Topic: An idea to promote line ships.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Perhaps a good way to promote more line ship usage is to give them more spare parts, and specialty ships less.

I think this might be somewhat justified in a roleplay sense as the more typical designs would be the ones that shipyards would have most of their production geared for.  Specialty ships might require more specialty equipment which is more expensive to make and which a shipyard would carry fewer of.  The shipyard would be more equipped to handle the 12 heavy cruisers and 25 light cruisers operating in its sector than the 1 fast cruiser I would think.

So imagine if the specialy ships had 8 part instead of 10 and the line ships got 12 instead of 10 at the CA level, this might encourage a bit more lineship flying.

Just another thought for consideration, i think DH might have mentioned something similar before but I don't remember for sure.

Of course if 8 parts is seen as too much a penalty for the specialty ships then perhaps they could retain 10 and the line ships given 15 instead.

[Alphageek]

Could someone give me a quick-n-easy definition of "line ship"?  Where is the cutoff between plain ol' ship and line ship?

[CaptJosh]

Um, vanilla ships are line ships, as opposed to specialty ships.

[Hexx]

Could someone give me a quick-n-easy definition of "line ship"?  Where is the cutoff between plain ol' ship and line ship?

Generally it's the, uhmm, line ships...
Anything with a tag of CL,CW,CA, the "base" ships of a class
So (for Feds) a NCL is a "line ship"
An NCD (drone variant) NEC (escort) NVS (strike carrier) are not
Some people (myself included) generally also throw in the command variants (CLC in this case)
some players just keep it to the basic class hull.


Another interesting idea Chuut- but again (imo) not really going to work
a few extra spares doesn't really make up for the 6 + points of extra power the CF will give you
Or the alpha strike/hex flipping ability of a droner.

[FPF-DieHard]

What about leaving "Line" ships at 10 and reducing Specialty to 5?   

Yes, I am that evil   

EDIT:   The more I think about it, the more I like this idea but it's gotta be 10 and 5. 

[Skaren]

How about changing the cost for specialty ships, leave the stock ones cheap.

That way if there is a border line ship that some would argue is maybe specialty, well then the cost can be adjusted up only slightly.

Cost and time to earn the money is what keeps me outta big/specialty ships.

[Capt_Bearslayer_XC]

I like that idea of reducing the specialty ship repair parts.

[Capt_Bearslayer_XC]

How about changing the cost for specialty ships, leave the stock ones cheap.

That way if there is a border line ship that some would argue is maybe specialty, well then the cost can be adjusted up only slightly.

Cost and time to earn the money is what keeps me outta big/specialty ships.

If you do that, then I think we need to stop the huge PP loss you get when you lose a ship.

Losing a 20K PP ship (like a BCH on SGO6) to end up in a 2-3K pp ship (which was a NCL or DD) is bad enough... but if you are going to increase the cost to 25-30K PP on top of that, I think it is a bit too much...

[FPF-DieHard]

How about changing the cost for specialty ships, leave the stock ones cheap.

That way if there is a border line ship that some would argue is maybe specialty, well then the cost can be adjusted up only slightly.

Cost and time to earn the money is what keeps me outta big/specialty ships.

This will change nothing.  Altering combat-effectivenes is the only thing that will make people fly a a line/command ship over Specialty ship. 

Reducing Spares to 5 will do this. 

[Dizzy]

Mb we should do the same to DNL's.

[FPF-DieHard]

Mb we should do the same to DNL's.

5-10 Spare in a DNL versus 15-20 (depending on DCR).   I like this!   

[GDA-Agave]

Mb we should do the same to DNL's.

5-10 Spare in a DNL versus 15-20 (depending on DCR).   I like this!   

You guys are evil!!     I LIKE IT!!  But I do agree with you that this one fact may have more effect on people flying speciality ships in combat heavy areas than just about any other idea we have mentioned.

5 spares!!   Holy Mizia tactics usuable again, Batman!!  And without it taking 40 minutes!! 

[762_XC]

Make all the DNL's 5 spares. Forget the DCR.

[Hexx]

Make all the DNL's 5 spares. Forget the DCR.

