StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Karmic Knight check your pm's

I have high hopes

Have we decided on the rules for the production rate?

Is it really wise to have an IC thread open before we've worked these things out? I'm reluctant to post in large part because I'm not sure what all the rules are.

Yay for diplomay.

The Romulan Republic wrote:Is it really wise to have an IC thread open before we've worked these things out? I'm reluctant to post in large part because I'm not sure what all the rules are.

Just keep things that would pertain to the rules sort of vague for now; we can lay the groundwork and get started as we nail down the edges of all the rules. I just didn't want to lose the momentum. Besides, the first few pages will be "meet & greet" diplomacy/first contact stuff anyway.

The thing about production rates, especially for fighters, was the things like the TIE Defender cost points because they represented a real drain on resources. Even when the actual Empire controlled all its resources, they could just afford a few of them. Things like the TIE Avenger ("TIE Advanced", the one based partially off Darth Vader's ship) were the "almost-as-good" lower cost alternative.

If we have to work out a point system for certain fighters, I'm cool with that. TIE Defenders should cost a lot, like 5-10 points per squadron. Same with TIE Phantoms (the cloaked fighters). I don't recall any Rebel/Republic designs that were expensive.

Right now I'm thinking that every planet and every starship comes with its full compliment of fighters as part of the deal. Perhaps we should charge points for any fighters that are added extra to that. For some fighters, like older Cloakshapes or Z-95s, maybe even Y-Wings, it'd be 1 point for a whole Wing. X-Wings, maybe 2 points for a wing. Specialized fighters and hotrods like the B-Wing and A-Wing, respectively, might be 3 points per wing.

The really expensive fighters, such as the TIE Defenders and Phantoms, would be in the 5 points per squadron cost range to prevent wankspam.

How's this for a summary so far:


Small Assault Ships: .5 Points (ie, VT-49 Decimator)
Corvettes/Gunships: 2 Points
Frigates: 3 Points
Dreadnoughts: 4 points
Cruisers, Light: 4 Points
Cruisers, Medium: 5 points
Cruisers, Heavy: 6 points
Star Destroyers, Light: 8 points
Star Destroyers: 12 points
Star Destroyers, Command: 15 points
Star Destroyers, Heavy: 20 points (You must command at least 5 "Major" or higher worlds to build these)
Star Destroyers, Super: 150 points (You must command at least 10 "Major" or higher worlds to build these)
Planetary Assault Platform: 150 points (You must command at least 10 "Major" or higher worlds to build these)
Assault Carriers: 10 points
Starfighter Carriers: 10 points

Older model starfighters: 1 point per wing (Z-95s, Eta-IIs, Cloakshapes, etc)
Standard starfighters: 2 points per wing (X-Wings, TIEs, etc)
Advanced/Specialized or Heavy starfighters: 3 points per wing (TIE Advanced, A-wing, B-wing, FP-31)
Experimental*: 5 points per squadron (TIE Defender, TIE Phantom)


*Experimental: No one starts the game with more than a wing total of "Experimental" class; and none of this class is free with initial load. It has to be purchased.

Jedi/Sith:
Padawan/Apprentice: 10 points
Knight: 15 points
Master: 20 points

Coyote wrote:The thing about production rates, especially for fighters, was the things like the TIE Defender cost points because they represented a real drain on resources. Even when the actual Empire controlled all its resources, they could just afford a few of them. Things like the TIE Avenger ("TIE Advanced", the one based partially off Darth Vader's ship) were the "almost-as-good" lower cost alternative.

If we have to work out a point system for certain fighters, I'm cool with that. TIE Defenders should cost a lot, like 5-10 points per squadron. Same with TIE Phantoms (the cloaked fighters). I don't recall any Rebel/Republic designs that were expensive.

Right now I'm thinking that every planet and every starship comes with its full compliment of fighters as part of the deal. Perhaps we should charge points for any fighters that are added extra to that. For some fighters, like older Cloakshapes or Z-95s, maybe even Y-Wings, it'd be 1 point for a whole Wing. X-Wings, maybe 2 points for a wing. Specialized fighters and hotrods like the B-Wing and A-Wing, respectively, might be 3 points per wing.

