the loosing end of initiative and still have an "ace up your sleeve" because you recognize the pattern in their tactics from Cardassian Tactics 101 (As in remembering his Instructor shouting "I want you Apes to remember that if the Cardie jinks to the left in this manuver you are in a world of pain. So don't just sit there like an apple-faced tart: hit him here, here and here!").

Thread: Tactics???

Thread Tools

Tactics???

Posting Permissions