As much as I'm loathe to agree with t00l..

10 spares on a DNL (instead of 2) fixes nothing. The problem is the power curve, not that they can repair 2x the damage a CA can
5 spares *might* make a bit of a difference in PVP

Again don't really think it will fix much (is someone actually going to fly the DN+ over the DNL because it can repair more?)
but if you're going to do it, go with 5 each.

[Skaren]

Agreed upping the cost then makes it really tough to get them.

How about lower the cost of a stock ship? 

Would you rather fly a stock CA for cheap or spend 4 hours trying to save the PP to by a fancy pants ship ??

Remember BPV is its combat value,.. that doesn't reflect a cost to construct it. 

One could argue that stock ships are cheaper because they are sorta mass produced. 

Just a thought.

S

PS that also helps folks like me who don't have the nutter ability to collect PP, still get to fly in something larger than those damn frigates 

[Hexx]

You'll still have the better players run the missions, buy the good ships
And then people will point out that we're penalizing them because they can't afford to
run X number of missions to ge the good ships.

[FPF-DieHard]

5 Spares for Specialty ships, 5 for DNLs. 

I'm sold!!!   

Chuut, you are fricking brilliant!

[Hexx]

Chuut, you are fricking brilliant!

Let's not get carried away with the crazy talk here..

But it will (I think) help with the specialty vs/line ships ~ as long as the other fleeting rulse discussed are used as well
(actually with the fleeting rules it may tuin into a very good solution)

DNL's I still think will be a problem
As  Fed pilot are you going to take the DNL (5 spares) or the DN+ (20 spares)
Coaltion races will be choosing between DNL (super power curve) (5 spares) or DN's (15 spares)

Although again if the fleeting restrictions are tightened DNL's will be a bit less of an issue.

[Capt_Bearslayer_XC]

Aye, Hexx, but the DNL's won't be able to stick around in a fire fight for as long now...

3 CC/CA's will now have a MUCH better chance vs the DNL, 2 CF's fleet....

[Skaren]

Ya I guess your correct,...

How about this thought,...

Instead of starting with really small ships how about you start with medium ones.  That way an infrequent player who steps in after a game has been going doesn't start off flying a frigate with everyone else in good stuff.   Sure, once it is destroyed go back to small stuff.  

So just your start ship is a good one ?  

Like I say get hooked early and they will come back.

[Hexx]

Aye, Hexx, but the DNL's won't be able to stick around in a fire fight for as long now...

3 CC/CA's will now have a MUCH better chance vs the DNL, 2 CF's fleet....

Yesss..
but you can say a 5% chance is much better than a 1% chance..

The problem (entirely as I see it) is the ability to combine CFs & DNL's ability to operate at around spd 30 in early

The DNL's huge advantage has alwyas been it's excellent power curve combined with a (near) DN weapons load
which is why they were (almost always) chosen above DN's.
Nothing has changed.

As I said though- if this is combined with the fleeting rules, then yes, for the specialties at least it has changed
and for the better (imo)
If the fleeting rules are used (I'm really hoping they are) then the DNL's powercurve will be somehwat restricted as it operates with CC's instead of CF',s it will have to fly slower (or simply use the CC's to phaserboat) which may result in the fights turning into more of slugging matches, where tha abilty to carry 10-15 extra spares on a regular DN may become very appealing

EDIT:Actually me restate that -the more I think about it the more I think this is a great idea (if used in conjunction wtih new fleeting rules)
The DNL will still (likely) dominate in solo fights, but the fleet engagements will (I'd think) favour the DN with more spares.

[Hexx]

Ya I guess your correct,...

How about this thought,...

Instead of starting with really small ships how about you start with medium ones.  That way an infrequent player who steps in after a game has been going doesn't start off flying a frigate with everyone else in good stuff.   Sure, once it is destroyed go back to small stuff.  

So just your start ship is a good one ?  

Like I say get hooked early and they will come back.

Most servers these days offer a fair amount of prestige to start, enough to grab a decent ship.

[FPF-DieHard]

with only 5 Spares, a DNL can no longer maniacly chase down and opponent or afford to get in a Knife fight with a "real" Dread.

