Points Cost Prototype

[Darzoni]

While I like the FAP system for the ease of use, a piece of me likes using point-based systems for tweaking and scraping every last bit of efficiency out of my fleet. So... I cooked up a way to calculate a rough points cost of existing ships.

Obviously this is not a be-all end-all ACTA point system, but a good way to get a rough starting point for later modifications and tweaks. This is also not comprehensive, as I have not had the time to analyze everything (especially where Fleet Rules are concerned...). It also isn’t meant to be a “Make Yer Own Ship” type deal, as it works far better if one takes an existing ship design and simply models it using ACTA’s system, /then/ calculates the points cost.

So the next three posts or so are going to be long and involved. But first...

General Stuff
With regard to items which provide a reduction in cost for the overall cost of something. When stacking these, they’re fractions. Half of half is one quarter, while a half of that is one eighth, while half of that is one sixteenth, etc…
Any increases in cost are applied prior to the reductions, except where explicitly stated.
Any percentage increases are applied to the total cost of the ship before reductions and percent increases. That is, a percentage increase in points is effectively based on the unmodified total cost.
If a decimal is encountered on the resultant cost of a ship, round it to the nearest whole number. Weapon cost totals are not rounded, as they are parts of the ship and add to the total cost (And thus fractions of a whole number may add up over a number of weapons).

 

[Darzoni]

Fleet Trait Costs
Allied Fleets: No cost beyond the points required to purchase the ships from other fleets.
Auto-Repair Critical: +50 points to the cost of all non-fighter ships.
Craft Options: Adds the difference in the cost between the new craft and the old craft per flight replaced.
Crew Quality Bonus: Add 15 points to the cost of all ships that can have Crew Quality scores.
Fighter Support: Add 5% to the cost of the fighters.
Fighting (Race Name): Add (Hull * 5) points to the cost of non-fighters.
Guardian Array: Interceptors on ships with Escort and Interceptors cost (Damage*X)/3 instead.
Hyperspace Mastery: +40 points to the cost of all ships with Jump Engines.
Initiative Bonus: +10 points per +1 bonus to the cost of all ships in the fleet’s cost prior to any reductions. It is -10 points per -1 penalty to the cost of all ships in the fleet’s cost prior to any reductions.
Masters of Destruction: Weapon systems which inflict Triple Damage on criticals will add 4 points per AD of the system to the weapon’s total cost. Weapon Systems which inflict Double Damage on criticals will add 2 points per AD of the system to the weapon’s cost.
No Crew: Multiply Hull by 1.5 to calculate the Hull for any calculations which require the Hull.
Pentacon Formation: Add 5% to the cost of ships.
Skin-Dancing: Add 2 points to the cost of eligible fighters in the fleet. Add Hull x 2 points to the cost of eligible ships in the fleet.
Suicide Fighters: Add 9 points to the cost of fighters after the reduction for Fighter is applied.
Unboardable: Since you can’t board anyone, and nobody can board you, it would almost be a wash. Execept it isn’t. Add 2.5% to the total cost of non-fighter ships in the fleet.
Weapon Options: Add the difference in the weapon cost between the new weapon and the old weapon to the cost of the ship.

 

[Darzoni]

Ship Attribute Costs

Damage points: Each damage point costs the same as the Hull of the ship.
Crippled Threshold: Each threshold point subtracts the Hull of the ship from the cost.
Crew Points: As per Damage Points.
Skeleton Crew Threshold: As per Crippled Threshold.
Dogfight: Add Hull + 4 points per +1, subtract 4 points per -1. This is applied after all other discounts and reductions.
Speed: Costs the Hull points per inch of speed.
Turns: Hull * 2 for 45 degree turns (each), Hull * 4 for 90 degree turns. Hull x 10 points for Super Manueverable.
Troops: Hull * 5 points per Troop.
Craft: : Calculate the total cost of the craft carried, then multiply by Hull/10 to get the Craft Cost. X * (Hull/10), where X is the total cost of carried Auxilliary Craft.

