El Capitan

Though I like the idea of a gladiatorial type setting, I do not think the structure of this game is suited for that. The aspects/outcome of space battles in the game as it is, is as much a function of stragegy, logistics, and production as anything else. It's not just the decisions you make on how to design your ship. Success involves a host of other factors: -When/where to attack -When/where to defend -Who you make enemies with -Who you ally with -Racial design -Ground combat -How do you get your war fleet to the ememy -How far away is the enemy -Fuel and fuel tankage -AP needed -etc., etc. To give everyone the same starting money/resources/whatever to design a ship would in essence strip away all of these other factors that are otherwise so vital to being successful in this game. Going along with this line of thought, but even more significant (and this is the biggest draw back), is that there just aren't enough variables in the combat system for a tactical, one on one type of combat. Pete has always said that the combat system is really more strategic than tactical. Gladiator style combat is approaching pure tactics, which this game was not designed for. In my opinion, for this to be a worthwhile venture, you would have to have a combat system that is much more varied than the one we have. For starters, there would need to be SIGNIFICANT differences between the weapon systems. Right now, the only difference is the name, the required defense to counter it, and a smattering of range thrown in. So basically, the winner would likely come down to who guessed right with a specific defense. That would get VERY boring in short order. Short of someone being a complete idiot, were basically talking about a coin toss. For a gladiatorial style combat to work, we would need the weapons to actually work very differently from each other. Stuff like armor penetrating, shield penetrating, crew incapacitating, energy draining, ammo based, energy based, etc. Then you would actually need to have crew members that could be killed or incapacitated, crew that could combat boarding parties, fighter pilots, damage control teams, etc. You would also need a ship design system that actually generated power for energy based weapons, and ALL of the ammo based systems would need to have ammo available for reloads, not just the fighters and drones. All missile systems and projectile systems would need a supply of ammo. I could go on and on with examples but I'm sure you get the idea. A tactical/gladiatorial style arena, without a vast overhaul of the combat system, just wouldn't hold my interest. It sounds great, and in theory is really cool. However, with the combat system as it is (much more strategic in nature than tactical) I would bet that it would get really boring really quick.

Sponge, I found your answer. After googling around a bit, I came across a web site that claims the origin of the idea of the Borg (resistance is futile, assimilation, collectivism, all will be as one, one mind, etc. and even the cube ship) is..........the Bible. Lots of descriptions in the Bible of the inhabitants of heavan being "as one". I won't give all the references, but you get the idea. But the most intriguing part is the idea of the cube. This is a quote from Rev. 21:16 (King James version) and it is a description of The New Jerusalem: "And the city lieth foursquare, and the length is as large as the breadth: and he measured the city with the reed, twelve thousand furlongs. The length and the breadth and the height of it are equal" Length, breadth, and hight are equal = CUBE! I do find it rather odd that when measuring a "city", that you would include the hight. So, if we can agree on who wrote the book of Revalation, and track down their heirs, they might have a case against the Roddenbery estate and Pete. BTW, this was a very stange/intriguing web site. If anyone is interested, just google Jesus of Borg.

I didn't play the original SN, but wasn't the race called the Death Machines or something like that, not the Cyborg? And were there actually cube shaped ships in the original SN?

You can never go wrong with too much clarification. Flagritz is correct. The HCBDs work like most of the other bridge systems in that their total bridge rating is cummulative and is divided by fleet tonnage to get fire control for a fleet. The Flag Bridges, though, have two effects. The bridge rating works just like the other systems to determine fire control - Add up all bridge system ratings and divide by total fleet tonnage to get fire control. The second effect of the Flag Bridge is what works differently and is what Pete is referring to when he says you only need one in a fleet. And this is it's ability to bypass junk screens and focus on the war ships of the opposing fleet. For this benefit, it does no good to have multiple FBs (except as he says to guard against losing your one and only FB during a battle, and thereby losing it's benefit to bypass junk screens before the battle is over).

Quite true. But that still doesn't change the fact that a massive ship WOULD take thousans of SFGs to achieve the level of protection in your example. 21% of a 1 billion ton ship is 210 million tons of Type D SFGs. At 25k per SFG, that's 8,400 of them. My analytical skills might not be the best, but I would say that qualifies as "thousands".

Depends on how big your ship is. It's % based. A massive ship would need thousands of them to maintain the level of protection in your example.

The Cylons of BSG would be another example of machine-like spacefaring thingies that are tough to beat.

The Type D Stasis Field Generator works like all of the other ship defensive systems. Protection (reduction of incoming fire power) is based on % coverage. To increase your protection you would need more of them on a ship. It is not a one size fits all deal. One of these on a massive ship would have little to no effect. Same with all of the systems that affect fire control, like the HCBDs. You total up their combined strength and divide by fleet tonnage to get the FC of the fleet.

Yeah, it's just something you have to get used to and it will make more sense as you open up new items. The generational level of an item is typically the level of the prereq plus 1. As another example, the Mk I Lightning Arc Generator is a second generation item/weapon. Its research cost is 12 points. It's prereq is Light Beam Laser. The Light Beam Laser costs 3 pts to reseach and it has no prereqs, making it a first generation item. Anything that opens off of it will be level 2 (like the Mk I Lightning Arc Generator). Anything that opens off of the Mk I Lightning Arc Gen. would then be a 3rd gen item, etc. Like Flagritz stated, you can't just go by the "Mark" number or the "Type" (as in Type A, B, C, etc.) or by the named generational stuff (like 1st Generation Cybernetics). 1st Generation Cybernetics is an advanced tech and you have to research a bunch of other techs before it will open. You have to take into consideration the number of previous levels of technology it took to get an item to open in order to determine its generational level.

I'm glad I waited a bit before I responded to this one. Saved me a lot of time typing. But just to clarify a minor point, when Flagritz states how many points each slot generates per "week", I'm sure he meant per "turn" (being every two weeks).

and it can be important to know when a fleet moved, not just where it moved.

I think that is a fantastic idea to add a tag to fleet sightings stating the diplo status. As already stated, this would allow for searches. I also like the idea of using bold lettering to ID Enemy, Unknown Alien, etc. Great idea! But don't take away ally or total ally sightings. I don't want anything to hinder the process of generating fleet sightings. Something like this might just create new areas for bugs. Like when two total allies both have fleets at a location and a third party moves in.

Yeah, I know they've been asking in private. I've given out at least a dozen anz's and tech paths over the last three weeks. And that's been my point all along. If new players want info, it's easily obtained just by befriending and asking a veteran player. So I don't think there are many new players lacking for information. And there is another reason new players ask in private -- they want to keep any advantage over other new players in their area also. That's why you havn't seen one new player ask for an anz to be posted in this thread. They want to get the info but they don't want their enemies (or potential enemies) to get the info also. And I'm glad to see that you've gained your senses and now realize that asking for and giving out info publicly can have the side effect of letting those around you clue in to what you are researching or might be lacking. This was also one of my initial points and I'm glad to see that you now agree with me

Bump. Interesting. I'ts been 3 wks and not one request from a new player.

487