Hadn't thought about that at all.

Drones are more like missiles than fightes and Marines are drones with a "bonus".

I suppose I could be convinced that weapons tech levels could affect Drones and Missiles, but honestly, I don't care too much about them, as they are one-shot and I haven't seen them tip the battle one way or t'other.

Don't lose track of the long range repeatable lasers that will also wreck havoc with fighters before they can get in to kill you.  They're expensive, but worth it if you can kill 2-3 fighter flights with each shot/

Like so:

LR-RL Mk. I [6/12/18, 3+, 3/1/1, repeating] (114.5)

I suggest we make that a house rule from now on.  'twill prevent the overwhelming authority of 120 fighters attack all at once.

Now I suggest that we tie the fighter upgrades to tech level somehow as well, like you can't have an interceptor unless you have a +1 tech in weapons

I think we could get a list together, no?

A "run" as you say would be what -- 2 copies

Yeah, Kevin.  I know.  I've got the troop lists done for Issus, then it's on to Granicus and a couple others and I'm done.

All information should be available to all players (except cloaked ships, of course)

Levels the field for player in the know vs n00bs

If you all agree, however, and all skill levels are equal, it is appropriate to hide some information to make the games more exciting but use common sense.  You should know what your ship captains would know.

e.g in the Terran civil war, it was made more fun (but slightly frustrating) when I knew there was a new ship class on the board but didn't know the particulars. 

In no way should this be used to cheese-ify your wins. that cheese is old and tastes bad.

Well, to be honest, it was not great from an admin standpoint.

Nobody contributed and the text formatting was unweildly for me to use.

I liked the old FAQ

But, if anyone has a better (and secure) idea, please let me know nd I'll try to get it working.

As of now, though, there's no way for me to get at the old FAQ, so all the questions are effectively lost.

Well, actually as i remember it was more like 80 total ships.

heh there are NO battles too large for die-hard starmada players

Somewhere noel's got notes about a 70 ship battle we fought out over the course of two or three days.

okay, now handling makes sense, and is completly confusing at the same time but I think I can muddle through again.  we'll see

I want to pick my own handling and armor. and engine stats too.

And, what is a small template and how does that work?

http://www.tablegamer.com/gfx/sstest/

Basic Impression:
Seems fiddly, but I haven't played so I can't really make that assessment.  I know that there seem to be a lot of situations where I am going to be expected to multiply on the fly and re-roll, etc.  Again, that's an initial impression and I will probably change my mind after playing.

Speed:
What difference does it make what the car length is?  I understand that you're trying for "universal" but the de facto standard for toy cars is matchbox scale, so make that the standrard so I don't have to multiply 5 by 1.5 every time I want to go 50mph. Plus, the matchbox scale isn't even correct from car to car in the line so you're trying to build a coherent system out of a random scale.

Accel and Braking:
um, braking table? 10-20, 20-30, 20-50? 

How about Handling Loss is MV/2 round up?
i.e.
10-20: 1
30-40: 2
50-60: 3
etc

I do not understand what the speed table is used for unless it's a max accel rate then I do understand and would expect that to be part of car construction, rather than based off the size of the engine.  i.e. if I want a car with a top speed of 200 and an accel of 1, I should be able to choose it. If I want a car that has a top speed of 80 and an accell of 6 I should be able to pick that. And, as has been said, let the engineers and physicists do their job and build it.

Maneuvers:
there's no difference between drift and align is there?

Driver skill is a neat idea. 

I don't like the tables for out of control, bt I can't think of a better way to do it.

I could care less about pedestrians. they are crunchy targets.  Riding on the running boards is idiotic, and should have a higher penalty.

Shooting:
Too complicated, at first glance.  I'd hate to have to go through a table of modifiers every time I take a shot at someone. That's so 80s

Penetration:
What kind of armor is there going to be is the weapons all have PEN modifiers (+5 pen? wow that's a lot)

< Armor: No Pen
= Armor: part. pen
> armor: pen
2x Armor: catastrophic

That table is just plain icky

Ramming: ok

Weapons:
Wow, um, why can't I just choose my range, choose my rof/pen and then add specials?

what the heck is load?

Gangers:
Whay can't I just pick a number?

Gang design and car design:
This is really nice. simple and easy to use. but where's the square root?

Conclusion:
obviously a rough draft and needs extensive playtesting to ensure the concepts are going to translate.  I don't think I can play based on the rules I see, but I will try.

Hopefully this weekenfd will offer me the opportunity... I may have some extra time. (yay)

Don't take this wrong: I will play test it and I see the need for a car combat game as good as starmada.

yeah, I hope he gets tons of chicks 'cause of it