Topic: OP+ shiplist 1.21 released.

[FireSoul]

In other news..
.. I decided to cut short the current review of the shiplist: who gives a bloody damn if the pirates get a proper and correct Y175 anyways?!?
I still have some work to do, but I'd like to show you a sample of what I have so far:


Item 1:
Just like in the previous preview pic I posted, the shipyard and actual battles are a lot more interesting and up to date. Here's a sample:
 



Item 2:
I scripted conditions which raised a "check me" flag on ships with questionable drone and ADD loadouts.
Specifically:
  - ships with ~Y168-170 and Y175 refits all rolled up in one. (lazy of Taldren to do. Mirak suffered from it)
  - ADD6 with 1 reload .. (ADD6 always had 2 reloads)
  - ADD12 with 1 reload .. (ADD12 always had 2 reloads)
  - Each G-rack has a ADD6 with 1 reload accompanied. (exception from 2 lines above)
  - Y175 refit changes G-racks from 1 drone reload to 2.
  - Y175 refit changes A-racks to either B or C racks with 2 reloads (depends on SSD)
  - A-racks had only 1 reload prior to Y175
  - B-racks usually had 1 reload, if ship had B-racks before Y175 (there are exceptions)
  - be careful of the exceptions which are everywhere.


Here's an example
This ship is identical in cost and weaponry from the F-GSC+, except in Y175 it recieves the G-rack reload refit.
 




This should add wholesome playable depth to the D2 campaigns, n'est-ce pas?  
-- Luc

[FireSoul]

PS. One can assume pirates had obsolete and unproperly maintained equipment. I don't care to review all the 550+ ships my perl script reported to have errors in the pirates' side of the shiplist.
PPS: I still have some work to do. How badly do you guys want this updated shiplist?

-- Luc

[FireSoul]

Additional examples. See the differences?
-- Luc



before Y175:
 

after Y175:
 



Again, before Y175:
 

after Y175
   

[jdmckinney]

Looks good. I'm glad to see you're using the "R" designation for Y175 refits. I've been doing the same in my work on an SFB list for SFCX's ToW campaigns to come.

After a brief spot-check of the FD7R, I noticed I had a BPV of 160 (not 158, and my FD7K has 155 instead of 153) and a total crew of 45. I don't have the SSD on hand to compare, but I think you're using the SFB total crew boxes as "regular crew," which is then boosted by half the marines value (and half the deck crews if present). In SFB, those marines are part of the crew, each 2 units representing 1 box of crew -- or do I have the rule wrong? Taldren's list is inconsistent on this point, sometimes following this rule, and sometimes using the total crew from SFB as regular crew, as you have here. The crew probably has no effect on the ship performance or longevity in battle, but I find it personally annoying not to have one standard for such things.

Using Taldren's BPV calculation of plus 2 pts. per starting fighter (representing SFC list BPV for those fighters), I also came up with 154 on the CVL+ and 160 on the CVLR. Total crew is 40.

Have you been using SFB BPVs as the rule for all ships, or deferring to Taldren BPVs? I'm just curious to compare how we do things differently, so I can find the best ways to handle things for my own purposes, which are more slavish to SFB than yours.

At the rate I'm going, I don't know if I'll ever finish my list (been working at it for almost a year off and on), but the less I have to go back and change things across the board to fit the standards (like the ADD reloads), the better chance I have to get it done sometime before entropy sucks the universe back in upon itself.

Keep up the great work!

[jdmckinney]

On YFA/YLA dates, it occurs to me that in SFB most of the Y175 refits (all of them?) are available from day one of Y175 at cost. Considering this, I always phase out any pre-Y175 refits still left in the list at year 11 (Y174) so that all AI ships are fully refitted. Any players with old ships in D2 would represent the captains who had not made it back to base for refits yet. This helps to unclutter the list when all those Y175 variants suddenly appear.

The balance of upgrade refits, generally, are more staggered in their implementation, with some ships and ship types receving priority over others for the refits.

You can't be more right about watching out for exceptions -- they're everywhere!

[Tumulorum Fossor]

Thanks to Rob O'Neal for setting me straight re: cargoed' drone reloads during a battle being legit (with appropriate rate adjustments that are not applicable to SFC).

Luc--

I'd say hold off on the release until you've got it done (sans the ~550 Orions that could use some tinkering).  Too many releases convolute everything...
...unless of course you envision your project taking 6 months to complete. In that case go ahead and do an incomplete release.

Oh, and jdmckinney, did I read you correctly when you wrote tnat you were MORE slavish with SFB standards than Luc, here?    Dang!  How much more strict can you be?  But seriously, the BPV standard question (SFB or SFC fighter rules) is a good one.  Unless it would force Luc to go back, I think I would prefer the SFB standard, since that's where we're going with all this.

You guys are GREAT!

Luc, keep it up.  JDM, Great website.

-TF

[FireSoul]

Quote:
Looks good. I'm glad to see you're using the "R" designation for Y175 refits. I've been doing the same in my work on an SFB list for SFCX's ToW campaigns to come.

