Classing Ships for Fleets

[jstenholt]

Oi. Everybody just classify your ship as whatever you want, and then later you'll probably have to synthesize what schema comes up with for fleet roles and your own system. Rest assured, schema's system will be as basic as possible so we are all allowed to be as creative as possible.

 

[Lecic]

Using Block count as both determiner of ship class and function does not work, as any builder can create a ship then pad the block count to get it into a different classification. Block count does not tell the average observer anything about the ship other than how many blocks it is comprised of. Energy per/sec gives more information about what a ship can do than does block count. Structure points give a more information then does Energy per/sec. But none of these options truly tell the average observer what ship can do or cannot do.

Why would you want to bump yourself up into a new blockcount for no reason? If you just slapped 100k dirt on your 100k ship to be a 200k, all your stats would be crap compared to an actual 200k. Block count based classification assumes people aren't absolute morons.

 

[Madman198237]

Well, there's a difference between a 100k block ship with lots of interior and fancy, decorative blocks all over the outside, and a 100k block ship with nothing but powerful weapons and tough armor. And until you meet it in battle, you won't know which is which based on block count.

 

[Lecic]

Well, there's a difference between a 100k block ship with lots of interior and fancy, decorative blocks all over the outside, and a 100k block ship with nothing but powerful weapons and tough armor. And until you meet it in battle, you won't know which is which based on block count.

Using block count as the constant when comparing different ships lets you more easily compare the strength of different systems between the two vessels.

It's the ratios of blocks that are important

you can compare strengths and ratios of various systems easily.

What? Being able to compare systems between two ships of the same or similar ship, or compare ratios of blocks between difference sized ships, is the main advantage of a block count based system.

If I compare two 200k block ships, and one has 50k of advanced while the other has 25k of standard, it's immediately obvious which one is the armor tanker and how effective the armor it has is. You line up the stats of two different ships by eachother, and you see which ones are worse, the better, or the same between them.

You compare the block counts between ships with a block count system. If Mastor Bulder Jimmy makes his ship that's 1 core and 1.5 billion doors, while Doom Cuber Joel makes a 1.5 billion ship with weapons, power, shields, etc, you can compare the two's block counts and immediately see which one is better at a certain job (Jimmy's is better at causing unholy amounts of lag when it opens or closes, Joel's is good at hopefully killing that door monstrosity before it causes too much trouble)

Let me restate it for the 6th time- The point of a block count based classification system... is to compare the block counts between two ships.

Additionally... decorative blocks and interior add system and armor HP, and are usually a small number of blocks even on a heavily decorated ship, so... it's not like they're a notable downside.

 

[Madman198237]

So you want to consider block counts of each type of block. Otherwise, you need more information before you know just what the ship is capable of doing, before you know whether it's the lag machine or the doomcube.

 

[Lecic]

So you want to consider block counts of each type of block. Otherwise, you need more information before you know just what the ship is capable of doing, before you know whether it's the lag machine or the doomcube.

Uh, yeah, as I've said 6 times prior, that's the point of a block based system.

 

[Madman198237]

But then how do you truly determine what a ship's capabilities are? If the ship has a 100 thousand block main cannon with one emitter, that's a lot different from 100000 one block emitters on the same computer.

Again, I stress that only subjective (Opinion-based, change from person to person) determinations can be made on a ship unless we get a classification system from schema. Otherwise, everyone has their own, idiosyncratic system.

 

[Lecic]

If the ship has a 100 thousand block main cannon with one emitted, that's a lot different from 100000 one block emitters on the same computer.

Block count based classification assumes people aren't absolute morons.

 

[StarWars1981]

So it is not block count that you are using but effectiveness in a given roll. As block count alone does not tell anyone how effective a ship is at a given job. Case in point.


Using Block count as both determiner of ship class and function does not work, as any builder can create a ship then pad the block count to get it into a different classification. Block count does not tell the average observer anything about the ship other than how many blocks it is comprised of. Energy per/sec gives more information about what a ship can do than does block count. Structure points give a more information then does Energy per/sec. But none of these options truly tell the average observer what ship can do or cannot do.

How big a ship is does not tell us how well it does its job either as a, 500m long, 200m long, and 150 High ship can have a massive block count/Energy per/sec, and Structure points, but be little more than a space hulk of drifting blocks. Where as a well built 20x21x12 meter ship can be a well defined mining, fighter, or cargo ship and be easily identified by its function.

