CYOA Thread
- Home
- Board: /tg/ - Traditional Games
- Reading: CYOA Thread
"Someone else can do the pasta" edition
FAQ: http://pastebin.com/MhAQAJiw
Here's a dropbox with a LOT of CYOA's:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/9ijwopa42ke49q1/AAA40vUS2BzstD9eHyyBLTr8a?dl=0
IRC Chat Channel
https://client01.chat.mibbit.com/?url=irc%3A%2F%2Firc.rizon.net%2Fcyoa
what's the latest version of Slut Life look like?
>>44297610
Updated Stardust romance DLC when?
Stardust DLC for men coming at what time?
>>44297540
>Little Girl
I might as well play by the rules.
>Magical Girl
Magic is fun, right?
>Character Creator
Red hair, green eyes, and freckles, here I come!
>Fountain of Youth
Dunno if people could put up with me forever, but you know what? After long enough that might not even matter.
>Sweets
What can I say? Gluttony is one of my greatest vices.
>Wardrobe
Mostly to confuse my friends.
Wish there was an option that let you still be treated as an adult legally, mostly so I could still pay for my own convention passes, bus/train fare, order my own food, be left alone at home, not have to go back to grade school, that sort of thing.
And my passport and everything. Maybe all the legal stuff just gets taken care of?
Rolled 2, 3, 1 = 6 (3d6)
>>44297730
A
>>44297841
Damn, a terrible roll.
Collar, Youth, Transformation, Invisibility, Defence, Resistance
At least I can make myself an immortal shapeshifter
>bothering to post anything but star dust
Ishygddt
>>44297610
I wonder: do you realize how obvious it is that you are the one who posts slut life?
Also, why? There hasn't been an update, you know this. So you just hope people will post builds if you ask for the CYOA and post it?
Why can't you just post the CYOA normally? Must it seem like someone was requesting it?
Oh, the things that keep me up at night
>>44297577
Last Thread: >>44270994
>>44297540
>"Someone else can do the pasta" edition
That's almost every edition, since almost nobody is autistic enough for it.
>>44297890
Nice post. Odd how there isn't any stardust in it.
>>44298164
>>44297890
https://mega.nz/#!xlVHFJwY!Vm0JTm1z7RYA8g10fODtRa1C7dZhKPWAOodeh05BPew
Here's your bookmarked pdf v2.0.1
>>44298164
I don't care for it, but I'm not a little child. I know what will happen.
Actually, Mega is having hiccups right now. Here's Mediafire version.
http://www.mediafire.com/download/jgo7b7hzaf957c9/Star+Dust+CYOA+2.0.1.pdf
>>44298322
Mega is terrible anyway. Use mediafire or dropbox.
How can other ships even compete?
>>44298502
Well for one thing, if you kept everything different but swapped your spinal mounts with three of the railguns, you'd have a better loadout. There's a reason the railguns are more expensive, they're better.
You could also take more than one antimatter cannon. And you could skip the missile launchers and take torpedoes instead. Tesla overchargers are also very short range weapons while most of your other shit isn't, and your ship is big and slow anyway, so they're not a good choice. I think overcharges are more for figthers, frigates and destroyers desu.
>>44297871
>At least I can make myself an immortal shapeshifter
Ladies and gentlemen, the power creep that's killing CYOAs.
The fun lies in using a mixture of luck (in the case of rolls) and cleverness to think up a good build out of a spread of options that have limitations and drawbacks. The entertainment comes from achieving good results with a limited toolbox. If you reach the point where becoming an immortal shapeshifter is considered a bad result, you know that the CYOA in question has stopped including any element of challenge or imagination and has just become a power fantasy.
>>44298486
Here's one of my NPC builds.
I wouldn't say this is 100% accurate (as I have to abide by CYOA constraints), but this at least gives an idea of what I'm goin' for, for these guys.
Now to get some sleep.
>>44298565
>fun policeI completely agree with you.
>>44297841
I haven't actually done this before.
>>44298560
*teleports behind your ship
*charges triple PBC and Particle Blasters
"Nothing personnel.... kid....."
I wanted to make the most balanced loadout possible. PBCs are powerful weapons, but they're not as unwieldy as AMC (and mind you, I made a build with as many AMCs as possible once or twice). That's why they're in the spinal mounts, to alpha-strike battleships while charging forward. Railguns are in the broadside slots because they already have shitty tracking, and with battleship's bad mobility (I maxed it out with upgrades, but still) would only hit big ships. This way I can also hope to hit slow cruisers. I chose missiles instead of torps because they're pretty universal. You can launch heavy missiles, you can launch cluster missiles. Chemical missiles, EMP missiles, anti-missile missiles, the list goes on. Besides, I already have a shitton of anti-battleship weapons, and missiles are ideal against medium targets. Teslas are for close-range engagements with speedy ships, along with LLCs and Flaks and small missiles.
But yeah, it's sort of a dream build. I'm going back to making NPC builds like this one >>44298581, all with a cool photoshopped layout and stuff.
>>44298560
If you look at the stats the railgun implies it has lower dps, due to abysmal fire rate. Though the improved range could be really good for a spinal mount, due to those weapons naturally being pointed towards any target you a heading towards, and the range letting you get your attacks in earlier. However that's much less useful in a protracted engagement or in one where you are on the defense and are not likely to get to start combat pointed towards your opponent.
>>44298581
SDA, do you have a .psd file for this build? It'd be easier to copy your layot than to make it from scratch.
>>44298589
I fucked up the rolling
Got 5 - 1 - 5. That's easily too much. I could make one armor for myself, with all the enchantments.
But that's boring.
Did you know google can roll for you? It can also flip a coin
>Full plate
>Robes
>Collar
Not for fetishshit reasons, but because the enchantments work when out of your armor
>Living
There's something gross about that "when they become damp", but I can't put my finger on it
>Eternal
>Regenerative
>Resistance
>Defense
>Solar power
>Ley lines
>Password
For defense against angry people. You never know.
So I can make unbreakable powerarmor that heals it's user, can only be destroyed if every last bit is melted, that makes the user unaging, more magically powerful and protected against sword and spell even when outside the armor.
Rolled 1, 1, 1 = 3 (3d6)
Rolling
>>44298704
goddamnit.
-latex, youth, transformation.
-Make a shitload of those and wear them everywhere.
-???
-profit
>>44298704
this had a 1 in 216 chance of happening. Of course it happened.
>>44298774
Every possible 3d6 roll has a 1 in 216 chance of happening.
Also that's nothing, try some of the rolls in quests where it actually matters and people roll 1 1 1 on a 3d20.
>>44298791
Yes, but this was my first roll ever. I have never used the dice feature on /tg/ before i think.
I might have once, but then it's still only my second.
>>44298502
>Year 4XXX AD
>Still using battleships, the ship equivalent of using cavalry against machine guns
>Laughing admirals.webm
Carriers were the deciding factor of every major WW2 naval battle. The bombing of Pearl Harbor, carried out by none other than a carrier strike group, did not affect the USN in any significant capacity, since the IJN specifically targeted their battleships, while their CVs were unscathed. The Yamato class battleships, the biggest and baddest of them all, were sunk with very little effort by USN carriers, while having not sunk a single ship on their part. Even after the war, the mighty Iowa, even when modernized with Tomahawk missiles and modern radar based fire control systems, did absolutely nothing but mine clearing and shore bombardment, a task that's already being passed down to destroyers by the introduction of the Zumwalt class DDs.
TL;DR: Battleshits are useless, carrier strike group pride world wide.
>>44298774
That's what happens when you roll.
You have to take the sweet with the sour
>>44298812
>WW2
>naval
Nice example, m8. Remind me, what's the speed of laser beam compared to the speed of the fighter?
>>44298828
>>44298812
And missile pods, and flaks, and brawler drones, etc.
>>44298804
You can only do better
>>44298812
That's because our anti-air is shit. I doubt railguns and lasers are going to be kind to the "lol i shoot a missile from my fighter jet" tactic that seems to be so popular these days.
Battleships also have the advantage of actually being interesting.
>>44298828
Tell me laddy, how's your laser beam fired from a single ship that's going to be detected first and foremost by smaller, stealthier crafts hold up when dozens of drones and fighters each possessing munitions capable of hitting a vital part of your ship and instantly causing it to implode? No health bars in real life buddy, get hit in your engine room or your ammo rack by a single torpedo bomber out of dozens of others going at you at once, and your expensive flagship's gonna go kaboom, when all the carrier's losing is a few drones and fighters.
>>44298853
You mean, stuff that carriers have more of anyways?
>>44298908
Not even CIWS on the Nimitz can reliably intercept Russian anti-carrier missiles if their missile cruisers get in range. This is where scouting with your planes and destroyers come in play, so all your potential threats are identified and eliminated before they become a problem. And even in stardust, all those fancy laser weapons and railguns are said to have shit tracking anyways, they'd not be able to hit a DD reliably, and certainly not a drone. Even in the case of BBs being successful, like Bismarck sinking Hood, Bismarck had to be sailed back to port for repairs. By being in range to hit the enemy, they'd be in range to hit you back too.
>>44298985
Good luck hitting me through my 25/25 armor from indestructibilium alloys and 24/25 eternium-particle shields. Besides, dozens drones is just dozens shots from laser cannons. And I'm pretty sure they can hit hundreds of targets while those drones are moving in.Besides, battleship are extensively used by all sides of the conflict in Star Dust, and it means they are effective. Your headcanon is one thing, and the established universe is another. And bringing RL naval tech into an autistic space opera universe is just bad taste.
>>44298985
>>44299016
>>44298581
>>44298502
Check out this dank carrier
Citizen
940 mil
Diplomacy, Mercantile, adv combat training, adv piloting
The Hellraiser, The Demigod
PRIMARY SHIP
"Asmodai" Carrier
POWER:
Anti-Matter Core, Nuclear Fission
SHIELDING:
Aegis Shielding
COMMAND MODS:
BH Command VR
MI520 "Visage"
HULLMODS:
Teleport Jammer, Shield Extender, Hanger Bay X2, Nano Armour Coating
WEAPON SYSTEMS
SPINAL: Ragefire Railgun
BROADSIDE: Ragefire Railgun X8
POINT DEFENCE: Flak Cannon X8
DRONES:
10 Combat Drones with Auto Cannons
5 Brawler Drones with Spinal Mana Blaster
3 Hull Repair Drones
INDUSTRIAL MODULES:
Composition Scanner, Tractor Beam
E-WAR:
Warp Jammer, Honey pot Module, MITM module
ROOMS:
Crew Quarters Upgrade, Officers Quarters, Captain's Quarters, Advanced Infirmary, Standard Mess Hall+Tavern, Lounge+rec+obs, Laboratory, Cargo Space+Engineering Bay, Hypercomms Room+Digital Security Room, Advanced Arsenal, Training Room, Holding Cells, Secure Vault, Stasis Cell, Cryosleep Chambers, Teleporting Platform
CREW:
Co-Pilots: "Hailey"
Engineers: Troy Hall, Amy mccartney
Doctors: Kelly Moss, Bethany Parks, Tina Wei
Gunners: "Comet"
Combat/Security: Rooks King, Scot Shephard, Patch Newton, Pierre Mikisugi, Gregorz Gregzrolka
Cyber Security: "Slash Singer"
Scientsits: Lauren L. Lazuli, Sarah Escher
Chefs & Bartenders: Jorgen Masterson, Hal
Other: 1000 Civilian Workers. 500 Mercs, 100 researchers
SECONDARY SHIPS-59 mi (total 177)
3X Viper Class Frigate
Fuel Cells
Shield:Advanced Shielding
Pilot: Lieutenant
Weapons: Spinal Artillery Cannon X1
Broadside Autocannon X6
PD Autocannon X2
Shield Drone
TOTAL:938 mio
>>44298985
>ou mean, stuff that carriers have more of anyways?
Doesn't matter that the carriers have more of it, because flaks don't do shit against things like railguns and antimatter cannons.
All the battleship needs is enough PD to protect from torpedoes that the carrier's bombers launch and it's over.
>>44298985
Lasers might have shit tracking in stardust, but stardust is a setting with healthbars. In real life their tracking will end up far better than any missile, and chances are those dozens of torpedo bombers are going to be shot down by dozens of lasers coming from the battleship and its supporting fleet.
>>44299084
Oh, so you think I'm going to park my carrier next to your battleship, sit still in range of your weapons, and let you blast me with your broadside, and when you're content with that, move your bow over towards me, in range of your antimatter cannon, and let you take a potshot at me?
Good luck, I'm behind 1,000 drones, fighters, DDs and CLs, all of which will always make sure any threat is detected before they detect their flagship. Get too close and I'll Herald teleport away. Enjoy getting withered to death by torpedo bombers and my lesser ships while I sustain zero damage.
>>44299134
>>44299084
Bruh.
I haven't seen this level of 'muh special snowflake can't be touched too good for you' since the chatboards on an anime streaming website.
>>44299134
Good luck with that m8, my battleship can teleport past your drones right up next to you :^)
But seriously. Unless you loaded up on bomber drones you are no threat to a battleship. Your 20 bombers are the only thing you have, and that's if you only took bombers.
And if you did load up on bombers? Yeah, then you're only good for fighting battleships. Good luck with everything else.
>>44299134
>my lesser ships
Wow, it's almost like an entire fleet would win against a single battleship. Everybody is so fucking shocked.
>>44299134
I made a carrier build. Carriers don't have enough offensive capabilities to warrant any sort of "carrier best girl" bullshit.
It's true they're basically impenetrable and the build i made basically has a carrier that can take a head-on antimatter blast from a dreadnought tier ship without flinching. Not to mention the ability to teleport the fuck away, and generally be invisible thanks to active cloaking. But a carriers offensive capabilities stem from the drones, and those can be shot down with enough point defense.
>>44297540
Little girl catgirl
Enjoy life as some rich weebs plaything.
>>44299134
Mmm, those Virginia classes out front make my dick rock hard.
>>44299227
> a carrier that can take a head-on antimatter blast
No it can't. Nothing can, thats the point.
>>44299312
>no one ship was supposed to have shields that are literally off the charts though
No one can. They're capped at 25.
>>44299296
>>44299227
If you had your carrier sit through the 5 minute charge time on the AMC's firing cycle just to get blasted then it was a massive pilot error to begin with.
>>44299134
"nuh uh I hide behind my force field but I can kill you easily" are the worst role players
I saw that. I know your sins.
>>44299338
I don't care if you say the shield was at 200/25 (which it wasn't, 25 is max), it still isn't surviving that AMC.
>>44299330
>>44299328
>>44299296
I was talking about the 1.0.1 version.
with this dlc
Anyone have the Fate / Stay Night CYOA?
>>44299371
>>44299368
I had frigate extremely high shields added t carrier extremely high shields.
Anti matter blasts are not ultimate doomsday devices.
They are inanely powerful. But they're not the deathstar.
>>44299352
AMCs are also off the charts, though. That's the problem.
>>44299388
It doesn't matter how inane your shields or your posts are. You aren't surviving and AMC shot.
>>44299388
Anon... High shields + high shields /=/ infinite shields.
>>44299405
>>44299390
The antimatter canon has the highest damage and is unsurvivable for anything of thesame tier, and pretty much unsurvivable for anything in upper tiers.
But it was not intended to be a completely trump-all "win the game" card. And not only because of the long chargetime.
Ask SDA if you don't believe me.
>>44299433
anon, super high damage =/= infinite damage
>>44299188
It's not even me, the original poster.
Come on, people, I just wanted to make the hottest ship possible. Of course it's going to get swarmed by well-balanced fleets, but come now, we're talking Space Battleship Yamato level of space opera protagonists, not LoGH 9999999 vs 9999999 ship battles.
>>44299451
>But it was not intended to be a completely trump-all "win the game" card.
Yes it is. That's why it has that retardedly long and obvious charge time, the huge price, the battleship or bigger ship limitation, and the spinal mount only limitation.
>>44299371
Oh, it's really old. I gotta remake that and other stat charts sometime.
>>44299451
>>44299477
Honestly, AMC can totally kill any mid-tier (read, typical Federation patrol) battleship, but high-end stuff will survive, although it's surely going to be crippled. That's what SDA said at least.
