Best Practices for Multi-Bridge Setups
I am looking for advice on "best practices" for running multi-bridge (for 2, 3, or more ships at once) simulations, either co-op or verses/BvB.
General advice of any kind is welcome. I've run a 6-player single bridge before but not yet 2+ bridges at once.
I'm also looking for advice specifically in regards to ship-to-ship communication. Some possible thoughts on this front included:
1. Communications officers (only) from all ships on headset open channel voice chat.
2. Communications officers (only) on open text/IM chat channel with each other.
3. A seventh officer per ship, the Liason officer (or first officer?) is on open voice chat with his counterparts, coordinating communication between ships.
4. Dedicated Liason officer per ship, but using text/IM chat instead of voice.
Likewise, there are questions about multi-ship decision making. Are all captains equal, with random-access anarchy-style decisionmaking? Or is the Artemis captain (for example) the "admiral" who directs the other captains in broadstrokes? Or perhaps even a dedicated Admiral who sits on the deck of the Artemis (perhaps with a Captain's Map terminal, which we don't normally use), directing the entire fleet, with a separate dedicated captain for the Artemis herself?
Two reasons I am considering text/IM rather than voice for ship-to-ship coordination are (1) easier to see exactly what people have said, without N-way crosstalk, and with clear history; and (2) easier to distinguish between things you are hearing/saying into your headset vs. things you are hearing/saying within your own ship's bridge; if the Liason (or Comms) officer is reading-and-typing ship-to-ship messages, but relaying to and from his own captain and crew via normal voice, perhaps that's most effective.
Looking forward to any and all ideas and suggestions.
Cheers,
-sq
Context: I am a professor at a game development grad school (SMU/Guildhall) where each of the 150+ students has an Alienware rig (laptop) and all of them are gamers. We have at least 6 lecture rooms with large-screen projectors, and are looking to work our way up to the largest possible Artemis party we can muster (6 ships x 6+ officers per ship = 36+ players?).
General advice of any kind is welcome. I've run a 6-player single bridge before but not yet 2+ bridges at once.
I'm also looking for advice specifically in regards to ship-to-ship communication. Some possible thoughts on this front included:
1. Communications officers (only) from all ships on headset open channel voice chat.
2. Communications officers (only) on open text/IM chat channel with each other.
3. A seventh officer per ship, the Liason officer (or first officer?) is on open voice chat with his counterparts, coordinating communication between ships.
4. Dedicated Liason officer per ship, but using text/IM chat instead of voice.
Likewise, there are questions about multi-ship decision making. Are all captains equal, with random-access anarchy-style decisionmaking? Or is the Artemis captain (for example) the "admiral" who directs the other captains in broadstrokes? Or perhaps even a dedicated Admiral who sits on the deck of the Artemis (perhaps with a Captain's Map terminal, which we don't normally use), directing the entire fleet, with a separate dedicated captain for the Artemis herself?
Two reasons I am considering text/IM rather than voice for ship-to-ship coordination are (1) easier to see exactly what people have said, without N-way crosstalk, and with clear history; and (2) easier to distinguish between things you are hearing/saying into your headset vs. things you are hearing/saying within your own ship's bridge; if the Liason (or Comms) officer is reading-and-typing ship-to-ship messages, but relaying to and from his own captain and crew via normal voice, perhaps that's most effective.
Looking forward to any and all ideas and suggestions.
Cheers,
-sq
Context: I am a professor at a game development grad school (SMU/Guildhall) where each of the 150+ students has an Alienware rig (laptop) and all of them are gamers. We have at least 6 lecture rooms with large-screen projectors, and are looking to work our way up to the largest possible Artemis party we can muster (6 ships x 6+ officers per ship = 36+ players?).
Andrew. I actually run three crews regularly at my house. What do you need to know because I can talk all about managing it. As for the bigs you just need to enter it differently or only play invasion mode. For how to play multiplayer missions just read the description in the mission brief. Also note most only play two ships so you won't get much playability for 3.
To Mankind
And the hope that the war against folly may someday be won, after all
Isaac Asimov
And the hope that the war against folly may someday be won, after all
Isaac Asimov
Thanks for the offer, Captain! As of right now, I don't know enough to know what to ask, but I'm sure I'll take you up on it later.
cdm014, we have our first official library game scheduled for July 17, so it will be a bit, but I'll let you know how it goes!
cdm014, we have our first official library game scheduled for July 17, so it will be a bit, but I'll let you know how it goes!
