Topic: OP+ 4.0: Conjectural Ships & PBR

[KHH Jakle]

I am thinking about making conjectural ships optional, if both teams agree to use them.  I can update PBR so that the Conjectural ships can be put on the Matrix, but clearly marked.

[762_XC]

Sounds like that would be a step AWAY from PBR.

[Kroma BaSyl]

Do you mean ALL conjectural ships or just the new ones from 4.0? What about Taldren creations?

[KHH Jakle]

Never considered the Taldren crap conjectural....

but I guess that's worth considering too...

[KHH Jakle]

Sounds like that would be a step AWAY from PBR.

It depends.  If you think PBR should be more ironclad historical, rather than just an application of S8 (which does not make formations automatically historical) then I guess I see where you are coming from. 

PBR, while making rules to make more realistic (pseudo-historical) ship formations (as opposed to 3x C7 v 3x BCF), is supposed to be a translation of S8 only. 

Conjectural ships are easily allowed by S8, provided all players agree in their use.

That's how I see it anyway

[FPF-DieHard]

Define conjectual?  What if one ship was built like the CAD or F-CS?

Does this mean you can "veto" the KCR?   

[KHH Jakle]

hmm.... interesting

My initial opinion:  any single construction ship should be allowed, as long as it's restricted to one.  In your example, the CAD is already covered since it's a Droner, but all single construction ships would have to be ID's to make sure they have the same handicap.

Also, you know what, I actually do think that ALL contectural ships should be optional (but vetoable).  Let that fall on everything from KCR's to the ships that never were.

But it's open for debate.  I sometimes think things are good ideas (like making a seperate rule for fast ships) then realize later they are crap

[FPF-DieHard]

Make the unique ships support vessels maybe?
 
How do you handle the utterly ridiculous ships like the Mauler B10?

[Corbomite]

The same way you handle other conjecturals, such as the F- BB. 

[Slider]

Actually a Mauler B10 makes sence big ship big gun, planet starship buster.

How about Hydrans without fighters. Some power and a few more Hydran style weopons. Make all the pouty fighters are cheese folks happy.

Hey did ISC fighters in SFB have Phaser Gs????

How about a SFB based fighter list!!!! Anyone have one we can adopt?

[762_XC]

How about a SFB based fighter list!!!! Anyone have one we can adopt?

Too hard to balance for GSA play. The only reason it's even conceivable on D2 is because carriers are restricted via OOB.

[Slider]

oh okj. Understood.

[FPF-DieHard]

How about a SFB based fighter list!!!! Anyone have one we can adopt?

Too hard to balance for GSA play. The only reason it's even conceivable on D2 is because carriers are restricted via OOB.

I wrote the fighter list for D2 and I SO do not want to see it in PBR!!!!   

[FPF-DieHard]

The same way you handle other conjecturals, such as the F- BB. 

Very good question, do we remove all BBs except the K-B10 series?  Where do we stop?

[Dfly]

Actually a Mauler B10 makes sence big ship big gun, planet starship buster.

How about Hydrans without fighters. Some power and a few more Hydran style weopons. Make all the pouty fighters are cheese folks happy.

Hey did ISC fighters in SFB have Phaser Gs????

How about a SFB based fighter list!!!! Anyone have one we can adopt?

Hey why stop at the ISC having phaser Gs.  The Lyrans have a whole mess of them on the rear of their ships, and those ones are certainly not SFB.  There are other discrepancies throughout the different races but we cannot go changing what is on each ship, or our name would be Firesoul.  Now I am not knocking Firesoul as I do like what he has done and all the work he has put into this game and others, but perhaps we should concentrate on what we can change and adjust more than what we cannot.

I saw some suggestions by Legendary in another post about each fleet using each race vs same race etc.  I like the ideas presented there as a good starting point for possible suggestions for next cycle.  I would suggest then the thought of dropping the top end bpv some, and taking all DN and larger ships out of the equation.  It is true that the DN(and later the BT which replaced some DNs in SFB) were not part of any 3 ship squadron for SFB. If this were the case, I would suggest lowering the bpv top end to say, 550 or so.  This would allow for up to 1 Command ship up to say 225, and 2 other ships at 150 and 175 respectively , or thereabouts.

[Slider]

Thank you Dfly, I value your opinion highly and im happy to hear you even bring that post up.

