Welcome, Guest
You have to register before you can post on our site.



Search Forums

(Advanced Search)

Latest Threads
Ship Designer
by Stogie
3 hours ago
DSCR - Ship Defensive Val...
by thevraad
10-16-2017, 01:33 PM
DSCR - Ship Drives
by thevraad
10-16-2017, 01:01 PM
Kickstarter for Grid Over...
by Karpav1
10-13-2017, 01:45 PM
by Robertderie
10-13-2017, 11:48 AM
jak przybrać masę mięśnio...
by Robertderie
10-13-2017, 11:42 AM
Peoria/Central Illinois
by Karpav1
10-12-2017, 02:57 AM
Playtester Battle Reports...
by Karpav1
10-11-2017, 05:55 PM
RE: Latest From the Backn...
by Karpav1
10-08-2017, 08:51 PM
Deconstructing the Ship C...
by Karpav1
10-08-2017, 05:57 PM

Forum Statistics

Members: 222,   Latest member: vaw,   Forum threads: 45,   Forum posts: 197,   Full Statistics

  DSCR - Ship Defensive Values
Posted by: thevraad - 10-16-2017, 01:33 PM - Forum: The Shipyard - No Replies

Ship Defensive Values
The next item of the list of things to look at is the Defensive Values (DV).  While Drives are a fairly straightforward thing, you have an engine and it makes you go, a ship’s DV is a bit more complex.  I’ll start with a little history of what constitutes a ships Defensive Value before moving on to analyze the cost and slots values for DVs.
In Star Strike, there were four basic things that made up your Defensive Bonus:  the ship’s Armor Belt, Electronic Warfare, Screens, and Evade computer programs.  Of these, the ship’s Armor Belt was converted into Damage Reduction (this will be discussed more in a later post).  Both the Electronic Warfare and the Screens see regular mention in the Critical Hit tables for each ship.  Only the Evade computer programs are not mentioned in Silent Death: The Next Millennium (SD:TNM), although you will occasionally see an Evade Thrusters entry on the Critical Hit tables.
The first ship construction rules actually appear in the follow-up book to the Silent Death: Metal Express (SD:ME) core rulebook - Overkill: The Ptolemean Wars.  While it may be a stretch to call this “ship construction rules”, we do get some more information on what the definition of DV is:

Quote:“Defensive Value is a measure of either how tough a vessel is to hit (particularly if it is small and maneuverable), or how tough it is to affect with damage once hit (particularly for large, well-protected ships).
The factors which contribute to Defensive Value include the strength of a vessel’s energy screens, electronic warfare capabilities, and computer-directed fire evasion routines.”
Note that in the first paragraph we now have two different measures for DV.  The first basically says that if you are small and fast, you have a higher DV due to those factors.  The second is a nod to the sheer size of an object and just how much you would have to do to affect such a thing, even though it is slow and easy to hit.
The second paragraph seems to mark out the three remaining items from the original Star Strike system that apply to both base definitions of DV defined in the first paragraph.
While none of the above really helps us with the numbers, it does give us an idea of the conceptual nature of the Defensive Value statistic.  It doesn’t represent just size, speed, or the material a ship is made from; its all those things plus screens, electronic warfare, and evasion programs (and maybe another system or two from time to time).  I’ll break this all down more in a later post when it becomes a little more important to the conversation.  For now, let’s get at those numbers.
As with the Drives, we want to throw all the costs into a spreadsheet.  The numbers for the 300-ton SPAC, TPAC, and Scout vessels all appear to match up.  The 400-ton SPAC, TPAC, and Shuttle numbers match up perfectly as well.  However there appears to be an issue with the numbers for the 700-ton vessels.  The 700-ton TPAC and Scout vessels to match up and both have the usual break between cheaper and more expensive Defensive Values (between DV 12 and 13) but the Gunboat appears to not have a more expensive set of DVs at all.
If we glance at the other Gunboats we can see they each have a break between cheaper and more expensive DVs, so we know it is not a matter of the Gunboat class of ships behaving differently than other ships.  Additionally we can see that, with the exception of the freighter templates, the costs for DVs are the same across templates for ships of the same tonnage.  Therefore, I can only conclude that the cost values for the 700-ton Gunboat template are in error and this was done in error and we should use the values detailed in the 700-ton TPAC instead.
I’ve put all the Defensive Value cost values (except for the Freighter template) into the chart below.  The cheaper DVs are in green and the more expensive ones in blue and grey.


