The only problem for me is the acceleration maneuver, you are going from speed 0 to speed 1 but without moving at all ??

I can't imagine any good explanation...

scenario:

You kiss your wife cause you have to go. You kick off the jetpack thrusters.

First round you accelerate from 0 to 1 and that's it cause your jetpack has only 1 system strain left

Round 2 : seconds laters your jetpack is over 100 decibels, at speed 1 but you didn't move a centimeter yet !! now you use that maneuver to actually move ... your wife is now deaf !

strange...

1) Your speed being 0 doesn't mean you're not moving. It only means that your movement is, on a planetary scale, so negligibly slow you can't change rangebands within a round or two.

2) I've only been paraphrasing RAW on starship and vehicle movement. Don't blame me!

3) The length of a round is not fixed; "[it] can last for roughly a minute [...]".

4) There will always be inconsistencies, when you quantise time at a macroscopic level.

I find it kinda interesting the assumptions that being at speed condition 1+=must be flying.

This is a good point.

You see this even in vehicular combat. A ship could have a current speed of 3 but not spend any maneuvers to change range bands. Instead, they could just use a maneuver to aim and an action to fire.

I suppose the difference is it's easier to narratively justify a ship not moving but maintaining its speed.

I find it kinda interesting the assumptions that being at speed condition 1+=must be flying.

There's nothing that says you can't idle the jetpack at speed 1 and take your actual move maneuver based on if you are walking or flying.

This would allow the system to function RAW and still match up with the material we see on the big and small screen. A lot of jetpackers would simply open an encounter by spinning up the turbines in much the same way a force user commits Enhance. Then they could do all the fancy stuff you see no problem.

If you don't move, your speed is exactly 0. If your speed is above 0, you're moving. There's no idling at 100 km/h.

Speed 1 is at least a couple of km per minute. That's why I chose speed 0, the nearest approximation of really fast movement at personal scale, if you consider close planetary range further than extreme personal range. You may call it speed .1 or 1/3, anything below .5, instead of speed 0, if it makes you feel better.

I suppose the difference is it's easier to narratively justify a ship not moving but maintaining its speed.

You might want to reconsider what you just wrote. There's exactly one speed you can maintain without moving: 0.

Not performing a fly/drive manoeuvre at any speed above 0 doesn't mean you're not moving, you're just not changing range bands.

I find it kinda interesting the assumptions that being at speed condition 1+=must be flying.

There's nothing that says you can't idle the jetpack at speed 1 and take your actual move maneuver based on if you are walking or flying.

This would allow the system to function RAW and still match up with the material we see on the big and small screen. A lot of jetpackers would simply open an encounter by spinning up the turbines in much the same way a force user commits Enhance. Then they could do all the fancy stuff you see no problem.

If you don't move, your speed is exactly 0. If your speed is above 0, you're moving. There's no idling at 100 km/h.

Speed 1 is at least a couple of km per minute. That's why I chose speed 0, the nearest approximation of really fast movement at personal scale, if you consider close planetary range further than extreme personal range. You may call it speed .1 or 1/3, anything below .5, instead of speed 0, if it makes you feel better.

Yeah.... buuuuut

The rules do say at speed 0 you aren't moving (at least not as a vehicle) but at speed 1+ it does not say you must move either...

It's a little rules-lawyery I grant you, but it does address the issue, at least in relation to personal flight gear...

And it's not like the system doesn't have ample balance. It's pretty rare a jetpack will be used "in combat" and not also be in "Difficult terrain" which would require a piloting check. Check what happens when a Speed one vehicle fails a piloting check...

I suppose the difference is it's easier to narratively justify a ship not moving but maintaining its speed.

You might want to reconsider what you just wrote. There's exactly one speed you can maintain without moving: 0.

Not performing a fly/drive manoeuvre at any speed above 0 doesn't mean you're not moving, you're just not changing range bands.

No need to be pedantic.

In my case - and I am sorry if I wasn't clear enough - I was referring to changing range bands when I said "moving".

In fact, even in personal combat, unless a character is unconscious, I suspect everyone is performing some kind of movement. And now I'm the one being pedantic.