Ship Trait Costs
For each trait that can be lost due to becoming Crippled, subtract the Crippled Threshold from the cost of that trait.
Adaptive Armor: Add a number of points equal to the cost of the damage points.
Advanced Anti-Fighter X: Total Advanced Anti-Fighter x 3
Advanced Jump Engine: Hull * 10 points.
Afterburners: Costs one half of the speed cost.
Agile: Costs the same as the Turn Cost.
Anti-Fighter X: Anti-Fighter x Hull
Atmospheric: Half of troop cost or 5 points if no troops.
Breaching Pod: As per Fighter.
Carrier X: (X/100)*Craft Cost.
Command +X: (Hull * X) points
Dodge X: 15 points per increment of ability. So it would be 15 for Dodge 6, 30 for Dodge 4, etc...
Escort: Costs one half of applicable Anti-Fighter Trait.
Fighter: Craft's total cost is reduced by three-quarters.
Fleet Carrier: Cost the same as the ship’s Carrier trait.
Flight Computer: Hull*5 Points.
Gravitic Energy Grid X: (Damage*X)/2 points.
Immobile: Halve the total cost of the ship.
Interceptors X: (Damage*X)/4 points.
Jump Engine: Hull * 5 points.
Lumbering: Cut the Turn cost by half.
Scout: Hull * 8 points.
Self-Repairing X: (Hull + X)*3. If variable, count each die as being 3.5 and multiply by number of dice to get X.
Shields X/Y: For X, it costs Hull * X. For Y, it costs (Hull + Y) * 2. If Y is variable, count each die as being 3.5 and multiply by the number of dice to get Y.
Space Station: Add 25% to the cost after the discount for Immobile is applied.
Stealth X: (Hull+X)*5 points.
Targets X: Points cost is 5 points per weapon system on the Station.
Unlimited Scouting Range: Costs additional points equal to the Scout trait.
Unique: No cost. Only being able to take one is enough cost itself.
Shuttles: Troop Cost * 1.5

 

[Darzoni]

Weapons
Attack Dice: No cost per attack die, as it is folded into many other factors.
Range: Number of Attack Dice points per inch of range.
Arc: Halve the total weapon cost if a Boresight arc. Double the total cost if a Turret arc. The cost for the Fore, Port, and Starboard Arcs is equal to half the Turn Cost. The Aft arc costs one quarter of the Turn Cost.
Subtract the Skeleton Crew Threshold from the cost of each weapon if the ship does not have the Fighter trait. Ignore this if the ship is unboardable.

Weapon Traits
Accurate: Weapon Attack Dice * 5.
Armor Piercing (AP): AD * 2
Beam: AD * 8
Conditional Slow Loading: Ignore the halving of the cost for Slow-Loading.
Defensive: Subtract (AD) from weapon’s cost.
Double Damage: AD * 2
Energy Mine: AD*5 points.
Gravitic Shifter: Range * 5 points.
Mass Driver: Halve Total cost.
Mini-Beam: AD * 4
One Shot: Halve total cost.
Orbital Bomb: Halve Total Cost.
Precise: AD * 3
Quad Damage: AD * 16
Slow-Loading: Halve the total cost.
Super AP: AD * 4
Triple Damage: AD * 8
Twin-Linked: AD * 1.5
Weak: Subtract (AD* 0.5) from the weapon’s cost.

 

[Triggy]

Nice idea, however, many of your costs are additions/subtractions where they should be multiplications or more complicated functions (e.g. -12 per reduction in fighter Dogfight, just imagine a -5 fighter costing negative points) and some of the "costs" are a bit silly to be honest (e.g. x10 for Accurate or Aft arc weapons costing the same as Fore arc weapons!)

My advice if you want to approach this is to start small. Have a "basic" ship (e.g. with Hull 5, Damage 28/6 and Crew 32/6, Speed 8, Turns 2/45, and 12" Pulse Cannon with 8AD Fore arc only) to start with, give it a points value and try to work out the value in doubling the Damage and Crew and seeing how much more effective the ship is (and assigning a points value), then double the weaponry instead and find out how much more effective this is. Carry this out for the basics and you'll get there eventually.

