ISC Invasion: (Cancelled do to lack of Interest)

[FPF-DieHard]

EDIT:   I like some of the ideas here but this was kind of off the wall.   I can understand people not being into it.




I'm going to do this.  Looking to get the leadership figured out as quickly as possible so we can hammer out the details.  There are a couple things to keep in mind:

- This is NOT a D2 server.  This is a “turn-based” strategic game where the battles will be resolved on a D2 server that will be up for a specific period of time.

 - All production of ships will be controlled; all ships will be assigned to players via the OCI by RMs and server admins.

 - This is primarily and excuse for PvP in a strategic context, don’t take this so seriously.  I expect this to be bloody and hopefully fun as hell.

Volunteers who've played F&E before will be a big plus as it will save on the explaining.  You can delegate to as many "ARMs" as you like regarding production and ship assignment.

Please post if interested.   

[FPF-DieHard]

bump 

[GDA-S'Cipio]

There is no way I'd have time to RM this, but I would be interested in the campaign.

Surely someone will volunteer?

-S'Cipio

[KHH Jakle]

Um...what does an RM do anyway?   

[KBFLordKrueg]

Um...what does an RM do anyway?   

Not much...
ususally just make sure all his pilots know the rules, plot the map strategy, co-ordinate pilots whenever on line, spend time staring at names, noting news reports when they light up so he can have pilots respond to threats, make daily posts in the forums outlining the latest Sit Rep and outlining what pilots should be doing to best make their missions count toward the common goal, rally the troops when the chips are down and drive them forward when they're not, make sure both sides are following OOB rules in place by monitoring what OOB ships are on, answer questions form pilots naive of any information about rules, again, usually on both sides, make sure kill reports are posted accurately so points are missed or misreported...hmmm, did I miss anything...?
Oh yeah, sometimes they even have time to run a few missions, depending on how much free time they have....
Not much...
And the rewards...well...those make it so worth while we ususally have pilots bickering over who gets to RM the next campaign....

[Dizzy]

OMG. Dont get me started on what a server admin goes thru... 

[FPF-DieHard]

Um...what does an RM do anyway?   

In this situation, he'd be primarily Setting build schedules and assigning ships.

[FPF-DieHard]

Here’s what the RMs will have to do for ISC invasion, remember, this is NOT a normal D2 Server:

1.   Get on TS with me and the other RM to hammer out the details.   A lot of stuff is still up in the air and I want a server that both sides think is either fair or both think they are equally screwed (my litmus test for knowing the SGO shiplist was balanced was when the Feds started flaming me  ).   We need to work out the Production Model, Fleeting Rules, length of turns, what the VCs shouls be, and a few other things that we’ll figure out later.
2.   Organize training:  This is going to be a primarily PvP server, get people on GSA/IP and shake the rust off.
3.   Once the server starts the RM’s primary job will be to set the production schedule and assign ships to pilots.   Assignment will be done via the OCI.  We cannot expect you to be one every hour the server is up so you will have help with this.

[KHH Jakle]

If you don't have any better options, I could do it for the Galactic Side - RM or ARM, whichever. 

I figured the role was gonna be what you described as opposed to Kreug's...build scheduling and ship assignment is about my speed

[FPF-DieHard]

If you don't have any better options, I could do it for the Galactic Side - RM or ARM, whichever. 

I figured the role was gonna be what you described as opposed to Kreug's...build scheduling and ship assignment is about my speed

That's one for the Barbarians, now who wants to be "The Pacifier?"

[FPF-DieHard]

Somebody's gotta want to be the head Frog, please stop forth!

[FPF-DieHard]

Jahkle and I had a brief discussion last night.   here's my thoughts so far . . . (nothing written in stone)

Game Turns:  (Each turn represents 6 months real time).  2 game turns per year.  Server starts 2279

Production model:   We will be using system based on the F&E model.  Each empire will have the below shipyards:

DN (2 turns to build)
CA
CW
CW
CW
DW
DW
DW


Each Empire will have 60 Economic Points for builds a round See the Ship Data Tables from (http://www.porterdavid.com/ ) for approx EP cost for ships.   I’m in the process of making Spreadsheets for the various empires for this that include all the ships we use and none of the ones we don’t. 

I’m thinking of starting each empire with 2 rounds of production before the war starts.  The ISC will start with a significantly higher number of ships built and more money than everyone else that needs to be discussed between me and the RMs.  There is also the option of not giving al the empire the same amount of EP (the Federation and Klingons had significantly more than the other empires) which is also up in the air.

What can be built in what yards?  See below for a general idea, the Spreadsheets will have the Substitution for specific ships:

DN:  Dreads, CVAs, BB, BCH
CA:  CA. BCH
CW:  War Cruisers (F-NCL, K-D5) and variants, New Cruisers (F-NCA, K-D5W) and variants.
DW:  War Destroyers.   HDWs, Frigates (I will be shocked if anyone actually builds a Frigate).

We will also follow the F&E Guide lines as to what can be build as closely as possible.  Hydrans can’t build all CAVs and MKEs, Feds can’t build only NCDs, etc . . .  Details need to be worked out between myself and the RMs.

Ship conversion:  Too complicated for this project, the only conversions that will be allowed are converting to X/XP tech.  If the RMs are willing to do this I’m open but I don’t think it’s really worth it.   I expect most ships to die before conversion anyway. 

On ship per pilot?:  I’m still thinking this is the best way to go but I’m open for suggestions as long as they don’t include a strap-on or a goat.

