• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.

Anyone ever tried to design a ship design system?

Okay, bit of a bizarre question.

I like both the CT LBB/HG and the T20 ship design systems; they are great fun solo, and give really nice, detailed designs for campaigns that feature long-term relations with a given ship.

However, for a new non-Traveller sci-fi campaign I'm developing, I want to have a variety of different ship types available that characters will encounter on a regular basis, and that the players can contribute to helping me build (basic setting is exploration and development by a small confederation--just after a bitter civil war. The exploration is a way to re-unify the confederation, so there will be a mix of older faction ships mixed with new designs. Characters play members of the crews, either as military members or civilian specialists).

The Trav sequences are, frankly, too complicated for what I have in mind. I've looked at two other systems, the old Star Frontiers system and the CODA Star Trek system. Both use the idea of abstract "spaces" for the construction of vessels, which goes a long way towards removing the complex math--at the cost of too much detail.

I would like a system where I can distinguish between two exploration vessels of the same class who might have different lab loadouts, see some "progressive" development in ship designs (how that faction destroyer was re-configured after the war into a light deep-space scout), and have some idea of how long a particular ship might be able to remain "on station." And I would like to be able to do this with out tracking EPs, required crew positions, or calculating the staterooms necessary for the fighter squadron crew.

So, I thought I might tackle actually building a ship design sequence that could handle anything from automated communications buoys to orbital starship construction stations. My idea was to use the idea of Hull Sizes and spaces, but to tied the spaces to specific "capacities." For instance, a Hull Size-10 hull gives 50 "spaces" of equipment. A space might be a general lab (giving a small bonus on character science rolls), a dedicated biology lab (larger bonus--but just for biology rolls), a cargo space carrying a set amount of goods, a laser beam, etc. The actual capacity would be set based on the Hull Size--for instance, one space of lab on a Hull Size-10 vessel supports two researchs (Hull Size/4), while 1 space of cargo on a similar size vessel contains 10 standard cargo units (1 per Hull Size). Thus, "spaces" on large ships carry more stuff.

My question is...has anyone tried designing a sequence? Not necessarily of this type, but in general. What kind of problems did you encounter? Anything I need to be on the look-out for?
 
Oops, might need to clarify what I'm using as standards for "Hull Sizes" to clarify my idea.

Vessel hull sizes go from 1 to 20, while space stations can over 20--but only in modules of 5 (so, Hull Size-25, then Hull Size-30, then Hull Size-35--I'm going for an idea of modular design, because I want space stations to be fairly common in the setting).

My "benchmarks" are based on roughly modelling fictional vessels, as follows:

</font>
  • Hull Size-1: One- or two-person fighter</font>
  • Hull Size-2: Eagle-transports from Space 1999</font>
  • Hull Size-3: Modular Cutter (or Eagle designed for two pods)</font>
  • Hull Size-4: Millenium Falcon or Type-S</font>
  • Hull Size-10: Heavy Destroyer (perhaps like the Tiger-class from Wing Commander)</font>
  • Hull Size-16: Constitution-class USS Enterprise</font>
  • Hull Size-20: Battlestar Galactica</font>
Okay, feel free to fire away...
 
Hmm, I did something kind of like that for SpellJammer (before there was any kind of a design system for making your own SpellJammers, if they ever did come up with such). Haven't a clue where those notes are now though or if they'd be much help


Maybe I'm too much of a gearhead, or I've been playing with the various design systems for too long (you might be a gearhead if... ), but I don't see what you mean by CT LBB2 too complicated. HG and T20 maybe, for what you're after, but not LBB2. Too limited perhaps, in that it won't do small craft as is. Anyway...

...I've got a feeling I've seen a system like you outline but can't recall where or even what for (though I think it was CT). Maybe it was even something I was playing with in my on again off again gui ship design and deckplanner idea :confused:

On the face of it this looks pretty easy, but I think once you start getting into it you're going to find it more complex than HG or T20. YMMV. Good luck, I'll be following this thread with interest, and who knows, maybe I'll be hit by inspiration.
 
