Re: Mass for Points Tradeoff

>Tom wrote: (for mass 40 ship..... cost: 210 vs hull 40 average of 140)
>60 pts MASS 60
>24 pts Weak hull (12 boxes, 12 MASS)
>36 pts Thrust 6 (18 MASS)
>12 pts FTL (6 MASS)
> 6 pts  2 Fire controls (2 MASS)
>18 pts 2 6-arc Class-2s (6 MASS)
> 9 pts 3 PDS (3 MASS)
> 6 pts 2 6-arc Class-1s (2 MASS)
> 9 pts Screen (3 MASS)
>24 pts 1 5-arc Class-3 (8 MASS)
> 6 pts Appears to be 2/3 'actual' or 'design' MASS (10% of 'design'
MASS in
>points, 0 MASS)

Pretty neat idea...... Actually My group has been playing around with 
this.  We keep trying to come up with a kick butt enterprise in some of 
our on going battles.  We've been working with the following assumption

2*cost for 1/2* mass
for drives that use up to the full thrust for turns cost*3

Now we further subdivided this as a tech benifit and started to play
with 
the following tech ideas.

1.  Advanced Drives ( 3*cost, up to full thrust for turns)
2.  Advanced Beams  ( 1/2 original mass (keep fractions) 2*original cost
)
3.  Advanced FTL    ( same 1/2 2*cost again deal )
4.  Advanced Hull   ( same 1/2 2*cost again deal )
5.  Advanced OTHER  ( all weapons/firecontrol/pds/ect........)

we were playing in order with these ideas.  Our group feels that:

item 1:  The drives are fairly well balanced (The Kravak Web page uses
the
	 same set of assumptions )
item 2:  The beams seem to be fairly well balanced, but note:  that when

we
	 use this rule, we've been by convention going to larger beam 
classes
	 if possible... aka class-3/4/5's
item 3:  Doesn't seem to be a big deal..... just buying more space for 
wpns
item 4:  No play testing.... but we like this in conjustion with 5 and
the
	 rest of the advance techs... otherwise your ships go boom way
too
	 fast verse a reasonable opposing fleet
item 5:  Just going all the way with the 1/2 mass 2*cost of original 
compent.
	 
We kept and carried fractions of .5... this probably represents more of 
what
tom has, because otherwise the little advanced ships don't get much of a

benifit
because of rounding.

We're kicking around with some of these designs right now:

(techs all:  What the Enterprise should be: )
   FedKazin Enterp CA
   ------------
   hull: 80 strong, armor 10
	 ()()()()()()()()()()
	 [][][][][][][][][]*
	 [][][][][][][][][]*
	 [][][][][][][][][]*
	 [][][][][][][][][]*
   Thrust - 8
   FTL
   Weapons(40):
	 3*firecon
	 1*pds
	 screen-2
	 4*p-torp    (f,
		      f,
		      f,
		      f )
	 6*class-3 beams (f fs fp,
			  f fs fp,
			  f fs as,
			  f fs as,
			  f fp ap,
			  f fp ap )

   tmf: 80 cost: 512
   ------------

   FedKazin Defiant DD
   --------------------
   hull: 30 average, armor 6
	 ()()()()()()
	 [][][]
	 []*
	 [][]
	 []*
   Thrust - 8
   FTL
   Weapons(14):
	 2*firecon
	 2*pds
	 screen-2
	 2*p-torp(f)
	 2*class-3 beams (f fp ap,
			  f fs as)

   tmf: 30 cost: 214
   -------------------

(tech adva drives,low mass on beams,pds,screen,firecontrol)
   SwordFish CA
   ------------
   hull: 80 average
	 [][][][][]*
	 [][][][][]*
	 [][][][][]*
	 [][][][][]*
   Thrust - 6
   FTL
   Weapons(24):
	 2*firecon
	 4*pds
	 screen-2
	 2*class-4 beams (f,
			  f)
	 4*class-3 beams (f,
			  f,
			  f,
			  f)
	 2*class-1 beams (360,
			  360)

