| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Illuminated Insanity
Posts: 4532
|
|
|
Post subject: Starmada?
|
 |
|
anyone play this?
I saw it being played the other day.
Looks pretty cool.
How are the rules overall?
do you have to buy a ton of books for various factions?
_________________
Always Flying. Always Fighting. RIP JIMMY.
 |
|
 Mon Sep 21, 2009 9:45 pm |
|
|
Posts: 748
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Boring.
You can only take so much of the Uruk horror plasma weapon. Or the Diglett needle bomb.
It's all meaningless crap. Even star fleet battles, the originator of meaningless crap, at least attempted to model something; Star Trek.
_________________
Eric
- "Think you used enough dynamite there Butch?" |
|
| Tue Sep 22, 2009 12:05 am |
|
|
Tora Tora Tora
Posts: 5700
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
I prefer Full Thrust, but Starmada has a strong following as well.
_________________
Member of the Helldivers WAS league |
|
| Tue Sep 22, 2009 12:19 am |
|
|
Posts: 748
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Full Thrust is better, but still has the problem of Generic Zapper, Large.
The key to space naval combat is Newtpn's law. If you're not following that the it's mostly pointless.
_________________
Eric
- "Think you used enough dynamite there Butch?" |
|
| Tue Sep 22, 2009 12:25 am |
|
|
Tora Tora Tora
Posts: 5700
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Not really. It's science fantasy, which has mostly eclipsed science fiction. The basic premise is that effective stardrives and new sublight engines based on technology we don't have/understand yet modifies movement in space games. Remember the Wrath of Kahn's two-dimensional thinking zinger...
_________________
Member of the Helldivers WAS league |
|
| Tue Sep 22, 2009 12:53 am |
|
|
Posts: 748
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Yeah i get that. The issue is you aren't playing a space naval combat game.
Would you play a tank game set in the sky? you could but what's the point? How about an air combat game where the planes roll around the ground shooting each other. Once again what's teh point.
Space combat is a different a medium. Planes fly through atmosphere. Ships float on water. Subs move in water. Tanks and humans fight on land.
If the medium doesn't interest you then just play axis and allies and pretend it's in space.
_________________
Eric
- "Think you used enough dynamite there Butch?" |
|
| Tue Sep 22, 2009 2:10 am |
|
|
Tora Tora Tora
Posts: 5700
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Totally not the same. Given reactionless drives and gravity control ships would be able to maneuver like that. I can understand the appeal of a newtonian space game like the new Honor Harrington one, but that in no way invalidates the other type.
_________________
Member of the Helldivers WAS league |
|
| Tue Sep 22, 2009 2:30 am |
|
|
Posts: 748
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| Duck Crusader wrote: | | Totally not the same. Given reactionless drives and gravity control ships would be able to maneuver like that. |
How do you know?
May as well play chess and pretend it's in space.
_________________
Eric
- "Think you used enough dynamite there Butch?" |
|
| Tue Sep 22, 2009 2:41 am |
|
|
Tora Tora Tora
Posts: 5700
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Because by definition gravity control (firmly science fantasy) allows you to circumvent newtonian laws, since you can manipulate gravity to your advantage. Elementary.
_________________
Member of the Helldivers WAS league |
|
| Tue Sep 22, 2009 2:46 am |
|
|
Posts: 748
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
yes, no doubt. My question is, how do you know these manipulations will work as described? Because the designer says so? Designer fiat?
Like i said, chess.
_________________
Eric
- "Think you used enough dynamite there Butch?" |
|
| Tue Sep 22, 2009 2:53 am |
|
|
Tora Tora Tora
Posts: 5700
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
No, because of the physics. Even if we can't reproduce the technology necessary, we can do the math to show what they'd have to do. Chess would bear far more resemblance to a space game with newtonian restrictions.
_________________
Member of the Helldivers WAS league |
|
| Tue Sep 22, 2009 2:58 am |
|
|
Illuminated Insanity
Posts: 4532
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
LOL at this thread. 
_________________
Always Flying. Always Fighting. RIP JIMMY.
|
|
| Tue Sep 22, 2009 3:48 am |
|
|
Posts: 312
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
I have been playing Starmada for over 5 years and I enjoy it very much! It is a great game and well designed. There are now movement rules that are semi-Newtonian and very usable. The game allows you to design your own weapons: their ranges, weapon abilities, and accuracy. The stronger, the more costly. The ship designer programer then calculates the ship's combat ability.
