All of this discussion has me really wanting to release the Extended Appendices material I had put together...

I like the A-F system (simple, elegant, easy to use) and the overlap is a good thing in my opinion. However, if it bothers you, consider this:

[*] Option 1: If a ship is in two arcs (A and B, for example), roll a die: 1-3=A, 4-6=B. Then, once the die is rolled, consider the ship in the appropriate arc for the rest of the turn.[*]Option 2: Allow the defending player to chose an arc in such instances and consider the ship in that arc.

SX V.2

Side note: What is this?

Some time ago, I wrote Dan and proposed a supplement to Starmada -- I called it the EXTENDED APPENDICES (XA for short). One of the chapters of this particular volume was a Fighter Design System [size=59](1)[/size] that allowed you to design fighters (and non-combatant smallcraft) in much the same way you design other starships. He has the document, and last I spoke with him, decided against the idea of publishing it as a whole.

I believe what he wants to do is this: break up the XA into several, smalleroptional rules volumes. No word on where he is on that approach yet.

[size=59](1) -- In addition, I had a chapter that allowed you more options for the standard Customeised Fighter Rules.[/size]

Please understand that when you read that -- Dan loves square roots. it is in his nature to suggest them.

Whew!

I was afraid that my curse from five years ago had returned. Back then, all I had to do was post in a thread, and it would dry up like a desert in no time flat.

My thoughts on this:

[*] Fighters (and ships) cannot attack from a range of 0.
[*] Fighters are therefor at a distance ot at least 1 when they shoot.
[*] This means that fighters are far enough away that their fire should be able to be intercepted by a PDS system.
[*] Fighters, however, do half shields.
[*] Being at a range of 1 means that when they shoot, fighters are far enough away that their fire should be able to be fully intercepted by a shield.

Thus, my final conclusion is this:

[*] The fact that fighters are at a range of 1 is an abstraction that the game makes in order to avoid firing arc questions for ships that are in the same hex.
[*] Fighters have the ability to half shields due to the fact that they are actually much closer than range 1 and are, in fact, under the shields much of the time.
[*] Since fighters are under the shields, they are also within the minimum range threshold for a PDS to be able to target and track the incoming fire.

In summary: Fighters ignore PDS systems.

But that is just my thought on the subject.

Idea and thought time.

Dan, right now you have a relatively complex formula for dealing with Space Units, Drives, and Shields -- two of these formulae actually have exponants of 1.3 and 0.5. The resulting formulas require that a table be created that gives the final results.

Could you not use something similar here?

In other words, suppose that the formula was something like this:

1+(Rmod)*(Pmod)*(Dmod)

Where, knowing that the further from the front of the equation you get, the less overall value that particular modifier can hold (as it needs to pass all those before it to become effective)...

[*] Rmod = R^1.3
[*] Pmod = P^1.2
[*] Dmod = D^1.1

And so, to make things easier, you included a small chart like this:

VALUE   Rmod  Pmod  Dmod
=====   ====  ====  ====
  1     1.00  1.00  1.00
  2     2.46  2.30  2.14
  3     4.17  3.74  3.35

To show what these modifiers would be. BTW: The final result of this particular formula is:

 R   P   D    Current   New
=== === ===   =======   =======
 1   1   1      2.00      2.00
 1   1   2      4.00      3.14
 1   1   3      6.00      4.35
 1   2   1      4.00      3.30
 1   2   2      8.00      5.92
 1   2   3     12.00      8.69
 1   3   1      6.00      4.74
 1   3   2     12.00      9.01
 1   3   3     18.00     13.51
 2   1   1      3.00      3.46
 2   1   2      6.00      6.28
 2   1   3      9.00      9.24
 2   2   1      6.00      6.66
 2   2   2     12.00     13.13
 2   2   3     18.00     19.94
 2   3   1      9.00     10.20
 2   3   2     18.00     20.73
 2   3   3     27.00     31.81
 3   1   1      4.00      5.17
 3   1   2      8.00      9.94
 3   1   3     12.00     14.97
 3   2   1      8.00     10.58
 3   2   2     16.00     21.54
 3   2   3     24.00     33.09
 3   3   1     12.00     16.59
 3   3   2     24.00     34.41
 3   3   3     36.00     53.20

No... go back and look at the chart. ROF 1 weapons would cost the same as they do now in the game. ROF 2 weapons would cost 33% more than they do now in the game. And ROF 3 weapons would cost 50% more than they do now in the game.

For example:

A 1/1/1 weapon costs 2.00 now, and would cost 2.00 in the formula I proposed.

A 2/1/1 weapon costs 3.00 now, and would cost 4.00 in the formula I proposed.

A 3/1/1 weapon costs 4.00 now, and would cost 6.00 in the formula I proposed.

Different Tech Levels per equipment: I will see what I can do.

Technical Readouts: You bet I am interested!

I have been busy (and away) for a while -- work and real life gets in the way -- and you guys have done a great job of stewarding my original little design sheet!

Thanks guys!

It was always my intend for the Shipyard sheet to be an ever-growing, living document without any one "owner" of it. It should belong to the Starmada community. And right now, it appears that it does.

I could not be happier!