On ‎6‎/‎11‎/‎2018 at 9:52 PM, EliasWindrider said:

It's to make the hp appropriate to the size of the ship you're building, bigger ships need more hp (e.g. so they can add more dedicated cargo bays) likewise smaller ships can have fewer cargo bays added, that along with the exponential growth of enc with silhouette is needed to replicate the range of cargo weapons etc. The bottom line is that bigger ships need more hp to fulfill their bigger missions, smaller ships need less hp because they have smaller missions (a sil 4 ship is likely to have about a hundred (maybe a few hundred) enc, a sil 5 ship could have 10K enc)

But the problem is that makes the whole point of choosing the enlarge or reduce option pointless. Those chooses are suppose to be the exception to the rule. If a player makes a silhouette 3 freighter or shuttle it should have the benefits of a 4 with the benefits of a 3. Remember Silhouette size is a abstract measurement not a precise one. These two ships below are both silhouette 5 ships in the books.

1 minute ago, Grimstory said:

But the problem is that makes the whole point of choosing the enlarge or reduce option pointless. Those chooses are suppose to be the exception to the rule. If a player makes a silhouette 3 freighter or shuttle. Remember Silhouette size is a abstract measurement not a precise. These two ships below are both silhouette 5 ships in the books.

I personally believe that to be a mistake on their part. I think someone made that call because the shuttle is a sil 3 shuttle and they were thinking of the 2+ rule for the hanger. But the shuttle isn't in a hanger, it's on a docking clamp which is a hand wave sidebar in the books.

5 hours ago, salamar_dree said:

I was just going off the wording of your Gunship hull. There was a mod for adding either an additional Oversize weapon or adding Linked.

As worded, you could add up to 3 additional integrated Oversize weapons, which could take the Oversize Weapon Mount attachment (which is actually listed as 2hp, but could take more at GM's discretion).

Also, I noticed that the Reinforced Construction option that is present on the Fully Operational Frame chart is missing on yours. Was that intentional?

The ability allows you to mount a weapon that is exactly one silhouette larger than normal, it does not increase the "silhouette" of allowed weapons. If you want to go 2 silhouettes too large you have to combine this with the oversized external weapon mount in dangerous covenants

4 hours ago, Grimstory said:

But the problem is that makes the whole point of choosing the enlarge or reduce option pointless. Those chooses are suppose to be the exception to the rule. If a player makes a silhouette 3 freighter or shuttle it should have the benefits of a 4 with the benefits of a 3. Remember Silhouette size is a abstract measurement not a precise one. These two ships below are both silhouette 5 ships in the books.

Not exactly... the base hp also tend get larger with larger sil, so using elegant design can still net you a few extra hp. Also different hulls have different features like the patrol ship being allowed a speed 1 greater than normal for a ship of its silhouette, so if you were to use elegant design on it, you'd get the same number of hp but would have 1 greater max speed than a freighter.

But using the sil 5 ship frames (Corvette and freighter) in the picture that you attached as an example... the Corvette would have 6 extra hp, a minimum crew size of 20, and a maximum number of passenger equal to 640. The freighter would have a minimum crew size of 1 and a maximum of 32 passengers (this is before hulls are factored in).

Those differences seem to fit with the size differences in those sil 5 ships.

In other words there's a lot more to frames than just how many hp you get.

6 hours ago, salamar_dree said:

Also, I noticed that the Reinforced Construction option that is present on the Fully Operational Frame chart is missing on yours. Was that intentional?

It's still there it just costs a triumph, can only be selected once, and adds silhouette htt instead of in Fully Operational costing 2 advantage, being able to be selected an unlimited number of times, and adding only 1 htt

A question about VSL. How is it supposed to work with Larger scope and Elegant design. Do you use the original VSL or the new VSL?

It might be good to add a sidebar in the document which explains how to handle it.

7 hours ago, VanHippo said:

A question about VSL. How is it supposed to work with Larger scope and Elegant design. Do you use the original VSL or the new VSL?

It might be good to add a sidebar in the document which explains how to handle it.

You use the new/current (not the original). As far as I can tell, the power point template doesn't have side bars, but I could add text below the table

@EliasWindrider

For that, you could always add that note in the actual table (in parentheses). Something like: Use the VSL of the new Silhouette to determine the relevant values.

Or add it as a note under the VSL Table.

And on the Frame crafting table there is a stray "A" next to the Triumph symbol.

11 minutes ago, salamar_dree said:

@EliasWindrider

For that, you could always add that note in the actual table (in parentheses). Something like: Use the VSL of the new Silhouette to determine the relevant values.

Or add it as a note under the VSL Table.

And on the Frame crafting table there is a stray "A" next to the Triumph symbol.

Thanks.

I would consider dropping the Military Grade Shield Generator. I found it too easy to max out a ship's Defense as it is, and there is the Reinforced Shield Generator Attachment.

You don't have to. Just a suggestion.

And you're very welcome!

BTW: I tried my fighter build with an Elegant Designed Shuttle.

I got 4 Armor, 4/4 Defense, Long range Sensors, x2 Hyperdrive, and still had 3 open hardpoints for weapons/attachments.

It wasn't as difficult as I thought it should be, but I'm not complaining.

Forgot to mention: I used the Scout ship hull instead of Gunship.

