|
zgrssd -> Let us talk about Unit Design (6/13/2020 12:11:53 PM)
|
This is a very complicated mater and it might not actually work out as intended yet, but this is what I gather:
Original, Previous and Subsequent designs:
There is the Original design. The "Mark 1" of every Model Line.
Then there will be a bunch of Previous and Subsequent designs.
When you make the Mark 2, the Mark 2 is the Subsequent design and the Mark 1/Original is the previous design.
In later itterations that does not have to be the case. You may skip a Mark 3, because is did not improove anything on the Mark 2 and you never deployed it. Wich means the Mark 4 may be based on the Mark 2 again.
Strucutral Design:
As the value is between 70 and 130, the average would be 100.
Original Design:
"The Structural Design Score is randomized with the first version of a Model and will not change with subsequent versions." - 5.12.3.6
Subsequent Designs:
This value is fixed, for a model line. It will not change.
If you want a higher value, you have to start a new line from scratch, meaning you are rolling a new base design and do new field testing. Indeed it is the one reason to start a new line.
Base Design:
Also sometimes called "Field Testing". All other important values are based on it (and Structural Design).
Original Design:
The Value is Randomized between 70 and 100.
While a high value is better, field useage will work out any "kinks".
But even the best design is not so good, that field experience can not make it better.
Subsequent Design:
The Previous Designs Base Design + Field testing done with the design. This value will only go up until it will hit 130 eventually.
Weapon/Armor/Engine Design
The formula for all 3 is:
(Base Design / 2) + 4D20, then "modified by structural design" - http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=4830993
Note that the large amount dice used, will result in a very strong trend towards the average of (Base Design / 2) + 42. The more dice you roll, the less likely extremely high or low results are.
Original Design:
These values will be rolled once, then used. The values can be as low as 35+4 = 39 (minimum base design and roll) or as high as 50+80 = 130 (highest base design and roll). With a average around 85/2+42 = 42.5 + 42 = 84.5 - so 84/85 equally likely. (all before Strutural design)
Subsequent Design:
These values will be rolled based on the (propably improoved) base design. They are then compared to the previous design values - and wichever one is higher will be used.
So they will never decrease, but are not guaranteed to increase either - if you roll lower, it just stays by the previous design values.
At maximum base design of 130, these values can go up to 130/2 +80 = 75+80 = 155, before structural design. But such a high result is extremly imporable. 75+42 = 117 seems to be something you can expect to get.
Weapon Design:
This value is applied to the Weapons Soft Attack and Hard Attack values. If you want real life examples for bad designs, see the M16 Rifle and the Mark 14 Torpedo.
It does not seem to have any effect on the Calliber/Armor calculations.
Armor Design:
This value is applied to the Units Hitpoints, wich is derived from the base unit and the Armor equipped.
It does not seem to have any effect on the Calliber/Armor calculations.
Engine Design:
This is applied to the engines Carry Weight. Wich is then used against the fixed weight of all gear (engine included) to get the mobility Modifier (5.12.3.7).
Just because you mandated a strong engine, does not mean the designers can not still mess up:
Gears, Transmission, Cooling, weight distribution, Fuel/Electrical Lines or Fuel Tank/Battery sizes on the unit.
And that is before we come to the point where the production model could be a good 10-20% heavier then the design goal had anticipated! (wich is modelled via a weak engine currently).
Field Testing Redesign:
After some amount of field testing, just doing a design pass on the same gear is worth considering. With the higher base design, there is a decent chance you will get better rolsl for Armor, Weapon or Engine design.
Empty Redesign:
If you feel the Weapon, Armor or Engine Design rolls are too low for the Base and Structural design, you could just make another design pass without even deploying it.
You may want to go to the previosu design, however. As the chancesa are good that you got some field testing done since you started the design you do not want to keep.
Changing Gear:
Especially early on, you will often change the gear. Infantry with Automatic Rifles and Combat armor are usually a good goal.
Doing so does mean that a large part of the Field Testing will not be applied to the new models Base Design. The increase in stats should usually be worth it, of course. But it is something worth keeping in mind and do not change gear without purpose.
Practical Example for new design:
With a structural design of 87, the Grunt was Garbage. Not worth developing further.
So I made a new design from scratch, wich came out as the Soldier-at-Arms. The only change I made, was upgrading the Armor from Enviro Suit to Padded Enviro Suit (+50 to +100 HP)
Strucutral Design was a new roll, that ended up being above 100 and a good 20 better then the Grunt.
Base Design for the Grunt 2 would have been 80+15 Field Testing=95. But a lot of that would have been lost by changing armor.
And SaA's 91 BD score still is acceptable compared to that. It will keep going up the more I field it.
Weapon Design made a jump of 16. So despite the weapon staying the same, they can use it a lot better. Also note that with a Firepower of 100, the Soft Defense value seems to match exatly the WD score.
Armor Design had a slight decrease from 91 to 90, but with the better armor that still more total HP. Also note how HP with a Armour Strenght of 100 eactly equals Armor Design.
The Grunt 2 could not have gotten lower then 91 (and might have rolled higher then that), but the value is comparable enough.
[image]local://upfiles/72251/CA0F55B14447418883BC5AFC79A4E38C.jpg[/image]
|
|
|
|
