StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Rogue 9 wrote:What's with all the phallic compensators in this game, anyway? Some of the ship sizes are just crazy.

Oh, blow it out your exhaust pipe. I was big then and big now. It's meant to be absurd.

I only count four ship classes longer than Executor outside the Black Alliance, who have big ships as part of their national character. It isn't that big a deal anyway since size doesn't really mean anything.

It's a game that involves a person named Dahak, what do you expect?

'That's no moon...'

Raxmei wrote:I only count four ship classes longer than Executor outside the Black Alliance, who have big ships as part of their national character. It isn't that big a deal anyway since size doesn't really mean anything.

I count 7, all of which are capital class.

Okay, serious question this time. I assume our ship values are not static, so what's the limit on how fast we can build new ships and train new troops?

Just a clarification. The Effectors I'm toting around are not attached to Minds. Thus, they cannot:

Hack any computer.
Hack human minds.
Recode anything anywhere.
Be unstoppable.

They are mostly an untracable downlink into any system I locate. Once attached, I still have human hackers to do the job.. So I can be stopped by any AI rather quickly. Mostly it's for infiltrating space by avoiding scheduled patrols and enabling embezzlement and the like.

Rogue 9 wrote:Okay, serious question this time. I assume our ship values are not static, so what's the limit on how fast we can build new ships and train new troops?

As of right now, this is something that is still up in the air. In the last STGOD the average build time for a new "fleet" was around three months, if your nation was on full war footing. Personally, I think that was a bit too fast for my taste. Ultimately, however, I suppose that the players of the STGOD will get together and with the assistance of some mods and some debate on the subject we will come to a reasonable conclusion as to build rates.

Editted to fix cruiser point errors and tweak Majestic-class stats.

As for build times and such, I'm so freakin raw at this it's not even funny. One question in addition, though, are we in any way modelling maintenance upkeep requirements based on resource base, or leaving that out for simplicity's sake?

How are ship point values determined?

Up to you. Each nation has a certain ammount of total fleet effectiveness, you can split up your points as you please, either amongst a lot of weak ships or a few strong ships, or a mix of the two- or a well-balanced mean.

Yes, you too can create the Huge Paper Mache Navy, with OODLES of 0.1pt ships!

Is the scale linear? Example, 15 point battle ship versus 15 1 point battleships. I'd think it wouldn't be...

Beowulf wrote:Is the scale linear? Example, 15 point battle ship versus 15 1 point battleships. I'd think it wouldn't be...

It probably should be kept as a linear scale, simply to make it easier to determine battles.

For sake of ease we might want to ignore N^2 law.

Hmmm

I need to know how close this runs to the old ASVS STGOD universe. I can see its clearly influenced in many ways, but just how much time has past and whats the status of the general universe...

It's been a few hundred years since Halite was defeated. Her invasion route went straight through the United Terran Republic, splintering it (one section became the Corporate Sector); the Star Kingdom was greatly weakened. The Succession Wars of the SKS began (in a fight for the throne between Serenity and Titanite's descendants) which further weakened the Kingdom. The last straw was the Kzinti Invasion which was only barely stopped. As a result, the SKS was reduced to three pockets.

The galaxy was more or less shattered in the endless wars and resulting Dark Age and now smaller newbie powers have appeared. The UTR, SKS, Kzinti and Corporate Sector have allied into the Quadruple Entente and are more or less acting like Hegemon. The Three Suns Commonwealth is slowly falling under the QE's sphere of influence after attempting to court an alliance to counter the Old Powers.

I was thinking of a single ship, not an empire, but a player all the same.

The last remaining ship (in this universe) of my old former power. The NOFR. There was never more then really a minor bit of space under my control in this universe, in this Galaxy. Most of it was in Andromeda, in an alternate universe. Though I did have some of the most powerful and advanced ships, 95% of the fleet was destroyed in the war against Hallite, including all of my Omega class Super ships in the final battle (though they took an ungodly number of Commie Hallites with them). The survivors after the great battle were sent home. Though my Character and one ship, a Whirlwind class Frigate stayed as the gateway was collapsed.

It became something of a spacer legend and myth over the years. Except to those powers who knew and remembered. But more recently its moved from myth to something near fact for most Governments as sitings have started to be made far more frequently. What purpose this ship has is known to no-one, except perhaps the few intelligence powers that have maintained their records from that time....



Thats the fluff side.

The effective side of it I propose would be this.

