Good Ol' Scoundrel
First of all, I apologize for this and disregard it if I can't be proposing/suggesting things since I am simply on trial. Neither do I write this to step on someone's toest or anything like that, simple my views which I would like to share with the rest of the team and see their views on it.
Now to the content itself:
Armament rating:
I've understood that it scales by power and size, but that is not always the case, in my opinion. As the greater the size = the greater the power/damage output is common but not something fixated. The first example that comes to my mind is the one where the content of this suggestion/discussion comes from these two - 1st example & 2nd example.
Both examples utilize a laser canon and a bomb (Ion Bomb & Seismic Charge respectively). The armament rating has been dropped to overally 5 despite that a Ion Bomb/Seismic Charge albeit being pretty small are very destructive in terms of damage output.
My suggestion is perhaps dividing the rating into two - size & power and requiring dev threads on a certain average of the two or per the judge's own judgement. Of course, it comes with the drawback of reducing simplicity.
Defences Rating:
What I have always liked about the armor template is that lots of people list their quality in terms of the attacks that the armor is to face i.e Quality 8 vs Energy; Quality 5 vs. Non-energy (Slugs) and all that. Now I am not at all a specialist in starships as most of the people here are but as far as I recall different shields or hulls had different purposes. A shield vs. energy attacks (turbolasers) and shields (and/or the hull itself I assume) that are stronger vs. solid attacks such as missiles. Perhaps that way it would give another indicator for judges to be able to see if there exists a balance of strengths and weaknesses, and legitimacy of the submitted piece of work.
I would be really happy to see what you guys and girls think!
zef out -drops mic-
Now to the content itself:
Armament rating:
I've understood that it scales by power and size, but that is not always the case, in my opinion. As the greater the size = the greater the power/damage output is common but not something fixated. The first example that comes to my mind is the one where the content of this suggestion/discussion comes from these two - 1st example & 2nd example.
Both examples utilize a laser canon and a bomb (Ion Bomb & Seismic Charge respectively). The armament rating has been dropped to overally 5 despite that a Ion Bomb/Seismic Charge albeit being pretty small are very destructive in terms of damage output.
My suggestion is perhaps dividing the rating into two - size & power and requiring dev threads on a certain average of the two or per the judge's own judgement. Of course, it comes with the drawback of reducing simplicity.
Defences Rating:
What I have always liked about the armor template is that lots of people list their quality in terms of the attacks that the armor is to face i.e Quality 8 vs Energy; Quality 5 vs. Non-energy (Slugs) and all that. Now I am not at all a specialist in starships as most of the people here are but as far as I recall different shields or hulls had different purposes. A shield vs. energy attacks (turbolasers) and shields (and/or the hull itself I assume) that are stronger vs. solid attacks such as missiles. Perhaps that way it would give another indicator for judges to be able to see if there exists a balance of strengths and weaknesses, and legitimacy of the submitted piece of work.
I would be really happy to see what you guys and girls think!
zef out -drops mic-