You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Play nice. (This means you.)
Logins from the previous forum have been carried over; if you have difficulty logging in, please try resetting your password before contacting us. Attachments did not survive the migration--many apologies, but we're lucky we kept what we could!
mj12games.com/forum → Posts by mj12games
In musing about the idea of area-effect weapons in Starmada, I note that many such suggestions in the past have proposed the label "flash" weapons or something like that...
Why?
I guess I don't get it... :?:
Very nice! 
:oops: Argh. Don't say wrong! I am taking your quotes as Starmada gospel so if you say wrong them I'll scratch this whole idea.
As well you should.
More people should take my word as Gospel. It would save a lot of time.
But in this case, I had failed to see what effect the additive equipment would have on the DRat -- so if anyone was "wrong" it was me. Your approach seems sound; but I would wait until playtesting results before passing final judgment.
Due to the non multiplicative items in the design. The Security Teams and such only add to the DRat not multiply. So the multiplication hits and then the adding.
Uh... yeah. I knew that. I was just seeing if YOU knew why it was coming up wrong.
Yeah, that's it.
Still, the ComRat hit looks appropriate doesn't it?
Your modifiers are correct -- but I'm not sure why it isn't changing the DRat appropriately... :?:
i.e., going from normal to strong should increase the DRat by 50%, but you have it going from 62.4 to 78.6 or an increase of only 26%...
The number of Hs on the damage track is accounted for in the DRat calculation ( rule A.2.2 ) by multiplying the Hull Points by 2. This means it takes, on average, two hits to destroy one hull box and equals 3 Hs on the damage track ( 3 / 6 = 2 ). So the desired number of Hs on the damage track can be used by replacing that x2 with the appropriate number below:
There is no reason at all why this would not work in principle -- however...
One function of the damage track is to ensure that 50% of the ship's "stuff" is gone at the time the final hull point is lost. So, you would need to also modify the damage track calculations as per rule A.3.1.
Currently, it is:
N * 2 / H
where N = number of system hits (engines, shields, etc.) and H = hull size. Instead, it would have to be:
N * X / H
where X is based on the number of H hits on the track:
1 H = 0.67
2 H = 1.33
3 H = 2
4 H = 2.67
5 H = 3.33
6 H = 4
All that would be required is that the player count them at the end of a move, and plop a die down behind the plane or on the base. No biggee.
True enough... although with the counters already out on the board for altitude and maneuver, do you think dice would be too much clutter?
thedugan wrote:Well, technically, it's a germanic language.....
But I digress...
I thought it was mostly French? hmm
The structure is Germanic. But the Norman Conquest added a lot of French vocabulary...
So, English is both!
I don't plan on encroaching on the TTA license at all.
Then a good start would be to remove the label calling it the "Starmada Trade Authority".
It depends on the movement system you are using.
If the basic Starmada system ("tank-like"), then it's usually best to put the big guns in a smallish arc (AB, for example) as it is relatively easy to bring the necessary side to bear on the enemy.
If using a cinematic, inertia-type system (a la Full Thrust), it is probably better to focus on broadsides (ACE/BDF) as there will be a lot of passing...
For smaller weapons, it's probably best to have all-around coverage to fend off pesky fighters.
Can i get "need to use" file upload to the Defiance area in order to upload virus-scanned and certified clean army lists?
I ask this as a valuable member of the MJ12 team, ya know.
I did a picture once!
Unfortunately, as part of the reinstall due to someone's negligence (*cough*) I haven't yet re-enabled file upload.
As soon as I do, you'll be the first to know.
Well, almost the first.
Well, it seems that the new spambot-blocker I added to the forum is working as advertised. I haven't had to delete a false account in the week since I installed it.
That isn't to say they are going away, however -- the note at the bottom of the top index page says there were 112 "users" online on Monday. Considering we have 325 members, I find this claim ... dubious ...
Just stumbled on this thread right after I was thinking this exact thing. So, is the "move the +1 from P to P and D" an official ruling?
Not for the moment, no.
What? Not even a single "way to go" for fixing the forum?
Sheesh... you people take me for granted...
Well, if the original version of Ablative Armor had 3 boxes worth exactly as much as 2 hull, and the new version has one box worth exactly as much as 1 hull, wouldn't that.. umm.. get you there? The way Beowulf is doing it?
Yes, it would. But only for the defensive rating; i.e., instead of HULL x SHIELD RATING, it becomes (HULL + ARMOR) x SHIELD RATING.
However, I was pointing out that the hull size also has an effect on the offensive rating. From A.2.1: "A starship's base offensive rating is: Hull Size x (MPs + 1)".
