Prev: Re: Re[2]: Looking for a new home. Next: Re: Hammer's Slammers/Forever War (Was Re: Starship Troopers)

# Re: New threshold levels.

From: Jim Bell & Christine Hartig <jnbell@i...>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 11:16:23 -0500
Subject: Re: New threshold levels.
``````
>
> Date sent:  19-NOV-1996 10:46:59
>
> Escort. Mass <= 18, Two rows of 5, 1 Fire con, Cost as Escort
>
> Cruiser. Mass > 18 to <= 36, Three rows of 6, 2 Fire con, Cost as
Cruiser
>
> Line. Mass > 36 to <= 56, Four rows of 7, 3 Fire con, Cost at 50/50
>							Capital/Cruiser
>
> Capital. Mass > 56 to <= 80, Five rows of 8, 4 Fire con, Cost as
Capital
>
> Flag. Mass > 80 to <= 108, Six rows of 9, 5 Fire con, Cost as Capital
>
> Mauler. Mass > 108 to <= 140, Seven rows of 10, 6 Fire con, Cost at
50/50
>
Capital/Super
>
> Supership. Mass > 140 to <= 176, Eight rows of 11, 7 Fire con, Cost as
Super.
>

The only problem with the wait classes is the as soon as you change to
the next catagory the ship costs more and is easier to force threshold
checks. I suggest one additionally category and a slight change to the
boundry of the next two.

Scout. Mass <= 8, One row of 4, 1 Fire con Cost 3/4 Escort
Escort. Mass > 8 to <= 20, Two rows of 5
Cruiser. Mass > 20 to <= 36, Three rows of 6

The allocation of the mass boxes for the ships in each class should be
done differently to stop the easier threshold checks. I think table will
best describe the mass box allocation.

1  2	3  4  9 16 25 36 49
5  6	7  8 10 17 26 37 50
11 12 13 14 15 18 27 38 51
19 20 21 22 23 24 28 39 52
29 30 31 32 33 34 35 40 53
41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 54

Using this system of allocation as you cross the class boundary the only
thing that happens is it costs more and it survives longer. Only the
high end of the class wait longer to take the threshold checks.

Just a thought

later Jim Bell
``````

 Prev: Re: Re[2]: Looking for a new home. Next: Re: Hammer's Slammers/Forever War (Was Re: Starship Troopers)