Topic: New edition: weapon conversion example

Maybe this will help people grasp what I'm doing with the new attack dice system... and see that nothing is being lost in translation.

Let's consider an example from the Imperial Starmada Sourcebook: the Negali Sverse-class cruiser. She has three batteries:

Shock Cannons: RNG 15 / ROF 1 / ACC 4+ / IMP 3 / DMG 4
Fire-Linked / Piercing
[AB][AB]

Dorsal/Ventral Plasma Cannons: RNG 12 / ROF 1 / ACC 4+ / IMP 1 / DMG 2
Doubled Range Mods
[AB][AB]

Railguns: RNG 9 / ROF 2 / ACC 4+ / IMP 1 / DMG 1
Carronade
[ACE][ACE][BDF][BDF]

First, the Shock Cannons. The total number of attack dice in the battery is determined by the following equation: # of weapons x ROF x IMP = 2 x 1 x 3 = 6. To account for ACC 4+, we give them the "Accurate" weapon trait. Likewise, because DMG is greater than 1, we use the "Damage [X]" weapon trait. "Fire-Linked" has no counterpart in the new system; however, the "Piercing" trait simply transfers over. There's a single bank of two weapons firing forward. Since the ratio of weapons in the bank to total weapons is 100%, the arc modifier is zero: thus, the arc display is "[FF]".

Second, the Plasma Cannons. The total number of attack dice is: 2 x 1 x 1 = 2. Again, the "Accurate" trait applies, as does "Damage [X]". "Doubled Range Mods" is renamed as "Diffuse". Once again, the arc display is simple: [FF].

Finally, the Railguns. The total number of attack dice is: 4 x 2 x 1 = 8. As before, the "Accurate" trait applies. The "Carronade" trait simply carries over. There are two banks, each with 50% of the total. A 50% reduction in firepower translates to a -2 modifier; thus, the arc display is [PB2][SB2].

The result:

Shock Cannons [size=85](Acr/Dx4/Prc)[/size]
Arcs [FF] / Range 5-10-15 / Attack Dice: 6 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 1

Dorsal/Ventral Plasma Cannons [size=85](Acr/Dfs/Dx2)[/size]
Arcs [FF] / Range 4-8-12 / Attack Dice: 2 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1

Railguns [size=85](Acr/Crn)[/size]
Arcs [PB2][SB2] / Range 3-6-9 / Attack Dice: 8 - 6 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1

This is merely the simplest way of converting it over. A little bit of imagination would allow different results -- for example, instead of applying the "Accurate" trait, one could use the ACC stat as a multiplier to the number of attack dice. ACC 4+ = x1.5; ACC 3+ = x2.0. In this case, the results would be:

Shock Cannons [size=85](Dx4/Prc)[/size]
Arcs [FF] / Range 5-10-15 / Attack Dice: 9 - 6 - 5 - 3 - 2 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 1

Dorsal/Ventral Plasma Cannons [size=85](Dfs/Dx2)[/size]
Arcs [FF] / Range 4-8-12 / Attack Dice: 3 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 1

Railguns [size=85](Crn)[/size]
Arcs [PB2][SB2] / Range 3-6-9 / Attack Dice: 12 - 8 - 6 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 1

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

Re: New edition: weapon conversion example

Terrific!!!

Marc - drool...

Re: New edition: weapon conversion example

So, would you be able to allow SAE impact dice to take the same form as Damage [X] in a similar way to damage dice?

Re: New edition: weapon conversion example

AFAIK, as per the above examples, IMP is factored as dice.

Marc

Re: New edition: weapon conversion example

murtalianconfederacy wrote:

So, would you be able to allow SAE impact dice to take the same form as Damage [X] in a similar way to damage dice?

Yes. "Impact [X]" would function identically to the existing IMP stat.

madpax wrote:

AFAIK, as per the above examples, IMP is factored as dice.

Please note the example I provided is (slightly) simplified so that the process is as clearly articulated as possible. In order to make sure the conversions remain "legal" (in terms of space units) and their relative combat ratings remain constant, some other factors will no doubt crop up in the final conversion rules.

Further, if an "Impact [X]" trait is adopted, then one could either use IMP as a factor to the number of attack dice, or apply that trait, depending upon the desired effect.

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

Re: New edition: weapon conversion example

Ah, okay, so there would be an Impact [X] weapon trait in addition to the Damage [X] weapon trait. I was asking if the impact dice of SAE weapons in a conversion to the new rules be either converted into attack dice or transformed into the Damage [X] weapon trait, but that answers that question in a different way than I'd expected...:D

Re: New edition: weapon conversion example

murtalianconfederacy wrote:

Ah, okay, so there would be an Impact [X] weapon trait in addition to the Damage [X] weapon trait.

Well, there could be. Whether there will be... :?