Have you seen the Alternity ship building rules?

A more advanced version was released online as the Warships supplement.

It's available for free from here.
 
...for a new non-Traveller sci-fi campaign I'm developing, I want to have a variety of different ship types available that characters will encounter on a regular basis, and that the players can contribute to helping me build (basic setting is exploration and development by a small confederation--just after a bitter civil war. The exploration is a way to re-unify the confederation, so there will be a mix of older faction ships mixed with new designs. Characters play members of the crews, either as military members or civilian specialists).
I don't see how this cannot be done as Traveller. Many areas on the fringes of the OTU would match this description. Plus never limit yourself to thinking that Traveller was/is only the OTU. Traveller is merely the idea to get you from here to there.

What was the premise behind Alternity, anyhow. I shyed away from it because it was T$R . But, I have subsquentally heard good things about it. Just curious...here not wanting to start a flamewar.
 
Wow, them were some fast responses...

Originally posted by kafka47:
I don't see how this cannot be done as Traveller. Many areas on the fringes of the OTU would match this description. Plus never limit yourself to thinking that Traveller was/is only the OTU. Traveller is merely the idea to get you from here to there.
Sorry--I meant "non-TU" when I said "non-Traveller." I want to change some assumptions (on aliens, government, technology), but I will be using either T20 or CT for atleast the character portion. Indeed, the campaign is a "re-imagining" of a CT campaign I ran in high school.

Still leaves me with the problem of the ship design question, however.

Sigg Oddra: I checked out the Alternity Warships supplement. Definately moving in the right direction, but having to allot 8,000 space points for a large cruiser, and calculating how many man-days of rations the cargo section holds, are some of the things I'm trying to avoid.

However, I do want to build me some vessels with symbiotic components someday, however...
 
Originally posted by far-trader:
Maybe I'm too much of a gearhead, or I've been playing with the various design systems for too long (you might be a gearhead if... ), but I don't see what you mean by CT LBB2 too complicated. HG and T20 maybe, for what you're after, but not LBB2. Too limited perhaps, in that it won't do small craft as is. Anyway...
You're correct about LBB2 being much easier to work with, but there's still the problem with complexities such as bridge size (wasn't this one of the major problems with the small craft), computers (having to actually figure it), and you still have to account for staterooms, etc. Doable, but still not quite what I'm looking for.

Plus, it's a challenge anyway.

On the face of it this looks pretty easy, but I think once you start getting into it you're going to find it more complex than HG or T20. YMMV. Good luck, I'll be following this thread with interest, and who knows, maybe I'll be hit by inspiration.
Well, maybe--but I can't see having to account for say 50 space points and roughing out crew requirements becoming more complicated than having to account for 5,000 dT and figuring out how many men are a minimum for an engineering section.

I'll write a brief look at what I've done so far, and selfishly troll for feedback.
 
Okay, far-trader was correct about the creeping complexity bit, but I still think it's doable.

A few comments on technology. I've handwaved a scientific explanation for FTL travel (based on changing wavelengths of real-space objects), but for practical purposes, it's still a form of Jump Drive, only quicker turnaround (about 35 hours for a Jump-1 of 2.81 ly, and 65 hours for a Jump-4 of 11.2 ly). Jump-4 is the recently discovered fastest, with Jump-3 just entering common military and civilian use. FTL communications are possible, but here's the kicker--only to a maximum of Jump-2 currently. So, modern ships can outpace communications, but there is also an incentive to construct something like a FTL comm grid.

Mechanics: For my first bit of complexity, I borrowed the idea from CODA Trek and the Alternity bit about larger hull sizes containing more spaces than smaller. Here's the table I'm working with:
</font>
  • Hull Sizes 1-10: 5 spaces per Hull Size</font>
  • Hull Sizes 11-15: 6 spaces per Hull Size</font>
  • Hull Sizes 16-19: 7 spaces per Hull Size</font>
  • Hull Sizes 20 + (stations): 8 spaces per Hull Size</font>
Power Plants: (I mixing together power plants and manuever drives) cost Hull Size/5 rounded up in spaces. (HS 1-5 = 1, HS 6-10 = 2, HS 11-15 = 3, etc).
Power plants on Stations are non-manuever; cost does not decrease, however, because of the associated question of more intensive shielding, safety standards, auxillary equipement (okay, enough handwaving).