Still, from a Federation standpoint you won't see the DN+ flown unless the FYA is moved up, I imagine this is the same for the other races.

[Hexx]

Lyrans would probably go with the DNPp, DNL doesn't have quite the same gap over our DN
extra 10 spares would (probably) be worth it.


But again- if this is combined with the CF's as capital ships idea it would leave them (DNls& CFs)to dominate 1v1's
(which was arguably their role anyway) and put teh "line" ships and DN's into the fleets.

[Age]

   You could use 5/10 or 6/12 . or half a dozen of the other.Not a bad idea Chuut.

[Riskyllama]

damcon assigns spares in blocks of 5, i dont think anything else affects this value, so its 5,10,15 etc

[762_XC]

Thinking about the DNL issue, the real reason non-heavy DN's are not flown is becuase of plasma.

It's a question of historical matchups. The Kzin and Hydran DN's almost never had to fight Roms (Titan being the exception) and the Lyran and Klingon DN's almost never had to fight Gorns. The few historical exceptions happened at the end of the GW.

The GW series showed that the western dreads are not that bad when they only have to fight each other. As much as I hated flying the PAL it was not a total deathtrap against a C8B, and vice versa.

If Superhawks and BF's had been appearing in the western theater in 2270, those ships doubtless would have been designed with more power.

[FPF-DieHard]

Thinking about the DNL issue, the real reason non-heavy DN's are not flown is becuase of plasma.

It's a question of historical matchups. The Kzin and Hydran DN's almost never had to fight Roms (Titan being the exception) and the Lyran and Klingon DN's almost never had to fight Gorns. The few historical exceptions happened at the end of the GW.

The GW series showed that the western dreads are not that bad when they only have to fight each other. As much as I hated flying the PAL it was not a total deathtrap against a C8B, and vice versa.

If Superhawks and BF's had been appearing in the western theater in 2270, those ships doubtless would have been designed with more power.

And the Gorn woul dhave better drone defense . . .

Most of the "balance" issue in this game can be blamed on non-traditional enemies and the existance of the ISC.

[KBF-Crim]

How about this....if you dont fly line ships your a wuss...

[Hexx]

How about this....if you dont fly line ships your a wuss...

Uhmmm thought you don't fly line ships?   

[KBF-Crim]

How about this....if you dont fly line ships your a wuss...

Uhmmm thought you don't fly line ships?   

Search every post I've ever made....not once...have I ever claimed to not be a wuss.....

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

With the idea of limited spares for fast cruisers and talk of fleeting restrictions for them, how about we bring back some older ideas about special functions for them?

One idea was that they would have a better ability to disengage.  Now I don't think anyone wants to have them immune from disengagement rules, but how about offering them a limited immunity from the deepstrike have to stay and fight requirement.  They would still be banned from the ex (and radius) if chased out, but they wouldn't have to stay and fight to the death if they were within 2 hexes of a friendly or neutral hex instead of simply being adjacent to one.  This would give them some extra functionality based on what they are designed for.

Thoughts?

[el-Karnak]

Cool idea about giving more spares to line ships.

[Capt_Bearslayer_XC]

With the idea of limited spares for fast cruisers and talk of fleeting restrictions for them, how about we bring back some older ideas about special functions for them?

One idea was that they would have a better ability to disengage.  Now I don't think anyone wants to have them immune from disengagement rules, but how about offering them a limited immunity from the deepstrike have to stay and fight requirement.  They would still be banned from the ex (and radius) if chased out, but they wouldn't have to stay and fight to the death if they were within 2 hexes of a friendly or neutral hex instead of simply being adjacent to one.  This would give them some extra functionality based on what they are designed for.

Thoughts?

I thought it should have been implemented when it was proposed before.

[762_XC]

Do we honestly need any more incentive to fly fast cruisers??? 

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

I thought it should have been implemented when it was proposed before.

I think with limited spares the idea will be more palatable for some, they can deepstrike better uder my propossal, but without the additional spares their deepstriking ability is curtailed somewhat.