I have played Full Thrust many times and although I have enjoyed it a lot, I enjoy Starmada much, much more. 
_________________
Darn the Torpedoes; full speed ahead!
Victory is blasting hostile ships out of the water before they blast you out of the water... |
|
| Thu Oct 15, 2009 11:08 pm |
|
|
Posts: 748
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| Duck Crusader wrote: | | No, because of the physics. Even if we can't reproduce the technology necessary, we can do the math to show what they'd have to do. . |
Not true. There is no math to describe reactionless drives. It violates thermodynamic laws and thus cannot be calculated and modeled in real life. Which leaves the designer free to make it all up. Which is fine. But it is as close to a space naval combat simulation as is a rock fight.
Actually the rock fight is closer because we can comfortably conclude that rocks obey physics.
_________________
Eric
- "Think you used enough dynamite there Butch?" |
|
| Fri Oct 16, 2009 12:30 am |
|
|
Tora Tora Tora
Posts: 5700
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| ehenry0623 wrote: | | Duck Crusader wrote: | | No, because of the physics. Even if we can't reproduce the technology necessary, we can do the math to show what they'd have to do. . |
Not true. There is no math to describe reactionless drives. It violates thermodynamic laws and thus cannot be calculated and modeled in real life. Which leaves the designer free to make it all up. Which is fine. But it is as close to a space naval combat simulation as is a rock fight.
Actually the rock fight is closer because we can comfortably conclude that rocks obey physics. |
Not true, sci fi is based on science, and the majority of them in the business of psychics. X result requires Y amount of energy applied along Z axis. Larry Niven, Issaic Azamov, and a host of others both inside and outside the community long ago worked out the psychics for Reactionless drives, Ftl drives, different methods of gravity generation and a host of other issues. The base line is getting enough POWER to get any of them to work, or reducing their power requirements to something we can understand.
Might as well have a rock fight and pretend it's in space as model what current tech would allow us to do...
_________________
Member of the Helldivers WAS league |
|
| Fri Oct 16, 2009 12:43 am |
|
|
Posts: 748
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
I've got a website for you. It may ruin how you look at space warfare though. It certainly ruined my "understanding". Now i'm just a curmudgeon.
You will hate it but you will learn a lot.
http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/
_________________
Eric
- "Think you used enough dynamite there Butch?" |
|
| Fri Oct 16, 2009 1:57 am |
|
|
Tora Tora Tora
Posts: 5700
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Been there, good site. Doesn't change anything for me though. Yes, that's what it would be like now, not seven centuries from now. Remember that powered flight is impossible, and the human body will disintergrate at any speed over 26 MPH...
_________________
Member of the Helldivers WAS league |
|
| Fri Oct 16, 2009 2:11 am |
|
|
Posts: 748
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
I have no ideas what that means.
All i know is a game designer cannot model something that doesn't exist. Yes, a game designer can make up things out of whole cloth and that's fine. But it's not a simulation of anything real. Ergo, checkers in space.
_________________
Eric
- "Think you used enough dynamite there Butch?" |
|
| Fri Oct 16, 2009 2:52 am |
|
|
Tora Tora Tora
Posts: 5700
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
The math is real. It's been on the bluddy discovery channel for crap's sake! Math is math. 'Real' space combat would sell probably twelve copies. I'd buy one, you'd buy one, ten other people would and then you're done. Not much basis for gaming. So you don't like it? Oh well, the market's out-voted you.
And both of those are firmly held scientific principles from the early twentieth century.
_________________
Member of the Helldivers WAS league |
|
| Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:04 am |
|
|
Posts: 312
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
This discussion is interesting. I play Starmada because I enjoy it! Not because is "realistic", etc. We can only speculate about how things will be in two centuries. This game allows and encourages players to design their own ships, even their own weapons!
I enjoy designing my own ships and seeing how they perform in battle. The Ship-design program also gives a combat value for these ships. I love it! For me the gam is Fun, nothing more.
I also like BattleTech because it too allows gamers to design their own units. This appeals to me a great deal...
_________________
Darn the Torpedoes; full speed ahead!
Victory is blasting hostile ships out of the water before they blast you out of the water... |
|
| Wed Oct 28, 2009 11:18 pm |
|
|
|