Power plant fuel--which provides the basic storage, injection machinery, safety gear, and one month's supply--is equal to the Hull Size in spaces (extra fuel can be carried as bulk cargo at the equivalent of 1 space = 1 SCU of cargo--in other words, its possible for a vesel to carry larger loads of fuel more efficiently).

Jump Drives: Probably going to equal to (Jump # x Hull Size/5 rounded up). Again, this includes fuel for 1 month's operations. Extra fuel as cargo.
No Jump Drives on vessels 1-3 (my definition of "small craft"), although I am toying with the idea of a "Jump Module" for Modular Cutters.
No Jump Drives for stations.

Control Spaces: This includes bridge, nav computer, crew stations, etc. I'm thinking on going Hull Size/5 for this as well (noticing a pattern???), with the option of buying extra for combat redundancy.

Life Support: This includes life support, and living space for crew. Again, Hull Size/5 as minimum, with each group of five Hull Sizes giving a number of max crew(HS 1-5 = 1 x Hull Size, HS 6-10 = 10, HS 11-15 = 25, HS 16-20 = 50, HS 20+ = 100). Hull Sizes 1-3 (my definition of "small craft") can not pay any, and have a crew of 2 for a max of 24 hours.
Addition crew (or passagers) can be bought through a passenger space allocation (say, each space = HS number of extra crew/passengers).

Weapons/Defenses: Working on this. Right now, a basic Vessel Laser costs 1 space, a Heavy Laser = 2, as does a torpedo. Not sure on defenses, although I am leaning against energy screens.

Special equipment: Everything else. </font>
  • 1 Cargo space = 1 SCU x HS.</font>
  • Passenger couches = 10 persons for 24 hours per HS.</font>
  • FTL Communications = 1 space per Jump.</font>
  • Labs = 1 space, with room for Hull Size/5 persons.</font>
  • Sensors = 1 space per +1 mod to sensor rolls.</font>
  • Fuel Skimming Equipment = 1 space for processing 1 SCU of fuel per hour.</font>
I'm planning on including here stuff like advanced computer designs (for instance, an astronomic computer is basically a glorified space science lab not requiring crew--1 space), fire control computers, recreation spaces, whatever.

Okay, that's the basics. I've thrown some designs together for the next post.
 
Originally posted by Sulpicius:
I checked out the Alternity Warships supplement. Definately moving in the right direction, but having to allot 8,000 space points for a large cruiser, and calculating how many man-days of rations the cargo section holds, are some of the things I'm trying to avoid.

However, I do want to build me some vessels with symbiotic components someday, however...
The system in the Gamemaster's Guide, expanded in the Starships supplement, is much simpler.
Its drawbacks are:
it only handles PC scale ships;
and,
they are out of print.

The latter can probably be solved by the second hand market, ebay, or you can get pdfs of them here.
 
Some basic, basic designs:

