"5150 Star Navy Rules Review" Topic

Haven't played a full campaign yet but have been fiddling about with the rules and some GZG minis. Haven't played it enough to rate game balance, but here's a guide to the mechanics and overall feel of the game:

link

As usual, I hope someone found this helpful

Nice review. Look forward to a AAR and you opinion on them then.

I was hoping someone would give us a mechanics rundown. Thanks for doing this, well done!

Yeah, Ed hadn't even hinted at mechanics in his AARs. Given the review, they sound simple enough that he'd have given them away.

I'm also looking forward to somebody else's AAR, because either Ed is a really awful spaceship gamer, or the game consists of two forces slamming into each other head-on.

Fleets maneuver before they go into battle. Deciding where to go on the Campaign map, intercepting the enemy fleet on the way to their objective, etc.

That's the maneuvering a fleet does and all with the purpose of bringing the enemy fleet into battle with the best chance of winning.

In Star Navy you're the admiral of the fleet. Once the ships hit the table your job is to defeat the other fleet. The game was written with having 20+ ships per side. Your job as Admiral is to decide how to deploy, have an overall battle plan, and know when to break off the battle.

Maneuvering during the battle on a ship by ship basis is the job of the ship's Captain. If you want to maneuver each ship, turning, etc. then Star Navy would not be your first choice.

Thanks for taking the time to review the rules and looking forward to your AARs.

I like the idea of crew quality, but am thinking that the scope of this game is larger than I prefer for space gaming.

I've a done a little preliminary play of Star Navy and put a fairly extended discussion up on my blog:

link

Short version: Even as a THW fanboy I found it a bit rough around the edges and some of the editing leaves a lot to be desired, but the core mechanics have a lot of room to build on and it's definitely a generator of fun.

I think you need to view Star Navy as a complete package (i.e. campaign AND rules).

The battle resolution reminds me of a 4x PC game – it's pretty simple, and to be honest, I think it abstracts far too much. But that's not the primary focus of the game.

If you just buy it wanting an engine for one off clashes of small groups of ships, you will probably be disappointed. Unless you are a solo gamer, really keen on the crew-skill thing, or (like me) you dislike recording lots of hitboxes etc, Full Thrust is better.

It's not meant to be compared to Full Thrust – it is more akin to the fleet-level Starmada rules, with a campaign system attached.

If you only want to play "one off" games or with smaller amounts of ships, I suspect you'd be better off waiting for "5150: Fringe Space" which is more focussed on smaller groups of ships.

Whilst I am not defending the battle mechanics (and I think more "texture" could be added without compromising game speed), I recognise SN has gone that way, in order to facilitate campaign play.

Star Navy is not really a game about space battles, but rather a game of space campaigns. With almost no record keeping, you work towards victory conditions, crew skill improves or decreases, and you can lose and replace ships.

Kinda like the old Battlefleet Gothic campaigns, or a very simple space Mordhiem.

Most 4X board games and games (think Starfire) have become bloated monstrosities. Star Navy would allow you to play a series of linked battles in an evening.

You could view it as (a) a poor man's Full Thrust – or a (b) simple 4X campaign game you can actually play and finish in a reasonable time frame, with more pew-pewing than record keeping…

Sounds like it has a similar scope to the USE ME spaceship rules… which is favorable as far as I'm concerned.

Good analysis, Evilmonkeighe, with just one thing to note:
5150 Fringe Space also allows for campaign play, but with more record keeping (not unlike an RPG or a more in depth game of New Beginnings) and no ability to play 4x. At best you take part in 4x-ish stuff (like taking on colonization missions or war missions) and in fact for participating in large space wars the rules recommend using Star Navy to resolve them.

I like it, reminds me of a tabletop version of GDW's Imperium.

I am not sure I'm a fan of the "all weapons are the same" and 360 degree firing and unlimited ranges. Can anyone who has run few a few games of this let me know what they think?

For me, a space game with ship battles is so much more interesting with different weapon types with strengths, weaknesses, etc.

Okay, as this bubbled to the top again, two questions I never got around to asking:

5150 Fringe Space also allows for campaign play, …for participating in large space wars the rules recommend using Star Navy to resolve them.

How well does Star Navy mesh with Fringe Space? Mirror battle results?

You could view it as (a) [sorry, hardly seemed a fair comment] – or a (b) simple 4X campaign game

Is Star Navy a good candidate for a Full Thrust campaign system? Can you see converting FT points to SN builds? SN battle results to FT battle results?

The latter is a problem with many campaign systems: can you have reasonable results with an abstract battle too one-sided for many to play.

While I think such battles should have Goliath receiving some pain, not everyone finds asymmetric battles interesting. ;->=

Doug