After a brief spot-check of the FD7R, I noticed I had a BPV of 160 (not 158, and my FD7K has 155 instead of 153) and a total crew of 45. I don't have the SSD on hand to compare, but I think you're using the SFB total crew boxes as "regular crew," which is then boosted by half the marines value (and half the deck crews if present). In SFB, those marines are part of the crew, each 2 units representing 1 box of crew -- or do I have the rule wrong? Taldren's list is inconsistent on this point, sometimes following this rule, and sometimes using the total crew from SFB as regular crew, as you have here. The crew probably has no effect on the ship performance or longevity in battle, but I find it personally annoying not to have one standard for such things.

Using Taldren's BPV calculation of plus 2 pts. per starting fighter (representing SFC list BPV for those fighters), I also came up with 154 on the CVL+ and 160 on the CVLR. Total crew is 40.

Have you been using SFB BPVs as the rule for all ships, or deferring to Taldren BPVs? I'm just curious to compare how we do things differently, so I can find the best ways to handle things for my own purposes, which are more slavish to SFB than yours.

At the rate I'm going, I don't know if I'll ever finish my list (been working at it for almost a year off and on), but the less I have to go back and change things across the board to fit the standards (like the ADD reloads), the better chance I have to get it done sometime before entropy sucks the universe back in upon itself.

Keep up the great work!  

1: I have not always been checking BPVs of ships. Sometimes I have.
2: I have DEFINITELY not been checking the crew of ships. you're correct on the 2:1.
3: Taldren uses 1 BPV for each SFC fighter.
4: There are so many BPV adjustments to take account for, one could go crazy trying to compensate. Here are examples:
  a- ships with disruptors: all Taldren ships have been equipped with UIM. They did not use '5' as the added BPV, but N disruptors + 1 BPV.
  b- Interceptors cost 10 each. Mechlinks cost 1 each.
  c- A lot of ships were adjusted for balance's sake. Escort ships for example.


I could write a script to systematically correct the crew unit proportions across the shiplist, that I don't mind so much.. (at least one to detect it). But the BPV is an issue I best leave alone unless there's a major correction to make.
Remember, this is SFC, not SFB. This is a SFC enhancement project, not a SFB correction project.



.. aww heck.. let's see.
FD7: 147 BPV. add 3 BPV for UIM adjustment. 150
FD7K: K refit +3 = 153
FD7R: Y175 refit +5 = 158.

.. my FD7 is correct.


-- Luc
FireSoul

[FireSoul]

Quote:
On YFA/YLA dates, it occurs to me that in SFB most of the Y175 refits (all of them?) are available from day one of Y175 at cost. Considering this, I always phase out any pre-Y175 refits still left in the list at year 11 (Y174) so that all AI ships are fully refitted. Any players with old ships in D2 would represent the captains who had not made it back to base for refits yet. This helps to unclutter the list when all those Y175 variants suddenly appear.

The balance of upgrade refits, generally, are more staggered in their implementation, with some ships and ship types receving priority over others for the refits.

You can't be more right about watching out for exceptions -- they're everywhere!  

Ah.
Well.
I did a 3-year overlap as a general rule for a refit, including the Y175 refit. Going back would be a massive correction. Some refits are K-refits and Y175 refits rolled up in one since they both occur in Y175. Maybe we should leave this alone? 3 years overlap isn't as bad as '999' as the YLA.

Having to correct this to exactitude would mean having to go through the entire shiplist all over again, and to add yet more "R" variants for the occasions I didn't because I rolled up the Y175 with another refit at the same time.



-- Luc
FireSoul

[FireSoul]

crap. I just realized I don't have an accurate data source for the correct SFB crew values to compare with.

Ok then. I won't be checking for crew unless someone points out to me an obvious error somewhere.

-- Luc

[Strafer]

Quote:
On YFA/YLA dates, it occurs to me that in SFB most of the Y175 refits (all of them?) are available from day one of Y175 at cost. Considering this, I always phase out any pre-Y175 refits still left in the list at year 11 (Y174) so that all AI ships are fully refitted. Any players with old ships in D2 would represent the captains who had not made it back to base for refits yet. This helps to unclutter the list when all those Y175 variants suddenly appear.
The balance of upgrade refits, generally, are more staggered in their implementation, with some ships and ship types receving priority over others for the refits.

On the other hand, looking at the bid screen you'll start to see both models for a little while. The ships don't ALL go from stock to refit overnight.
In the roleplaying sense of the setting, seeing a mix of refit and non-refit up for grabs sets the mood for a "work in progress" feeling in the few years of overlap.

