New Ship Rating Proposal

[Alric Kuhn]

So, Larraq posted a suggestion for a new rating on starships;

http://starwarsrp.net/topic/56309-the-failure-of-the-armament-rating-its-saving-graces-and-the-possible-future-of-the-starship-factory/

I have my own judgment on this, and honestly...I like parts of it. I think it will have to be simplified and worked on, maybe streamlined a bit, but the ideas make sense and some of his points struck a cord. I have of course been guilty in the past of basically trying to break the Factory, this would prevent further iterations of that, but would also come with its own problems.

I would like everyone to weigh in on this issue, even if you don't know starships super well because its a new system that either would help or hurt.

[member="Silara Kuhn"]
[member="Raziel"]
[member="Seraphina Shel'tah"]
[member="Popo"]

 

[Ellie Mors]

I am currently reading this through, will post an opinion or something soon/when I've finished.

 

[Popo]

I'll weigh in on this after the others. I'm not hugely comfortable popping up until I've read others' thoughts on the thing solely because of my RL association with Larraq. I want to avoid any potential whiffs of favoritism and all. Not that I think y'all will think so, just a firm believer and devout follower of CYA.

 

[Raziel]

The man needs to learn to write executive summaries.

Main thoughts: utility rating is an unquantifiable waste of time.

Armament ratings: 16 should be standard assault, so there is room to overpower ships based on dev, or throwing in massive weaknesses.
Like Val I don't see a great utility in having a separate armament rating for all the classes if it's really going to be used for fleeting. As per my guide the armament rating should be a very simple step and anyone more advanced should give a full load out OR there should be one scale to cover all ships on broad buckets.

Other ratings: there should be one for Hull, one for armour. I like Val's system of using the size of a ship as a base for taking damage, and the applying a modified based on these ratings. There should either be a point system that covers the whole range of vessels, or it should be simplified to 10 points.

 

[Raziel]

But let's take a step back and ask what's the starship template for?

If we follow Larraq's proposal, there would be a lot of work to do.

What's the single statement of need for this?

I'd say the starship template should be there to allow roleplayers to expand on SW Lore with their own creations. It should allow roleplayers to quickly and easily make new starships that are relatively well balanced. It should allow roleplayers to make more advanced vessels, with new technologies and unique systems.

It is not to assist in any wargaming efforts and balance should be up to the roleplayers.

I like the notion of ratings. They help people make a ship quickly, and give people a rough comparison between ships at a glance. There's a limit to how detailed they should be, before actually looking at the details of a sub is more useful.

 

[Raziel]

With that in mind, a simple combined defence rating should do the trick.

1-3 Very light or no shields, no particular armour plating [Typical for non-combat vessels]
4-5 Might have light shields or armour. [Typical for Interceptors and specialised vessels]
6 Standard shield and armour plating or equivalent [Typical for most carriers/patrol ships]
7
8 [Typical for ships-of-the-line designed to directly engage the enemy]
9
10 - [Specialist/unique/flagships]

The final four are combinations of: Advanced shields, redundant shields, heavy armour plating.


I Strongly believe that adding separate hull, armour, shield and utility ratings are unnecessary. I know the items you balance are:
Speed
Maneuvrability
Size
Production
Armaments
Defense
Unique systems

But I'm not sure I see a way to make the utility rating useful to either roleplayers or judges. Unique systems are just that, and should be carefully balanced.

 

[Raziel]

My guide http://starwarsrp.net/topic/55701-guide-to-starships-wip/could very quickly and easily incorporate one more rating into the system, and so could the templates IMO.


Final question: what about defensive armaments? People often build escort ships with low main armaments, but with a lot of flak guns, quad lasers, etc. These don't go toe-to-toe with other vessels, but act to deal with enemy fighters and ordnance. Should there perhaps be a "Defensive Armaments" rating? Unsure myself.

 

[Alric Kuhn]

[member="Silara Kuhn"] [member="Seraphina Shel'tah"] [member="Popo"]

Now is the time for you opinions folks.

 

[Popo]

[member="Alric Kuhn"]
Working a 24 hour shift today. Will pop up when and if I can.

 

[Ellie Mors]

[member="Alric Kuhn"]
I like portions of it, such as shield ratings, but I don't see the purpose of a utility ratings - we don't really measure the sensors and such in submissions as-is (most people just type Standard or Advanced, not specific things), so it is already fairly vague. I also don't really want to see a ship with 20 utility claiming they can detect stealth ships.

Most of it is also written out in a way that sort of runs together and is all over the place, so I am not sure if what I am understanding is the whole point he's trying to make in each section, or how it is any better than what we have (other than adding new ratings onto the template, which is fine).

 

[Seraphina Shel'tah]

It has, for the duration of the new Starship Factory, been used merely as a loose guide that may or may not be followed. And yet, those that submit starships through the factory seem to cling to the old template. They cling to a system that is no longer supported by official rules or guidelines and, by doing so, have created conflict and drama as judges enforce their own personal viewpoints on the outmoded template and how strictly they feel new submissions should or should not adhere to an optional guideline.

• I agree with him 100% on this. The FJ have entirely different viewpoints and set of personal guidelines when judging ships. This needs to be corrected. I can't tell you how many group chats I am a part of where once someone submits a starship they write "I hope X doesn't judge this because they always X." When people begin hoping that someone doesn't judge their submission for a number of legitimate reasons, it shows a clear sign of a problem with the system in which we judge things.
• Most of what he carries on saying in the proceeding two paragraphs I also agree with. Grandfathered ships, and/or ships with development have been given a vast amount of leniency when leaning towards game breaking power.

Now, getting into what has been proposed.

• Number scales: I don't agree with these at all. How are they judged in battle? My 8 beats your 7 because it's one number higher. I hate scales. They don't work. They don't bring balance.

