Grand Admiral, First Order Central Command
First off I want to say that I'm very impressed with the all the work done so far, the new templates are exhaustive yada yada it all looks good.
My main concern is that the armament rating is a vague number with no comparative weight. For all that it's also got a very wide range. I personally am not clear on what a rating 1 Fighter looks like vs. a rating 20. Same idea with a rating 1 vs. 20 Destroyer. Now if you compare ships of a different class, it gets even worse.
A hard formula for figuring how effective one ship is against another (assuming both use rating only) would probably be relatively easy to work up but wouldn't solve all the issues something like, when dealing with a class up armament rating is x.75 for each step up.
That would uh, let me do the math here. A 20 Fighter would be 15 vs. a Corvette, 11 vs. a Frigate, 8 vs. a Cruiser, 6 vs a Destroyer, 4 vs a Flagship.
That's just an example, it's not something I'd necessarily recommend for use. Another possibility is to have it be more of a static scale (relating basically to weight of shot, if you will) and restrict it on a line. So say Fighters can have a MAX rating of 3, Corvettes a MAX rating of 6, Frigates 9, Cruisers 12, etc. That also solves the confusing status of Carriers, where they're the same size as Destroyers but should be significantly less well armed. Individual submissions could go beyond the listed max too, if they were very well done.
I could be totally off base here, but I feel that the goal with armament ratings should be to give any random ship a baseline to go off when dealing with any other random ship. Right now they don't really do that, they tell you that Cruiser X with Rating 16 is probably more powerful than Cruiser Y with Rating 10. It's also probably less powerful than Destroyer A Rating 15, but what about Destroyer B Rating 10? What about Carrier C Rating 15, or Frigate D Rating 20?
And finally I feel obligated to note that the various size classifications continue to legitimize the sci-fi problem (it's not unique to Star Wars) in thinking that a Destroyer is a big badass ship when historically they have been very small escorts (because apparently 'Battleship' is too damn mundane sounding). Obviously this is the case in canon, so you are free to ignore this particular part of the post as me shaking my fist as the moon.
I totally had this written up for the other thread.
My main concern is that the armament rating is a vague number with no comparative weight. For all that it's also got a very wide range. I personally am not clear on what a rating 1 Fighter looks like vs. a rating 20. Same idea with a rating 1 vs. 20 Destroyer. Now if you compare ships of a different class, it gets even worse.
A hard formula for figuring how effective one ship is against another (assuming both use rating only) would probably be relatively easy to work up but wouldn't solve all the issues something like, when dealing with a class up armament rating is x.75 for each step up.
That would uh, let me do the math here. A 20 Fighter would be 15 vs. a Corvette, 11 vs. a Frigate, 8 vs. a Cruiser, 6 vs a Destroyer, 4 vs a Flagship.
That's just an example, it's not something I'd necessarily recommend for use. Another possibility is to have it be more of a static scale (relating basically to weight of shot, if you will) and restrict it on a line. So say Fighters can have a MAX rating of 3, Corvettes a MAX rating of 6, Frigates 9, Cruisers 12, etc. That also solves the confusing status of Carriers, where they're the same size as Destroyers but should be significantly less well armed. Individual submissions could go beyond the listed max too, if they were very well done.
I could be totally off base here, but I feel that the goal with armament ratings should be to give any random ship a baseline to go off when dealing with any other random ship. Right now they don't really do that, they tell you that Cruiser X with Rating 16 is probably more powerful than Cruiser Y with Rating 10. It's also probably less powerful than Destroyer A Rating 15, but what about Destroyer B Rating 10? What about Carrier C Rating 15, or Frigate D Rating 20?
And finally I feel obligated to note that the various size classifications continue to legitimize the sci-fi problem (it's not unique to Star Wars) in thinking that a Destroyer is a big badass ship when historically they have been very small escorts (because apparently 'Battleship' is too damn mundane sounding). Obviously this is the case in canon, so you are free to ignore this particular part of the post as me shaking my fist as the moon.
I totally had this written up for the other thread.
