some more data (had to reread the thread to remember these things)...

Photon torpedo: always did 8 points of damage, no matter the range, it just had a very low hit probability at long ranges.  Took 2 turns to arm, costing 2 energy per turn. 

Disruptor: better hit probability, but lower damage and damage was based on range.  Took one turn to arm (can fire every round) costing 2 energy to arm.  The disruptor, at ranges from 9-15, rivaled the Ph-1 in damage-to-energy ratio.

Overloaded torpedoes did double the damage, costing twice as much power to arm, with a maxium range of 8. 

I like what you did with overloading since you don't get quite double the damage so it takes more thought if you want to use it.  In SFB games I played torpedoes were almost always overloaded when the combat was within range 8 and energy could be spared for it. 

Shields (if I remember these correctly, and I just threw out all the SSDs with huge dust bunnies sitting on them  ) ...

Fed CA      : 30, 24, 24, 20, 20, 20
Klingon D7 : 30, 22, 22, 15, 15, 13
D7B & D7C : 30, 22, 22, 20, 20, 20 

IMO (and I hate to say this since I usually play Klingons), change the AS and AP shielding of the D7 to 1-1 (instead of 2-1).  This might help bring the cost of the D7 down.

hull...

Klingon ships were a little more fragile than their Federation counterparts (had less hull boxes and "free hits", e.g., Labs), so I suggest changing the Klingon D7's hull to 9.  Of course, maybe you can't fit stuff into a 9 hull?

engines...

All ships had the same maximum speed in SFB (31), but Klingons did have better turning capabilities, so the engine ratings seem fine.

Some SFB stats..

Phaser-1 (Ph-1) maximum range was 75, cost 1 energy point,
Phaser-2 (Ph-2) maxium range of 50, cost 1 energy point,
Phaser-3 (Ph-3) maximum range of 15, cost 1/2 energy point,
Phaser-4 (Ph-4) maximum range was 100, cost 2 energy points, but this was a base-only weapon,
(costs are just to show what it took to arm them)
but I don't recall people shooting past range 30 with intact ships except once in a fleet battle, although long range sniping from a very damaged ship happened once in a while,
all torpedo type weapons had a maxium range of 30, exception: in some versions the disruptor maximum range was determined by the size of the ship: small to large went from 15 (escort), 22 (destroyer/frigate), 30 (cruiser), and, I think, 45 (dreadnought/battleship).

All phasers shot at drones and shuttles/fighters with the same penalty (none), while direct-firing torpedoes had a -2.  IMO, all phasers should have the anti-fighter bonus.

The Ph-1 was the most energy efficient ship-based weapon of the game.  The Ph-2 was close, but damage tended to drop off quickly in comparison.  The Ph-2 at range 0 averaged better damaged than the Ph-1, but only at range 0.  Phasers were the most versatile weapons.  They just didn't have the punch of an overloaded torpedo, but then overloaded torpedoes were very energy-consuming.  And in SFB, energy is life.

The D7C (Command version of the D7) had it's 3 forward Ph-2s replaced with Ph-1s.

The D7's cost/combat rating was always less than the Fed's heavy cruiser.  It took a refit (D7B) with increased shielding in the rear (and other stuff I can't recall, although faster drone shooting was one) to match the Fed CA in cost.

I see a lot of single arc weapons in your designs.  Single arc weapons in SFB were very rare. 

I would go with FC on ship designs, since that is the newest and most streamlined version of SFB.  I've yet to see FC, but Starmada designs based on it would probably fit better.

and an Impulse movement system where you can fire weapons after each hex of movement.
/end moresarcasm

I think Armor Plating is not something you can totally destroy.  Like I put in my chart, it can be bypassed for a particular DMG roll (or rolls from the same IMP die if DMG>1) like a critical hit but cannot ever be destroyed to non-functional status for the rest of the scenario.

The same can apply to Regeneration.  This would seem to be a shipwide ability of its hull, like human skin for humans.   Perhaps it can be impaired momentarily (i.e., shock), but should not be a system that is totally destroyed in one shot.  Or, it can have a set number of hits it can take before it becomes non-functional.
   :idea: Borrowing from the Hyperdrive activating sequence method: each hit does 1D6 damage and when the total damage to Regeneration is 10 or greater then the Regeneration no longer functions (the system is repairing itself?).  It's also something that cannot be repaired in the scenario.  :idea:

The problem with 2D6 is that it's a "curve" (not exactly, but similar) in that 7 is the most common roll.  It might be better to assign systems to slot numbers.  An example (if ship does not have a system that is rolled then treat as no effect), if multiple systems are listed then it's the defender's choice as to what is damaged:

