Wyrdysm Games

Looks like gamma needs more people, count me in! Now I just need to find the time to build a ship...

Well, if Team Gamma doesn't mind a rookie, I would like to enter my first tournament.

I'm up for it as well, have a battleship in the works that I can reappropriate for this! Although to be fair, Jafo got his name in before me, I don't want to steal his spot

I going to pull out, this ruleset feels more like a step back. I like that it was jacked up to 200 points, but the limits on weapons per sections felt and looked a lot better than the tiled weapons this will bring about. That rule effectively replaced the differing prices between classes, since battleships have more weapons by the fact that they had more sections.

The prices also look like they were decided more on personal preference, but thats something testing can iron out.

So Qwice can take my spot if he really wants to play in this one.

All right, I'll step in for Gamma. Think my ship needs a complete rebuild from the ground up though which means I'm not going to have a preliminary build up tonight

I dislike the scaling rule..

what it will do is force everyone to practicely use the biggest and longest sections to shield their ships, thus resulting in less variance in ship appearance and design.

Just limit the size increase..let's say Max 3 increase (TOTAL) on any axis.

SO I can enlarge a segment 3 time in the X axis
Or 2 times in X and 1 time in Y
Or 2 times in Y and 1 in X... you get the picture.

ChaosTheory wrote: Team name: Delta Force?

that or Task Force Omega.... both sounds ass-kicking good

EDIT: I've "refavored" the missiles so they're cheapest (2) for the Frigate (Missile Frigates just make sense) and 3 points for the Battleship/Corvette.

I don't know about that.

frigates are fast and nimble and can avoid most missiles easily. Ergo a battleship would need even more of them to fight against a frigate.

Speaking of which, isn't it more natural to place weapons that require a lot of ammo on bigger ships? Where you can easily store that ammo?

TrashMan wrote:Speaking of which, isn't it more natural to place weapons that require a lot of ammo on bigger ships? Where you can easily store that ammo?

Then why are chainguns and large missile pods on helicopters?

I dislike the scaling rule..

I like it, makes people stay honest. If ya increase one part of a section you must decrease the otherway. Brilliant!!!! Keeps people from enlarging there sections to much both ways, and brings a air of balance. You shouldn't be able to make smaller pieces the size of larger ones, the current setting elimanates that problem. I don't see a problem with ships looking the same, ship designs never come out exactly the same. No matter the point system used. Finished up a few models thus far, not to shabby. They can still use improvment however I want them to be able to take two ships on there own, instead of just one.

Müg wrote:

TrashMan wrote:Speaking of which, isn't it more natural to place weapons that require a lot of ammo on bigger ships? Where you can easily store that ammo?

Then why are chainguns and large missile pods on helicopters?

Cause they are smaller guns and missiles? And fewer?
We don't change weapon stats, ergo they are technicly all the same size.

I like it, makes people stay honest. If ya increase one part of a section you must decrease the otherway. Brilliant!!!! Keeps people from enlarging there sections to much both ways, and brings a air of balance.

And what I proposed doesn't do the same?

No if you allow section size change both ways, its still possible to make large sections and not have to make them smaller the other way. By having to make a section smaller one way if ya make it big the other, you limit the size a section can be better.

DarkenShroud wrote:

I dislike the scaling rule..

I like it, makes people stay honest. If ya increase one part of a section you must decrease the otherway. Brilliant!!!! Keeps people from enlarging there sections to much both ways, and brings a air of balance. You shouldn't be able to make smaller pieces the size of larger ones, the current setting elimanates that problem. I don't see a problem with ships looking the same, ship designs never come out exactly the same. No matter the point system used. Finished up a few models thus far, not to shabby. They can still use improvment however I want them to be able to take two ships on there own, instead of just one.

yeah, but it will limit the design too much, and will be a hell do judge. There will be just a lot of large-thin sections.
A square-limit based system is a lot easier and more free, with even less chance for exploiting.
Its very easy: don't make the sections bigger than 5x2 or 4x3 or smaller than 1x1. Obvioulsy section 26 can't be scaled larger, and the small wing sections can't be scalled smaller. You just look at the shipmaker file and you will know if it break the rules. at max you will need to rotate the section to be sure.

DarkenShroud wrote:No if you allow section size change both ways, its still possible to make large sections and not have to make them smaller the other way. By having to make a section smaller one way if ya make it big the other, you limit the size a section can be better.

It is limited BOTH ways..you got 3 increases per section.. how you spend them (on which axis) is your problem.

You can increase X by 3, but you got nothing left for the Y.
You can increase X by 2 and Y by 1, but now it's not as long a you want it.

Get it? It's almost like a point buy system.

One more thing about the missile price - a PD beam and a missile launcher cost the same - yet a single PD beam can easily take out 2 missiles, if not more.

you just made missiles more than useless with cheap point-defense.

*Oh, I'd loose aeigis shields too*

heh darn, just suddenly got busy in RL. Can you remove me from Beta team and put me on the bench? I might still play if you happen to need another person.