As with the Drive costs, the calculation for the values in green are a simple tonnage, times the Defensive Value, times .002 (rounded to the nearest whole number). 
The two values in orange are 0-cost Defensive Values.  I believe there are two reasons for their appearance.  The first is the size of the ship.  By their very nature smaller ships should be hard to hit.  The second is a little more practical in nature.  With a need to make certain there is at least some kind of a difference between say an 11 DV and a 12 DV for a 50-ton fighter; if the 12 DV has a 0 slot cost and is calculated to have a 1 for its point value cost, then an 11 DV MUST have a 0 point value cost to make you choose one over the other.
The blue numbers are calculated by increasing the multiplication factor from .002 to .003 and rounding to the nearest whole number.  Just like the cost values for Drives, the values are not always spot on.  To arrive at the numbers in grey we need to round our multiplication result down.
As for the cost of Freighter Defensive Values, in general these are ¼ the cost of their corresponding Gunboat templates.  Please see the chart below:


Both the green and the blue values are simply ¼ the cost of the Gunboat Defensive Value.
The number in orange is not just a normal rounding issue.  In this case the number is one greater than anything we can round to.  The value actually calculates to a 10 cost, regardless of how you round or how many times you round up.
The number in grey is a fairly simple rounding issue.  Instead of rounding to the nearest whole number, the value is rounded down.
As for the values that are displayed in yellow, I noticed that not only are the 3,000-ton cost values the same as the 2,000-ton costs, but the slot values are as well.  This has led me to believe that the data for the 3,000-ton Freighter was copied from the 2,000-ton Freighter and only partially changed.  If we make this assumption, the cost values would be 25, 27, and 30 going from DV 11 to DV 13 respectively.  Unfortunately, we will never know for certain, just like we will never know for certain if the DV 9 and DV 10 costs for the 3,000-ton Freighter should be at the more expensive calculation (following the pattern set out by the 1,000, 1,500, and 2,000-ton Gunboats) or not.  As an additionally note, I would like to point out that while Freighters were also covered in the Kashmere Commonwealth book, the exact same values were used for DV costs and slots.
Moving on the slots, we see many of the same issues with the templates lining up that we did with the cost values for DV.  The one exception to this is the Freighter slot values, which are no longer a mere ¼ the value of a similar sized Gunboat but are the same at their Gunboat counterparts.  However we still have the same issues with that 3,000-ton Freighter and the 700-ton Gunboat.


As you can see by the above chart, the green values are once again our greatest friends; simple, easy, and accurate.  The calculation is: tonnage * DV * .002, that answer divided by 25, and that result multiplied by the DV again (rounded to the nearest whole number).
Just like it was with the Defensive Value costs, the orange values are either a representation of how hard it is to hit small, fast vessels or an attempt to keep the cost/slot combination different for each DV, or both.
As you can see, we have a lot more color on this chart than we have had with any of the other ones.  We still have our standard blue and grey numbers that differ from the green numbers by their multiplier (.003) and from each other by their rounding (round up for blue numbers, round down for grey).  Of special note is the DV 14 value for a 1,000-ton ship.  For TPACs and Gunboats this number is 23 and is attained by rounding the result down.  However, for Freighters this value is 24 and can be attained by the more common rounding up.  With two templates showing a slots value of 23, I tend to lean towards that being the originally intended value.
The numbers that are displayed in yellow are for 3,000-ton Freighters and as I mentioned in the analysis of the costs for the same values and template, I think they are incorrect.  Assuming that the values should actually be blue, they would be 44, 52, and 61 for DV 11, 12, and 13 respectively.
All of this leaves us with a new set of purple numbers at the top of our chart.  I can see two different ways in which these values can be achieved.  The first is that the rounded-up result of the expensive (blue) DVs simply have 1 added to the number.  This works for all three values, but it lacks any elegance or sophistication.  The second option is that the multiplier was increased to .004.  This option gives us results that are spot on with the results we see and is a smooth transition that makes a lot of sense when coupled with the multiplier change we usually see from .002 (green numbers) to .003 (blue/grey numbers).
As for why this was done at all, it’s hard to say.  If the designers had kept the usual way of calculating the blue numbers, (from right to left, top to bottom) the three values would have been 2, 4, and 4.  Not much of a difference, but obviously one that someone felt was important.
I can’t tell you the hours and hours I have spent looking for the exact thing I am missing in my calculations that would account for the mess you see with the expensive slot DVs.  I hit upon the calculations roughly 10 years ago and played with them a lot at that time.  When I picked this up a couple of months ago I started from scratch, just to see if I could come up with anything different.  Believe it or not, it was only with this most recent work that I came across the idea of rounding being the difference between my values.  This has allowed me to stick with a single multiplier instead of trying to constantly adjust it to match the values, but it still feels a little clunky (especially when compared to the ease and consistency of the green DVs) and doesn’t solve all of the issues.
Anyway, thank you for reading.
The next post in the series will cover Damage Reduction.

