|
I do like the starship customization but I have an issue with the concept you can upgrade a transport to the point it can take out an equal tier Dreadnaught. A lower tier (less advanced ship sure) but the way the system is currently you actually get more benefit from upgrading a smaller ship to Tier 20 than you do a Dreadnaught as the costs for it are signifcantly less and the Dreadnaught doesn't get a higher pool of BP to actually pay for these costs. It wouldn't be as big an issue if it weren't for the fact that as I said even though the two are theoretically equal tier the Dreadnaught is far less likely to win the fight as it can only afford less advanced computers, less advanced shields, travels slower, turns slower, etc, etc.
So has anyone overhauled the system? Hoping maybe something where roughly equal tier and equal size can go either way but a signficant tier/size advantage will give them a signifcant advantage e.g.
Tier 5 Transport vs Tier 10 Cruiser isn't likely to win.
Tier 10 Transprot vs Tier 10 Cruiser isn't likely to win but might damage it depending on skill of players and cruiser type.
Tier 15 Transport vs Tier 10 Cruiser could go either way.
Tier 20 Transport is likely to win against Tier 10 Cruiser but will probably take damage doing so.
Just marking this thread. I have some ideas, but I haven't put them down yet. If I do, I'll be back.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In terms of published ships, there's already something of a tier cap for the hulls.
Fighters tend to not be over tier 3, explorers and destroyers tend to be up to tier 8, cruisers tier 12, dreadnoughts tier 15-17, and only ultranoughts and base ships being tier 19 or 20.
Obviously, the PCs ships don't follow this guideline. You could leave a tier cap on frames they buy. As in, and explorer frame can never be higher tier than 10, a destroyer 14, that sort of thing. That would make higher level starship combat hard to balance though.
Personally, I'm okay with a tier 20 super-advanced technology wonder explorer being able to threaten a big ultranought that was more likely built with budget technology.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, I'm okay with a tier 20 super-advanced technology wonder explorer being able to threaten a big ultranought that was more likely built with budget technology.But whats the purpose of the dreadnought then?
The mechanics suggest that a wonder transport is about as expensive as a dreadnought, but then the dreadnought takes way more crew, moves slower and is just generally worse.
The purpose being that the tier 20 explorers are one of kind ships built with exceptionally advanced technology and only even able to be operated by the best of the best of the best.
The tier 20 dreadnaught being cheaper, being easier to build, requiring less advanced technology, etc.
As in, I'm okay with the occaisonal super explorer/prototype destroyer existing, but I'd still expect that the vast majority of tier 15+ ships in existence to be dreadnaughts, battleships, and ultranaughts.
Remember, BP are an abstraction, not a currency. If dreadnaughts are built by the various space powers, there must be a reason. Pick one:
A) the various space powers are stupid and like big ships for no reason
B) it's actually cheaper to build and maintain a tier 20 dreadnaught than a super powered explorer.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is like complaining that a colossal CR 20 opponent should be much much more deadly than a medium sized CR 20 opponent. Tiers, Levels, CR are meant to be indications of the effectiveness of the thing.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Frankly I think the premise is flawed here. A transport is a medium frame. There are limits on the weapons it can mount (no capital ship mounts) and the number it can sport. A tier 20 dreadnaught is not going to have those problems. I think that will make a pretty big difference in the fight.
|
|
Personally, I'm okay with a tier 20 super-advanced technology wonder explorer being able to threaten a big ultranought that was more likely built with budget technology.But whats the purpose of the dreadnought then?
The mechanics suggest that a wonder transport is about as expensive as a dreadnought, but then the dreadnought takes way more crew, moves slower and is just generally worse.
The purpose being that the tier 20 explorers are one of kind ships built with exceptionally advanced technology and only even able to be operated by the best of the best of the best.
The tier 20 dreadnaught being cheaper, being easier to build, requiring less advanced technology, etc.
As in, I'm okay with the occaisonal super explorer/prototype destroyer existing, but I'd still expect that the vast majority of tier 15+ ships in existence to be dreadnaughts, battleships, and ultranaughts.
Remember, BP are an abstraction, not a currency. If dreadnaughts are built by the various space powers, there must be a reason. Pick one:
A) the various space powers are stupid and like big ships for no reason
B) it's actually cheaper to build and maintain a tier 20 dreadnaught than a super powered explorer.
