Okay, so, I wanted to take another crack at figuring out how the point system for making custom ships.

With that, I had an idea.

First, lets take a look at our 2 base ships, the Z-95 Bandit and the Tie Fighter Academy. Both have 12 points, and using a few knowns, we can reverse engineer the point system a bit.

First, let's look at Tie Fighter to Tie Interceptor.

Their dials are close enough that it does not give a point advantage, the Int has +1 attack, and the Int has boost. Boost = +1 Point, Attack = +5 Points, total 18 points.

Now, lets look at the A-wing compared to the Z-95.

Not sure how the dials are going to compare, but I would assume the Z-95 would be similar to the X-wing. With that, the A-wing has +1 agility, and has evade and boost. +4 Points for the agility, +1 for the evade/boost, +1 for the dial, -1 for the PS, 17 points.

Now, Z-95 to X-wing

+1 attack, +5 points, +1 shields (using the value from the mod card), +4 points. 21 points.

Now, I did this for many of the ships and it works within a value of 1 point, which can account for dials and balancing. The odd ducks were the YT-1300 and the HWK-290, but they are more of special circumstances. So, here is my formula:

Compared to the Z-95 always

+1 attack, add +5 points

+1 hull, add +3 points (for every hull above +1, only +1 points)

+1 Shields add +4 points (for every shield above +1, only +1 points)

-1 Shields add -4 points

-2 Shields add -7 points (ignore the -4 for -1 shield)

+1 evade add +4 points

-1 evade add -4 points

+1 PS add +1 points

-1 PS add -1 points (only taken sometimes, usually for balancing)

Fast Dial add +1 points

actions that are more than target lock, add 1 point, no target lock, remove 1 point.

All ships below are the lowest possible PS and have no special abilities.

Using this formula you get:

12 + 5 + 4 = 21 - x wing

12 + 4 +1 + 1 -1 = 17 - a-wing

12 + 5 + 4 - 4 = 17 y-wing (balanced to 18)

12 + 5 + 3 + 6 -4 +1 -1 = 22 B-wing

12 + 4 + 3 + 1 +1 = 21 Tie Advanced

12 + 5 +3 + 4 - 7 +1 = 18 Tie Interceptor

12 + 5 +4 +4 +1 = 26 E-wing (balanced to 27)

12 + 5 +4 +4 +3 +1 +1 = 30 Tie Defender

12 + 5 -4 +6 + 5 -1 = 23 Shuttle (Balanced to 21) (likely due to really slow dial)

Now, this doesn't seem to work for the HWK or the Tie Bomber (and I didn't even attempt for the YT-1300 or the firespray).

So what do you think?

Not sure how the dials are going to compare, but I would assume the Z-95 would be similar to the X-wing.

link

I think this is a pretty good model for figuring things out generally, but it does seem to have trouble taking weapon options/stronger actions into account.

The new Phantom in particular is cheaper than your model predicts, but it also has an incredibly strong cloaking power. It seems unlikely that cloaking grants a discount, so I'm left thinking that you've overpriced shields/hull on other ships and that the overpriced has been hidden by their upgrade slots.

Really good work though. I love what you've started here. When I'm not goofing off at work, I'll try to post some of my thoughts on system prices.

My thought has always been that there's a formula of sorts that FFG applies to get a general idea of baseline costs for stats (PS, ATT, AGI, Hull, Shield), adjusts for pilot special abilities, adjusts for dial, adjusts for actions, and adjusts for upgrade options, and then finally, adjusts everything towards a "balance index" towards the 100 point squad threshhold. In other words, there is no absolute formula that will ever be discovered that proves all ships costs from strictly a mathematical basis. Attempts like these to find relative cost comparisons are OK towards the end of making custom ships for casual play, but I don't think there will ever be a way to realistically crack the FFG because too much of it is ultimately subjective adjustments from their playtesting group.

The fact that they are willing to make corrections via mods, titles, etc., means they acknowledge that the subjective formulas occasionally get it wrong. Personally, I would have ZERO problem if they scratched out certain card/ship costs entirely and issued revised versions, even if I had to pay for them. If they want to give me the option of ditching "Expose," for example, at 4 points and make it 2 points or whatever is actually balanced/fair to get it used, sure, I'll ditch the old ones for replacements that actually get used. At some point, there will be probably an X-Wing Second Edition, or something along those lines, and they will ultimately have to reprint cards anyway, so actively fixing them like they've done with Daredevil, etc., is a great sign for me.