On 6/15/2018 at 9:04 AM, salamar_dree said:

I would consider dropping the Military Grade Shield Generator. I found it too easy to max out a ship's Defense as it is, and there is the Reinforced Shield Generator Attachment.

You don't have to. Just a suggestion.

It's a lot easier to max out defenses when you only have to worry about 2 arcs (silhouette 4 and smaller), it's really hard to do it when you have 4 arcs to cover (silhouette 5 and above) I suppose I could limit military grade shield generators to silhouette greater than or equal to 5. I could also give it 4 increase defense in 1 zone by 1 mod instead of the one increase defense in all zones by one mod, if you think that would be an improvement.

Limiting it to Sil 5+ would be an excellent idea.

I'm curious: Why do you have both a Carrier Frame and a Carrier Hull?

It's actually confusing when reading the Hangar Bay table.

I would get rid of the Carrier frame and just use the Hull version (which would change the table).

It would be built on any frame, but typically the military ones (corvette, frigate, etc.).

17 minutes ago, salamar_dree said:

I'm curious: Why do you have both a Carrier Frame and a Carrier Hull?

It's actually confusing when reading the Hangar Bay table.

I would get rid of the Carrier frame and just use the Hull version (which would change the table).

It would be built on any frame, but typically the military ones (corvette, frigate, etc.).

I'm forgetting the precious context/details but the gist of it was there are uber carriers that need both to be replicated (but that was before the current scheme for hp) and also matching crew requirements (the frigate didn't work for crew/passengers, but I've fidgeted with crew sizes since then) and I think there was a third and/or 4th reason that I'm not remembering at the moment, htt eas likely one of them

Okay, sounds good.

Maybe make the reduction in hp cost for Dedicated Hangar bays: one for the Frame and one for the Hull. That way, if you have both it's 1 hp, but if you only have the Frame or only have the Hull, it's 2 hp.

Just a thought: Maybe rename the "Transport" Hull as "Passenger Liner" and the "Carrier" Hull as "Vehicle Transport". Then none of the Frames/Hulls would have the same name.

I could easily see using the "Vehicle Transport" hull with a Sil 4-5 Speeder/Walker to carry smaller craft.

Just an example of what a starting character can accomplish.

(I forgot to include the "Advanced Safety Features" in the stat block, and I cannot seem to edit it.)

Also: I just realised that the max Armor for Sil 2 ships is 3. Therefore, at that stage of design I would should have added +1 Hardpoint instead of Layered Armor.

14 hours ago, salamar_dree said:

Just an example of what a starting character can accomplish.

(I forgot to include the "Advanced Safety Features" in the stat block, and I cannot seem to edit it.)

Also: I just realised that the max Armor for Sil 2 ships is 3. Therefore, at that stage of design I would should have added +1 Hardpoint instead of Layered Armor.

That seems reasonable enough to me (for the specified purpose built starting character)

So, I think this ship is insane.

However, it did make me think that there should be an option to increase passengers.

I definitively think that the Carrier Frame and Carrier Hulls should only reduce HP cost from 3 to 2 (not 1 at all).

Granted, the Fighters are special Sil 2 creations (posted earlier), but 84 fighters (7 squadrons!) is insane.

It's like stuffing 84 Airspeeders from Hoth into the Millennium Falcon.

I hope this feedback helps!

1 hour ago, salamar_dree said:

So, I think this ship is insane.

However, it did make me think that there should be an option to increase passengers.

I definitively think that the Carrier Frame and Carrier Hulls should only reduce HP cost from 3 to 2 (not 1 at all).

Granted, the Fighters are special Sil 2 creations (posted earlier), but 84 fighters (7 squadrons!) is insane.

It's like stuffing 84 Airspeeders from Hoth into the Millennium Falcon.

I hope this feedback helps!

Actually the hoth airspeeders would be sil3. These would be the size of the central egg in the ETA interceptor... the fighters that obiwan and anakin were flying at the beginning of revenge of the Sith. And I'm thinking something a hair smaller than the ghost from rebels (which should be sil 4 rather than sil5 because it's a good deal less than half the length of a cr90 Corvette) it's still stretches the bounds of credibility but not as badly as you were thinking. But I do think I need to refigure the hp costs in terms of the new vsl formula's for hp.

@EliasWindrider

There should be something like a Dedicated Passenger Berth to complement the other Dedicated options.

I still like this idea:

Maybe rename the "Transport" Hull as "Passenger Liner" and the "Carrier" Hull as "Vehicle Transport". Then none of the Frames/Hulls would have the same nam  e   .  

(BTW: the Alliance T-47 Airspeeder is listed as Sil 2 in the AoR CRB.)

Cheers!

10 hours ago, salamar_dree said:

@EliasWindrider

There should be something like a Dedicated Passenger Berth to complement the other Dedicated options.

I still like this idea:

Maybe rename the "Transport" Hull as "Passenger Liner" and the "Carrier" Hull as "Vehicle Transport". Then none of the Frames/Hulls would have the same nam  e   .  

(BTW: the Alliance T-47 Airspeeder is listed as Sil 2 in the AoR CRB.)

Cheers!

There would still be freighter hull and freighter frame. I suppose a dedicated passenger berth could work, it would be a "bay" though, so I'd have to change the name of the section.

Ffg hasn't entirely been consistent on the meaning of silhouette... there are several silhouette 3 starfighters that are smaller than specific silhouette 2 airspeeders. And I think the starship sizing is more appropriate here.