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 japridemor
I totally don't have the attention span to make it all the way through that site.
Sweet. I missed that note in Dreadnoughts about all ship weaps being starship(ship) exclusive. Thanks a ton guys. As for the thread de-rail, no prob, I have come to expect it 
.
<double post> 
And there I was thinking that I had the "shipyard" up to date.
I did include ALL of the options including Flotillas, dual mode weapons, dual mode fighters etc.
The official sheet has lagged behind a bit.
Paul
Well, your shipyard program is awesome but...it cannot duplicate the ships from Dreadnought either. When I use the newest version to enter, oh say the Derrflinger from Dreadnoughts, it comes up with a value of 400 (like my home made sheet as well ). The Derrflinger in Dreadnoughts says 340. Thats one reason why I want an official MJ12 version...to see where I am getting it wrong.
I'm really confused ... I thought that's what we were talking about.
SAE Rulebook is at revision 1.
You're confused? I'm confused. I wanted to know about changes to the SAE Shipbuilder on the MJ12 website...not revisions to the rulebook. Epic thread derailment .
The current version (2.2) on the website has errors on calculations (discussed above) and doesn't support the newer rulesets (Dreadnoughts, Iron Stars). I want to design some ships but there is no spreadsheet out there that can duplicate the units from Dreadnoughts, Hammer & Claw, Iron stars, IS Sourcebook, etc. HELP!
Tried out the SAE Shipbuilder v2.2 dated 24 Apr08 from:
mj12games.com/starmada/shipbuilder.xlt
Weapons still getting hit twice by the TL mod. Increased Impact still listed as Increased Damage. Any chance we'll see the cool doo-dads from ISS, Dreadnoughts, H&C, etc. added for v2.3?
This snow you all speak of, what is it? Is it like fine white beach sand. On a side note, its still cold here in Florida as well. I wish it would get up out of the '70s so I can put away my winter clothes.
Nice disigns with a powerful forward battery. No hyperdrive lets you slip in more firepower for the HS. Are these intended to be carried to other star systems by another craft or in your setting is there no need for hyperdrive?
( 19 ) FLYSPECK -class GUNBOAT of the CONJECTURAL SPACE NAVY
Hull: 1
Engines: 10
Shields: 1
Weapons:
1:W 2:W 3:W 4:W 5:W 6:W
W: Laser: 3/6/9, 1/4+/1/1
Range-Based DMG
[AB]
Special: Hyperdrive; Countermeasures; Armor Plating
In my opinion Crew and/or Officer grade rules should be part of the campaign setting not Starmada.
The question to ask is "WHY do you go to war?"
If you want to live on the planet you suggest pounding into submission, probably it is best NOT to use large rocks at high speed to beat the population into submission. For stations, such rocks are okay - provided you can assure that the large stations don't land on the planet more or less intact....
This is a question for my political masters. I'm an Admiral...I want to end the fighting in as quick, ruthless and ultimately least expensive (to my side) manner as possible. I don't want to beat the population into submission...just take out their space capable weaponry. Once I control the planets orbits I can drop small rocks that result in equivalent multi-kiloton range nuclear weapons with zero radiactive fallout. I can custom tailor the size rock to the installation needing smashing and leave the least possible secondary effects.
This reminds me of terrorism. Its not my fault the hostages got killed when I took out the terrorists..the terorists took them hostage not me. Conversely..if you build weapons on a planet...be prepared to lose the planet. there is always the seige method but I bet blockading an entire planet would be an exercise in futility.
Submission of the planet's population is a police matter not a military problem.
Uses of a Station:
- Temporary quarters for occupying troops
- Temporary quarters for the terraforming crew
- Industrial parks for building and manufacturing items more efficiently made in space (there's actually a lot that can be)
- Agriculturual Stations that grow food for worlds unable to produce enough of it
- Luxury hotels, because sex is always better in Zero-G.
I can agree with these (and the o-G sex does sound fun). None of these options requires special rules like extra HS or longer ranged weapons.
but don't tell a Navy chief that....they usually eat Midshipmen for breakfast..
That would be a balsy Middy to order a Chief around. At least to do it and not make it sound like a request. Are Midshipmen even in the chain of command? In the Army a Cadet is outside the chain of command and cannot issue lawful orders.
Starmada is what I call 'design for effect' - it just doesn't matter just how big the ship is, unless you're trying to correlate how much stuff from YOUR faction into YOUR faction's ships... SU's are relative to your faction, and may not be as big for ANOTHER faction.
<snip>
Zentradi SU's are bigger then Micronian SU's....
My take is the opposite..an SU is an SU is an SU. The tech levels in starmada means that the Zentraedi at TL+1 need less SU to equip an equivalent Hyperdrive than the TL-1 Micronians do. I alway took SU as a measure of mass, or size if you will. How an SU relates to your background material is open to interpretation. 1 SU could be x number of m^3 or whatever the GM decides but would hold true across all factions.
Sorry for the impending Wall of text:
I don't know, the whole concept of a stationary weapons platform seems a little silly to me. If I were ever confronted by one (and had the tech available in Starmada) I would just strap engines to as big a rock(s) as I could find in the outer system, accelerate it(them) hard for a month or ten and smash it(them) into any orbital or even planetary defense installations that wouldn't surrender to me. No engines equals sitting duck in space warfare. Build 'em as big as you want, I'll just look harder for a bigger rock.
If you have sufficient space borne forces to contest the outer system then why did you build the big station anyway? I understand construction/repair and orbital cargo transfer facilities but weapons platforms? Seems better to put weapons on mobile hulls that can go to the enemy or leave if they cannot win.