[Lepton]

Hey, just to throw fuel on the fire.  The Mirak DF is not a line ship nor is any other drone frigate, drone destroyer, drone light or heavy cruiser.  They are meant as support vessels for large battles and bombardment.  See ya.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Hey, just to throw fuel on the fire.  The Mirak DF is not a line ship nor is any other drone frigate, drone destroyer, drone light or heavy cruiser.  They are meant as support vessels for large battles and bombardment.  See ya.

Of course they aren't line ships, but we don't have 20 player battles yet for them to be deployed into.    See ya.   

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Now one thing I am concerned about is the reaction of other pilots who fly mostly specialty ships that don't consider themselves "aces".  Does such limitations on spares for these ships threaten their fun?  It is something that we must all be deeply aware of if it does.

For me I have rarely been in a situation where a few more spare parts meant a different outcome in PvP when flying a droner.  It has happened but very rarely.  Versus ai it has been more of a factor particularly if you draw an escort, and even more so if you draw multiple escorts.  The decrease in the frequency of fleet actions vs ai will likely help with this somewhat, but I could see it being very frustrating for some.  perhaps Admiral level ai should be downgraded as well to help compensate.

[Lepton]

I really don't get this spare part thing.  Who cares?  Some nutty ship speciality should be able to clean the place up so I see no need to attempt to balance them against line ships.  Basically, I would like to see two levels of play here: one in which players fly line ships and are rewarded for it in some manner, PvP points, rule exemptions what have you and one in which nutty speciality ships and heavy iron duke it out for the sake of fun and strategic outcomes not necessarily tactical sophistication.  The idea of putting more veterans in line ships for me is merely to ever so slightly level the playing field a bit.  I see no particular reason to make speciality ships or iron somehow more tolerable with respect to line ships.  Merely restrict their use to some degree and that is sufficient.  Heck you could take them all out for all I care, but other people seem to enjoy them.  I am sure you all have fine reasons for your arguments but I think we've left sense behind with this one.  Next someone is going to be telling me how many marines I can put on my marine ship or how many drone reloads I am permitted to purchase.  Slippery slope.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

I'll give you one example Lepton,

I'm in a Z D-F, t00l is in a H-LB.  Not possessing Soreyes skill and audacity with the D-F I try and sneak in a wave on t00l.  After 20 minutes I've been unsucessful and he has scored a fair amount of internals.  Using 5 spares I'm still able to fly at 31 as he nickle and dimes me down.  If I have 5 more spares I can stay a bit longer in hopes of a "lucky" shot.  If I don't have them i have to make a decision immediately on whether to run or stay as another hellbore hit will slow me enough to get caught.

Either way with 5 or 10 spares the result will be the same 95% of the time (unlesss t00l has drunk more cutty sark than usual), but without 5 more spares the affair is concluded more quickly.

The other side might be a case where a little bit larger droner, say a D5D, that has some phasers on it and a great power curb, might be able to use its spares long enough to extend a fight so that it could break an opponent's rear shield as it chases it.  The D5D then could hit and run some systems and perhaps pull off a kill with 10 spares that it could not have with only 5.

It is indeed a tricky thing to balance.  But perhaps we can try it sometime and see how it plays out.

[FPF-DieHard]

It is indeed a tricky thing to balance.  But perhaps we can try it sometime and see how it plays out.

Nah, let's run with it full speed ahead!!! 

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

It is indeed a tricky thing to balance.  But perhaps we can try it sometime and see how it plays out.

Nah, let's run with it full speed ahead!!! 

Full speed ahead is the only way to get a true trial 

[Lepton]

Yes, I understand the logic.  I have understood it from the first.  I merely see no reason to attempt to balance speciality ships against line ships.  One should not be penalized for flying any particular type of ship and I see no particular reason to wish to shorten or lengthen PvP engagements.  There is a simple proposal made that I will make again.  Have line ships be exempt from the disengagement rule when faced with a non-line ship.  This will force players (yes, I used that word and I know all your perverts like it) into line ships by one additional rule.  A line ship is subject to the disengagement rule when faced by other line ships.  So to clear out a hex for flipping, players will have to run to line ships just as now they run to DNs and other wacky ships to fully clear out a hex.  Both ship types, line and non-line, will be essential not only for strategic purposes but also for PvP purposes.  Forgot one additional rule that should be obvious, non-line ships are always subject to the disengagement rule.

