| Re: The Hunt for Red October |
Tue, 06 May 2008 02:37   |
|
|
|
| cyph34r wrote on Tue, 06 May 2008 00:48 |
As for the SS, I'll impose the suggested restrictions that they cannot fit additional cloaks on their RO and it may not join fleets.
|
If SS can't have additional cloaks, then the others must be restricted, to say the 72% cloaking previously suggested, unless all are allowed to be 98%. If the latter, if the RO is prevented from merging with a fleet, additional cloaks for overcloaking purposes are pointless. So if someone wants to waste slots let them.(Just checked - 3 SS cloaks for non SS gives 80% cloaking. SS with one SS cloak gets 80% too. SS get 83% with 3 slots of the SS shield or basic stealth cloak. They get 81% with the SS armour.)
If you do restrict the RO cloaking to 72(75 for SS) then merging it with a fleet is not such a big issue since the combined fleet will have either less than 75% if the rest of the fleet has no cloaking or just 75% if SS. Obviously, this changes is if you have overcloakers good enough to overcloak your RO - which along with the IS TD, if you can get to them I think you should have them.
BTW, if this game does get off the ground, I'd like to be in it. If so I'm almost certainly not going to be SS regardless of your decisions about rules if the RO does get race specific goodies.
Sulpholobus.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: The Hunt for Red October |
Tue, 06 May 2008 06:57 |
|
|
|
| cyph34r wrote on Mon, 05 May 2008 10:48 |
I'm okay with IS using tachyon detectors, I think most people aren't a big fan of that race and its a bit of a leap to play the game for one component.
As for the SS, I'll impose the suggested restrictions that they cannot fit additional cloaks on their RO and it may not join fleets.
If it is too difficult to setup the custom ROs we'll go with a universal design, but that takes the fun out of it a bit. I'll do some research after work today.
|
IS Unpopular?
I'm surprised that you thhink IS is unpopular. IMO IS is the 2nd most economically powerful PRT (not counting CA), it has the FT which allows rapid early expansion, pop growth in ships, better planetary defence & tachyons to defeat stealth. In fact, the only significant negative is the 25% extra expense for weapons.
In the 5 games that I've played in + 2 that I've hosted a total of 67 races were involved & 14 were IS.
If tachyons are permitted in this game I fully expect more than half of the players will choose IS - I know I would.
Stealth
I think that Cyph meant that no race can overcloak their RO, not just SS.
IMO the tactics & strategy should be about protection of your RO & destruction of your enemies' ones. I think that ROs should have a universal design (except for the 75%/72% cloaking depending in SS/nonSS).
I also think that the ROs should not be too hard to find. A non-IS race would find it too difficult to detect a 98% cloaked RO & even more difficult to keep track of it. IMO the 72/75% cloaking is about right.
Having said that, if custom designs are to be allowed, the zerohack mod that Micha produced & pointed out (I knew about that but had forgotten it) means that all ROs can be built in 2400 regardless of who builds them since any number can be built for free.
[Updated on: Tue, 06 May 2008 07:07] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: The Hunt for Red October |
Tue, 06 May 2008 07:49 |
|
| Micha | 
 | |
Messages: 2342
Registered: November 2002
Location: Belgium GMT +1 | |
|
| cyph34r wrote on Thu, 01 May 2008 16:25 |
Design Limitations on the RO
-Engines will be fuel mizers
-Only technology that requires level 14 or less may be used
-The only scanner allowed is the possum scanner
-No technology that is unavailable to your race may be used
-No weapons
|
Just an idea: nub hull, QJ5, that's it. It would make the RO just what it is: a target to find and destroy. Let it hide at planets, allow it to be merged and overcloaked ...
This simplifies several things: not in the least that the ROs do not need to be transferred because this is the design that it will become after the first gen with the non-hacked .exe.
It also removes the unbalance the RO might bring into the game: it's cloaks, it's scanning, ... The stripped version only offers a very interesting fuel booster ... No need for the FM, the nub can go a long way with it's own fuel, even with the QJ5.
Adding items/toys will only increase it's role in the game, make it a costum "starting ship" along with your colonizer and Peeping Tom.  But of course that's just a choice you make as host: a KISS RO to be found and shot down, or a pimped RO to be designed at the leasure of the player (or all the same design) as an extra and "useful" starting ship ... I'm not saying one is better than the other, they are just different options ...
mch
[Updated on: Tue, 06 May 2008 07:50] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: The Hunt for Red October |
Wed, 07 May 2008 02:29 |
|
|
|
| cyph34r wrote on Wed, 07 May 2008 06:21 |
fair enough micha - i'd like to get things going so we'll go with KISS for now unless thats a turnoff for a lot of people
|
Not so much a turn off as a rethink. I've tested numerous RO's with different races. Lots of fun.
