Remove ads

Star Wars: Ship Designer Quest

Reader mode
Void Stalker said:
Hmmm... we may need to go with small for the bridge for the +1 compartment that it provides as is we can barely put any weapons on this thing due to lack of space, with a small bridge we can fit 3 double deaths on this thing and a single double death is worth the the -1 weapon that small gives
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
All the weapons are half the size and we only will use laser cannons instead of any turbolasers or other special equipment. IE no missiles, no tracker beam, or Ion cannons.
 
Adventwolf said:
All the weapons are half the size and we only will use laser cannons instead of any turbolasers or other special equipment. IE no missiles, no tracker beam, or Ion cannons.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Where are you getting half the size? And we did not use any special equipment on the last one. For the record this is the weapon I anticipate us using:
[ ] Double-Death
Name: Zyrinox Double-Death Laser Weapon
Size: Normal
Weapon: 2
Type: double laser cannon / turret
Compartment Space: 1
Advantage: 3
Flaw: 1
Cost: 1

1 compartment at +2 advantage 2 weapon and 1 cost. Small cockpit is +1 compartment, -1 weapon which gives us enough room for a single double-death which provides more weapon than we lost and gives us +2 advantages when we desperately need to reach net 30. As is unless we skimp on shields we will only have room for 2 double deaths with a normal cockpit, 3 if we go with a small cockpit
 
Void Stalker said:
Where are you getting half the size? And we did not use any special equipment on the last one. For the record this is the weapon I anticipate us using:
[ ] Double-Death
Name: Zyrinox Double-Death Laser Weapon
Size: Normal
Weapon: 2
Type: double laser cannon / turret
Compartment Space: 1
Advantage: 3
Flaw: 1
Cost: 1

1 compartment at +2 advantage 2 weapon and 1 cost. Small cockpit is +1 compartment, -1 weapon which gives us enough room for a single double-death which provides more weapon than we lost and gives us +2 advantages when we desperately need to reach net 30. As is unless we skimp on shields we will only have room for 2 double deaths with a normal cockpit, 3 if we go with a small cockpit
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It is the literal trait we just picked up all weapons are now half the size because of the newer smaller reactors.
 
Adventwolf said:
It is the literal trait we just picked up all weapons are now half the size because of the newer smaller reactors.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Hmm, that might just let us rack up the advantages we need.

Small Strong 6 Double Deaths
Advantage: 33 + Bridge
Flaw: 10 + Bridge -1d6
Cost: 22 - 1
Weapon: 12 + Bridge (bridge starts at 0)

Net 23 + Bridge + 1d6

Normal Strong 4 Double Deaths
Advantage: 27 + Bridge
Flaw: 8 + Bridge -1d6
Cost: 20 - 1
Weapon: 8 + Bridge (bridge starts at 1)

Net 19 + Bridge + 1d6

Small Light 12 Double Deaths
Advantage: 51 + Bridge
Flaw: 16 + Bridge -1d6
Cost: 28 - 1
Weapon: 24 + Bridge (bridge starts at 0)

Net 35 + Bridge + 1d6

Normal Light 10 Double Deaths
Advantage: 45 + Bridge
Flaw: 14 + Bridge -1d6
Cost: 26 - 1
Weapon: 20 + Bridge (bridge starts at 1)

Net 31 + Bridge + 1d6

Light vs Strong is Shield, Small and Normal are bridge/cockpit size (of note we do have a trait for -1 flaw on custom cockpits)

The best we can get from the bridge is a net 6 advantages if we do not spend any the worst is negative advantages. Looking at it if we want Strong Shields we have to go with a small bridge to have a shot at hitting the 30 advantage mark. If we go with Light Shields than normal or small can work, though with our new trait that does mean reducing weapon count by 2

As is the fact that we can add 2 double deaths for going small is +3 weapons, +4 net advantage for +2 cost overall that seems like a good deal to me

Edit- also of note is that normal strong needs 6 from the bridge and a 5 or 6 on the 1d6 from QA to make it which means even if we do we cannot spend advantages on anything, as is if the bridge or QA roll is worse well we miss the mark. Light shields lets us spend advantages though the exchange is that they cant take much in the way of fire. Going small still gives us +4 net advantages so we can up maneuverability which they need if we go light.
 
