Prev: Re: [FMAS] [ECC VI] was SG2 Terrain Next: RE: Re: [FMAS] [ECC VI] was SG2 Terrain

Re: FT: Sa'Vasku ship costs...

From: Charles Taylor <nerik@m...>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 18:58:40 GMT
Subject: Re: FT: Sa'Vasku ship costs...

In message <5.1.0.14.1.20020312181647.00a64b30@d1o4.telia.com>
	  Oerjan Ohlson <oerjan.ohlson@telia.com> wrote:

> Imre Szabo wrote:
> 
> >Here's another idea with how to correct custom built Sa'Vasku
ships...
> >
> >Pro-rate the cost of power generators based on the percentage of mass
they 
> >use.  Ships with 12.5% PG's pay 1 NPV per PG.  Ships with upto 25%
PG's 
> >pay 2 NPV per PG.  Ships with upto 37.5% PG's pay 4 NPV per PG. 
Ships 
> >with upto 50% PG's, pay 8 NPV per PG; etc...
> 
> Good thinking.
> 
> >This will affect the price of only one ship in the FTFB2, the 11 mass
scout.
> 
> It won't even affect that one if you allow those percentages to be
rounded 
> to the nearest integer Mass. 25% of 11 is 2.75, which rounds up to 3.
> 
> However, the above idea needs to be combined with other fixes -
otherwise 
> it doesn't do anything about the problem with SV which stay at range
72+ 
> and picks the enemy apart :-/
> 
> Later,
> 
> Oerjan
> oerjan.ohlson@telia.com
> 
Well, fortunately, there are only 3 SV designs in FB2 that can do that
(the 3 biggest) :-)
Less fortunately, All but 4 (the 4 smallest) of the FB2 SV can reach
ranges of 48mu or more, and there are very few non-SV ships with this
kind of range (err... Komarov SDN and... nothing else).

OTOH, I'm not totally happy with the 'reduced range' bands for SV,
largely for aesthetic reasons :-)

No problem with the changed power pool allocations.

Charles

Prev: Re: [FMAS] [ECC VI] was SG2 Terrain Next: RE: Re: [FMAS] [ECC VI] was SG2 Terrain