The space wargame I play is rather ambiguous on that, as an infinite number of ships can fit in 1 hex (technically).

Also, battles are far more likely to be in empty space, as a battle in an asteroid field might include one asteroid, probably not much bigger than a ship at best. Ship battles would probably be no closer to the planet than a high long-term orbit, due to ships not being built for trans-atmospheric operation.

Anyway,
The thing I would do when making a mini is to avoid scale entirely and put however much detail you want to on it and say "this is how big it is." Especially if it's the type to range from fighter to dreadnought.

Don't bother even trying to do this on any sort of realistic scale unless you want to play with match-heads on a football field.

>>2435536
>>2435554

They're right, bro.

If you want to do realistic scale, you'd be using a pinhead to push your scouts while you use both of your hands to move your massive command ships, etc.

Like >>2435536 said, make a different range of sizes and just have a reference to how big they actually are.

Attack Vector: Tactical seems to do alright with its 1:3000 scale.

>>2435536
Here.

Pictures and Maptool makes anything work, also. Over the internet!

Er, also, two things to add:

#1: I'm not going the ogre battle route of models bigger than they are in reality at the moment.
#2: I am considering throwing up the semi-finished game for public ridicule/criticism once I finish. I'm even pondering a little public wiki for fluff and stuff. Just need to find a good server first. Copyright laws for the finished thing apply as usual - though I don't give a shit if it catches on (yeah right) and people make their own factions and designs.

Though it's really too early for that.

Core ideas at the moment:
* Preserve a feeling of real space (though 3d movement is virtually impossible in tabletop and doesn't add much - there will be some things which have to do with three dimensions though). Real world physics is considered when creating the rules - if simplified.
* The units should be semi-customizable with basic skeletons having options for armament etc.
* Strategy has a place in the tabletop battles, not only through the forces purchased and terrain chosen, but another factor.
* The game shouldn't be too complex to play, but give a goodly range of tactical options.
* Time is a relevant - what factions are around and what units can be used depend on the time period.
* To carry on from the previous point, the game starts at relatively primitive technology/times and moves forward. The conflicts have results which influence future conflicts - as an example: 1000 battle results are required to see the winner in the first interstellar war. After this, a result is record and specific battles are added to a timetable to show the ebb and flow of the war.

Some of the stuff considered. Anything which stands out as good/bad?

>>2435567
Hm... Well, fighters I was going to circuimvent the problem somewhat with having them in swarms rather than single ships.

Probes and scouts though... Hrm.

>>2435634

> After this, a result is record and specific battles are added to a timetable to show the ebb and flow of the war.

I love this idea, I was actually starting to write up a table top system/RPG with this guideline but you have a better grasp. Love it.

>>2435634
So it's a campaign thing? I may highjack the campaign system, I use Starmada for the tactical battles, it's a nicely streamlined and highly customizable system.

Also, space terrain will be very limited. Dense terrain distribution will only be found in non-natural areas and dense clouds of gas/small particles (i.e. comet tail, planetary ring, debris field, Karos Graveyard)

the problem with scale in space games.

>>2435669
Kind of a campaign system, yeah. I was actually going for a "players playing the game around the world send in their results, just note the wins and losses down at first, cap at 1000 battles, the rest of the battles in that war unfortunately had no effect on the outcome. Specific battles are added as a summary in the timeline as time is available" kind of deal. But considering the odds of it catching on is low (for one I don't consider myself a good modeller) I'll throw in a campaign system for it. The campaign system should be fairly easy to separate from the tabletop system on most accounts. The difficult bits is where the strategic elements interlock with the campaign system. It's pretty simple though. I'll just throw an example in (writing it up on the spot):

Strategic advantage: Infiltrators/Mutiny. Cost: x points.
Rules/Description: Infiltrators have take up key positions in one of the enemy fleet's ships. At a given signal (declared by the player during one of his turns), show this advantage to your foe and roll. Add x to the value. Remove relevant factors (such as ship defenses, counter-intelligence strategic factor, et all) from the result, and compare to the ship's Command value. If above, the ship now has a Command score equal to the amount the score was above the original Command. It may be controlled by flag ships as per normal.
(You buy it with points as a card and keep it upside down. There may or may not be limits on the number of strategic advantage cards you may have).

>>2435785

This kind of thing happening is added in the records sent in, so it could look like this:
"2083, June 3rd: In the battle at Moon Cross, the Jovian Order suddenly revealed a trump card against the Combined Earth Alliance: Infiltrators had taken up key positions in the CEA flagship, and by some stroke of luck they managed to seize the ship, crippling it for the rest of the battle, throwing CEA forces into disarray and granting the JO a crushing victory."

Naturally, against anyone semi-competent in the rules the odds of this happening should be almost non-existant. Mind, I'm not at the balancing stage just yet.

1000 battles is probably too much, at least for starters.

Cheapass mode:

How about taking the boards and pins from the "Battleship" game and using the boards as a coordinate system to plot the locations of ships. You'd need a posterboard (or something) 3rd wall to do 3d movement.

All ships get to accelerate or coast every turn. Acceleration totals up as points. Coasting neither increases or decreases Acceleration points. Acceleration must be canceled by accelerating in the opposite direction to slow, stop, and then reverse course at one acceleration point per turn.
A ship cannot target (or be targeted by) another ship if it has more than 6 points of difference in Acceleration points.
If your ship and an enemy ship occupy the same coordinate they open fire (roll d6, higher roll destroys target ship), Opposing ships one coordinate off do damage at a (-opponents acceleration points) penalty.
This could probably use some tweaks for ships moving in the same direction, but is more complicated than I really care about.

Thoughts?

>>2435828
Like the Battleship pegs, but I don't feel like thinking about the rest.

>>2435828
Sounds fun. Not exactly what I'm going for (though I do have a similar mechanic on the coasting/acceleration thing written down), but overall seems like a simple basic game with parameters making it complex and adding depth depending on how those are changed.

>>2435894
Given the size of battleship boards, it's also a very small playing field.

Since the players would likely be keeping track of acceleration and direction with notepaper, it would also get very confusing/time consuming with more than, say, a dozen ships per side.

Give us the rough draft!

>>2435795
Well, yeah. At least if it's only like four people playing. I'll probably make a mini-campaign at like 10-20 battles in a conflict originating from space debris mining and disposal rights in Earth orbit, just to test the system and get bugs out. Scale would be a bit different from the regular game I guess, even a converted space U-hauler isn't gonna be as big as proper cruisers. Yes. Space trashmen. Flinging space garbage at eachother with modified rail guns normally used to transport raw material from Earth Orbit to Moon receiving stations.
... Shit, I know this will end in Kessler Syndrome either way.

>>2435914
You're right there.

>>2435924
>Give us the rough draft!
Erm... How about this weekend or so?

Provided I don't forget all about it because I'm busy playing FFXII, Kotor 2 or Odin Sphere or something...

First thing to keep in mind that there's a difference between the model scale and map scale. The models being the ships can be any scale you want. As for map scale most starship battle games use the map scale at 1 hex = 10,000km across. Which can also be 1inch = 10,000km.

At this map scale the models are only a representation of your ships, their location would be at the center of the base they stand on. Which is why in starship games you always measure the distance between the base posts.

Believe me, I've been a starship gamer for a long time.

>>2435828
This seems similar to CBT's system for aerospace combat.

how high of technology are you planning to use, like a collection of several different ship with little standardization or "LOL I has giant space battle fleet d00ds"

Most ship games use 1:1200