Artemis across three bridges can be a little laggy, especially if you have a slow network or an underpowered server.
Sometimes the consoles get a little out of sync with the server. If, for example, a Kralien cruiser explodes on your main viewscreen but it still appears on the Weapons console, then they are out of sync. It will clear up on its own after a few seconds. But even with this issue the game is still playable; just imagine that the ship's systems are being overtaxed by the demands of battle and tell the crew to roll with it.
When an out-of-sync condition exists you can *usually* assume that the server shows the truth and the consoles are hallucinating.
Sometimes the consoles get a little out of sync with the server. If, for example, a Kralien cruiser explodes on your main viewscreen but it still appears on the Weapons console, then they are out of sync. It will clear up on its own after a few seconds. But even with this issue the game is still playable; just imagine that the ship's systems are being overtaxed by the demands of battle and tell the crew to roll with it.
When an out-of-sync condition exists you can *usually* assume that the server shows the truth and the consoles are hallucinating.
"Damn the torpedoes! Four bells, Captain Drayton!"
(Likely actual words of Admiral David Farragut, USN, at the battle of Mobile Bay. Four bells was the signal for the engine room to make full steam ahead).
(Likely actual words of Admiral David Farragut, USN, at the battle of Mobile Bay. Four bells was the signal for the engine room to make full steam ahead).
Interesting topic.
I am a bit more puzzled by the big deal made over being Captain. I've only ever played the captain position. But I've watched a lot of Star Trek, and have quite a bit of leadership experience.
Here's the captainy behaviors that work for me:
Be Calm. Be patient.
If the captain is agitated, the crew gets agitated. This results in emotions running wild. A calm captain will help calm your crew and put a cap on how problems escalate among crew disfunction.
Trust your crew to do their job.
One of the first YouTube videos I saw of the game being played has a them using a really nice "trek" setup. Then the captain pulls a player off his station and takes over. Never do that, it hurts their confidence. Part of being patient, means being patient when the player doesn't know how to do what you're asking for. It's just a game. If you want the NEXT game to run better, then buy that player more time to figure out how to do what you asked for. The player only needs to learn how to turn on the Shields once. So have the Helm go into evasive action while the Weapons officer figures it out. They will learn it better if they figure it out themselves.
Give short statements
Players can barely focus on their job and what you're saying. keep it brief. If you explain your plan, which is sometimes a good idea, keep it brief and get to the intent (ex. I want to approach from the rear, so go around DS1, then move to attack).
Ask for confirmation
If you want to turn to 270 and go to Warp 1, ask your Helmsman to tell you when he has done it. try to instill this pattern before the mission starts. Ask for it when you notice the player hasn't been keeping up. this will help you know that the ship is ready for the next part of your plan.
Don't micro-manage
You don't need to know what's in Tube 2. The Weapons officer has it down. You don't need to order her to fire Tube 1. Just give her authorization to open fire and let her resolve the shooting part of the combat. A real naval captain doesn't manage each gun. Once the order is given to open fire, the gunnery crews keep loading, aiming and shooting until the order to stop is given. By staying out of their business, you give each crewman agency over their station. They will get your ship through it. if they don't, they just need more practice, which they'll get in the next game.
I'v run 2 sessions (multiple games) with brand new crews. I've never lost. Start the first few sessions on easy, and ramp up when they learn the ropes. Use good tactics, run away when your ship is hurt to repair and regroup. By the time your crew has their job down, you should have your job of being captain solidified.
I am a bit more puzzled by the big deal made over being Captain. I've only ever played the captain position. But I've watched a lot of Star Trek, and have quite a bit of leadership experience.
Here's the captainy behaviors that work for me:
Be Calm. Be patient.
If the captain is agitated, the crew gets agitated. This results in emotions running wild. A calm captain will help calm your crew and put a cap on how problems escalate among crew disfunction.
Trust your crew to do their job.