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

Re: New edition: weapon conversion example

murtalianconfederacy wrote:

Ah, okay, so there would be an Impact [X] weapon trait in addition to the Damage [X] weapon trait. I was asking if the impact dice of SAE weapons in a conversion to the new rules be either converted into attack dice or transformed into the Damage [X] weapon trait, but that answers that question in a different way than I'd expected...:D

I'm hoping that the [Dx4] for the shock cannons is a misprint.  wink
There are a few of us who are thinking that a [Dx2] is plenty.
[Dx3] is borderline excessive, while [Dx4] will hopefully never see use in our group.

While this is the first I've heard of the possibility of an Impact weapon trait, I also believe that an impact boost, in addition to a damage boost, could also potentially cause problems from a balance point of view.
That's just us, though.
Kevin

Re: New edition: weapon conversion example

underling wrote:

There are a few of us who are thinking that a [Dx2] is plenty.
[Dx3] is borderline excessive, while [Dx4] will hopefully never see use in our group.
Kevin

Is it really a problem, as long as this is taken into account in the ship cost?

My biggest worry would be to find in S:NE some S:AE weapon traits that are much too excessive, especially in combination. I remember a fateful game with repeating and continuous damage weapons, where one hit could lend to major damages (I had such weapons...)...

Marc

Re: New edition: weapon conversion example

underling wrote:

I'm hoping that the [Dx4] for the shock cannons is a misprint.  wink
There are a few of us who are thinking that a [Dx2] is plenty.
[Dx3] is borderline excessive, while [Dx4] will hopefully never see use in our group.

While I have absolutely no desire to rehash earlier discussions, I'd like to point out that from a game balance perspective, there is no appreciable difference between a weapon battery with N attack dice and a hypothetical "Quadruple Damage" trait on the one hand, and a weapon battery with 4N attack dice on the other.

Again, please keep in mind the example above should be seen as "proof of concept", and not the exact formulas one might see in the final rulebook.

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

Re: New edition: weapon conversion example

cricket wrote:

Second, the Plasma Cannons. The total number of attack dice is: 2 x 1 x 1 = 2. Again, the "Accurate" trait applies, as does "Damage [X]". "Doubled Range Mods" is renamed as "Diffuse". Once again, the arc display is simple: [FF].

Juste a note. According to the ship sheet examples as there: http://www.mj12games.com/forum/viewtopi … p;start=50, Diffuse has been given to Phasers, but originally, Photon had double range modifiers.
And the latter has no more traits. :?:

Marc

Re: New edition: weapon conversion example

madpax wrote:
cricket wrote:

Second, the Plasma Cannons. The total number of attack dice is: 2 x 1 x 1 = 2. Again, the "Accurate" trait applies, as does "Damage [X]". "Doubled Range Mods" is renamed as "Diffuse". Once again, the arc display is simple: [FF].

Juste a note. According to the ship sheet examples as there: http://www.mj12games.com/forum/viewtopi … p;start=50, Diffuse has been given to Phasers, but originally, Photon had double range modifiers.
And the latter has no more traits. :?:

Marc

Photon Torpedoes should have had (as things stand) Diffuse, with the addition of Slow for the oVerload.
Just a slight glitch in the example, which is after all just an example.

Paul

Re: New edition: weapon conversion example

Currently I play SFO rather than SAE (I like to field lots of ships) but I design my ships in SAE and convert to SFO, as it allows me to more easily imagine the weapons and ship designs. Perhaps the solution for us unimaginative diehards is to use the 'conversion' rules to design weapons systems the old way then add a ship description as 'fluff' in the fleet lists to describe the weapons we have envisaged, similar to the existing source books. Then play using the new rules, having been told by our 'source book' what the dice represent in a particular case. That way we get the benefits of both worlds umm stellar systems ... galaxies ... universes ... dimensions ... whatever.

Re: New edition: weapon conversion example

mikeaxe wrote:

Currently I play SFO rather than SAE (I like to field lots of ships) but I design my ships in SAE and convert to SFO, as it allows me to more easily imagine the weapons and ship designs. Perhaps the solution for us unimaginative diehards is to use the 'conversion' rules to design weapons systems the old way then add a ship description as 'fluff' in the fleet lists to describe the weapons we have envisaged, similar to the existing source books. Then play using the new rules, having been told by our 'source book' what the dice represent in a particular case. That way we get the benefits of both worlds umm stellar systems ... galaxies ... universes ... dimensions ... whatever.

