Jump Drives, Mines, Swarms, Hull Costs, etc.

Discussions about Cosmic Starfire.

Moderators: SDS Members, SDS Owner

Forum rules
Cosmic Starfire is being designed by Fred Burton (aka 'Crucis'). Please direct all inquiries to him.

1. Nothing obscene.
2. No advertising or spamming.
3. No personal information. Mostly aimed at the posting of OTHER people's information.
4. No flame wars. We encourage debate, but it becomes a flame when insults fly and tempers flare.

Try to stick with the forum's topic. Threads that belong to another forum will be moved to that forum.

Re: Jump Drives, Mines, Swarms, Hull Costs, etc.

Postby tmul4050 on Tue 04 Jun 2013 04:15

On Prototyping I think if it was dropped no one would miss it. I always thought it was strange to prototype hull types. Now systems I can see that because that does happen in the real world. But I guess that could be seen to be part of the research effort to develop the system.

An idea, if you didn't mind the potential complexity. When a newly developed system is installed on a vessel, say that the vessel is of poor quality for a month as it works out the systems bugs, and doctrine for its use is modified.
Also say that this applies only in the first month it is deployed. This adds to the ordinary workup time.

eg Gun/missile launchers are developed. Rex the Reckless, Monarch of the Thrill seeker Imperium :D orders that ten of his destroyers are immediately refitted to include the weapon. When the ten destroyers are finished, the time for work up is increased by one month. (two months I think, I am not sure of the rules for working up a ship, I cant remember if it applies to refits). This extra time only applies to the first time the gun/missiles are deployed as the lessons of their use are learned. We can only hope Rex doesn't use them to fight someone during that time ;) .
tmul4050
Commander
Commander
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Sun 27 Dec 2009 20:28

Re: Jump Drives, Mines, Swarms, Hull Costs, etc.

Postby JoeBuckeye on Tue 04 Jun 2013 05:23

Crucis wrote:One thing that I'm a little wary about with this idea is this... Let's say that a hull built before its soft limit takes a 10% hit to available HS. If that's an 80 HS BC, you'd be talking about a 72 HS BC. This would introduce a predictable element into the mix, since if someone encountered a 72 HS BC, they might automatically assume that the BC was built before its normal TL, and hence would give the opposing admiral some useful intel. When the penalty is a "weak hull" and/or increased cost, those are details that aren't readily apparent to the opposing player, at least until start doing damage and the weakness of the hull becomes apparent. Thee "weak hull" penalty is a more subtle and not readily apparent penalty than the reduced hull size penalty. I won't say that there isn't an appeal to your idea. it does make sense. But it also eliminates some of the uncertainty I'd like to see added back into hull sizes. (Of course, a really, really tricky player who has proper BC hulls could get really tricky and build them to this reduced size to try to trick enemy players into thinking that the BC was built at a lower TL than it really was.)


Or make max hull size build-able be a item to research and each time you complete it you roll a d10 (or 5 + d10 or something) and add that many hull spaces to your max build. The hull size chart would remain the same but your max size would be totally random and based on how much you push it.

This might lead to you building all sorts of different sized ships as you are pushing your max hull size out. Do you want to wait to see how much bigger you can build something or do you want the somewhat bigger hull now?
Joe
JoeBuckeye
Commander
Commander
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Sun 19 Dec 2010 16:14

Re: Jump Drives, Mines, Swarms, Hull Costs, etc.

Postby Crucis on Tue 04 Jun 2013 19:18

JoeBuckeye wrote:Or make max hull size build-able be a item to research and each time you complete it you roll a d10 (or 5 + d10 or something) and add that many hull spaces to your max build. The hull size chart would remain the same but your max size would be totally random and based on how much you push it.

This might lead to you building all sorts of different sized ships as you are pushing your max hull size out. Do you want to wait to see how much bigger you can build something or do you want the somewhat bigger hull now?


We'll see.

IF (big "if") I go forward with some sort of generation "hull" linkages to engine advances, I suspect that what you've suggested above would complicate matters more than they already would be with my idea.

Generally speaking, my underlying assumption is that hull sizes are directly proportional to engine power with actual size being determined by multiplying the hull type's I/MP engine power by the power rating of the engines in question, (i.e. i30, i32, whatever).
User avatar
Crucis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 1888
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27

Re: Jump Drives, Mines, Swarms, Hull Costs, etc.

Postby tmul4050 on Wed 05 Jun 2013 06:02

Crucis wrote:
JoeBuckeye wrote:Or make max hull size build-able be a item to research and each time you complete it you roll a d10 (or 5 + d10 or something) and add that many hull spaces to your max build. The hull size chart would remain the same but your max size would be totally random and based on how much you push it.

This might lead to you building all sorts of different sized ships as you are pushing your max hull size out. Do you want to wait to see how much bigger you can build something or do you want the somewhat bigger hull now?


We'll see.

IF (big "if") I go forward with some sort of generation "hull" linkages to engine advances, I suspect that what you've suggested above would complicate matters more than they already would be with my idea.