[KBF-Crim]

"One should not be penalized for flying any particular type of ship "

Yeah...that's what I been sayin....

[762_XC]

I'll give you one example Lepton,

I'm in a Z D-F, t00l is in a H-LB.  Not possessing Soreyes skill and audacity with the D-F I try and sneak in a wave on t00l.  After 20 minutes I've been unsucessful and he has scored a fair amount of internals.  Using 5 spares I'm still able to fly at 31 as he nickle and dimes me down.  If I have 5 more spares I can stay a bit longer in hopes of a "lucky" shot.  If I don't have them i have to make a decision immediately on whether to run or stay as another hellbore hit will slow me enough to get caught.

Either way with 5 or 10 spares the result will be the same 95% of the time (unlesss t00l has drunk more cutty sark than usual), but without 5 more spares the affair is concluded more quickly.

The other side might be a case where a little bit larger droner, say a D5D, that has some phasers on it and a great power curb, might be able to use its spares long enough to extend a fight so that it could break an opponent's rear shield as it chases it.  The D5D then could hit and run some systems and perhaps pull off a kill with 10 spares that it could not have with only 5.

It is indeed a tricky thing to balance.  But perhaps we can try it sometime and see how it plays out.

I'm not sure I get this. Barring the occasional Cutty Sark-fueled anomaly, what do parts have to do with a droner having a prayer against a line ship? I think we're talking about fast cruisers more than anything else here.

[Capt_Bearslayer_XC]

We are, but as proposed, ALL specialty ships would have reduced repair parts to reflect the difference in their systems from line ships.

[KBF-Crim]

God...I remember when the droner was the bane of PvP...no one flew them for killing live players.....because it was impossible...

My how times have changed....

[Lepton]

"One should not be penalized for flying any particular type of ship "

Yeah...that's what I been sayin....

Yeah, I agree with you.  Forget all that other PvP point crap I was saying.  This system will be great.  It will create a whole new dynamic.  Line ships will be scraping with line ships and it will mean something.  When a line ship runs into a non-line ship, neither will really wish to withdraw as for the line ship there is no penalty for death and the non-line ship does not want to be bumped or give up the DV shift.  This will escalate to bringing in both line and non-line ships into meaningful PvP battles that have both map consequences.  The only exploit I can see is if a side would refuse to fly either non-line or line ships both of which I think would be hard to do.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

what do parts have to do with a droner having a prayer against a line ship?

More than you would think if the droner has enough phasers on it to crack a shield of its foe. 


Perhaps we should not impose limits on spare as far as droners, escorts, and carriers.  These ships were in the stock game.  Restricting them on fast cruisers couldn't really be seen as a penalty as these ships are not stock but rather additional options that have been offered to players by memebers of our community.  Since they weren't stock ships, having them available in any form can be seen as a bonus.  This should quell most opposition to the limiting of parts.

[Hexx]

I'd say restrict them on all specialty

The restriction on spare parts will have a far greater effect on DN's than on specialty ships.
As has (I think) been mentioned, not to many CF's are using more than 5 spare parts in duels with line ships.
In single duels I still think the DNL with 5 will beat a DN with 15, but the extra spares will let the DN have a fate better chance of turning it into a slugging match.
In Fleet engagements (as long as CF's are restricted) a DN will become (in most cases) a better ship to have than a DNL as it will turn into more of a slugging match.

[Dizzy]

Whoa, a DNL shouldnt have less than a DCR of 2. 5 is too little. 10 is just right. CF, 5 sure. But what of the rest? Like carriers and bombardment ships? I dont want to shortchange these ships too much. This is a radical move. Fast cruisers I can see with fewer spares, the other specialty ships will be a hard sell.

