StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Okee-Dokee, let's get this rolling by finalizing agreements on rules.

We've decided on capping folks at 1800 points for worlds to start with, right? That's where I see people stopping.

So that means we all start with a 1800-point fleet, then.

It looks like we're agreed on this part:
CLASSES:
Homeworld- 600 pts.
Major----- 400 pts.
Average--- 200 pts.
Minor----- 100 pts.
Colony---- 50 pts.

A major Homeworld, like Corellia or Coruscant (or of another major, space-faring species) is worth 600 points. (A "major, space-faring species" means a sentient species that has achieved faster-than-light travel on its own --so, like, Ewoks or Jawas don't count since, though they may be intelligent species, they never developed space travel-- or much technology on their own at all).

"Major" worlds are worlds that may not be homeworlds to major species, but are large, high-population industrial giants. Your typical "city-world" will be like this, such as Eriadu or Druckenwell.

"Average" worlds are worlds that have sizeable and respectable populations, but have not covered the surface of their worlds in population. They may be popular or important, but they're not giants on the Galactic scene. Naboo, for example, is an "Average" world.

"Minor" worlds are worlds with self-sustaining population but very little real power or influence. Bespin would be like that.

"Colony" is a small world or space station that relies on contact with another world to keep going. Any large, industrial space station would be a Colony (but not an ordinary Golan defense platform-- you can't spam space stations to boost your points). Mining colonies like the one on Mustafar would fit in this category.

Try to find a small cluster of worlds that are near each other, don't go picking all Homeworlds that are clear across the Galaxy from one another. Have a good, clear reason why these worlds banded together, especially if they're a mix of, say, former Imperial and Republic worlds.


--and it looks like we're largely agreed on the ship list, although it needs to be updated. I'll re-post it with the SB.com original ships removed.

How about the "standard defense packages" for worlds? I really dig that idea and wish we'd done it at SB.com. How shall we implement that? Your first worlds come with that for free, and they must be paid for later, or, shall we say that you have to buy that from the outset?

It seems that since we're picking worlds for their industrial power, they ought to come with defenses. Also to prevent the steamrolling of other empires right off the bat.

Very true. I lean towards the first worlds coming with defenses for free, to start with.

Here is a reprint of Master Baerne's proposal for planetary defenses:

Light Defense Package - Comes with Average Worlds
-4x Squadrons Faction-Appropriate Fighters
-Theater Shields Around Major Installations
-1x Surface-to-Space Weapon (Ion cannon or turbolaser)

Medium Defense Package - Comes with Major Worlds
2x Wings Faction-Appropriate Fighters
Basic Planetary Shield Network
-10x Surface-to-Space Weapons (Ion cannon or turbolaser)

Heavy Defense Package - Comes with Homeworlds
10x Wings Faction-Appropriate Fighters
Full Planetary Shield Network
-30x Surface-to-Space Weapons (Ion cannon or turbolaser)

Note: A Basic Shield Network provides coverage to the entire planet, but does not contain the backup generators and redundant shield layers that make Full Shield Networks so impenetrable. It will still withstand a raid or light bombardment, but once a part falls, it cannot be brought quickly back online.

You know, 1800 is a really odd number to stop at. Why not like 2000?

Also, as for ships carrying non-faction type fighters, I was thinking that if you're using a ship of one faction type, but using fighters from another faction type, then you carry, say, half the normal amount.

So an Imperial ship, designed for use with 20 TIEs and equipped with TIE racks, would only be able to carry 10 Republic ships such as X-Wings or A-wings, etc.

Likewise, squeezing TIEs onto the deck of a Republic ship that does not have TIE racks, will cut you to 1/2 capacity as well. TIEs may not mass much, but they have a big footprint.

If you modify your ship (a 6-game-month down time for that ship) to accomodate the non-standard fighters (TIE racks in a MC80, for example), then you can carry the normal amount stated.

EDIT: This is just a proposal for discussion, not a decree.