 I consider at least 2 of those options over there as a great way to level the playing field WITHOUT altering the shiplists. I consider each suggestions as very doable and each can be rotated.

1 cycle Mirror Matches
1 cycle Race Centric (as it is today)
1 cycle Race by Lineup. (Like Baseball pitchers, Per series, or even per game makes that last few weeks very intersting as people run out of ships they "prefer"!!.)

No need to have just one unless you just really like it. Keep in mind Leauge play is ment to test player ship knowledge and skills as well as team work. Its not ment to be a representation of historic battles. That is best left up for Dyna or special occasional fun games.

My post in this thread was not to be take very seriously and I apologise for not prefacing it.

I just dislike "Win Baby, Just Win"  mentalitly people and wish to thwart their efforts to keep unfair advantages at every turn, fairly of course..

Onward!

[Slider]

PS. You other leagues reading this are not allowed to use my ideas for your communities. Not even for communities sake. My ideas are for this community and this community only.

 

Slider

[KHH Jakle]

How about a SFB based fighter list!!!! Anyone have one we can adopt?

Too hard to balance for GSA play. The only reason it's even conceivable on D2 is because carriers are restricted via OOB.

I wrote the fighter list for D2 and I SO do not want to see it in PBR!!!!   

I whole heartedly support a new, SFB-ish fighter list for use in this league, and I would augment the PBR inorder to force proper SFB-ish fighter load outs.  Kel would have to manage such a move and the vote or whatever, but I can adjust PBR accordingly if it happened.

[KHH Jakle]

The same way you handle other conjecturals, such as the F- BB. 

Very good question, do we remove all BBs except the K-B10 series?  Where do we stop?

My opinion:  since all the other BB's are conjectural, call the B-10 conjectural too.  I think that's an easy exception to make.

[KHH Jakle]

How about a SFB based fighter list!!!! Anyone have one we can adopt?

Too hard to balance for GSA play. The only reason it's even conceivable on D2 is because carriers are restricted via OOB.

I wrote the fighter list for D2 and I SO do not want to see it in PBR!!!!   

I whole heartedly support a new, SFB-ish fighter list for use in this league, and I would augment the PBR inorder to force proper SFB-ish fighter load outs.  Kel would have to manage such a move and the vote or whatever, but I can adjust PBR accordingly if it happened.

You know what's funny - at first glance, I thought DH was saying he WANTED it in PBR...lol

Let me just say this - there were a bunch of posts about how Carrier groups needed to replace one of their escorts with a line ship to give them more offensive punch.

Why not give them some fighters worth a damn?

I know when KHH fought 9th, and they pulled a carrier group out on us, I think the main strategy there was to give them overwhelming drone defense.  From what I understand, their fighters were only launched to deliver the coup de grace.

But you are right....they would play hell to 'balance' - but are they necessarily balanced now?  I think to large degrees, carriers and fighters are really unknown territory when it comes to the kind of set peice battles we have in a league environment.  Maybe the current taldren crap are known entities, but I don't think that makes them better for the league than DH's, for example.

I don't know if people ever tried this before, but as a preliminary BPV balancing, I used to launch my SFB fighters out by individual squadrons against an AI opponent of similar total BPV.  A flight of F-14's vs a Klink F5C for example.  Depending on how well they did would give me an idea whether they were priced appropriately or not.

[KHH Jakle]

Make the unique ships support vessels maybe?
 
How do you handle the utterly ridiculous ships like the Mauler B10?

First thing that needs to be done is get a list of all Conjecturals and all single constructions.

From there we can see what we're dealing with and make a better, informed decision (do nothing, or if to do something, do what and how).

Any volunteers?

[FPF-DieHard]

But you are right....they would play hell to 'balance' - but are they necessarily balanced now?  I think to large degrees, carriers and fighters are really unknown territory when it comes to the kind of set peice battles we have in a league environment.  Maybe the current taldren crap are known entities, but I don't think that makes them better for the league than DH's, for example.

I don't know if people ever tried this before, but as a preliminary BPV balancing, I used to launch my SFB fighters out by individual squadrons against an AI opponent of similar total BPV.  A flight of F-14's vs a Klink F5C for example.  Depending on how well they did would give me an idea whether they were priced appropriately or not.

Let me re-word this, they could be balanced but you have to throw the SFB BPVs in tha garbage and start over.

