One of the ideas I was playing with for a while was to have a NRE 'mothball'
or Reserve fleet with older ships which no longer quite cut it on the front
lines. I wasn't sure how to represent this. One
thought I had was to remove the more 'high-tech' weapons, and to make
the ones that were installed bulkier. Any ideas on exactally how to peg
the ratio of 'modern' size to 'obsolete' size, and how to point-cost
them?
It would really depend on how 'obsolete' you want your fleet to be. If the
systems were experimental when installed, then increase the mass by 50% with
normal point costs per mass. If they're just 'antique' versions, then increase
the points by 1 or 2 per mass for the 'antique' systems.
'Neath Southern Skies
http://users.mcmedia.com.au/~denian/
*****
They seek him here, they seek him there; Those Frenchies seek him everywhere.
Is he in heaven or is he in hell? That damned elusive, Pimpernel.
- 'The Scarlet Pimpernel', Baroness Emma Orkzy
[quoted original message omitted]
> John M. Atkinson wrote:
Rather than tinkering with the points system / design rules, which I
hate doing, I've just restricted the weapons I fit on older designs. My
'obsolete
battleship' design has nothing larger than Class-2 batteries, no screens
(just armour and high hull integrity), no P-Torps, SMs etc. It only has
two PDS, the PSB behind this being that SMs weren't invented when the ship was
designed and fighters weren't such a threat (analogy = late 30s / early
40s wet navies). Low thrust engines are the order of the day as well.
I haven't yet designed an obsolete fighter carrier but I guess the same ideas
would apply, so you'd restrict the fighter types available to
(say)
standard, maybe interceptor.
> "John M. Atkinson" wrote:
> One of the ideas I was playing with for a while was to have a NRE
> On Thu, 18 Feb 1999, Tony Francis wrote:
> Rather than tinkering with the points system / design rules, which I
umm ... my battleship has nothing larger than class-2s anyway. bob
mackenzie's have class 1. i don't think absolute size of beam is a very good
way of limiting the design. i'd suggest increasing the required mass, or
saying that, say, 20% of obsolete ships is taken up by "inefficiency", so that
the ship's systems are effectively 25% larger.
> no screens
some people do it that way anyway!
Tom
> One of the ideas I was playing with for a while was to have a NRE
You have two choices, degrade performance of the systems, or increase the mass
for comperable systems. I'd opt for the former as being more reasonable.
I'd say a 33% to 50% decrease in performance would do quite nicely.
(i.e.
archaic beam batteries use 8 MU range bracketws instead if 12.)
One quick thought...
How about using the size and cost of the next higher weapon class? The more
the shift, the older the weapon, and the stats are allready figured for
you! :-)
In a message dated 99-02-19 01:10:14 EST, you write:
<< One quick thought...
How about using the size and cost of the next higher weapon class? The more
the shift, the older the weapon, and the stats are allready figured for
you! :-)
Donald Hosford >> So a normal Pulse Torp (one arc) would be 5 mass, a two arc
6 and a three arc 7. What about PDS? ADFC? Fire Con? Fighters?
-Stephen
> DracSpy@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 99-02-19 01:10:14 EST, you write:
The
> more the shift, the older the weapon, and the stats are allready
> How about using the size and cost of the next higher weapon
The
> more the shift, the older the weapon, and the stats are allready
No, no, no. We want to give people an incentive to use older ships, to reflect
a more realistic fleet makeup. Increase mass, okay, but decrease points cost,
so a player can buy more ships if they're less efficient.
> Laserlight wrote:
> >> How about using the size and cost of the next higher weapon
Sorry, I was just considering the size, I had forgot about the costs. Yes they
would have to be cheaper....How about taking the total cost of the ship, and
then reducing it by some percentage? Say 20% or 30%?
> Sorry, I was just considering the size, I had forgot about the costs.
Yes
> they
No, this would need to be done on a "by system" basis to maintain balance and
design flexiblity.
> Sean Bayan Schoonmaker wrote:
> >Sorry, I was just considering the size, I had forgot about the costs.
Yes
> >they
I see. This will take more thought. I have messed around with "empire
building/tech level" rules to understand whats happening.
(Don't have the FB yet...It is on order. Had to order it direct from Geohex.
Say KR? How long will it take to ship? I mailed it last week.)
> Donald Hosford wrote:
> Sean Bayan Schoonmaker wrote:
----Original Message Follows----
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 14:38:15 -0800
To: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
From: Sean Bayan Schoonmaker <schoon@aimnet.com>
Subject: Re: [FT] Obsolete ships
Reply-To: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
> Sorry, I was just considering the size, I had forgot about the costs.
Yes
> they
No, this would need to be done on a "by system" basis to maintain balance and
design flexiblity.
Schoon