|
cost
Feb 14, 2011 9:41:19 GMT -5
Post by evanmiller70 on Feb 14, 2011 9:41:19 GMT -5
hve you give a thought to econmoic cost. for campaign games if i follow the construction rules right all 250 ton ships are not made equal
|
|
|
cost
Feb 14, 2011 23:07:00 GMT -5
Post by warchariot on Feb 14, 2011 23:07:00 GMT -5
Not sure what you are asking? Are you saying econ should play a factor in what you could place on a 250 hull?
|
|
|
cost
Feb 15, 2011 10:06:51 GMT -5
Post by evanmiller70 on Feb 15, 2011 10:06:51 GMT -5
in most campaign sys yhere is a mass cost and there is a economic cost. if you look at games like ft or sfb each ship is given a cost. i could make a default 250 ton ship and custom 230 ton ship and they will not have the combat abilities it would be good to have the ability to rate them or for campaign purposes to get a cost
|
|
|
cost
Feb 15, 2011 11:09:24 GMT -5
Post by TheDreadnought on Feb 15, 2011 11:09:24 GMT -5
In Colonial Battlefleet a tonnage 250 hull (for example), has identical potential combat effectiveness to any other tonnage 250 hull. Whether they are identical performers in combat depends on too many situational factors that it would be impossible to assign a point value to. Scenario, total force composition, opposition force composition, tactics used, etc.
For example, a 250 ton ship loaded to the gills with cluster missiles is invaluable against an enemy fleet with lots of fighters. . . but virtually useless against an enemy fleet consisting only of capital ships. Or a ship bristling with ASGM launchers can be devastating at extreme range in the hands of a player who knows how to use ASGMs, or can be of very little value in the hands of a player with no skill in stand-off missile strikes.
That's why ship tonnage is used as the point system because all ships of a given tonnage are capable of the same performance. . the differentiating factor is how well the player designs, and uses the ships he controls. Even a great design can be slaughtered by "lesser" designs if the player controlling the better design doesn't use it effectively.
Tonnage is the measure of combat capability potential in CBF. Whether a ship lives up to that potential is up to the skill of the player - and the campaign system will continue to use tonnage as the yardstick for production.
Now one way in which "economic cost" would be reflected is in the tech levels. A tonnage 250 hull from an average TL2 base is going to be less effective than a tonnage 250 hull on an average TL4 base.
So you will need to make the decision to invest in higher quality ships, through R&D to increase your tech levels. . . or just crank out masses of cheap, low quality hulls by devoting all your resources to production, rather than research.
Remember the end goal here is a campaign system with both tacatical and strategic considerations, and one that creates scenarios and consequences for tactical starship combat.
The goal is NOT to create a whole game around managing economies, or tax systems or simulating many of the government functions of an interstellar empire.
|
|
|
cost
Feb 15, 2011 20:15:58 GMT -5
Post by fastgit on Feb 15, 2011 20:15:58 GMT -5
Tonnage is the measure of combat capability potential in CBF. Whether a ship lives up to that potential is up to the skill of the player - and the campaign system will continue to use tonnage as the yardstick for production. Well said. So you will need to make the decision to invest in higher quality ships, through R&D to increase your tech levels. . . or just crank out masses of cheap, low quality hulls by devoting all your resources to production, rather than research. This I like. Looking forward to the finished product.
|
|
|
cost
Feb 15, 2011 23:10:19 GMT -5
Post by evanmiller70 on Feb 15, 2011 23:10:19 GMT -5
i understand in a one off game its not important to worry about this but most if not all do not want to play 1 off game we want to campaign. also if i follow your line of reasoning the yamato and the enterprise witha full load of aircraft are the same bot approx 72k tons
|
|
|
cost
Feb 16, 2011 5:14:31 GMT -5
Post by fastgit on Feb 16, 2011 5:14:31 GMT -5
i understand in a one off game its not important to worry about this but most if not all do not want to play 1 off game we want to campaign. also if i follow your line of reasoning the yamato and the enterprise witha full load of aircraft are the same bot approx 72k tons Not exactly. If you're referring to CVN-65, she weighs in at around 93,000 tonnes when fully loaded with air-wing, fuel, etc. (almost 25% heavier!) Additionally, a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier commissioned in 1961 is definitely at a different tech level than a battlewagon commissioned twenty years earlier... and more effective as a result. If, on the other hand, you're referring to CV-6 (commissioned 1938 and a contemporary of Yamato, she only weighed in at around 25,500 when fully loaded.
|
|
|
cost
Feb 16, 2011 10:12:11 GMT -5
Post by TheDreadnought on Feb 16, 2011 10:12:11 GMT -5
i understand in a one off game its not important to worry about this but most if not all do not want to play 1 off game we want to campaign. also if i follow your line of reasoning the yamato and the enterprise witha full load of aircraft are the same bot approx 72k tons Not exactly. If you're referring to CVN-65, she weighs in at around 93,000 tonnes when fully loaded with air-wing, fuel, etc. (almost 25% heavier!) Additionally, a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier commissioned in 1961 is definitely at a different tech level than a battlewagon commissioned twenty years earlier... and more effective as a result. If, on the other hand, you're referring to CV-6 (commissioned 1938 and a contemporary of Yamato, she only weighed in at around 25,500 when fully loaded. As pointed out, drastically different tech levels between the two examples you provide. The point I was trying to get at, is that during a campaign game, you will have limited resources. Those resources can be devoted to: New Construction Repairing Old Ships Ongoing Maintenance Costs Tech R&D You can call those resource points whatever you want, megacredits, quatloos, seashells. But you only have a limited amount of them. Bigger ships are going to cost more than little ones to build but offer more capability. So, the idea of "economic cost" is there, its just being handled at the level of overall production/research capacity and resource allocation rather than having to track raw materials separately from currency and having to mcromanage an interstellar economy.
|
|
|
cost
Feb 16, 2011 23:45:50 GMT -5
Post by warchariot on Feb 16, 2011 23:45:50 GMT -5
You were also talking about the way you spend tonnage for a ship and the role the ship is given. One of the nice thing about CBF is you can take the same hull and buy weapons, armor, ect in an almost unending combination. This makes hulls very flexible and useful.
|
|
|
cost
Feb 17, 2011 7:44:22 GMT -5
Post by fastgit on Feb 17, 2011 7:44:22 GMT -5
Excellent point. That's the game-changer, in my book. And my favorite part of the design system.
|
|