The (ROF+1)*PEN*DMG formula came about because I wanted to weight ROF more, since it was more "versitile" (i.e., ROF is important against fighters, whereas PEN and DMG are not). However, as was subsequently pointed out to me, this has the OPPOSITE effect.

Several options are out there:

1) Leave it.

2) Change it to R*(P+.5)*(D+.5)

3) Change it to R*(P+1)*(D+1)/2

4) Change it to R*P*D (i.e., all three variables are equal weight)

Until such time as there is a new revision of Starmada, I leave it to players to decide which option works best for them.

Thanks for the reply.  We will take a look at the options you presented.  Here is something I did as well.  ( added ^1.8, or ^1.9 to the ROF formula)
This file shows both options, and a comparison to the original formula.

These make ROF more expensive than p & d, but dont change the costs of rof 1 weapons.

enjoy

Of these three options, I prefer the original, option #1. With the other two options it costs the same for 3x 1/1/1 weapons as it does for 1x 3/1/1 weapon. I'll have the same number of shots but it will take more hits to kill me and I'll never build anything but ROF 1 weapons ever again. In my opinion, it isn't broken. With the current algorithm of (ROF+1) x P x D you can get a discount for high ROF but the trade off is, you are easier to kill.

Dan,

After much wrangling, we have decided for option-

3) Change it to R*(P+1)*(D+1)/2

Now the big question is ...what cell in the ship builder has the weapon formula?

(PS OldNGrey  if you would be so kind as to answer for your sheet as well, it would be much appreciated!)

thanks!

Here is a tool for anyone that wants to use adjusted rules for cost on high ROF weapons.   This spreadsheet basically reverses the cost of ROF and P&D.  ROF is now more expensive, P&D are less expensive; as was the original intent of the game design. 

Having designed a few ships and played a few games, we are quite pleased  with the results.

Enjoy!

With this algorithm, 1 x 3/1/1 weapon will cost the same as 3 x 1/1/1 weapon. The ship with the higher number of weapons will be more survivable and there is no incentive to ever build anything but ROF 1 weapons. Here is a look:

Scenario 1
Given two 10 HS ships, one (Ship A) armed with 5 x 2/1/1 weapons and one (Ship B) armed with 10 x 1/1/1 weapons. They will have the same ORat and ComRat with the [ R*(P+1)*(D+1)/2 ] formula. Both (assuming no armor or shields) will statistically take 20 hits to destroy. Ship A with fewer weapons will have 1 weapon on the damage chart (1 in 6 hits will destroy a weapon) while ship B, with two times as many weapons, will have 2 weapons on the damage chart (2 in 6 hits will destroy a weapon). If both ships take 18 points of damage, ship A loses 3 weapons and ship B should lose 6 weapons. They should still have the same firepower.

Scenario 2
Given two 10 HS ships, one (Ship A) armed with 2 x 2/3/3 weapons and one (Ship B) armed with 4 x 1/3/3 weapons with the defenses as above (i.e. none). Again they will have the same ORat and ComRat with the [ R*(P+1)*(D+1)/2 ] formula. Now however, both only have one weapon on the damage track (1 in 6 chance of a weapon hit). After only twelve hits, Ship A is weaponless while ship B will still have two weapons.

All of this is assuming an even spread of dice rolls (which never seems to happen in the real world). But it seems to me that at best high ROF weapons have parity with ROF 1 weapons and in some situations, are less survivable. They are both equally effective against fighters but you have a better chance of keeping some ROF 1 weapons to shoot back with using this algorithm. This makes ROF 1 weapons superior to high ROF weapons and eliminates the reason to ever build high ROF weapons ever again.

Yea, I do the same thing. If I have to have more, then I try to have them in multiples of HS/2 to get the most weapons for the least vulnerability on the damage track. Kind of hard though in a campaign where you are restricted to pre-designed weapons.