Frame Damage and Skip Points

[pinecone]

He's probably laughing at the fact that anyone would take skip points on frame...

That was a joke, don't take offense. But honestly, why would anyone want to do the DAC that way? It just doesn't make sense.

[DirkSJ]

He's probably laughing at the fact that anyone would take skip points on frame...

There are a few times when you would want to.

(edit removed terrible bad example that was invalid)

[pinecone]

Yes, but if you're already skipping on the DAC, you probably are not in good shape anyway, and you could use frame in place of damage when, not if, it comes.

[storeylf]

I think Dirks point is that the rule is in fact part of the main rules, it is a normal part of the 'primary' damage allocation rules that you can if you want take any skip as a frame. It isn't an alternative or secondary allocation rule. At any point I can choose to take a frame instead of a skip using the one and only damage allocation procedure. I might choose to do that if I see that a bit further down the chart I will lose a torp if I skip (for example) that isn't covered under the 'last box of type' exception. But I can't see why anyone would use it otherwise.

Taking skips as frame as a standard mechanism certainly does seem to hurt some empires/ships more than others - A D7 goes pop noticeably earlier than a fed CA. In fact damage that would not normally quite count as a cripple can realistically pop a D7. Whereas the CA doesn't hit more than tiny fraction of 1 percent chances before critical point.

[storeylf]

He's probably laughing at the fact that anyone would take skip points on frame...

There are a few times when you would want to. For example say they directed targeted weapons and it's down to the last couple hits of the volley and you don't want to lose another weapon. You might take a couple skips on frame to be safe.

Well actually if it is directed any skips are lost anyway, so no need to take anything. On the other hand, if it wasn't directed and you could see a weapon coming up if you took the skip, then maybe the frame is better, just as taking frame instead of the last of a DAC type.

[DirkSJ]

He's probably laughing at the fact that anyone would take skip points on frame...

There are a few times when you would want to. For example say they directed targeted weapons and it's down to the last couple hits of the volley and you don't want to lose another weapon. You might take a couple skips on frame to be safe.

Well actually if it is directed any skips are lost anyway, so no need to take anything. On the other hand, if it wasn't directed and you could see a weapon coming up if you took the skip, then maybe the frame is better, just as taking frame instead of the last of a DAC type.

You are right; my example was terrible.

[terryoc]

Wedge, it's not an "alternate way to do the DAC". It's a tactical choice, you may choose to take the skip point as Frame, or not, every time you have a skip point that is eligible to be scored on Frame. You can do it that way to absorb a hit that would otherwise hit something you didn't want disabled.

Oh, and it should be noted that you can't take a skip point on Frame if there is no frame remaining, so you can't blow up the ship that way.

[wedge_hammersteel]

I was going to post but thought why am I wasting my time....my apologies to everyone...I'm out.

[Scoutdad]

I'll follow-up Burt's non-post with a few thoughts:
1) I have played Fed Comm with Burt and his group. They are very talented players and it required every trick I cpould pull out of a hat just to maintain pace with them:
[You can see the write-up here.]
2) Applying "skips" to the frame is a valid use ofthe DAC allowed by (3E1a) and there are many times when tactically speaking, it is advantageous to do this. One good example was posted: Say both of your Photons are OL'ed and you're at range 9, but next Impulse you'll be closer. If the final damage point to be scored is Torp... then taking a frame is a good option.
3) Battlegroup Acadiana is well aware that this method is... whatever you choose to call it: altenate, optional, secondary, etc. They; as a group choose to play this way to speed the game along. Yes, they are aware that not everyone plays that way and when we were at CoastCon and at Origins - there was never any question as to which damage allocation method was in force. We used the "standard" (for lack of a better term) method of damage allocation. Although they did mention that they used the alternate method - which led to a lively discussion of the various ramifications of that process. There was no animosity directed toward either side of the discussion, just a straight forward discussion. In fact, after the return from CoastCon - Plasmaboy and I played a couple of games using this system. Yep. they were much faster... but we didn't enjoy them as much. Perhaps it came from our SFB background, but it seemed the ships (especially the smaller ships) blew up waaay too fast. But again, that was just our opinion.

[Doublesixjunkie]

Thank You MJ.

Why couldn't it be written in the rules that way?

Also the guys can get quite passionate about the rules. Good debate, but its an option per skip point by my reading, but house rules are house rules.

I was actually getting it all wrong. i was saving up the skip points until the end of damage allocation, then rolling again and applying the skip hits to the new chart just rolled. If they then skipped again, i treated it as Frame damage. Completely wrong, but I did it that way until I got the Revised 5th edition rules and re-read them from cover to cover. I then went ooops, checked my 4th edition rules and had read them totally incorrectly.

It helps to read, then reread, then rereread the rules.

[mjwest]

Thank You MJ.

You are welcome.

Why couldn't it be written in the rules that way?

Because writing rules like that will always be a delicate balance. Sometimes things that are very simple an clear in your head can be extremely difficult to write so that they are simple and clear to everyone else. So, if it had been written to be clear for you, then someone else would be struggling with them. Weird how that works.

[DirkSJ]

3) Battlegroup Acadiana is well aware that this method is... whatever you choose to call it: altenate, optional, secondary, etc.

The contention (and thus most of this thread) comes from the fact that this is a houserule, not an "alternate damage allocation method that is in the rulebook" as was being claimed. The rulebook never endorses or outlines this method as an accepted alternate. In fact it specifically forbids forcing skips to frame.

If someone wants to use a houserule; they should use a houserule. It's their game. But don't try to say the actual rulebook suggests or supports it as an official alternate or variant.

[malleman]

Why should there be a contention? Is this a hostel board? I participate here because for the most part I enjoy everyone's company, not to argue, but to relax and have fun. Burt’s original post was not meant for you to have a "contention" with. Sometimes it is better not to say anything, if you can't say it in a positive way. Please try some social skills and be constructive and contribute, not argumentative. Imagine that we are friends, would you talk to a friend that way? Instead of dissecting a member's post, why don't you give examples of games you have played with your friends so that we can all enjoy, such as my friend Scoutdad.

Matt

[mjwest]

Guys, chill. This isn't worth arguing about.

The original question has been answered, and the drifting conversation is at a good ending point.