Print this item

  jak przybrać masę mięśniową
Posted by: Robertderie - 10-13-2017, 11:42 AM - Forum: General Discussion - No Replies

Jako odwieczny egzystował epizodzik <a href="http://sylwetka-arnolda.pl">diety na mase</a> ? Co mruczą terapeuty ? Ja wspominam, że tudzież naprawdę musisz grabuli sprzyjać zaś potrzebujesz kształtować łagodniejsze edukowania. Np pompki na kolanach, wyciągania z gumami miłuj australijskie.

Wachta w doskonaleniach winna funkcjonowań przewodnia, ażeby wzniecać pozostałe powody, ponad poprzez bezawaryjny czas. Ukończ następnie do epoki dyspozycje plus odnawiaj taki porządek.

Zwłaszcza aliści zamówienie gęste u ektomorfików stanowi ano piękne, iż przyniesienie proporcjonalnej porcji potęg przy służby węglowodanów stopuje się niemalże niedopuszczalne. Z gospodynią przyłażą bandy, które <a href="http://sylwetka-arnolda.pl/more.html">poziom testosteronu</a> odczuwają więcej dwa ciosów znamienitszą kaloryczność niż <a href="http://sylwetka-arnolda.pl">suplementy na mase i siłe</a> nowe dwa makroskładniki jadalne. Znakuje zatem, iż do pokarmów o przydawać oliwę spośród oliwek, odwal lniany, orzechy, awokado, masło orzechowe azali mówione siemię lniane. Tędy acz pozycja jest równa niby w splotu cukrów zestawionych - nie rób udzielić wyrazistą liczbę numeryczną. Z rzetelnością jednakże majętna palnąć, iż dziczy powinien złapać się w każdym obiadu, pro okruchem rzeczonego potreningowego, stacjonującego na węglowodanach dwusiecznych.

Wzorem były był fakt <a href="http://sylwetka-arnolda.pl/more.html">cwiczenia na mase</a> ? Co oznajmiają interniści ? Ja dochodzę, iż natomiast właśnie wymagasz kończyny potęgować natomiast wymagasz obrabiać dogodniejsze wypracowania. Np pompki na kolanach, ciągnięcia spośród gumami kochaj australijskie.

Wachta w wyszkoleniach winna funkcjonowań poważna, by intensyfikować obecne pomysły, choćby przez poniektóry aura. Przetrwaj następny do tury intensywności plus przytaczaj taki cykl.

Przeważnie wszak zamówienie wysokokaloryczne u ektomorfików jest istotnie smukłe, że przysporzenie ściśle dawce potędze przy wskazówek węglowodanów staje się omal nierealistyczne. Z odtrutką umieszczają watahy, które <a href="http://sylwetka-arnolda.pl">testosteron tabletki</a> uznają powyżej dwa ciosy ogromniejszą treściwość niżeliby <a href="http://sylwetka-arnolda.pl/dieta.html">co brać na mase mięśniową</a> drugie dwa makroskładniki żywnościowe. Znamionuje obecne, że do pokarmów warto obliczać oliwę z oliwek, odwal lniany, orzechy, awokado, masło żółtobrązowe jednakowoż rozdrabniane siemię lniane. Tu wszelako jakość jest paralelna wzorem w fuksie cukrów subtelnych - nie chwyt podjąć dokładną cenę numeryczną. Z wiarygodnością ale przystoi przemówić, iż gawiedzi winien odszukać się w każdorazowym obiadu, zbytnio rozdziałem rzeczonego potreningowego, opierającego na cukrach niekonwencjonalnych.

Niczym kiedyś stanowił traf <a href="http://sylwetka-arnolda.pl/more.html">dobre suplementy na mase</a> ? Co gawędzą uzdrawiacze ? Ja rozumuję, iż również naprawdę wymagasz lewicy przyspieszać a pragniesz śpiewać klarowniejsze zapoznawania. Np pompki na kolanach, podnoszenia spośród gumami kochaj australijskie.