I think this is a pretty good model for figuring things out generally, but it does seem to have trouble taking weapon options/stronger actions into account.

The new Phantom in particular is cheaper than your model predicts, but it also has an incredibly strong cloaking power. It seems unlikely that cloaking grants a discount, so I'm left thinking that you've overpriced shields/hull on other ships and that the overpriced has been hidden by their upgrade slots.

Really good work though. I love what you've started here. When I'm not goofing off at work, I'll try to post some of my thoughts on system prices.

Any feedback would be great. I would think that 4 attack would not be +8 compared to 2 attack, and I didn't see the phantom article before I wrote this, so I will try and take that into account.

I'll do some more work myself, but I thought it would be good for modeling things such as prequel ships for our own enjoyment.

Thanks all for the feedback, and keep it coming!

I can't remember where it was (it was on these forums but a while ago), but somebody did figure out a point formula that worked perfectly through wave 2. But I've noticed some things change - for example Wes Janson is 1 point more than Luke even though the statline and PS are the same. As I recall that formula did not account for the difference. Evidently FFG thought the special text was good enough to warrant 1 more point cost.

Evidently FFG thought the special text was good enough to warrant 1 more point cost.

And it is, as Luke's ability works on him, Wes' ability has an effect on everybody who shoots after him.

I think, that if you want to deduce the cost you're going to have to assign points to the different maneuvers on the dial as well and not stick to using whole points but use half and quarter points as well.

So, for example, 1 point for a 1 turn, - .25 for making it red. 1 point for a 2 straight, + .25 for making it green. 1 straight = 1.5 points, something like that.

I also think that +5 is too much for +1 attack. From Bandit to Rookie is a cost of 9 points. For that you get a longer K-Turn, tighter greens, 1 extra hull, 1 extra attack, an astromech slot and a torpedo slot, and you lose one missile slot.

If you equalize the cost of torpedo tubes to the cost of missile launchers then that'd leave 4 points for the (imo) better dial, the astromech slot and the hull.

I think, that if you want to deduce the cost you're going to have to assign points to the different maneuvers on the dial as well and not stick to using whole points but use half and quarter points as well.

So, for example, 1 point for a 1 turn, - .25 for making it red. 1 point for a 2 straight, + .25 for making it green. 1 straight = 1.5 points, something like that.

I also think that +5 is too much for +1 attack. From Bandit to Rookie is a cost of 9 points. For that you get a longer K-Turn, tighter greens, 1 extra hull, 1 extra attack, an astromech slot and a torpedo slot, and you lose one missile slot.

If you equalize the cost of torpedo tubes to the cost of missile launchers then that'd leave 4 points for the (imo) better dial, the astromech slot and the hull.

The issue here comes for other ships and comparing to the Z-95. For starting from 0, this would work, but given that I am starting at a 12 point ship this would have flaws. Also, taking into account every maneuver would make for a very complicated formula that wouldn't be anywhere near as accurate, because of the difficulty determing point values. How much is a 2 k-turn compared to a 4? What about 3 90 degree vs 2? They would be so arbitrary.

Now, above, I realized that my formula for Rookie was incorrect. It should be:

12 + 5 (attack) + 3 (hull) + 1 (balance\dial) = 21

You cannot take into account upgrade slots, otherwise this game would be horribly unbalanced for un-upgraded, but highly upgrade-able ships. If I added points, ships like the B-wing would have a base value of 26, but adds no value.

Also, I am not aiming to look at any named pilots, because their abilities are given a point value that is play tested for balance. Hence the Wes/Luke debate. I am trying to look at base ships with PS 1 or 2.

I still want to leave the attack value at 5 (at least for the first upgrade from 2 attack to 3 attack) because this makes other things balanced, such as the TIE Interceptor, using the TIE Fighter as base:

12 + 5 (attack) + 1 (Boost/Dial) = 18

Another thing to take into account is that a higher agility value is highly correlated with a high speed value, so by assigning 4 points to an additional agility dice, we are partially taking into account the better dial. This is what makes ships like the B-wing work without a dial adjustment.

Also, lets take a quick look at the phantom:

12 + 10 (attack) +1 (BR/Evade) +3 (PS) = 26 for Tie Phantom Shadow Squad(not including cloak).

Due to the cloak ability, I think that the attack value is too high.

