Page 8 of 28
Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 5:21 am
by Stormcaller
How about this:
1-2pt weapons/modules, 3 per section.
2-4pt weapons/modules, 2 per section.
5+ pt weapons/modules, 1 per section.
Keeps all the big nasties on the big nasties, while your small and fast ships keep the small and fast weapons. Course, that's all off the cuff, so points might need adjusting.
Personal opinion though, is that at this point we shouldn't be fuxing with the rules unless there's a serious inconsistency or loophole found. To my knowledge there's a lot of work on getting ships ready, and altering rules, particularly very basic ones like this, would zero out all progress so far.
Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 5:33 am
by DarkenShroud
3 per section is really not messing with the rules that much, and gives us a slight increase. Which is always a good thing. The big nasties that really matter, are expensive or restricted already. Three per section in this rules format is much better then 2, and gives the players a better shot. Plus frigates become better then they are able to be currently.
Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 5:44 am
by Stormcaller
Yes, but giving us five bazillion points also would give us a better shot, and tilt the contest too far in our favor. Better to keep things as per design and challenging.
As for the above, I was intending that to be the maximum per section based on most expensive weapon/module there. So a MegaTach would require its own section, whereas you could stick three mining lasers onto one section. A section that already has a Gat Blaster on it could only accept one more weapon/module of 4pts or less. A section with two mining lasers couldn't accept anything else unless it cost less than 3 points. A section with two Gat Blasters could not have any other weapons or modules.
Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 5:47 am
by Lloyd16
i quite like that system of putting weapons on. only 1 proplem for me. i may well put 2 lancers on, and by these rules, they would go on seperate sections, which would stop my idea of boosting them(without spending 10 points on boosters).
edit:i reckon the system i came up with is better, or maybe 2 sections for frigates, 3 for cruisers, and 4 for battleships, this would allow a fair-ish system of 3 weapons/modules per sections.
Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 5:50 am
by Stormcaller
Well like I said, it was off the cuff. Something to think about for tournaments in the future, if people want to fiddle with it.
Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 6:28 am
by AllStarZ
If you made it three per section, my Stormwall will chew through ships like a laser knife through butter with the points I will save.
Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 6:31 am
by Strideo
It's definitely something to consider in my opinion. In the meantime I would hesitate to change any of the rules while the tournament is underway unless it turns out to be something urgent.
Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 7:31 am
by EndlessInfinity
Yeah, I didn't wanna change the rules too much from the last mothership tourney, particularily because they seemed to work rather well, but for the inevitable tourney #3, whoever starts it could definitely consider that...
edit: that, and at the moment, I'm not totally sure you guys need it as an advantage - you're all doing really well!
Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 3:47 pm
by Griffin999
Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:02 am
by Normandy
Normandy wrote:http://www.geocities.com/normandy_333/Hammer.zip
Sorry for the late entry, a bit busy yesterday.
(Too lazy to post screenie)
It's a very dense, compact ship - only 6 sections. It's slow, but it can put out quite a lot of blaster fire.
2x Blaster
2x GatBlaster
2x QuadBlaster
2x Particle Gun
1x Point Beam
1x Nano Matrix
Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2008 5:40 am
by Stormcaller
The Super Companion Cube. In .zip format. Hosted and so on. SB3 and SHP files. Etc. etc.
Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2008 8:37 am
by M123
Here's an update to my HBP Pummeler (which will now be my submission):
Damn, the ship database is still down. :x
Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2008 10:34 am
by DarkenShroud
Suggestion-
Get rid of two flectors, a few back sections, and the blasters. Add either more beamers, or 2 lancets.
Needs more firepower.
The blasters will be interecepted by the enemy I feel, there not good unless theres enough used. So either go all gat blasters, or all beam type weapons. But eitherway you need more firepower. So drop a few flectors and those two back sections.
M123 wrote:Here's an update to my HBP Pummeler (which will now be my submission):
Damn, the ship database is still down. :x
Himura.Kenshin wrote:Captain Trek wrote:Would it be alright with you guys if I drop out? I'm just not... well... 'feeling' it this time... I don't seem to have any motivation... I fear I'll jeapordise the team with a lackluster design if I stay...
No problems... I appreciate you asked us first. This has in no way affected my high respect for you, except possibly made it higher =P.
And, uh...
NATCH GET YO FAT ASS IN HERE.
2nded
You took the words right out of my mind.
Infinity could you move Natch to our team in Treks place, and add a alt in his spot please? There are a few alts that have posted.
BETA FLEET
1. Natch
2. Anarki
3. DarkenShroud
4. M123 - HBP Pummeler {Short-Medium-Long Range DPS/ Tank}
5. Kalanosis
6. ChaosTheory - Fallen Light Mk IV {Long/Short Range DPS/ Bombardment}
7. Comus - Rao III-G {Bombardment}
8. Himura.Kenshin
Natch wrote:Oi, might as well say it.
Anyone willing to move to team delta so I can be on team beta?
Captain Trek wrote:Would it be alright with you guys if I drop out? I'm just not... well... 'feeling' it this time... I don't seem to have any motivation... I fear I'll jeapordise the team with a lackluster design if I stay...
Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2008 11:53 am
by AllStarZ
Question: Can we parent any weapons to the core?
Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:28 pm
by antisocialmunky
2 weapons or modules OR you can cover it. Not both.
