• Registered: 2005-03-28
  • Posts: 5

Topic: Fighter costing and the SX worksheet

Dan,

How did you determine the costs for the fighter modifiers? I have been playing around with the idea of treating fighters like a battery (separate ToHit/ROF/PEN/DAM, etc.). It would add considerable flexibility in fighter design without adding too much more complexity.

Additionally, is there an error in the VBAM/SX worksheet?. The sheet seems to calculate defensive ratings based upon the formula Hull*2*Shield Factor*Specials rather than Hull*3*Shield Factor*Specials. I found this while trying to design a sheet that combined the attributes of the older SX Fleet worksheet with the VBAM/SX worksheet. If there is any interest, I'll post it for the group.  Thanks.

Jack

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

Re: Fighter costing and the SX worksheet

The entry in the book is incorrect. The correct formula for determining the base defensive factor is indeed Hull*2*Shield Factor*Specials

  • Registered: 2006-03-23
  • Posts: 241

Re: Fighter costing and the SX worksheet

jwhsu wrote:

I have been playing around with the idea of treating fighters like a battery (separate ToHit/ROF/PEN/DAM, etc.). It would add considerable flexibility in fighter design without adding too much more complexity.

I would be interested. I've played around myself with the idea of customizable Fighters, Drones, Battlesats, marine boarding parties and Mines. It would be cool to have control over the small craft-like components of the game as with the weapons.

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

Re: Fighter costing and the SX worksheet

Hello everyone,

I like using Battle satellites, and would be very interested in being able to customize them in the same way as fighters, and now as drones can be.  I wonder if the same cost modifiers for fighters can be used to make assault, heavy, & fast(er) Battle satellites.  It would be very useful.   :idea:
0r we opening a can of worms?   :shock:

[with a sigh, the game designers may be wondering if the players will EVER be content; good grief!!<LOL>]   :roll:

(My friends and I here in NE Fla are playing on Sunday 4/1.  We are gonna play in St Augustine at one of the gamer's  home.  Saves 'em a 41 mile drive up here to Jacksonville).  smile

Steven Gilchrist; Jacksonville, Fla, USA.

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

Re: Fighter costing and the SX worksheet

I think the point is to modify the game?

If you have any ideas I'm sure Dan would be happy to hear them smile

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

Re: Fighter costing and the SX worksheet

Here is an idea that I had about Battle Satellites.  :idea:   
Use the options & costs outlined in F.2, Customized Fighter Flights, to modify battle satellites.  The one uncertanty is what speed to make "Fast Battlesates".  should they be speed 6, caused by the +20% cost. Or should they be speed 7; fast = +2 to speed...  :wink:

This seems logical to me, but not having taken the time to do the many calculations and testing that the game designers have done, I could be wrong.   :shock:
I will defer to the game designers.  I admire their accomplishment, this Starmada game, and value their opinion  big_smile     
What does everyone think :?:

Steven Gilchrist; Jacksonville, Fla, USA

  • Registered: 2005-03-28
  • Posts: 5

Re: Fighter costing and the SX worksheet

murtalianconfederacy: Thanks for the clarification. I would have replied sooner but real life right now is intruding on gaming ideas.

I think I figured out how to cost extended weapon ranges. Fighters as essentially guns with the stats RNG:1, ToHit:5+, R/P/D: 1/1/1. There are 6 hexes at range 1, 12 hexes at range 2 and 18 hexes at range 3. If we assume a flight of 6 fighters with a ToHit of 5+, we can perform the following calculations:

Range 2: total hexes (range 1 + range 2 = 6+12=18 )

- # hits @ range 1 = 2 / flight
- # hits @ range 2 = 1 / flight
If we multiply the potential number of hits by the number of hexes involved, this gives us:
- Range 1 (5+): 2*6=12
- Range 2 (6+ as per SX and SX Brigade): 1*12=12
If we add the total number of hits and divide it by the total number of hexes involved, this gives us:
- (12+12)/18 = 24/18 = 1.3, which is the modifier given in the rulebook.

Extending this to range 3 would allow short/med/long range brackets and give us the following:

- Total Hexes:=6 (rng 1) + 12 (rng 2) + 18 (rng 3) = 36
- # hits @ rng 1 (short) = 3 / flight
- # hits @ rng 2 (med) = 2 / flight
- # hits @ rng 3 (long) = 1 / flight
Multiplying # hits by # hexes gives us:
- Rng 1: 3 * 6 = 18
- Rng 2: 2 * 12 = 24
- Rng 3: 1 * 18 = 18
Total hits / total hexes = 60/36 = 1.6 modifier.

As far as the other parameters:
- ToHit: Fighter base cost * 3 * ToHit factor
- ROF: Fighter base cost / 2 * (ROF +1)
- PEN/DAM: fighter base cost * PEN/DAM

The adjustment for fighter speed has been discussed in a previous thread but it would be speed/10.

Drones and battle satellites would use similar calculations.

As far as Steven's question on costing battle satellite movement, I think a cost of MP/5 is appropriate as they do have RNG 12 weapons compared to  RNG 1-2 for fighters and RNG 0 for drones.

As far as integration with TL and campaign settings, a prior thread by Tyrel Lohr did touch upon most of these ideas:

http://mj12games.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1049

I have not been able to playtest these ideas as I haven't had the time or any local players to try them on :-(. I also am not a statistician so I'm not sure whether these calculations are correct or if I am totally misguided and should scratch the entire project.

The worksheet I'm working on has incorporated these ideas but is very rough and real life has been limiting my ability to polish it to a point where others can critique it. Again I think Dan and the people on this board have done a wonderful job in enhancing the flexibility of the design system without breaking the cost system and complicating gameplay. I hope this may add some fexibility to the small craft aspect of SX without bogging gameplay down with too many details.

Jack