Agreed. After looking at Dan's conversion example, this was pretty much my exact thought. I have only played SFO twice, and enjoyed it, but I cannot for the life of me build ships in the system without first doing them in S:AE, where I can (more) clearly define what I want. I chalk it up to lack of flexibility in my old age. I have actually found the process of converting ships from other games with greater specificity (B5Wars for example) is actually harder than doing them in S:AE first where I can "balance" them better. I'm imagine that if I had never played earlier versions of Starmada and had started with SFO, I probably wouldn't have this hang up. I think I'm going to like S:NE, but I may have to do some mental yoga getting used to the differences and forgetting the "old" way of doing things.
Cheers,
Erik

Re: New edition: weapon conversion example

Blacklancer99 wrote:
mikeaxe wrote:

Currently I play SFO rather than SAE (I like to field lots of ships) but I design my ships in SAE and convert to SFO, as it allows me to more easily imagine the weapons and ship designs. Perhaps the solution for us unimaginative diehards is to use the 'conversion' rules to design weapons systems the old way then add a ship description as 'fluff' in the fleet lists to describe the weapons we have envisaged, similar to the existing source books. Then play using the new rules, having been told by our 'source book' what the dice represent in a particular case. That way we get the benefits of both worlds umm stellar systems ... galaxies ... universes ... dimensions ... whatever.

Agreed. After looking at Dan's conversion example, this was pretty much my exact thought. I have only played SFO twice, and enjoyed it, but I cannot for the life of me build ships in the system without first doing them in S:AE, where I can (more) clearly define what I want. I chalk it up to lack of flexibility in my old age. I have actually found the process of converting ships from other games with greater specificity (B5Wars for example) is actually harder than doing them in S:AE first where I can "balance" them better. I'm imagine that if I had never played earlier versions of Starmada and had started with SFO, I probably wouldn't have this hang up. I think I'm going to like S:NE, but I may have to do some mental yoga getting used to the differences and forgetting the "old" way of doing things.
Cheers,
Erik

So you would find it easier/better/more enjoyable to design a weapon as AE and be given the new stats?
A mini weapon converter?

Paul

Re: New edition: weapon conversion example

OldnGrey wrote:

So you would find it easier/better/more enjoyable to design a weapon as AE and be given the new stats?
A mini weapon converter?

Paul

Speaking strictly for myself, I would say yes. I think at least until I have some time to grasp the system that would absolutely help. In the sense of bringing designs from S:AE forward to S:NE I think it is almost a necessity (for me at least) as it would cut a lot of the grind-work out of the process. I'm sure that things will require tweaking as when designs go from SAE to SFO, but tweaking beats the heck out of re-creating from scratch in a new system!
I guess thanks in advance for a S:NE shipyard are probably in order  wink
Cheers,
Erik

Re: New edition: weapon conversion example

Blacklancer99 wrote:
OldnGrey wrote:

So you would find it easier/better/more enjoyable to design a weapon as AE and be given the new stats?
A mini weapon converter?
Paul

Speaking strictly for myself, I would say yes. I think at least until I have some time to grasp the system that would absolutely help. In the sense of bringing designs from S:AE forward to S:NE I think it is almost a necessity (for me at least) as it would cut a lot of the grind-work out of the process. I'm sure that things will require tweaking as when designs go from SAE to SFO, but tweaking beats the heck out of re-creating from scratch in a new system!
I guess thanks in advance for a S:NE shipyard are probably in order  wink
Cheers,
Erik

If I'm understanding you correctly, I think you'll probably find that after you convert or design a ship or two, you'll find this to not be the case. I've converted a number of ships, and I found it a bit tedious at best. But to be fair, these were done by hand, as we don't have an "easy conversion tool" yet.
It probably would've been easier for me to take an existing S:AE ship, and then simply do a "best fit" in S:NE. The flip side of that is a little consitency would be lost in doing so.
Kevin

Re: New edition: weapon conversion example

underling wrote:

we don't have an "easy conversion tool" yet.

And I believe that is where Mr. OldnGrey comes into the picture  smile
Erik

Re: New edition: weapon conversion example

This looks good. 
Will there be a Ship Designer Program that will make allow ship sesigning and print out SSDs, for this New Starmada 2012 version?

Re: New edition: weapon conversion example

BeowulfJB wrote:

Will there be a Ship Designer Program that will make allow ship sesigning and print out SSDs, for this New Starmada 2012 version?

Maybe... smile

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

Re: New edition: weapon conversion example

Is it possible to have a list of weapon traits, please?

Marc

Re: New edition: weapon conversion example

I've gotta save SOMETHING for the rulebook, right? smile

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

Re: New edition: weapon conversion example

cricket wrote:

I've gotta save SOMETHING for the rulebook, right? smile

You could resolve this by simply releasing the book this week as a wonderful Christmas surprise!

Re: New edition: weapon conversion example

cricket wrote:

I've gotta save SOMETHING for the rulebook, right? smile

The set-up rules for the initiation scenario? big_smile

Marc

Re: New edition: weapon conversion example

cricket wrote:

I've gotta save SOMETHING for the rulebook, right? smile

You know what Cricket, if you just post the complete rules with detailed examples and full color graphics, it would make it easier for everyone here to decide if they like the system and if they want to buy it!  wink
Erik