I would regard wearing a jetpack as being in the vehicle station to control it and thus you just need to do the accelerated maneuver and fly. You don't need a separate maneuver in a spaceship to start the engines in your game, right? Only one to actually get onto the controls, which are in case of a jetpack already tied to your back.

Though if you are looking for a talent to use: Let's ride sounds like the one to use.

edit: Oh and iirc the vehicle rules state even that speeds above 0 mean that you are moving, but can maintain a relative position. You for example circle with your snowspeeder at range 3 around that AT-AT with speed 3, but stay in close range to it. If you add GtA to it then you are not circling around but doing attack runs and break them again to fly a loop and come back from that angle again, etc

The rules are fine to allow all kind of descriptions without conflicting with the range bands. Even taking cover in vehicle combat should be possible without trouble. Just fly through those asteroids and use them as cover against incoming fire … though I would guess it usually not worth the trouble compared to evasive maneuvers. On the other hand sil 5 ships have no access to evasive maneuvers … asteroids, get ready for that big, fat VCX-100 to hide behind you.

And now I stop, before I am going completely off-topic in my love for the vehicle combat rules. °_^

I suppose the difference is it's easier to narratively justify a ship not moving but maintaining its speed.

You might want to reconsider what you just wrote. There's exactly one speed you can maintain without moving: 0.

Not performing a fly/drive manoeuvre at any speed above 0 doesn't mean you're not moving, you're just not changing range bands.

No need to be pedantic.

In my case - and I am sorry if I wasn't clear enough - I was referring to changing range bands when I said "moving".

In fact, even in personal combat, unless a character is unconscious, I suspect everyone is performing some kind of movement. And now I'm the one being pedantic.

Even a dead person is moving, as decomposition slowly breaks down the body. Even inanimate objects anchored in space are moving as their molecules bounce around.

I win the pedantism!

I find it kinda interesting the assumptions that being at speed condition 1+=must be flying.

There's nothing that says you can't idle the jetpack at speed 1 and take your actual move maneuver based on if you are walking or flying.

This would allow the system to function RAW and still match up with the material we see on the big and small screen. A lot of jetpackers would simply open an encounter by spinning up the turbines in much the same way a force user commits Enhance. Then they could do all the fancy stuff you see no problem.

This is kind of my point when I said just because the missile on your back will let you go 400 mph through the mall, doesn't mean doing that indoors or even outdoors while shooting and being shot at is such a swell idea. A GM is perfectly fine in telling a PC if you're flooring it we are rolling some piloting checks, if you wanna fly at like 25 mph, which is still plenty fast depending on circumstances, we will call it regular movement not impeded by difficult terrain and maybe you get some kind of high ground boost or negate some cover type bonus.

Well, speed 1 is more like 60 kph, but asking for a pilot check on a mall when you want to use the pack at vehicle speed is a splendid idea. You get the advantage of basically getting from short to extreme range in one turn, so the least thing the GM should be able to ask you to make a pilot check if the environment is an actual hard to navigate area. Using a jetpack within a building at full speed is certainly something requiring a pilot check and it won't be an easy one either.

Fly boys love their pilot checks anyway. ;-)

I would regard wearing a jetpack as being in the vehicle station to control it and thus you just need to do the accelerated maneuver and fly. You don't need a separate maneuver in a spaceship to start the engines in your game, right? Only one to actually get onto the controls, which are in case of a jetpack already tied to your back.

Actually, in my game there is a requirement to start the engines. As there is in real life. Even in a battery powered vehicle, you at least have to move the lever from “park” into “drive” or “reverse” and then press the accelerator.

Those activities take some time. For a small vehicle, I would make those take less time because there is less work involved and you’re getting a smaller vehicle ready to go. For a larger vehicle, I would make those take more time.

Of course, there would be the possibility for a roll in there to make it take less time than normal.

Though if you are looking for a talent to use: Let's ride sounds like the one to use.

That could be a good one. I’ll have to re-read that one.

Even a dead person is moving, as decomposition slowly breaks down the body. Even inanimate objects anchored in space are moving as their molecules bounce around.

I win the pedantism!