[KHH Jakle]

But you are right....they would play hell to 'balance' - but are they necessarily balanced now?  I think to large degrees, carriers and fighters are really unknown territory when it comes to the kind of set peice battles we have in a league environment.  Maybe the current taldren crap are known entities, but I don't think that makes them better for the league than DH's, for example.

I don't know if people ever tried this before, but as a preliminary BPV balancing, I used to launch my SFB fighters out by individual squadrons against an AI opponent of similar total BPV.  A flight of F-14's vs a Klink F5C for example.  Depending on how well they did would give me an idea whether they were priced appropriately or not.

Let me re-word this, they could be balanced but you have to throw the SFB BPVs in tha garbage and start over.

Yeah - but couldn't the SFB values be used to establish relative strength? ex: the F-14's v the Klink Frigate

[FPF-DieHard]

But you are right....they would play hell to 'balance' - but are they necessarily balanced now?  I think to large degrees, carriers and fighters are really unknown territory when it comes to the kind of set peice battles we have in a league environment.  Maybe the current taldren crap are known entities, but I don't think that makes them better for the league than DH's, for example.

I don't know if people ever tried this before, but as a preliminary BPV balancing, I used to launch my SFB fighters out by individual squadrons against an AI opponent of similar total BPV.  A flight of F-14's vs a Klink F5C for example.  Depending on how well they did would give me an idea whether they were priced appropriately or not.

Let me re-word this, they could be balanced but you have to throw the SFB BPVs in tha garbage and start over.

Yeah - but couldn't the SFB values be used to establish relative strength? ex: the F-14's v the Klink Frigate

Um, how much do you factor in AI stupidity?   

Have you seen the GW4/Slave Girls fighters?    Is this sort of what you are talking about?

[762_XC]

But you are right....they would play hell to 'balance' - but are they necessarily balanced now?  I think to large degrees, carriers and fighters are really unknown territory when it comes to the kind of set peice battles we have in a league environment.  Maybe the current taldren crap are known entities, but I don't think that makes them better for the league than DH's, for example.

I don't know if people ever tried this before, but as a preliminary BPV balancing, I used to launch my SFB fighters out by individual squadrons against an AI opponent of similar total BPV.  A flight of F-14's vs a Klink F5C for example.  Depending on how well they did would give me an idea whether they were priced appropriately or not.

Let me re-word this, they could be balanced but you have to throw the SFB BPVs in tha garbage and start over.

Yeah - but couldn't the SFB values be used to establish relative strength? ex: the F-14's v the Klink Frigate

No, for two reasons.

One, trying to balance the fighters alone without their carrier is unrealistic. The carrier adds an element of offensive and defensive support which lends to the effectiveness of the fighter group. Ask any experienced carrier pilot how well independent strikes work.

Two, the type of ship you select as a test target will affect the outcome. Different fighters have different effectiveness against different types of targets. Variations in target point defense will also yield different results.

This will be a HUGE HUGE headache to try to accomplish. Personally I think the devil we know is a better choice.

[KHH Jakle]

But you are right....they would play hell to 'balance' - but are they necessarily balanced now?  I think to large degrees, carriers and fighters are really unknown territory when it comes to the kind of set peice battles we have in a league environment.  Maybe the current taldren crap are known entities, but I don't think that makes them better for the league than DH's, for example.

I don't know if people ever tried this before, but as a preliminary BPV balancing, I used to launch my SFB fighters out by individual squadrons against an AI opponent of similar total BPV.  A flight of F-14's vs a Klink F5C for example.  Depending on how well they did would give me an idea whether they were priced appropriately or not.

Let me re-word this, they could be balanced but you have to throw the SFB BPVs in tha garbage and start over.

Yeah - but couldn't the SFB values be used to establish relative strength? ex: the F-14's v the Klink Frigate

Um, how much do you factor in AI stupidity?   

Have you seen the GW4/Slave Girls fighters?    Is this sort of what you are talking about?

Well....it's sort of AI v AI, so I figure the stupidity cancels each other out.

Seriously, depending on how well the Squadron did, I would just use a gut check to measure how much adjustment might be needed for a human opponent.

You sent me your SGO ftrlist once, so I've seen it. 

