KnightDisciple
Love God. Do Right. Fear No Man.
- Location
- Midwest, USA
[X] Five Torpedo Salvo (Cost 45.5 -> 65) [Second Tranche: 43.5 -> 59.5]
[JK] Nein Torpedo Salvo (Cost 45.5 -> NOPE)
Probably too early to say until we get most of the rest of the weapons fit done. Which is why I think we'll get the rear weapons last, since it'll be a choice between additional utility and additional ships that has decent arguments either way.I know for the impulse vote we got a marking on where we are wrt our expected budget, how's that looking now? Are we still below expected figures? Are we above?
We haven't had another cost-relevant vote yet. Canon Constitution had a RFL.I know for the impulse vote we got a marking on where we are wrt our expected budget, how's that looking now? Are we still below expected figures? Are we above?
I think part of the problem isn't your idea, it's more the direction it pushes is different from where it seems the quest is going.Hense why the numerical solution I proposed earlier involves more than a single metric, as more than a single metric is involved in that kind of limit.
So for example, if we say that the current phaser banks take 1 energy each, and the Warp 8 core has a baseline of 1 energy plus 0.5 per 100 ktons rounded up, then we arrive at most of our current ships having something in the ballpark of 2 phaser banks being able to fire; and we can infer that the non-upgraded Mark I phasers must have less power consumption and the Warp Seven engine less generation, without ever having to specify exactly what those numbers are. Simple, intuitive, and logical based on the Watsonian reasoning, and easy to modify in the future.
No, the two Type 3s pushed us above par:
And we aren't cheaping out on torpedoes.The engines have put you over your expected budget, but making savings elsewhere with the advantages of high maneuverability might balance the scales.
I think part of this is just a different perspective on what crunch is for in a quest like this; which I have always held as being a GM tool to ease keeping the story parts consistent, so you don't have a ship casually exploding Klingon warbirds in one scene and then fighting a desperate losing battle against a single Bird of Prey in another, to use an extreme example, without some kind of flip-the-table N-factor involved (the BoP having the ship's shield frequency, for example, thereby compromising its defenses).I think part of the problem isn't your idea, it's more the direction it pushes is different from where it seems the quest is going.
You and I are demonstrably more into hard crunch. Simulation style numbers. A wargame focus perhaps.
Much of the advice Sayle was getting us instead pushing towards the abstract. A bit more fluffy, a story telling focus.
I fondly remember weapon mount size damage bonuses from the Space Empires 4x games, which was similar to the first system Sayle proposed, then the size/damage chart next shown seems like the rules light version of it. (Unless they were both meant to be used together, in which case ignore my next comment)
It does a good job abstracting bigger ships more powerful, but the ability to make specialist combat ships with a metric other than size, defiant style, would be eliminated immediately.
I am not sure anything CAN stern chase this ship, at least in the near term. We have made it about as fast as a ship can be made. The only time something can stay behind her is if she wants to let it stay behind her.I'm in favor of at least one aft tube, just because unlike phasers the main limit on how many torpedoes we can shoot is how many tubes we have (pointing the right way) and being able to shoot back in a stern chase is always a good thing if we can afford to add the ability, but am prepared to be argumed around.
I think part of this is just a different perspective on what crunch is for in a quest like this; which I have always held as being a GM tool to ease keeping the story parts consistent, so you don't have a ship casually exploding Klingon warbirds in one scene and then fighting a desperate losing battle against a single Bird of Prey in another, to use an extreme example, without some kind of flip-the-table N-factor involved (the BoP having the ship's shield frequency, for example, thereby compromising its defenses).
It's a tool for maintenance of Suspension of Disbelief and immersion, not some kind of omnipotent god.
I know for the impulse vote we got a marking on where we are wrt our expected budget, how's that looking now? Are we still below expected figures? Are we above?