HULL SIZE 1
Fighter: 5 spaces.</font>
  • Power Plant: 1 space</font>
  • Power Plant Fuel: 1 space</font>
  • Jump Drive: 0</font>
  • Command Space: 1 space</font>
  • Life Support: 0 (Max: 2 crew for 24 hours)</font>
  • Hardpoint: 2 spaces (2 x Vessel Laser, or 1 x torpedo, or 1 x Sensor-1 and 1 x computer to process/record information)</font>
Admin Shuttle: 5 spaces.</font>
  • Power Plant: 1 space</font>
  • Power Plant Fuel: 1 space</font>
  • Jump Drive: 0</font>
  • Command Space: 1 space</font>
  • Life Support: 0 (Max: 2 crew for 24 hours)</font>
  • Passengers: 1 space (10 for max. 24 hours)</font>
  • Cargo: 1 space (1 SCU--maybe for a small air/raft style vehicle?)</font>
Communications Buoy (designed to be "dropped" behind an exploring ship to maintain contact back to the base): 5 spaces. </font>
  • Power Plant: 1 space</font>
  • Power Plant Fuel: 1 space</font>
  • Jump Drive: 0</font>
  • Command Space: 1 space (computer to handle comm relays)</font>
  • Life Support: 0 (absolutely none)</font>
  • Jump-2 Communications System: 2 spaces</font>
Fuel Skimmer Module: 5 spaces. Use with Modular Cutter (below)</font>
  • Power Plant: 0 (uses mothership's)</font>
  • Power Plant Fuel: 1 space (to contribute to mothership)</font>
  • Jump Drive: 0</font>
  • Command Spaces: 0</font>
  • Life Support: 0 (no crew required)</font>
  • Fuel Skimmer/Processor: 1 space (1 SCU hour)</font>
  • Cargo: 3 spaces (3 SCU bulk storage)</font>
Lab Module: 5 spaces. Use with Modular Cutter (see below).</font>
  • Power Plant: 1 space.</font>
  • Power Plant Fuel: 1 space.</font>
  • Jump Drive: 0</font>
  • Command Space: 1 space (laboratory computers)</font>
  • Life Support: 0 (max 2 crew for 24 hours)</font>
  • Lab: 1 space (either General or Specific Type--Space, Geology, Biological, Intelligence)</font>
  • Lab Support: 1 space (Sensor-1 package, or Cargo for 1 SCU of rock/biological samples).</font>
Cargo Module: 5 spaces (for use with Modular Cutter)</font>
  • Cargo: 5 spaces (5 SCU). Your typical bulk cargo container. Fill as desired (not recommended for transport of illegal aliens).</font>

HULL SIZE 3
Modular Cutter: 15 spaces. </font>
  • Power Plant: 1 space</font>
  • Power Plant Fuel: 3 spaces</font>
  • Jump Drive: none</font>
  • Command: 1</font>
  • Life Support: 0(Max: 2 crew for 24 hours)</font>
  • Modules: Can support 2 x Hull Size-1 modules (5 spaces per module, or 10 spaces total)</font>
Intrasystem Transport (Sci-Fi Boeing 757, for planet to satellite or station to station trips): 15 spaces.</font>
  • Power Plant: 1 space.</font>
  • Power Plant Fuel: 3 spaces</font>
  • Jump Drive: 0</font>
  • Command Space: 1 space.</font>
  • Life Support: 0 (maximum 2 crew for 24 hours)</font>
  • Passenger Couches: 8 spaces (240 passengers)</font>
  • Recreation Space: 2 spaces (meal prep and movies; includes 2 steward crew per space).</font>
HULL SIZE-4
Millenium Falcon: 20 spaces.</font>
  • Power Plant: 1 space</font>
  • Power Plant Fuel: 4 spaces</font>
  • Jump Drive: 3 spaces (Jump-3)</font>
  • Command Space: 1 space</font>
  • Life Support: 1 (4 persons for 1 month)</font>
  • Weapons: 2 spaces (2 x Vessel Laser)</font>
  • Cargo: 8 spaces (32 SCU cargo)</font>
That's it for now. One problem is how to balance Power Plant Fuel for small craft. Obviously, the fighter and admin shuttle cannot carry a month's supply of fuel. And the power plant for the Comm Buoy should last about a year. Maybe Hull Size-3 vessels and below have fuel for 24 hours if moving, and up to one year if stationary?

Also, vessels above Hull Size-5 can carry small craft at 1 space=Hull Size. So, a Hull Size-5 cutter might carry a Admin Shuttle (1 space), while a HS-20 carrier might carry 4 squadrons of Size-1 fighters (say, 48 spaces) and 2 Modular Cutters with Fuel Skimmer and Cargo Modules (6 spaces).
 
