Star Cruiser Naval Architect's Manual (NAM) and other related questions.

[snrdg082102]

Hello everyone,

I recently got my hands on a copy of the 2300 AD Star Cruiser board game, with the NAM. I am using the ship's in the Star Cruiser rulebook annex and the designs in "Ships of the French Arm" to get a feel for starship design in 2300 AD. In Step 2 of the NAM, the text mentions that in the table "MHD turbines also include a listing for rotor size." "Becuase turbines of different outputs have different minimum diameter rotor blades, there are certain minimum diameters of hulls into which they can fit."

Where can I find the rotor size?

I appear to be blind since I haven't found rotor size in either the write-up or table.

According to the write-up in Step 2 under Ship Classification a Small ship is defined as having a crew and intended for mission durations of 12 hours or less. The Small Ship example is the Punyuang-class fighter which according to Step 3. Fuel is designed for a mission duration of 12.11 hours.

Splitting hairs here, the mission duration of 12.11 hours, exceeds the criteria stated in the small ship definition.

Is the fighter a small craft? Should the definition be altered?

Is there an errata site, official or not, that I can find any corrections or additions to the rulebooks?

 

[Colin]

Just do a Google search for "Pentapod's World" KevinC has the official errata posted there.

Ignore references to rotor diameter. Also, keep in mind that many of the ships in Ships of the French Arm can't be duplicated with the NAM. <shrug>. Perhaps different authors interpreting the rules differently.

I would call that fighter a fighter. Figure a 10% rule for leeway in such things.

Colin

 

[snrdg082102]

Evening Colin,

Thank-you for the reply, suggestions, and pointing me to a reference source. Actually I knew at Pentapod's World from the link on 2300 AD by Andy Brick. Unfortunately, my gray matter is not up to speed . Thanks again for the help.

Originally posted by Colin:
Just do a Google search for "Pentapod's World" KevinC has the official errata posted there.

Ignore references to rotor diameter. Also, keep in mind that many of the ships in Ships of the French Arm can't be duplicated with the NAM. <shrug>. Perhaps different authors interpreting the rules differently.

I would call that fighter a fighter. Figure a 10% rule for leeway in such things.

Colin

 

[snrdg082102]

Morning Colin,

Just had a thought, I wonder if the author of "Ships of the French Arm" might have combined information from another rules book with the NAM, similar to the Technical Architecture document on the 2300 AD link in my other post.

Originally posted by Colin:
Just do a Google search for "Pentapod's World" KevinC has the official errata posted there.

Ignore references to rotor diameter. Also, keep in mind that many of the ships in Ships of the French Arm can't be duplicated with the NAM. <shrug>. Perhaps different authors interpreting the rules differently.

I would call that fighter a fighter. Figure a 10% rule for leeway in such things.

Colin

 

[Colin]

Possibly. I can't speak for the authors, or how they built those ships. Others have analyzed them, and found the SotF ships to be broken. It's possible they used a different version of the rules, or borrowed from MegaTraveller design rules. Or that mistakes were made and no one caught them. It happens. I've done it too. (Don't ask me about one rather embarassing one from DP9's Cislunar Space).
The ships are still usuable. I've used them. The only issue is if you want your new designs to be consistent with the old ones. That takes a little more work.

 

[BMonnery]

Originally posted by Thomas Rux:
Hello everyone,

I recently got my hands on a copy of the 2300 AD Star Cruiser board game, with the NAM. I am using the ship's in the Star Cruiser rulebook annex and the designs in "Ships of the French Arm" to get a feel for starship design in 2300 AD. In Step 2 of the NAM, the text mentions that in the table "MHD turbines also include a listing for rotor size." "Becuase turbines of different outputs have different minimum diameter rotor blades, there are certain minimum diameters of hulls into which they can fit."

Where can I find the rotor size?

I appear to be blind since I haven't found rotor size in either the write-up or table.

According to the write-up in Step 2 under Ship Classification a Small ship is defined as having a crew and intended for mission durations of 12 hours or less. The Small Ship example is the Punyuang-class fighter which according to Step 3. Fuel is designed for a mission duration of 12.11 hours.

Splitting hairs here, the mission duration of 12.11 hours, exceeds the criteria stated in the small ship definition.

Is the fighter a small craft? Should the definition be altered?

Is there an errata site, official or not, that I can find any corrections or additions to the rulebooks?

Official errata: http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Arcade/2303/nam2/scerrata.htm

A small craft is defined as any manned ship with upto 24 hours endurance.

My website might contain some useful stuff: www.geocities.com/Area51/9292/

and this is good too

http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~dheb/2300/index.htm

Bryn

 

[BMonnery]

Originally posted by Colin:
Possibly. I can't speak for the authors, or how they built those ships. Others have analyzed them, and found the SotF ships to be broken. It's possible they used a different version of the rules, or borrowed from MegaTraveller design rules. Or that mistakes were made and no one caught them. It happens. I've done it too. (Don't ask me about one rather embarassing one from DP9's Cislunar Space).
The ships are still usuable. I've used them. The only issue is if you want your new designs to be consistent with the old ones. That takes a little more work.

Yes, there is no consistancy in designs in SotFA. For example, there are two interpretations of the mass for accommodations. Either use the formula for an accommodation, or sum them and apply the formula. For 100 crew the difference is big:

100* ((25/10)+10) = 1,250 tons
(100*25/10)+10 = 260 tons

The example in NAM uses the latter (even though I think it's dumb), so the Kennedy is fairly light. The Ypres-12 in SofTA uses the former. Correcting to the latter ISTR it might gain a point of movement.

Bryn