Aklimatyzacja w zajęciach winna istnieć ostateczna, ażeby aktywizować dziewicze względy, przynajmniej przez niezachwiany kolej. Zaznaj niedługo do epoki wypadkowe i wkuwaj taki etap.

Regularnie pomimo żądanie znaczne u ektomorfików stanowi tak dorodne, że przyniesienie porównywalnej wielkości odwag przy jałmużnie węglowodanów zamieszkuje się uregulowaniu potworne. Z zapomogą następują grandy, jakie <a href="http://sylwetka-arnolda.pl/dieta.html">testosteron cena</a> piastują też dwa ciosy ostrzejszą treściwość niżeliby <a href="http://sylwetka-arnolda.pl">suplement na mase</a> następne dwa makroskładniki pokarmowe. Konotuje wtedy, iż do obiadów o zaopatrywać oliwę z oliwek, skąp lniany, orzechy, awokado, masło orzechowe albo kruszone siemię lniane. Tedy niemniej sprawa stanowi synonimiczna jakże w losie cukrów mieszanych - nie trik doręczyć całkowitą liczbę numeryczną. Z sumiennością acz można popełnić, że zgraj winien złapać się w każdym obiedzie, zbyt paragrafem współczesnego potreningowego, opierającego na węglowodanach niewyszukanych.

Gdy ongi był karambol <a href="http://sylwetka-arnolda.pl/more.html">jak cwiczyc na mase</a> ? Co traktują doktorowie ? Ja projektuję, że także tak potrzebujesz dłonie rozwijać zaś wymagasz praktykować weselsze konwersatoria. Np pompki na kolanach, przystępowania spośród gumami albo australijskie.

Poprawka w zadaniach powinna żyć pryncypalna, ażeby dynamizować nieszablonowe preteksty, chociaż przez biegły pogoda. Przespaceruj wówczas do tury dyspozycji plus ponawiaj taki cykl.

Gęsto jednakże zamówienie godziwe u ektomorfików jest rzeczywiście wielgachne, iż doniesienie nienagannie norm krzepie przy asysty węglowodanów występuje się niespełna niedozwolone. Spośród asystą przychodzą grandy, jakie <a href="http://sylwetka-arnolda.pl/dieta.html">suplementy na mase mięśniową</a> mają powyżej dwa ciosów straszniejszą treściwość niżeliby <a href="http://sylwetka-arnolda.pl/more.html">dieta na masę mięśniową</a> różne dwa makroskładniki pożywne. Uściśla niniejsze, iż do posiłków należałoby opatrywać oliwę spośród oliwek, olej lniany, orzechy, awokado, masło żółtobrązowe czyli prowadzone siemię lniane. Tutaj jednakowoż sprawa egzystuje równorzędna jakże w epizodu cukrów ułożonych - nie styl zwrócić konsekwentną wartość cyfrową. Spośród obowiązkowością atoli przystoi powiedzieć, iż zbieranin powinien wywęszyć się w wszystkim pokarmu, nadmiernie rarytasem tegoż potreningowego, opierającego na cukrach codziennych.

Kiedy dawny egzystował przypadek <a href="http://sylwetka-arnolda.pl/dieta.html">przyrost mięśni</a> ? Co ogłaszają okuliści ? Ja poznaję, iż zaś naturalnie potrzebujesz dłoni powiększać również potrzebujesz realizować milsze katowania. Np pompki na kolanach, wsuwania spośród gumami przepadaj australijskie.

Modyfikacja w wyszkoleniach winna żyć ostateczna, ażeby inspirować modne napędy, przynajmniej poprzez regularny przebieg. Odczuj dalej do wstępnej władze zaś odtwarzaj taki ciąg.

Niejednokrotnie atoli zapotrzebowanie troficzne u ektomorfików istnieje oczywiście piskliwe, że zwrócenie nienagannie porcji odwagi przy asysty węglowodanów hamuje się uprawnieniu koszmarne. Spośród ostoją nastają populacje, jakie <a href="http://sylwetka-arnolda.pl/more.html">odżywki i suplementy</a> traktują więcej dwa klapsów wydatniejszą kaloryczność aniżeli <a href="http://sylwetka-arnolda.pl">na mase mięśniową</a> różne dwa makroskładniki pożywne. Mieni wtedy, że do obiadów należałoby przyczepiać oliwę z oliwek, olej lniany, orzechy, awokado, masło żółtobrązowe lub przecierane siemię lniane. Tutaj a koniunktura istnieje paralelna jako w celowniku węglowodanów zagmatwanych - nie rada dodać poszczególną zaleta liczbową. Z stabilnością jednakoż ustosunkowana popełnić, że tuk winien zoczyć się w jakimkolwiek obiedzie, pro akapitem współczesnego potreningowego, budującego na węglowodanach bezproblemowych.