I think the attack rule should be:

+1 attack = +5 points

+2 attack = +8 points (ignore +5 from +1 attack)

Now this only applies 3 points to cloak, but I think that is very fair, given the inability to attack while cloaked.

But if you want to reverse engineer the formula, you'd have to look at a couple of ships and their points and from there figure out what is different and how much the difference costs.

So you must take into account upgrade slots, the cost of different maneuvers and everything so you can properly design basic ships.

You can't just say "oh an interceptor is 6 points more expensive than a basic academy pilot, let's say 1 attack is 5 points and a boost is one point". That's totally disregarding the bigger difference in the K-turns and the load of green. Why would more green on the dial not be worth more? It's why Saber + PTL (or GSP + PTL) is much better than BSP and PTL.

Will it be a complicated formula? Yes, impossible to figure out? No, just time consuming.

Saying the shuttle gets a discount because of the slow dial is disregarding that the 0 move is strong, especially with the Adv. Sensors and that the beast has legs, covering large amounts of distance easily.

At least half the game is maneuvring, not costing the different maneuvers available is, in my opinion, a mistake.

I've been thinking that the upgrade cards might carry some of the keys to the formula.

Targeting Computer suggests the target lock action is worth 2.

Hull Upgrade suggests 1 hull is worth 3.

Shield Upgrade suggests 1 shield is worth 4.

Chaardan Refit suggests 1 missile slot is worth 2.

We know from the basic ship cards that 1 point of pilot skill is worth 1. Veteran Instincts suggests an Elite slot is worth 1.

Taking all that together, we can start to zero out some cards. I'll start with the A-Wing (Prototype Pilot):

1 skill = 1 point

2 hull = 6 points

2 shields = 8 points

targeting computer = 2 points

missile = 2 points

Total = 19, which shows that my formula is all wrong, since the Prototype Pilot costs 17 and I haven't included the attack, defense, dial, or other actions. :-(

Let's try the TIE Advanced (Tempest):

2 skill = 2 points

3 hull = 9 points

2 shields = 8 points

targeting computer = 2 points

missile = 2 points

Total = 23. Huh. But again, I haven't included the attack, defense, dial, or other actions.

Must be more complicated than I thought.

I've been thinking that the upgrade cards might carry some of the keys to the formula.

Targeting Computer suggests the target lock action is worth 2.

Hull Upgrade suggests 1 hull is worth 3.

Shield Upgrade suggests 1 shield is worth 4.

Chaardan Refit suggests 1 missile slot is worth 2.

We know from the basic ship cards that 1 point of pilot skill is worth 1. Veteran Instincts suggests an Elite slot is worth 1.

Taking all that together, we can start to zero out some cards. I'll start with the A-Wing (Prototype Pilot):

1 skill = 1 point

2 hull = 6 points

2 shields = 8 points

targeting computer = 2 points

missile = 2 points

Total = 19, which shows that my formula is all wrong, since the Prototype Pilot costs 17 and I haven't included the attack, defense, dial, or other actions. :-(

Let's try the TIE Advanced (Tempest):

2 skill = 2 points

3 hull = 9 points

2 shields = 8 points

targeting computer = 2 points

missile = 2 points

Total = 23. Huh. But again, I haven't included the attack, defense, dial, or other actions.

Must be more complicated than I thought.

Modifications are all overcosted compared to the points formula. Especially engine upgrade. I doubt any particular upgrade slot is more than a point either, with most being fractions of a point.

Honestly, my formula uses the mod cards as a base value (4 points for 1st shield point over 1 and 3 points for first hull point over 1).

Though, thinking about this, if we reduce both those values by 1, and then give more points towards maneuver dials, that may make some sense.

Issues arise with my formula and ships like the B and Y wings, which work out nice under my current formula,

I've been thinking that the upgrade cards might carry some of the keys to the formula.

Targeting Computer suggests the target lock action is worth 2.

Hull Upgrade suggests 1 hull is worth 3.

Shield Upgrade suggests 1 shield is worth 4.

Chaardan Refit suggests 1 missile slot is worth 2.

We know from the basic ship cards that 1 point of pilot skill is worth 1. Veteran Instincts suggests an Elite slot is worth 1.