This is like complaining that a colossal CR 20 opponent should be much much more deadly than a medium sized CR 20 opponent. Tiers, Levels, CR are meant to be indications of the effectiveness of the thing.
I'm fine with the concept of super-advanced thing beating budget thing the issue here is that isn't the case with starship rules as they are. A Tier 20 Dreadnaught and a tier 20 transport is 9 times out of 10 going to go to the transport because its simply better. It isn't an issue of a colossal CR 20 creature being more deadly than a medium CR 20 creature its a colossal CR 20 creature actually only being stated for CR 9 while the medium one is genuinely CR 20. Lets look at a comparison.
The Vindicas Tyrant Tier 16.
Speed: 4 hexes.
Turn: 5 hexes.
AC: 28
TL: 26
HP: 600
DT: 15
CT: 120
Shields: Medium (50 per arc)
Forward Arc: Paricle Beam (3d4 x 10, long), Heavy Laser Canon (4d8, Medium).
Computer: Basic Computer.
Aft Ark: Nothing.
Port Ark: Superlaser (2d4 x 10, long), Heavy Torpedo Launcher (5d8, long, 14, 5)
Starboard Ark: Superlaser (2d4 x 10, long), Heavy Torpedo Launcher (5d8, long, 14, 5)
Turret: Linked Coilgun (8d4, Long)
Cobbled together hurriedly Tier 16 Explorer
Speed: 12 hexes.
Turn: 1 hexes.
AC: 34
TL: 40
HP: 95
DT: N/A
CT: 19
Shields: Superior(150 per arc)
Computer: Mk 10 Duonode (+10 to 2 rolls per round)
Forward Arc: Nothing.
Aft Ark: Nothing.
Port Ark: Nothing.
Starboard Ark: Nothing.
Turret: Linked Persistent Particle Beams(20D6, Long), Laser Net (2d6, Short).
Yes the Dreadnaught has a damage threshold and more weapons but who do you think is a greater threat, who is likely to win a fight? Get in the Dreadnaught's rear arc and its basically 8d4 vs 20d6 and this is for a non-optimized explorer I threw together in a few minutes. Bump them up to tier 20 and it gets worse because there's not a lot you can do for the Dreadnaught due to the high costs for most of its upgrades but the explorer can upgrade that laser net to a heavy laser net and add a particle canon (long, 8d6) and a light laser net (short, 2d6) to every ark. Meaning the explorer can now do 28D6 long range damage in any direction AND gets 2 shots to knock down any tracking weapons fired at it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In addition to more/larger weapons, larger ships can have larger crews with more gunners to fire all of those weapons.
Granted, the example ships are not always "built" the most "efficiently."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah. pre-built ships are iffy on their effective tier.
Now, if that pre-built vindicas tyrant had four persistant particle beams in it's turret, how does it's 600HP vs 95HP start shaking out? maybe even include a point weapon and a heavy weapon in each arc and leave out the capital weapons on the sides?
If you build a dreadnaught to kill a medium explorer of a similar tier, I think it actually works pretty well. Most pre-made dreanaughts are built to fight other dreadnaughts though.
And yet there is no requirement for the PCs to actually find exceptionally advanced technology. Instead a tier 20 transport can be cobbled together any any basic shipyard thanks to Starfinder not really caring much about starships.
I figure if they're using dimensional slice weapons and have access to wish spells, etc. that group of PCs have actually kitbashed their ship together from all the random and potentially advanced tech they've come across. Yes, it's sadly been neglected in terms of actual explanations. Kinda sucks, but you can make it work.
In addition to more/larger weapons, larger ships can have larger crews with more gunners to fire all of those weapons.
Granted, the example ships are not always "built" the most "efficiently."
Yeah, the Tyrant gets 5 gunners, which makes a difference. One thing I noticed, there don't seem to be hard rules on minimum crew:officer ratios in bigger ships. The Tyrant is only at 300 crew, when it could have 500, it assigns dozens of people to each role. Like, what stops the ship from have 100 crew members just making minor actions to boost the dreadnought? Make it virtually impossible for the transport to hit it or dodge attacks.
I suspect the simple answer is that PCs aren't supposed to pilot Dreadnoughts. The developers expect us to stick to smaller ships and the big ones weren't given much though.
