Topic: Planning OP+ shiplist 2.1 .. controversial? (Read 53277 times)

FireSoul · « **Reply #20 on:** April 27, 2003, 12:24:51 pm »

Quote:

Oh, and point taken about the list being for general use. There are always going to be problems in determining what to do because of the different ways in which the solo campaign/D2 and skirmish/GSA work. Again, I think it's a shame they are so different in the matching approach. At some point, you just have to pick one method and stick with it, knowing you can't please everyone.

.. thanks for understanding!! .. this was a major issue in the beginning of the shiplist and I had to make a decision way back when.
-- Luc

jdmckinney · « **Reply #24 on:** April 27, 2003, 12:48:06 pm »

I seem to recall the NCCs are all non-standard ships. They were either created by SFB players or published somewhere outside of the mainline modules. Or, they were created by Taldren, though I somehow doubt that. Were they in an earlier edition of SFB and never published in Captain's? I find that odd if true.

Anyway, can someone point to an online SSD from a fan site? I seem to remember at least one site that had such ships.

FireSoul · « **Reply #26 on:** April 27, 2003, 01:39:04 pm »

Ok.. I will increase the centerwarp by 2 and recalculate the BPV.

SPQR Renegade001 · « **Reply #27 on:** April 27, 2003, 02:15:10 pm »

Any thoughts on changing the UI on the PFs to a ship UI?
That allows both players to see the loadout, arming and damage status of the PF, and allows the owner to actually select weapons groups when flying it directly. A big bonus for both players, without actually changing anything. GFF, LFF & RLN are the UIs that I've used.

IndyShark · « **Reply #29 on:** April 27, 2003, 02:49:31 pm »

Firesoul, I love the PHD website! Is there any chance we can add some of their ships? I especially like the new ships and captured ships.

SPQR Renegade001 · « **Reply #30 on:** April 27, 2003, 02:55:43 pm »

One of the features of OP over EAW, eh? Cool.

jdmckinney · « **Reply #33 on:** April 27, 2003, 03:39:29 pm »

Although ...

The question of additional ships does bring up the ADB-approved "Brothers of the Anarchist" feature from the Captain's Logs. Captured ships appear there regularly, and some are interesting. I have a recent issue on captured Orion ships used in imperial navies and police forces.

I could see a whole separate "fun" list for campaign or skirmish use based on captured ships -- a race would have all kinds of ships except their own. It would be kind of a laugh. Of course, that means someone would have to input all those ships, which I don't see anyone volunteering for when there are more pressing things to do.

The essential problem with additional ships is that many of the ones you can add aren't worth a hill of beans. Many of the captured ships, endless tug variants, and stuff like FCRs fit this category. It may be neat to see them in there, but who would use most of them?

FireSoul · « **Reply #34 on:** April 27, 2003, 03:43:23 pm »

I would recommend keeping those for custom campaigns.

.. I have a few of the captain's logs with the "Brothers of the Anarchists" here. I like the ideas but ..

1- I don't have them all and I'm poor right now.
2- I *really* don't feel like getting into making these additions at this time.

Note:
.. I think the only ships I accepted for addition from the captain's logs SSDs are the X1 ships I could find. Anything else I left behind. You have to remember that all ships in the Captain's Logs are not final in their testing and design.

-- Luc

FireSoul · « **Reply #35 on:** April 27, 2003, 03:46:58 pm »

Anyways.. I don't intend to add any ships at this time.. .. I would like to make that clear. I don't think Module J2 is a good idea either: not all the races have carriers. There would be an unbalance.

SO!.. ;>
.. Can we keep to the items I have listed?

Oh, and correction requests are welcomed.
-- Luc

KBF-Dogmatix · « **Reply #36 on:** April 27, 2003, 04:30:01 pm »

If the current convention is 1 deck crew per fighter, I don't see anything wrong with making the proposed corrections. that seems reasonable to me.

Correcting fighter loadouts to the 2/3 rule is fine, but the casual carriers creat a bit of a problem and I'd be with TarMinytaur in terms of just leaving their conversions alone. Perhaps adjust the deck crews where applicable.

I have zero problems with the proposed hardpoint splitting.

As far as the LYAs go...well, this is a matter of taste. Since I play this game pretty much solely in the D2 arena, I'm going to side with Nomad on making ships' LYAs coincide with the release of a given refit. Nothing bugs me more that seeing Klingon B-refits clogging up the yards on a given server as late as 2277 or '78 (or even later). The K-refits come out around 2272 or '73. There should be no further B-refit production after that date. As I said..this is a matter of taste and certainly this game is played in other manners than D2. However, if we're talking shipyard production, I can't see any reason that B refits would continue to be produced even 1 year after the K-refit comes out. Sure..some may remain in service as 2nd or 3rd echelon forces...but damnit, I don't fly 3rd echelon! heheh...

Love the shiplist!

FireSoul · « **Reply #37 on:** April 27, 2003, 04:36:43 pm »

can you help me find the part that mentions 2272-2273 for the K refit in the SFB material?

..as for the Casual Carriers..... that change *IS* for them. I would not leave them alone. They need fixing. That's the issue, here... a balance overhaul for carriers, casual or not.

-- Luc

EDIT: All master ship charts show Y175..

TarMinyatur · « **Reply #38 on:** April 27, 2003, 04:41:33 pm »

http://www.mninter.net/~phdship/klndwc.gif

Holy cow, that sucker's a bit stronger than Taldren's DWC.

+2 Center Warp
+1 Ph1 on each wing
Ph1 -> Ph2 on waist
+1 B-rack
all for 9 less BPV! (163 vs 154)

FireSoul · « **Reply #39 on:** April 27, 2003, 04:43:35 pm »

Because it's not an official ship, I won't change anything else.. unless there's a GOOD reason for it.

-- Luc

News:

Topic: Planning OP+ shiplist 2.1 .. controversial? (Read 53277 times) var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

FireSoul

jdmckinney

FireSoul

FireSoul

jdmckinney

3dot14

FireSoul

SPQR Renegade001

FireSoul

IndyShark

SPQR Renegade001

FireSoul

FireSoul

jdmckinney

FireSoul

FireSoul

KBF-Dogmatix

FireSoul

TarMinyatur

FireSoul

Topic: Planning OP+ shiplist 2.1 .. controversial? (Read 53277 times)