2 : Blow Through!  Armor plating has no effect on the damage roll (meaning 1s will do damage for that weapon hit)
3 : Fire control/Countermeasures out next turn
4 : All Launch Tubes/Teleporters out next turn
5 : Point Defense/Overthrusters out next turn
6 : Hyperdrive out two turns (such a fragile system  )
7 : 50 Science/50 Hospital/100 Cargo/100 Repair/100 Transport/Bowling Alley ( :mrgreen: ) destroyed
8 : 50 Carrier space destroyed
9 : Stealth/Cloaking out next turn
10: 4 Anti-fighter Batteries destroyed/4 Mines destroyed/1 Marine (tough lil buggers, aren't they?  ) destroyed
11: Regeneration hampered this turn, only 1/6 chance of repairing hull damage
12: ship loses a damage control party (destroyed) (yes, means something else to keep track of, but you're already adding a lot more detail when this damage system anyway  )

Instead of worrying about repairing these systems, I went with temporary damage for some systems otherwise a destroyed system is that: destroyed for the scenario.  Another idea is to use the regular repair rolls and if a roll cannot repair an indicated system then it repairs any special system of the owner's choice (i.e., no engines are damaged but a roll indicates to repair an engine hit so the owner chooses to repair 1 AFB).  Also, I put in fixed numbers to keep the amount of dice rolling down some.  :roll: <---     (on ROLLing eyes)

Shieldbreaker - a weapon ability that does Shield Damage whether it makes the IMP roll or not.

The recent AFB suggestion might be more of an Improved AFB, for those of us who rather fight fighters/strikers with some ship-based weapon system rather than other fighters/strikers.

Super computer/A.I. run ships.        

Deckplans for boarding actions, with new 15mm miniatures to go with it.  (hey, I'm just trying to get more of those for my Traveller RPG games  ).

Cone-shaped AOE ability for weapons. (that will be expensive!)

Grappling hooks  (I kid.. I still think that was quite a silly thing on Enterprise)

The British were already showing the value of naval air power in WW2 before the Japanese got involved, even with British "obsolete" naval aircraft.  Swordfish vs. Bismarck, anyone?       

Now, we are not playing a WW2-era game.  And in space, there really is no difference between a "fighter" and a "ship" in terms of the medium they are maneuvering in.  What can be  different is mass vs maneuvering engine in the construction.  If fighters are considered to be a short duration combat vessel then it can sacrifice the amenities of living conditions (like a bowling alley  ), most life support functions that a ship has, powerful sensors, scientific gear, medcial facilities, and all the staff needed for such things, which cuts down on the fighter's mass and lets it have more maneuverability for the same size engine.  It can also be made smaller for the same abilities that a similar ship has.  But the cost is that it must return to a base very soon after launch.

What does this mean for Starmada?  I like the fighter movement rules, it lets the fighters be more flexible and maneuverable, and saves game time plotting movement/actions for all those squadrons (and striker/seeker salvos). What I don't like is the free action that fighters get vs. ships.  Both in WW2, and seen in the movies (such a great standard of reality  :roll: ), anti-aircraft/starfighter systems got to damage and destroy some of fighters before those fighters got to attack ships; but not in Starmada. 

Luke wouldn't have needed to fly down the trench of the Death Star since a few of the first wave of bombers that was shot down by anti-fighter defenses probably would have instead been able to drop their special package down that vulnerable spot if Starmada was used to simulate the battle.   

Changing how AFBs work seems to me to be the simplest, and most logical considering their name and how they function now, way to allow some sort of active defense for ships vs fighters.  And, make them useful against strikers and seekers.

Seems to me that Anti-Fighter Batteries should have been given the option to fire in either the Fighter Phase or the Ship Combat Phase, with AFBs being able to fire before the fighters attack their target. 

Rule suggestion:
The AFBs of a ship must be plotted at the start of the turn as to which phase, Fighter Phase or Ship Combat Phase, they can fire in and all AFBs of that ship can only fire in that phase.  Any number of AFBs can be fired at a fighter group, but all that are to be fired at a specific target must be designated before dice are rolled.  Example: BB Bozo has 24 AFBs which have been plotted to fire in the Fighter Phase.  It is attacked by the first of three enemy fighter groups (6 units per group) that could attack it, so the player chooses to fire 8 AFBs at the fighter group, leaving 16 AFBs for any possible other attacks by fighter groups.  The dice rolls are 1,1,1,3,4,4,5,6 thus two fighters are destroyed before they get to roll their attacks against the ship.

Optional idea for damaging AFBs: if any AFB roll is a 1, one AFB is destroyed and unrepairable (keep track like you do with lost Marines); this would be one of the currently fired AFBs.  Perhaps this would keep the current cost of the AFBs if you think the above rule should increase their cost.

It isn't that easy.

So ALL the AFBs are knocked out in one hit?    They do fire separately, not as one battery.  All the marines are dead in one hit?

No, it's better as it than being that drastic.

S:X had 1d6 losses for some systems, which is what I foresee could be done for this system.  But I raise the point because it seems to be overlooked with all the proposals so far.

Disobey every scientific law known to man?   :wink:

(I hate them)