One of the first YouTube videos I saw of the game being played has a them using a really nice "trek" setup. Then the captain pulls a player off his station and takes over. Never do that, it hurts their confidence. Part of being patient, means being patient when the player doesn't know how to do what you're asking for. It's just a game. If you want the NEXT game to run better, then buy that player more time to figure out how to do what you asked for. The player only needs to learn how to turn on the Shields once. So have the Helm go into evasive action while the Weapons officer figures it out. They will learn it better if they figure it out themselves.
Give short statements
Players can barely focus on their job and what you're saying. keep it brief. If you explain your plan, which is sometimes a good idea, keep it brief and get to the intent (ex. I want to approach from the rear, so go around DS1, then move to attack).
Ask for confirmation
If you want to turn to 270 and go to Warp 1, ask your Helmsman to tell you when he has done it. try to instill this pattern before the mission starts. Ask for it when you notice the player hasn't been keeping up. this will help you know that the ship is ready for the next part of your plan.
Don't micro-manage
You don't need to know what's in Tube 2. The Weapons officer has it down. You don't need to order her to fire Tube 1. Just give her authorization to open fire and let her resolve the shooting part of the combat. A real naval captain doesn't manage each gun. Once the order is given to open fire, the gunnery crews keep loading, aiming and shooting until the order to stop is given. By staying out of their business, you give each crewman agency over their station. They will get your ship through it. if they don't, they just need more practice, which they'll get in the next game.
I'v run 2 sessions (multiple games) with brand new crews. I've never lost. Start the first few sessions on easy, and ramp up when they learn the ropes. Use good tactics, run away when your ship is hurt to repair and regroup. By the time your crew has their job down, you should have your job of being captain solidified.
Continuing on to the multi-ship/admiral part of the conversation:
barring bugs and technical challenges, I would consider a 6-way ship game as follows:
Each ship gets its own room, so they are physically isolated.
The Admiral(s) goes into his own room, with his support staff (as needed) as Central Command.
The Admiral gets a table with a paper sector map on it. Have lots of miniatures/tokens for enemy and friendly ships.
The Comm officer will be transmitting their Sector location and enemy ship location to Central Command.
A staff officer will be recieving the intel updates and repositioning the tokens on the sector map.
Central Command will issue orders to individual ships.
The idea being, the players in Central Command have a deliberately abstract view of the quadrant. there could be multiple Admirals in there, debating the strategy, etc. But they are to remain isolated from direct command and control of the ships. they are playing a different kind of game.
Technologically, you have some choices on how to implement the actual communication system.
IM is nice and simple. Given that the main game itself acts like communication is short message based, you could stay to that fiction and keep using IM running on the Communications officer's station. it can be fairly simple to have a chat connection to Central Command, and one to each other ship. A second monitor on the Comms station would solve that, and most laptops support dual heads by using the built-in display, and the external VGA port as a second screen.
For Central Command, if you want to skip relaying ship locations, you could have a GM player that updates the map in CenCom by referring to his iPad with the GM Console on it. His job is to keep quiet and just update the physical map based on his perfect information, once every 2 minutes.
barring bugs and technical challenges, I would consider a 6-way ship game as follows:
Each ship gets its own room, so they are physically isolated.
The Admiral(s) goes into his own room, with his support staff (as needed) as Central Command.
The Admiral gets a table with a paper sector map on it. Have lots of miniatures/tokens for enemy and friendly ships.
The Comm officer will be transmitting their Sector location and enemy ship location to Central Command.
A staff officer will be recieving the intel updates and repositioning the tokens on the sector map.
Central Command will issue orders to individual ships.
The idea being, the players in Central Command have a deliberately abstract view of the quadrant. there could be multiple Admirals in there, debating the strategy, etc. But they are to remain isolated from direct command and control of the ships. they are playing a different kind of game.
Technologically, you have some choices on how to implement the actual communication system.
IM is nice and simple. Given that the main game itself acts like communication is short message based, you could stay to that fiction and keep using IM running on the Communications officer's station. it can be fairly simple to have a chat connection to Central Command, and one to each other ship. A second monitor on the Comms station would solve that, and most laptops support dual heads by using the built-in display, and the external VGA port as a second screen.
For Central Command, if you want to skip relaying ship locations, you could have a GM player that updates the map in CenCom by referring to his iPad with the GM Console on it. His job is to keep quiet and just update the physical map based on his perfect information, once every 2 minutes.
Login below to reply:
