But otherwise the guide is pretty good.

I understand that def should be used for swarmers, nor was I trying to get a super ship. I also got that the guide was written and not updated for several rounds. I was looking for parity in size/cost ratios to effectiveness.

What I wasn't sure of was the intended usage for ships designed using this system (is it an attack ship, mission ship, power ship.....). I don't think emi has made signifigant changes to the hull size/price ratio. Even factoring in changes to def and swarming, this system seems to make overly large ships. If you are going to pay 999 trillion or more for a ship, why the concern over the cost of the components used? I mean 999 trillion for the hull, what's a few mil on components.....

The issue is that the system doesn't work for superships or swarmers that are worth the extra money. I mean 2 ships built using this system with each costing well over an additional 2.6% each can't meet one I can build using my newbie understanding of design.

I see a lot of people trying to minimize weight on components. The issue is that sure, you have an awesome weapon with 1 wt and 1 cost and 50% acu, but the power requirement means you can't use it on many ship types or even 'cheap' ships. And if the ship ain't cheap, why worry about wt/energy/cost ratio so much?

That was more like the point I was trying to make. Why the attention to detail if the ship is going to be so massive as to require you to make a donation to afford just one?

The size of the components is the limiting factor here. Reducing weight is great if you have the money to pay for the hull that your massive powercore requires. The more space it uses, the bigger the ship needs to be. The bigger the ship, the more it costs.

Like I said, I've not got the fine details down, but this is simple. Bigger does not mean better, just more expensive.

The system for ship building given here is not effective for the game as it exists now. I also doubt that it was the most effective method even several rounds ago. Worrying about the powercore last is a mistake when designing. Obsessing about minimal weight is also a mistake. Concern over minimizing the cost of the component is only an issue if you don't have large amounts of money laying around.

I checked out the site. It's generally good, but I do have a bit of an issue with the ship building section. I used it to create a ship based on one I had already designed.

my ship
wt 6000
att 296523
def 2900
hp 72273
acu 46%
  actual att: 136401
components used:
PC, Special, Weapon X2
cost: 990033

tester
wt 9351
att 24091
def 0
hp 72273
acu 50%
  actual att: 12046
components:
pc, special, weapon
cost 1543124

I have 2 problems with the design based on your advice.

Hull size adds cost and I would have to add at least 32 more if I had put in shields and a computer (wich would have required much more power and therefore yet more hull space wich in turn drives the cost up).

No defense.
Each point of defense is like a virtual 10 points of hp for the first attack (if I understand the mechanics correctly). Sure, I could block something like 42% of incoming damage, but if there is more than 72k damage left, your ship is gone. Easily possible. Just as an example, my ship, after factoring the 42% shields leave 79k damage done to your ship.

my ship has a defense of 2900. Multiply by 10 and you get 29000. The ship designed by your system at it's max leaves almost 17k to even touch hp.

First round, you get 2 ships to my 1. I'll even give you first shot. Here's to hoping I'm doing this right.

You do 24092 att (since I'm going with max figures using actual att that factors in the 50% acu). I have 29000 defense. Your attack fails.

My attack. I do 136401 att (using my max actual att). You shields reduce the damage to 78673. You lose 1 ship.

round 2.

you do 12406 att. (if I'm doing this correctly, def only applies to round 1). I have 72273 hp; your attack leaves 59867 hp. Your attack fails.

I do 136401 att reduced to 78673. you lose 1 ship.

Now here's a ship that is closer in price range to the one designed with your system.

comparative ship
wt 9090
att 197166
def 2001
hp 231438
acu 47%
actual att: 92668
abs 42%
comonents used:
PC, sheilds X3, special, weapon
cost: 1502870

This one has shields in addition to def.

What I can't figure out is why bolth my ships (on paper at least) outpreform the one I designed using the system on your site and still cost less.