Taking all that together, we can start to zero out some cards. I'll start with the A-Wing (Prototype Pilot):

1 skill = 1 point

2 hull = 6 points

2 shields = 8 points

targeting computer = 2 points

missile = 2 points

Total = 19, which shows that my formula is all wrong, since the Prototype Pilot costs 17 and I haven't included the attack, defense, dial, or other actions. :-(

Let's try the TIE Advanced (Tempest):

2 skill = 2 points

3 hull = 9 points

2 shields = 8 points

targeting computer = 2 points

missile = 2 points

Total = 23. Huh. But again, I haven't included the attack, defense, dial, or other actions.

Must be more complicated than I thought.

This is an okay approach, but I believe that every ship has a given amounts of hull, attack, etc. There seems to be a constant number that is subtracted from every ship, and that is why I always start from the TIE Fighter or the Z-95. Points make more sense given a starting point.

Modifications are all overcosted compared to the points formula. Especially engine upgrade. I doubt any particular upgrade slot is more than a point either, with most being fractions of a point.

Honestly, my formula uses the mod cards as a base value (4 points for 1st shield point over 1 and 3 points for first hull point over 1).

Though, thinking about this, if we reduce both those values by 1, and then give more points towards maneuver dials, that may make some sense.

Issues arise with my formula and ships like the B and Y wings, which work out nice under my current formula,

Actually, you probably should be comparing the X-Wing to the TIE Fighter, since those are most likely the baseline ships. I'm guessing that there are fudge factors involved, which prevents a simple mathematical algorithm.

anyone think that they don't have a formula and just laugh as we try to pick apart osmething that isn't there.

I have seen time and time again where FFG has made a ship 1 point too much to fit perfectly in a good combo.

double post oops

I thought about starting a new thread but I think this one will work just fine (sorry for resurrecting after 3 weeks, but deal with it).

I got really curious about how these numbers might work, so I tried to solve (by hand) a large system of simultaneous equations (all of the non-unique pilots of small-base ships). My brain fell out so I called a friend at a major research lab for help. Using my data, he ran the numbers through Mathematica and did some interesting mathy things I don't understand (including fudge factors, unknown constants, etc.). The results we got... don't make a lot of sense. Some of the variables came out very close to the actual values; some of them were negative; some appeared to be way off.

So the rest of you can tear all this apart, here are my assumptions and oversights:

-Oversight: None of this takes into account maneuver dials

-Oversight: None of this establishes a base cost for specific ship types ("an X-Wing with no stats starts at P points")

-Oversight: None of this includes the huge ships, for reasons I consider fairly obvious

-Assumption: Those things should fall out if I get the rest of the numbers lined up

-Assumption: Fantasy Flight has some idea of what stats are worth (at least a rough number) and then bends ships up or down based on playtesting, designer feel, game constraints, etc.

-Assumption: My friend knows what he's doing with math software

-Assumption: Points for each ship treat each variable with an equal value (e.g., hull points on an A-Wing are priced the same as hull points on an E-Wing)

Variables:

Skill (K)

Attack (A)

Defense (D)

Hull (H)

Shields (S)

Focus (F)

Barrel Roll (L)

Evade (E)

Target Lock (G)

Turret (T)

Torpedo (P)

Astromech ®

Boost (O)

Missile (M)

System (Y)

Cannon (N)

Crew (W)

Bomb (B)

Cloak ©

Example from Dataset:

TempestAdvanced: 2A + 3D + 2S + 3H + 1G + 1L + 1F + 1E + 1M + 2K = 21
(I went on like this through Storm Sq, Rookie, Red Sq, Obsidian Sq, Tala Sq, Bandit Sq, Gold Sq, Gray Sq, basic Hawk, Gamma Sq, Scimitar Sq, Avenger Sq, Alpha Sq, Prototype, Blue Sq, Dagger Sq, Knave Sq, Delta Sq, Shadow Sq, Sigma Sq, Academy, Outer Rim Smuggler, Omicron Gr, & Bounty Hunter.)

After running a solve on all those equations simultaneously (insert magic computer math stuff), these are the results we got:

A = 1.01

D = 6.72

S = 5.80

H = -2.44

G = 1.94

P = 0.77

W = 8.11

Y = -13.40

C = 7.66

L = 11.15

O = 5.49

F = -9.37

E = -5.93

N = -2.96

M = -4.92

R = 5.23

T = 3.04

B = 18.09

K = .89

As I said, a lot of these don't make sense (the Bomb slot costs 18? the System slot gives you back 13 points?). So we ran it again, removing the large base ships (ORS, Omicron, BH) and the two ships that seem to have been given an extra point to prevent big(ger) swarms (Bandit Sq and Academy).

A = 2.58

D = 1.67

S = 1.19

H = 0.65

G = 6.06

P = -2.29

W = 6.97

Y = -2.88

C = 2.70

L = 6.77

O = 4.42

F = -9.82

E = 0.91

N = 7.14

M = 0.56

R = 9.62

T = 1.06

B = 2.02

K = 1.00

These numbers look much better than the original set (only 3 negative values, skill = 1, boost and evade close to the cost of the upgrades that provide them), but we still have those wacky negatives. So what if we pull out the large base ships but leave the (presumably overcosted) Academy and Bandit Sq in?

A = 2.67

D = 1.75

S = 1.23

H = 0.68

G = 5.56

P = -2.28

W = 6.41

Y = -2.59

C = 2.53

L = 6.37

O = 3.83

F = -8.98

E = 0.70

N = 6.58

M = 0.59

R = 9.02

T = 1.11

B = 1.83

K = 0.89

Not much change- the biggest is still less than 1 point- although we lose the K=1 that seems to be the easiest variable to suss out from looking at the cards. We do have the nice confirmation of Lanchester's Laws that have been discussed elsewhere on this forum, with Attack retaining just over a 1.5 multiplier over Defense (2.58:1.67 in the previous calculation). So what do we do next? Let's subtract that "ghost point" from the Academy and Bandit Sq and roll them in with everything else.

A = 0.93

D = 6.68

S = 5.73

H = -2.52

G = 2.51

P = 0.85

W = 8.67

Y = -13.76

C = 7.95

L = 11.59

O = 6.07

F = -10.18

E = -5.76

N = -2.41

M = -4.96

R = 5.78

T = 3.06

B = 18.19

K = 1.00

Hmm. Our results got goofy again: six negative values and really high numbers for Bomb, Barrel Roll, System, and Defense. However, this model (along with the results from the "no large ships, no Academy, no Bandit" set) come out on the money for most of the ships tested (the "no large/Ac/Bt" set whiffs on the Omicron, suggesting a point cost of 33.07). Of course, getting the data out of a system that's the same as the data you put in isn't a great feat. In the absence of much conclusive data, I decided to try to set ranges on these values based on the results I got over time (this part is ripe for refinement).

A = 2.50 to 2.67

D = 1.67 to 1.78

S = 1.15 to 1.25

H = .67

G = 5.50 to 7.00

P = -2.33 to 0.75

W = 7.00 to 8.00

Y = -3.00 to -2.50

C = 2.50 to 2.75

L = 6.33 to 6.75

O = 3.80 to 5.50

F = -10.00 to -9.33

E = 0.75 to 1.00

N = 6.50 to 7.20

M = 0.50 to 0.67

R = 5.25 to 9.75

T = 1.00 to 3.00

B = 1.75 to 2.00

K = 0.88 to 1.00

These ranges predict the small base ships I tested pretty well (value of Rookie predicted at 15.31 to 26.23, averaging to 20.77 and printed as 21) but flop on things like the Omicron (average prediction 34.49; printed 19). Any suggestions about what number might be skewing these results are welcome!

So what did I learn? What principles can we apply? What refinements are possible? How can these numbers be used?

Variables:

1. Pilot skill (K) is likely to be around 1 point per level.

2. Attack (A) costs about 1.5 times as much as Defense (D); A is likely between 2.5 and 2.67 while D is likely between 1.67 and 1.75.

3. Focus (F), which is present on every pilot card for every ship, is likely rolled into the base cost, which seems to be around -10.

4. Barrel Roll (L) appears to be a pretty costly (valuable) ability, with a value between 6 and 12.

5. The Millennium Falcon title upgrade which grants the Evade (E) action for 1 point seems to be the right value (my best results come out between 0.7 and 1.72).

6. A Cannon (N) slot on a small ship looks to cost between 6.5 and 7.25.

7. A Missile (M) slot on a small ship looks to cost between 0.5 and 0.6 (implications for the A-Wing/Chardaan Refit are for you to draw, dear reader).

8. A Turret (T) slot appears to cost between 1 and 3. I'm not sure what this means for the cost of the YT-1300's primary turret.