The answer is the PCs aren't expected to pilot dreadnaughts. The other answer is that most crew actions should only ever happen once (minus gunners). Also, if GMs feel the need for more crew actions on a large ship they should pre roll, or make assumptions on a success. Also, that most of that crew is filling the support roll for the rollers, etc.
But that is an advantage of bigger ships. More crew means every science officer and engineer action can be taken every turn. Multiple gunners can fire instead of one at -2, and so on.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Frankly I think the premise is flawed here. A transport is a medium frame. There are limits on the weapons it can mount (no capital ship mounts) and the number it can sport. A tier 20 dreadnaught is not going to have those problems. I think that will make a pretty big difference in the fight.
Turret gravity gun to immobilize a small ship plus a killer array of capital weapons in the front arc is a recipe for yikes in a one on one.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, I'm okay with a tier 20 super-advanced technology wonder explorer being able to threaten a big ultranought that was more likely built with budget technology.But whats the purpose of the dreadnought then?
The mechanics suggest that a wonder transport is about as expensive as a dreadnought, but then the dreadnought takes way more crew, moves slower and is just generally worse.
For the realism argument: If I throw enough time, money, and high-end parts at a Toyota Corolla, I could probably get it to outrace a stock Camaro too.
The point of these different starship frames is to be able to tell cool stories. And maybe have some mechanics behind them so that the people playing are all on the same page.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
No wonder the millennium falcon was so good...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Kinda new to to SF, especially ship combat, but is this premise based on a highly customized transporter with really high end gear vs a generic npc block dreadnought designed to likely fight others of it's kind?
I saw BP being mentioned, but it doesn't seem said BP went into customizing the example dreadnought considering how much smaller dices it has?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Kinda new to to SF, especially ship combat, but is this premise based on a highly customized transporter with really high end gear vs a generic npc block dreadnought designed to likely fight others of it's kind?
I saw BP being mentioned, but it doesn't seem said BP went into customizing the example dreadnought considering how much smaller dices it has?
Generic NPC starship vs. PC custom special will always be a PC win. No matter what base frames you're using.
Using the ship building rules, you can probably make an optimized tier X dreadnaught that can win against an optimized tier X transport.
But, they'll be somewhat evenly matched. This seems odd if you don't consider that BP are an abstraction from what actually goes into building starships in the setting.
|
|
Kinda new to to SF, especially ship combat, but is this premise based on a highly customized transporter with really high end gear vs a generic npc block dreadnought designed to likely fight others of it's kind?
I saw BP being mentioned, but it doesn't seem said BP went into customizing the example dreadnought considering how much smaller dices it has?
As Garettmander said this is PC built dreadnaught vs PC built transport. The issue is generally speaking the only thing that differs between the frames is a few weapons, some DR and the number of bays to put things in. HOWEVER there are a number of issues. First while the costs do change for the larger capital ship gear its budget doesn't. A Tier 20 Racer and a Tier 20 Dreadnaught will have the exact same number of buildpoints they need to stay under. Secondly the smaller ships have a much wider range to choose from within their budget.
For example the selection of power cores for the racer will cost you between 4 and 20 of your 1,000 build point budget generating between 50 and 200 power while the Dreadnaught has 1 power core that costs 50 points and generates 500 power. Sure the dreadnaught has a default of 4 slots so you can have up to 2,000 power without using an exapansion bay but there goes a fifth of your total budget just on power generation.
Then you look at something like armour it does have the same range for both but a racer pay's costs of 1 to 45 depending on grade while the Dreadnaught for the exact same armour benefits pays 7 to 315 respectively. Same armour benefits, same total budget but the racer getting Mk 15 armour pays 45 build points while the Dreadnaught will pay 315 of its budget over a quarter. Yes its a bigger ship but there's only an increased cost not an increased benefit from layering it in armour. This imbalance continues through the whole system e.g. the racer to get T6 Thrusters (speed 6, piloting +1) pays 20 power, 3 build points while the Dreadnaught getting C6 (again speed 6, pilot +1) pays 300 power, 12 build points.
