Z Datagroup Sizes

Home of SOLAR STARFIRE, 6th edition, rules based on the upcoming history of the Terran Solar Union.

Moderators: SDS Members, SDS Owner

Forum rules
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: Z Datagroup Sizes

Postby procyon on Sun 23 Jul 2017 02:40

We never liked the HS idea with Z. We just stuck with the # of ships.

Letting CNC add to Zc if it is the datagroup leader would be nice.
...and I will show you fear in a handful of dust....

Cralis wrote:I would point out that the "what was" which is different from "here and now" can easily change in the "future then."
User avatar
procyon
Sky Marshal
Sky Marshal
 
Posts: 2549
Joined: Mon 26 Apr 2010 16:26
Location: SE IOWA

Re: Z Datagroup Sizes

Postby Cralis on Mon 24 Jul 2017 01:02

procyon wrote:Letting CNC add to Zc if it is the datagroup leader would be nice.


So instead of acting as a Z or Zc system, instead add +X to the group size?
Image
User avatar
Cralis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 10201
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27
Location: Oregon, USA

Re: Z Datagroup Sizes

Postby procyon on Mon 24 Jul 2017 07:00

Yes. Have a ship with CNC acting as the datagroup leader add to the max number of units.
...and I will show you fear in a handful of dust....

Cralis wrote:I would point out that the "what was" which is different from "here and now" can easily change in the "future then."
User avatar
procyon
Sky Marshal
Sky Marshal
 
Posts: 2549
Joined: Mon 26 Apr 2010 16:26
Location: SE IOWA

Re: Z Datagroup Sizes

Postby Cralis on Mon 24 Jul 2017 15:17

procyon wrote:Yes. Have a ship with CNC acting as the datagroup leader add to the max number of units.


I thought about that originally, but point defense and all that is balanced around datagroup sizes. Even a +1 ship is a huge addition to early datagroup sizes. 4 DD instead of 3? 5 BB instead of 4? Let alone it gets to +2, +3, or higher...

CNC would become an "absolutely must have" system which calls into question whether we should even have it at all (as opposed to just assuming it's always there and giving the bonus to every unit. Like maintenance storage, for example).
Image
User avatar
Cralis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 10201
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27
Location: Oregon, USA

Re: Z Datagroup Sizes

Postby procyon on Mon 24 Jul 2017 20:31

In that Zc is usually at least one ship smaller in link size, and it will be giving up HS to add to the link - I don't forsee it being terribly unbalanced. But we have never tested it on the board so I don't know that for sure.

I would never let it be more than a +1 bonus. And perhaps it only adds to Zc of the same gen or less. So CNCb can add one to Zca or Zcb. You might even require that the add of a single vessel not occur until CNC is over SL 10 or so.
...and I will show you fear in a handful of dust....

Cralis wrote:I would point out that the "what was" which is different from "here and now" can easily change in the "future then."
User avatar
procyon
Sky Marshal
Sky Marshal
 
Posts: 2549
Joined: Mon 26 Apr 2010 16:26
Location: SE IOWA

Re: Z Datagroup Sizes

Postby procyon on Tue 25 Jul 2017 02:43

And we do have an issue with CNC acting as Z anyway (I had forgotten as we have already decided not to allow CNC to act as a Z in our games). If CNCb can act as a Zb, and all three ships in a link have CNCb - just when does the 'link' fail?

If the link fails when a ship loses all of its shields and armor and takes an internal hit, but the ship's CNC is still intact - why is the CNC not working? If the link stays up until the CNC is taken out, them my three BB mounting CNCb now effectively have the 'equivalent' of Zcb one SL lower than what the Zc tree can field Zca at.

This issue caused us to drop the Z ability of CNC already.
But if CNC can add an extra ship to Zc, then that might be ok. At most SL, Z has about 2 more ships in a link than Zc does. Giving up extra HS so that your Zc link is only one ship less than a Z link probably isn't going to be unbalancing.
...and I will show you fear in a handful of dust....