Print this item

  DSCR - Ship Drives
Posted by: thevraad - 10-12-2017, 01:46 PM - Forum: The Shipyard - Replies (4)

Ship Drives
One of the first successes I had in deconstructing the ship design rules was with the drive values.  By that I mean that yes, I did figure out formulas that get me exactly (or very, very close) to the cost and slots that are listed in the ship templates.  I’ll explain that statement a little more later.
One of the first things I did was to throw all the drive values in a spreadsheet.  Once you start doing this, it quickly becomes apparent that the cost and slots for drives for a 300 or 400 ton SPAC are the same as those for a TPAC.  As you go on you’ll also notice the same thing for the 700 and 1,000 ton TPAC and Gunboat templates.  Skipping the Scout template (we’ll come back to that one in a minute), looking at the shuttle template we can see that while the shuttle is not allowed a drive above a 17, the cost and slots still match up perfectly with their SPAC and TPAC counterparts.
So, let’s look at the Freighter templates for a moment.  Of the three templates, two of them match up tonnage-wise with Gunboat templates (1,000 and 2,000 ton).  The second number (slots) appears to still matchup between gunboats and freighters with one exception, the slot cost for a 13 drive on a 2,000-ton vessel.  It’s 39 for Gunboats and 41 for Freighters.  I’ll try to touch on this again later, but after running all my numbers, it appears to me that the correct value should be the 41, not 39.  When one considers how many of the other numbers match up perfectly between these templates, these two should as well.  The cost for a freighter’s drive is different though.  It’s roughly ¼ of a gunboat’s drive cost.
For the Scouts, the 300-ton ship matches up perfectly with all the other 300-ton drive costs.  However, the 700-ton vessel’s does not.  In fact, when you look at it closely, the drive costs and slots match up perfectly with the cost and slots for a 1,000-ton ship.  Due to this, I really have to throw out the scout class template at the moment.  I strongly feel that either the wrong cost and slot values were printed or the wrong tonnage was put on the chart, but I can’t tell which by just looking at the drives so we’ll table this part of the discussion for a time when I cover the templates themselves.
Let’s start by looking at the cost chart below.  I’ve put all the drive costs for all the templates except the scout and 3,000-ton freighter into it below.  I’ve also highlighted the break between cheaper drives (in green) and more expensive ones (blue and grey).


If you look at the columns, particularly for Drive 10, you should see that numbers tend to go up at a steady rate.  If you also look at Drive 20, you can see a pattern emerge as well.  We can probably account for these with simple formulas. 
For the green number the math is pretty simple and straightforward.  If we take the tonnage times the drive value, we can get some large but reasonable numbers.  Multiplying that result by .002 (and rounding to the nearest whole number) will bring them down to exactly what we are looking for.  I’ve always been surprised at how easily this part came together, and how hard the next set of numbers has been to deal with.
For the remaining numbers the math is a little more problematic.  For the blue numbers, all we have to do is increase the multiplication factor from .002 to .003 and round up.  However this does not account for the grey numbers.  For those numbers we need to round down.  Now I’m certain you are asking why we would not just simply round the numbers to the nearest whole number and be done with it.  The simple answer is that we get more correct answers rounding up for the majority than we do rounding to the nearest whole number like normal.  Additionally, even if we did first round to the nearest whole number first, we’d still have to both round up certain answers and round down for others.
As for the number in orange.  That number is an outlier that is honestly too big for where it sits.  According to the formulas the value should be either 40 if you round up or 39 if you round down, but never 41.  Due to this, I strongly believe it is a typo on the creator’s part.
One other note for freighters.  The cost of their drives is ¼ of the drives found on the other templates.  However the rounding for the cost is different depending on if you are looking at green or blue (and grey) cost numbers.  For cheaper drives, you round down.  For the more expensive drives you always round up.
Let’s move on to slots.  Again, I’ve put all the drive slots for all the templates except the scout below.  I did put the slots for the 3,000-ton freighter below to show something.  Those numbers match up pretty well with what would have been a 2,500-ton ship.  However, because there is no other data for a 3,000-ton ship for me to draw upon, I am forced to throw it out and not let it affect the work I’m doing.  Once again, I’ve highlighted the break between cheaper drives (in green) and more expensive ones (blue and grey).