Will now do same with KISS RO. Will probably end up with a different favoured race this time.
So count me in.
Sulpholobus.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: The Hunt for Red October |
Wed, 07 May 2008 05:25 |
|
 m.a@stars |
| Commander |
Messages: 2765
Registered: October 2004
Location: Third star to the left | |
|
| Micha wrote on Tue, 06 May 2008 13:49 |
Just an idea: nub hull, QJ5, that's it. It would make the RO just what it is: a target to find and destroy. Let it hide at planets, allow it to be merged and overcloaked ...
|
That would be RH for "Red Herring" instead of RO for "Red October" which was after all a nuclear missile platform, able to devastate half a continent on its own. That's why it was so furiously chased after! 
*sigh* What was wrong with the idea of allowing all races their own "supercharged" Red October? Why not let every player decide if they want theirs be a super-minelayer, a super-scanship, a super-spyship, or even just a super-missile boat? That would at least give a reason to run risks with the things. 
And forbid it to be merged with anything else, of course. It's a lone wolf, after all, unloved even by its own. 
So many Stars, so few Missiles!
In space no one can hear you scheme! Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: The Hunt for Red October |
Wed, 07 May 2008 10:11 |
|
|
|
| Micha wrote on Wed, 07 May 2008 20:11 |
Starting Superships are hard to balance ... I do remember a game where all players started with a miner which had OAs on it as well (game by LEit?) but IIRC all players had the same ship and it's as for offensive power it was pretty limited ...
mch
|
Transformers?
There was room for some variation in design. You could have remote miners too and the 3 armour/elec/mech slot of the ultra miner could have any suitable item of choice up to tech level 20 IIRC.
Sulpholobus.
[Updated on: Wed, 07 May 2008 10:13] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: The Hunt for Red October |
Thu, 08 May 2008 01:00 |
|
|
|
heh I remember the discussion about possible designs for the Jolly Roger in Pirates...in the end I took my inspiration from Stars! itself and essentially produced a Stalwart Defender on the Rogue hull...next to useless but it served as a kingpiece.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: The Hunt for Red October |
Mon, 12 May 2008 14:18 |
|
| ForceUser |
 | |
Messages: 383
Registered: January 2004
Location: South Africa | |
|
Interesting game idea and I'd like to add my 2c 
1. To make it really interesting and risky, make it so only one RO can kill another RO, or a fleet containing an RO. Afterall, that was the best part of the movie, one sub hunting another. It is possible to lose your RO and kill the enemy RO in the same battle tho.
2. Make 3 (or more) standard ROs that can be chosen. This could allow for a rock-paper-sciscours setup and will make finding out what RO the enemy has a priority. (if only a RO can kill another RO)
3. Make the designs very sub (futuristic) like for RP flavour. Torpedoes, Stealth generators, Jammers, computers etc. You can even make the "standard" ROs this way: one has more jamming, another more torpedoes etc.
In my opinion if you want to run with a cool idea like this, go all the way and make it as interesting and rule-ridden as possible 
"There are two types of people in the world. AR players and non-AR players" Nick Fraser
Working on some new stuff: http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/stars-nova/index.php?t itle=Graphics
And the Mentor Database www.groep7.co.za/Mentor/ ZOMGWTFBBQ!! it still works lol!
Check out my old site with old pics at www.groep7.co.za/Stars/
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: The Hunt for Red October |
Tue, 13 May 2008 00:30 |
|
| Wayne |
 | Chief Petty Officer |
Messages: 74
Registered: November 2002
Location: New Zealand | |
|
But as I remember the movie the sub doing the hunting was a dedicated hunter killer and the red october a boomer(missile boat). So therefor make the boomers missile/torp boats and the hunters beamers/torps.
[Updated on: Tue, 13 May 2008 00:33]
WayneReport message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: The Hunt for Red October |
Mon, 02 June 2008 19:44 |
|
|
|
I'm interested in playing, if there is still room.
I like the empty qj5 only design for the RO.
Any thoughts on size and density of the universe. IMHO, that has more effect on race design/choice than anything else. After all, we are still playing Stars!
naz
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: The Hunt for Red October |
Wed, 04 June 2008 18:16 |
|
|
|
Is this game happening? Not much activity in the last fortnight.
I could generate & host it myself if you want but I don't want to usurp Cyph if he's still around. It's his baby.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
*Another* rule. 
if you did that to me 