One last design for the evening (it's almost midnight here in France):

CONSTITUTION-CLASS HEAVY CRUISER
Hull Size-16 (112 spaces)
</font>
  • Power Plant: 4 spaces</font>
  • Power Plant Fuel: 16 spaces</font>
  • Jump Drive: 12 space (Jump-3)</font>
  • Command Spaces: 5 spaces (4 + 1 redundant)</font>
  • Life Support: 4 (200 crew maximum)</font>
  • Weapons: 14 spaces (6 x Vessel Laser-6 spaces; 4 X Torpedos-8 spaces)</font>
  • Sensors: 3 spaces (Sensor-3 package)</font>
  • FTL Communications: 2 spaces (Jump-2 suite)</font>
  • Accommodations: 15 spaces (additional 240 members)</font>
  • Shuttlecraft: 6 spaces (6 admin shuttles)</font>
  • Med Bay: 2 spaces (2 operation + 32 patients--Hull Size per space)</font>
  • Labs: 7 spaces (2 x general, 1 x space, 1 x medical, 1 x biological, 1 x geology, 1 x archaelogy)</font>
  • Computer: 2 spaces (+4 to all search checks)</font>
  • Cargo: 20 spaces (320 SCU, which includes 140 SCU for 5 months additional fuel, 95 SCU for 5 months life support, 70 SCU for 5 weapons load-outs [1 battle per load-out?], and 15 SCU empty for samples, etc.)</font>
Roughly gives a vessel with the ability to operate independently for 6 months, and fight up to six days of combat (I'm abstracting the weapons reload usage). Because of the genre conventions, there are no fuel-skimmers--although adding them can result in a decrease in cargo spaces considerably, because fuel is more readily obtainable.
 
Some interesting ideas there Sulpicius


A couple of questions if I may.

How would your design system account for some ships being faster than others in normal space?

Isn't this more complicated than CT LBB2?

How much cargo can be carried in one space?

What does SCU mean?
 
Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
A couple of questions if I may.

How would your design system account for some ships being faster than others in normal space?

Isn't this more complicated than CT LBB2?

How much cargo can be carried in one space?

What does SCU mean?
This is why I was posting here--to get the questions.

1) Accounting for Speed in Real-Space: This is one large problem--I'm going to have to work on integrating it with a combat system (same with the weapons). One option I have thought about is tying speed to the power plant number--for instance, you can buy an additional Power Plant space to go up 1 "step" in speed, or buy 1 less and go "down" a step. The same with manueverability [that doesn't look right]--an extra Control Space plus or minus might adjust the manuever a step.

As a sidenote, when I ran this campaign in high school (I found the notes in a box at my mother's house late last year, which is what brought up the idea of redoing it), we eventually replaced the LBB2 system with something hacked together from Starfire, which we enjoyed at the time as a lite alternative to SFB. I really like the idea of "real-space" ships not having an upper speed limit, but being able to accelerate at different rates and having different effects on turn radii. I guess that idea is influencing my thinking a bit--there would not be a major difference in performance between vessels of the same size.


2) I'm not thinking so, given that half of my effort is in the design process; it seems that once that is set, it should be possible to whip up the statistics for a ship in 5 minutes at most (the narrative component--what is this ship going to do?--might take longer, but that's alright). But I'll have to go back to do these redesigns in LBB2 to see how complex it is (another month or so, when I get back stateside).


3) By SCU, I was thinking of something like a "Standard Cargo Unit," a short-hand way of noting items. In the Admin Shuttle example, I put in that an SCU might be the space necessary to carry an air/raft, or 10-12 people in relative comfort. I didn't want to get into actually assigning a value, cause that just gets me back where I'm trying to avoid. But, maybe something similar to 1dT? Or a metric ton?
My thinking is that by assigning SCUs, I could abstract certain aspects. For instance, I could adapt the trade rules to use SCUs, and away I go with the designs. I was also thinking that Fuel and Life Support essentials could be translated into SCU. For example, 1 "space" of Power Plant fuel equals 1 SCU of cargo--which is where I got the numbers for the Constitution class (16 Power Plant Fuel spaces plus 12 Jump Drive spaces = 28 for one month of operation; add an addition five months, and you have 140 spaces).