[KHH Jakle]

But you are right....they would play hell to 'balance' - but are they necessarily balanced now?  I think to large degrees, carriers and fighters are really unknown territory when it comes to the kind of set peice battles we have in a league environment.  Maybe the current taldren crap are known entities, but I don't think that makes them better for the league than DH's, for example.

I don't know if people ever tried this before, but as a preliminary BPV balancing, I used to launch my SFB fighters out by individual squadrons against an AI opponent of similar total BPV.  A flight of F-14's vs a Klink F5C for example.  Depending on how well they did would give me an idea whether they were priced appropriately or not.

Let me re-word this, they could be balanced but you have to throw the SFB BPVs in tha garbage and start over.

Yeah - but couldn't the SFB values be used to establish relative strength? ex: the F-14's v the Klink Frigate

No, for two reasons.

One, trying to balance the fighters alone without their carrier is unrealistic. The carrier adds an element of offensive and defensive support which lends to the effectiveness of the fighter group. Ask any experienced carrier pilot how well independent strikes work.

Two, the type of ship you select as a test target will affect the outcome. Different fighters have different effectiveness against different types of targets. Variations in target point defense will also yield different results.

This will be a HUGE HUGE headache to try to accomplish. Personally I think the devil we know is a better choice.

Independant Strikes don't work because the Taldren fighters stink.  I made a SFB fighterlist before to goof around, and playtest solo Independant strikes all the time.

I wasn't too different than DH's, although I went with SFB fighter loadouts (so 6 instead of 4 in a Squadron), and I only used the heavier (but slower) missles.  The Dogfight drones on the SSD were ignored (I think DH used the light missles for these).

Anyway, just to test the effectiveness of the squadrons relative to SFB bpv, I would launch them on independant strikes against targets of roughly equal BPV.  Results varied - for exactly the reasons you state (does the ship have AMD? for ex) - but by and large, the performance was roughly consistent.

So you start with a concept.  Lets say DH's SGO ftr list to start.

You balance the BPV v AI.

Then you playtest some missions v Human opponents.

[762_XC]

Independant strikes do NOT work with SFB fighters. They are even more vulnerable then Taldren ones.

More weapons but fewer hit points as a general rule.

Balancing the BPV against AI is pointless, because AI does not know how to deal with fighters.

[KHH Jakle]

Independant strikes do NOT work with SFB fighters. They are even more vulnerable then Taldren ones.

More weapons but fewer hit points as a general rule.

Balancing the BPV against AI is pointless, because AI does not know how to deal with fighters.

Not like I have a Master Fighter Chart sitting in front of me, but I don't recall SFB fighters being any weaker that Taldren from a hit point perspective.

I just don't see how you can call it pointless to use AI as a starting point.  It's raw, but it's a starting point.

[FPF-DieHard]

I just don't see how you can call it pointless to use AI as a starting point.  It's raw, but it's a starting point.

Because the only valid test is combat <Snicker>

[762_XC]

What Kumerian said. 

It's pointless because the AI is as bad against fighters as it is against drones. There are so many ways of dealing with fighters that the AI does not do.

[KHH Jakle]

I just don't see how you can call it pointless to use AI as a starting point.  It's raw, but it's a starting point.

Because the only valid test is combat <Snicker>

DH, you bastard. 

[KHH Jakle]

But you are right....they would play hell to 'balance' - but are they necessarily balanced now?  I think to large degrees, carriers and fighters are really unknown territory when it comes to the kind of set peice battles we have in a league environment.  Maybe the current taldren crap are known entities, but I don't think that makes them better for the league than DH's, for example.

I don't know if people ever tried this before, but as a preliminary BPV balancing, I used to launch my SFB fighters out by individual squadrons against an AI opponent of similar total BPV.  A flight of F-14's vs a Klink F5C for example.  Depending on how well they did would give me an idea whether they were priced appropriately or not.

Let me re-word this, they could be balanced but you have to throw the SFB BPVs in tha garbage and start over.

So why couldn't this just be done??

[KHH Jakle]

Make the unique ships support vessels maybe?
 
How do you handle the utterly ridiculous ships like the Mauler B10?

First thing that needs to be done is get a list of all Conjecturals and all single constructions.

From there we can see what we're dealing with and make a better, informed decision (do nothing, or if to do something, do what and how).

Any volunteers?

Does anyone want to be a sweet heart and list all the conjectural ships as of OP+ 4.0?  I'd do it, but I am not living at home right now