• Registered: 2007-12-17
  • Posts: 331

Re: Some thoughts on fleet organization

It's funny but I thought his discussion was just a suggestion for some kind of option. Some people have responded vehemently to this idea. People don't like their freedom being taken away!   :shock:

I think it would be a nice option for people to have to organize player-designed fleets. Most miniatures games have some kind of rule, or at least suggestions, about army composition. Why shouldn't Starmada? (aside from the standard no more than half the points in one ship)

It shouldn't, and really can't, be forced on anyone, though. (Like the range 30 discussion -- it's an optional rule that absolutely should exist but if you want to play with it, being an option, you should seek out other people who want to play with that option. Likewise, if you don't want to play with an option then no one can force you to.)

  • Registered: 2022-11-15
  • Posts: 1,424

Re: Some thoughts on fleet organization

MadSeason wrote:

It's funny but I thought his discussion was just a suggestion for some kind of option. Some people have responded vehemently to this idea. People don't like their freedom being taken away!   :shock:

I really resisting the urge right here to don a kilt and paint myself blue...
smile
..the pig sticker's kinda cool, but my legs are much too pale.

MadSeason wrote:

I think it would be a nice option for people to have to organize player-designed fleets. Most miniatures games have some kind of rule, or at least suggestions, about army composition. Why shouldn't Starmada? (aside from the standard no more than half the points in one ship)

It shouldn't, and really can't, be forced on anyone, though. (Like the range 30 discussion -- it's an optional rule that absolutely should exist but if you want to play with it, being an option, you should seek out other people who want to play with that option. Likewise, if you don't want to play with an option then no one can force you to.)

I'm all for options, including the range 30 guns and some sort of "Squadron Rule" to streamline small fleets of similiar ships. Having an optional rule for a required fleet layout would be very much a 'race specific' rule - ala the fleet layout ofthe ISC from SFB....

I don't see how you could limit the effectiveness of small ships and stay within the current point costing rules and stay balanced - any such rule would radically alter point costing, seems to me.

Proper point costing has been at the center of Starmda since it's inception, and I don't see how you could alter it without radically affecting the game's overall balance.

  • Registered: 2007-06-18
  • Posts: 128

Re: Some thoughts on fleet organization

I believe the best way to limit the effectiveness of small ships is Area of Effect weapons.

Those are already, as I recall, a choice for weapons...

That said, Starmada is a points system.  No point-based system is, or can be, unbreakable to the extent that all uses of points, taken in any combination, are entirely equal.  Some things will be better, some things worse, and the further one deviates from the core assumptions of the game, the more extreme the results may tend to become.

If it is a game to be played among friends, my best advice is for everyone to build friendly fleets.  Always stop to ask 'would I have fun playing against this'.

  • Registered: 2022-11-15
  • Posts: 1,424

Re: Some thoughts on fleet organization

Marcus Smythe wrote:

I believe the best way to limit the effectiveness of small ships is Area of Effect weapons.

Those are already, as I recall, a choice for weapons...

Heh...

Marcus Smythe wrote:

That said, Starmada is a points system.  No point-based system is, or can be, unbreakable to the extent that all uses of points, taken in any combination, are entirely equal.  Some things will be better, some things worse, and the further one deviates from the core assumptions of the game, the more extreme the results may tend to become.

Thus making a fiat adjustment based on size less attractive....

Marcus Smythe wrote:

If it is a game to be played among friends, my best advice is for everyone to build friendly fleets.  Always stop to ask 'would I have fun playing against this'.

Always good advice, no matter what game you're playing.

  • Registered: 2006-01-17
  • Posts: 740

Re: Some thoughts on fleet organization

Great ideas everyone!!
I have designed some excellent smaller ships and have had fun with shieldless one-hulled ships with armorplating (couldn't resist that) that have CR=31 with speed eight.
PS: I'm intreagued by the idea of painting oneself blue... :shock:

  • Registered: 2007-06-18
  • Posts: 128

Re: Some thoughts on fleet organization

Marcus Smythe wrote:

That said, Starmada is a points system.  No point-based system is, or can be, unbreakable to the extent that all uses of points, taken in any combination, are entirely equal.  Some things will be better, some things worse, and the further one deviates from the core assumptions of the game, the more extreme the results may tend to become.

Thus making a fiat adjustment based on size less attractive....



