You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Play nice. (This means you.)
Logins from the previous forum have been carried over; if you have difficulty logging in, please try resetting your password before contacting us. Attachments did not survive the migration--many apologies, but we're lucky we kept what we could!
mj12games.com/forum → Posts by mj12games
I'm having a bunch of fun with the new ship builder so I decided to create one for fighters, strikers, and seekers:
Man, but I'm feeling technologically incompetent lately.
I can't make it do anything. 
Yaay! I got it to work-- looks really nifty. 
Question: What are "step markers"?
Good stuff!
I like that you've latched on to the new carrier/seeker rules -- this is EXACTLY what I was hoping for. 
Its up on the site now. Sorry for the delay.
In the shipbuilder program there is a repair option. Where is this in the rule book, I couldn't find it.
Oops. For some reason I didn't list the individual auxiliaries in the index. You can find them on page 35.
What is the elusive and hidden meaning of the Pill Bug? What is it's importance?
I've checked our records, and you're not cleared for that information.
Dan, what happens when you download the .jar file and then double-click on it?
Absolutely nothing.
Do you have a bundle price for buying the print copy and file together?
No -- but if you buy the print copy, I may be willing to work something out.
I assume that if someone cared about this, I'd have heard some comments, or requests, or suggestions for publication. But because I believe in visualization, I went and added some screen capture pictures.
Pretty!
Makes me wish I could make the thing run...
No... not 5 million.
You're right. I re-did the math.
There are actually 8.93 million different combinations of RNG,ROF,ACC,IMP,DMG, and weapon traits.
I have a cosmetic suggestion and it looks like you have room for it. Could you put 1-3-5 next to Hull, 1-2 next to Engines, 3-4 next to Shields, and 5-6 next to Weapons? Little pictures of dice would be cooler, but even a smaller font would be nice.
Tried both ideas... didn't like either one. :cry:
Also having the the arcs listed left to right, top to bottom is counterintuitive for me. I would expect them to rotate clockwise. I'm sure time will take care of that, but for now it's annoying.
The reason for that is my bias. When listing a series of arc designations, I like them to be (a) alphabetical and (b) front to back, left to right. The A-F designations as given in Starmada (and Grand Fleets) meet both criteria.
I was worried making the cost less than .9 because then you could add it to everything that you planned to have hit in one turn. (Although, hitting with plasma on the first turn launched is how you do it in SFB.) Just worried about flavor vs Munchkin-ability.
Actually, you're correct. I'd forgotten that the fighter trait mods are applied AFTER the square root. So x0.9 would work fine.
Come to think of it, if you were a twink you'd max the speed and use Fading and get a pure size bonus. Maybe the fade needs to be "Roll a die per hex moved and lose a strength on each 6." Would still feel like plasma.
Nah, no need for an additional roll. Remember that the base calculation for weapon value is (Range + Movement). So giving your seekers a low movement in order to reduce their cost is the same as reducing the range on a direct-fire weapon. No abuse there...
Little pictures of dice would be cooler,
How come there's no freeware font with little dice in it?
I think I am one rule short of a plasma torpedo. Damage fading over time for a Seeker. Something like...
Fading: In each End Phase, reduce the flight's strength by 1. Cost: x0.9.
No reason why this wouldn't work. I might even knock the modifier down to x0.8.
I have a cosmetic suggestion and it looks like you have room for it. Could you put 1-3-5 next to Hull, 1-2 next to Engines, 3-4 next to Shields, and 5-6 next to Weapons?
I'll see what it looks like...
Sorry, but my guess is that stepped up graphics ultimately have very little to do (in MJ-12's case) with sales of (any) rule set. The game engine and presentation (quality of the book, pages, etc.) are going to drive the sales.
As for the interior art (in Starmada), I think it looks just fine the way it is.
Kevin
Thanks, Kevin. I knew I liked you for some reason...
And to meander a bit further. I was thinking that it would be nice to have a graphic representation of the weapons on the ship sheet like Full Thrust and SFB.
That's odd... one of the few things I would NOT take from FT, SFB, or even B5W or SBFCS is the graphic nature of the SSDs.
To me, it seems much cleaner (and more functional) to have everything in a pre-determined spot on the sheet, with the vital stats listed right there.
Just a personal preference, I suppose.
Besides, can you imagine coming up with 5 million different icons for weapon systems?
The alternative would be to make two seperate versions, and for Dan and I to collaborate on the graphics and put in more like we did in the Iron Stars books.
...