Defining ship categories based on function could work, but even is modern history several ships have been defined in different ways. The Battleship has been defined as: Battle Cruisers which are lightly armored Battleships, whereas Dreadnoughts are heavily armed and armored Battleships, but the run of the mill Battleship is either bigger or smaller then both of these. There are several different kinds of Carriers as well, ranging from Full Aircraft carriers to Lighter helicopter Carriers, mixes of both, and some that are a mix of Battleship and Carrier.

A combination of size category and function/roll could help as I doubt anyone would argue that a 20x15x10 meter ship is going to be more effective than a 100x75x50 ship at the same task/roll. This is dependent on a ship builder that knows what they are doing of course.

This is why I advocate for Ship size Categories: of Light, Medium, Heavy, Super-Heavy, and Gargantuan. With Rolls defined by the builder. The only issue I have run across thus far is where to draw the lines between Categories.
[DOUBLEPOST=1459964301,1459961073][/DOUBLEPOST]

If I may make a suggestion. You used light and heavy several times meaning about the same thing each time.

Why not simply say that Light ships tend to be emphasize speed instead of armor/weapons, and Heavy ships emphasizes weapons and armor over speed, and the base type is a balance of all three.

Other than my person preference to describe a Gunship as a roll more than a class. This is pretty good.

I probably should have, yeah. However, in my opinion, those deserved a mention, because IRL they are used, and/or because they mean a larger difference than average. But yeah, should've left it off. I tried to give an idea of the different role of those sub-classes, but I didn't do a great job of it. However, they do have different roles.

 

[Madman198237]

I would simply remind you that people are, in fact, morons. And that you will get that one jerk who has a supercomputer, and makes the million-block ship of doors....and then opens and closes it with a logic clock.

You will get people whose ships simply defy classification regardless. Block count, power gen, creator's preference, judgement of others, thrust to mass, all these systems are inherently flawed in that people don't build to the system, like modern militaries, they build to suit needs, like modern industry, which has thousands, if not millions, of rare or unique items built to serve various purposes, all in different ways. Why could we not be satisfied with one type of bolt and one wrench to turn that bolt? Because there's a million different ways to approach the problem, and we'll never find the perfect solution, because it doesn't exist. Therefore, there will always be things that defy classification, because every classification relies on a set of ways to approach a problem, and someone will always find another way to approach it.


Think battleships and aircraft carriers: You need a way to destroy targets on land and at sea. The usual approach was bigger guns and more armor. Then someone came up with the idea that aircraft can be used instead of shells, and the battleship rapidly became outmoded.

 

[MacThule]

Naval ship classification is a field that has changed over time, and is not an area of wide international agreement

The US Navy classes ships primarily by weight & function. Interestingly the article seems to imply that all the ships of a certain size class have similar function. From what I recall though, a Cruiser can be outfitted for use as a general missile cruiser, Aegis (missile defense), sub-surface warfare, or even fitted with additional VTOL capacity (room for extra choppers and harriers). So within a size class (Cruiser) there are certainly role-based subfunctions. The role is not homogeneous by size.

I think that, even granted an intelligent builder, mass is not only less relevant to classification in Starmade, but would likely be of far less relevance in any Zero-G environment IRL where weight and displacement are not frequent concerns.

Personally anyway, by using power divisions as class groups, I can set out to build frigates from scratch and repeatedly end up with ships of relatively similar overall capacity in terms of DPS, viable weight, HP, and size. If I set out to build a ship within the cruiser class of power cores, it consistently ends up with a predictable range of size, DPS & HP unless I go to the extreme with one system at the expense of others.

Before when I was attempting to use weight classes, setting out to "build a destroyer" by shooting for a goal weight based on the desired class, the result varied wildly in terms of DPS, maneuverability, HP, etc. I just find power classes to be far more practically useful than weight classes for building a fleet with a balance of small, medium, and large ships.

 

[StarWars1981]

Sounds logical. Then there's people like me, who set out to build a hull out of an idea they got that looks good.
When that's done, I fill it with systems and decorations (limited).
After that, I look at its shape, size, goal in construction, and how it plays out ... and I say it's a corvette, destroyer, whatnot else, with a mission focus. The class is basically size range, though intended role factors in. If I build something the size of a cruiser that is meant for a slashing trench-run-defense sort of maneuver, I may very well downgrade it to a frigate because cruiser doesn't so much cover that. If I build something the size of a corvette that is only meant to blow big holes in things, I may call it a bomber because that's it's job. It's so subjective it's very nearly worthless. However, assuming we can all agree that when we use certain classifications it means certain things (i.e. heavy cruiser built to withstand punishment and deal it out, light frigate built for slashing TRD attacks), we can come up with a generic system that allows variation while still giving us poor suckers a general idea of just how bad it is that our frigate is facing down a Heavy Cruiser-class brawling vessel.
And such things as Titan: if you're not in something that you can name a Titan, run away. That's the general idea we should be going for.
Hence my text wall a page ago. It makes sense to me, even if I did type for a long dang time.