Fighter Factors: Keeping track of attrition unit loses in a campaign like this is going to be impossible.   F&E gets around this by having “Fighter Factors” in which you pay a decent amount up front for the carrier but the replacement fighters are free. EXAMPLE: In F&E a K-C7V cost 12 EP for the ship and another 12 EP for the “fighter factors.”  Empires would also get several free fighter factors per year (in the case of the Klingons, 12) so if that C7V was the only fighter the Klingons built that year the fighters would essentially have cost them nothing. 

Since we’re going to stay with the 2/3 fighters reduction (unless both RMs say otherwise, I’m open to full-fighter deployment.) each empire will get 8 “Free fighter” factors per year, additional fighter factors will cost 1 EP each.  Hybrid ships (Casual carriers, I’ll have a Spreadsheet of those as well) require half a factor per fighter so the Hydran don’t get screwed.

I know what some of you are thinking, fighters are more effective in SFB than SFC so why do they still cost the same?   Two reasons: first, Megapacks cost extra in SFB/F&E but we will not be charging for this.  Second in F&E the fighters could only be used in one battle per turn.  In ISC Invasion fighters can be used in countless battles.  In this setup where ships cannot repair in spacedock carriers are worth their weight in gold!   

PFs: PFs are a conundrum.  In F&E PFs cost ½ EP each and their production was unlimited, you could build as many as you wanted as long as they were assigned to planets, bases, or Ships.  We have a couple of options regarding PF Deployment.  First we can keep track of all PFs built and then remove them from the tally when they are killed.  The price would be 1/3 EP per PF because PFs are not as deadly in the SGO mod as they are in SFB (AI control is the biggest factor).

The second option would is to charge a “lease” per Mechlink.  I’m thinking 1 EP per Mechlink per turn.  This is more than fighters but at the same time you need to remember that PFs can added to a hell of a lot more ships than fighters can. 

Both options have their pros and cons.   Option 1 requires more record keeping but is more Flexible.   Option 2 is easier to go with but might not be as efficient.  Say we go with option you have 10 Ships that you wish to have mechlinks, it will cost you 20 EP a round.  It might be cheaper if option 1 is used because that 20 EP could buy 60 PFs and if they aren’t all used, they can be used next round.

Fleeting rules: What should they be?  A lot of the Current SGO fleeting rules are “artificial” to try to limit ships that were rare and minimized cheese fleets.  Since were using full OOB, is this even needed?   You won’t be able to build all specialty ships.  They only thing I insist on is No “capital” ships winging together.   Nothing else is written in stone.

Repair: To repair a ship it needs to sit out a round.  I’m thinking the repair cost should be the ½ the EP cost of a ship rounded down.  EXAMPLE:  An F-CB costs 9 EP to build.  It would cost 4 EP to repair.

[Lieutenant_Q]

Is there a reason for the lack of Cruisers? Only one CA yard seems a bit light.

BCHs can be built in both DN yard and CA yard?

[FPF-DieHard]

Is there a reason for the lack of Cruisers? Only one CA yard seems a bit light.

This is proportional based on F&E.  With full F&E productions, the Fed could build 1 DN, 2 CA, and 12 NCL in a round.   

You can build NCAs in your CW shipyards so if you have the money you still can build bigger ships.  Answers the age old Fed question of why the heck would anyone build an F-NCC when the F-CB has a lower BPV and is better by far.  The F-NCC can be built in a War Cruiser shipyard.

Remember, it's 7 empires versus 1.  That's still 7 CAs a round versus whatever the ISC can field.

BCHs can be built in both DN yard and CA yard?

Correct a BCH is a "Subsitution" and can be built in either an CA or  DN shipyards.  I'm not sure about the ISC CC, I think that one might need to be build in a DN yard.  Same with the Killerhawk I think.

[FCM-Corbomite-XC]

...  I'm not sure about the ISC CC, I think that one might need to be build in a DN yard.  Same with the Killerhawk I think.

Nonsense. There is nothing on a CC or KHK hull that would require a special shipyard.

[FPF-DieHard]

...  I'm not sure about the ISC CC, I think that one might need to be build in a DN yard.  Same with the Killerhawk I think.

Nonsense. There is nothing on a CC or KHK hull that would require a special shipyard.

Checked the F&E SITs.  For the KHK, yes is can be subbed for a CA.   The I-CC has to be subbed for a DN. 

It's not going to matter, the ISC will have plenty off CCs.  After building a BB and a CVA or two I'd be amazed if another DN gets build.

[FCM-Corbomite-XC]

...  I'm not sure about the ISC CC, I think that one might need to be build in a DN yard.  Same with the Killerhawk I think.

Nonsense. There is nothing on a CC or KHK hull that would require a special shipyard.

Checked the F&E SITs.  For the KHK, yes is can be subbed for a CA.   The I-CC has to be subbed for a DN. 

Substituted economically. I see no reason why it can't be built in a CA shipyard.

[FPF-DieHard]

...  I'm not sure about the ISC CC, I think that one might need to be build in a DN yard.  Same with the Killerhawk I think.

Nonsense. There is nothing on a CC or KHK hull that would require a special shipyard.

Checked the F&E SITs.  For the KHK, yes is can be subbed for a CA.   The I-CC has to be subbed for a DN. 

Substituted economically. I see no reason why it can't be built in a CA shipyard.

If both RMs are fine with it so am I.  It is a 1 move cost ship so I don't understand F&E's logic behind this.  There is some wiggle room in the SITs for somethings that just don't make sense.

[FPF-DieHard]

Still need a head Frog, don't make me conscript Dizzy!