• Registered: 2005-03-29
  • Posts: 859

Topic: AE or NE?

I'm starting to think of going back to AE for designing my supplements, but I've not yet committed myself either way. My main concern is that, with the amount of people saying they're sticking with AE as opposed to NE, that most of my supplements aren't even being looked at, and considering I need to think that I'm at least doing this for someone else's benefit, that's a major concern...  smile

To that effect, I'm thinking of doing a AE/NE supplement, set in a universe I've tried for at least twelve years, maybe thirteen/fourteen, to do. Certain individuals may know what I'm talking about. It will feature both AE and NE designs, each being designed from the ground up. Of course, I will be transferring the NE seeker rules to AE because at least two weapon types require the ability for PD systems to attack them, but that's the only change to AE I'll be making.

  • Registered: 2012-04-21
  • Posts: 99

Re: AE or NE?

I for one have been enjoying your NE supplements, as they've been helping me with my own supplement. (Heck, I even mention you in my notes.) Which will get off the ground. Eventually. I hope. Just need to stop mucking with the setting. And work on one "Chapter" at a time.

I myself have been torn between AE and NE. I prefer NE damage resolution (less clunky) and am seeing the merits of the new weapon design concepts (thanks to your supplements). On the other hand, AE has more options for weapons and small craft (I admit, I'm a fighter junkie), also 'non-violent' combat of sorts which NE lacks.

Myself I've dabbled in both. Been focusing on NE of late as that was the most recent, and the one I saw the most supplements for.

  • Registered: 2005-03-29
  • Posts: 859

Re: AE or NE?

Thanks for the vote of confidence...:)

I think I need to spread myself more through both of the most recent iterations of Starmada to try and give myself more chance to realise a specific idea. For example, an idea I'd thought of last year (ships with modular turrets, based on idle drawings on square paper) didn't work in NE, but I've been able to do the framework for it quite easily in AE, where the rounding-of-weapon-SUs worked to my benefit.

OTOH, when trying my hand at converting the notes for my recent supplement from NE to AE, I realised the issue that has afflicted that setting ever since its first incarnation as a HV supplement--the fact that fighters have more weapon range than almost all rulesets allow for. That works fine with my NE Flotillas, where the fighter squadron is represented by a single vessel with multiple short-range weapons, but trying to convert them to AE didn't work, as the AE Flotillas were meant to represent groupings of identical vessels and didn't allow, for example, my recent thoughts of providing a squadron-wide anti-fighter battery to represent the total AF firepower of the group.