All of this makes sense to me.

Coyote wrote:Also, as for ships carrying non-faction type fighters, I was thinking that if you're using a ship of one faction type, but using fighters from another faction type, then you carry, say, half the normal amount.

So an Imperial ship, designed for use with 20 TIEs and equipped with TIE racks, would only be able to carry 10 Republic ships such as X-Wings or A-wings, etc.

Likewise, squeezing TIEs onto the deck of a Republic ship that does not have TIE racks, will cut you to 1/2 capacity as well. TIEs may not mass much, but they have a big footprint.

If you modify your ship (a 6-game-month down time for that ship) to accomodate the non-standard fighters (TIE racks in a MC80, for example), then you can carry the normal amount stated.

EDIT: This is just a proposal for discussion, not a decree.

Just half capacity for non-native fighter types? Another proposal I've seen suggests anywhere from 2/3 to 5/6 capacity for non-native fighter types, like so:

RogueIce wrote:For an example of starting modifications, my idea is an Empire-type with Imperial shipping, but mostly Rebel fighters. For balance sake, however, I will stipulate that such designs do not carry as many fighters as normal. IE: an Imperial Star Destroyer won't be carrying 72 X-wings, A-wings and B-wings. Because Rebel fighter types tend to be larger than their Imperial counterparts, and they can't use the overhead launch racks, either. So as a result I'd have to fit them on the hanger decks where I also have to have shuttles and other stuff, so as a result I'll have fewer fighters than if I used an ISD with TIEs. Since I don't want to play Starship Engineer I'd say I could carry between 48 and 60 (ie: 4 - 5 squadrons) and call it a day. Although there will doubtless still be TIEs in service on several ships as well.

I'm playing a Republic faction that uses a fair amount of Imperial gear, namely the Venator class Star Destroyer and the Strike class cruiser. At the end of the Clone Wars, a Venator carried 192 Eta-2 Actis class interceptors, 192 V-wings, and 36 ARC-170s; a Strike configured for space superiority could carry up to three squadrons of TIE fighters (36?). I could probably get away with cramming 144 X-wings, 144 E-wings, and 24 B-wings onto a Venator, but the most X-wings I would hope to carry on a Strike would be one squadron. Does that sound reasonable enough?

I'm personally going with a mix of TIE Advanced and TIE Scimitar bombers, and a scattering of TIE Defenders and Phantoms. That should be enough to deal with you Rebel fighters.

I don't have any fancy fighter production lines (Yet!) so I'm limiting myself to normal TIEs, except for a few squadrons of prototype TIE Defenders.

Shall we allow folks to start off with personal designs, or do we all start stock and then modify things later, in-story?

Stock designs at the outset, I think. Two years after a major war is not enough time to design, build, and test a new design.

Stock designs at the outset, I think. Two years after a major war is not enough time to design, build, and test a new design.

Well then how long are we going to have it be for development of custom designs? Personally I would say that any new designs would be entering testing stage soon after game start. The best argument for not having custom designs from the get go is for identification of project necessity and mission goals. So what I am saying is to allow One or two squads of fighters or one capship that is custom per faction and say that the fighters are entering a six month test phase while the capship is set for a year and a half long test phase.

As always open to suggestions.

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:You know, 1800 is a really odd number to stop at. Why not like 2000?

Since most people have already decided on their worlds, it's probably too late to change the limit without some hassle. *shrug*

Agent Sorchus wrote:

Master_Baerne wrote:Stock designs at the outset, I think. Two years after a major war is not enough time to design, build, and test a new design.

Well then how long are we going to have it be for development of custom designs? Personally I would say that any new designs would be entering testing stage soon after game start. The best argument for not having custom designs from the get go is for identification of project necessity and mission goals. So what I am saying is to allow One or two squads of fighters or one capship that is custom per faction and say that the fighters are entering a six month test phase while the capship is set for a year and a half long test phase.

As always open to suggestions.

