• Registered: 2013-02-06
  • Posts: 7

Topic: Questions about Starmada Nova v1.1

Good morning, all. After having played my first session of Starmada, I had a few questions.

1. Why are overlapping arcs listed for weapons? For example: The Majestic-Class BC lists the arcs for the Close Defense Cannons as "[FF2][PH4][SH4]", meaning that any target at (say) 1 o'clock will be in both the FF and SH arcs. Is it the case that (1a) all targets for a particular weapon system must be in the same arc, meaning that if I were shooting at one target at 1 o'clock and another at 4 o'clock, I'd be using the SH arc and would be subject to the -4 for both shots? Or is it the case that (1b) as the rules state, as long as a target is in any arc, it can be targeted, which means that the Close Defense Cannons arc list should be instead listed as "[FF2][AP4][AS4]"?

2. For weapon systems which have penalties for all arcs, why not remove the minimum penalty and shift the attack dice list to the left by the same amount? For example, why have a weapon system with arc "[FF2]" and attack dice "A B C D ...", and not "[FF]" with attack dice "C D E ..."? It's simpler and less confusing.

3. In the ship design section, why use log with sqrt(.5) as the base? Why not simplify "log (base sqrt(.5)) X" to "-2.885ln(X)", since every scientific calculator has an "ln" function?

Thanks for the time!
-Damian

  • From: Denver, CO
  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 3,578

Re: Questions about Starmada Nova v1.1

FifthInterval wrote:

1. Why are overlapping arcs listed for weapons? For example: The Majestic-Class BC lists the arcs for the Close Defense Cannons as "[FF2][PH4][SH4]", meaning that any target at (say) 1 o'clock will be in both the FF and SH arcs.

Each arc designation indicates a bank of weapons, each of which makes a separate attack.

2. For weapon systems which have penalties for all arcs, why not remove the minimum penalty and shift the attack dice list to the left by the same amount? For example, why have a weapon system with arc "[FF2]" and attack dice "A B C D ...", and not "[FF]" with attack dice "C D E ..."? It's simpler and less confusing.

This has been suggested by others, and is not a bad idea. The reason things are the way they are now is so that one can quickly determine the relative size of each battery by looking at the first number in the row, even if all of those weapons cannot be used to attack a single target.

3. In the ship design section, why use log with sqrt(.5) as the base? Why not simplify "log (base sqrt(.5)) X" to "-2.885ln(X)", since every scientific calculator has an "ln" function?

Not entirely sure why that would be "simpler". smile

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

mj12games's Website

  • Registered: 2013-02-06
  • Posts: 7

Re: Questions about Starmada Nova v1.1

Thanks for getting back to me.

cricket wrote:

Each arc designation indicates a bank of weapons, each of which makes a separate attack.

This doesn't address my question, though. The two interpretations I listed (1a and 1b) are distinct cases; which one is the accurate interpretation?

cricket wrote:

The reason things are the way they are now is so that one can quickly determine the relative size of each battery by looking at the first number in the row, even if all of those weapons cannot be used to attack a single target.

Except, with my group, this worked the opposite way. At-a-glance assessment of weapon systems by numbers which would never be achievable was actually de-clarifying. For example, if there's no way that a Furious-class DD will ever get to 7 attack dice on its CDCs (because all arcs are -3), then it's not a 7-dice weapon, and seeing it as one wasn't helpful to us.

cricket wrote:

Not entirely sure why that would be "simpler".

Because you wouldn't have to have a page of screwy log value tables to help people? wink No, seriously, it would be much simpler because every scientific calculator in the world has a natural log function, and it's the native log function implemented in most coding languages. As it is, I had to simplify all the related equations in order to use them when designing my own ships (first by hand, then using Perl code). Armor score is, for instance, equal to 2.885ln(1+A/H), which to me is a lot simpler, and more easily worked out on a hand calculator. I know this has nothing to do with gameplay - it's just a notational suggestion from a math guy. smile

Thanks for getting back.
-Damian

  • Registered: 2013-02-06
  • Posts: 7

Re: Questions about Starmada Nova v1.1

Hang on...

cricket wrote:

Each arc designation indicates a bank of weapons, each of which makes a separate attack.

So, it took me hitting the "submit" button on my most recent post before I really understood your answer here. What you're saying is that if a weapon lists arcs as, say, "[FF][PH2][SH2]", it doesn't mean a weapon which has these three arcs - but rather three separate weapons, each with one arc in the specified list? That makes a lot more sense than either of the other two interpretations I had.

Apologies for the confusion on my part. smile
-Damian

  • From: Denver, CO
  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 3,578

Re: Questions about Starmada Nova v1.1

FifthInterval wrote:

This doesn't address my question, though. The two interpretations I listed (1a and 1b) are distinct cases; which one is the accurate interpretation?

Neither is correct.

Looking at the Majestic's close defense cannons, I can attack one target in the FF arc at -2; a second target in the PH arc at -4; and a third target in the SH arc, also at -4.

Except, with my group, this worked the opposite way. At-a-glance assessment of weapon systems by numbers which would never be achievable was actually de-clarifying. For example, if there's no way that a Furious-class DD will ever get to 7 attack dice on its CDCs (because all arcs are -3), then it's not a 7-dice weapon, and seeing it as one wasn't helpful to us.