I wouldn't have a problem if the Dreadnaught and other capital ships got a benefit from their size e.g. build points are X per tier timmes Size category (e.g 1 = minimum crew 1, 2 = minmum crew 6 to 20, 3, minimum crew 75+) or the like. Better yet rehauled so equal Tier gives the benefit to the bigger ship. Right now however because the budget is solely based on tier but the costs and to an extent options available are based on hull size equal tier, optimized ship combat tends to favour the smaller ship because they can get more/better equipment while still staying inside the budget.
Just HAVING a Dreadnaught costs you 200 build points so technically you can have on at Tier 8 that is a shell no weapons, no drives, no power core, nothing but an empty Dreadnaught shell because that used up 200 of your 205 budget and you can't buy anything else now. So any tier 8 or below ship of smaller size would always win out because it can actually do things. Yes this is an extreme example but like I said right now your better off building smaller ships over a larger one because you can get better gear for your tier.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think this comparison is fundamentally flawed.
This comparison is between a warship and the personal craft of some of the most powerful people in the galaxy, going head to head in single combat. Yes, the hero ship wins, it should win. The hero ship should also be extremely rare. The technology to build it is cutting edge/taken from some long lost empire/prohibitively expensive/made from ultra rare materials/etc. Build points is a game mechanic only and has no bearing on in world currency or economics.
Compare how these ships function in other ways. The warship is going to be used in a war, along side numerous other ships of all different sizes. Its damage threshold makes it mostly immune to the smaller ships in a battle. It's numerous weapons on multiple arcs allow it to simultaneously engage multiple targets. It probably also carries a garrison of soldiers and a bay full of fighter craft. The dreadnought is designed for fighting ships that are lower level than itself, and outperforms the hero ship for this use.
Aside- the sample ships in the crb are starship pregens, and we all know how incredibly well built and optimized Paizo's pregens are.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...right now your better off building smaller ships over a larger one because you can get better gear for your tier.
Insofar as this is a worry, I think the new Design Budget optional rules in the Starship Operations Manual (which impose caps on what percentage of a ship’s BP can be allocated to certain things) will help with this.
A big part of the worry, I suspect, comes down to the possibility of a tier 20 transport using the extra BP it gets from having a smaller frame (relative to a dreadnought) to super-boost some features of the ship — shields, or turret weapons, or whatever. With the budget limits, you can’t do that.
Some of the other points you raise will still be true — e.g., armor and speed will be cheaper for the transport than the dreadnought. But when you offset this by the boatload of extra HP the dreadnought gets, and the dreadnought’s ability to mount much larger weapons, carry more power cores, and so on, I suspect the end result will be roughly equal (if not in the dreadnought’s favor).
Perhaps a total BP cap based on ship size, or count the larger frames as multiple connected ships with each section having its own BPs?
|
|
I think this comparison is fundamentally flawed.
This comparison is between a warship and the personal craft of some of the most powerful people in the galaxy, going head to head in single combat. Yes, the hero ship wins, it should win. The hero ship should also be extremely rare. The technology to build it is cutting edge/taken from some long lost empire/prohibitively expensive/made from ultra rare materials/etc. Build points is a game mechanic only and has no bearing on in world currency or economics.
Compare how these ships function in other ways. The warship is going to be used in a war, along side numerous other ships of all different sizes. Its damage threshold makes it mostly immune to the smaller ships in a battle. It's numerous weapons on multiple arcs allow it to simultaneously engage multiple targets. It probably also carries a garrison of soldiers and a bay full of fighter craft. The dreadnought is designed for fighting ships that are lower level than itself, and outperforms the hero ship for this use.
Aside- the sample ships in the crb are starship pregens, and we all know how incredibly well built and optimized Paizo's pregens are.
That's the thing though I'm not looking at PC vs mass produced both the ships in this scenario ARE the hero ship with lost technology. This isn't Starfury X PC built party transport vs Atech Immortal Huge Cruiser. In a case like that I can accept it because as you said the PC one is built to have the best tech available. This is Starfury X PC Built Party Transport vs Titanic PC Built Party Dreadnaught. This should be a case of equal tech bigger warship wins but it isn't even with the lost technology the rules favour the smaller ship for the reasons I said. They both scavenge the ancient MK15 armour from the long lost Anteran race yet the smaller ship gets a far larger advantage from it.