And I'm saying that armor should not impact this part of the equation. However, changing the hull size in the SXCA will change that part of the equation, so the resulting CR is not completely accurate.
That's all.
BACKGROUND
In my campaign, the setting uses "jump lanes" for interstellar transit, instantaneous movement between pre-existing warp points if the ship has the right engine to activate them. Nav-buoys on either end are used in the abstract to determine how many ships can go through at what speed, i.e. how big the jump lane is. Most races equip all their military ships with these engines, along with engines for regular spacial movement at sub-light speeds.SITUATION
A newly-encountered alien race is supposed to have warships that are not independantly jump capable, but which can be led by small, technically more complex jump tugs which create a field that will transit themselves and up to X other bodies (ie ships, of whatever size). Their fleets are able to pack more wallop per ship since they don't have bulky interstellar engines, but they are obviously not as flexible in their deployment and usage.QUESTION
How would I model the 'jump tug' using Starmada X? I need this for my ongoing campaign, and don't want to have to scrap the basics of the fluff on this newly-encountered race
Welcome, Emiricol!
In order to answer this question, I would need to know how FTL movement works in your universe. Do you use the SX hyperdrive rules, or something else?
It makes it easy to use the ship generator programs too.
The way we do it is to design the ship, then decide how much armor you want to add, then increase the ship hull size by that number, and note the new CR. Then reduce back to the original size, print the SSD and pencil in the armor and the new cost.
This will give you a good approximation, but it isn't totally accurate, as the ablative armor should only increase the point cost on the DefRat side -- hull size is also used on the OffRat side, although to a minimal extent.
And now I'm trying to get the e-mail to Yahoo! functionality back...
Grr...
There... that should do it.
And now I'm trying to get the e-mail to Yahoo! functionality back...
Grr...
Well, this morning the forum was offline 'cause I'm an idiot.
It seems to be working again -- but please let me know ASAP if you discover any problems.
Isn't Facebook limited to those with a .edu e-mail account?
The above formula is very simple. Can this formula be used to change fighter's ability to half shields to any of the other weapon abilities?
Theoretically, yes.
In baseball, what does the average actually mean? Y'know, the whole .257 or .385 thing. All the plausible things I can think of somehow doesn't feel right...
Simply put, it is HITS divided by AT-BATS. For example, a player with 43 hits in 133 at-bats would have an average of 43/133, or .323 (pretty good). The last player to bat as high as .400 for an entire season was Ted Williams in 1941 (.406).
The more complicated questions are, however, "What is a 'hit'?" and "What is an 'at-bat'?" There are many wrinkles in official scoring, but generally speaking, a hit is awarded any time the batter reaches base by putting the ball in play (unless there is an error or a fielder's choice), and an at-bat is charged each time the batter comes to the plate (unless he is walked, successfully completes a sacrifice hit/fly, or the inning ends with him still at the plate, such as a baserunner thrown out stealing).
One thing NOT included: a batter is neither given a hit nor charged an at-bat for walks. As a walk has been shown to be (almost) as good as a hit in generating runs, many people think the better gauge of a player's offensive contribution is the "on-base percentage", which is in its simplest form: HITS plus WALKS*, divided by AT-BATS plus WALKS* plus SACRIFICE FLYS (*"walks" includes "times hit by pitch", which is essentially the same thing, with the addition of a bruise. ) The Oakland Athletics, for example, are known to use a player's OBP as a primary factor in whether or not to give him a new contract, trade for him, sign him as a free agent, etc.
More and more commonly, you will also see "OPS", which is "on-base percentage plus slugging average". Slugging average is TOTAL BASES (from hits) divided by AT-BATS. For example, a player with 12 singles, 5 doubles, 1 triple, and 4 home runs over 75 at-bats would have a slugging average of .493 (12+5*2+1*3+4*4=37/75).
And now you know. 
There were several reasons we think the cost should be doubled. First, the armor absorbs hits just as hull, but unlike hull, this ab-armor protects shields, weapons, engines, & equiptment completely, until all of it is gone. It is thus better than hull so should cost more.
Indeed ... which is why it currently does cost more than hull. Every hit you take on your armor removes one point, while only 50% of the hits you take after the armor is gone will eliminate a hull point. So, the armor (at 2/3 hull) costs 33% more than it "should".
However, I have been thinking that it should be more -- but 4/3 is a bit much, IMHO. Increase it to Armor = Hull and see how it goes.
So I would normally delete this ship outright, but I thought I'd warn folks before I get that far.
It's your thing, Jim, but I don't see why there can't be room for ships that are testing out possible new equipment and rules.
mj12games.com/forum → Posts by mj12games
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.