Which is why I admitted the suggestion was a good one. smile

Because you wouldn't have to have a page of screwy log value tables to help people? wink No, seriously, it would be much simpler because every scientific calculator in the world has a natural log function, and it's the native log function implemented in most coding languages [...] I know this has nothing to do with gameplay - it's just a notational suggestion from a math guy. smile

A fair point. FWIW, I wrote that section after completing the Drydock in PHP, and in that language the syntax is "log(X,base)". So that's where my head was.

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

mj12games's Website

  • Registered: 2013-02-06
  • Posts: 7

Re: Questions about Starmada Nova v1.1

cricket wrote:

Looking at the Majestic's close defense cannons, I can attack one target in the FF arc at -2; a second target in the PH arc at -4; and a third target in the SH arc, also at -4.

Got it. I'm on board now. smile

Which is why I admitted the suggestion was a good one. smile

True, thanks. smile

A fair point. FWIW, I wrote that section after completing the Drydock in PHP, and in that language the syntax is "log(X,base)". So that's where my head was.

I gotcha. Most of my coding is done in Perl or SQL, where all logs are natural. Plus, it makes things like derivatives simpler, too. YMMV.

Again, thanks for the feedback.
-Damian

  • From: Denver, CO
  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 3,578

Re: Questions about Starmada Nova v1.1

FifthInterval wrote:

Except, with my group, this worked the opposite way. At-a-glance assessment of weapon systems by numbers which would never be achievable was actually de-clarifying. For example, if there's no way that a Furious-class DD will ever get to 7 attack dice on its CDCs (because all arcs are -3), then it's not a 7-dice weapon, and seeing it as one wasn't helpful to us.

Does the fact that each arc indicates a separate weapon change your interpretation of this?

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

mj12games's Website

  • Registered: 2013-02-06
  • Posts: 7

Re: Questions about Starmada Nova v1.1

cricket wrote:
FifthInterval wrote:

Except, with my group, this worked the opposite way. At-a-glance assessment of weapon systems by numbers which would never be achievable was actually de-clarifying. For example, if there's no way that a Furious-class DD will ever get to 7 attack dice on its CDCs (because all arcs are -3), then it's not a 7-dice weapon, and seeing it as one wasn't helpful to us.

Does the fact that each arc indicates a separate weapon change your interpretation of this?

Nope. wink It doesn't matter whether I have one system (that isn't really a 7-dice weapon) that can fire in any of three different arcs, or whether I have three systems (that aren't really 7-dice weapons) that each fires in its own arc. Same issue in each case.

-Damian

  • Registered: 2010-03-09
  • Posts: 630

Re: Questions about Starmada Nova v1.1

In your example, it looks like you have 4 close-in defense cannons. Two are FF, one is SH and one is PH. Personnaly, I'm more on the 'one weapon type = one big battery with one fire arc'. More easier to handle during play.

Marc

  • Registered: 2013-02-06
  • Posts: 7

Re: Questions about Starmada Nova v1.1

madpax wrote:

In your example, it looks like you have 4 close-in defense cannons. Two are FF, one is SH and one is PH. Personnaly, I'm more on the 'one weapon type = one big battery with one fire arc'. More easier to handle during play.

The argument in favor of the multiple arcs is that it makes positional strategy more important, especially if you factor in terrain features.

-Damian

  • Registered: 2010-03-09
  • Posts: 630

Re: Questions about Starmada Nova v1.1

Not necessarily. Positioning is not really important if your weapons arcs are all TT. But if at least one, powerful, weapon has a more restricted arc, then strategy positioning is more important than with multiple arcs and obviously weakened weapons.

Marc

  • Registered: 2013-02-06
  • Posts: 7

Re: Questions about Starmada Nova v1.1

madpax wrote:

Not necessarily. Positioning is not really important if your weapons arcs are all TT. But if at least one, powerful, weapon has a more restricted arc, then strategy positioning is more important than with multiple arcs and obviously weakened weapons.

Yep, I agree with you there. However, multiple weapons with their own arcs can create positional requirements if you're using directional damage. Either way, the greater the proportion of a ship's firepower that's allocated to TT-arced weapons, the more its strategy becomes simply "get close"; the more directional the weaponry is, the more complex the strategy can become. That's what I was getting at, I guess. smile

-Damian

  • Registered: 2010-03-09
  • Posts: 630

Re: Questions about Starmada Nova v1.1

You are right. But having multiple arcs for the same weapon type can become tedious. First, you have to determine, for each arc, which enemy ship is in, then determine how many AD. Roll dice for each target, resolve, etc.
If you have one weapon = one arc, it's very quick. With one weapon = three or more arcs, well, you can easily see that it will taker more time. My personal opinion is that it doesn't add game pleasure, but it's purely personal.

Marc

  • Registered: 2022-11-16
  • Posts: 516

Re: Questions about Starmada Nova v1.1

FifthInterval wrote:

For weapon systems which have penalties for all arcs, why not remove the minimum penalty and shift the attack dice list to the left by the same amount? For example, why have a weapon system with arc "[FF2]" and attack dice "A B C D ...", and not "[FF]" with attack dice "C D E ..."? It's simpler and less confusing.

My local group has been involved with this from the playtest stage and on, and what you've suggested is exactly the way we handle the dice columns. The amount of variance you get in a column or two, in our opinion, that occurs when simplifying the modifiers isn't worth worrying about.
So with any given weapon, we always set the smallest modifier at zero, and go from there.

Kevin