The really expensive fighters, such as the TIE Defenders and Phantoms, would be in the 5 points per squadron cost range to prevent wankspam.

The XJ-Wing fighters, which were a serious modernised revamped version of the X-wing, should cost as much.

E-wings are a toss between a TIE Interceptor and an Advanced but since a TIE Advanced is priced 0 points, then leave them be.

Hmmm. I still feel like I am getting kinda railroaded by this decision to move forward the whole stuff, especially as I won't be able to make my first post until tomorrow.

So yeah, not that good IMO.

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:The XJ-Wing fighters, which were a serious modernised revamped version of the X-wing, should cost as much.

E-wings are a toss between a TIE Interceptor and an Advanced but since a TIE Advanced is priced 0 points, then leave them be.

Well, check above, you'll see that a pricing system is being considered for fighters above and beyond initial load. Bean brought up the possibility of equipping his entire navy with TIE Defenders, which even the Empire couldn't afford, so obviously some sort of stopgap needs to be considered. Like, no one would have, say, the Experimental class to start with.

No one should be pressured to get a post up right now, since we're not doing any ground-shaking stuff. Those who are ready are doing the early diplomacy handshake stuff so we don't have it all hit at once and forget who sent diplomats to who.

It's an EU Brainbug with fighters however as a TIE Defender is nothing more than a faster than an X-Wing slower than an A-Wing, missile equipped TIE fighter. It should not be uber expensive except for crazy features thrown in like the TIE Phantom's cloaking or tractors put on certain TIE fighters.

Speaking of which on my "Night Caller" MOD class. What I'm doing is taking the standard CR90 Corvette, so well know as a system defense vessel, convoy escort and some-times law enforcement vessel. And turning it into a pocket carrier. The standard CR-90 has four large escape pods plus a side and top hanger. On the Night Caller itself the side hanger was big enough to hold TIE's because they removed the entire deck above it. I'm not modifying that bit as by rough yard work standards but instead simply coping the first part of the Night-Call Mods where the escape-pods were moved to the side hanger, the Dorsal hanger remains the shuttle craft hanger and I hang four TIE fighters in place of the escape pods and paint the TIE's and the ship to make them look like it's still escape pods there. It gives me the ability to turn my little Corvette's into Pocket carrier's. TIE's don't carry missile weapons of any kind so they are only dangerous to small scale craft and a nasty surprise to any X-Wing group that takes them on.

I figure yard work it takes two weeks to cycle them through my two ship smaller scale ship yards(500m each) and I can squeeze two in side by side with room to spare and cycle them through at a rate of about eight a month. So long term I hope to change all of them over to that new Corvette which I think up of some classy name for later.

OOB updated in the Prologues thread.

XJ X-wings don't even exist yet, do they? That was something that came along well after the DE stories.

As for production rates, isn't there a months column by everything? I assumed that would be how long it took to build something. OK, for capships it did, but not for fighters. Humm.

Not sure about points for fighters, except for high end stuff. TIE Defenders, TIE Phantoms, E-wings maybe...

And Fin, what's up with your Eclipse? It's not operational, is it? Because I thought we decided on no Star Dreadnoughts?

And speaking of, I think I'll go with Coyote and not have ISD-capable shipyards yet. The repair yards are good enough for maintaining them. Might as well prevent ISD spam at the start, indeed.

RogueIce wrote:XJ X-wings don't even exist yet, do they? That was something that came along well after the DE stories.

There was some upgraded version of the X-Wing per the Bacta War, don't know about the XJ-Wing though.

And speaking of, I think I'll go with Coyote and not have ISD-capable shipyards yet. The repair yards are good enough for maintaining them. Might as well prevent ISD spam at the start, indeed.

ISD's clock in at 1600 meters plus, biggest yard we can buy at start is an 1000 meter yard meaning the biggest ship you can chunk out is an Victory-II Class ISD. Even Mon-Cal cruisers clock in at over 1200 meters.

And before anyone says it, a 1000 meter Mon-Cal cruiser design would take months of redesign work if not years.

Mr Bean wrote:It's an EU Brainbug with fighters however as a TIE Defender is nothing more than a faster than an X-Wing slower than an A-Wing, missile equipped TIE fighter. It should not be uber expensive except for crazy features thrown in like the TIE Phantom's cloaking or tractors put on certain TIE fighters.

Eh? Slower than the A-Wing? It's supposed to be a souped up version of the TIE Advanced which was at least as fast as the A-wing.

RogueIce wrote:And Fin, what's up with your Eclipse? It's not operational, is it? Because I thought we decided on no Star Dreadnoughts?

And speaking of, I think I'll go with Coyote and not have ISD-capable shipyards yet. The repair yards are good enough for maintaining them. Might as well prevent ISD spam at the start, indeed.

It was removed. Assuming we stick to the idea that no one has Star Dreadnaughts early game.

Empire Information has been updated, but it's still a work in progress.

I should have an introductory post up sometime this weekend and a response to your ambassador Fin, and anyone else who sent them.

It seems we have a major problem:

- Anaxes which was claimed by me and Axum, which was claimed by Bearne, are both in the same system. Also, using the hyperlanes, it is impossible for Bearne to get from Byss to Axum without passing through my territory.

Anybody have any suggestions?

Unless its been changed, I must echo my objection in the first thread with Acclamators being priced at 25 percent more costly than a Victory Star Destroyer.

Are not Acclamators a smaller class the primary purpose of which is being an armed troop transport (if a very well armed one), while the Victory is basically a weaker ISD? So why is the Victory worth less? Or are my facts incorrect?

The Romulan Republic wrote:Unless its been changed, I must echo my objection in the first thread with Acclamators being priced at 25 percent more costly than a Victory Star Destroyer.

Are not Acclamators a smaller class the primary purpose of which is being an armed troop transport (if a very well armed one), while the Victory is basically a weaker ISD? So why is the Victory worth less? Or are my facts incorrect?

If by anything, the Venator should be similarly priced to the Victory. It trades troop firepower for troop capacity and fighter capacity.

The Romulan Republic wrote: Are not Acclamators a smaller class the primary purpose of which is being an armed troop transport (if a very well armed one), while the Victory is basically a weaker ISD? So why is the Victory worth less? Or are my facts incorrect?

Acclamators also double as carriers if you configure them as such and can carry over a 180+ Fighters. A Victory Class does not have that option since it carries a max of two squadrons of fighters into battle.

As for a Venator, if Wookpedia can be believed it's able to carry over seven hundred fighter craft into battle with it. Making it one hell of a dedicated carrier.

Thanas wrote:
- Anaxes which was claimed by me and Axum, which was claimed by Bearne, are both in the same system. Also, using the hyperlanes, it is impossible for Bearne to get from Byss to Axum without passing through my territory.

Anybody have any suggestions?

Hyperspace lanes are simply well documented easily traded hyperspace routes which pass close populated worlds. They are only fast in the sense that ships in them don't have to drop out to realign their hyperdrive but instead can simply keep on going. The other benefit of hyperspace lanes is if you do have engine trouble or have to drop out of hyperspace you have a wealth of options of close habitable/settled worlds to limp to.

Nothing says you can't bypass worlds on a hyperspace route.
As for claiming two worlds in the same system, this is why I claimed my resources by system instead of by planet. It makes far more sense to grap the Axum system then it does to grab Axum prime itself.

Hmm .. On second thought, leave the Venator as it is. I will be using that as my stock standard heavy military combatant at the initial start of the game, rather than use the Victory. The Venator is more useful as an anti-ship vessel in addition to other roles such as troop/starfighter carrier.

Also, another thing. I intend to have TEctors in my fleet. A small number. But I will assume they cost similar to an Imperator.

Also, shouldn't the vessels scale in terms of cost? Ships about half the size of the Star Dreadnaughts which are essentially Star Battlecruisers like the Procurators ought to cost about half that of a Star Dreadnaught and not a paltry 20 points!

Also, are there set limits on how many scout ships are there? I am thinking of adding those to my standard flight complements but...

You're right that that's a problem, Thanas, but why would I want to go from Byss to Axum?

Master_Baerne wrote:You're right that that's a problem, Thanas, but why would I want to go from Byss to Axum?

Aren't you also taking Byss? If not, my apologies, I am having a major headache.

Anyway, just storywise it makes no reason for one planet to go into this camp and for the twin of that planet to enter another camp.

As an aside, did you get my PM?