So I've been mulling over the cost for ships in VBAM/Starmada and wanted to get people's opinion on a couple of things. The first is the cost for ships in EP. Currently the formula is CRAT^0.5/2 (roundup), but my thought is to try the following: The average of CRAT/100 + hull (round)
Some Imperial Sourcebook ships and their costs (note the first two number are CRAT/Hull size)
Daitenshi 996/14; old system: 16 EP, new system: 12 EP
Dokujin 115/4; old system: 6 EP, new system: 3 EP
Hayabusa 125/6; old system: 6 EP, new system: 4 EP
Izanagi 452/10; old system: 11 EP, new system: 8 EP
Kyouwa 226/9; old system: 8 EP, new system: 6 EP
Raikou 555/11; old system: 12 EP, new system: 9 EP
Tetsukabe 345/9; old system: 10 EP, new system: 6 EP
Now carriers make the points a bit 'wonky', but my feeling is state that the cost includes a full 'loadout' of small craft.
My second is the final cost additions for ship equipment and the like (all the +1 EP adjustments). I like the idea that all the costs were 'included' in the designs and not have any final price adjustments. It would mean that campaign stuff would have a ORAT and DRAT to give is a CRAT value and thus a EP cost. Do those final additions bother anyone or would the fairly arbitrary ORAT/DRAT values be an issue.
Later,
-Bren
Starmada ship costs!
I have wrestled with this issue a few times myself.
I am not 100% behind the current system, but after exploring options never found a better way. That is, I never settled on a single formula based on combat rating that worked consistently across a broad spectrum of CR points. Your proposal seems, at first glance, to be pretty solid. I'd have to play with it quite a bit more to make a final decision.
Long story short, I agree with the direction. Can't speak to the specifics, yet.
I am not 100% behind the current system, but after exploring options never found a better way. That is, I never settled on a single formula based on combat rating that worked consistently across a broad spectrum of CR points. Your proposal seems, at first glance, to be pretty solid. I'd have to play with it quite a bit more to make a final decision.
Long story short, I agree with the direction. Can't speak to the specifics, yet.
No man is wise enough by himself.
- Plautus
- Plautus
- Tyrel Lohr
- Vice Admiral
- Posts: 1466
- Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 3:48 am
- Location: Lusk, WY
- Contact:
I am a bit late to the conversation, but I had substantially modified the Starmada Edition ship costs to provide what I thought were better results.
I have just uploaded a Klingon XLS sheet up to:
http://www.epsiloneridani.com/starmada/
I have no idea what to do with conversion for the new Admiralty Edition. I haven't had the time to play it yet, and probably won't for another year the way my schedule is going.
I have just uploaded a Klingon XLS sheet up to:
http://www.epsiloneridani.com/starmada/
I have no idea what to do with conversion for the new Admiralty Edition. I haven't had the time to play it yet, and probably won't for another year the way my schedule is going.
If I had my way, a starmada conversion would have all the 'costs' in the actual Starmada CRAT so I wouldn't have to determine what ships get an extra EP cost for certain VBAM abilities. With the sqrt root of the CRAT in the original calculation, it makes it very hard to determine the ORAT and DRAT of VBAM abilities unlike if it was CRAT/100 (or some other linear value).
-Bren
-Bren
I agree completely.jygro wrote:If I had my way, a starmada conversion would have all the 'costs' in the actual Starmada CRAT so I wouldn't have to determine what ships get an extra EP cost for certain VBAM abilities.
I spent some time trying to achieve this again... and a simple model eludes me.
No man is wise enough by himself.
- Plautus
- Plautus