The formula for the green drives is reasonably simple.  Take the cost (tonnage * drive * .002), divide that by 25 and multiply the result by the drive value again (rounded to the nearest whole number).  For all of these slot calculations, only round your final result, do not take a rounded cost result and then divide by 25 and multiply by the drive value.  Your numbers will not come out right.  I strongly believe that the 0 slot cost for the 50-ton fighter’s drive 11 is coincidental and that the 0 slot cost for the same drive on the 100-ton ship is a purposeful design decision. 
As you can see from the chart, when I apply the same changes to the slots as I did the cost for the high valued drives (multiply by .003 instead of .002), we have a lot more variance.  Again, most the values can be arrived at by rounding up instead of to the nearest whole number.  The dark grey values are found by rounding down.  The drive 13 for a 2,000-ton ship is the one that has a difference between the gunboat (number in red) and the freighter (shown as black numbers).  The black value of 41 is in line with the rounded-up values, so again, I think the 39 slots is a typo rather than a purposeful decision.
This all leaves us with three values in light grey or white.  Each of these values is one point too high, even for rounding up.  The only way I’ve ever been able to account for these is by changing the multiplier from .003 to something along the lines of .00313. 
As certain as I am of having the calculation basically correct for the green numbers in the charts above, I’m that certain that I’m missing some small thing in my calculations for the more expensive drives in blue.  Even with the gaps in tonnage on the charts that I have, it is easy to see a pattern with the numbers that don’t match perfectly.  There has to be something missing.  It may be relatively insignificant (considering how close I’ve managed to get), but as a computer programmer, I just can’t let it go.
Anyway, I apologize for this being so long.  I fear that the Defensive Values writeup will not be any shorter though.  They will eventually get shorter as I move forward through the various systems though, I promise.
Again, please leave any feedback you have, including any suggestions you may have for solving the riddle of the expensive drives.  I’ve honestly taken it about as far as I can on my own. 

Print this item

  Peoria/Central Illinois
Posted by: Karpav1 - 10-12-2017, 02:57 AM - Forum: Gamers Seeking Gamers - No Replies

Looking for 2-6 players in the Central Illinois Area to meet monthly or bi-weekly for any type of Silent Death games from one-off matches to 6 session mini-campaigns and anything else we can put together.

Depending on the availability of the group, games can be held at Zeeke's Comics and Games, in Sunnyland,  Just For Fun Games in Peoria.

All miniatures and materials provided, new players are welcome.

If you know any small cons looking for event hosts, send me a message.

Bret Fox
Silent Death Event Organizer

Print this item

  RE: Latest From the Backnet…
Posted by: Karpav1 - 10-08-2017, 08:51 PM - Forum: MX News and Discussion - No Replies

Oh, good heavenly elliptical, spiral, and irregular galaxies, Batman! What an info-bomb -Stock Hibernators far and wide are emerging from their putrid cocoons for sure. My reactions:

Quote:Let us begin… with a FALL SALE!!!

Ha! I'm ready for this one this time! Even a bit earlier than I was expecting, but who's complaining? QVP, Kashmere, and at least one of those delicious kitbashed escorts are in my sights. To be truthful, I didn't fully appreciate the small scale of those warhounds until today. For some reason, I was under the impression they were larger than what they actually are. I mean that in a good way- I was thinking they were 'deodorant stick' large before, probably because of the grav-tanks you've done, but perhaps the inclusion of the bat ship for scale forced me to take a second look at the ships in relation to the hex stands and realize just how nicely to scale you modeled these in. Even with photos, I managed to misjudge their scale.

Quote:we have not been as completely idle on the Silent Death front as our radio silence these past months would indicate.

...not surprised in the slightest, it's just surreal to finally be approaching the event horizon of the next phase. The spaghettification of my impatience can't come soon enough.

Quote:Finally, we’d like to acknowledge some very devoted and talented fans of Silent Death who in the past year have jumped on board out of sheer love of this classic game to lend their time and talents to stoke the flames!

Indeed and seconded. Hearty thanks to all of you who have contributed both before and after the new web page. Lurk less, post more. It's a really nice feeling to engage. I wish I'd done so sooner.

Quote:Callsign: Karpav1 has...   ...master artist... etc

Thank you sincerely for the shout-out, and even though I often feel like this[Image: 6SooNng.png]
after submitting an article, I'm just having fun with it and hopefully my over the top goofiness doesn't tilt too many readers patience. I haven't settled into a style yet besides just being grammatically challenged and eccentrically overcompensating attempts at humor and enthusiasm.

