Ship creation rules...
- Thread starter Chernobyl
- Start date
tneva82 said:
good sound reasoning there :lol:
although I am inclined to agree on the basis that you will just end up with far to many ship types, it will be a nightmare to keep track of, you will end up checking each others ships, their will be people who cheat and rely on people not to check, and it's just a big can of worms waiting to be oppened.
CZuschlag
Mongoose
I'm certain such a mechanism exists, but I would suggest that
1). The Hull-Damage value calculation will be highly nonlinear.
2). The effects of 2/90 and SM will be a huge void for exploitation, as the combat value is also massively dependent on the quality of the weapons array
3). GEG values will be very difficult to judge
4). Don't even get me started on trying to conceive of the values of the +1 Rangers/Vree crew quality bonus
A correct formula is probably so difficult it would make my head hurt. Triggy's calculations would be a start, but I guarantee once people actually see the formula, the ride pimpage would start, twisting the balance in it like the One Ring destroyed Smeagol. It's what we, as gamers, do -- it's called "powergaming", and there are lot of 'em out there.
And it would damage the whole point of the Priority Level system. Even if you don't like it (and would rather have points), it's positive argument is that it maks buying a fleet super-easy. Now, building your fleet and verifying your opponent's could be a process longer than Car Wars. Yeek.
1). The Hull-Damage value calculation will be highly nonlinear.
2). The effects of 2/90 and SM will be a huge void for exploitation, as the combat value is also massively dependent on the quality of the weapons array
3). GEG values will be very difficult to judge
4). Don't even get me started on trying to conceive of the values of the +1 Rangers/Vree crew quality bonus
A correct formula is probably so difficult it would make my head hurt. Triggy's calculations would be a start, but I guarantee once people actually see the formula, the ride pimpage would start, twisting the balance in it like the One Ring destroyed Smeagol. It's what we, as gamers, do -- it's called "powergaming", and there are lot of 'em out there.
And it would damage the whole point of the Priority Level system. Even if you don't like it (and would rather have points), it's positive argument is that it maks buying a fleet super-easy. Now, building your fleet and verifying your opponent's could be a process longer than Car Wars. Yeek.
operative 6678
Mongoose
I would be in favour of creating variants using existing hulls stripped down as a start point, rather than building whole new ships from scratch.
[Omicron]Urobach
Mongoose
sounds like an fantastic idea. i build a lot of ships for ACTA and other wargames and need often new ship variants... 8)
Shadow Queen
Mongoose
Wheel of Construction hummm ?????
Right Hand of God
Mongoose
I think the only way this would be possible wold be for a kind of shipyard data file where hull types were matched with weapon systems that could be carried and racial traits such as the ranger and Vree bonuses were already built in.
So hull x can carry 2 weapon systems A1 and A2
the AD and range are dependent on the level of the ship or standardised to the weapon type or a mix of the two
damage and crew levels and modifiers are within set boundaries governed by race and priority level
then factor in racial oddities like Geg or SM and produce a table for each race so that whilst for example a centauri ship with an identical level of damage and crew and weapon fits as a vree ship of the same type come out at different priortiy levels to take into account the SM and +1 modifier unique to the vree and not available to the centauri
So hull x can carry 2 weapon systems A1 and A2
the AD and range are dependent on the level of the ship or standardised to the weapon type or a mix of the two
damage and crew levels and modifiers are within set boundaries governed by race and priority level
then factor in racial oddities like Geg or SM and produce a table for each race so that whilst for example a centauri ship with an identical level of damage and crew and weapon fits as a vree ship of the same type come out at different priortiy levels to take into account the SM and +1 modifier unique to the vree and not available to the centauri
You don't want to know how I work out GEGCZuschlag said:
Suffice to say I've crammed the formulae into about an A4 page and still feel it needs work. Of course, the biggest area of abuse is people filling holes in fleets - this is where "undercosting" ships can come in to prevent people exploiting this system.
emperorpenguin
Mongoose
hiffano said:
tneva82 is right, it won't work. Too many different races, too many "racial tricks"
Look at Full Thrust for THE classic example. With only three races added to the 4 human fleets it attracted criticism for the absuiveness of the shipbuilding system.
You just can't put a cost value on some things in wargaming
friendlyfire
Mongoose
Hmm, so no points....
How about slots? Similar to Battletech maybe?
I figure each Hull size would start out with a default number of slots to fill up and a default number for Damage, Crew, and Speed. Slots can be filled up with weapons, add more Damage, Crew, Speed and Traits. If say, you fill up your slots you can lower your ship's Damage, Crew, or Speed to gain more slots to fill.
Each race would have their own list(weapons and traits) to choose from I imagine. Weapon systems might also need to be restricted to certain arcs maybe... I don't know, haven't thought about it long enough.
Am I way off? Just rambling... (bored at work :? )
How about slots? Similar to Battletech maybe?
I figure each Hull size would start out with a default number of slots to fill up and a default number for Damage, Crew, and Speed. Slots can be filled up with weapons, add more Damage, Crew, Speed and Traits. If say, you fill up your slots you can lower your ship's Damage, Crew, or Speed to gain more slots to fill.
Each race would have their own list(weapons and traits) to choose from I imagine. Weapon systems might also need to be restricted to certain arcs maybe... I don't know, haven't thought about it long enough.
Am I way off? Just rambling... (bored at work :? )
vitalis6969
Mongoose
I think battletech provides a good example too. It was so easy to min/max those construction rules I never once ran anything that was provided in a technical update book. Anything I could build was better by far. Waaaay better.
I love the idea of being able to design my own ships. But the essence of the game will be shot to hell in an instant.
I do like the idea of variants though. That would be cool and maybe not quite so easy to break.
-V
I love the idea of being able to design my own ships. But the essence of the game will be shot to hell in an instant.
I do like the idea of variants though. That would be cool and maybe not quite so easy to break.
-V
MarkNorfolk
Mongoose
I don't think it's a goods idea. The power gaming argument is a just one and iconic ships of the show have to compete as it is for a place on the team. It'll be awful, lot's of patrol level versions of raid level ships by reducing speed, hull and side weaponary.
Cheers
Mark
Cheers
Mark
Similar threads
