mj12games.com

Looks good! Couple responses: 1) I hate graphical displays. Just my personal preference, but as you note, it has informed certain game design choices, most notably the loss limits. But if you can make them work, more power to you. 2) You can use the "Code" delimiter to indicate mono-spaced...

Cloaking devices work differently in the SFU, and therefore I reduced the DRAT multiplier. Entering "Romulan" as the faction is a trigger for the spreadsheet to know it's an SFU design. I have had the "Cloaking Devices are overpriced" discussion many times over the years, and I h...

Here is why CM has a x1.5 multiplier: Assuming a distribution of attacks where three times as many occur at long range as at short range, and enemy weapons are ACC 3+, you get: NO CM: Long Range = 3 * 50% Medium Range = 2 * 67% Short Range = 1 * 83% Average = 61% CM (1): Long Range = 3 * 33% Medium ...

Very nice! I like the redesigned ship displays.

GamingGlen wrote:Thanks! I can add it myself. Is it ranged based? The spreadsheet has a column for that.

No, it is not range-based.

But I really don't want to buy another book for some design options. A fair point. Once it has been tested outside of the SFU, I may make the trait (Evp = "Evaporating") available in the spreadsheet. For now, however, it has a 0.7 multiplier and works as follows: at the end of each move, ...

Our battles here, between Beowulf and myself mostly, with our longer ranged weapons than those in the book (we go with 18, where as I see a lot of range 12 & 15 in the book), tend to be at medium range a lot more than long. Usually one turn is at long and several at medium before 1 - 3 turns at...

Some thoughts, not necessarily in any order or leading to any conclusion: In order for seekers to be balanced, the target has to have the capability of shooting down 60% of incoming seekers. This brings to mind one important point: there always has been, and always will be, a certain rock-paper-scis...

So you took one lousy example, show that it's not all that effective, and say the game is good. No, I took an extreme example and demonstrated that while powerful, it's not quite as jaw-dropping as it looked at first glance. I didn't say the game was "good"; I was inviting further discuss...

I'm aware of the problem, and endeavoring to fix it.

Pease stand by.