The Oz
SOC-14 1K
I could see that, but then what happens to the CT ships with the old bridge? Do they get 16 tons back, or 10 tons, or none at all?
I think that leaving the bridge as it was in CT is the best way to avoid any "instant obsolescence" of CT designs while allowing referees to add whatever they want.
I =like= the idea of CIC's, Flag Bridges, Fighter Control Centers, Cargo Monitor Stations, Engineering Centrals, and whatever else you might want (a big liner would certainly have an Environmental Central Control, for instance). I think the size and cost of such control centers should be based on the size (and cost) of whatever it is they are controlling (CIC's based on the ship's sensors and weapons, Flag Bridges on the number of =other= ships to be commanded, Cargo Monitors on the size of the cargo bay(s), etc, etc, etc.)
But I think the basic "bridge" should stay as it is to maintain backwards compatability. YMMVIYTU.
I think that leaving the bridge as it was in CT is the best way to avoid any "instant obsolescence" of CT designs while allowing referees to add whatever they want.
I =like= the idea of CIC's, Flag Bridges, Fighter Control Centers, Cargo Monitor Stations, Engineering Centrals, and whatever else you might want (a big liner would certainly have an Environmental Central Control, for instance). I think the size and cost of such control centers should be based on the size (and cost) of whatever it is they are controlling (CIC's based on the ship's sensors and weapons, Flag Bridges on the number of =other= ships to be commanded, Cargo Monitors on the size of the cargo bay(s), etc, etc, etc.)
But I think the basic "bridge" should stay as it is to maintain backwards compatability. YMMVIYTU.