Last edited:
[X] Custom Corvette Bridge
-[X] Small

I don't really care which we use since we will have enough weapons on it either way.
 
do we need strong shields though? This thing is being built to deal with fighters not other warships so it shouldn't need the strongest shields as fighters don't really deal that much damage anyways besides bombers which to my knowledge usually are armed with torpedos that ignore shields. If anything more AA guns would be better suited than stronger shields as the best way to deal with fighters is to swat them out of the sky quickly before they can build up enough numbers to overwhelm the ship.
 
x0Nothing0x said:
do we need strong shields though? This thing is being built to deal with fighters not other warships so it shouldn't need the strongest shields as fighters don't really deal that much damage anyways besides bombers which to my knowledge usually are armed with torpedos that ignore shields. If anything more AA guns would be better suited than stronger shields as the best way to deal with fighters is to swat them out of the sky quickly before they can build up enough numbers to overwhelm the ship.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
No torpedoes don't ignore shields they still hit them. Military ships which this Corvette has use both particle and ray shields together. The only way a missile can ignore a ship is if it only has a ray shield.
 
x0Nothing0x said:
do we need strong shields though? This thing is being built to deal with fighters not other warships so it shouldn't need the strongest shields as fighters don't really deal that much damage anyways besides bombers which to my knowledge usually are armed with torpedos that ignore shields. If anything more AA guns would be better suited than stronger shields as the best way to deal with fighters is to swat them out of the sky quickly before they can build up enough numbers to overwhelm the ship.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
No but we then need to crank maneuverability to max, keep in mind the corvette we just built for the ORSF includes a turbolaser and has good maneuverability, and ships a size up can be corvette killers as well. Just because the role is anti-fighter does not mean we can ignore it being able to deal with fire from other light ships or even enemy caps. If you vote normal than that locks us into light shield it also means we need to pump maneuverability (1+ the net on the bridge component for normal, 5 + the net on the bridge component for small). Honestly the bigger issue is them wanting to keep 5 compartment space free which is causing stress on the design. At 2 compartment space free we could easily fit in strong shield on a maneuverable corvette with lots of weapons (basically add 6 double death to the normal strong and small strong options for 10 on normal and 12 on small)

In other news that trait we picked up for 50% compartment space on weapons... so good we could make a corvette much better than what we gave to ORSF (+4 double deaths for +8 advantages +8 weapons +4 cost, can use 5 advantage to drop cost increase by 1)
 
Void Stalker said:
In other news that trait we picked up for 50% compartment space on weapons... so good we could make a corvette much better than what we gave to ORSF (+4 double deaths for +8 advantages +8 weapons +4 cost, can use 5 advantage to drop cost increase by 1)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Except, didn't we make a choice there to save space by skirting the law, which saved the same space our new trait does?
 
[X] Custom Corvette Bridge
-[X] Small

They want those free compartments, so let's get started getting more...
 
Adventwolf said:
No that was on one option. We didn't save space we only cheated. The new weapons we build have the new reactors which bring every weapon's size down by half.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
We cheated to save space, and considering our trait, it wouldnt make any sense for it to stack with the cheating option there, which, well...
Considering the comment I replied to, don't think it would give us more space to work on compared to the one we just finished...
 
Themarineguy said:
We cheated to save space, and considering our trait, it wouldnt make any sense for it to stack with the cheating option there, which, well...
Considering the comment I replied to, don't think it would give us more space to work on compared to the one we just finished...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Since Void already got this for me no reason to say much more. It was for one gun not for everything else. It also is not standard we would need to make the choice again if we didn't do the option to get the trait.
 
Adventwolf said:
Since Void already got this for me no reason to say much more. It was for one gun not for everything else. It also is not standard we would need to make the choice again if we didn't do the option to get the trait.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
We also need to take into account that we meet the requirements for this Corvette model and not go ham on the Cost. But the weapon trait that we have will pay major dividends when we start producing the bigger ship classes.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top