[FPF-DieHard]

Whoa, a DNL shouldnt have less than a DCR of 2. 5 is too little. 10 is just right. CF, 5 sure. But what of the rest? Like carriers and bombardment ships? I dont want to shortchange these ships too much. This is a radical move. Fast cruisers I can see with fewer spares, the other specialty ships will be a hard sell.

I disagree.  Carriers/droners/Tenders get a ton of "BPV" basicly for free (yeah you pay for supplies, but that doesn't matter in PvP).   The 5 fewer spares should even this out. 

[Hexx]

Whoa, a DNL shouldnt have less than a DCR of 2. 5 is too little. 10 is just right.

If you want people to fly the DNL's until DNH's come out, 10 is fine
Otherwise cut them back to five.

CAn't really see any serious PVPer (although I freely admit to not being one)
saying " Oooh I'll give up the insane powercurve of the DNL for those extra 5 spares.."
5 spares means you really have to watch wht you do, 10 gives you enough to repair pretty much anything you'll need.

[Dizzy]

tHIS ALTERS THE GAMEPLAY DYNAMICALLY. oops caps. I cant see specialty ships across the board with 5 fewer parts. DNL's shouldnt have less than 10. 5 is way too much of a handicap.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

My biggest concern with the cutback of parts for ships is that some races might have huge gaps in their list due to this.  Take the Gorn BF.  If it gets cut back to 5 parts it would be a greater handicap than the reduction in other specialty ships as the Gorn have to rely on that boat quite a bit.  Now I did hear something about changing some refit dates so it might work ok if those are tweaked.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Whoa, a DNL shouldnt have less than a DCR of 2. 5 is too little. 10 is just right. CF, 5 sure. But what of the rest? Like carriers and bombardment ships? I dont want to shortchange these ships too much. This is a radical move. Fast cruisers I can see with fewer spares, the other specialty ships will be a hard sell.

I disagree.  Carriers/droners/Tenders get a ton of "BPV" basicly for free (yeah you pay for supplies, but that doesn't matter in PvP).   The 5 fewer spares should even this out. 

Umm..... BPV usually doesn't mean anything in PvP (unless ai is involved) The fact that their Heavy metal/PvP points are adjusted upwards would make them equal.  BPV is really only important for ai fights, ship cost,  and determining replacement value.

[FPF-DieHard]

tHIS ALTERS THE GAMEPLAY DYNAMICALLY.

For the better 

[Dizzy]

tHIS ALTERS THE GAMEPLAY DYNAMICALLY.

For the better 

Insane!

[FPF-DieHard]

tHIS ALTERS THE GAMEPLAY DYNAMICALLY.

For the better 

Insane!

I've been called worse. 

[762_XC]

I think somebody just tipped Dizzy's sacred cow.

[FPF-DieHard]

I think somebody just tipped Dizzy's sacred cow.

Because Maniacal chase-down don't work on a ship with only 5 spares?   

[762_XC]

n00bs around the world are suddenly feeling safer.

[FPF-DieHard]

n00bs around the world are suddenly feeling safer.

be nice 

[Dizzy]

U guys are f*cking nuts... 5 spares on anything not a line ship? Have you all lost your marbles? Where r we? The fraking line ship convention? Revenge of the line ships? Line-ships4ever? We love Line ships why dont you? Mise well call a server like this, 'Spare's arn't us'.

You guys are nuts. WTF is the matter with you all?

[FPF-DieHard]

U guys are f*cking nuts... 5 spares on anything not a line ship? Have you all lost your marbles? Where r we? The fraking line ship convention? Revenge of the line ships? Line-ships4ever? We love Line ships why dont you? Mise well call a server like this, 'Spare's arn't us'.

You guys are nuts. WTF is the matter with you all?

It's friday, I'm at work, I'm bored, I'm having a little fun.  You know I lilke to toss random idead out like raw meeat to starving animals just to see what happens

t00l on the other hand is just an alcoholic

[Skaren]

Boy this thread has grown !!

It seems to me the issue is that everyone takes all these specialty ships over the regular line ships,.. why cause they are better.