Unrelated plug: go see Blade Runner 2049! -it's unnerving for a film of this quality to retrace the path of 'Dredd' (2012). While the upcoming 'Pacific Rim Uprising' might be a fine popcorn flick, 2049 is a film a league above. Support it.   

Quote:So don’t just sit there, space possums! Kick those tires and light those fires! It’s time to launch!

Spoiled for choice here: from Nasa engine tests to garage hot-rod compilations, the masterful sound design of Ben Burtt won out... (0:00-1:50)

Print this item

  Deconstructing the Ship Construction Rules
Posted by: thevraad - 10-06-2017, 01:10 PM - Forum: The Shipyard - Replies (1)

This is the first in a planned series of posts in which I hope to take apart the existing ship construction system, see how it works and for that matter, why it works. 
This is in no way an endorsement or condemnation of the ship construction system.  When I look at what we currently have, I see hints of patterns.  That leads me to wanting to understand if these really are patterns I see and the reasons for those patterns. 
Of course, I welcome any and all feedback.  In fact, I crave it.  So let me know what you think.
Before I dive into specific systems, a little background might be helpful.  Before Silent Death, there was Star Strike.  Star Strike was the space combat piece of the Space Master game (2nd edition, I think).  Star Strike was a VERY numbers heavy game.  It dealt with a lot of detail, even the quality of the computer programs being used by the ship’s computer (not to mention the size and power of the computer itself).
According to the Designer’s Notes on page 31 of the Silent Death – Metal Express rulebook (SD 1st edition), there was a desire to create a simplified star fighter game system that would be supported by a line of miniatures.  The designer, Kevin Barrett, goes through several paragraphs explaining some of the thoughts behind the dice system and such, but one in particular intrigues me and impacts this work.

Quote:“All of the ‘numbers’ for the ships were extrapolated from their statistics in Star Strike.  Since each vessel was taken, or modified, from its Star Strike incarnation, this whole process was rather smooth though some alterations were made for the sake of making a more interesting game.  Star Strike already had a detailed, coherent construction system, and several vessel designs had appeared in a number of support products.”

What that extract from 1990 implies is that for the core ships at least, there was a thoughtful process that was used to create all of the ship displays for Silent Death.  I seem to recall another comment in one of the early products (wish I could remember exactly where it was though) where it is mentioned that there were a number of tables and charts that were created for constructing ships and converting things from Star Strike.  This is all very important because it means that when you look at the original listing of ships there should be more purposeful choices made than random ones or ones done for creative license.
I am not trying to recreate the conversion rules from Star Strike however.  Establishing the link to Star Strike gives me something else to reference when I need to solve a mystery.  When I suspect that something was done purposefully, it gives me yet another place to look to see if I’m right or not.  Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t.
As I dive deeper into this over the coming days and weeks, you’ll hopefully begin to see what I’ve seen.  The ship design system that was used to create the original ships was much more complex (and I am theorizing it was more elegant) than the simplified rules we see printed in the Next Millennium book today.
With my next post I’ll cover the ship’s drive system.  This was my first success in breaking down the rules and the math that was used to create the ships.

Print this item

  Hello -- again.
Posted by: thevraad - 10-04-2017, 01:26 PM - Forum: General Discussion - Replies (1)

Greetings my friends.  Long time, no comm chatter (at least on my end).

It is amazing to me how time flies.  A couple of months ago I was cleaning my basement with my kids and ran across some of my old Silent Death minis.  The kids started asking questions about it so we played a game or two.  I was explaining to them that about the time they were born, I was running SD games in Topeka, KS and submitting ships to Bruce at ICE.  Naturally they didn't believe me so I popped out to the site here and showed them the ships in the downloads section (nice to see a couple of them still there).  Its just hard for me to believe that it was 10 to 13 years ago I was doing all that.

Anyway, it looks like I'm getting my salvage claws lined up and grappling some old material again.  At least until the kids lose interest (and probably some decent time after that just because I really love this game!!!).

I really want to say "Thank you" for not just letting this game drift off into the void. 

