Starship Gun Counts

[Valiens Nantaris]

Simple question.

Would you be more likely to use the Starship forum if there were no gun or hanger calculations?

Be honest.

 

[Durotar]

Then you'd have people whining about lack of information on how armed the ships are. It's a mixed blessing, I guess.

 

[Thurion Heavenshield]

I have to go with 'no' on this one, mainly because I am not a manufacturer nor will I ever need more than one ship at a time. Gun counts and hangar space has never been a problem for me, since I've ever only subbed one ship to the Factory, and that one was just a recreation of an existing one.

If I was to mention fleeting as a passing notion, I'd say that I've never fleeted before, but not because I don't want to or don't enjoy it. It's because none of my characters have ever been faced with having to do so as of yet.

 

[Sarge Potteiger]

Ultimately, my biggest issue with starships is the depth involved. Some people like that, and on some level I do too, but at the same time... I can go into tech and sub something in a half hour if it's detailed.

To do a detailed sub for a starship might take me an hour, hour and a half, because I have to double check gun counts, hangar space, find the appropriate ships to fill said hangar, etc. It's just constant alt-tab and rechecking so I don't look like an idiot. Even then, there's usually two or three things I missed.

It's just too much information for the layman to find accessible, even if the finished products are nice.

Then again, I've never heard someone say in an RP "Fire 231 of our 593 batteries." So, there's that, too, I guess.

 

[Alice Red]

Personally, yes.

Objectively speaking, no. Let's not continue making fleeting and other facets of combat more irrelevant by limiting features

 

[Darth Imperatus]

Personally, yes.

Objectively speaking, no. Let's not continue making fleeting and other facets of combat more irrelevant by limiting features

I agree. This is an important feature and removing it would take all objectivity out of fleeting and reduce it to nothing.

 

[Sasha Santhe]

I voted no. But I vote no with the caveat of "It could be simpler". Like guncount as a concept isn't bad. The guide isn't bad. But there are a few things that I think could be pretty simply streamlined to help players more quickly adapt and post in the forum. I think if we can provide ease of access within the current gun count system we would be golden.

 

[Olivia Dem'adas]

i think the gun math is... a little on the high end per ship. all the more so on LSD, SD, and Command Ships and flagships.

but i think it promotes balanced technology levels between all writers. with the exception of the Sith's light star destroyer, most ships have the same basic strength per tier. some have more armor or shields, some have specialized weapons, some have fancy tech... but they are all roughly the same thanks to setting a hard limit on maximum weapon value.

 

[Mr. OOC]

I voted no. I think taking it away just kind of... ruins it. That's the most challenging part of ship design and a large part of what differentiates ships.

 

[Camellia Swift]

Guns is the easiest part for me personally. I always blank out at descriptions for them to get flare and individuality.

 

[Saera Willamina Savan]

I vote no, not only because arguments will arise over why some subs are treated with different standards than others, but because it's actually quite easy once one remembers the counts. I have no trouble reciting everything from Interceptor up to Frigate just from having done it enough to remember them all. Most of the people who frequent the Factory are the people who love to go into detail anyways. The rest are usually content with others' tech, canon tech or the one or two things they've subbed for themselves. On the other hand, you also have all of the individuals like myself who ca always help the people who face more difficulty, thus inspiring more community effort and teamwork.

 

[Soeht]

Gun / hangar count needs to be based on a combination of canon inspiration and function along with the submitter's effort in a dev thread. This is by far the easiest way for a layman to get involved in the forum.

For example, I want a ship and I used X, Y, Z for my guns because of my dev thread - compare it to the Imperial Star Destroyer. Hardly any math required. Easy to judge.

 

[Artorias V. Golswye]

Yes and no, I only need one ship, however I don't know if I NEED to have it destroyed ever by these people here tbh

 

[Olivia Dem'adas]

blown to hell and back and burned full of holes... we can fix that. quick! someone sub a towtruck company for starship recovery.

"You can break it? We can fix it." Get a couple of rednecks driving in space towing broke-down ships back to the shipyard.

 

[Judah Dashiell]

blown to hell and back and burned full of holes... we can fix that. quick! someone sub a towtruck company for starship recovery.

"You can break it? We can fix it." Get a couple of rednecks driving in space towing broke-down ships back to the shipyard.

Hey, salvage is how I feed my wife and kid. Don't knock it.

 

[Nikolas Faselli]

I am going to be honest, like asked. I know I'd be more comfortable with making ships when there were no calculations like these, so I voted 'yes'. But the point is, that it's just me. Who wouldn't be more comfortable with submitting ships if it were easy? Because you asked "Would you be more likely to use the Starship Creation forum if there were no gun or hanger calculations?" and the answer to that must be personal.

But would have you asked something along the lines of "Would it be better if there were no gun or hanger calculations?", I would have voted 'no'. Because we need calculations.