Can I please post my answer to this question that closed while I was writing it?

Question

I'd like to post the following answer to GURPS 4E Space Combat - Hexes and Distance

but in the time it took me to write it, it got closed.

One-yard hexes are for man-to-man combat, usually in close quarters. It's awesome for brawls, combat with hand weapons (swords, spears), and close-range shootouts (in buildings with relatively small rooms). So I'd only use that scale with fighters if they are parked - or if they're flying over a combat, in which case they're pretty much be a several-hex-wide streak moving across the whole map in one turn.

For fast-moving vehicles, yes, you want to use another scale. And space fighters are very fast. The minimum scale you might consider using for space fighter dogfights would probably have each hex be at least slightly larger than the size of the largest fighter - I'd use maybe 25 yards minimum, but probably more.

I'm a little concerned from an accuracy point of view with the 100 MGLT to 55 yards/s conversion. 55 yards/s = 50 m/s = 180 km/hour = 111 miles/hour, so that's about as fast as a decent car can go on an open highway. A World War I biplane can manage twice as fast. I'd think space fighters would be faster still, and outside an atmosphere, would be unlimited and acceleration would be what would matter.

You can try to build your own hex-based simulation of starfighter combat in GURPS using the existing rules. They do have rules for momentum and turning radius and to-hit modifiers for relative speed/range and so on. However you still have a lot of work to do to have it come out well, and your first tries may have errors or gameplay problems. If I were to do that, I'd look at how many seconds I wanted per turn, too, and watch (and time) the dogfights in the first Star Wars film for inspiration. I'd notice that there are several seconds of maneuvering trying to get an opportunity to fire, and that a lot of what determines who gets to fire and where the ships are relative to each other is based on the pilots' ability to notice and keep track of where everyone is, including communicating with each other to alert and coordinate actions. It's very much not a case of everyone seeing where everything is, and making decisions for each second. Also it's not about one fighter moving 300 yards and then another fighter moving 300 yards - they tend to chase each other, so the movement is actually the difference between the two, with a contest of skill and vehicle properties determining whether one pilot gets to line up a shot, or the other gets away, or a wingman gets on the tail of the guy going after him.

One option is to use some of the existing GURPS rules for more abstract space combat, which don't even use maps. Before 4th edition, GURPS Space included an abstract space combat system. GURPS Spaceships is the space combat system for GURPS Space 4e (which doesn't include one), which is mapless but a hex system is in the works. GURPS Lensman or Compendium II have 3e versions of a Space Opera combat system which is abstract but pretty good and more geared for Star Wars dramatic dogfights than simulation.

Another option is to integrate some other dogfight game, making a conversion system from GURPS to that game. For example, you could try using the Star Wars: X-Wing Miniatures Game, though its scale is... interesting, but it comes at the problem of designing a Star Wars space combat game from the low-resolution side, which could at least be interesting.

If I were to do this, I'd probably look at all of the above, and pick the parts I liked. I'd probably use a combination where the character/strategy based system in 3e Lensman/Compendium-II is used, but results in corresponding movements on a 3D hex map to keep track of where things are, even if just in general terms. I might also be wanting to include larger ships which dwarf the fighters, so the hex scale might be closer to the size of a Star Destroyer, and fighters move into the same hex to do Lensman-style dogfight combat.

There are tons of choices - it depends on what you and your players want.

If you want help and ideas and open-ended discussion on modelling such things in GURPS, the best place for it is probably the GURPS forums.

Answer 1

No. Help the question get clarified and reopened, then answers can be posted.

Answer 2

It does need clarification first.

Your answer above has some details that reassures me that closing was the right choice, as it has a number of mismatches with the fan rules they're using. You're currently benefiting from it being held for clarifications before posting, as it would possibly draw downvotes.

Based on those same investigations I am fairly sure that answers would be greatly improved in usefulness to the question asker if they would clarify the situation they're asking about. For example, the fan rules they are using say not to put ships on maps, so why they have a TIE Fighter on the map will reveal important details about what the heck they're trying to accomplish that is critical to giving them an answer that usefully addresses what the heck they're trying to accomplish. There is evidently important information missing, even if it's only information that reveals their precise confusion.

That energy isn't a waste though. Your work so far is saved in the text box by the site, so it will still be there when it unholds, ready to revise to take into account any new information.

It might be reassuring to consider, too, that if they don't even bother returning to fix their question, then your work wouldn't have ever been seen by them to even partially help. The hold thus incidentally ensures that the asker cares enough about the question to actually read any answers that come in, so the wait is somewhat beneficial for everyone.