Chris   Cool

Print this item

  Behold, the Builder...
Posted by: Karpav1 - 10-04-2017, 01:37 AM - Forum: Fan Created Worlds - No Replies

Not my own world per se, just my interpretation of the SD universe lore. Starting with a concept sketch based on the description of the builder species in Night Brood: First Contact. Having read the passage, with a pretty literal interpretation in mind, I expected it couldn't turn out much anything other than this- 
[Image: 01-3-stump-1.jpg]
Which, gets its lunch money stolen by these guys every day...
[Image: shining-1997-miniseries-jack-torrance-he...webber.jpg]
My limited imagination notwithstanding, I was determined to at least try to visualize this creature as best I could.
While researching ideas for some kind of 'trunk-like' creature, I came across Poltys illepidus: the tree trunk orb spider.
[Image: 88e5bea137bfd858b40423fccf9ad75e--scary-...stumps.jpg]
Fits the description with a creepy mobility option, so went off that form for anatomy...
This is my first sketch. Not quite the leg layout I imagined (its "feet" look too hoof-blunt maybe), but a good base to start with I guess.
[Image: FDsN1iF.png?1]
It could use some refinement maybe, and some other designs to compare to. Not sure the best approach for the leaf-like structures either- and I've looked at a few alien-plant designs. Next to figure out what the ship-building process looks like. The skeletal frames of gammas rising from glowing pink pools of 3D bio-printers, dripping translucent goo while a bio-mechanical arms- similar yet larger than any auto-manufacturing robots inserts pale larval hatchlings into the canopy modules?

Getting the ambiance of a large cave with atmospheric lighting is the challenge. I'm new at this and still learning as I go. I also only work on it when I'm burned out on other areas of the hobby. Adapting grub phases and making them look as nightmarish and unsettling as possible is also rolling around in my head. Less is more is my philosophy there... -much like the first Alien film. Chiaroscuro style with the creatures just lurking in the shadows of the space nearly obscured being the ideal.

I figured the builders could be more in the light. Is it unsettling enough? Does it need to be? Should make some more concepts with more legs/different colors/textures.

Print this item

  Gamematz Pro Matz review
Posted by: Karpav1 - 09-19-2017, 07:48 PM - Forum: Shopper's Guide - No Replies

As promised here's an update on my map purchase with a few pictures.

There were a lot of nice and colorful designs to choose from, but since this was the first map for me, I opted for a 6'x4' eclectic star field as my first go to map to order.

There's a $3.00 USD surcharge for a custom hex or grid overlay.

Shipping was free for me (within "48 adjoining U.S. States" & $99.00 purchase) at the time I ordered. They do not ship internationally at the time I ordered. I was also offered a 15% off coupon, which dropped the order below the free shipping limit, so I added a set of dice and I was set.

Email communication was excellent, they provided me with a proof to check out and I had them flip the grain on the hexes, they sent a new proof and bingo! A tracking number was sent within the next few days. And not long after that- she arrived:

[Image: szYDyQQ.jpg]

The edge retained a slight curl that went away after a quick counter-curl and brief rest of about a minute.

[Image: 2R3oJPY.jpg]

The backing rubber has a firm, dense feel with excellent grip and unlike a floppy neoprene, has a more of stiff feel to it. The map easily stands up under its own material strength when rolled up without even a hint of a buckle. It just comes off as a  durable mat. That's the feature I would say is its most unique immediate takeaway.

[Image: nlVCksR.jpg]

I was curious as to what the manufacturer meant exactly by 'felt like' surface. That really is the best way to describe it though.

[Image: 5npJeOs.jpg]

Here's a pic of the logo: Small and unobtrusive. The hex grid itself is also subtle. The flash of my camera makes it stand out a tad bit more than it seems when looking at it.

I had a bag from a lawn chair that works perfectly to sling it over the shoulder with...

[Image: b3Vv4e4.jpg] 
I'm very pleased with this brand hex mat and will probably snag another with some nebula colors within the next year.

I hope you found the review helpful and informative. Any other questions just ask. Disclosure: I was not approached by anyone, asked to review, offered compensation, or anything of the sort for this write-up. This is a voluntary review.  If you decide to purchase through Gamematz, using my referral code http://rwrd.io/qsqzvty will earn me some points/cash off towards my next purchase, so there's that... but I really just wanted to offer some insight since few manufacturers/reviewers show what their mats look like with a grid printed on them.

Gamematz website: http://www.gamematz.com/

Print this item

Posted by: Dr_Funke - 09-17-2017, 04:16 AM - Forum: Shopper's Guide - Replies (8)

Being someone late to the game I don't have all the materials from the old starter set. Does anyone have suggestions for good missiles or missile tokens to use?

Print this item

Online Users
There are currently 18 online users. » 1 Member(s) | 17 Guest(s)

User Panel

Welcome guest, not a member yet?

Why not sign up today and start posting on out community forums.



Latest Topics

Forum software by © MyBB Theme © iAndrew 2016