I suspect that the setting books will have more and better graphics, but no promises (not from me, anyway) - I don't drive the bus.
I think the comment about "cheesy" graphics was a plant from Dugan to get me to stop thinking I can do "art" by myself.
Howdy everyone, I'm new to the forums.
Welcome!
MishimaWorks XK-515/08 Heavy Frigate
Hull Size 8 (SU 1493)
Looks good -- my math says it ends up with a CR of 331; nice punch with the particle cannons!
Engine Rating 5 (515 SU)
Shield Rating 4 (432 SU)
Special: Carrier - 3 Fighter Squadrons (150 SU)
So far, so good.
Weapons
Particle Cannon 2AB (176 SU)
Rng 15 / RoF 1 / Acc 4+ / Imp 3 / Dmg 3
Minor quibble -- these take up 264 SUs.
Base SU cost = 15 x 1 x 3.25 x 3.6 / 4 = 43.875, round up to 44
44 x (2 weapons + 4 arcs) = 264
Heavy Point Defense Cannon 2AC/2BD/1EF (SU 220)
Rng 6 / RoF 2 / Acc 4+ / Imp 2 / Dmg 1
These you've OVER-costed:
Base SU cost = 6 x 2 x 2.25 x 1.6 / 4 = 10.8, round up to 11
11 x (5 weapons + 10 arcs) = 165
It works out to a final SU total of -33. So either lose one fighter bay or drop the DMG of the particle cannons to 2.
Weapon Damage Track
AB/EF
AB
AC
AC
BD
BD
I'm confused; your weapon damage track should look like this:
1 2 3 4 5 6
X X Y Y Y Y
Can you explain why you did it this way? I hope the example in the rulebook didn't lead you astray...
The idea of the ship is a general, all-purpose ship of the line. It's not very big, but it seems to be pretty tough and can dish out some steady damage with its main weapons. The fighters are mainly to help deal with fast, flanking ships and other enemy fighters.
Looks like a solid design to me.
Uploaded version 1.1 to the web site: mj12games.com/starmada/shipbuilder.xlt
The stated revision is to fix the Tech Level bugs -- but I also cleaned up a few things and changed the "ACC" boxes to text values.
My only issue is that I wish the XLT file had 5 weapons slots instead of three. It is going to be hard to convert some of the (secret project name related to googleplex's comment) designs to the new format due to spinal mounts and antifighter batteries becoming true weapons.
An easy enough alteration. If no one else gets around to it, I can whip one up in the next day or two.
I had some questions about how some of the weapons traits interact with fighters (like does double damage roll 2 dice when attacking fighter flights or does its effect only work on capital ships)?
With so many options, great pains were taken to be very specific in terminology and wording. So, to answer your question:
Rule 5.4 states "In addition, each hit scored on a fighter flight automatically destroys one fighter; no impact or damage rolls are necessary."
Option C.4 (Double Damage) states: "The double damage trait does exactly what it implies; the effect of each damage die from such a weapon is doubled."
Since damage rolls are not made against fighter flights, and the double damage trait only affects damage dice, the answer would be that the double damage weapon trait does not come into play against fighter flights.
If you pay close attention, you'll see that if you enter a value of 6+, the box on the data card changes from "SHIELDS" to "SCREENS".
Or, rather, it's SUPPOSED to.
Grr.
Congratulations, MJ12 -- this thing looks and feels professional, and seems quite smooth (if only you could afford an artist rather than cheezy computer graphics...but perhaps that's part of the charm).
Pardon me while I go cry... I was really proud of the graphics...
One question I have -- though IMP works more or less as PEN used to (barring the 'impossible values' addition), it seems odd to me that ships can be assigned a shields value above 6...unless I missed that critical stricture somewhere. It's only noted in the 'definitions' section, and the field isn't limited to values 1-5 on the spreadsheet. I assume this is just a matter of clarification and not a fundamental change.
No, you didn't miss anything -- although there should be a mention in the construction section about the upper limit of 5.
The spreadsheet allows values greater than 5 because of the "screens" option. If you pay close attention, you'll see that if you enter a value of 6+, the box on the data card changes from "SHIELDS" to "SCREENS".
That's really my only criticism, though. I love the integral vector system in theory, though I'll have to see how it flies when I get some folks into a game or two. The new firing arcs are perhapss the most commonsense element -- matching them to the actual hex sides makes them much, much easier to remember.
People had been pushing for those for quite some time. Glad they're being accepted into the family.
mj12games.com/forum → Posts by mj12games
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.