Re: Mass for Points Tradeoff

djwj wrote:
> I think that the new rules could stand a cost-for-mass tradeoff. Some
way
> that I can shoehorn in that last 10% (more or less) mass of systems,
> engines, ect. by paying more points for it. At it's most obscene it
could be
> used to design "Defiant" or "White Star" type ships, those that are in
> limited production with outrageous power levels for their class. I
haven't
> really worked on the idea myself, but I'd certanly like to hear some
> thoughts (It would be a nice change from the resounding silence on the
> list).

Hmmm.  Something like this might be useful for flavour, but you have
to be careful not to unbalance the game too much, since MASS is usually
the defining factor in ships, and not points.  

If we abuse the 80/20 rule (20% of performance represents 80% of the
cost,
very, very roughly (8-) ) then maybe something like every 10% MASS
reduction
costs adds 50% to the cost of the system.  To be even better, you
probably
want to make it a geometric or exponential progression over the MASS 
reductions.

J.
-- 
/ Jerry Han -  CANOE Canada - jhan@canoe.ca -
http://people.canoe.ca/jhan \
  ** Visit the Canadian Online Explorer! => http://www.canoe.ca **
TBFTGOGGI
 The opinions expressed are mine, and not necessarily those of CANOE
Canada.
	 "...And if I should try, Would you catch me If I Fall?"