Units with no engines already get extra mass...the mass not used to equip engines (5% alone for not equiping Hyperdrive). Any mobile ship should lose to an equivalent sized stationary unit just due to the extra mass the stationary unit can throw into weapons and defense. If you want to reflect an even tougher unit, pick a larger HS.
As for station keeping engines, wouldn't all units already have them assumed into their basic hull structures. My 12 HS Battleship needs 'em just as much as a big space station does...just not as often.
The wife and I went down to Key West this last weekend. In her quest to find the perfect Bloody Mary, she found one that used Clamato in it. The conversation with the Bartender then turned to the fact that Clamato is good mixed with beer. At first this horrified me, adulturating my beer with anything, then I thought hmmn. So, is this true, beer and clamato mixed?
Any chance we could have enlisted ranks in addition to officer ranks or can I choose the enlisted path instead of the officer path? NCOs do all the work.
Why do they need special rules? Just use a real big hull and put no engines or Hyperdrive on 'em. Why should a stationary unit get treated any different than one that moves?
Heh...
And to further stir the pot, consider that the actual physical dimensions have nothing whatsoever to do with mass.
Is your laser a gas-filled tube, a solid state semiconductor, or a cube of heavy metals encrusted with nano-tube circuitry?
Surely, this way lies madness....
Do we have any tables on the specific gravity of the materials used in constructing Starmada ships?
/end sarcasm
By no means am I critisizing the new additions. Keep 'em coming! I would just like to see an always updated list of the Weapon Trait and Starship Options tables. It is very close now. for example the A.4 Index of options in Iron Stars (and other books) lists the supplement that the rules are found in...just can we add the mod to that table? That way the newest supplement will be the official one. It seems from the comments in other threads that this is currently true but you have to dig a little to get the values.
Anyway, love the game, keep up the great work.
http://www.mj12games.com/starmada/appendixA.pdf
This is great but still doesn't tell me that the ORAT of teleporters is now 10; the "area effect" modifier is now x2.0; "doubled ranged modifiers" modifier is now x1.0; and the "piercing" modifier is now x1.4.
I love the direction that Starmada has taken. Its just that all of the rules and options are spread over many supplements now and the little changes are getting hard to keep track of. :?
Regarding Admiralty errata, there haven't been too many.
Changed capacity requirement of boarding pods to 16.
Changed ORAT of teleporters to 10.
Changed "area effect" modifier to x2.0; "doubled ranged modifiers" modifier to x1.0; and "piercing" modifier to x1.4.
Clarified the effects of cloaking on combat by adding the following to B.3: Cloaking Device: "A cloaked ship may not be attacked by opposing weapons and/or fighter flights (even those with the 'area effect' trait; see option C.4: Weapon Traits) unless it has been detected (see below). However, a cloaked ship is subject to other forms of damage, such as from minefields (see option B.8: Mines)."
Well the newest product (Dreadnought) has piercing (+1) at 1.5, and teleporters at +20 so it is hard (for me at least) to know what is the latest correct value. Perhaps a stickied thread with a consolidated and updated mod for everything would be useful?
Wow, these look really good. Great work. Now post the ship designs in the basin
In the campaign games I have played in (using VBAM for the economy), we have always used the SU as a calculation for mass. So a 2HS ship with 247 SU is more than twice the size of a 1 HS ship with 100 SU.
Using the HS^(2/3)*constant, with the constant set at 100 (to match SU at HS1) gives:
HS SU HS^(2/3)*constant
1 100 100
2 247 158.7401052
3 418 208.0083823
4 607 251.98421
5 811 292.4017738
6 1,028 330.1927249
7 1,255 365.930571
8 1,493 400
9 1,740 432.6748711
10 1,996 464.1588834
11 2,259 494.6087443
12 2,529 524.1482788
13 2,807 552.8774814
14 3,091 580.8785734
15 3,381 608.2201996
16 3,676 634.9604208
17 3,978 661.1489018
18 4,285 686.8285455
19 4,596 712.0367359
20 4,913 736.8062997
21 5,235 761.1662611
22 5,561 785.1424411
23 5,892 808.7579399
24 6,227 832.0335292
25 6,567 854.9879733
26 6,910 877.6382955
27 7,258 900
28 7,609 922.0872584
29 7,964 943.9130677
30 8,323 965.4893846
Using SU as an indicator of size (mass) makes the big ships a lot more massive.
/end ridicule
It's not an "error" ... it's a "feature".
I'll have to remember to tell my boss this one.
I am reposting this here because it was in a thread about the Shipyard series of spreadsheets and I should have put it here. It really concerns Shipyard CORE v2.2 that is on the MJ12 website although as you can see the same issue was ported into the Shipyard sheets as well.
japridemor wrote:Well, I've noticed a little error that crops up in the CORE Shipbuilder from the MJ12 website. specifically in the way that Weapon TL affects ORat calculations of Battery X,Y and Z in cells G20, G26 and G32 of version 2.2. If all of the TLs are set at 0 and a ship is designed, when you change the weapon TL to say +1 or -1, the ORat of the design changes. This shouldn't happen. This is happening due to the weapon TL mods being nested in multiple Round functions in cells J19, J25 and J31 and then being unapplied in Cells G20, G26 and G32, throwing the rounding off.
I haven't used the Shipyard programs to see if they are duplicating this rounding error.Guilty, in an effort to get the two spreadsheets to give the same results I made this sort of mistake in the shipyard. Since your post I have been through the shipyard and made corrections. Had to add a bit since they have to account for dual mode weapons as well. Will be in version 27. Thank you for spotting it.
Paul
mj12games.com/forum → Posts by japridemor
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