Cralis wrote:I would point out that the "what was" which is different from "here and now" can easily change in the "future then."
User avatar
procyon
Sky Marshal
Sky Marshal
 
Posts: 2549
Joined: Mon 26 Apr 2010 16:26
Location: SE IOWA

Re: Z Datagroup Sizes

Postby Cralis on Tue 25 Jul 2017 03:30

procyon wrote:In that Zc is usually at least one ship smaller in link size, and it will be giving up HS to add to the link - I don't forsee it being terribly unbalanced. But we have never tested it on the board so I don't know that for sure.


I think this was done to create an incentive to overlap Z with Zc, so Zc wasn't an automatic "always use once available"

I would never let it be more than a +1 bonus. And perhaps it only adds to Zc of the same gen or less. So CNCb can add one to Zca or Zcb. You might even require that the add of a single vessel not occur until CNC is over SL 10 or so.


Yeah... If we did this, I agree. I'm just not sure I want to do it.

procyon wrote:And we do have an issue with CNC acting as Z anyway (I had forgotten as we have already decided not to allow CNC to act as a Z in our games). If CNCb can act as a Zb, and all three ships in a link have CNCb - just when does the 'link' fail?

If the link fails when a ship loses all of its shields and armor and takes an internal hit, but the ship's CNC is still intact - why is the CNC not working? If the link stays up until the CNC is taken out, them my three BB mounting CNCb now effectively have the 'equivalent' of Zcb one SL lower than what the Zc tree can field Zca at.


If you recall we had this discussion a while back in the SDS section, with the same questions and issues. That's why I am inclining towards removing the Z/Zc functionality from CNC. Although, without looking at my notes, I seem to recall that we considered simply removing the Z functionality and leaving the Zc.

This issue caused us to drop the Z ability of CNC already.
But if CNC can add an extra ship to Zc, then that might be ok. At most SL, Z has about 2 more ships in a link than Zc does. Giving up extra HS so that your Zc link is only one ship less than a Z link probably isn't going to be unbalancing.


Yeah, not sure. Testing seems to be in order here.
Image
User avatar
Cralis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 10201
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27
Location: Oregon, USA

Re: Z Datagroup Sizes

Postby procyon on Tue 25 Jul 2017 04:12

Cralis wrote:If you recall we had this discussion a while back in the SDS section, with the same questions and issues. That's why I am inclining towards removing the Z/Zc functionality from CNC. Although, without looking at my notes, I seem to recall that we considered simply removing the Z functionality and leaving the Zc.


I remember. And it was a large part of why my group simply eliminated the Z capability of CNC. But I have just recently been able to get back out on the internet from here at work and haven't been able to backread much at all yet. Wasn't sure if anything else had been decided.

I hadn't really thought of the bonus to Zc usage (which seems reasonable on the surface) as we have been fairly busy with our own lines of testing for our games.
...and I will show you fear in a handful of dust....

Cralis wrote:I would point out that the "what was" which is different from "here and now" can easily change in the "future then."
User avatar
procyon
Sky Marshal
Sky Marshal
 
Posts: 2549
Joined: Mon 26 Apr 2010 16:26
Location: SE IOWA

Re: Z Datagroup Sizes

Postby Whitecold on Tue 25 Jul 2017 11:15

Cralis wrote:CNC would become an "absolutely must have" system which calls into question whether we should even have it at all (as opposed to just assuming it's always there and giving the bonus to every unit. Like maintenance storage, for example).


CNC would still only be required on the designated lead ship, not all of them.
Still, I'd look for bonuses other than increasing the size a CNC can give a datagroup. Why Z and Zc have different sizes is already tricky to argue for by anything except 'balance,' but why CNC should affect Zc and not Z seems really arbitrary.
Whitecold
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
 
Posts: 446
Joined: Fri 19 Sep 2014 15:03

Re: Z Datagroup Sizes

Postby Cralis on Tue 25 Jul 2017 13:41

Whitecold wrote:but why CNC should affect Zc and not Z seems really arbitrary.


That is actually pretty straight forward: Z is a distributed network while Zc has a centralized control system. The synergistic effects of a centralized command center would have a minimal impact on the capabilities of a Z datagroup's network, as it is hobbled by the unit with the lowest capability.
Image
User avatar
Cralis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 10201
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27
Location: Oregon, USA

PreviousNext

Return to Solar Starfire

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests