126 Reply by Marcus Smythe

(42 replies, posted in Starmada)

Marcus Smythe wrote:

So, its CR impact is the same as increasing the hull by 2/3...

Works for me.  I'll let you know if any play results suggest that the value should be higher or lower.

Im sorry.  I should have been more clear.  I meant to say "Its CR impact is the same as if you had increased the hull value of the vessel by an amount equal to 2/3 the amount of Ablative Armor added"

Example:  Vessel A has 6 Hull.  Vessel B has 4 Hull and 3 Ablative Armor.

Cost for Vessel A=Cost for Vessel B, correct?

Now if I can just learn enough excel to edit that wondermous spreadsheet...

Go to forum: Starmada

127 Reply by Marcus Smythe

(42 replies, posted in Starmada)

So, its CR impact is the same as increasing the hull by 2/3...

Works for me.  I'll let you know if any play results suggest that the value should be higher or lower.

Go to forum: Starmada

128 Reply by Marcus Smythe

(14 replies, posted in Starmada)

GhengisRexx wrote:

Do weapons that Ignore shields also ignore PD?  (The rules say "This weapon's penetration dice automatically get through the targets shields."- implying that no Pen roll is needed, therefore bypassing PD)


If there is still a Pen roll, (allowing PD to stop 50% of the hits) does that mean that a weapon with Increased Pen and Ignores shields would roll Pen vs a 0 shield? (Potentialy doing 7x damage on a roll of 6)

Correct me if I'm wrong.. but against a 0 shield, the roll needed to pierce the shield is 1.. so the 1 would do normal damage, and the 6 would do x6 damage.

Thats quoting from the book example, where a roll of 5 against a level 4 screen does normal damage, and a roll of 6 does double.

Go to forum: Starmada

129 Reply by Marcus Smythe

(42 replies, posted in Starmada)

RE:  Spambots, et. al.:  No worries, my thanks

RE:  Fighters as part of carrier
-I think that extra 'Q' hit has some value, and beyond that, having hulls designed as carriers definitely has some value, if only for flavour!
Proposition:  'Launch Bays' cost some nominal number of points, and have a Q hit.  Most of their point value comes from that Q hit, but they do let you Launch and land.

The fighters themselves are included in the ship cost, have a system for them just as now.. but have the cost go, rather than into the Orat and Drat, into the back end as a flat amount.  That way we charge for the extra Q hit, but a flight of fighters costs what a flight of fighters is worth.. when their over 80 points on some designs and under 50 on others, we are I fear encouraging soap-bubbles and other 'gamist' solutions.


RE:  Fighter Costs
I dont know what the solution would be.  Its entirely possible that the 'cost model' their based on is just not worth its points.
For my own hulls, I think I'll lean to using 1 mass 'Strikeboats' as demi-fighters.  Now if I just had a system to launch and land them on my ships...  heh...

RE:  Madness
muah... Muah.. MUAHHH HAAA HAAA HAAAAA...
wait.. what was the question?

RE:  Ablative Armor

Agreed that ablative armor has to cost more than the same increase in ship lifespan due to hull boxes.. but ablative armor only provides half the average increase in lifespan under fire as the same number of hull boxes would (as hull boxes get hit half the time, whereas ablative armor always gets hit, but protects other systems by doing so)

Thus a hypothetical Hull 6, Ablative Armor 6 ship will be destroyed by on average 18 damage, while its same-cost Hull 12 cousin would require 24 damage.  Assuming that damage taken is continuous over time, that firepower lost to damage is even over a ships lifespan trending to 0 at the time the last hull box is lost, and ignoring the impact of earlier-lost screens and mobility impacting later survivability and firepower*, we can define the firepower produced by the vessel during its life as the area under a line, where the X axis is firepower at any given moment and the Y axis is time.

Im saying this poorly.. my math is too far gone and I cant draw here!!! sad

For the above ships, and assuming that over the course of one 'unit of time' they receive 6 damage....

The H12 ship will have full firepower at Time 0, 2/3 firepower at time 1, 1/3 firepower at time 2, and 0 firepower at time 3.

This gives us a triangle with a height of 1, and a length of 3.  Firepower over life is 1.5.

The A6H6 ship will have full firepower at time 0, full firepower at time 1, and 0 firepower at time 2.

This describes a triangle with a H and L of 1 and a square of the same dimensions.  Firepower over life.. 1.5.

Of course, the first ship starts loosing firepower immediately, as well as risking loosing other important systems.  That said, well designed ships loose firepower more slowly than modeled above, which I think makes up for the difference, because the 'immunity zone'is not as valuable under a weapons=1/2 hull mass design.

All of that being said, if you think it needs to be higher in value than the extra hull box, I'd be willing to test that condition as well...  where would you start (I DO agree that it needs to tie into the formula pretty tightly, like hull values do... because of the many cascade effects of knowing how much damage you CAN take, as well as the tactical advantages of KNOWING that you wont loose system X on round 1 at long range, barring exceptional firepower on the other side)


PS:  I notice alot of ships in the Bourbaki, but almost no commentary/evaluations by other designers... are those posts intended as archival, or was the initial intent more of a 'request for comment'?

Go to forum: Starmada