 

[Markus_McCloud]

I think classing should be based on multiple factors, such as mass, top speed, number of turrets, and armaments.

In all honesty, though, I feel classing would be better for sorting through ships here at StarMade Dock rather than in-game. It'd make it easier to find the type of ship you're looking for (such as a light fighter or a medium cruiser.) Fortunately, most ship creators already do this with the ship's name.

I'll make a new post with my personal classing system soon.

 

[Master_Artificer]

I went ahead and drew up some thoughts on the size of 1 mill and 2 mill power bases would look like:

Spoiler: Frigate Sized Power Framework:

1 mill e/s generated

Perfect for the frigates of your fleets

Spoiler: Destroyer Sized Power Framework:

2.1 mill e/s generated

Perfect for the destroyers of your fleet, ships that don't require the assistance of docked reactors but use numbers to overwhelm and destroy.

Copy and paste it into a ship or build something around it, they can be stretched and squeezed across all three axis's to suit 90% of all ships shapes, and added/removed to get the power amount that you want. I would suggest a 1-2 layer of advanced armor around the whole thing though, and to fill the spaces between the lines with shield blocks.

I still think that using power generation is best, it somewhat controls the ship size and is still loose enough that it is easily malleable and cater-able to peoples needs. If people are lazy I can go and post these to the CC as tools for people making ships and not quite knowing what to do to get started.

Spoiler: I even tried my own hand at making something using my new powerlines

I took the medium sized lines and armored them to make an armor tanker frigate fleet ship.

A group of a few older and smaller Washtenaw still beat the crap out of them though

Then I fit this into that, and soon will have a proper fleet destroyer!

 

[StarWars1981]

Neat idea for the set power lines, and I can see some ships to build off a setup like that ...
Anyways, neat idea, but say I run all rapid-fire heavy cannon armament off many, many turrets on a small glass cannon type ship ... and I have 2 mil regen on, Idk, a 2K mass, 20-25K block ship (I think it works out to something like that for the mass) with lots of turrets. Does that make it, Idk, a destroyer? Or very efficient cruiser? Or should I leave it around corvette-frigate size? Lol.
I'm just poking fun.
In all seriousness, nothing is going to be universal. A lot of it, given the sheer number of variables Schine is throwing at us, and it's great, is going to be relative. I pick frigate because I like the name, or that's what >I< think of when I see that ship, or its role, size, or everything altogether.
The categories can be roughly defined, generalized, even standardized, but it's going to come down to individual preference.
Our best efforts should result in a locked thread, sometime in the future, that contains a near-unanimous decision on various guidelines for ship classing.
These efforts should give rough estimates of the kinds of ships that fit the categories, containing subcategories and missions/roles for vessels.
It should give us an idea of general armor scaling, power, shielding, firepower (measured by how much crap it can break inside 1 minute or whatever) relative to other classes and vessels, and thrust. It can add in such things as drone carriage, RP sections of the vessel, and crew capacity (when we get more than 5 per player aboard ... xD).

We should begin here, rather than on other specifications. If, somehow, we find that one specific measuring point is good enough to result in a standalone, single-measurement classification system, we make one.
If not, we build a framework that takes in many different factors, with a lot of overlap between classes to allow flexibility even to those who rigidly adhere to the system. This framework gives us everything we need, not to build a ship, but to tell others what you've built.

We can begin with physical stats - dimensions, power cap/regen, shield cap/regen, weapons modules, turret hardpoints, size of turrets, size of crew, and internal spaces. --- These will give us a rough starting point, but they overlap between classes. Also, we don't need all of them. Just hurling ideas as fast as they come to mind.
Then we toss in some roles. I've got a text wall some pages back dedicated to roles, but we can come up with our own unanimous ones in here somewhere. Or just say they're there, they're good, and edit the "final" thread later if we don't like it.

This thread won't come about soon, but it's a goal to work towards on THIS thread. I just feel like we're tossing a ball back and forth and going nowhere yet.

 

[Bladeriker]

Cool power set up. I like the idea.

what about more lateral based ships or ships that are wider than the are tall/long as I enjoy to think outside of the box.

I have been playing around with a ship that kind of looks like an Angel Fish in shape.