Im all for making cost adjustments where something is found to be disproportionately good.  I don't think small ships, in the normal condition, are disproportionately good.

I DO think that small ships, when they are all you bring, are likely to be disproportionately good.  However, thats far enough outside the normal bounds of play that we don't need to change the rules to make up for it.  Im not comfortable with the idea of making rules adjustments to try to enforce what I consider normal play.

  • Registered: 2008-05-16
  • Posts: 76

Re: Some thoughts on fleet organization

Marcus Smythe wrote:

However, thats far enough outside the normal bounds of play that we don't need to change the rules to make up for it.  Im not comfortable with the idea of making rules adjustments to try to enforce what I consider normal play.


I know I am newer to this BBS.  But I am really at a loss. 

A person asks a casual question and half a dozen people start ranting about not having a new rule. 

The problem is nowhere was this ever brought up, making it a rule.  Except by the "no rule people".  Even when the original poster clarified for even the most casual reader that no "manditory rule" was being considered, and even if something were to appear at most it would be an optional guideline, there seems to be no let up on the "no rule" drum beat.

Am I missing something here?

  • Registered: 2006-01-17
  • Posts: 359

Re: Some thoughts on fleet organization

I rather like the idea of recommended deployment lists for certain navies. It makes sense when you consider design factors....i.e., a certain escort was specifically designed to support this battle cruiser class to assist with a design flaw......

In Star Wars, the Lancer Class Frigate is an escort ship with 20 Quad lasers, designed to screen Star Destroyers from enemy fighters and other small craft. This allows the Star Destroyer to concentrate on other capital ships - and use their Tie Fighters for specific strike missions, rather than defense against enemy fighters.

Even if Dan did make it a hard and fast rule... would it really matter? Last time I checked, he doesn't have commando teams that will air-drop into your gaming area and force his view at gunpoint......LOL. For that matter, every version of Starmada I have seen includes optional rules (which you do not have to include) and a disclaimer that the end user can change things in their games.

This is specifically a suggestion to assist in keeping the flavor of certain fleets. It is no different than the deployment percentages in B5Wars or the recommendations in some of the books for Star Fleet Battles. I don't see where there should be a problem with this.

Nahuris

  • Registered: 2007-06-18
  • Posts: 128

Re: Some thoughts on fleet organization

Spence wrote:
Marcus Smythe wrote:

However, thats far enough outside the normal bounds of play that we don't need to change the rules to make up for it.  Im not comfortable with the idea of making rules adjustments to try to enforce what I consider normal play.


I know I am newer to this BBS.  But I am really at a loss. 

A person asks a casual question and half a dozen people start ranting about not having a new rule. 

The problem is nowhere was this ever brought up, making it a rule.  Except by the "no rule people".  Even when the original poster clarified for even the most casual reader that no "manditory rule" was being considered, and even if something were to appear at most it would be an optional guideline, there seems to be no let up on the "no rule" drum beat.

Am I missing something here?

Well, I don't propose to speak for other posters, but for my own part, I was speaking both a.)  Hypothetically, and b.)  About something a little off topic (the idea of cost-adjusting things that are found to be overly efficient, not the idea of making an enforced fleet composition rule).

While the discourse hereabouts does on rare occasions get a few degrees above lukewarm, I don't think anyone was taking what cricket said as a proposed rule, so much as discussing the pros and cons of its effect, the interaction of any kind of fleet organization with different fleet and design philosophies (and it is at this latter point that we headed off into the land of 'is there a reason, game-balance-wise, that we should encourage or discourage single-ship fleets, swarm fleets, etc)

  • Registered: 2008-05-16
  • Posts: 76

Re: Some thoughts on fleet organization

Thanks all,

And I hope no one thinks I was wagging a finger at anyone.  Not my intent.  It just seemed at my limited time on the board that things were more than they are I guess.    I've been on a few forums in the past that were really bad and didn't really want a repeat.

Plus I wasn't sure if I hadn't stumbled into an old taboo flame topic, that every forum seems to have buried somewhere.


Glad to hear my impressions were wrong....

  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 811

Re: Some thoughts on fleet organization

if you want an old Taboo topic, let's start talking about banked weapons (tee hee, <duck>)

  • Registered: 2006-01-17
  • Posts: 740

Re: Some thoughts on fleet organization

How about banked weapons with range 30, and 2+ to hit, and ... :shock:  tongue