How about restricting what people can buy ?  When I go to a dealership for a car, the Lamborghini is not even in the lot for purchase.  Is there no way to limit the ship selection to line ships with only "occasionally" there being some small number of specialty ships available.   Do players always have to have like 20-30 ships to choose from ?  What if for some turns of the game only line ships were in the dock for purchase, with an occasional specialty ship.  Maybe some level of randomness to what is in the dock can be generated with some PHP code.

Again the reason that our navy or air force is not full of all specialty units (B-1's and Agies Cruisers) is that they cost an arm and a leg to build.  The production costs do not reflect that, the BPV does not reflect the true cost to build a specialty ship only its equivalent combat value.  If it did,.. players would not fly them cause they could not afford them.  Of course if they are cheap and available they will be taken.

As aghast as I am to say this,..  I agree with Dizzy,...  Starting to fudge with ship load outs seems wrong and a small patch for a much bigger issue.

In my campaigns folks often fly with line ships cause I set fleets at the start and I set mostly line ships.  During the campaign when they get under way building stuff they can build whatever they want.  Due to build rates we see only an occasional specialty ship.

Players like that cause otherwise you rarely will see a War Eagle in a game.  In our games crap ships are flown and the battles are still a lot of fun.  Plus it is much closer to realistic, if I dare use that term.

[FPF-DieHard]

It seems to me the issue is that everyone takes all these specialty ships over the regular line ships,.. why cause they are better.

Reducing Spares seems like a good way to level the field.

[FPF-Paladin]

It seems to me the issue is that everyone takes all these specialty ships over the regular line ships,.. why cause they are better.

Reducing Spares seems like a good way to level the field.

Agreed... but I'm probably biased, I like flying line ships.  Adjusting the disengagement rule for them isn't a bad idea either, but I think this would have more impact.

[_Rondo_GE The OutLaw]

Just what do we mean be speciality ships?

Anyway I'm assuming we mean carriers, pure droners  (5+ racks? and no heavy weps?),escorts,  Transports, Tugs, War Destroyers ?,  maulers, etc...)  Well NO etc since we really need to define this.  I suppose DNL's are included their and "fast"... ships...(seems to me just move them up inthe timeline).

Anyway my two cents...

Not just spares...less marines. Twelve and no more for a light cruiser and scaled up and down appropirately.  I speciality ship (unless a transport of course) should have less marines to begin with.

Drone racks in SFCII and OP seem much tougher to knock out than in SFC1 (for example).  So a few less repairs wont really slow them down much.  (by "slow" I mean their use as a staple in Dynaverse battles)

Marines in the Dynaverse can be very powerful if used to capture a ship.  Thus flying a speciality ship would allow some powerful gambit against it.

Also a maximun of 2 shuttles for a light, three for a heavy and scaled accordingly.

And there are balance cosiderations which mustr always be looked at ... for example should carrier be restricted to shuttle if thats what they do?  Should transports be restricted to marines if to do so cripples their mission?  I would say no.

What about X ships?  I actually liked the X ships on this server but they weren't X ships...I mean the primary weapon the X phaser was missing.  I thought they should have had a few.

[Hexx]

Just what do we mean be speciality ships?

Anyway I'm assuming we mean carriers, pure droners  (5+ racks? and no heavy weps?),escorts,  Transports, Tugs, War Destroyers ?,  maulers, etc...)  Well NO etc since we really need to define this.  I suppose DNL's are included their and "fast"... ships...(seems to me just move them up inthe timeline).

Depends who you ask.
Generally CFs,carriers,droners,escorts (though they've been neutered so..),maulers .tugs and transports aren't really used.
War destroyers aren't considered specialty. Neither are HDWs (although they should be BANNED!!!)

Anyway my two cents...

Not just spares...less marines. Twelve and no more for a light cruiser and scaled up and down appropirately.  I speciality ship (unless a transport of course) should have less marines to begin with.

Yeah, only problem with this is you pretty much just gave the Klinks (and Rom Kests) the game.

Also a maximun of 2 shuttles for a light, three for a heavy and scaled accordingly.

Which pretty much nullifies the racial abilites of th Gorn (which is a good thing) and Lyrans (which is a very bad thing)

What about X ships?  I actually liked the X ships on this server but they weren't X ships...I mean the primary weapon the X phaser was missing.  I thought they should have had a few.

