Ship scarcity in a tech level/research game

[Emiricol]

I've been thinking that in a VB:SX campaign it might be interesting to base scarcity off a combination of cost and length in service.

For example, a new ship class might be Very Rare for a year, Rare for two more years, Uncommon for 7 years, Rare for 5 more, and Very Rare again thereafter, giving most ship classes a lifespan of about 15 years of production. Then perhaps modify either the scarcity or the duration per band based on size - smaller ships having a shorter duration per category, for example.

I'm not sure how that all would play out, but has anyone done something similar, or have ideas on how to do it properly?

Thanks,

-Emiricol

[Charles Lewis]

I'm always leery of self-applying scarcity levels in a game where you design your ships. Odds are if you've designed a new ship, you have a purpose in mind, whether it's to counter a specific threat or to replace an existing design that's outlived its usefulness, or whatever. You then want to build to a level that meets your needs as dictated by the design.

What would make sense would be to present scarcity levels on a final campaign report based on relative build numbers so that others could use your ship list.

[Emiricol]

That makes sense. Thanks.

Emiricol

[nimrodd]

I would base rarity on either hull size or equipment. In most cases, you are never going to have "Common" Dreadnoughts, so that ship class would probably be Rare. Also, certain technologies would be Uncommon, such as Scout or Jammer.

[mwaschak]

I would base rarity on either hull size or equipment. In most cases, you are never going to have "Common" Dreadnoughts, so that ship class would probably be Rare. Also, certain technologies would be Uncommon, such as Scout or Jammer.

I like to let economics and maintenance dictate the scarcity of a ship. If R&D wants to finish that crazy railgun Hyperion and it is several points more construction and months to build, then is higher to maintain, it is naturally scarce .

Of course you have to make sure the various ship classes are still useful for their rolls too so there is incentive to diversify.

-Jay

[Tyrel Lohr]

I would base rarity on either hull size or equipment. In most cases, you are never going to have "Common" Dreadnoughts, so that ship class would probably be Rare. Also, certain technologies would be Uncommon, such as Scout or Jammer.

Don't tell that to the Terran Federation in the Starfire universe!

Seriously, though, I think I have to agree with Charlie. The rarity levels would best be applied later in a final campaign report, or else calculated on the fly on your maintenance spreadsheet. Getting that setup to calculate them "right" can be difficult -- I tried it once, and trying to find the right break points to keep everything from being "Rare" was a bigger pain than it was worth.

I think the economics of construction/maintenance costs should probably have the most impact on rarity, especially in campaigns where you build your own ships.

When playing in other universes, the rarity rules do help to force fleet formations akin to what was seen in that universe. Of course, a good set of source materials should have things skewed in such a way so that those kinds of decisions make themselves, and that new ships don't instantly invalidate older classes.

[jygro]

I've been thinking that in a VB:SX campaign it might be interesting to base scarcity off a combination of cost and length in service.

For a VB:SX campaign that I started (which quickly died due to lack to time and the appearance of a really powerful 'enemy' at my doorstep), I combined the costs for prototypes and scarcity by using the following formula for the cost of a given ship:

Normal cost of ship x 3 / total ships built ^0.5 (round normally)

So the first ship that normally cost 6 EP to build would cost 18 EP. The second would be 13 EP, the third 10 EP and so on. The eighth ship of that class would cost 6 EP and the 27th ship of that class would be 3 EP! Interestingly, the break even point was ~27 ships of a certain class.

I liked this since I wanted a change from the prototype chart in the SX book and I wanted the players (er... just me) to really have to think about which ships to design since to be cost effective, I was going to need to do really big production runs.

The only downfall is that when you got a ship class to a high production run (40+), it was very cheap to produce it. For example: the 45th ship that normally would cost 10 EP (and 5 turns to build) would only be 4 EP (and 2 turns!) in this system. But that's the beauty of mass production...
-Bren

[Emiricol]

It is an interesting idea. I probably wouldn't use it because I like the prototype chart and because it involves more math for every purchase, but it would be a good tool to get away from the prototype chart, that's true!

What does the ^ function mean?

Regards,

-Emiricol

[nimrodd]

What does the ^ function mean?

To the power of

x^2 means "x Squared"
x^0.5 means "Square root of x"

[MarkG88]

I've been thinking that in a VB:SX campaign it might be interesting to base scarcity off a combination of cost and length in service.

For a VB:SX campaign that I started (which quickly died due to lack to time and the appearance of a really powerful 'enemy' at my doorstep), I combined the costs for prototypes and scarcity by using the following formula for the cost of a given ship:

Normal cost of ship x 3 / total ships built ^0.5 (round normally)

So the first ship that normally cost 6 EP to build would cost 18 EP. The second would be 13 EP, the third 10 EP and so on. The eighth ship of that class would cost 6 EP and the 27th ship of that class would be 3 EP! Interestingly, the break even point was ~27 ships of a certain class.

I liked this since I wanted a change from the prototype chart in the SX book and I wanted the players (er... just me) to really have to think about which ships to design since to be cost effective, I was going to need to do really big production runs.

The only downfall is that when you got a ship class to a high production run (40+), it was very cheap to produce it. For example: the 45th ship that normally would cost 10 EP (and 5 turns to build) would only be 4 EP (and 2 turns!) in this system. But that's the beauty of mass production...
-Bren

Good suggestion. I like how you illustrate the cost effectiveness of mass production over a long production run of ships with this.

[japridemor]

Normal cost of ship x 3 / total ships built ^0.5 (round normally)
-Bren

I like this. I think I will use it to replace the prototype roll. I also think I'll round up.

[Charles Lewis]

Perhaps to temper the large scale reductions in time and cost, it should depend on the number of consecutively built units.

You build 20 hulls of a cruiser class and then stop as operational requirements are met. A conflict rears its ugly head and you find that you need more to replace losses and meet new, higher, operational requirements. I don't think you should be able to pick up where you left off in terms of price and time reductions. In fact, such bonuses could be tied to specific shipyards reflecting the increasing expertise in building that unit.

Hmmm....I may just have to wrap that in with my other shipyard mods.

[MarkG88]

Perhaps to temper the large scale reductions in time and cost, it should depend on the number of consecutively built units.

You build 20 hulls of a cruiser class and then stop as operational requirements are met. A conflict rears its ugly head and you find that you need more to replace losses and meet new, higher, operational requirements. I don't think you should be able to pick up where you left off in terms of price and time reductions. In fact, such bonuses could be tied to specific shipyards reflecting the increasing expertise in building that unit.

Hmmm....I may just have to wrap that in with my other shipyard mods.

Yes you should. Sounds like you're on the right track. In Star Fleet Battles, the Klingon D-6 stayed around for the "General War" campaign for that very reason (a specialized shipyard which made them cheaply).

[japridemor]

I don't think you should be able to pick up where you left off in terms of price and time reductions.

Makes sense. We couldn't exactly hop right back into mass producing Fletcher class DDs at the same rate we were at the end of WW2.

[Charles Lewis]

I need to repost my shipyard mods here on the forum, but essentially one of the options put restrictions on the number of different units a particular shipyard could build. Essentially, it could only hold the plans, equipment and forms (etc.) for a limited number of designs. Adding or replacing a design at a shipyard involved an additional expense to cover the new producers, forms, etc. being setup at that shipyard. It also then forced you to seriously consider where to build a new design and whether it would be better to build a new shipyard to do it.

All because of fluff in the old FASA ship guides.