Damage Theshold? The Atech Immortal has a damage threshold of 5, even a dreadnaught is only 15. A transport can equip linked persistant particle beams that do 20 to 160 damage per shot at long range. Given the Dreadnaught is likely to have far weaker shields, worse maneuverability, weaker armour, less capable computer systems its going to savaged again with this being a PC built lost tech warship vs a PC built lost tech transport.
Multiple targets? Again most of these larger ships will still only have one or two weapons per ark. Even the vindicator tyrant a dedicated warship only gets 3 shots and most of those are not that powerful. This isn't something that's easy to fix as a PC because again the costs are so much higher meaning you can't put the heavy hitters on it without costing yourself elsewhere.
Again I'm not comparing Pregens vs PC I'm comparing PC vs PC.
...right now your better off building smaller ships over a larger one because you can get better gear for your tier.Insofar as this is a worry, I think the new Design Budget optional rules in the Starship Operations Manual (which impose caps on what percentage of a ship’s BP can be allocated to certain things) will help with this.
A big part of the worry, I suspect, comes down to the possibility of a tier 20 transport using the extra BP it gets from having a smaller frame (relative to a dreadnought) to super-boost some features of the ship — shields, or turret weapons, or whatever. With the budget limits, you can’t do that.
Some of the other points you raise will still be true — e.g., armor and speed will be cheaper for the transport than the dreadnought. But when you offset this by the boatload of extra HP the dreadnought gets, and the dreadnought’s ability to mount much larger weapons, carry more power cores, and so on, I suspect the end result will be roughly equal (if not in the dreadnought’s favor).
Ah I don't have that one I'll need to have a look at it when the PDF becomes available.
Yeah, I noticed a long time ago that the build system for ships was skewed in this way and there's not really much to be done about it. Not to mention that except at the lowest levels before PCs have an opportunity to customize their ship the PCs are expected to win in combat and usually do so quite easily because NPC ships are built poorly.
I think this is intentional, because the PCs are supposed to win.
It's also worth noting that a PC ship (regardless of base from) shouldn't ever have an opportunity to engage a dreadnought in 1 v 1 combat under normal circumstances. The dreadnought should normally be surrounded by allies which will protect it.
Do you think the USA carrier fleets are sending out the aircraft carriers by themselves un-escorted? (The carrier is the staple behind the ability for American to have force projection across the world, it is core to the US ability to fight a war virtually anywhere). A typical carrier strike group consist of an aircraft carrier, at least one cruiser, at least two destroyers or frigates and possibly other vessels.
Now the game doesn't do this because 5 on 1 missions would be suicide unless the vessels where each individually so under-tier that they would be irrelevant. So instead the plot comes up with reasons why the other ships of the strike group are preoccupied and can't attack the PC ship which is attacking the biggest ship.
Remember, if the weapons can pierce the armor on the hull it doesn't exactly matter what the size of the ship is, it's a threat.
In the same way, if the weapons on a ship are enough that the enemy can't just repair the shields each turn enough to erase all the damage and in turn can't deal enough damage that the enemy can repair all the damage, then the other ship is a credible threat, regardless of size.
Well Borg technology isn't ancient tech, usually it's technology of assimilated races that the Borg have modified/improved/repurposed. They are the most technological advanced race around (for the most part) in Star Trek.
That aside, your point about ancient technology dreadnought is an interesting one...because if it has ancient technology it should have weapons, armor, shield upgrades that aren't available to anyone else that are cheaper than the others (in terms of BP) or are substantially stronger (or maybe both).
NPCs don't have to play by the standard rules.
I would argue that creating anything from "ancient tech" would have to not play by the rules.
I'm still pretty sure you can build a dreadnought to take on an equal tier explorer. Capital weapons in each arc, plus heavy weapons in the turret. 600 shield, 95 health explorer vs a 600 shield 650 health dreadnought, it just comes down to if the dreadnought can dish out damage before it's HP goes away. I think I'd prefer trading the dreadnought chassis for a base ship or a bulk freighter if I was trying to make a PC custom killer.
But it also depends on if one or both sides are in a bubble of death.
But if you really want a super-dreadnaught, just cheat.
Make a tier 30 ultranought, fill out it's possible weapon mounts and expansion bays with whatever you want, just understand that the PC ship no longer has a chance of winning.