The Xphaser simply puts Xhips way OTT compared to ..well anything without Xphasers.
No one ever uses th things on anything other than OL, which means your CX's are prety much gutting BCH's in a pas.

[Lepton]

Look, I'd really like to see someone respond to the proposal I have been discussing.  This spares arguement has little bearing on that discussion.  My proposal gives line ships a strategic role to play and sets up a system wherein line ship use is not only encouraged but desirable within a strategic and PvP context.  Line ships to be exempt from the disengagement rule and by extension of course the hex ban when in mission with any human piloting a non-line ship.  Line ships subject to hex ban when opposing players are all in line ships.  Non-line ship always subject to disengagement rule and hex ban.

This means line ships can be a strategic assest to flip hexes and a venue for meaningful PvP battles.  It also introduces a whole new strategic fold.  Consider scenarios wherein line ships encounter heavy metal and the possibilities that opens up for the line ship players.  Consider what happens when line and non-line ships wing together and encounter either line or non-line ships.  It alters the whole dynamic of how we might do things on the dyna and encourages people to utilize dfferent types of ships for strategic and PvP purposes.

[FPF-DieHard]

I would have to consider HDWs to be specialty ships and subject to the parts reduction.   They are 10 pounds of stuff in a 5 pound bag.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

I would have to consider HDWs to be specialty ships and subject to the parts reduction.   They are 10 pounds of stuff in a 5 pound bag.

The HDW is a late era lineship.  They make up most of the late era additions to shiplist.  There are no more CAs being produced at that point because the HDWs have filled that role, they should have the same spares as a CA.

[Dizzy]

 

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Well then what is the FYA for the latest era CA Dizzy?

[Dizzy]

Well then what is the FYA for the latest era CA Dizzy?

[FPF-DieHard]

I would have to consider HDWs to be specialty ships and subject to the parts reduction.   They are 10 pounds of stuff in a 5 pound bag.

The HDW is a late era lineship.  They make up most of the late era additions to shiplist.  There are no more CAs being produced at that point because the HDWs have filled that role, they should have the same spares as a CA.

Come on Chuut, the HDWs are cheasier than the X-ships. 

[Capt_Bearslayer_XC]

I would have to consider HDWs to be specialty ships and subject to the parts reduction.   They are 10 pounds of stuff in a 5 pound bag.

The HDW is a late era lineship.  They make up most of the late era additions to shiplist.  There are no more CAs being produced at that point because the HDWs have filled that role, they should have the same spares as a CA.

Come on Chuut, the HDWs are cheasier than the X-ships. 

?!?!??!

I ran around in a F-HDW for a few missions before selling it off.... every mission I went thru 1/2 or more of my repair parts...

Hell, the one mission, I never even used my SP's b/c every time I was hit thru open shields, it took out the shuttle bay... which, IIRC, I repaired 3 times before giving up on it...

[762_XC]

Try the Kzinti ones Bear. 

Or that sick-ass Gorn one with 5 plasmas.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Come on Chuut, the HDWs are cheasier than the X-ships. 

You have been drinking like t00l tonight I presume. The HDW line ships )HDW1, HDW2, HDW3)  are good but niothing near X level.

I do consider the casual carrier HDWs with 4 fighters, the commando variants, and the carrier versions with 7 fighters to be specialty.

[Dizzy]

In keeping with the standard SG disengage/destruction rule, I'd be willing to see line ships, not command ships, enjoy half the ban time. Sounds like the best/least drastic compromise that keeps everyone from being too grumpy. Depending on what goes on with SS3's rules, we will see how that will apply. But I like another variation on fleeting rules that require any 3 ship fleet to include a line ship.

[CaptJosh]

I would note that Rondo there is forgetting one thing in his suggestion that specialty ships also have reduced marine compliments. What about the specialty ships that are commando ships. They are specifically designed to carry lots of marines, and as such are specialty ships. And while one might reduce the spare parts aboard, one may not reduce the marines bunked on those ships. They're troop transports. That's what they do.