Same with life support--the initial spaces include not only oxygen, water, and food, but also beds, kitchen, recycling equipment for air and water, etc. Therefore, storing the "perishables" should take up less space. I just figure by abstracting 1 SCU of pershiables per 1 space, the usage is tied to a single decision, and I skip the step of figuring out, for example, how many people are in each stateroom to figure how much tonnage of supplies I need for a six-month expedition.

Atleast at this stage, I'm having some fun with this.

[EDIT--Ever wonder why there is no TAB equivalent in UBB?]
 
One idea on the normal space speed/maneuverability idea, since you have tied the drives to the powerplant, and indirectly the fuel supply, and as you are already looking at making the fuel endurance a flight duration with stationary endurance much greater (long sentence I know
)...

How about basic speed is 1 (an abstraction) and for each increase in speed you halve the endurance of the powerplant for that period (basically double the time recorded when in use).

So to go twice as fast, each turn counts as two for fuel consumption. To go three times as fast, each turn counts as four for fuel consumption, and so on. 4x speed is 8x fuel use, 5x speed is 16x fuel use, ...

Instead of speed the extra units could be applied to evasion at a 1 to 1 rate. So you say triple your engine output (sucking down the fuel four times as fast) and you can go base speed with 2 units of evasion, or double base speed with 1 unit of evasion, or put it all into running at 3 times speed, or all into evasion and have 3 units of evasion (but really going nowhere).
 
I don't mind using tons, but my feeling on the matter is to try to reduce the size of stuff like engines and computers and stuff (such as making plants more efficient for size).

Though I suppose that I've kinda been snagged by tons; I find other stuff too hard to wrap my head around.
 
I would like to see the system in work. I used to be a big Star fleet battles fan too and in one campaign we used SFB for starhip combat. We had a D5.
I do like they way SFB combat works out with marking off boxes gives you a good visual interpetation of what is happening to your ship and how bad a shape you are in.
Having just a spec sheet is nice but when it comes to starship combat a Sheet with the layout of the ship with boxes reresenting various systems gives better feedback as far as what is happening.
On another note I might just go with classic trav basic design and then abstact the tonnage to 10 tons 1 box. Scout 10 boxes far trader 20 boxes unless you happen to have a number of encounters perepaed with larger ships that might work. A tigress class would have 50,000 boxes.
 
Originally posted by Madarin Dude:
I would like to see the system in work. I used On another note I might just go with classic trav basic design and then abstact the tonnage to 10 tons 1 box. Scout 10 boxes far trader 20 boxes unless you happen to have a number of encounters perepaed with larger ships that might work. A tigress class would have 50,000 boxes.
This is what Power Projection:Fleet has done. They scale things so you can have smaller warships in the game, but it's 400 tons per box for the first 10,000 tons, then 1000 tons per box to 100,000 tons, then 2000 tons per box after that.

It still takes 310 boxes for a Tigress.

A similar but smaller scale would work well for CT LBB2 ships up to 5000/6000 dtons. Perhaps 1 box for every 50 dtons?
 
How about throwing volumes out the window and using an advantages/disadvantages build system like BESM? Basically you have a certain number of build points to put in things like FTL drives, Cargo space, AI, weapons etc etc. Building in defects will give you extra build points and also give the ship character.

Deckplans can be winged. How big is a jump drive? How much fuel does it need? You don't need exact figures as long as you are sensible (and I imagine you're not a munchkin). Besides, your ship designs (visually) can then be more creative and interesting when you're imagination's not tied down by strict volume figures and rules.

Crow
 
Originally posted by far-trader:
One idea on the normal space speed/maneuverability idea, since you have tied the drives to the powerplant, and indirectly the fuel supply, and as you are already looking at making the fuel endurance a flight duration with stationary endurance much greater (long sentence I know
)...

How about basic speed is 1 (an abstraction) and for each increase in speed you halve the endurance of the powerplant for that period (basically double the time recorded when in use).