I would instead propose something like a "Point Buy" wherein your ship is given X number of points to put into:

1. Hull strength
2. Shields
3. Armaments
4. Speed
5. Maneuverability
6. Hangar space
7. Material (special/restricted are higher values)
8. Production.

Then create an easy to follow list of weaponry, with the "special" weapons listed as an exception to be reviewed, of which the FJ would ask the writer to explain its' power in comparison to a standardized weapon, and assign that weapon a point number based on that decision. Internally we would need to consider a unified guideline to judging those weapons so that we all are in agreement when it comes to a number value on specialized tech. This avoids the possibility of having game breaking tech constantly pass through, as well as avoiding the generalized number scale that can be arbitrarily assigned. Yes, this system will still use numbers, however it creates the framework wherein all ships will fall into. Ships that have dev threads would be given a small pool of additional points depending on the amount of dev to increase the ratings on the above list. This information would be broadcast to the community so they knew how much work they would have to put in to get rewarded. This also then avoids the mess of "Well I did the same amount of dev as X"

This system would be further broken down into the categories of starship available. Smaller ships logically have a smaller point buy pool.

How to deal with grandfathered ships?

• Give ships older than 1 year a one month grace period to be updated by either their faction or their writer. This will bring everything still in use up to unified power.

This won't make the people who have vastly overpowered ships happy, but then again, isn't that exactly the reason for all the angst in the factory to begin with? We will have a lot of subs to re-evaluate, yes, but if we want to fix the factory, we need to put in the work as well, not just the writers.

Back on to Larraq's post.

• I don't agree with utility ratings because someone having an advanced series of sensors capable of making slicing more difficult shouldn't affect the vessel's ability to power its' massive engine.

I agree the factory needs an overhaul. I don't agree with this scaled approach where everything is a number. Fleet battles will turn into a "My ship is faster and more armed so I win or I report you" instead of RP. Where point buy is still a number system, it will encompass a much more balanced framework with clear understanding as to what the tradeoffs are.

[member="Alric Kuhn"]

 

[Popo]

Honestly, and don't tell Larraq this, but his guide makes my head hurt like no tomorrow. I get where he's coming from and all, but he's missing a baseline as well. With his system, you can't really use a one size fits all baseline and to incorporate a form standard would mean each class of ship has a separate standard, making it more complex. As an add-on? Maybe.

Outside of that, he has other points that maybe we need to look at. From what I remember, we used the 2.0 guide even after the changes as a reference point. Looking around, this is still the case to an extent. We don't have a standard method or point of reference for judges right now, either. Judge A will stamp all things one way while Judge B requires Dev threads for 90% of things.

Me, personally, I think an overhaul of the factory and starship guide is needed, but we should start with the factory first.

 

[Raziel]

Give ships older than 1 year a one month grace period to be updated by either their faction or their writer. This will bring everything still in use up to unified power.

Oh I hadn't even noticed this. No chance.

 

[Seraphina Shel'tah]

Do as you wish.

 

[Alric Kuhn]

I like Val's system of using the size of a ship as a base for taking damage, and the applying a modified based on these ratings

Not a fan of this. I strongly believe in the theory of smaller ships being capable of taking out larger ships, especially when it comes to specialized vessels like the Yuuzhan Vong. However if we could come up with some more interesting and defined ideas i would be open to it.

With that in mind, a simple combined defence rating should do the trick.

I like the idea of adding a defense rating...there's something to that and maybe should be more looked into.

I also don't really want to see a ship with 20 utility claiming they can detect stealth ships.

This is a huge concern for me as well, I don't like the idea of utility ratings for the exact same reason as you guys don't, so that definitely will not be happening.

I agree with him 100% on this. The FJ have entirely different viewpoints and set of personal guidelines when judging ships.

This is absolutely true and I hate it as well. People have differing opinions, I for instance would get rid of Dev Threads entirely if i thought it was feasible. I know this is impossible however, and I know that people have different thoughts from me. What i would really like is to create a standard baseline of opinion on submissions, which in part we already have. Perhaps we can further expand upon this. I'm also super open to hearing any suggestions on maybe curbing this in the future as its been an issue from day one.

I would instead propose something like a "Point Buy" wherein your ship is given X number of points to put into:

I kind of like this idea, I would very much like to hear more about it.

Give ships older than 1 year a one month grace period to be updated by either their faction or their writer. This will bring everything still in use up to unified power.

Unfortunately as said by others, this won't happen. Grandfathered in technology stays the way it is, that's not something We, or even I can mess with. If ships from the ancient past get reported thats another issue, but for now it is out of our hands.

I think an overhaul of the factory and starship guide is needed, but we should start with the factory first.

What do you mean the factory first?


So to summarize my opinion. No we will not be implanting the changes that Larraq put forth. Also to comment on Sera's opinion on number scales, I'm afraid i have to completely agree. I don't like the idea of matching numbers, I don't like the concept of putting the factory out as a way to play a game. This is a roleplaying board and the factory should be used to enhance roleplaying, not to create another game. However, I will be starting a vote and detail out the possible addition of a defense rating, mostly because that is seemingly something most of you can agree on.

I would also like to hear from Sera about further proposal of her Point system(If you are willing) as that seems like something that might be simple enough to understand for most people while also being practical.

I would also like for Rhys to complete his guide, I think that will create a baseline standard for starships at least to what and what doesn't need a dev thread. As for Judge standards in other sections, I think perhaps a long thought out conversation on what everyone's opinion is on Dev Threads and such could be very helpful, Though i will of course take any and all suggestions on trying to fix this odd deviation between judges.

[member="Silara Kuhn"]
[member="Raziel"]
[member="Seraphina Shel'tah"]
[member="Popo"]