I'm afraid straight "costs" rather than multipliers or functions are rarely seen in this game. I should know, I have my own formula for calculating costs (that is not too bad if you ask me) and seems to be pretty consistant with my estimation of ships' worths.

Best of luck though!

 

[Darzoni]

Nice idea, however, many of your costs are additions/subtractions where they should be multiplications or more complicated functions (e.g. -12 per reduction in fighter Dogfight, just imagine a -5 fighter costing negative points) and some of the "costs" are a bit silly to be honest (e.g. x10 for Accurate or Aft arc weapons costing the same as Fore arc weapons!)

Could you give examples of some of the more complicated functions then?

With regard to the Fighter's Dogfight... that is applied before the reduction in points for being a fighter, though perhaps it would be more elegant and understandable to simply say it's a +/- 4 points after the reduction, since nobody but fighters has a Dogfight score.

I'm not sure how firing arcs affect effectiveness yet, would you care to elaborate on that?

 

[Triggy]

Nice idea, however, many of your costs are additions/subtractions where they should be multiplications or more complicated functions (e.g. -12 per reduction in fighter Dogfight, just imagine a -5 fighter costing negative points) and some of the "costs" are a bit silly to be honest (e.g. x10 for Accurate or Aft arc weapons costing the same as Fore arc weapons!)

Could you give examples of some of the more complicated functions then?

With regard to the Fighter's Dogfight... that is applied before the reduction in points for being a fighter, though perhaps it would be more elegant and understandable to simply say it's a +/- 4 points after the reduction, since nobody but fighters has a Dogfight score.

I'm not sure how firing arcs affect effectiveness yet, would you care to elaborate on that?

So long as you realise I'm just trying to help you rather than wasting some time on a couple of the sections that aren't quite going to work then please take my thoughts as they are meant - friendly help

More complicated functions would include the Gravitic Energy Grid and Interceptors. Of these, Interceptors are simpler as they tend to block a certain number of shots per turn then burn out (the average can be calculated and is close to a simple addition) then they block a set percentage of all further weapons fire (generally increasing the ship's toughness by a percentage). All of this of course is only against interceptable weapons fire.

In terms of weapons arcs, Fore arc is generally the best and if you already have a Fore arc weapon then adding an Aft gun is a lot less desirable. Even adding side guns is not as good as more Fore guns as you can't concentrate your firepower on a single target (this is generally a useful thing for a ship). However, if the main guns are on a side arc then the reverse is true and the Fore/Aft arcs aren't as useful.

See - it's not quite that simple but it is doable!

Keep on working at it

 

[Darzoni]

So long as you realise I'm just trying to help you rather than wasting some time on a couple of the sections that aren't quite going to work then please take my thoughts as they are meant - friendly help

Nah, I wouldn't have responded if I didn't want some help. Heck, I wouldn't have posted it out on the forums if I didn't want criticism of the system. I'll have to sit down later this evening to puzzle out the info you've given me though. Being at work is not conducive to critical thought.

 

[Darzoni]

Edited a bunch of stuff for costs and clarity.

Added in cost reductions on ship and weapon traits based on Crippled and Skeleton Crew Thresholds, since the easier it is to cripple or skeleton crew a ship, the less effective its traits and weapons will be overall.

Based the cost of the Fore, Port, Starboard, and Aft weapon arcs on how well the ship can turn, as that determines how easily it can bring weapons to bear.

 

[Darzoni]

Experimental results show that ships with a lot of auxilliary craft seem to be overpriced. Hmmm... I mean, look at this list. I've listed three Raid-level ships: A Hyperion, an Explorer, and an Avenger.

Avenger Heavy Carrier: 1,118 pts
Explorer Survey Ship: 1,252 pts
Hyperion Cruiser: 729 pts

I should probably recost Auxiliary craft to some kind of percentage of the Auxilliary craft based on the hull score. Carrier and Fleet Carrier will probably be readjusted to add to that percentage, since those traits allow the auxilliary craft to be deployed more effectively.

