Serious issues with vehicle design system

[apoc527]

Ok, so I'm really sort of confused. I've been working with the T20 design sequences, and I'm wondering if they left something really important out. You see, somehow I don't think a ladar unit costs MCr2.5 at TL15. I mean, it's introduced in TL8. I KNOW that they probably intended for stuff to get cheaper and smaller as TL's get higher. Otherwise why would they include that information. If you use the miniaturization and cost reduction from the computer chapter things look a little better, but that ladar unit still comes in at a hefty KCr250 (perhaps their intent was to apply those rules to all design sequences, but that should have been made EXTREMELY obvious. It's possible I'm missing it, but I don't think I am).

Also, it sort of annoys me that no other vehicle bothers to use electronic sensors of any kind. That, and I think they got the costs and everything wrong for the battledress for its visual systems. It claims it has a range of 1km, but only seems to account for 100m of range in the design notes. Gah. This really should have been looked at before publication, and I really, really hope that TA3 (which I believe is vehicular stuff) is done more carefully and more accurately. Now, it's possible they intended to leave all these vehicles free of sensors so you can add your own, but this is kind of a cop-out. I mean, why in the world would a G-carrier NOT have any sensors or electronic equipment of ANY kind. What gives?

Since I don't want to end this post on a bitter-ish note, I just want to say that overall I really like the T20 design sequences. Compared to GURPS or T4 FF&S, this is an awesomely simple system that produces fairly detailed vehicles without causing severe headaches, abdominal pain, and wrist cramps. I just wish there were some better examples, but hey, this book is already bursting at the seems with quality information. Hopefully TA3 will be out really soon and I can get my vehicle design fix. <crosses fingers>

 

[tjoneslo]

The issue here is that in order to cram a vehicle design system into 8 steps and 14 pages, some compromises need to be made. Depending upon your level of gearheadedness the comprimises may be acceptable or unacceptable.

Issues to be addressed.
Stuff gets cheaper at higher TLs: This adds a complicating factor into the design process. If you really feel it's missing, borrow the rule from the Computer design: Subtract 10% from the cost, weight and power requriements, add 10% to the power for each TL above the base one. For example the Ladar system at TL15 would cost Cr750,000, takes 1.5vl, require 0.0075EP, and have a base range of 17km. But this adds another step into the design process and you see how confusing it was for the computer rules.

Electronic Systems in Vehicles: This is a levels of abstraction issue. It's easy to imagine the Grav drive system has a resonable sophiticated computer system to control it which can also act as a primitive autopilot.
This is also a matter of only game affecting items need paying for. There is no entry for a "Rockin' sound system" because the item does not affect anything from a rules standpoint. You can add one for no weight/cost if the Referee says OK.
I assume the vehicles have all manner of electronic doodads, but none of them are strong enought or configured properly for use under stressful (i.e. combat) situations.

You are correct in that the examples given in the book could have been better. For TA3 and TA5, I've added all the cruchy bits so they may or may not satisfy your vehicular desires.

 

[apoc527]

Thanks Thomas, that helps.

I can understand how including TL reductions in cost and size might get confusing, but IMO, it's necessary for some amount of suspension of disbelief. I think I'll just use your suggestion and go ahead and use the same rules given in the computer design suggestion.

As for the electronics thing, I still say that a G-carrier (which is a combat vehicle, unless I'm horribly confused) is going to need combat capable electronics. Regardless, I'm really looking forward to TA3 and TA5 and I'm sure you've done a really good job of providing plenty of crunchy bits for the gearheads among us. (Which is funny, because I'm not really a gearhead. If T20's design sequences were any more complicated, I'd probably not bother). That's why I like them.

Thanks again for your quick response!

I think what I'll do is just post my final design and see what people think.

 

[tjoneslo]

Re: The G-Carrier. Were I building these vehicles, all the air craft and grav craft would get a radio and a radar set (some short range than others) at the very least. The GCarrier and the Wheeled AFV both need a good set of passive sensors. And the Submarine needs a sonar set.

 

[apoc527]

Yep, sounds like a job for an enterprising young fan with too much time on his hands. Know anyone who fits the bill?

Maybe I'll just putz around with the system and get to know it pretty well. I tried to get into gearheading with GURPS, but it's just too darn difficult and not fun. I love designing stuff in Alternity, and I think I might be nursing a growing obsession with T20's design system as well.

 

[tjoneslo]

Originally posted by apoc527:
I tried to get into gearheading with GURPS, but it's just too darn difficult and not fun.

I do GURPS vehicles gearheading to relax in the evening.

Ok. Not really. But I do a great deal of Vehicles gearheading and I find the level of detail much more satisfying.

 

[apoc527]

Originally posted by tjoneslo:
I do GURPS vehicles gearheading to relax in the evening.

Ok. Not really. But I do a great deal of Vehicles gearheading and I find the level of detail much more satisfying.

<shudder> Yea, I'm at the point where I can't even PLAY GURPS anymore. The problem is that GURPS has a lot of rules that really aren't all that optional. This massively slows down the game during combat, much more so than usual. I also find the 1 second combat rounds to be a really limiting factor in the amount of play one can have in a round. All in all, until someone with a brilliant GMing style comes around and shows me The One True Way to run GURPS, I'm through with it. At least the sourcebooks are still completely usuable for my other games.

On gearheading, obviously some people out there much enjoy that, but it just gives me a headache. The most I ever succeeded at in G:Vehicles was making new weapons. That was easy. Trying to make something as simple as a boat? Nope, too many calculations for stuff that 1) doesn't ever matter in game and 2) means nothing to me anyway. I have no idea what a cubic foot looks like, so describing everything that way is entirely useless for me.

Hehehe. This is rapidly going OT, but that's the Way of the Forum anyway. The final problem with GURPS that I wish someone would solve for me is the apparent lack of any roleplaying-friendly vehicular/space combat system. The main problem, I suspect, is that no one in my main RPG group likes to wargame. At all. So the thought of bringing out a hexmap and counters/miniatures to run a space combat is about as appetizing to them as a pizza topped with cat turds. So yea...any ideas?

 

[EvilDrGanymede]

Originally posted by apoc527:
<shudder> Yea, I'm at the point where I can't even PLAY GURPS anymore. The problem is that GURPS has a lot of rules that really aren't all that optional. This massively slows down the game during combat, much more so than usual. I also find the 1 second combat rounds to be a really limiting factor in the amount of play one can have in a round. All in all, until someone with a brilliant GMing style comes around and shows me The One True Way to run GURPS, I'm through with it. At least the sourcebooks are still completely usuable for my other games.

Sigh. SJG really needs to do a "Common False Assumptions About GURPS" page...

There's no "One True Way" to run GURPS. You don't have to use all the options in combat. If you want a simpler way to do it, use the GURPS Basic combat system (or the one in GURPS Lite). You want an even simpler way? Roll to hit, roll to dodge, roll damage, estimating the modifiers as you go along in the process. Or just screw the modifiers completely

. Heck, ditch the different types of damage and armour if you like. It's not all necessary to play GURPS.

On gearheading, obviously some people out there much enjoy that, but it just gives me a headache. The most I ever succeeded at in G:Vehicles was making new weapons. That was easy. Trying to make something as simple as a boat? Nope, too many calculations for stuff that 1) doesn't ever matter in game and 2) means nothing to me anyway. I have no idea what a cubic foot looks like, so describing everything that way is entirely useless for me.

I'll agree with you there - the G:Vehicles system is very complicated, not particularly well laid out, and it's a total nightmare of Imperial Unit Incomprehensibility. It's just utter nonsense to me. On the other hand, I used to love making tech and vehicles using TNE's Fire Fusion & Steel (it's metricness was no doubt a huge help, and the explanation of the tech was wonderful)...

Hehehe. This is rapidly going OT, but that's the Way of the Forum anyway. The final problem with GURPS that I wish someone would solve for me is the apparent lack of any roleplaying-friendly vehicular/space combat system. The main problem, I suspect, is that no one in my main RPG group likes to wargame. At all. So the thought of bringing out a hexmap and counters/miniatures to run a space combat is about as appetizing to them as a pizza topped with cat turds. So yea...any ideas?

Probably better to just nick a system from another game. Though I can't really think of *any* vehicle/space combat game that isn't horribly complicated - maybe the descriptive RPG version of DP9's tactical vehicle combat system? Unfortunately this sort of thing does rather lend itself to miniatures and hexmaps...

 

[apoc527]

Originally posted by Evil Dr Ganymede:

There's no "One True Way" to run GURPS. You don't have to use all the options in combat. If you want a simpler way to do it, use the GURPS Basic combat system (or the one in GURPS Lite). You want an even simpler way? Roll to hit, roll to dodge, roll damage, estimating the modifiers as you go along in the process. Or just screw the modifiers completely

. Heck, ditch the different types of damage and armour if you like. It's not all necessary to play GURPS.

I'm not entirely sure I agree with you on this one. I've played and GMed GURPS for 2 years. What they *really* need to do is go through the trillion sourcebooks and make a new Basic Set that has all the rules listed into Basic, Moderate, and Advanced combat systems. Basic is fine, but really, it can't be used as soon as you add in ranged weapons. If you don't use the modifiers, the game system breaks down. The point of GURPS is realism (and flexibility, of course). If you ignore the rules to make the game run faster, you sacrifice realism and all semblance of "game balance."

I like d20 because it makes no pretenses about being realistic. The Hit Point system is entirely abstract, and the simplicity can never be beaten. You roll to hit and then you roll damage if you hit. Sure, there are some minor variations (like Lifeblood and armor) but overall it's just so simple (and yet satsifying). My main complaint with GURPS is that it makes a terrible roleplaying system, focuses far too much attention on min/maxing your character (even for gamers I don't consider "munchkins"), and has so much flexibility that it ends up doing nothing particularly well at all. This is a complete 180 from my view 2 years ago, which put GURPS as the Game From God in my eyes. Then I played it...lots of it. I suppose it would be better if I was playing with a group that liked the more wargamey side of gaming. If you like spending an entire real-life minute to work out the result of a burst of SMG fire (and subsequently spending 10 minutes of real life on 1 second of game combat) then it might work. Certainly the stuff in the game is fairly consistent so you can run your Shadowrun/Dragonstar game quite easily.

Anyway, this isn't really the place for system discussions, but for now, GURPS is more trouble than it's worth. YMMV.

 

[snrdg082102]

Lo apoc527 & The Evil Doc,

First, I agree with the Doc here, be it GURPS or any other RPG there is not any "One True" Combat System, especially in Science Fiction. I've got Battletech, SpaceMaster, Star Fleet Battles, Traveller (CT, TNE, MT, GURPS, Marc Miller's (T4?) & T20 variants)and several other game systems.

Next, on gearheading I find that all construction systems have positive/negative aspects. Being a Yank the metric system is difficult to wrap my mind around, which slows down the process. One minor glitch I see with the Traveller design systems, mainly large vehicles, is that most if not all forget about allocating space for corridors (hallways/passageways), stairwells, and other similaar mundane items. I actually drew a deckplan, back in the 1980s, and discovered that including the space for the passeways put me over the dtonnage of the vessel. Yep, G:VE2 is complex/time consuming, which in my opinion, is on about the same level as TNE:FF&S. CT and G:Traveller are in the middle, with Marc Millers falling as maybe the easiest or just slightly easier than CT and a little more than G:Traveller.

Oops gotta go, running late for work

 

[tjoneslo]

Well, I don't actually play GURPS, just build vehicles.

I actually found the GURPS combat system easier to explain and play than the D20 one. Hell, even Champions was easier than that obnoxious Attack of Opportunity rule. But then my players fall into two groups: The wargamers for whom D20 is too abstract, and the roleplayers for whom D20 (and GURPS) is to wargame like. For the latter we tend to use Amber diceless or Storyteller. D20 combat tries to do two things at the same time, be a quick, simple combat system with wargame style of play. For me, it fails on both accounts.

Anyways, Your wish regarding a recompliation of GURPS may (I say *may*) be in the works. For the past year SJGames has had a comment board for what should go into GURPS 4th edition. So the time of myth may be passing (it has for Hero 5th edition), and the GUPRS 4th may be coming out, sometime.