I would have one ship, with a few support ships (a few shuttles and a couple of fighters/bombers in the hanger bay). Its pre-fall technology meaning despite its relatively small size, its incredibly powerful, able to face off against a Contemporary Battleship and win more often then not. It does not owe its allegiance to any power, even former NOFR allies necessarily. Its following orders from a source that has defied investigation or discovery and remains an enigma. Its prefall technology means it can effectively resupply and reprovision itself on its own, excepting crew of course.

However it very rarely engages in any kind of direct combat or battle. Generally manipulating events in the right place at the right time.... or not.

phongn wrote:For sake of ease we might want to ignore N^2 law.

Agreed

Alyrium Denryle wrote:

phongn wrote:For sake of ease we might want to ignore N^2 law.

Agreed

Oh, now we do this.

Alyrium Denryle wrote:

phongn wrote:For sake of ease we might want to ignore N^2 law.

Agreed

clarification for those of us not familiar with the N^2 law?

Darth_Zod wrote:

Alyrium Denryle wrote:

phongn wrote:For sake of ease we might want to ignore N^2 law.

Agreed

clarification for those of us not familiar with the N^2 law?

In layman's terms: If you're outnumbered, you lose, and the amount you're effectively outgunned by increases exponentially relative to how badly you're outnumbered rather than in a linear fashion. If you're outnumbered two to one, the amount by which you're effectively outgunned is the square of your forces, not times two. There are exceptions, but by and large with all other things being equal, this is the case.

Rogue 9 wrote:

Darth_Zod wrote:

Alyrium Denryle wrote: Agreed

clarification for those of us not familiar with the N^2 law?

In layman's terms: If you're outnumbered, you lose, and the amount you're effectively outgunned by increases exponentially relative to how badly you're outnumbered rather than in a linear fashion. If you're outnumbered two to one, the amount by which you're effectively outgunned is the square of your forces, not times two. There are exceptions, but by and large with all other things being equal, this is the case.

Personally, I think that tactics should matte a bit more in these battles.. rahter than just "You are out-numbered. You lose" Tell that to Henry IV at Agincourt, or Edward III at crecy. Or hell, or Robert the Bruce at Bannockburn, Wallace at Stirling, Alexander at...his entire campaign against the persians...

Alyrium Denryle wrote:

Rogue 9 wrote:

Darth_Zod wrote: clarification for those of us not familiar with the N^2 law?

In layman's terms: If you're outnumbered, you lose, and the amount you're effectively outgunned by increases exponentially relative to how badly you're outnumbered rather than in a linear fashion. If you're outnumbered two to one, the amount by which you're effectively outgunned is the square of your forces, not times two. There are exceptions, but by and large with all other things being equal, this is the case.

Personally, I think that tactics should matte a bit more in these battles.. rahter than just "You are out-numbered. You lose" Tell that to Henry IV at Agincourt, or Edward III at crecy. Or hell, or Robert the Bruce at Bannockburn, Wallace at Stirling, Alexander at...his entire campaign against the persians...

Lord Nelson at Trafalgar, the crazy good fencing instructor at my school who will take a dozen students at once without breaking a sweat, Francis Marion, the list goes on. *Shrug*

Rogue 9 wrote:

Alyrium Denryle wrote:

Rogue 9 wrote: In layman's terms: If you're outnumbered, you lose, and the amount you're effectively outgunned by increases exponentially relative to how badly you're outnumbered rather than in a linear fashion. If you're outnumbered two to one, the amount by which you're effectively outgunned is the square of your forces, not times two. There are exceptions, but by and large with all other things being equal, this is the case.

Personally, I think that tactics should matte a bit more in these battles.. rahter than just "You are out-numbered. You lose" Tell that to Henry IV at Agincourt, or Edward III at crecy. Or hell, or Robert the Bruce at Bannockburn, Wallace at Stirling, Alexander at...his entire campaign against the persians...

Lord Nelson at Trafalgar, the crazy good fencing instructor at my school who will take a dozen students at once without breaking a sweat, Francis Marion, the list goes on. *Shrug*

Also at the battle of the Nile, the brits were outumbered as well.(I am mildly intoxicated, so if they are the same battle, hurt me)

The N2 advantage becomes more and more pronounced with modern technology rather then older technology. Because the idea of 'all things being equal' is an assumption you can make much more readily with even 1914 era C2 technology, let alone modern C4I. In order for N2 to work, you need to be able to work well together. Its the idea that the unit is stronger then the sum of its parts that makes N2 so deadly.

And is anyone going to respond to my request for involvment