That's what I did when I changed up the final book of dead suns. The PCs were flying a ridiculously powerful massive ship with an ancient automated crew. It worked great as a final fight.
|
|
Another thought that occured to me would be doubling the expansion bay's of ships that can mount capital weapons. Currently the capital class ships have 6 to 20 expansion bay's. So a huge cruiser has only 1 more expansion bay than a medium transport. Then it jumps from the 20 bay's of a Dreadnaught to the unlimited bay's of an Ultranaught. If you double the capital ship bay's you get . . .
Bulk Freight: 20
Cruiser: 12
Carrier: 20
Battleship: 16
Dreadnaught:40
You're still dealing with the other issues I hope the starship book will help but that makes them a lot more viable. Sure you still have the costs but no the Cruiser has more than twice the number of bay's of a transport for shuttle bay's (2 slots), brigs, additional power cores, etc.
It would also make sense for the dreadnought to use some of the extra bays for fighter craft, to harass small level 20 enemy transport ships that are trying to blow it up.
|
|
It would also make sense for the dreadnought to use some of the extra bays for fighter craft, to harass small level 20 enemy transport ships that are trying to blow it up.
I was thinking that myself and not just for the dreadnaught a fighter bay uses 4 slots and allows 8 fighters that's almost HALF a current carrier's expansion Bays. Put 2 on there 8 slots and its only got 2 left for other things. Double the bay's to 20 and now the carrier has 16 fighters, plenty of room for other things (brigs, science labs, gym, second power core, cargo holds, etc). You could probably even fit 3 on there no problem for 24 fighter's launched from the carrier and similar from the "Dreadnaught". Even a Battleship with 12 expansion bay's and probably more common than Dreadnaught's can now carry 8 fighters and still have 8 slots left for other compartments. Which are probably only going to keep increasing in number.
You could even put in some "not really needed" systems like life boats or escape pods (for the higher ranking officers, you're not getting enough for 100+ people even on the expanded Dreadnaught unless you allow more than 6 escape pods, 2 life boats per expansion slot). Not to mention bay's for shuttles and the like to make surface visits.
Bays are really poorly designed part of the starship building system.
And is honestly one area I really feel they should completely overhaul.
Fixing this area is probably what would allows us to see a clear advantage of big ships over little ships the same tier.
I kind of like the lack of massive numbers of fighters personally. It's a breath of fresh air from other settings.
But, a ships boat or something being standard on huge or larger ships for shuttling between ships and planets wouldn't be amiss.
Insofar as this is a worry, I think the new Design Budget optional rules in the Starship Operations Manual (which impose caps on what percentage of a ship’s BP can be allocated to certain things) will help with this.
I have been able to find *nothing* about the new SOM's content. Where did you hear about the design budget?
|
|
I kind of like the lack of massive numbers of fighters personally. It's a breath of fresh air from other settings.
But, a ships boat or something being standard on huge or larger ships for shuttling between ships and planets wouldn't be amiss.
I definately feel they should come standard with enough escape pods for a full 100+ crew compliment.
Which is the case in real life with carriers replacing battleships in modern navies. Carriers capable of carrying generally 70 fighters with some over a hundred compared to our 8-16.
You have to remember that these are just game mechanics. They don't expect anyone to actually run an encounter with over a hundred fighters, so they don't present that option. Story wise, they could carry several hundred if they wanted to.
|
|
Which is the case in real life with carriers replacing battleships in modern navies. Carriers capable of carrying generally 70 fighters with some over a hundred compared to our 8-16.You have to remember that these are just game mechanics. They don't expect anyone to actually run an encounter with over a hundred fighters, so they don't present that option. Story wise, they could carry several hundred if they wanted to.
I know its just if you aren't going to correctly represent capital class ships then don't give us the ability to buy capital class ships. Make them like the pathfinder army mechanics where you don't fight/operate them by the same rules as the PC ships.
Insofar as this is a worry, I think the new Design Budget optional rules in the Starship Operations Manual (which impose caps on what percentage of a ship’s BP can be allocated to certain things) will help with this.I have been able to find *nothing* about the new SOM's content. Where did you hear about the design budget?
I was lucky enough to get my shipping order really early this month. I've been answering some questions about the book in the SOM product thread, starting here.
But yeah, the Design Budget optional rules are my favorite part of the book (followed closely by the squadron rules).