So to go twice as fast, each turn counts as two for fuel consumption. To go three times as fast, each turn counts as four for fuel consumption, and so on. 4x speed is 8x fuel use, 5x speed is 16x fuel use, ...

Instead of speed the extra units could be applied to evasion at a 1 to 1 rate. So you say triple your engine output (sucking down the fuel four times as fast) and you can go base speed with 2 units of evasion, or double base speed with 1 unit of evasion, or put it all into running at 3 times speed, or all into evasion and have 3 units of evasion (but really going nowhere).
I've seen some systems like this, but I'm not exactly sure it's a "good fit" with the other technological conditions I've set.

First, it seems to work really well for smaller vessels--like the fighters and what not (which may be what you were addressing) that have only a limited amount of fuel. For larger craft, where we are talking a month's use of fuel, I'm not sure that anything but a sustained, running battle would make that large of an impact. (Plus, also note that unlike OTU, the FTL drives use fuel per month, not per jump. A system like this might make a huge impact if say a carrier was forced to dig into its jump fuel to evade a strike cruiser--surviving the battle, but maybe without the possibility of leaving the system anytime soon).

The other big problem I see is that I've made refueling (through skimming) relatively easy, so I'm not exactly sure if tying fuel use back directly to combat makes sense. For instance, if I ran combat with, say, 15 minute turns, and a cruiser ran for 5 turns at 4x speed for evasion, even at 8x fuel use you're talking him using 10 hours of fuel--out of a basic "gimme" supply from basic construction of 720 hours (figure 24 hours x 30 days for the month). And that's alot of bookkeeping.

I rather like the idea of size--even in space--being a bigger determinate factor in speed and agility than raw engine power per se.

Two reasons I was interested in the question of "on-station" times. First, I wanted to explore the possibility of deep exploration; the local astrography has a small nebula with little in the way of supporting planets (well, atleast intially... ;) ). The nebula--and the potential of all kinds of goodies--was to offer one early line of adventuring as characters were on the first ships to "see what was on the other side." The second reason was the question of seeing the question of development. I wanted space stations to play an important role here, partially for communications and partially because, in the early days, ships--particularly military ships (remember that civil war) couldn't carry that much fuel. [Tech note: One thing I've done with the FTL drives is that they don't just operate at the maximum light-year range. Ships can microjump in a sense close to their destinations. However, each jump uses the same amount of fuel--and the same required downtime of roughly 25 hours between jumps. The "practical" result is that stations became set up at points to maximize the jump distances between systems.] So a system of stations developed, and they continue to operate as such.

This is good--I'm being forced to think this through.
 
Originally posted by Madarin Dude:
I would like to see the system in work. I used to be a big Star fleet battles fan too and in one campaign we used SFB for starhip combat. We had a D5.
I do like they way SFB combat works out with marking off boxes gives you a good visual interpetation of what is happening to your ship and how bad a shape you are in.
Having just a spec sheet is nice but when it comes to starship combat a Sheet with the layout of the ship with boxes reresenting various systems gives better feedback as far as what is happening.
On another note I might just go with classic trav basic design and then abstact the tonnage to 10 tons 1 box. Scout 10 boxes far trader 20 boxes unless you happen to have a number of encounters perepaed with larger ships that might work. A tigress class would have 50,000 boxes.
Agree 100% with this--who doesn't like the scene in Star Trek II when Kirk asks Spock what the damage is after Khan's first strike, and Spock actually walks over to a screen and POINTS to the damaged area, adding "He knew just where to hit us." That's instant suspense right there.

But, perhaps there is a reason SFB never seems to include a ship design system--and I think we're hitting on it. Starfire did, although just crossing a line of letters off one at a time didn't quite capture that tense combat feel.

I'm going to have to get the Google-fu working on The Oz's suggestion of Power Projection; it might be worth a look. It might be that since I'm scaling certain size components (like cargo) anyway, it might adapt fairly well. I mean, a Hull Size-20 craft would have 160 boxes maximum; I think that compares pretty well to some of those SFB monsters.

Geez, I just wanted to design ships--not a combat system as well. Curse this creeping complexification!
 
Back
Top