A Nameless Guide for Ship Classifications..

[Origsgtpepper]

I used this when I was starting out in single player and made this.

http://i.imgur.com/Icz2tL6.jpg

 

[Calbiri]

I am not a font, nor is it a mispelling, I am simply Calbiri

 

[ardiel]

I\'m with the idea that these classifications should be role, not by mass.

You could have a Bucket class that is 94732 blocks of dirt with no weaponry. I\'d hardly call it a Dreadnought.

I have Cruiser designs that are Frigate sized. Packed with turrets, shields and thrusters but hardly anything else - they\'re able to be small because everything is placed with efficiency, purpose, and compactness in mind. The smaller I can make it, the less thrust it needs to move, and the less hull I need to protect it, which also makes for a lighter ship. Something like 90% actual purpose and only 10% aesthetic.

 

[Zenithas]

Just, a really bad one.

What you\'re talking about, and what was talked about earlier, with roles, is kind of part of the same problem. That\'s why I\'m currently working on a new table - just having fun working out the approximate measurements for size categories.

For roles, I would recommend MisterVec\'s guide to ship roles - it\'s very thoughtfully laid out.

If you want to help out, give a poke at my guide help request

 

[Nameless]

Well now.. here\'s a surprise. Didn\'t think my class guide would even survive another barrage of new-comers.

Anyways.. I believe the overall issue is a historical one and one that can never really be solved. That said, I\'m also thinking of releasing other documentation I use when building things.

 

[Zenithas]

Making a version myself. And yes, your guide has indeed survived. You, sir, have started a legacy.

 

[Nameless]

I\'ve updated the inital post! Read \'em and weep.. or something that latter.

=)