   tmf: 80 cost: 364
   ---------

   CrawDaddy CL
   ---------
   hull: 44 average
	 [][][]*
	 [][][][]
	 * [][]
	 [][]*
   Thrust - 6
   FTL
   Weapons(14):
	 2*firecon
	 4*pds
	 1*adfc
	 screen-2      8l
	 2 * class-3 beams (f,
			    f )
	 3 * class-2 beams (f fs fp,
			    f fs as,
			    f fp ap )
	 2 * class-1 beams (360,
			    360)

   tmf: 44 cost: 209
   -------------

   SiegeGun CL
   ------------
   hull: 44 average
	 [][][]*
	 [][][][]
	 * [][]
	 [][]*
   Thrust - 4
   FTL
   Weapons(18):
	 1*firecon
	 3*pds
	 screen-2

	 1 * class - 5 beam (f)
	 1 * class - 4 beam (f)
	 1 * class - 3 beam (f)

   tmf: 44 cost: 215
   -----------------

   CrayFish DD
   ------------
   hull: 30 average
	 [][][]
	 []*
	 [][]
	 []*
   Thrust - 6
   FTL
   Weapons(9):
	 1*firecon
	 2*pds
	 screen-2
	 2*class-3 beam(f,
			f )
	 1*class-2 beam(f fs fp)
	 2*class-1 beam(360,
			360)

   tmf:30 cost: 137
   --------------

Other notes of interest..........Our group has been in serious delima 
over beam weapons..... there are a few of us who are really dissapointed

with the squared mass requirements of the larger beam weapons..... we'd 
really like to see more honking beam weapons that can be setup either as

doing more damage, but keeping a short range like 12"/24" maybe 36" or 
so, but say 3d at 36",4d at 24", 5d at 12" or something like that.....
or 
perhaps get the 1d at 72" and less?  Because of the way that beams grow 
expenentially we kinda feel that by doing the cost*2 div mass/2 
route..... that you'll still end up with a lot o'ships wanting to put 
just 2*'s as many class-2's on them and buzzing around... especially if 
you go with adv manuver and light weight thrusters/hull...  But if you 
stick to a convention of trying to cram class-3+'s in there its a fairly

good situation.

Oh, by the way........ the FedKazin Enterp CA can really kick some 
serious butt...... we pitted her against an NSL BDN........ it was 
amazing just how much hurting the Enterp did on the poor NSL ship.... 
It 
was pretty nasty..  The first salvo + ftrs from the NSL managed to drop 
the armor and inflict some rather nasty damage on the NSL, but the next 
round saw the Enterp right on the NSL's rear arc and there for the rest 
of the battle...... I think just another 2 rounds and the NSL ship was 
toast....  The manuverability advantage coupled with the hull and 
firepower....... almost makes it worth a lot more on top of the 
calculated cost of 512..... obviously some more play testing needs to be

done....... but it still seems rather a rough bet.  Tom's suggestion 
looks like a similar setup.......  but almost more of a + 1/2 more space

for + 1/3 more cost of the ship?  Looks good for a mass 40 ship, but
what 
about a mass 80 ship? does it fall apart...... how does a mass 20 ship 
look?

Anyway, just some thoughts on this subject, I'm interested to hear what 
others have come up with.

Chuck

-- 
The trail is the thing, not the end of the trail.
Travel too fast and you miss all you are traveling for.
					  ~Louis L'Amour
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
-
|Chuck Choukalos | IBM : 1000 River Road   | Phone:802-769-5787 (tie
446) 
|
|ASIC Core	 | Essex Junction, VT 05452| Fax  :802-769-5882 (tie
446) 
|
|Developement	 | Bldg. 862C Dept. RDVV   | Email:chuckc@btv.ibm.com	
 
|
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
-