9. My guess is that a Bomb (B) slot costs about 2, but there aren't many samples to calculate from.

10. The Targeting Computer (G) upgrade has a pretty good cost (my best values place it between 1.94 and 2.51).

Refinements and next steps:

1. For designing your own ships, playtesting is key. I hope my ranges of values can help guide how to cost the "dream ships" initially, though.

2. Narrowing down those value ranges would be nice, as would figuring out what throws off the model when large ships or ships with multiple Torpedo (P) slots are calculated.

3. I really want Torpedo and Missile slots to have similar values.

4. Comparing ships with similar stats (A-Wing/Z-95/TIE Advanced) could illuminate the values of dials and specific abilities.

5. I suspect the Elite (I) slot costs 1 in most cases.

6. The stepped attribute model proposed by some on this forum (2 hull, 2 shield is the baseline zero cost for ships; ships with values less than this have a cost reduction) looks like it has some value and may help eliminate some of the negative variables.

Feedback and suggestions?

That is probably the best result there is so far.

However, negative points values for upgrade slots do not make sense at all.

B-Wings without cannon upgrade are very competitive. 6+ points for the empty cannon slot? Remove that slot from the ship and the value drops to 16 points? I do not think that matches reality.

I may have missed it, but it doesn't look like you took the dials into account. For example, you said that your model massively overshot the cost of the Omicron Group Pilot, predicting that it should cost about a dozen points more than it does. But the reason it costs far less than it does is because it has such a terrible dial.

That is probably the best result there is so far.

However, negative points values for upgrade slots do not make sense at all.

B-Wings without cannon upgrade are very competitive. 6+ points for the empty cannon slot? Remove that slot from the ship and the value drops to 16 points? I do not think that matches reality.

I wholeheartedly agree that the negative values don't make sense- especially when their magnitude is so high (like some of the -12 values for System slots)! My best guess is that the "starting value" for the ships that carry those specific slots/abilities are very different from what the model accounts for.

I may have missed it, but it doesn't look like you took the dials into account. For example, you said that your model massively overshot the cost of the Omicron Group Pilot, predicting that it should cost about a dozen points more than it does. But the reason it costs far less than it does is because it has such a terrible dial.

No, I didn't take dials into account- I've collected the values but I don't know how to integrate that into the calculation (and I'm not sure my friend has time to punch it all in to the supercomputer again). At risk of being slightly offensive, "I want proof, not leads!" I suspect that the weirdness of the predicted values (and again, those values use the set of variables calculated from the small ships only, which get weird when you throw in the large ships) does reflect the "base value" of specific ships, which includes the maneuver dial. I don't think we have the data to conclude that the shuttle's dial is worth a bid of -13 points.

Perhaps, however, we could get some traction in our attempts to deduce how squad points are assigned by trying some squadbuilding using a bid system instead of the printed squad points. (I put Red Sq Pilot on the table and say I'll pay 18 of my 100 points for him; you say you'll pay 19. The highest bid sets the value for the ship in both players' squadbuilding phase. Continue with all ships/pilots/upgrades and see if Expose or the TIE Advanced really is "worthless." I know there's no way I'd let my opponent field Darth Vader at 0 points- maybe 27 but definitely not lower than 25.) Now that I describe it, I really want to try it....

Off to start a new thread and see what happens.

You should mention that you assumed that the formula is of the form :

Cost = a*A + d*D + s*S + h*H + g*G + l*L + f*F + e*E + m*M + k*K

Which is a flawed hypotheses, if you ask me.

Case in point : The 3 shields + 3 hull on a TIE Defender are "worth" a lot more than the 3 hull + 5 shields on the B-Wing, because of the difference in agility values.

Hmm- it took me a minute to figure out what you're saying, but I think I get it.

It is one of my assumptions that points for each ship treat each variable with an equal value.

Another thing I don't see in your values is that the factions have different identities. I'm guessing that TL/Focus is the baseline for the Rebel {scum} and BR/Focus for Imperials. The rebels probably get some "wiggle room" on health and the droid slot is getting pretty dang powerful. Meanwhile bombs are imperial only (and hopefully getting better) and they certainly get boost and "special" dials more often (interceptor, defender, shuttle).

Pretty sure the old breakdown was:

6 per green over 2

6 per red over 2

4 per sheild

3.5 per hull over 2

1pt per PS

After that there is fudge room up or down for pilot abilities, special circumstances (shuttle's stop, Big ships discount of ~7, Hwk's 1 att), really good/bad dials...

It predicted things pretty well until all those special things showed up.