 

[Silvereye]

Out of curiosity, have you calculated any War or Patrol ships yet? Those PVs look like they could really be helped by dividing by 20 or so.

 

[l33tpenguin]

It is my opinion (and an opinion is just that) that it is easier to 'creat' a point system by taking what Mongoose has given us (FAP) and just breaking it up more.

The sum of any ship is not the total of its parts. And, I honeslty, think it is too difficult to assign points values based on breaking down each ship into parts, giving those parts values, then putting them back together. Too many factors go into what is worth more/less. How much is each arc worth? Forth is obviously the prefered arc, but if it is short ranged, it isn't much good. Look at ships like the "Omega-X' Lots of fire power, but lacks range (the thing most complained about) however, if it can get into the middle of a fleet, it will decimate it.

Probably the best way to build a point system, as I started to mention, is take FAP and break it up, then compare the ships within each level against one another (taking that ships ROLE into consideration) and assign values within their designated level. Once each level has been broken up, you the work on determining how far apart the levels are from one another.

This all comes down to A LOT of play testing and a lot of trial and error. Because ACTA is about 'fleet' combat, you can't compare two ships against one another. You can, however, compare two ships with matching support vessels, fighting a standard opponent. You basicly build a support fleet and swap out the 'test' ship, assuming the ships being tested fill the same roll (i.e. 'scout' 'long range bombardment' 'close ranged damge dealer' 'fast attack ship' etc.)

I don't envy play testers... they try to do their best to make the game they enjoy better but in the end they get a lot of grief.

Of course... they get to play a game...

 

[Darzoni]

Actually, here's the list of what I've calculated out so far. This is from the same day that the Hyperion, Explorer, and Avenger were calculated out. I haven't gotten around to doing more.

Artemis Escort Frigate 573 pts
Artemis Heavy Frigate 541 pts
Aurora Starfury Flight 56 pts per flight (220 pts/4)
Avenger Heavy Carrier 1,118 pts
Breaching Pod 33 pts (132 pts/4)
Explorer Survey Ship 1,252 pts
Hermes Transport 290 pts
Hyperion Assault Cruiser 716 pts
Hyperion Command Cruiser 830 pts
Hyperion Cruiser 729 pts
Hyperion Missile Cruiser 841 pts
- Flash Missiles for -60 pts or Heavy Missiles for -65 pts.
Nova Starfury Flight 49 pts per flight (245 pts/5)
Tiger Starfury Flight 44 pts per flight (220 pts/6)

(EDIT: Added in the total cost for a wing of the Fighter ships.)
Also, the missile variants are generally less points than the standard missiles due to the severe decreases in RANGE.

 

[Darzoni]

The sum of any ship is not the total of its parts. And, I honeslty, think it is too difficult to assign points values based on breaking down each ship into parts, giving those parts values, then putting them back together. Too many factors go into what is worth more/less. How much is each arc worth? Forth is obviously the prefered arc, but if it is short ranged, it isn't much good. Look at ships like the "Omega-X' Lots of fire power, but lacks range (the thing most complained about) however, if it can get into the middle of a fleet, it will decimate it.

That's why I'm currently working out the system on the Earth Alliance Early Years. There is no initiative, there are no special fleet rules to worry about. There's only the missile variants and craft replacement rules to worry about. So what happens is that in reality, the Early Years fleet relies on sound tactics and strategy to win.

Also, the system isn't perfect, and nor can it ever be perfect. Static systems and probability don't intersect at perfection, they intersect at 'good enough'. The system outlined above is more or less for getting a starting point to tweak based on playtesting and what not, as I said in my original post.

And yes, it probably would have been simpler to dissect ships by FAP level. But I wanted to deconstruct the ships themselves and analyze them in large numeric values and view the trends in what each Priority Level ends up being relative to each other and within a given priority band. Given that large numbers of carried craft cause severe problems in the overall trends, I have to go figure out how to properly weight auxilliary craft, especially when the Hyperion Cruiser is such a solid Raid ship that it's pretty much the gold standard for the Early Years' Raid ships.

