I just read through the Sim News regarding the 2009 progress report. First, I'd like to say thank you for all of the work that was put into this year. I'm really looking forward to where we're going in the game.
Now to the question, which I understand from a previous post I've made is a restricted topic, though I couldn't find a sticky listing restricted topics.
I'd posted about the Quasar Fire-class having stats that didn't make sense and Hal said,
“The stats for many ships are messed up. Fixing one without addressing any of the others is largely futile.
It's well known, and that's why it's a restricted topic.
- Hal Brenden ”
When looking at the chart regarding where we're going and seeing things like R&D, which are very soon approaching release, I didn't see anything about fixing things that are known to be incorrect. Wouldn't it make sense to go in and take a completely fresh look at all of the entities on which R&D will be based and fix those that need fixing? Sure it'll be a massive undertaking and likely a lot of research for certain things, and it might even make some players/governments/etc upset due to price changes or load limit changes. But in the end, won't it be better for the game and community?
If this is something already in the planning process, it might be good to put a time frame to it, say by Q3 2010 or something and let people know it's being planned for and will be worked on. Stick it on the chart of things to be done, as a reminder to you and us that it's part of the project.
Perhaps you could get a group of players to do the research for you and come up with the stats based on canon materials with references, etc. Then once a week or so they submit 10 entities that could then be fixed, if needed.
That's it. A question or two and suggestion or two. Sorry if this is a restricted topic, but it's something that I didn't see that still presumably needs to be addressed. For all of us Type-A personalities, it helps to know that perfection is being striven for.
I'm willing to help with research if needed and have a fairly large collection of source material at my disposal. Thanks.
Might as well let some of us players help share the load.
Maybe set up a forum for player help like this. Have each ship a different topic. If you went forward with this it might help to assign a team leader for each ship, someone to help settle the disputes and keep it on track.
There was a mass shipstats project that some people might remember, back before Production was released. Everything was canonised, and set, and done... and then it was pointed out that the project had jumped the gun and the RM req/R&D rules it was based on had not been accepted and were not going to be used. Everything got scrapped, and I don't think anyone has wanted to go near tackling it again.
I don't see why those would of been such a big stumbling block Hal - RM reqs equations just changed the RM requirements which is based on stats. THings like length, cargo capacity etc are not likely to be changed with R&D unless the ship is canonly different to how it is here. Weapons I could accept would change though. And I have offered a few times Hal to go through them all and try and fix up the stats.
It was a very different system at the time, Ellias. And if you're serious about wanting to do it, I'd suggest approaching an Asim directly about it. Maybe you can sucker Jesfa into agreeing to oversee such a project?
considering it took what, 12 months to get even close to some sort of agreement/finished status on that job and even then there were huge discussions around various ship stats, balance of them and so on.
Well I've started. Began with the freighters, and made myself a nice little graph to convert the canon hyper class of ships to SWC hyper system. Of the ships I've done so far, they are quite close, but there are some major discrepancies between certain stats.
Ok, I've painfully copied over what I've done, bashing stupid google to do what I want. Here is how I laid it out:
Hyper Calc - if that worked that is a calculator to convert from canon hyper classification to the SWC system of hyper. I set hyper class 0.5/0.4 as our hyper 15, and hyper class 1 as our hyper 7. Then just made a curve to fit it, exponential like. There was a graph but google stuff doesn't like it. Simply put the canon hyper classification into the green box and the blue box will give you my interpretation of SWC hyper. Just round to the nearest decimel since I have no idea if google-dumpster can do that.
Thats the easy part. Next, the rest Ships sheet - and if that worked that should be a list of all the ships. I've already put in the SWC stats for capitals and freighters. Its laid out simply, each of the categories given in the rules are there, alternating grey and white boxes for ease of seeing. Each category is then split into SWC and canon sections.
I have started/finished the freighter section so I can explain how its done. Black in the canon column means that its the same as what we have in SWC, or (if there is no hard number) that it can be taken to be that. I've used wookieepedia so if anyone wants to check the sources it gives for the numbers feel free.
Red numbers are hard numbers given by wookieepedia. MGTL I've used atmospheric speed / 10 just like in SWC. Unless there is a separate MGTL number in which case I've used that instead. Shields and Hull stats that are red are numbers on wookieepedia. Amazing.
Green numbers are those that I guessed at. Either its based on some descriptive text, and then put in based on similar ships (for things like sensors, manouverability etc) or I've calculated it (in the case of volume of ships, I multiplied height, by width, by length when all three were given).
Blank spots are those that no information was given regarding it, so a guess cannot really be done.
Hope that some people find it interesting, and that the admins do too.