I'd think design should just start from the start of the game, just to make it even. I mean the difference in time between designing something the size of a Corellian Corvette compared to an Imperial Star Destroyer would not be insignificant, I would think. Much less getting an actual prototype. And rather than give rules or trying to justify the design time spent while the Great Turmoil was going on, we should just say it all starts from scratch on Game Day One. And then figure out reasonable design timeframes for various things.

It'll also help the game start that much faster. Since you're not going to design anything within a day, that means starting from scratch on GD 1 gives us time to hash it out, while the game is going. IOW, we can mess with those 'general guidelines' (since Romulan Republic hates the word rules ) while the game is going and the design work is proceeding in the background.

Though do use some common sense. It would be really silly to have a whole bunch of design projects meant to replace your entire fleet right from the start, after all. Unless you start with a tiny-ass fleet, I suppose.

On the subject of starting worlds: My 1800 points thing was based solely on the fact that that's how many I'd already claimed. It would be little to no trouble to make up a few more and make the necessary changes to my OOB. I don't know about anyone else, but I for one certainly don't object to more points.

Are we keeping the less than ten worlds advantage? If we are it is already hard with 1800 points to stay under ten worlds. If we do want to shift it up to 2000 points and have an advantage for small empires then the number of planets in a small empire probably should be adjusted upwards too.

It's not that hard. Examples:

1 homeworld, 2 major worlds, 3 average worlds - 6 total
2 homeworlds, 2 major worlds - 4 total
1 homeworld, 3 major worlds, 1 average world - 5 total
1 homeworld, 2 major worlds, 1 average world, 3 minor worlds, - 7 total

But it gets harder if you a) try to keep the worlds close together and b) justify them in universe.
Sure you can have just 3 homeworlds but try finding some that are close together and have not been claimed. That is all I am saying.

Again: There are billions of worlds in the galaxy, and only hundreds named. If you need worlds close together (Which you don't what with hyperdrive), just make some up.

So which shall it be? 1800 because it's already accepted, or 2000 because it's more reasonable?

Let's set 2000 as the max limit.

Do we want to decree that no Homeworld can be made from scratch but any other world can be? Or are people aching to get their own alien races into the game (provided they're not wanky?)

Coyote wrote:Let's set 2000 as the max limit.

Do we want to decree that no Homeworld can be made from scratch but any other world can be? Or are people aching to get their own alien races into the game (provided they're not wanky?)

Fuck you. Now I have to figure out another Average World (or equivalent) that's A) somewhat near Corellia and B) makes sense to include?

*sigh* You bastards, the lot of you. But if 2000 is the consensus I'll figure something out. I suppose I can use the extra points to beef up shipyards or something.

EDIT: No I'm not really pissed. That was tounge in cheeck. Here's a smilie to prove it:

EDIT2:

The Romulan Republic wrote:Total: 131+ points (need point values for transports, which don't seem to be in the ship list).

I don't think they have points values. Instead, it's a 'what seems reasonable' thing.

TSAB? Mid-Childa? Agent Sorchus, are you trying to get your Nanoha in our Star Wars?

I've already got a wary eye cast at "Manticore"!

Rogue, just because the upper limit is set at 2000 (and that's not necessarily 100% set yet, either, I'm open to arguments since we haven't started yet), it doesn't mean you must reach for that.

I've been working up worlds and (so far at least) I'm topping out in the 1500's somewhere, and I'm content with that.

I hope folks are of the mind that this is as much, if not more so, about politics, diplomacy, and posturing, as it is about flat-out "uber fleet pwnzorz" stuff.

Coyote wrote:I hope folks are of the mind that this is as much, if not more so, about politics, diplomacy, and posturing, as it is about flat-out "uber fleet pwnzorz" stuff.

War is a continuation of politics by other means

And what has the Star Empire done to provoke such wariness, my dear Coyote? Other than being militaristic, expansionist, and Imperial revanchist, that is.