 

[Ripple]

One advantage to what Darzoni is doing over just doing existing ships and PL is he's creating a basis for expansion that is not so 'dart board' dependent. Not that it can't be manipulated like any design structure, but at least giving a basis for why something would cost x. Mongooses system has given us such duds as the Fireraptor and Shadow Omega, which clearly fall short of their jobs. By this system, in theory you would see the dudness before going to final stats and make the necessary adjustments.

A ship locally that we all like is the Juyaca, but funnily enough it's utterly worthless against the opponent it was built to fight, so it fails in its role. (A stack of raiders just runs behind it and blows it away over time, any ships left back there to prevent this are worthless against ships to the front due to lack of range in the fleet, so the pair become a net negative. That and it's not tough enough to actually take the pounding it takes trying to close range as such slow speed, but it needs to be slow for turning radius.) This is a very tough ship to point, and because it has a role, but little ability to actively seek the opportunity to exercise it. Similar to the G'Quan in some ways, a great short range brawler that most races can simply choose not to engage.

My thoughts are a tad muddy on this one... but basically I would say that you would want a point system for building things first, then playtest ships that it estimates to make sure they field as the build says they would, not dartboard the idea, and playtest hoping you bump into the uber strategy that will break that design. In part because that requires way more builds to test.

Ripple

 

[Chernobyl]

speaking in terms of initiative got me working on the probabilities.

I worked out the odds of winning the initiative based on the difference in initiatve scores

Same score: 44.4% (you'd think it would be 50%, but remember the probability of a tie)
+1 advantage: 55.6%
+2 advantage: 66.4%
+3 advantage: 76.1%
+4 advantage: 84.1%
+5 advantage: 90.3%
+6 advantage: 94.6%
+7 advantage: 97.3%
+8 advantage: 98.8%

so a fleet with a +1 advantage in initiative has a +11.2% chance of winning the initiative over a fleet that would have an equal initiative.

 

[l33tpenguin]

Something that I think struck me as undesirable about a cost break down of parts is, when I see a list of point valued pieces to build a ship, I immediately want to build a ship...

And Min/Max the hell out of it. Its a personal character flaw...

Because, inevitably, I will. And there are a lot of players that will. And you will end up with ships that have a single powerful weapon with extreme range, in the rear arc, that fight flying away from a fight and can decimate ships twice their size, or even whole fleets.

 

[Chernobyl]

I did a white star for argument's sake, got 821.5 if I did it right...

 

[Darzoni]

Something that I think struck me as undesirable about a cost break down of parts is, when I see a list of point valued pieces to build a ship, I immediately want to build a ship...

And Min/Max the hell out of it. Its a personal character flaw...

Because, inevitably, I will. And there are a lot of players that will. And you will end up with ships that have a single powerful weapon with extreme range, in the rear arc, that fight flying away from a fight and can decimate ships twice their size, or even whole fleets.

I know people will min-max. People already min-max the hell out of the FAP system. What's your point, exactly?

This isn't a Do-It-Yerself toolkit, it's supposed to be a means to examine ships with a finer grading tool. Read the initial post more carefully, Penguin.

@Chernobryl: That's very useful information regarding the initiative differences, but I'm at a loss as to how to integrate it in. Clearly the Fleet initiative set-up is grossly misshapen. At first I didn't understand why it went to a difference of +8, then I remembered that some fleets have -2 initiative and then you have Command ships, etc...

I'm probably going to sit down for a bit tonight and tweak out some stuff and write down more concrete steps in applying the system in order to ensure that anyone tinkering with it will get the same results when the math all shakes out. Order of Operations is a harsh mistress...

 

[l33tpenguin]

Sorry, Darzoni, that wasn't supposed to be a critisism against what you are doing... it was actually more on myself and min/maxers in general. Its something I DON'T like, but its the way my mind works. I see a system and I work at how best to exploit it. I do my best NOT to do it... you should see how frustrated I get when making a dnd 3.5 character...