I noticed that you didn't mention one weapon trait:

Rp6

I'm guessing that it's repeating but only on a 6 and not 5-6 as normal?

Having looked at this (and sadly failed to figure out how to use it properly) I'm wondering why the massive changes? I don't see range traits anymore. Looking at this makes me feel like there's massive changes coming to the rules...

Also, noticed that there are a bunch of new traits (outside of the SFB ones I could identify). Will we be getting rules to go with them?

I recall something called CyberBoard. I think it was used for PBEM, but if I remember (it's been a while) I think it could be used as a substitute board.

Nope. I think the idea (and correct me if I'm wrong Dan) was to simplify fighters; Starmada is a game about ship to ship combat.

If you want to keep fighter flights the same size, you could always adjust the cost of the fighter flights variants (F.4) as follows:

4 fighters to 6 fighters = 1.5*SU, ORAT, and DRAT values
5 fighters to 6 fighters = 1.2*SU, ORAT, and DRAT values
7 fighters to 6 fighters = 0.857142...*SU, ORAT, and DRAT values

This is a quick math fix though. For balance purposes I think that you'd have to look at each variant separately.

Alternatively, if you want to focus on fighter-level battles, you could always draw up each fighter as an individual ship...

So as I work on the conversions I've discovered something that might be/is a glaring error.

To recap this part of the conversion, you add up all power generated by a ship, subtract out costs of powering weapons (Phasers 1/ea (Ph1/Ph2) or .5/ea (Ph3), Photons, Disruptors, Particle Cannons & Shield Crackers 2/ea*), divide by Engine Power Ratio, and you have the Engine rating. Plasma Torpedo costing seems to be in error though...

Plasma-F Torpedoes (the weakest standard torpedo) in SFB need 1+1+3 energy (or, 1 point per turn plus 2 more on the turn of firing). For conversion purposes, seems to require 2 points of power per launcher for calculations.

Plasma-G Torpedoes in SFB need 2+2+3 energy (or, 2 points per turn plus 1 more on the turn of firing). For conversion purposes, seems to require 3 points of power per launcher for calculations.

Plasma-S Torpedoes in SFB need 2+2+4 energy (or, 2 points per turn plus 2 more on the turn of firing). For conversion purposes, seems to require 2 points of power per launcher for calculations.

Plasma-R Torpedoes in SFB need 2+2+5 energy (or, 2 points per turn plus 3 more on the turn of firing). For conversion purposes, seems to require 3 points of power per launcher for calculations.

Plasma-F, G, and R torpedoes appear to be costed (conversion wise) incorrectly. Plasma Fs should require 1 energy/ea, Plasma Gs and Rs 2 energy ea. This would make them consistent with other power requirements.

**While this doesn't seem to affect the Romulans much, the Seahawk frigate should have an Engine of 10, and the Snipe Frigate should have an Engine of 2(?!), which is odd because it lists it as having Engine of 4; it also means that it has to come to a complete stop to fire one of it's two (TWO!) Plasma F torps. Dan, is this a fudge to make the Snipe playable?

**For the Gorn, I get a Hull 11 for the Battle Cruiser and Command Cruiser (book says 10), Hull 6 for the Battle Destroyer (book is 8), Hull 8 and Engine 7 for the Heavy Destroyer (book is 6 and 6), Hull 6 for the Destroyer (book is 5), and Engine 10 for the frigate (book is 9).

*Also, Particle Cannons are supposed to fire twice per turn, but only have a ROF 1?

Spacedock on YouTube just released this:

Types of Sci-Fi Warship (Frigate, Destroyer etc.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHbxdbiMopg

Finally found my current (Unity) guidelines I'd made a while ago:

Escorts (Corvette, Frigate, Destroyer) 2-8
Cruiser (Light, Heavy, and Battle) 9-15
Capital (Battleship, Dreadnought, Super Dreadnought) 16-24
Super Capital (Monitors +) 25+

This allows for some overlap - a Heavy Frigate might be the same size as a Light Destroyer for example. And not everyone might have a Size 5 Frigate for example. Or use Frigates at all.

Now, I was basing them a bit on the StarFire order of categories. (Their actual order of ships, smallest to largest is: Explorer, Escort, Corvette, FF, DD, CL, CA, BC, BB, Super Dreadnought (yes, Dreadnought is missing), and Monitor.)

Another set I have is: Gunboat (1), Corvette (2), FF (4), DD (7), CL (10), Medium Cruiser (12), CA (14), BC (16), BB (21), DN (27).

I've also experimented with size categories from other games; Star Fleet Battles (though the variants and lack of concrete sizes made that a nightmare in spreadsheeting), Star Empires 2 (or 3 or 4?), even the old Alternity Warships supplement.

The other complicating factor is that SU in any version of Starmada isn't linear. A Size 6 ship is ~7.88x bigger than a Size 1 ship. A Size 10 is 15.63x.

And the end of the day I think the consensus (well, me and mj12 anyways) is pick something, go with it. Everyone's going to have different opinions. Which is why I settled for the 3 class ranges rather than break it down further. Though it might make for a nice suggestion* in the yet-unnamed Unity Supplement we're all dreaming of.

*Dan, I don't care if you use it or not, all I ask is that if you do you simply credit me by name/alias for the idea (and don't be like another gaming company who took my forum posts, published them, and denied I ever made them).

Oh, I remember asking a similar question once. In fact, it was here:

http://www.mj12games.com/forum/viewtopi … 887#p30887

While I do typically settle for a size-based approach (which is where 90-odd% of the gaming community seems to), there are other theories. Babylon 5 for example (The Omega Destroyer for example!), Star Trek, Star Wars.

I tried Wikipedia once for help, came away with a headache.

I'd ultimately say that it's a personal choice. murtalianconfederacy's supplements might give you some inspiration.

I would say the former, the flight scores a hit and one fighter is destroyed. All damage in Starmada is 'simultaneous' . And besides, why are you rolling two dice in order? All examples I've seen are fighters rolling all dice as a single flight. ie: A full flight of 4 Assault Fighters rolls 8 dice all at once, not 4 then four.

If it were a single Assault fighter, then I'd still say roll 2 dice. You get a 1 and a 6, fighter does it's point of damage and gets nuked as well.

If you had a single Assault fighter going up against 2 non-Heavy fighters, and the two fighters both rolled 1s, 5.4 states that you'd only get to kill 1 opposing fighter with your Assault fighter. Against Heavy fighters you'd still only get to 'kill' one, but that one still gets it's 50% chance to ignore the 'kill'.

I've been biting my tongue, but I gotta reply.

Your argument makes perfect mathematical sense, save for (what I feel are) two flaws:
1) You assume a normal distribution of dice rolls. If rolling dice in the thousands, then yes, makes sense. Rolling them a handful or less at a time, and my decades of gaming proved to me that dice are notoriously un-normal distribution. (Rolling 20x 6s in one roll one time disabused me of that notion, along with the time I rolled 1-20, sequentially, one at a time, on that d20...)

2) You're min-maxing. I said in another post that while it's perfectly 'legal', it's not really with the spirit of the game. When I design ships for my settings (when I find the time) I pick tech based on the setting, and use that, math be darned. For example, when designing warring races, and one doesn't use shields, I don't set up their enemies with all Non-Piercing weapons and give them a ~30% firepower increase.

I've always felt that Starmada (in it's many forms) was about the game, not the math. (Though let's face it, there's much math involved. Thanks Daniel!)