And you'll probably only hit battleships+ targets with it, as cruisers can easily evade it.
>>44299502
The entire point of the AMC is that it kills anything it hits well. Otherwise it's completely useless.
So, are Heralds cyborgs? Ancient Controllers who fused with their ship? Ayylmaos? I don't follow Star Dust questsorry, SDA,
>>44299519
No, otherwise anything slower than a Destroyer is completely useless because it'll just eat an AMC shot and that will be that.
>>44299519
KV-2 tactics, wooo!
>>44299519
>it's either OHK or completely useless
Look at this teenage maximalist and laugh.
>>44299535
No, that's why the charge time of the AMC is 5 minutes and obvious. That's the balancing factor.
Both Battleships and Carriers are useless -poi
None of them can do jack shit without a proper Destroyer escort-poi
And they're such a resource drain no one in their sane mind would use it on any situation short full scale fleet combat-poi
Destroyers are much more flexible and useful-poi
>>44299373
It's in the dropbox.
>>44299557
So what you're essentially saying is that dreadnaughts are useless?
>>44299557
MY GOD, we have SDA's take on this already >>44299502. You can use your interpretation as your personal headcanon, but stop making it the official setting fact.
>>44299502
If it can't take out a high end battleship, then it's literally the worst gun in the game and I need to rethink my build. It's ridiculously expensive, hard to aim, incredibly obvious, energy intensive, and so slow to charge that any battle you find yourself in is likely to be over by the time it's ready.
>>44299579
>That's what SDA said at least.
That's not how that works at all. Saying "he totally said this" isn't exactly proof.
>My shields can block your gun!
>Nuh-uh, my gun can blow up you and your shields!
>Nuh-uh!
>Yuh-huh!
>>44299535
Again: 5 minute charge up time, 10 minute cooldown, then another 5 minute charge up time.
If a ship isn't taking evasive maneuvers to evade or take out the ship carrying the AMC and manages to get hit after a 15 minute cycle time (with a weapon that travels in a straight line, the ship housing the cannon has to face the target the whole time or it wont hit anything) then they really had no chance in space.
Unless FTL/Warp takes awhile to spool up, or you can't disable the AMC/it's ship before it fires I dunno.
>>44299591
Maybe that's why it's mostly used to bombard planets and slow ships, right?Do whatever you want, anon, it's your world.
>>44299579
Hey, I can do it too, look:
SDA said that nothing can survive and AMC shot.
Is it a paradox? How can it be both at the same time?
>>44299560
DESU cruisers are the best ship, and always were.
>>44299607
SDA said that CYOA was a mistake. Here, I have proof.
>>44299519
It's well worth it so long as it does something like 50 damage. Because at that point the only way to survive is to have either a dreadnought with good shields, or something else really powerful and bulwark.
We had this discussion back when the description said "it can blow holes in planets"because it was inspired by WMG from SB Yamato. And it was, what, 3 years ago?I'm really bad with years, so maybe it was 2.Stop, please.
>>44299628
No it's not, because a regular weapon in the same slot would have done thousands of damage by the time it fires.
The only way the AMC is worth it is if it doesn't follow regular damage rules.
Which it doesn't, that's the entire point of its damage indicator.
>>44299607
>Hey, I can do it too, look:
>SDA said that nothing can survive and AMC shot.
>Is it a paradox? How can it be both at the same time?
To be honest that's entirely possible.
The entire thread and SDA called me a fucking sperglord last year for daring to ask why carriers couldn't be dreadnoughts.
And now we have "the mothership".
People can change their opinions and that's alright.
>>44299655
Damage was said to not work that way.
Sufficiently high shields can block damage completely and not be worn down. there are not startrek shields
>>44299689
>Damage was said to not work that way.
>Sufficiently high shields can block damage completely and not be worn down. there are not startrek shields
Well yeah, that's why the AMC doesn't do "damage", it just obliterates whatever it hits.
This is ignoring how retarded it is to create a situation where permanent invulnerability is possible which no game designer in their right mind would do.
>>44299689
>Sufficiently high shields can block damage completely and not be worn down.
Their description contradicts this, it says they need to be recharged if hit instead of repaired like armor.
Destroyer best ship.
>sneaks up behind your back
>all your shields are belong to tesla overchargers
>suddenly torpedoes
>if that doesn't work use elusive and ridiculous fighter-like 23/25 speed to turn 360 degrees and walk away
Nothing personnel..... kid
Also 24 hangar slots seems ridiculous to have on a destroyer, but I'll take it.
>>44299607
This anon gets it. Cruisers are big enough to dish out and take damage, but small enough to run like a little bitch if you find yourself outmatched. They also don't attract too much attention. Truly the best ship.
>>44299813
truly the most beta ship
>>44299802
Well that is their niche. Destroyers are meant to be the wolves, they hunt alone or in small groups and use their speed and intelligent strikes to take down larger ships. Battleships and Carriers, but especially Carriers, are meant to be completely fucked against a good Destroyer or Destroyer squad.
>>44299867
Battleships and carriers both tend to be dogshit without a capable support fleet anyway. They aren't meant to go it alone.
>>44299723
It's not permanent invulnerability. It could be worn down.
Just not with one shot.
Don't forget that the herald tier things are supposed to be night invincible anyway. And this is the largest ship-class of the herald tier, AND supported by another ship with heraldic technology.
And it's a completely valid point in game design to not make things out of paper.
Otherwise a battle is immediately decided once the strength of the other fleet is known.
That was something that was supposed to be avoided as far as i remember so people can't make "ultimate best i conquer everything builds" but will actually have to imagine strategies and adventures.
>>44299746
aegis:
>this anti-matter powered shield will neutralize anything that tries to penetrate it. it will take very potent weaponry to crack.
heraldic:
>Just as powerful as aegis shielding, however even more powerful, when on systems with mana energy cores
add this to the fact that >>44299371
>a carrier basic shielding will deflect almost everything a frigate can mount, because it's an equivalent to the frigates heraldic shielding.
The recharging is done by the mana core.
so yes, most smaller guns get deflected, which is precisely the reason why one can't just equip a carrier with a shitton of tiny laser drones and kill a battleship. You need a minimal amount of DPS done to actually decharge the shields enough for them not to recharge immediately.
In other words your DPS output needs to be higher than the shield recharge rate of the enemy. And since the heraldic mana core and shields offer the best energy supply t the best shields and have a combo-bonus, it's gonna e pretty tough to wear it down.
Okay, so question. Basically, why drones and not fighters? I can see cost is an issue, but is complexity also a part of it? Because the bomber drone doesn't look like it would fight near as well as even the low-tier fighters and it can't pack near the punch. The S92-TMC's base chassis is cheaper than the bomber drone, but then you have to get into reactors and weapon systems and shit. Brawler drones carry a lot less weaponry, but you also get a free weapon, so you don't have to buy it, and takes half the hangar space.
u w0t m8
>>44299927
>Don't forget that the herald tier things are supposed to be night invincible anyway
No they're not. They're supposed to be the elite, which is marginally better but a lot more expensive than the standard. SDA even talked about this concept in the previous thread.
>And it's a completely valid point in game design to not make things out of paper.
Yes, that's true. But you're arguing that things are impossible to wear down.
I have a feeling that you just don't like the thought of a trump card existing. But guess what, the entire point of the AMC is that it trumps turtle builds. That's the only thing it does, it's useless in other applications.
>>44299935
Drones are basically budget fighters. They take care of most strike craft duties while the human pilots are reserved for priority tasks.
>>44299746
>>44299723
It IS however possible to wear it down:
If you have small enough ships that can effectively evade and target the carriers drones, you can essentially concentrate the firepower on the carrier once you have fought off the drones and thus disabled the carrier's offensive abilities.
This would run into the problem of the carrier cloaking and teleporting away, and to counter this you would need to actively pursue it and try to get in another shot with the AMC before the chields have completely recharged or you would have to somehow board the carrier and fight your way to the command center to stop it from jumping away.
In other words: If someone does NOT want a confrontation, it's gonna be pretty tough to still kill them.
Which is a great idea for a system that is not exclusively space combat focused.
Because remember, that by making the carrier night impenetrable i lost all the fancy offensive capabilities it could have had, because i spend literally all the money on defense.
I called it the "cozy build" for a reason.
It will not be able to stay anywhere where people don't want it to be, because it can't really defend itself, but it won't just be blown to smithereens if someone with high attack power attacks it.
>>44299935
No pilots you have to house/feed/pay, and no bitching if they get killed.
>>44299967
>elite
The heralds themselves are stuff of legend and actually acquiring one of their ships with energy tech you can't even reverse engineer is a feat in itself. They're pretty far out.
>I have a feeling that you just don't like the thought of a trump card existing. But guess what, the entire point of the AMC is that it trumps turtle builds. That's the only thing it does, it's useless in other applications.
Yes because trump cards inherently make a system bad. It's selecting a single thing that you absolutely need to have otherwise you'll be inherently inferior. Which is the opposite of what SDA was going for.
It's the specific purpose of the SD CYOA to make ALL SORTS OF BUILDS viable.
If there was a trump card in one, it would be possible to just "win" the CYOA which defeats the purpose of having a CYOA.
>>44299952
You can't add hull mods to dreadnoughts
>>44300031
B-but my 10 AMC!
>>44299967
And no, amc-s are pretty useful if you actually want to attack say a dreadnought. OR an offensive focused carrier. OR other battleships. OR space stations. OR anything not specifically built to disengage from combat, turtle in and flee.
>>44299982
A 25 shield and 25 armor ship can be destroyed in one hit. This wouldn't necessarily even be just by an antimatter cannon, for example ramming into an asteroid would do the same thing.
The shields aren't unpiercable until they get hit X times. Such an unintuitive fact would be present in their description. Instead we have a description that says that a shield value of 25 is equivalent to an armor value of 25, which shows us that there isn't some kind of magic number of hits they need to take before they can fall.
If shields get hit by something that overwhelms them in one hit, then they're going down in one hit, period.
>>44300019
>Yes because trump cards inherently make a system bad.
No, they inherently make a system good when used properly, as long as they're balanced against other trump cards. Which the AMC for example is, because it's so extremely unwieldy that it's useless in most situations.
You yourself are arguing that maxing out shields is a trump card in itself. This is an example of why the system is better with the AMC working the way it does. If the AMC didn't trump your "impenetrable" shields then there wouldn't be any point for anyone to take any other kind of build. Everyone would just max out shields and nobody would be able to ever hurt anyone. Which is dumb and obviously against the fluff.
>>44300012
I feel like there's usually more bitching when the pilots are alive than when they're dead.
>>44300019
Nah mate. It's a trump card against turtles and space stations. Nothing else. Teleportation (which you have), destroyer kill teams, massed cruisers, destroying the AMC before it can strike and putting a cheaper ship between yourself and the cannon are some of many ways to counter it.
>>44300055
>shield 25
I'm still talking about the 1.0.1 version which you people seem to conveniently ignore.
>Which the AMC for example is, because it's so extremely unwieldy that it's useless in most situations.
It is absolutely not uselsss. Most special powers in ships have a recharge time that's comparable or longer to the amc-s
I'm arguing that maxing out shields AND having transfer shield strength, AND building your entire build around defense will be DIFFICULT to just obliterate with your amc trump card.
The same goes for the amc. A ship built entirely around having offensive power will be extremely DIFFICULT to defend against. but not impossible.
Saying that the ONLY WAY one could do x-y (obliterate something or defend against something) goes against the very idea of CYOAs, which is why i am very happy that SDA did not do that.
And again, you seem to be ignoring the latter part of my post.
NO people would not just max out their shields, because then they would basically have NO defensive or offensive capabilities and could not defend a territory. This is all exactly as it should be.
>>44300087
>Nah mate. It's a trump card against turtles and space stations.
That's simply wrong. That would completely invalidate turtle builds.
>>44300087
>>44300055
Besides if we want to get really sperged out: you have an antimatter reactor in your own ship. If you couldn't defend against antimatter because it obliterates everything no matter what, you could not make a reactor for it.
How independent and pirate factions keep their battleships, carriers and dreadnoughts? It seems to me that for those the maintenance cost is the biggest enemy, not other vessels. Federation has a strong economy (an entire nation) behind it to bank it, though.
SDA, you still wanting someone to comb through and find all the small spelling errors and all that? I vaguely remember you saying something to that effect.
>>44300139
>I'm arguing that maxing out shields AND having transfer shield strength, AND building your entire build around defense will be DIFFICULT to just obliterate with your amc trump card.
Well at this point all we can do is agree to disagree. I still think your build is probably somewhere on the order of hundreds of times too weak defensively to take a direct AMC hit and survive.
>The same goes for the amc. A ship built entirely around having offensive power will be extremely DIFFICULT to defend against. but not impossible.
See, this is what you're not getting. Yes, a *ship* built for offense is going to be difficult to defend against, but not impossible. Why? It's difficult to defend against because it can kill you in a single hit, no save, if you let it get away with it. It's not impossible to defend against because you can do countless things to prevent it from firing and hitting you with its impossible-to-survive weapon, as the weapon has a huge weakness in how long it has to charge and how difficult it is to aim.
Do you see the difference? You're saying that a *ship* should be possible to defend against, which is absolutely true. That doesn't mean that the AMC needs to be survivable if you let it hit you, because you had hundreds of chances to prevent it from hitting you. That's why it's balanced, and why it would be useless if it wasn't an autokill.
>>44300139
It would invalidate turtle builds dumb enough to rely solely on turtling and nothing but turtling. Clever use of blink would make your ship able to deal with AMCs anyway.
>>44300139
>Besides if we want to get really sperged out: you have an antimatter reactor in your own ship. If you couldn't defend against antimatter because it obliterates everything no matter what, you could not make a reactor for it.
It takes a, what, 70 million credit device to be able to handle reactor scale amounts of antimatter, which is somewhere around micro- or milligrams at a time. I don't think that's comparable to a big ass cannon.
>>44300165
its stated the pirates have their own sizable shipyards and mining operations
>>44300165
The pirate factions are more like space pirates from Metroid than regular pirates. They're entire nations that happen to do a lot of piracy.
>>44299373
I do.
>>44300165
There isn't anything stated about maintenance being so difficult. Considering you can have ore processing, a factory, engineering, a laboratory, and mining and repair drones. It seems that a ship should be able to be self sustaining. Besides the fact that the pirates are themselves large factions holding a lot of space where they could produce such things as shown on the map.
>>44300201
Hell there were real peoples like the Phoenicians who had piracy as an official part of their government and way of life, instead of it being something for outlaws. And when you get right down to it, Vikings did something similar. And then, more recently, you have cities like Tortuga and Port-au-Prince that were essentially small pirate nations.
>>44300171
>the only way you can defend against it is to prevent it from hitting you
That's like saying that the only way you can destroy that defensive build is to board the carrier and disable it from the inside. Which would be pretty fucking stupid.
Things invalidating certain strategies are just not fit to be a part of a CYOA. Because it's a CYOA. And remember that SDA specifically set out to NOT make a player versus player CYOA, so actually HAVING to enter conflict against another player even if you don't want to, is just nuts.
You're saying that it's balanced to have something that obliterates everything and nothing that can withstand everything.
You're trying to shift the focus of the CYOA to combat.
It should be optional to enter battle if you don't want to and have literally done everything permitted to do so.
>>44300176
That clever use of blink would make the blink system overpowered if it could be used in such a way. Because in that case blink would be impossible to counter.
>>44300185
And in my interpretation it would take about 200 million credits to make a system that can defend against a large batch of antimatter without controlling it.
You in your reactor are not just trying to not get killed, you're trying to micromanage and manipulate antimatter precisely on the atomic level.
You can make a wall that will withstand a direct nuclear blast for a couple million dollars, but to build a nuclear reactor you'd also need several million dollars.
>>44300260
>Things invalidating certain strategies are just not fit to be a part of a CYOA.
Why not? This is the dumbest thing I've heard all thread.
Absolutely every strategy should have something that invalidates it.
>>44300271
No strategy should have anything that completely invalidates it is what i meant.
The most important thing (that i lieft out accidentally) being COMPLETELY.
There have to be things to counter every strategy, but if something completely invalidates a strategy it's not really a CYOA any more, it's a game of tic tac toe. = solvable.
>>44300260
Dude blink is fine as it is because it can only be used once every five minutes, it's not like you can use it to dodge everything all the time.
>>44300260
>And in my interpretation it would take about 200 million credits to make a system that can defend against a large batch of antimatter without controlling it.
Well in my interpretation it's completely unfeasible to create such a device, because the only reason why the reactor itself works in the first place is because it's handling minute amounts of completely stable antimatter in a completely controlled environment.
A cannon shooting a large batch of unstable antimatter at you at massive speed is completely incomparable to that.
>>44300283
blink catapults you far out of range and you can basically instantly enter hyperspace after it and just completely and with the press of a button evade all combat. Which would be too overpowered, so i don't think that it can immediately be used. the recharge time should be a charge time instead in which case it's precisely NOT a valid defence against an all obliterating weapon.
>>44300260
How would blink be impossible to counter? Once you dodge the shot, that's 5 minutes before you can teleport again. It's good for countering AMCs, but everything else is able to shoot you several times within those 5 minutes.
>>44300282
>No strategy should have anything that completely invalidates it is what i meant.
Yes it should. Absolutely every strategy should have something that completely invalidates it. That's why you're not supposed to put all your eggs in one basket.
For example, the AMC strategy has hundreds of ways to completely invalidate it.
>>44300307
Like another AMC on two ships at once.
>>44300286
>Well in my interpretation it's completely unfeasible to create such a device,
in my interpretation it's completely impossible to create something that can defend against an atomic blast
>because the only reason why the reactor itself works in the first place is because it's handling minute amounts of completely stable antimatter in a completely controlled environment.
because the only reason the nuclear reactor works is because it's handling minute amounts of not chainreactioning radioactive material in a completely controlled environment
>A cannon shooting a large batch of unstable antimatter at you at massive speed is completely incomparable to that.
>a bomb exploding a large batch of supermassive chain reacting radioactive matter at you at massive speed is incomparable to that.
>>44300301
Once again, blink doesn't just move you a bit to the side, it moves you out of range and out of combat so you can just enter warpspeed and get away. It it can be activated at ANY time it is thus overpowered.
If it can only be activated after initially CHARGING for 5 minutes it's not a valid defense against an AMC
>>44300307
>>44300317
>amc
>how to counter it?
>uuuh more amc
If there is no way to survive an amc shot it's not balanced. That's it. No amount of "but but long cooldown" changes that.
With the AMC being absolutely incounterable the only defense against it would be OFFENSE.
And that basically completely and utterly invalidates all defensive builds. So no, that is not balanced.
Once again StarDust is not supposed to be a "combat is the only solution" thing.
>>44300300
Read the CYOA, it's a cooldown. If it didn't work that way smaller ships wouldn't stand a chance against bigger ships.
Don't bring outdated versions and your own headcanon into this when it's explicitly stated to work a certain way.
>>44300301
>Range: Very Long
>a far distance
If the range is long enough, which it sounds like it is, the attacking ship won't be able to catch up with the blinking ship before the cooldown is complete.
>>44300317
More like flying away, flying out of the firing arc, counterattacking the ship while it's charging for a long ass time, using e-war to prevent the charge from happening, misdirecting them so they fire at someone else other than you, various cloak and dagger shit that doesn't even touch on weapons and shields in the first place, etc. etc.
>>44300330
Well yeah, lots of things can survive nuclear blasts by not being directly in the blast itself, or shielded by large amounts of dirt. That doesn't mean that they can survive a direct hit.
So if you want to fly your ship behind an asteroid with precise timing so the AMC shot is blocked by the asteroid, then that's a valid strategy. So nice that you came up with it I guess. Now we can agree that the instakill AMC is valid.
>>44300367
But two AMCs is by far the easiest and most assured way to solve the problem. We're playing fleet-level value/counter-value strikes. Why risk a chance of failure on a strategic-level target when you can have assured victory?
>>44300362
>If there is no way to survive an amc shot it's not balanced.
There's plenty of ways to survive an AMC shot. They all amount to not getting hit. There's no way to survive getting hit however. But that's fine and balanced because it's very easy to not get hit by it if you try.
>With the AMC being absolutely incounterable the only defense against it would be OFFENSE.
Well yeah.
Assuming the AMC is impossible to survive if you get hit. A ship that spent 1000m credits on being a good battleship versus a ship that spent 1000m credits on being a good battleship with an AMC.
Which one wins? Probably the first one, because its offense is better and it can get more damage done while the second one is busy charging its cannon.
>And that basically completely and utterly invalidates all defensive builds.
No, it only completely and utterly invalidates the builds that *only* rely on soaking up every hit that gets sent their way. Those aren't "defensive" builds, they are suicide builds. Every rational defensive build is going to have ways to escape, evade, or prevent the AMC from charging up.
>Once again StarDust is not supposed to be a "combat is the only solution" thing.
Well yeah, but this is besides the point. An exclusively defensive build as a build exclusively geared for combat.
Anyone have the stardust romance one?
In case anyone has the old page 1 of Monster Hunter, would they mind posting it?
There's an effect that I'd like to replicate.
>>44300427
No, two AMCs is exactly the same as one in a 1v1 engagement, since they charge at the same speed and have the same result as one.
>>44300446
Here ya go.
>>44300363
>Read the CYOA, it's a cooldown.
I know it says it's a coooldown, but that doesn't make any sense because then it's compeltely imbalanced in favor of herald ships.
>>44300367
There are things that can withstand a direct nuclear blast without tons of dirt. few meters of heat shielding, reinforced carbon nanofibre, some meters of steel concrete, and another meter of steel, some lead plus shock dampening
And that would survive a nuclear blast without dirt.
It's possible to defend against shit like that and that's one of the reasons why people would employ bunker busters before trying a direct nuclear attack on a bunker.
>>44300432
>There's no way to survive getting hit however. But that's fine and balanced because it's very easy to not get hit by it if you try.
>it's easy to survive if you do things my way and enter combat
how about no.
>Assuming the AMC is impossible to survive if you get hit. A ship that spent 1000m credits on being a good battleship versus a ship that spent 1000m credits on being a good battleship with an AMC.
Yeah but with your idea of unsurvivable AMC blasts, someone that spent 800m credits on shielding and being able to withstand shit could easily be killed by someone that spend 150m credits on the cheapest fucking hull with a reactor and an AMC.
And that means that the system would inherently favor aggressive builds.
Which is shit, and not what SDA was going for.
>>44300481
Thanks.
>>44300449
Awoo, my brother.
>>44300488
>few meters of heat shielding, reinforced carbon nanofibre, some meters of steel concrete, and another meter of steel
No it wouldn't. That would survive an overhead airburst. It wouldn't survive if the bomb was sitting on top of it directly while going off.
If that's your answer, then I'll point you to all the times people have said that you can just evade the AMC shot, since you're arguing in the same vein here.
>>it's easy to survive if you do things my way and enter combathow about no.
Sure. You don't need to enter combat. You can also leave combat or make sure that combat doesn't start.
>Yeah but with your idea of unsurvivable AMC blasts, someone that spent 800m credits on shielding and being able to withstand shit could easily be killed by someone that spend 150m credits on the cheapest fucking hull with a reactor and an AMC.
Yes, this is true. In a fight between an AMC and nothing else versus a bunch of shielding and nothing else, the AMC is going to win.
>And that means that the system would inherently favor aggressive builds.
No, this isn't true. That means that the system inherently favors well rounded builds.
You're focusing on only the aggressive approach to get around an AMC, even though the suggestions you've been given have mostly been non-aggressive ones. Why?
>>44300458
Its not a 1v1 engagement. The point is to bring more AMCs than your foe. If a ship is big enough to have an AMC it is also big enough to almost certainly be unable to avoid an AMC. Its simple application of nuclear deterrence theory.
The stalemate can really only be broken with an effective ABM-like system that would force the evolution of MIRV-like applications.
In a fleet-like setting it can also be compared to the ship-building considerations of the USN and fleet structure at a doctrinal level dating to the cold-war. Soviet concentration of overwhelming force in single vessels compared to a distribution of overwhelming assets over a larger number of vessels to reduce risk of tactical and strategic annihilation to act in concert. In this case heavy ASM's taking the role of ACMs. This is however extremely simplified as there are effective counters to ASMs but they favour a distributed approach even further due to the munition and redundancy of 3 to 1 interception launches, sensor coverage, airborne elements, and munition limits.
>>44300488
Unfortunately all considerations point towards aggressive action being almost always the preferable action in a combined arms or nuclear environment.
>>44300488
>that doesn't make any sense because then it's compeltely imbalanced in favor of herald ships.
Again, read the CYOA. Any ship can take any command mod.
>>44300502
Thank you!
And oh wow, the intro certainly changed. It's a lot more grimdark "survival of the fittest" versus the "let's go kill some monsters with mythology-tier powers"
I personally prefer the images being behind the lines under the "skills", and not the other way around line in the later versions.
I started watching RWBY again thanks to this CYOA, and I must say that I really like Neptune's weapon.
>>44300564
Large scale confrontations where a lot of battleships appear on both sides likely would look that way, yes.
I don't think most people whoeffectuatthe stardust CYOA think about that sort of thing though. It is a good argument for having battleships with multiple AMCs, maybe even four of them.
>>44300573
Well, while I do prefer the 'you're a hunter go hunt some stuff in your world' over 'asshole god gives you powers!', the danger is really the same. The third page still has the yearly murder-rape festival everyone has to take part in.
>>44300539
no, that would survive the pressure and heat wave of the blast at ground zero
http://sc-ems.com/ems/blastICT/blastICT.htm
As an example the hoover dam may get cracks if a nuclear device exploded directly on the side of it, but it would only be destroyed if the device was inside of it.
>Sure. You don't need to enter combat. You can also leave combat or make sure that combat doesn't start.
That doesn't work that way. If the umbra thing isn't changed and the 5 minutes is just the cooldown, it would be waaaayy overpowered, because that would put YOU in an impossible position because no matter how hard you try to catch me i can always just jump the fuck away and enter warp.
>In a fight between an AMC and nothing else versus a bunch of shielding and nothing else, the AMC is going to win.
>so you think that someone spending 150m on offense should be able to kill someone that spent 800m on survivability.
and you think this is balanced?
>suggestions i've been given
The only suggestion given is to hide behind a planet.
any other suggestions were either not possible or agressive.
I don't think that a weapon against which the only defense is either to kill it before it kills you or to run the fuck away, is balanced.
>>44300564
Bringing more AMCs than your foe only works when that foe can't kick the shit out of your AMC ships with their other weapons before you manage to fire. Trying to charge an AMC immediately makes you a priority target for fucking everybody in the battle.
>>44300564
You can get up to 10 navigation with a ship that can carry an AMC, though that does require getting two hull reductions and five afterburners. Though with how the thing works I can't imagine you want low navigation if you have an AMC, because that number is likely to work out to be how fast you can aim the thing, and you likely can't hit anything with a higher navigation than you have.
>>44300564
>Unfortunately all considerations point towards aggressive action being almost always the preferable action in a combined arms or nuclear environment.
That is if the conflict is stationary.
The nice part of this whole cyoa for me was that conflicts here don't have to be stationary.
I can just move my carrier away if smeone doesn't want me there. And i just need enough survivability to do this. But noooo, that's not valid because your AMC is best girl and can kill everything and doesn't afraid of everything.
>>44300569
Then it's completely imbalanced against that command mod. The point is that there should be no system that is completely IMPOSSIBLE to counter.
I shouldn't be able to get away no matter what. and the AMC shouldn't be able to obliterate me no matter what (because a slow moving carrier can't just go hide real quick)
>>44300481
>only females
absolutely horrifying.
>>44298429
Origins
Fairlight
Skills
Advanced Piloting, Advanced Combat, Diplomacy, Mind Link, Mercantile, Mechanics,
Cyber Security, Medical, Nuclear, Ship Weapon Specialization
Titles
The Hellraiser +400m
The Demigod +420m
Contracts
Mining King Steve - Tier 1
All Aboard - Tier 2
Heat - Tier 2
The Acheron Tier 3
Escalation - Tier 3
The Twin Fangs - Tier 3
And The Fire Grows - Tier 4
Search & Rescue Tier 4
Ace - Tier 4
Rogue Drones - Tier 4
This Land - Tier 4
Final Credits: 1,4m
>Carrier
Asmodai (Crimson Lady)
>Energy Subsystems
Anti matter core/ Fission
>Shield Subsystems
Aegis Shielding
>Command Mods
Herald Blink
>Hull Mods
Teleport Jammer, Nano Armour Coating, Vehicle Bay x2
>Ship Weapons
Spinal Weapons - Anti Matter Cannon
Broadside Turret - Heavy Laser Cannon x4 -20m, Tesla Overcharger x2
Point Defence - Missile Launcher x5, Flak Cannon x5
Hangar Space 3
>Drone Hulls
Science Probe x2, Combat Repair Drone x2, Mining Drone x2, Combat Drone x12,
Bomber Drone x4
Railgun x1, Torpedo Silo x1, Missile Pod x1
Vehicles & Mechs
Drop Ship, Submarine, APC x2
Industrial Modules
Mining Harvester, Salvage Harvester, MK3 Frequency lens, Tractor Beam,
Composition Scanner
E- War Modules
MITM Module, Honey Pot Module, Comm Scrambler
Rooms & Compartments
Advanced Infirmary, Captains Quarters, Officer Quarters, Crew Quarters, Standard,
Mess Hall, Tavern, Laboratory, Terraforming Bay, Holding Cells, Teleport Platform,
Lounge, Observatory, Engineering Bay, Factory Wing, Ore Processing Facility,
Advanced Arsenal, Evacuation Room, Hypercomms Room, Digital Security Room,
Hydrophonic Garden, Aquaculture Room, Training Room
Ship Crew
Co-Pilot Hailey, Mikayla Stone
C&S Archangel, Rooks King
Cyber Security Arachne -6m
Chefs & Barters Patricia Cooper, Laurie Parsons
Production Ty Piper
Gunner Comet
Doctors Kelly Moss, Tina Wei
Engineers Amy McCartney, Troy Hal
Scientists Lauren, Sara Escher -3m
Captain -9m
Researchers x1000
Explorers x1000
Industry Workers x500
>>44300627
I think he was being pedantic about the two ships. If you have one with 800m in shields and one with 150m and an AMC there is only one ship there that has any weapons.
>>44300599
What exactly is it?
Some kind of grenade laucnher / assault rifle / electrified trident?
And I love the CYOA, it got me to watch the show.Same with space hobo and Fate/Stay Night.
>>44300624
I can't say which I prefer more.
The new one is all "it's you dumped into a fantasy setting, and you get powers for no real reason". It's *you*, not a character that you play.
The old one is "you are playing a character that has trained all his life to get his powers". I like the old one for the same reason I like battlemage: There's an actual reason for the player having powers plus there are other battlemages/hunters far more powerful.
But it's still not *you*. It has less of the whole "you are the most interesting man in the world" that's so generic and dull.
>>44300624
There were only two pages the first time around.
>>44300641
How are they going to stop you? At the extreme ranges of an AMC and on a battle-ship class hull you'd easily last at least five minutes. Let alone considering that if you're bringing these forces there is likely a fleet of support craft in the battle group dedicated to point-defence and fighter elimination.
The grand majority of casualties would be inflicted in the first five minutes of a fleet battle, then with the large threats of the secondary systems aboard the battleships eliminated, the cruisers and down are free to act with near impunity to rout the enemy. Sincerely the best form of defense in such a scenario would just to have a fleet-wide retreat before they can bring the ACM's to their target.
>>44300620
Yes, multiple AMCs on a ship would effectively act as a MIRV in this scenario. Allows for multiple target annihilation in a shorter span of time and redundant single-target annihilation if the target has a fractional chance of surviving the first shot. There'd likely be a cut-off point for the amount you'd want to have on a hull before it becomes overly-redundant and prohibitive on a fleet scale however.
>>44300723
The promised, mythical third page was always a thing, and I have an older version of such running off of guild points.
>>44300717
My biggest problem with both is and always will be the third page, honestly. I prefer one over the other but it's not a dealbreaker. Only the murder-rape and the three years and your done aspect bothers me.
>>44300712
>Fighters (3)
S97-TRN x3
>Command Mods
Cool Paint Job
FDN Control zrt3
X38 TDNK
>Hull Mods
Overdrive Afterburner x5, Point Defence Upgrade x2, Nano Armour Coating
>Energy Subsystems
Power Capacitors x6
>Shield Subsystems
Advanced Shielding x3
>Ship Weapons
Spinal Weapons - Rail Gun x2 / Light Laser Cannon x2
Broadside Turret - Artillery Cannon x4
Point Defence - Missile Pod x6
Ok don't know about this one, first one I managed to finish.
Its meant to focus on exploration and not that much on battle per se but when its necessary.
>>44300717
http://rwby.wikia.com/wiki/Neptune%27s_Gun
>>44300627
>no, that would survive the pressure and heat wave of the blast at ground zero
That's not what ground zero means in an airburst situation, anon. Ground zero is the ground several hundred meters below where the nuke is detonating. This is done to spread the blast out and cover more area, as well as concerns such as limiting fallout. Something in the middle of the fireball would be completely vaporized no matter what you made it out of.
>That doesn't work that way. If the umbra thing isn't changed and the 5 minutes is just the cooldown, it would be waaaayy overpowered, because that would put YOU in an impossible position because no matter how hard you try to catch me i can always just jump the fuck away and enter warp.
It's a powerful ability, but that's how it works. You're SUPPOSED to be able to get away with it. It's one of the simplest ways to avoid the AMC and anything else for example.
But I wasn't talking about the Umbra. You can leave combat without it too you know. The only way someone could prevent you from doing so while training an AMC onto you for five minutes is if they used lasso drones or frigate interdictors or something like that.
Which would be an example of a well rounded build including an AMC. See why being well rounded is important?
>and you think this is balanced?
Yes. If defense was untrumpable it would be a boring game. All of those weapons in there would be pointless along with 50% of the CYOA.
>any other suggestions were either not possible or agressive.
Why were they not possible? Because you didn't bring an E-War room? Because you didn't spend money on a cloaking system? Because you don't want a teleport escape system? Because you're unwilling to just go away?
It's impossible because you're unwilling to address the glaring weakness in your build.
>>44300743
>I have an older version of such running off of guild points.
Post that sucker, man. I've never even heard of it.
>>44300785
Sorry anon, I save all of my images on one folder, unsorted, so it'd take me all morning to sort through 50,000 images.
>>44300775
That's the funny thing. It isn't even a glaring weakness in his build. Tanky carrier has cloaking and blink, both of which are good for fucking with AMC users.
ACMs are effectively the nuclear option in setting it appears. There's a very strong chance there's a hefty diplomatic consideration to using them. Using an ACM in a fleet battle would be like using a nuclear-armed ASMs/torpedoes in the old cold war plans for fighting opposing CBGs.
It'd be a distinct escalation of force beyond the conventional and likely cause a rapid escalation between the parties involved. Possibly ending with planetary/orbital relativistic or warp-capable singular weapons being launched by the involved parties.
If you have an ACM on your ship you're probably a rogue state scenario waiting to happen. I don't think you'll have many friends.
>>44300717
And by the way Bliss, I know you're still here. That picture was not what I thought it was about.
It wasn't about headpatting, it was about adopting a girl and doing horrible things to her. At least that's what I got from reading a thread on it.
My point is that with an AMC you only need to distract the enemy for 5 minutes and keep it pointed at him for you to win the entire thing instantly. Any combat would be over and decided in 5 minutes. No real planning involved. Just one core ship that you need to defend for 5 minutes.
Any fight between battleships would just get a "mission time remaining" timer, and the person who damaged the other persons anti matter canon more in that time would automatically win once that time runs out.
And that's if the encounter is not immediately decided by the turnrate of the ship that has the AMC spinal mounted.
>>44300713
Yes so?
If i have an million dollar armored car and you have a 100k$ rpg and are on a bike, i will still survive in the armored car and get away.
And if i'm in a million dollar blast shelter you can fire at it with the rpg until you get smoke poisoning but i'm still gonna survive easily.
It being any other way would not be balanced.
>>44300775
ground zero in a zero altitude detonation. that's what we were talking about.
besides even meters away from the epicenter things aren't a million degrees hot any more.
>You're SUPPOSED to be able to get away with it.
But that's not fair and then i will have to complain about that ability being way too overpowered. Because there's no way to effectively catch a ship with that ability.
You know you CAN move while still aiming the AMC. It has no tracking and is spinal mounted, but your SHIP can still move. Not very fast but fast enough to track a carrier with abslutely horrible maneuverability.
If super expensive defense was nigh untrumpable it would simply mean that you can't enter combat against someone that doesn't want to. THAT IS ALL.
Which would be a super good thing.
It wouldn't mean that people can stay whereever they want because as long as the shields are up no activity outside the ship is possible, plus shields can be worn down. pacifism would be more possible and new attack strategies necessary.
>>44300832
I don't understand what he expect, honestly. I mean, there's a battleship coming at him guns blazing. It's either fight or flight, what else could there logically be?
I mean, if a guy came at you in real life and started shooting at you, what would your options be besides flight or fight? Because apparently neither of those are good enough for him.
>>44300844
>There's a very strong chance there's a hefty diplomatic consideration to using them.
I find this unlikely. All starship weapons would be WMD-scale when used against a world, and the only reason why real life nukes are so diplomatically significant is because they're WMD.
>>44300844
Nice fanwank.
>>44300864
this whole argument can be solved by you not replying and believing what ever you believe is true, that nothing can harm your ship ever.
>>44300846
Which image?
>>44300812
Work on it a little at a time. Make subfolders to organize stuff, start saving new things in the appropriate spot. A couple minutes here and there everyday and you'll get it sorted before you know it.
>>44300898
I really should but I am incredibly, amazingly, impossible lazy.
>>44300870
Yes but ACMs are WMD to fleet-assets. They're an inherently unbalancing force for conventional assets and should be considered as such. When the defense mechanism for protecting against naval artillery is your own navy, then the definition of WMD is likely changed to what will devastate that mechanism.
Tactical nuclear weapons exist and do have a place in several doctrines of escalating force but they all have very dangerous lines to cross when considering use for diplomatic reasons and when the opposition side dos not share the doctrinal delineation of tactical and strategic nuclear weapons.
>>44297841
>Full plates
>Defence
>Eternal
>Regenerative
>Living
>Resistance
>Solar Power
>Lingering
>Transformation
Whoever wears the armour instantly transforms into the opposite sex.
>>44300864
Dude don't bring up real life into it, you can blow a hole in an armored car with under $100. Why do you think improvised explosive devices are such a concern?
>>44300904
I understand.
>>44300870
>>44300890
>It's either fight or flight,
That's the point a carrier isn't able to get away. If a guy shoots at you with a gun you need cover or a bullet proof vest to get away and out of range. Especially if you can't use your legs because they're broken (carriers are FUCKING slow)
There is no fight or flight against an AMC if you have a carrier.
It's only fight or be fucking pulverized.
I still have not seen anything to disprove this.
Cloaked ships can still be detected with a good enough electronic warfare room.
The only option would be the umbra (which i did include in my build) but i think THAT on the other hand would be unbalanced in MY favor too much if it wasn't nerfed.
>>44300864
>Because there's no way to effectively catch a ship with that ability.
Sure there is. I can think of a few right now.
1) The most obvious. Bring your own Umbra.
2) Disable the engines of the ship while it's still in range, since if it's fleeing something probably happened.
3) Cloak and ambush the ship.
4) Social engineering. Pretend you're not an enemy. Only works if there wasn't a fight already, but eh, it would be useful in some situations.
5) Use warp jammers creatively. If you're really worried you could combine this with a support frigate that has the Umbra that you stubbornly refused to bring on your main ship.
>Not very fast but fast enough to track a carrier with abslutely horrible maneuverability.
Your fault for not putting any points into maneuverability. This is just compounding your weaknesses.
Anon, please tell me why you expect this CYOA to have some kind of third option to the fight or flight dilemma. I mean, this just doesn't make sense to me. What else could there be once someone is already attacking you? There is fight, there is flight, and there is lay down and die. I've never heard of anything else.
>>44300892
Don't ask why, but I ended up on /a/ and there was a thread about a game about adopting a girl and giving her a sandwich.
And this was posted, so I'm assuming there's a connection.z
>>44300864
5 minutes is a long time to keep someone confined, especially if they can just teleport away and fuck off at a moment's notice (which you can do since you've got blink).
A ship with a couple of Ragefires could do the same thing to you in 5 minutes as one with an AMC could.
>>44300844
I doubt it. It's not even enough to destroy a decent sized moon, and there are more than enough moons to go around.
>>44300960
Oh, Teaching Feeling? That game isn't about abusing her at all. You get her as an abused slave from some shady asshole whose life you saved, and if you DO abuse her, which is only available right at the start, you get a bad end. If you don't, then the game is about head pats and taking her out to buy clothes/sweets until she starts to open up to you. You're not doing horrible things to her, I mean you don't even have sex until she specifically asks for it. All in all pretty innocent.
>>44300959
>Your fault for not putting any points into maneuverability. This is just compounding your weaknesses.
Why are you so much against turtle builds? This whole thing just seems to come from you not wanting lengthy drawn out battles with shields being slowly worn down.
>Anon, please tell me why you expect this CYOA to have some kind of third option to the fight or flight dilemma
I'm expecting this CYOA t HAVE a flight option in the first place.
See my post above.
>>44300958
>That's the point a carrier isn't able to get away. If a guy shoots at you with a gun you need cover or a bullet proof vest to get away and out of range. Especially if you can't use your legs because they're broken (carriers are FUCKING slow)
If you have broken legs no vest is going to save you. He'll just walk up to you and shoot you in the head.
>It's only fight or be fucking pulverized.
No. There is flight. You just *go* *away*. Battleships are almost as slow as carriers. The five minute charge up is a lot more than enough for you to enter warp.
Also, since you're a carrier, why aren't your drones covering your withdrawal?
>>44300971
>if they can just teleport away and fuck off at a moment's notice (which you can do since you've got blink).
as >>44300959 said, you can just teleport right after him with your own umbra.
>>44300998
>No. There is flight. You just *go* *away*. Battleships are almost as slow as carriers.
But they can turn considerably faster and that's all they need to keep the AMC pointed at you. Plus, everyone with an AMC would be using warp jammers anyway.
So tell me how am i supposed to get away again?
>>44300979
Well I'll be darned.
>>44300971
>A ship with a couple of Ragefires could do the same thing to you in 5 minutes as one with an AMC could.
I really want to do that with a frigate.
SDA, please make it so that it's possible to take bigger weapons on smaller ships but they can only be mounted as spinal weapons and take +1 weapon slot for each class the ship is below the lowest class the weapon is for.I'm mostly joking, but wouldn't it be fun?
>>44300958
>carriers are fucking slow
No they aren't. The fastest fleet assets short of the aircraft around are usually carriers. In part because NUCLEAR POWER but also because power output efficiency scales with size. Only a select few ships that were designed purely for speed and are nowhere near the utility, crew complement, or utility of a carrier can beat them in a dead sprint. Since WW2 a lot of ship design is simply built around with having the carrier escorts keep up with the thing they're supposed to protect. Main reason why the fast-battleship classes exist, conventional battleships would have been too slow to fight an engagement with carriers involved.
Maneuverable that'd be true, CVNs have abysmal turning. Better than you'd expect since they can take on some serious lean when they need to, but give them a wide berth in the turns to be safe.
>>44300998
>>44300971
>>44300959
Just give me a way to actually get away from an AMC ship.
A way where the enemy would need actual creativity and lots of dedication to counter it.
>>44300987
>Why are you so much against turtle builds?
I'm not. I'm against exclusively defensive builds. Those never work out in video games for example, and there's a good reason for that. You need to do other things than defend if you want to win.
Do you know what turtling actually is? It's a strategy that tries to win. Therefore, it's a type of offense.
The way you made it sound your build isn't a turtle build, it's a build so mired in defensiveness that it has become paradoxically defenseless.
>>44301041
>But they can turn considerably faster
They can't, actually, it's all just Navigation in the current version.
>So tell me how am i supposed to get away again?
Well, okay, apparently you have only one trick up your sleeve: moving around.
Meanwhile your enemy can move around, stop you from moving around, and also it can kill you.
Sorry, but your ship which can only move around is defenseless in this situation. Maybe bring a ship that can do more things next time.
>>44301099
Anon, we're talking spaceboats in Stardust, not waterboats in reality.
>>44301081
I sorta want that just because it'd let me build Spike's ship the Swordfish.
>>44301130
Square Root Law don't change.
>>44301054
You should play it if you like the art style.
>>44301115
Cloak and go away.
>>44301099
>The fastest fleet assets short of the aircraft around are usually carriers
we're still talking about StarDust.
>>44301124
>I'm not. I'm against exclusively defensive builds. Those never work out in video games for example, and there's a good reason for that. You need to do other things than defend if you want to win.
I played fallout 3 and NV without once killing a sentient being.
>They can't, actually, it's all just Navigation in the current version.
oh that's news then
And no anon, if i don't want to enter combat with someone i should have the option to do so.
Damnit can't you get it into your heads that StarDust was not exclusively a spacecombat simulator? Hence all the origins the terraforming bays, the interesting challenge choices, the elaborate crew system.
It's more than just who can shoot the other person better and fuck anyone who wants to turn it into that.
>>44301172
Still not relevant to the cyoa, where we have set speeds for various ships. You can complain it's not realistic all you like, that's not what people are talking about.
>>44301196
Cloak can be quite easily countered with electronc attack dishes and e-warfare room. Things that almost everyone is going to have. It's really only effective against smaller ships and ragtag pirates.
Any other ideas?
>>44301172
But ship stats given in the CYOA do.
>>44301221
Actually its well supported by the cyoa. Navigation covers maneuverability and acceleration. Larger ships can likely accelerate proportionally better, but they suffer maneuverability to slow that mass and redirect it. Smaller vessels are a mix of over-sized engines intended to keep up with accelerating larger fleet assets but maintain tactical maneuvering.
>>44301174
I can't shake the feeling you're somehow trying to trick me.
>>44301199
Then don't enter combat. Warp jammers don't have a particularly long range. If you get ambushed by a battleship with decent navigation, Umbra, cloaking, cloaking detectors, a warp jammer and an AMC, then you might be a bit fucked. But you'd be similarly fucked going up against a battleship with decent navigation, Umbra, cloaking, cloaking detectors, a warp jammer and several other big guns.
>>44301311
Up to you man. I'm not your porn dealer.
>>44301224
No they can't. Nothing in E-War can counter cloak.
>>44301327
If I asked nicely, would you be my dealer?
>>44301199
You're the one who framed this entire situation in a sense where the fight was already happening. It's true that stardust isn't just about combat, but this discussion was.
I mean, if a fight isn't going to happen because you didn't take any enemies and aren't antagonizing anyone, then why are you worried about the AMC in the first place?
>>44301313
No because the several other big guns literally cannot penetrate carrier tier overcharged herald shielding reinforced with transfer shield strength from an overcharged heraldic frigate.
That's my entire point.
I want to NOT be fucked if i encounter someone with a setup that literally everyone can have, because every battleship will have decent navigation, e warfare room, and a warp jammer. The only thing they need to bring me down is umbra.
...
>>44301353
I checked again and that's actually true.
In this case cloak is overpowered, because there is literally no way to counter it. Someone combines umbra and cloak and they can't be found.
Although i guess it's a rare enough combination to actually be okay.
>>44301389
Nope, it's a sticky business and I wanna stay clean.
>>44301405
>AMC is overpowered!
>Umbra is overpowered!
>Warp Jamming is overpowere!
>Cloak is overpowered!
So basically everything is overpowered.
That's my favorite kind of situation actually, it keeps things exciting.
>>44301432
Eh, I prefer the lower end. Rocket tag is too hectic to get invested in.
>>44301399
If i am peacfully mining away at an asteroid and a bunch of red daggers warps in and says that the asteroid is theirs and because i was mining there my ship also belongs to them now, i'm in a combat situation where i would need to get away and no amount of sweettalking can get me out of that.
But as i said>>44301405
It's okay because cloak is also overpowered.
>>44301432
I don't necessarily agree. Overpowered things usually keep engagements short and only decided by raw powerlevels.
If someone finds a way to somehow board my ship and disable my cloak i'm dead in one hit.
If they don't i'm out of combat in one button press.
>>44301431
piss
>>44301405
>No because the several other big guns literally cannot penetrate carrier tier overcharged herald shielding reinforced with transfer shield strength from an overcharged heraldic frigate.
If they cannot do that, you are literally invincible to anything but AMCs, and that's retarded. By big guns I mean triple spinal ragefires or broadsides covered in torpedoes. If an umbra battleship replaces their AMC with triple spinal ragefires, you're just as fucked. The only difference is that it might take seven minutes to destroy you instead of five.
>>44301467
>I was mining there my ship also belongs to them now
WELCOME TO THE WORLD OF EVE-ONLINE. YOUR ASS IS FUCKED LITTLE HULK. THERE'S A REASON LOW-SEC MINING OPS ARE DONE IN A FLEET.
>>44301467
>If i am peacfully mining away at an asteroid and a bunch of red daggers warps in and says that the asteroid is theirs and because i was mining there my ship also belongs to them now, i'm in a combat situation where i would need to get away and no amount of sweettalking can get me out of that.
I don't know what to tell you, anon. I already know and accept that the CYOA has a combat focus. If you have trouble dealing with this there's actually plenty of other CYOAs out there that have non-combat focuses.
>>44301518
>By big guns I mean triple spinal ragefires or broadsides covered in torpedoes
Oh those.
Well yes.
But for that i have point defense. The build was really stable, the only thing that worried me was that i wouldn't be able to get away from an AMC if i couldn't blink away in time.
>>44301537
>WELCOME TO THE WORLD OF EVE-ONLINE. YOUR ASS IS FUCKED LITTLE HULK. THERE'S A REASON LOW-SEC MINING OPS ARE DONE IN A FLEET.
i lol'd
>>44301545
nonono it's okay now, the active cloak is pretty much an easy way to get out of a fight that has just begun, so it would be difficult to actually force me into an engagement.
>>44297540
Why is this being posted. Slut life is so much better in terms of content and I actually update that.
>>44301518
I don't think he considered that his enemy might use multiple guns. There's also the fact that we only have a baseline score that, depending on mounting point, tier and type can result in weapons with the same stats dealing radically different amounts of damage and we have no idea what kind of armour/shielding each of them can penetrate.
>>44301605
Oh?
Please go ahead and post it then.
>>44301596
I'm not sure point defence is going to work well against a battleship. Luckily, any battleship with triple ragefires or an AMC is going to be rare as fuck, and probably not going to be bothered hunting your noncombatant ass.
>>44301605
hey, would you mind answering my question? >>44298023
At the time, there were 8 posts and 4 IP's. It's pretty strange how the CYOA was posted immediately afterwards, in less than three minutes, with only 4 IP's in the thread, no?
>>44301691
I don't know, I didn't post it, and haven't for a few weeks. I just make it.
>>44301605
Different focus and tone. Being a little girl is a lot different than getting fucked in all holes for money.
>>44301641
It would work against the broadside torpedos you mentioned and i have never actually seen the ragefires so imma check those out first....
well yes it seems they are quite powerful indeed and could wear the shields down with time, but i just need three dedicated drones to constantly float about in the path of the railgun to effectively block every single shot.
And it would take a long time to destroy all 40 drones.
Plus the energy and shield systems of the drones the frigate and the carrier are combined because of the pulsar passive trait and the shield extenders.
In effect the probability of me taking significant damage before blinking out is marginal.
>>44301704
I believe you.I actually do. I'm just tired of seeing this same faggot, right at the start of a thread, asking for slut life to be posted, and sixty seconds later it's posted.And now I've jinxed myself. Shit.
>>44301754
I'm not sure railgun slugs are going to give much of a fuck about small drones. In fact, sending out a bunch of drones or a frigate to block a shot seems like it would work better against an AMC than a ragefire.
>>44301845
not aginast a bunch of small drones, but against drones with extreme overcharged powersystems that are shared between all my ships and heraldic shielding.
It would be difficult to penetrate the shielding and then the projectile would still easily cut through the drone itself, but because of the shielding it would be less of a threat for the main ship and its heraldic+ shields.
>>44300960
Pat Head
>>44297619
Oh here it is
>Each penis has its own set of testicles
oh 4chan you make me giggle
Holy shit, what did I wake up to.
I do recall saying that something -can- survive an AMC blast, but it would require maximum shields, a well-placed Bulwark activation along with the assistance of another ship with maximum shield using a shield extender mod AND activating Leviathan. And even after all of that is said and done, your ship is not coming out okay and you are most likely disabled anyways.That's not a bad thing though; look up BR-5RB.
Battleships are supposed to be anti-carriers in this setting, but they aren't much good for much else other than conventional fleet warfare against each other or structure siege. The whole point in ship classes is escalation; if your enemy brings cruisers, you're gonna bring your cruisers. If they bring battleships, then you either bring more destroyers/cruisers or your own battleships. When they bring a fuckton of battleships then you have to bring either a huge fuckton of destroyers/cruisers or a fuckton of battleships.
>>44301405
In the context of the CYOA, everyone can have that stuff. But you have to remember that Umbra is ultra-rare Herald tech, and AMCs are usually only owned by the most powerful groups.
All T3 weapons, especially the Ragefire and Torpedo Silos, are meant to skull-fuck big hulls. In context, they're meant to eat away at your shields/armour faster than anything else, so I don't know where that's coming from.
>>44301878
No drone would be able to take more than one shot of a T3 weapon, boost or not. Remember that they usually have trouble with T1 weapons.
>>44300960
>>44301884
Now I want to make a Star Dust build about a doctor/mechanic that receives a destroyer in bad shape.
>>44302042
Oh i know that. They would be completely obliterated, but the carrier behind them would be not. And since it has a production line it can rebuild them after it got away.
>>44302052
destroyer best girl?
>>44302041
>shield extender
Exactly how do those work anyway? Do all ships in range other than the one with the range extender get +2 to their shields? It isn't specified in the CYOA.
Honestly, the best ship is probably either a destroyer or a cruiser. Frigates are too small and you'd end up not spending all your cash, the bigger ships are too big and you're forced to buy the plebeian T2 weapons instead of only using T3 and T1 in PD slots like a patrician.
>>44302041
How would 3-4 destroyers fare against a battleship or carrier?
>>44302071
Why not? They're bloody lovely.
>>44302108
>How would 3-4 destroyers fare against a battleship or carrier?
Destroyers would probably rek the big ship. Fact is that weapon mount numbers are proportionately much higher on the destroyers given their size.
>>44302081
Now that I think of it, I actually have no idea... I'll have to reword it a little. I'm thinking sacrificing 10% of your shields to give 20% to all other ships in range.
>>44302108
A good destroyer with a good pilot easily fucks over a meh battleship/carrier with meh pilots. One on one it'll be tough, but believe it or not a destroyer will be able to do a lot before getting blown to bits, if not destroying the battleship outright.
Destroyers have the largest amount of spinal weapon mounts in the CYOA; you're supposed to put your hardest hitting weapons on them.
I'm considering allowing destroyers to equip any T3 weapon on spinal mounts only.
>>44302159
>I'm considering allowing destroyers to equip any T3 weapon on spinal mounts only.
Is this better or worse?
Does anyone have the stardust infantry DLC?
>>44302071
Destroyer second best girl. Cruiser-chan will always have my heart.
>>44302159
>I'm considering allowing destroyers to equip any T3 weapon on spinal mounts only.
I'm ambivalent towards this. On one hand it makes sense, on the other hand this limitation really makes overchargers and torpedoes shine more than usual.
>>44302179
Better, they can't do that now.
>>44302159
>Destroyers have the largest amount of spinal weapon mounts in the CYOA; you're supposed to put your hardest hitting weapons on them.
Ahem, I mean pre-dreadnaught.
>>44302099
What if you buy a swarm of frigates?
>>44302179
The only T3 weapons destroyers can equip are tesla overchargers and torpedo silos. If you look at all the other T3 weapons (tachyons, pulse beams, ragefires), they all can only be equipped on cruiser or larger. I really think destroyers should be able to utilize these, but only on their spinal mounts.
>>44302200
>On one hand it makes sense, on the other hand this limitation really makes overchargers and torpedoes shine more than usual.
I'm a little reluctant as well in this regard, but those can stay effective in drones, fighters, and frigates.
>>44302159
>>44302200
Speaking of which, what's the point of the distinction between T2 and T3 anyway?
>>44302238
From the CYOA it looks to be mostly a case of what drones can use them.
>>44297619
Sooo in slut life.... there's a mistake.
>>44302234
>What if you buy a swarm of frigates?
I don't like the thought of having multiple similar sized ships desu.
>>44302099
That's probably because stardust is geared towards building single ships/small fleets, and classes above cruiser need a sizeable support fleet that the CYOA simply doesn't have the points for. Which is fine, because that isn't the focus of the CYOA itself, and if you wanted to build a bigger fleet just up the credits you gain/earn by like 5-10 and pretend you're an established bigshot or something.
>I'm considering allowing destroyers to equip any T3 weapon on spinal mounts only.
A good way to balance that would be to just make them take up multiple slots, that way you have to choose between big boom, more dakka, or a compromise between the two.
>>44302159
That's good to hear, I prefer a something more... simple, like a flotilla of federation navy destroyers with or without a cruiser, than a a herald battleship or carrier.
About the T3 weapons limitation, I think it's fine. I think an average destroyer would have torpedo as spinal, missile launchers as broadside and Machine Gun/Flak/Light Laser as point defense. Filling it's broadsides with torpedo or tesla charger sounds silly.
>>44302181
I don't disagree, Cruisers are beautiful too.
>>44302304
The 'average' destroyer only having one build is pretty trash honestly.
>>44301884
I'm going to play this and pretend it's about making Bliss feel better after people bullied him.
>>44302323
Variety and flexibility are nice things, but I think an organization big as Federation Navy would prefer mass production to reduce cost, so they would find a nice build for their doctrine make it their bulk and have a smaller number of specialized destroyers.
>>44302430
Not everyone is Federation.
Okay, I'm going to be releasing the FINAL final final update for SD when this thread dies. Maybe the start of next thread.
It'll involve the spelling fixes from the kind anons of last thread, T3 weapons being able to be fit on destroyer spinal mounts, and I'm going to reduce costs for crew members all around. I might do cost reductions on a bunch of other stuff too, like more elite tier ship hulls and drones.
>>44302234
>>44302294
That's a good point. You know SDA, even though it's easier to make support ships now, it's still not easy. Maybe you could expand the % cost reductions for ships smaller than your main to include some other things as well?
>>44299689
>SDA called me a fucking sperglord last year
Never Forget, Anon. Never Forget.
>>44302304
You can use my destroyer build here >>44299802
as an average, though I don't think a herald ship that costs almost 1b credits is average :^)
>>44302483
SDA is my idol anon. Senpai noticed me and called me a sperglord.
>>44302463
Can you please give me your .psd for this >>44298581?
Also,
>dreadnaught
>dreadnaught
>dreadnaught
>dreadnaught
>dreadnaught
pls
>>44299802
>Nothing personnel..... kid
Personnel: people employed in an organization or engaged in an organized undertaking such as military service.
So you have no crew? You're just a dead ghost ship floating through space....
Nothing PERSONAL there buddy.
>>44302507
Maybe there should be a gamemode for large fleets and dreadnaughts but no named crew.
>>44302294
>A good way to balance that would be to just make them take up multiple slots, that way you have to choose between big boom, more dakka, or a compromise between the two.
This could be applied to rooms too, I never understood how a factory wing occupies the same space as the captain's quarter.
>>44302488
Thank you. My favorite factions are the Fed Navy and Beatrice R&D so I'm not sure if I'll use it as is but being a captain of herald ship belonging to those factions could be interesting.
I'm also thinking about loading Active Cloak on Destroyers and pretending they're space submarines.
>>44302555
Yes anon, we know it's a meme, no need to explain the joke and ruin everyone's fun.
>>44302463
I've been holding up to make a build. After a lot of contemplating, I decided I will make a build with The Traveller title and that sexy Er'el cruiser.
But I have been thinking about StarDust, and wish it was a bit more focused on building a space ship, rather than a whole space opera setting. I also wish you could have whole ship AI's. Just make a ship, and have an AI for the entire thing; pilotting, guns, mechanics etc. I hate constructing a crew. Well, it's one of the reasons why I am making a drone ship filled with androids anyway. AI never tires, never miscalculates.
>>44302562
M8,
>dreadnaught
>dreadnought
Which do you thing is a correct variant and the name of the ship that started the entire new class, and which is outdated?
>>44300139
>I'm still talking about the 1.0.1 version which you people seem to conveniently ignore.
No one is doing the 1.0.1 version because it's not the newest version so get with the program,
>>44302562
That's really easy, all you have to do is multiply the credit gain by like 5 or 10 or whatever number you want. As for the crew, you can always just take generics.
>>44302600
>This could be applied to rooms too, I never understood how a factory wing occupies the same space as the captain's quarter.
>Being a huge faggot that doesn't have his captain's quarter be the largest room in his ship
baka desu senpai
>>44302507
Here, it's about 12MB:
https://mega.nz/#!YMlgAYAQ!8MRJTQGS51-P2c5kZki3o_0sdI0h-LFIcfmctAwdsTY
Oh please tell me I've been fucking up on spelling dreadnought this entire time. Can I keep dreadnaught and brush it off as space-magic?
>>44302600
I actually was considering making AMCs take up multiple spinal slots so not everyone has 3 of these things attached to their ships. I've withheld out on that but I'd like to know what everyone thinks.
>>44302618
Nothing's stopping you from making a minimalist build; I actually want to see a title-less build with nothing but the starting 100m and a few million contracts.
I considered adding an AI section but decided not to implement it. I didn't really see a function in it.
What do you guys think?
>>44302723
>Can I keep dreadnaught and brush it off as space-magic?
Eh, if you want your invincible monster ships of destruction be called after some minor tugboat, be my guest. Thanks for the .psd.
>>44302723
>Oh please tell me I've been fucking up on spelling dreadnought this entire time
You have been fucking up on spelling dreadnought this entire time.
>>44302723
>I actually was considering making AMCs take up multiple spinal slots so not everyone has 3 of these things attached to their ships.
Yes, I heartily endorse this. Also, please make it possible to do this >>44299952, at least for minmaxing reasons.
>>44302723
>I actually was considering making AMCs take up multiple spinal slots so not everyone has 3 of these things attached to their ships. I've withheld out on that but I'd like to know what everyone thinks.
I'm fine with it. I think it makes sense. I'm a fan of the AMC, and while mechanically it would be a nerf, fluffwise it just makes it seem even more awesome.
>>44302723
I don't think AMC is good enough to cost more slots.
>>44302463
A couple more of such I've found since, in case it's needed.
Page 4: Crew
Engineer: "Trainwreck"
>get pased up
Though I would be willing to forgive this as some weird accent he might have.
Gunner: Brian Richardson
>+Boost
Just in the middle of his card, for some reason.
>>44302723
>I considered adding an AI section but decided not to implement it. I didn't really see a function in it.
Not only do I wish to see an AI replace a crew system, but also make various AI qualities, just so I can buy the best of the best.
Really, I am willing to spend a cool 50+ mill just for a badass ship AI. It should require androids or drones or something though.
>>44302723
>I considered adding an AI section but decided not to implement it. I didn't really see a function in it.
I would like to see an AI section. I think it would be a function for its own sake. I mean, it doesn't need to affect stats or anything, though maybe specific types of AI could give you +1 to nav or shields or maybe even max crew... Or maybe it could reduce min crew needed...
But yeah, I really like it as an idea, it would be really neat to have AIs available at least from a fluff perspective, you could do them sort of like the Command Mods are right now.
>>44302776
>>44302783
I'm glad someone else agrees. Do you think they should take up 2 spinal slots or 3? Most battleships have 2 spinal mounts but you can get 2 more from mods.
>>44302815
Should I bring back its planet-cracking description?
But seriously, I really want them to be THE doomsday weapon. They're meant to be feared, not bought en masse by some civillian. What do you suggest to make them more appealing if I'm implementing this?
I think making them cost 2 spinal mounts means most ships will only have 1 attached, and attaching 2 ends up not being very cost effective.
>>44302833
Thank you.
>>44302847
>replace
WOAH there anon, easy now. No need to go overboard with this.
>>44302723
>I actually was considering making AMCs take up multiple spinal slots so not everyone has 3 of these things attached to their ships.
Fine by me.
> actually want to see a title-less build with nothing but the starting 100m and a few million contracts.
Give me a few minutes.
>I considered adding an AI section but decided not to implement it. I didn't really see a function in it.
I would love to see this.
>>44302847
>>44302854
>>44302877
I was thinking of making ship AI free; you'd mostly be choosing between personality and specialization (assault vs support vs industry vs exploration, etc). They'd have voices too.
>>44302555
>So you have no crew? You're just a dead ghost ship floating through space....
Jesus that is so fucking awesome.
A ship totally without crew just an ai floating around in space.
>>44302650
i know i just didn't have the patience yet to redo the entire thing
Whoa i just noticed that we only get 100 mio instead of 500 mio starting credits... dayum son.
>>44302723
SDA one thing the tachyon laser is said to send ouot a wave of super destructive radiation in addition to the laser and it a t3 superweapon.
...
And the damage shown is actually minimal. Same as a simple autocannon.
Also a much more burning issue.
Hull reduction. Please please let us have more than 2.
How else am i going to fly a half disassembled wreck?
>>44302896
It could work. I wonder how this would interact with The Whisperer though.
At any rate, I completely approve of adding an AI section, even if the mechanical impact is minimal or subtle.
>>44302896
Can you at least put in some options to upgrade it? So it can take on tasks like piloting etc?
>>44302723
>Nothing's stopping you from making a minimalist build; I actually want to see a title-less build with nothing but the starting 100m and a few million contracts.
Challenge accepted.
Space Trucker is a weird concept I've been throwing around in my head for the past few hours. So a quick question.
Is it intentional that a fighter can take a Hull Extension and get extra rooms (Cargo Space for my purposes)?
>>44302917
The gross scale damage of ionizing radiation is pretty minimal. You wouldn't even notice anything changed if you didn't get radiation poisoning and cancer from it. That's why it's so scary.
>>44302859
>AMC
Well, if you want it to be THE doomsday weapon, I say you should make people specifically invest in its purchase and make builds specifically for it. Make it occupy 3 slots and increase the price. Maybe the planet-killing thing should be left out for some extra-galactic threat, but making it level entire cities would make it feared. You should clarify how it interacts with ship shields etc. Can it kill a maxed-out battleship like this >>44298502? Can it destroy a dreadnought? Remember, if Star Dust station has 3 of them, it can probably be a serious military power in the region.
>>44302950
>>44302896
In that case he could just add AI crewmembers to the crew section and make a note at the top saying that you can only take one AI.
>>44302983
I'd prefer AI to have effects as per the Command Mods though.
Also two more command mods, it's tickling my autism that there's empty room for two more.
Can anyone think of something to suggest?
>>44302982
>Cities
>A big deal
Dude, all the ships can wreck a shitty litttle city. That's not significant.
>>44302970
Never mind, I missed the bit about fighters not being able to have extra rooms.
>>44302971
But it's not just ionizing radiation is it?
It's
>"deadly radiation, destroying anything in its way"
>>44302970
Fighters can't take hull extensions. It says so in their section description.
>>44303040
Ionizing radiation is what you mean when you say deadly radiation. Otherwise it would just be called a regular laser. Because that's radiation too. Also the light that your eyes see? All of that is radiation.
>>44303026
M8, not just some shitty third-world Firefly-tier cities. I mean cities with forcefields, planetary defence, marines in power armor - all the Master of Orion stuff.
>>44301789
Funny thing is every time he asks for it to be posted and then posts it, no one ever posts builds to it. That only happens when the creator does a significant update.
>>44302917
Gotta go with titles now, man.
>And the damage shown is actually minimal. Same as a simple autocannon.
They're an upgrade of the heavy laser cannon. Max rate of fire, velocity, good range and accuracy means business.
>>44302930
The Whisperer puts more sass into them andthey have the potential to fall in love with you.
>>44302950
I'm reluctant in having them do too much to disturb the functions of the CYOA right now. However I might just specify that all AIs can do auto-piloting.
I have an idea.
Instead of command mods, why don't I just repurpose those to be the ship AI? For example, the Talon "Blueberry" AI has the Kraken special ability,and her voice sounds like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2XMKRiP-5o
I really want this now.
>>44303026
It could say something like "....can restructure the geology of entire continents."
>>44303058
Yes. So?
It's not necessarily deadly because it's ionizing. A laser is just "light" and it's pretty deadly.
It's supposed to be extra deadly because it destroys everything as stated one line below.
>>44301704
BTW For shits and giggles I started making a layout for an image version of SL in InDesign after seeing the image only version you posted.
>>44303088
I'm talking about the way the concept of "deadly radiation" is used. Is deadly radiation going to kill you? Yes. Is it going to drill a hole in steel plating? No.
>>44303085
>command mods
Don't touch my Coldsteel Herald Blink Katana teleport, you filthy casual!
>>44303109
I'm not changing what the command mods do, just changing their picture, name, and adding a personality of a ship AI behind them.
>>44303085
I personally don't want an AI, so while I'm fine with there being an AI system for people who want it I don't want my Command Mods turned into AI.
>>44303085
>Instead of command mods, why don't I just repurpose those to be the ship AI?
Why? I think the CYOA could use an extra set of mods, not just repurpose old mods. I mean, something like Umbra really changes everything up you know? A similar build otherwise is completely different in overall effect. I think if AIs added a similar set of mods that you can combine, it would be a benefit to the CYOA.
Of course, you should be careful with balance here, but still. I'm sure we'll spot it really fast if anything ends up unbalanced.
>>44303142
This bothers me. A lot of the command mod bonuses just don't seem like something an AI could do.
The Beatrice one? Yeah, that's a good example of what would fit an AI. The Herald one? Uhh, what, how would and AI be able to do that with the ship if others can't?
>>44303085
autocanon has 39 points spent in abilities and is T1 using practically no energy
tachyon has 6 points more spent in abilities and is T3 using almost max tier energy.
pulsebeam has ...
>lasers are basically continuous fire
oh never mind me then
>>44303107
...dude no.
i just told you it's deadly because it destroys everything
including the steel plating, the thing it's mounted in and the entire building around it.
it destroys EVERYTHING in its path.
That is LITERALLY what is written there.
>>44303196
>i just told you
Yes, I noticed you were being retarded, that's why I corrected you. I can see why people call you a sperglord.
>>44303162
>>44303152
I'm not adding or removing any if I go with >>44303085
I'm just changing what they mean.
Otherwise, I'm just going to add a ship AI section that doesn't really add anything in terms of function. I never planned on adding more, this is just to give your ship an AI and personality.
>>44303187
A Herald AI is space magic, yo.
Alright, I'm just gonna go with a separate AI section if that's what everyone wants. Just a reminder that these aren't going to really change much in the CYOA, and they'll all be free.
>>44303142
Mr SDA, i want my spaceship to be a sort of cult fanatic zealots brings their doctrine to the stars. could we get a church/temple option for a room please?
>>44303243
>Alright, I'm just gonna go with a separate AI section if that's what everyone wants. Just a reminder that these aren't going to really change much in the CYOA, and they'll all be free.VIRTUAL SMELLY NEET PUSSIES
>>44303243
>Otherwise, I'm just going to add a ship AI section that doesn't really add anything in terms of function. I never planned on adding more, this is just to give your ship an AI and personality.
How about add two new Mods, and then split them into 6 command mods, and 6 AIs, according to what fits the AI theme better. That's almost the same, but the CYOA would look better without that empty space for two mods.
>>44303252
Recreational room. It accomodates everything from golf courses to concert halls to churches to swimming pools to brothels.
>>44303072
exactly anon. It's one guy asking for the newest version, which is the same as last time he asked, and he posts it himself, and there are never any builds made.
It baffles my mind. I just can't, anon. I can't.
>>44303252
I imagine the spaceship full of zealots (a filler archetype i would like too) practicing in many training rooms, some attending the temple, some attending the libraries and a bunch of mercs that help spread the word of their god when preaching wont do. Could be Herald worshipers, thats an idea too.
>>44303281
>Recreational room. It accomodates everything from golf courses to concert halls to churches to swimming pools to brothels.
>brothels
AWW SHIT NIGGA THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING
DREADNOUGHT PLEASURESHIP HERE I COME
>>44303335
Why not a pleasure frigate? There's less space so everyone would have to squeeze in nice and close to each other.
>>44303281
Ah, thanks for clarifying. Recreational rooms are useful after all.
>brothels
>temples
>arcades
>firing ranges
>fucking laundry rooms
I happy.
>>44303243
>Origin: Federation Spec Forces
>Skills: Advanced Piloting, Standard Combat Training, Computer Science, Ship Gunnery
Is Ship Gunnery required for fighting in a Fighter? Sounds redundant with Piloting skill.
>Titles: The Whisperer
>Ship: Yukikaze
>Hull: X61 Stark (38-4=32m)
>Energy: Power Capacitors (12m)
>Shield Subsystem: Adv. Shielding (24-12=12m)
>Command Mod: X38 "Tribe" TDNK (4m)
>Hull Mod: 5x Overdrive Afterburner (5x3=15m)
>Ship Weapons:
>Spinal(4): 2x Torpedo Silo (14+7=21m), 2x Missile Launcher (10+5=15m)
>Broadside(4): 4x Flak Cannon (4+6=10m)
>Point-Defence(2): 2x Flak Cannon (4m)
Real quick build about a mercenary fighter pilot. I'm not too happy with it, will tinker with it later.
>>44303365
What if you have 3,000 prostitutes?
>>44303390
REALLY close to each other.
>>44303386
>laundry room
we realistic spaceniggas now
>>44303390
>pick mothership
>fill it with prostitutes
>name the ship "mother harlot"
>>44303085
>you actually have to go with titles
y u do dis SDA?
Those titles are all awful.
Plus since the expenses are numerous and the starting credits went down shouldn't the jobs at least bring more money?
And this also doesn't really make sense.
It makes sense that you'd get a ton of dough for completing dangerous jobs, but why would anyone pay you more that you can earn ALTOGETHER with all jobs just because you got swallowed by a wormhole for a few years.
>>44303480
CYOA balance.
Okay SDA two quick questions.
How much hanger space does each fighter take up?
Can you give us some more info about The Saint title?
Also I think you may want to tweak the ship mod multipliers just a little bit.
>>44303531
4
It's under hangar space in the ship stat information section.
>>44303531
>How much hanger space does each fighter take up?
4. It's in the ship stat descriptions section.
>Can you give us some more info about The Saint title?
Purest form of love. But seriously, those two used to work together and were known as the "Siblings of Death". Something happened between them that separated them; what that is, I leave that up to you. Taking that title means you've got to solve it.
What do you mean tweak the mod multipliers?
>>44303480
Is there a reason why you're namefagging? It's an anonymous imageboard, you know.
>>44303085
>Instead of command mods, why don't I just repurpose those to be the ship AI? For example, the Talon "Blueberry" AI has the Kraken special ability,and her voice sounds like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2XMKRiP-5o
Why not have something that you can just add on to a command mod to make it into an AI? Should be less work that way and those that don't want an AI don't have to get that addon.
>>44303591
Sperglord credentials
>>44303518
Yeah but it's not really balanced this way and it doesn't make sense.
I mean how would you POSSIBLY get more that TWICE your starting credits out of being followed by drones trying to kill you?
And how is it balanced that you getting an awesome sentient AI in ONE of your ships that can "occasionally be incooperative" gives you over twice the amount of money for having someone actively trying to kill and sabotage you in your crew.
>>44303616
It is balanced, it's just not balanced for extreme pacifism builds like yours.
>>44303088
>It could say something like "....can restructure the geology of entire continents."
What, every 15 minutes? Might as well just make it be able to destroy planets. And given theres less than several dozen listed, could lead to a situation where some lunatic just runs around "restructuring" every undefended planet in the galaxy in a couple weeks.
>>44303591
fine
>>44303085
>The Whisperer puts more sass into them
Can we have subtle AIs? Something that is clearly very intelligent but not very sociable (not unfriendly, like it won't small talk with you but will be at all times using all it's capacity to protect you).
>>44303572
How drone weapon energy drain works? If my ship only have 3 energy bars, my drones too can only use up to 3 energy consuming weapons?
Can I passively receive data while using Active Cloak?
>>44303572
>4. It's in the ship stat descriptions section.
Whoops didn't see that.
>What do you mean tweak the mod multipliers?
It feels like like they're a bit high.
>>44303634
the continents are just the upper 1% of the planet.
you guys and your war machines. I will use my destroyer as a prison carrier, or a trader ship, or a mining ship. Hell, i will fit it with vehicles and submarines and take people to organized tours getting mad cash.
Also why is everyone obsessed with single ships? Make a squad of fighters like 40 or so and offer your services as extras for the big guys. Populate the fighters with federation pilots and you are good to go.
think outside the box!
>>44303662
I like the submarine tours thing. Except I'd bring a lot of combat mechs to conquer the depths!
>>44303662
>you guys and your war machines.
Because war and battle is part of human nature.
>Also why is everyone obsessed with single ships?
Because deep down everyone wants to be a super special snowflake.
>>44303591
you know actually screw that you i'm putting it back on if it bothers you that much hide my posts this board is not forced anon and it makes life easier for me.
>>44303633
>it's balanced to favor a specific kind of build and not others
in other words it's not balanced
>>44303662
Because I don't want to manage an army, I wanna be a cool dude in a cool ship having cool adventures. Fleets are for people who want to play dictator and warlord, not adventurers.
>>44298429
Didn't get a chance to post this before last thread died. But anyway, Battleships are hard and all I wanted was to fight the Fire Legion.
Origin: Blackhawk Elite
Ship: Paladin Battleship
Skills: Advanced Piloting, Diplomacy, Basic Combat, Ship Gunnery
Energy: 2x Anti-Matter Core
Shield: Aegis
Command: FDN Control zrt3
Hull Mods: Nano Armour, Teleport Jammer, Spinal Upgrade, Overdrive Afterburner
Spinal: Anti-Matter Cannon, 2x Pulse Beam Cannon
Broadside: 2x Missile Launcher, 16x Heavy Laser Cannon
Point-Defence: 8x Flak Cannon
Hangar: Combat Repair Drone x4
E-War: MITM Module
Rooms: Crew Quarters, Officer's Quarters, Adv. Infirmary, Adv. Evac, HyperComms + DigiSec, Adv. Arseal, Teleporter, Lounge + Rec Room, Standard Mess + Tavern, Holding Cells, Cargo Bay
Pilot: Conrad Byrant
Engineer: Mereille Fairley
Doctor: Devon Trice
Gunner: Comet, Theresa Herder
Combat: Archangel, Ricce, Scot Shephard, Dani Laine, Darrel Wallace
DigiSec: Veslav Smertdov
Chef: Patricia Cooper
Bartender: Laurie Parsons
Archetype: Blackhawks x1250
Titles: The Nemsis, The Sorcerer
Contracts: S&R 4, Acheron 1, Escalation 4, All Aboard 2, Twin Fangs 3, Rogue Drones 2, Heat 4, Fire Grows 4
Hull: 24/25
Nav: 2/25
Shield: 21/25
Alright, now where can I improve? There are somethings I chose for RP purposes, so obviously it's not optimized.
>>44303572
SDA is there any chance that the rewards for the jobs and titles will be rebalanced to
a) make sense between the sources of income
b) make sense betweeen different title choices
c) not be so excessively combat favoring?
Figured I'd try to make a functional mining vessel. I might have gone with the wrong class of ship but the whole point was to try and make a functional, comfy little miner's ship on as small a budget as possible. I'm disappointed that I had to pick up a title at all but there wasn't any other choice.
>>44303746
Then why don't you just get a frigate or fighter?
>>44303813
>Frigate
Shitty baby boat that can't handle real combat.
>Fighter
This thing can't even function long-range on its own, are you even serious?
>>44303085
>They're an upgrade of the heavy laser cannon. Max rate of fire, velocity, good range and accuracy means business.
This is not reflected in the stat line. In fact on the stat bars they seem to have worse accuracy, the same RoF(max on the bars for both), the same Range and if you count in the HLC bonus damage after focusing for 2 min they seem to have the same damage.
>>44303870
what
>>44303662
said. a fighter on its own is boring yes, but a squad of 40? the big battleships are slow
>>44303870
It can, just get solar collectors.
>>44303920
They're different tiers, the stats aren't directly comparable like that.
>>44303926
>Squad of 40
I told you, I'm playing an adventurer and independent, not a warlord/dictator wannabe.
>>44303935
It can if you want to sit in something tiny and irrelevant in the cockpit seat for days at a time.
>>44303870
>complain about not being just an cool dude with his cool ship
>complain that single pilot ships can't be a one man armadas
So what's the benefit of taking the rec room more than once?
>>44303978
double thefun
>>44303978
More recreational space for more crew.
>>44303976
Because you can't be a cool dude with his cool ship in frigates or fighters because they're tiny, weak, and irrelevant.
>>44303935
>Not putting Mana Cores in your fighters.
>>44303946
they should be comparable though, otherwise making all the T1 weapons have less points across their stats and all t3 have more makes no sense.
>>44303946
Huh, didn't know that. Did I just miss it or is that something not stated on the CYOA its self?
Haven't seen this in a while so I'm posting it.
>>44304016
Weapon stat information under the weapon section.
>>44303643
There will be 'default' or subtle AIs.
>>44303643
The energy consumption of drone weapons apply to the energy output of the ship they come from.
Cloaking disables everything of yours but navigation.
>>44303654
>It feels like like they're a bit high.
I've determined that they're relatively balanced.
>>44303920
All with one extra pip of damage. That with max rate of fire means the damage collectively increases by a fuckton over time.
>>44303926
>>44303952
I've tried my hardest to make this CYOA accomodate such a wide spectrum of visions. Everything from small freighters, miners, lone wanderers, big military fleets, and so on. I know the whole thing is probably horribly out of balance but at least we're at the point that these things are achievable.
>>44303978
You can make them anything you want. Maybe you want one to be a swimming pool and another to be a movie theatre.
>>44304004
Can you understand scale?
One pilot ships aren't supposed to survive and win engagements with much bigger ships or entire fleets singlehandedly. Unless you're a angsty teenage boy piloting a mecha suit.
A different question:
I have a herald ship. and i'm getting a mana core.
then i get a second mana core but install it in another ship.
The first mana core is 40m
is the second 35m or 20m?
>>44304097
One pilot ships aren't good for anything since they can't operate alone.
>>44304049
The argument is specifically against people saying 'why not take a giant fighter swarm' and 'why do you want to only have one ship'.
>>44304033
anon, don't bother. Just wait for after Christmas.
Okay, finally finished what I started back at >>44302970 and I admit to cheating slightly with a title.
Name John Harker
Origins: Hammerhead Industries
Skills: Advanced Piloting, Industry, Mercantile, Mechanics
Titles: The Old Timer
Contracts: T4 Search & Rescue, T1 All Aboard, T1 Ace, T1 Twin Fangs
Ship:Hauler Bear
Class: S47-LTM
Spinal: 2 Auto Cannon
Broadside: 4 Missile Pods, 2 Auto Cannons
Point-Defense: 4 Flak Cannons
Hangar Space: 2
Navigation: 18/25
Hull Armor: 06/25
Shield Strength: 15/25
Length: 120m
Max Crew: 16
Extra Rooms: 9
Energy Use: 1/3
Energy System: Nuclear Fission, Solar Panels
Shield System: Advanced Shielding
Command Mod: V77-SLT Control Room
Hull Mods: Overdrive Afterburner x5, Hull Extension x2, Shield Extender
Modules: Tractor Beam
Rooms: Crew Quarters Upgrade, Standard Infirmary, Evacuation Room, Standard Mess Hall, Cargo Space x3,
Secure Vault, Lounge, Hypercomms Room
Drones/Vehicles: APC
Crew:
Pilots: Ivan Chasnikov, John Harker
Engineers: Malcolm Red, Troy Hall
Doctors: Ignacio Lopez
Gunners: John Pope, Viktor
COM/SEC: Pierre Mikisugi, Gregorz Grzegrzolka
Food: Patricia Cooper
Misc: 1 Android, 5 Operators
Ship: Hauler Wolf
Class: S92-TMC Fighter
Spinal: 3 Auto Cannons
Broadsides: 2
Point-Defense: 2
Hangar Space: 0
Navigation: 19/25
Hull Armor: 03/25
Shield Strength: 06/25
Length: 18M
Max Crew: 1
Energy Use: 1/3
Energy System: Power Capacitors, Solar Panels
Shield System: Basic Shielding
Command Mod: V77-SLT Control Room
Crew: Royce Kodai
The active concept was "Space Truckers", so main ship specializes in cargo space, and an escort just for safety's sake.
Ivan and Viktor because Space Slav Truckers was an amusing notion to me at the time.
>>44304049
>miners, lone wanderers
These are basically invalidated by the forcible title choice. You cannot get a hull that can defend itself alone for the amount of money you can get without picking titles that necessarily involve you having a totally fighting oriented build.
seriously please take a look at the titles
>>44304049
So is playing an arms dealer any way a good idea? Or has the future made it extremely easy for people to produce their own equipment?
>>44304140
There's nothing wrong with a miner having a fighting build, and lone wanderers even more.
>>44304140
MINERS AREN'T MEANT TO BE DEFENDING THEMSELVES FROM COMBAT YOU DAFT COW.
>>44304171
>miner carrier
>no mining drones because all are fitted with weapons instead.
>>44304180
Yes, because it isn't specifically stated that there are pirates who like to raid exactly these miners.
>>44304206
>carrier
You have plenty of weapon slots. Also, just try a cruiser instead
>>44304140
You might eek out a miner build, but you'd have to deal with always being considered dead and having a sassy AI.
>>44304206
That's why miners do not venture into undefended space. I mean fuck, look at mining operations in the real world! A lone prospector didn't travel out into the fucking Indian-infested lands alone or without a gun if he didn't want to fucking die.
>>44304121
If you pick fuel cells/solar panels you can travel and operate pretty much anywhere within a star system. That alone gives you a enormous roaming range.
And yeah you can't just jump to other systems by yourself or traverse the entire galaxy, just like you can't kayak the pacific ocean from North America to Europe by yourself.
>>44304242
>A single star system
Not big enough for adventures. And you need to get in/out obviously.
You also missed that I'm complaining about 1. Sitting in your cockpit for days/weeks. That's miserable and shitty. 2. Being irrelevant. A single fighter or frigate can't do jack shit relevant.
>>44304049
plus a lore/description problem:
heralds are said to have unleashed masses of fighters n their enemies and then they go and have only one ship that can carry them and even it can only carry 9 of them.
>>44304236
>a gun
not a canon and a bridage of soldiers
>>44304230
those two only give up to 400mcredit starting money which can go up to 500 with jobs.
Which falls just short of the minimum needed to make a build that can actually drive off pirates armed with more than just a couple fighters.
>>44304275
You'd have enough for traveling between stars.
>>44304332
Enough what?
>>44304374
Power.
>>44304328
>not a canon and a bridage of soldiers
Then don't get any and accept that a fucking mining ship can't fight. It's not supposed to. Get an escort or stick to safe space.
>>44304385
So? You're kinda missing my point. It's not an energy issue or even an ability to travel issue (though sitting in such a small space constantly makes it a miserable prospect)
>>44304328
hey you want to hire my company of 40 fighters to escort you? we can gurantee safety while you mine
>>44304275
>Sitting in your cockpit for days/weeks
Solar panels takes 30 minutes to recharge.
>That's miserable and shitty
Some fighters have hangar spaces you can probably repurpose as luxurious living quarters.
>Being irrelevant
You're not tied down by obligations that bind players that command dreadnoughts or fleets of ships. Yes you start as being irrelevant, but isn't the entire point of being a adventurer is explore the galaxy, make a name for yourself and become relevant through your adventures and exploits?
To me, it seems like you're complaining that you can't be cool adventurer because it sucks to be an adventurer.
>>44304392
uhm
this>>44304414
sounds like an option.
that's not really like being a prospector though.
And it's not like it wouldn't be POSSIBLE to make self sufficient prospector ships.
if the rewards for the titles which don't make any sense anyway were changed.
>>44304431
But you'd be flying around and have no other place to sleep.
>>44304431
>Solar panels takes 30 minutes to recharge.
They hold a charge that lasts for 30 minutes, we don't know how long they take to recharge.
>>44304443
>buy a simple cot from a space Wal-Mart
>set up cot in unused hangar space
>?????
>Sleep
>>44304443
>that's not really like being a prospector though.
Yeah it is. Hire guides, hide from threats, and have a shotgun. That's a prospector. Wanna know why so many of them fucking died?
>>44304451
Then that is the fault of my poor reading comprehension.
The alternative is fuel cells or a nuclear powered single piloted frigate.
>>44304431
>Yes you start as being irrelevant,
And you'll always be irrelevant because you can't accomplish anything with a single fighter or frigate. Everyone will kick your ass, you're not strong enough to do anything. You'll always be irrelevant.
What is the point of a thread about CYOAs if all we do is talk about one specific CYOA?
So, no one is planning a space-to-surface attack build, something with drop ships and land vehicles? Fine, I'll do it.
>>44304523
Piss off, we're not obligated to talk about shit you want us to. It's not like you have even posted any other CYOA either.
>>44304515
Anon nothing in the cyoa says you can't require and accumulate money then buy better ships later on.
You know the entire point of an adventure, to require loot in order to get better gear.
>>44304451
I think they last indefinitely (give you free 1 energy) if you're in the solar system, and 30 minutes if you're not near a star.
>>44304557
>can't require and accumulate money then buy better ships
So you mean stop being an adventurer and turn into a shitty warlord wannabe? You're not an adventurer flying around in a massive fleet. You're a rogue government or pirate lord.
>>44304557
and also not everyone is a pioneer exploring the fringes of known space. some take missions locally or join larger groups united under one cause (pirates or federation for example)
>>44304604
That's not an adventurer at all. That's a soldier.
>>44304592
What sort of adventurer flies around space in a gigantic world-obliterating titan of a ship? Space opera 'adventurers' are the scrappy guys flying around in nimble frigates somehow taking on entire fleets.
>>44304592
Or you know you can just settle down and live a normal life.
Its your adventure anon, you decide how it starts and how it ends.
>>44304625
Not possible in this system.
>>44304626
That's not an adventurer either. Why are you suggesting non-adventurer activities to adventurers?
>>44304523
>>44304544
Get a room, you two.
>>44304651
It absolutely is. Sorry, you're not an 'adventurer' if you ride around in a gigantic dreadnought. You're just a petty warlord compensating for something. Real adventurers use frigates.
In the Star-Dust CYOA, are the courses supposed to be stuff our character is already trained in, or are they courses the character will undertake on the station?
Also, help me decide between which characters to roll with/dedicate to
1) A ruffian Dustkeeper with a metal arm who sold an expensive Herald artifact and plans on creating a mercenary/treasure hunting company based on a destroyer ship,
2)A young Geo-Thermal power farm operator who got lucky when a drone crash-landed on his frozen homeworld, with a stash of credits inside, who plans on exploring/adventuring with a tightly knit crew in a frigate.
>>44304707
>Real adventurers use frigates.
Fucking this.
>>44304707
>Real adventurers don't accomplish anything because they're flying a baby boat.
>>44304049
Are the Twins supposed to provide free fighters with the Tier 4 Reward?
>>44304726
The Serenity is smaller than the smallest Frigate.
>>44304707
Seriously though, yo u keep defending frigates but you can't actually accomplish anything in a lone frigate.
>>44304651
Because your character may one day be too old to continue adventuring.
Or you simply stopped playing the character altogether.
>>44304726
>Real adventurers are thuggish brutes dragging themselves through space at a painfully slow pace in over-sized behemoth ships, refusing to allow themselves to be harmed or take any risk whatsoever.
Sounds more like a paranoid warmongering bully to me, anon.
>>44304747
>Letting yourself grow old.
>>44304761
Real adventurers accomplish things.
>>44304619
i suppose im happy being a cog in the Federation machine, opening my log in the morning to see what new orders I get from Central then going to who knows what shitty rim planet to do who knows what. its an adventure of sorts.
>>44304763
I'm 27 how old are you?
>>44304783
Nope, it's a soldier. A punch card jarhead.
>>44304780
Real adventurers take risks and give themselves to chance every once in a while. The way you treat these ships is the same way that a stockbroker analytically leers at his investments.
>>44304712
It could be either, it's up to you.
I'm going to post the update next thread, so I'd appreciate it if you'd all hold off on posting the CYOA when the thread is created.
>>44304800
What is your definition of an adventurer?
>>44304829
The problem is that you cannot do anything with a single frigate. I don't get how that's hard to understand, it's not enough firepower to accomplish a single thing. That's why it's not viable for an adventurer to be flying around in one. The ship doesn't do anything but serve as a taxi.
>>44304780
"Real adventurers"
What, like the crew of the Millennium Falcon, The Serenity and the Milano?
They're all moderately sized ships on the lower end of the Frigate scale with small crews. Only the Normandy and the Enterprise are big warships, and they're Government sponsored.
>>44304839
oh, another update? is it wording or something bigger?
Real adventurers use destroyers and cruisers, just saying.
>>44304854
Or every star trek away mission.
>>44304854
you know what would be fun? SDA reducing available credits to half. Suddenly everyone is flying frigates and you will have to collaborate with another Anon to be able to afford anything more expensive.
>>44304853
Doesn't the idea of bringing down dreadnoughts with a taxi sound pretty adventurous to you?
>>44304908
>multiplayer
fuck that
>>44304049
yet another thing:
you doubled the hangar requirements for drones and fighters but you didn't double the hangar space in carriers which means that while current carriers can carry up to 90 aircraft or helicopters your kilometer long spaceships can only carry 10 or 20 drones.
>>44304462
That's like sleeping in a garage beside your car instead of inside of it.
>>44304495
>wanna know why so many of the fucking died
well yes, it's supposed to be dangerous but not utterly hopeless.
>>44304854
Did they ever accomplish anything with their boats, though? That's the thing. In Star Wars at least, the ships only ever did anything in massed combat. On their own they only ran away and transported jedi who solved the problem on-foot. This is Stardust, it's about the boat.
>>44304920
That's not mechanically possible.
>>44304929
ok not saying multiplayer but surely you belong to a faction. don't you at least tolerate others of your kind?
>>44304885
That's my view personally. Destroyers and Cruisers are the viable single ships.
Y'all need to realize that adventurers don't use anything larger than a frigate, and they don't do any work of significant scope.
A bit of trade, a bit of smuggling, a bit of merc work, some hired escort missions or some banditry. Sneaking fugitives out of places or into others. Investigating colony or small ship distress beacons. Bounty hunting and assassinations. If you want to be an adventurer, half of your work is going to be on foot, in backwater towns and seedy bars. Not in epic space battles.
>>44304946
Adventurers say fuck the mechanics, we're going to do the impossible.
>>44304908
I'll be your l̶i̶t̶t̶l̶e̶ ̶g̶i̶r̶l̶ bunkmate anytime you like anon.
>>44304946
>>44304854
Voyager.
Fucking voyager.
Single starship and not even the flagship stranded on the other end of the galaxy and it was totally self sufficient, solved conflicts overcame the borg and so on.
That's because it was DEFENSIBLE and didn't rely exclusively on superior firepower crippling the enemies before they could cripple them.
This was possible without the title change and now it's not.
>>44304946
Star-Dust is a space opera, not hard sci-fi
It's closer to Star Wars than it is Star Trek, meaning the impossible is made possible and the main characters experience the unlikely.
>adventurers only fly big ships
>>44304992
It wasn't a defensively oriented ship, it had good offense, defense, and support. It was somewhere between a destroyer and a cruiser in SD speak.
>>44304969
Which is why Star Dust isn't for space adventurers, that's more the Space Refugee's thing (I think that's what it was called), Star Dust is for being space Big Boss or being a Star Trek deriative.
>>44304970
No that's what insane people say. Adventureres weight the pros cons, plan way ahead and always have a dozen lans with letter of the alphabet if things go wrong.
Going with a taxi against a dreadnought is plain wrong. And it doesn't sound adventurous, it sounds "heroic" or "glorious" but get this: the reason people are complaining is because not everyone wants to play warhammer fucking 40k. Spare me your glory and the huge battles.
>>44304937
Some fighters have hangar spaces you namefagging sperg.
>>44304992
Anon, I hate to break it to you, but Voyager had constant retarded shit happening, basically exactly what you'd expect from someone who took two of the biggest titles.
>>44304992
It wasn't built upon being defensible, Voyager's strong point was actually speed, it just outclassed most things in the area, weapons, shields and warp drive outclassed most other things in the area. Only borg, who had some real notable weaknesses in how they did things(shitty writing) had a large tech advantage.
>>44305005
Except both of those are space opera, and there's no mysticism like the Force in SD, so while it is somewhere on a spectrum between star trek and star wars, it's probably closer to star trek.
Additionally. The story is about the ship and its community in star trek, and that fits a lot better than star wars where the story is about some dude who runs around with a light saber and is basically never on the ship when it matters.
>>44304992
The Voyager is the Star Trek equivalent of a Destroyer, not a Frigate.
>>44305031
Stardust isn't a heartless hard sci-fi wankfest. It's space opera which means wacky heroics, which means flying out of the way of an AMC shot before dropping a torpedo right on the barrel and soaring away as the chain reaction tears the dreadnought apart. You know, adventurous stuff.
>>44305005
Did I not just point out that small single ships never accomplish anything alone in Star Wars?
>460 posts
>46 IP's
>>44304969
But that shit isn't what Stardust is about.
>>44305077
In stardust terms it's really exactly in the middle between a destroyer and cruiser.
>>44305028
I agree that's what SD is focused on. And that's fine. The people who think this is Star Wars need to realize that it isn't built that way, not everyone gets to be Luke Skywalker or Han Solo. If you want to be an adventurer in SD, be prepared to have a life like a background character.
Which is fine and actually what I want to do. I'm not going to complain because my fighter wouldn't stand a chance against a big frigate.
>>44305097
What are you using to track IPs?
>>44305097
thanks for the info m8
>>44305025
Yes so? It's still not a viable concept in SD. Anything below a small armada is not a viable concept.
>>44305044
there's a difference between you occasionally being in hostile territory but the borg still largely ignoring you and the borg making you their number one enemy.
the only title theiy had was the traveler.
>>44305035
What is that even supposed to mean you idiot. Fighters can still not dock fighters. And i wouldn't call 10 fighters a "swarming"
>>44305071
Voyager had fucking ablative shielding. It could turtle in pretty well.
>>44305077
as you can tell by my name i'm not the anon who initially brought this up. I just chimed in because generally any single ship builds with anything smaller than a dreadnought are night impossible.
>>44305087
So all the mechacincs the CYOA introduces are not actually relevant at all because a frigate can cripple a battleship. GG
>>44305114
4chan does it natively anon :^)
>>44305097
So SDA is back then.
>>44305087
How about we get SDA to weigh in on this
SDA, is Star Dust a heroic space opera ala Star Wars, or is it closer to a more realistic Star Trek?
Is it intended primarily for large ships, or are small solo frigates intended too?
>>44305104
Still, like I said, it doesn't support the frigate anons.
>>44305122
You can dock vehicles and mechs.
>>44305103
Sure, that's why there's several sections where ground combat is a serious and important part.
>>44305028
It was SUPPOSED to be a startrek derivative, but it's moving away from that and rapidly becoming a WH40k knockoff because that's what people demanded.
in startrek the enterprise NX01 could take on absolutely fucking impossible odds. Alone.
>>44305122
>Yes so? It's still not a viable concept in SD. Anything below a small armada is not a viable concept.
Pfft. A destroyer can take 820m from titles and achieve ALL the contracts.
It's more than viable, it's pretty easy if you wanna tryhard it.
>>44305006
The difference is that 1. The Swordfish had a Destroyer-tier canon on it. Can't do that right now. 2. Most of the important shit was done on foot. The Bebop was almost solely transport.
To people saying Frigates can't do any thing, go play some mother f**king EVE.
>>44305114
Bottom right corner of the page, this function has been on 4chan for a while now.
>>44305136
> is Star Dust a heroic space opera ala Star Wars, or is it closer to a more realistic Star Trek?
What a retarded false dichotomy. It's obviously a heroic star trek.
>>44305112
Then why are people sitting here trying to defend the frigate/fighter bullshit?
>>44305169
Sorry, I already use Excel to create my builds in Star Dust.
>>44305103
In what fucking sense is it not about that? I don't see a single thing suggesting wacky chosen hero story telling, I see an extensively detailed CYOA where everything has statistical advantages and disadvantages. It has space fantasy elements but looks like it's about realistic people doing realistic work to me.
>>44305097
Why do people think everyone should only make one post?
>>44305153
I was criticizing that while the description says the heralds "swarmed their enemies" with fighters and thus they're abundant, even the largest herald ships can only take in 10.
>>44305160
>a destroyer can take all the contracts
>all the hardest titles.
i wonder how a destroyer alone will put up with a fucking armada of borg, OR heraldic dreadnoughts, or being hated by an entire pirate faction.
>>44305155
>Implying anybody cares about that shit at all.
>>44305206
Stardust is not about on-foot missions.
>>44305190
because they're dumbasses who want a nobody ship and a somebody story.
>>44304969
But that's the point you can't create a build with a frigate that can do all those things because you don't have enough money.
And the only way you could get MORE money is by taking on OTHER work too, for which a frigate wouldn't be enough.
So the only way to be able to do ANYTHING is have a large fleet.
>>44305217
>i wonder how a destroyer alone will put up with a fucking armada of borg, OR heraldic dreadnoughts, or being hated by an entire pirate faction.
By choosing its battles, numbskull. You obviously need to play it right. It's not like Voyager, which you like talking about, succeeded against the bog by charging in guns blazing.
>>44305231
The creator does otherwise it wouldn't be included and the creator decides what matters, not you.
Just because you believe Stardust is 'muh hard sci-fi carrier wankathon' doesn't make it reality.
>>44305217
Why does everything you do in stardust have to involve fighting and space combat?
Can't you make a living in the safest Federation territories, transporting goods?
>Thanks to the Traveller title I can quite contently pull my spess refuge build and companions over into my new SD one, renouncing all of the stardust companions and crew.
>>44305231
It's gonna be if you pick a tiny ship that can accomplish nothing.
>>44305217
Who says those Scabs were launched from another ship? They could be have been largely launched from space stations or planetary facilities.
>>44305250
You are such a fucking whining crybaby holy shit. I hope you never drop your namefagging so SDA can completely ignore every worthless whine, moan and fart you come up with.
>>44305284
I know right? This guy has bitched literally all day.
What I dont' get is how you can have a ship larger than a frigate and also be a freelance merc/adventurer/explorer
Like, can you imagine having to divide the spoils between 32 people? It'd be worthless. You could only take huge jobs or go home, or belong to a larger faction. It doesn't make any sense.
>>44305279
It's gonna be irrelevant then.
is it time for a fresh new thread without the bitching?
>>44305326
Yes and no respectively.
>>44305326
Not until it falls off.
Also you're gonna have bitching.
>>44305323
I agree. That's what I'm saying. You can have a small ship, or you can be relevant.
>>44305254
voyager was not actively being hunted down by the borg.
The sleeper title DOES that.
Voyager was not actively hunted by any faction for any prolonged periods of time. The longest were the kazon and they haadn't been constantly hostile either.
Here the red daggers will want to kill you
and some feds too.
>>44305272
Because this is a choose your own ADVENTURE.
You're supposed to be able to ADVENTURE about. And in such an adventure you'll have to be able to defend yourself. And in the current version that's only possible with an armada of ships, or the largest hulls.
Because smaller ships don't have any sources of income sine the huge combat titles give all the money.
>>44305280
>>44305310
i wish you would pick names too so i could ignore your bitching that i want StarDust to support anything other than your epic fleet builds.
>>44305320
They are your employees, anon, why the fuck do you think you paid them to join. I mean you could give them bonuses when the haul is good but that's up to you.
>>44305134
It's amazing to come back ten minutes later to 30 new posts all made by like, four guys
>>44305348
I thought your build was about being a lone mining vessel? That's already well supported. The only problem is that you think lone mining vessels should be more powerful than they are.
>>44305326
no and yes respectively.
>>44305344
>>44305334
just hoping it will die soon because SDA will post another update in the new thread
>>44305348
>voyager was not actively being hunted down by the borg.
Yes it was. From the moment the Borg learned about it they were hunting it. They just weren't able to find it a lot of the time.
>Voyager was not actively hunted by any faction for any prolonged periods of time.
Yeah, but they were always hunted by some kind of angry local, so it still fits just fine.
>>44305348
But I am choosing my own adventure.
I want to freight cargo in Federation space.
>>44305355
And we just hit 500, holy fuck.
>>44305394
507 bitch
>>44305355
Welcome to Flames Wars; Pocket Sized Edition.
>>44305388
I like your adventure, anon. Sounds comfy.
>>44305376
I'm saying lone adventuring in a small vessel should be possible.
I don't want to take on all the forces of hell but still want enough money so i can have defenses that are better than wet paper.
This middle ground does not seem to exist. You are either wet toilet paper and barely have more than 150 mcredits, or you are a fucking armada with a 1000mcredits.
>>44305388
That's not an adventure.
>>44305320
Android crew, also no reason why a large mining operation wouldn't be able to support a larger number of people.
>>44305418
Mining vessels are not meant for any combat at all. Civvies having shit defense is logical.
>>44305429
android crew is best crew, no mutiny, no fights, just work.
>>44305452
But who do you talk to?
>>44305418
>That's not an adventure.
That's only your opinion man.
The perfect exampe is the Normandy. Both versions are a frigate with a minimal crew.
And yet it could take on fairly large threats without an entire army backing it up.
>>44305438
>>44305384
a) my main concern is not mining ships. that was just a sidetrack
b) by "mining" i meant prospecting. Prospectos had their defenses, but they didn't travel with a small army backing them up and they didn't only work in well defended civilized areas
>>44305320
Well, you do have to pay for crew. So I imagine they're up-front contracts or the total sum of their employment.
Plus, if you're a cool enough dude they might hang around for free.
>>44305403
this whole thread has been cancer, and there's no reason to believe it'll stop anytime soon.
>>44305462
Named characters, also hypercomms room for what would amount to internet access.
>>44305490
The Normandy is a super special experimental government craft that gets upgraded with forbidden tech derived from super robot spaceship gods. It's not your average boat.
>>44305462
Shitpost about how bad loner builds are in School Days CYOA on intergalactichan's Ancient Games board for all your social needs
>>44305490
...you said you didn't want to take on the forces of hell. What do you consider an armada of ship sized robots that want to devour all sapient life in the galaxy?
>>44305418
>I'm saying lone adventuring in a small vessel should be possible.
It is. The only thing that's stopping you is your staggering burden of autism.
>>44305486
adventure
[ad-ven-cher]
Spell Syllables
Examples Word Origin
noun
1.
an exciting or very unusual experience.
2.
participation in exciting undertakings or enterprises:
the spirit of adventure.
3.
a bold, usually risky undertaking; hazardous action of uncertain outcome.
4.
a commercial or financial speculation of any kind; venture.
5.
Obsolete.
peril; danger; risk.
chance; fortune; luck.
If you are thinking of saying 4. is also an adventure: That's an economic adventure. Space adventure=/=economic adventure in space.
>>44305512
Why should any boat be an average boat. Yours can be upgraded with fucking herald tech and pilots that are semi transcendental beings.
>>44305538
The normandy did not do that on it's own.
>>44305553
But it isn't.
>>44305512
So, like... A Triglav destroyer with some of the pricier things in it?
>>44305490
The Normandy is destroyer sized.
SR-2 was somewhere in the late 100s and early 200s in terms of size.
>>44305577
This guy is bitching about frigates or something. I don't think anyone has said lone Destroyers aren't viable. I think they are.
>>44305568
>But it isn't.
It is, anon, it has been for all this time. The entire thread. Probably your whole life. Get some help for your autism, I'm sure there's hope. Just leave us alone.
I was drunk and wasn't really sure what I was arguing about, honestly.
>>44305594
Hey, don't look at me, I even made a build up here >>44299802
I even have a submarine for adventure. A fucking sub. Fuck you I'm an adventurer with a submarine.
>>44305568
>Space adventure=/=economic adventure in space.
All I'm hearing are opinions and not objective facts.
>>44305584
It also strikes me that the plot of ME2 could probably be summed up with the Hellraiser title with a few fluff adjustments.
>Origin: Dustkeeper
>Skill: Adv. Combat, Diplomacy, Ship Weapon Specialization (Kinetic)
>
>Ship:
>Hull: Venture (26m)
>Energy: Nuclear Fission (20m)
>Shield: Standard (8m)
>Command Mod: None
>Hull Mod: None
>
>Weapons:
>Spinal: Artillery Cannon (5m, origin discount)
>Broadside: 2x Missile Pods (4+2=6m), Flak Cannon (4+2=6m)
>Point Defence: 4x Machine Gun (2+3x1=5m)
>
>Vehicles: MLUV (4m)
>
>Compartments:
>Crew Quarters Upgrade (1m) , Standard Infirmary (2m), Evacuation Room (1m), Standard Mess Hall (2m), Lounge (0m), Laboratory (3m), Cargo Space/Engineering Bay (3m), Arsenal (4m),
>
>Crew:
>Anna Tse (1m), Enrico Jourdan (1m), Malcolm Red (3m), Ignacio Lopez (2m), Lauren L. Lazuli (0m), Jorgen Masterson (1m), 5x Explorers (0.3m), 1xResearcher (0.1m).
>
>Total Cost: 105m
>Contract: This Land Tier 1 +5m
I tried to create a frigate of Dustkeepers but the budget was so tight it became kinda meh.
>>44305584
>>44305584
the SR2 has exactly 28 crew members.
>>44305598
That was actually a good reaction.
congrats
>>44305909
You could have taken a bunch more contracts than that and some of the more benign titles like whisperer.
>>44305909
and that's what i'm complaining about
>>44305941
SR2 also had a lot more room for people than it used, and you only need half the maximum crew for a ship. That puts it as having a bit more than the required number of crew for the largest Destroyer.
>>44305941
>the SR2 has exactly 28 crew members.
So you are agreeing it's destroyer sized? I mean the frigates usually only have mid to low teens for max crew capacity. 28 is pretty damn close to the lower end of destroyer crew size for a full crew. And nothing says you have to have a full crew on a destroyer.
>>44306037
it is stated to be a frigate though.
The sr1 was a frigate and the sr2 was twice the weight but not twice the size.
So still a frigate.
>>44306060
Mass Effect frigate =/= Stardust frigate
>>44306060
Eh, different mean of classification. If you want to build the SR-2 in stardust it will be classed as a destroyer.
>>44306090
>>44306073
Would it really? look at the available hangar space. Look at the example pictures given for destroyers and frigates. Look at the amount of weapons mounted on frigates and destroyers.
Compare all that to the normandy.
It's just a large frigate.
>>44305947
>>44305947
>>44305947
Next thread, next SD version.
>>44306143
Destroyers are just large frigates, silly.
>>44306143
Yes, seems pretty spot on for the K792-UN4.
I think you're forgetting the hanger deck isn't normally accessible in game. You only go to it when fighting the orb after jumping through the relay that starts the end game sequence.
