[grumbler]

PF: I have tried a little experiment with the weapons. I simply made a rule: all light weapons have a basic range of 2, medium of 4, long of 6. Lasers get +1 range but reduced damage, seekers +2.

Level 1 weapons lost 1 range, level 6 (the highest I went in a short game) got +1. Medium ship mounts got +2 (large would get +4 and massive +6, but again I didn't go that far).

In the short game, things seemed to work out a bit better. Obviously, the low ROF weapons weren't any good - I will try to come up with a reasonable compromise between ROF and range. However, the smaller ships didn't prove as dominating as in the earlier games. In particular, Shadow escorts could no longer zap enemy light cruisers with impunity.

I am working on a cost-benefit calculation for range, hitting power, and ROF. It will have to be empirical, though, since the tradeoffs are not necessarily strictly numerical, and they definately change based on strategic vs tactical combat (since the human player can shoot and scoot and the computer cannot).

Hopefully, such a formula will allow us to more cogently talk about weapons.

ALL: I don't like the idea of abandoning weapons mounts, for somewhat personal "stylistic" reasons. If you get rid of them, especially with the rules as is on reactive armor, then capital ships become a losing game.

Take the example of 800 tons of warships in two cases: one battleship and two light cruisers.

The battleship has 50 tons locked up in required components, the 2 CLs 60 tons. It will take the BB 245 tons of standard fusion engines to get a speed of 16, while it will take the 2 CLs 250 tons to do the same.

At first blush, the BB looks like the better deal, as it has 505 tons to devote to weaponry, armor, and sensor/ECM, while the 2 CLs have only 490 tons. However, when you add in the fact that the 2 CLs can have 2 sets of reactive armor, they seem the better deal. Smaller ships get the advantage of additional reactive armor protection, even if they have to carry more sensors et al to get it.

I don't think we want games where hordes of small ships fight it out. Capital ships should be distinctly different, and more powerful, and more expensive on a ton for ton basis. It should take a capital ship to match a capital ship.

The way to make that happen it with the weapons mounts. I see a triple-cost/double- tonnage/double-damage/increased-range formula as working better than the double-cost/double- tonnage/triple-damage formula used now. that way, capital ships get range as their primary benefit, and pay for it in cost.

thoughts?