[jdmckinney]

These various little issues are exactly why I'm doing my own version of the shiplist to SFB specs -- at least then I know it is consistent, even if sometimes it contradicts Taldren's rules. On the fighters, for instance, in the past all the fighters were counted for 2 BPV per fighter, EXCEPT the Hydrans, who were getting 1 BPV extra per fighter (because their fighters in the ftrlist were only 1 BPV when they should be 2). That, to me, is a mistake -- they should all be done the same. I elected to go with 2 BPV for consistency, but any serious campaign should probably do more fighter loadout and BPV tweaking, since the carriers always have a BPV advantage in that their combat value in mission scripts for D2 is the BPV, not the BPV plus fighter upgrade costs. If carriers had to pay the actual BPV of the fighter types they use, then D2 would be better balanced.

Anyway, I understand your reluctance to check every single ship with a fine-toothed comb. That's exactly why I have no release ready on my list -- I'm not even through half of the races (much less pirates) yet.

Oh, and on the SFCX website, the credit for that goes to Castrin and Capt. Stumpy.

[FireSoul]

I wish I knew how carrier BPV is calculated exactly.

Examples:
K-F5V:  70 + 8 fighters * 1 BPV = 78  (match)
F-NVL: 100 + 8 fighters * 1 BPV = 108. (no match. SFC has 137 BPV)
I-CVL(Z):  135 + 8 fighters * 1 BPV = 143 + 6 for PLaI adjustment = 149  (SFC has 157)
I-CVLS: 145 + 8 fighters = 153 + 6 for plaI = 159.  (SFC has 157)

Base Fighter costs:
Fed: 2
Klingon: 2
Mirak: 2
ISC: 2
Hydran: 1
O-PE: 2


.. ... I'll need to think about it.. and to think about balance.
-- Luc
 

[jdmckinney]

Heh, I didn't mean to give you more headaches!

The biggest problem with the fighter BPVs, to me, is the 1 BPV for the KillerBee.I. Obviously, it is an equal ship to the other type-I fighters, plus Hydran Hornets (which tend to stand in for those 1 BPV spots when flown by players) are often considered among the best fighters available. An extra few BPV is small enough an adjustment for balance's sake, but how do you determine what BPV adjustment to use?

These are the trials and tribulations us shiplist editors have to deal with, folks -- do you appreciate Luc's efforts even more now?

For the record, I think he's doing a bang-up job, and his shiplist rocks.

Luc, thanks for the hard work!

[FireSoul]

I have decided to raise the BPV by 1 per fighter of ships that I have added myself. Basic Hydran fighter BPV will remain 1 BPV each.

If you encounter any other ships with BPV problems in after the release of this shiplist, tell me.
-- Luc

[Rod O'neal]

I've put SFB fighters in my EAW & OP shiplist. Then put the correct standard fighter for the first year that the ship is available on the ship. For example, if a Fed ship isn't available 'til Y183, then it's going to have F-18C fighters as its stock loadout. That's a bpv of 10 for each fighter! Should be 11 but i'm skipping wbp's. Oh, and drone speed upgrades. Since SFC ignores this all together. My point is that bpv is IMO almost purely subjective in SFC since only a small percentige of SFBs rules are in effect. I don't even know if Steve Cole could come up with an accurate bpv assesment It's fun to try though, and in the end maybe we all can learn from what others do to try and get the game closer to the standard of SFB with what we've got to work with.      

[FireSoul]

I've pretty much given up on putting SFB fighters in SFC: the lack of Warp Booster Packs on both fighters and PFs kinda screw things up.
.. therefore all the original SFC fighters are present.. but additional PFs were added, of course. I think, persoanlly, that that's fair, especially since PFs appear so much later than fighters.


Anyways.. I have a good shiplist for now.. one could probably call it "stable" except I want to play with it for a while. I'll release it in a couple of weeks unless something special comes up. That should give me ample time to test it.

-- Luc

[FireSoul]

I have a suggestion for you: make a version with and one without WBPs.
.. reduce the # of hits on the ones with WBPs by 1/2, but double the speed. .. 2 separate fighters, but not a bad implementation.

.. also, SFC:OP has a mSetFighters function which does work if setting the fighters on a non-human controlled ship (AI). Maybe missions scripts should be revised to reflect this? (see coopace)



.. me, because I am trying to enhance SFC while keeping its own flavour, I might be keeping SFC fighters for a while.
-- Luc

[jimmi7769]

Well, if you look at it from the point that all of the fighters are packed and they all have doubled internals then the way they are in sfc would be close to right.

24 damage points 15 speed ...with packs 12 damage points 30 speed.

[FireSoul]

That makes sense.

[Mog]

Giving carriers "proper" or improved fighters for the ai opponents on a dyna can make cariers over the top for players, especially when using ED missions. If you do this, I strongly urge you to ADD fighters' BPV to the carrier's BPV. This is based on several EAW servers experience. To start off in an F5 or similar, and to have to face half a dozen ships worth of Hydran fighters at a time, means many players (including the vets) will struggle to accomplish anything. The server "Ragnarok" was the epitomy of this problem, and it did appear on Herr Burt's recent day of the Eagle server until he increased carrier BPV so that the small ships weren't drafting carriers anymore (that one was with SFB fighters too).