Generally speaking, my underlying assumption is that hull sizes are directly proportional to engine power with actual size being determined by multiplying the hull type's I/MP engine power by the power rating of the engines in question, (i.e. i30, i32, whatever).


How would engine efficiency work with J drives, or are they being dropped?
tmul4050
Commander
Commander
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Sun 27 Dec 2009 20:28

Re: Jump Drives, Mines, Swarms, Hull Costs, etc.

Postby Crucis on Wed 05 Jun 2013 06:41

tmul4050 wrote:
Crucis wrote:
JoeBuckeye wrote:Or make max hull size build-able be a item to research and each time you complete it you roll a d10 (or 5 + d10 or something) and add that many hull spaces to your max build. The hull size chart would remain the same but your max size would be totally random and based on how much you push it.

This might lead to you building all sorts of different sized ships as you are pushing your max hull size out. Do you want to wait to see how much bigger you can build something or do you want the somewhat bigger hull now?


We'll see.

IF (big "if") I go forward with some sort of generation "hull" linkages to engine advances, I suspect that what you've suggested above would complicate matters more than they already would be with my idea.

Generally speaking, my underlying assumption is that hull sizes are directly proportional to engine power with actual size being determined by multiplying the hull type's I/MP engine power by the power rating of the engines in question, (i.e. i30, i32, whatever).


How would engine efficiency work with J drives, or are they being dropped?


J drives are in limbo at the moment.

One of the problems that I encountered was that having a faster drive at the start (than the I drive) is that tactical speed is an incredible advantage, and trying to balance things out requires doing things to the faster drive that turn around and can make the drive seem undesirable to use. For example, in Ultra, J drives have larger blind spots, higher turn modes, lower strategic speeds, and LRWs are limited to 90% of their max range... which causes me to wonder, why bother using such a hamstrung drive in the first place?

At this point, I think that the better solution is going to be to introduce some form of J drive at a higher TL where it can be seen as an advancement and its increased tactical speed won't have to be hamstrung with such seriously debilitating penalties for the sake of balance. Exactly what form this iteration of the J drive will take, I don't know yet, though I have an idea brewing in my mind that has yet to fully form ... mostly because I've been working on other things.
User avatar
Crucis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 1888
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27

Re: Jump Drives, Mines, Swarms, Hull Costs, etc.

Postby SCC on Fri 21 Jun 2013 23:29

I think I've figured out a solution to the issue of swarms when jumping in, each unit gets an amount of multiplexing equal to its freighter hull size that isn't affected by wrap transit, this represents the fact that larger crews can better handle tracking multiple targets
SCC
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
 
Posts: 739
Joined: Fri 08 Mar 2013 15:11

Re: Jump Drives, Mines, Swarms, Hull Costs, etc.

Postby Crucis on Sat 22 Jun 2013 09:53

SCC wrote:I think I've figured out a solution to the issue of swarms when jumping in, each unit gets an amount of multiplexing equal to its freighter hull size that isn't affected by warp transit, this represents the fact that larger crews can better handle tracking multiple targets


Not so much "larger crews" as it is more space dedicated to more capable fire control computers.

And by "freighter hull size", I assume that you mean the FT number of the equivalently sized freighter. And yes, this is one possible thing that I have and am considering.
User avatar
Crucis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 1888
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27

Re: Jump Drives, Mines, Swarms, Hull Costs, etc.

Postby Dawn Falcon on Sat 22 Jun 2013 12:18

Well, sounds reasonable as base capacity even. I'd still halve it when affected by WP transit effects :P
User avatar
Dawn Falcon
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
 
Posts: 1558
Joined: Thu 02 Jul 2009 17:26

Re: Jump Drives, Mines, Swarms, Hull Costs, etc.

Postby Crucis on Sat 22 Jun 2013 14:03

Dawn Falcon wrote:Well, sounds reasonable as base capacity even. I'd still halve it when affected by WP transit effects :P


One minor downside that I think might need adjusting is that with the tweaking of the hull table and the removal of the EX and ES types, the FT numbers are different than in Classic. For example, in 3E, ES=FT1, CT=FT2, FG=FT3, DD=FT4, and so on. But in the current (but not necessarily the final) version of the Cosmic hull table, the 15 hs CT=FT1, the 30 hs FG=FT2, and so on. And at a higher end, 3E BB's were FT8, whereas in the current Cosmic hull table, BB's are only FT7. Of course, this isn't all that terrible, since it's only a difference of 1 FT#, but it was at least worth noting.
User avatar
Crucis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 1888
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27

Re: Jump Drives, Mines, Swarms, Hull Costs, etc.

Postby SCC on Sat 22 Jun 2013 15:42

Dawn Falcon wrote:Well, sounds reasonable as base capacity even. I'd still halve it when affected by WP transit effects :P

The whole problem is swarms being used in warp point defense and finding a way to make that unworkable, this solves that without being to unbalanced
SCC
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
 
Posts: 739
Joined: Fri 08 Mar 2013 15:11

PreviousNext

Return to Cosmic Starfire

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron