Just now, EliasWindrider said:

That was the intent, but i think (memory unclear on this) it was also from a time where hp were more scarce, and it doesn't prevent someone from putting 5 dedicated hanger bays on a sil 4 ship.

True. Maybe do both the Integrated attachment change, and the Limit on the max Hanger Bays.

Also for weapons, look into having rules for how they are mounted onto a ship? I think the base rules doesn't really specify what firing arcs they can have when installed. As for your rules, there is only really the Weapons Banks which only affects larger ships. However what about smaller ships for Firing arcs?

@Mon_Cal_Professor

The base Attachment rules for weapons (in the CRBs) is sufficient.

Not even having a turreted weapon affects it's cost or HP, as combat is so narrative.

The weapons banks are to accommodate the capital ships with large amounts of weapons, as the standard HP system cannot cope with such quantities without radically affecting non-weapon systems.

Does that make sense?

It does. I guess I was just thinking of a 'gunner seat' mod and trying to justify it.

1 hour ago, Mon_Cal_Professor said:

True. Maybe do both the Integrated attachment change, and the Limit on the max Hanger Bays.

Also for weapons, look into having rules for how they are mounted onto a ship? I think the base rules doesn't really specify what firing arcs they can have when installed. As for your rules, there is only really the Weapons Banks which only affects larger ships. However what about smaller ships for Firing arcs?

I plan to do both and

@salamar_dree got the turrets right when I had it wrong (I thought it needed to spend a hp to add a turret back in the day). The weapon banks weren't my idea originally, although the implementation and interaction with the ship of the line hull was.

I contacted the Devs about turrets, because honestly, it makes more sense that a turret requires more space than a fixed weapon (like Eliaswindrider had it originally), but the RAW didn't mention it either way.

If firing arcs mattered more, I'd say we should have better rules about it, but it's been my experience that they rarely affect gameplay.

On 3/28/2019 at 8:53 PM, salamar_dree said:

@EliasWindrider

I still think that at least the Bulk Freighter Hull should start with worse Handling, though.

And I feel that there's a missing Hull type. I can't quite articulate what it should be, but it seems that I lean towards the Transport and Scout Hulls a lot more than I should.

Maybe not. Just thinking out loud.

it is intended for transport and scout hulls to be the hulls most commonly used by players (as it describes the type of ship most players use).

but if you have a suggestion for any hull type I'd be happy to consider it, a while back I was looking at a "utility" hull but I wasn't able to figure out a generic mechanic that fit "utility."

I made a bunch of changes not sure I've got every change I said I'd make since last time.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/2w9oicv7s63dhmg/TheNubianDesignCollectivesWholeVehicleCraftingHandbook.pdf/file

40 minutes ago, EliasWindrider said:

it is intended for transport and scout hulls to be the hulls most commonly used by players (as it describes the type of ship most players use).

but if you have a suggestion for any hull type I'd be happy to consider it, a while back I was looking at a "utility" hull but I wasn't able to figure out a generic mechanic that fit "utility."

Like you said, I'm not sure if it's needed, but maybe a "Customizable" Hull. Base Armor 1, Base Handling ?

But give it a generous amount of Mod options?

I did go back and look at the Fully Operational "Hulls". You have more options than they do, so again, might not be needed.

@EliasWindrider

Okay, I looked over the new doc.

Looks pretty good!

Just a few things:

1) I know that you wanted to add the Astromech Socket Attachment to the list, because you wanted to make it 1 HP if installed during Construction on Sil 3 ships.

2) The Fine-Tuned option on the Engine Crafting Table still says, "Remove 3 from..."

3) I still think that the Dedicated Hangar Bay for Sil 3 should be +5 (instead of +10).

Cheers!

48 minutes ago, salamar_dree said:

@EliasWindrider

Okay, I looked over the new doc.

Looks pretty good!

Just a few things:

1) I know that you wanted to add the Astromech Socket Attachment to the list, because you wanted to make it 1 HP if installed during Construction on Sil 3 ships.

2) The Fine-Tuned option on the Engine Crafting Table still says, "Remove 3 from..."

3) I still think that the Dedicated Hangar Bay for Sil 3 should be +5 (instead of +10).

Cheers!

1) look at hyperdrive, it's a conditional reduction in hp cost

2) thanks I forgot

3) if I had a table I might do that but one of the design goals is SIMPLE and I don't want to do VSL except

Okay. Thanks. 😊

@EliasWindrider

I'm trying to help you figure out the base crew and passengers for the carrier frame. I tried to find as many ships that have a fighter complement.

Note: Only a few are actually "carriers"

Sil 5:
Assault Corvette crew 177, passengers 80

Sil 6:
Carrier crew 250, passengers 150
Assault Carrier crew 800, passengers 250
Frigate crew 900, passengers 80
Frigate crew 920, passengers 75
Frigate crew 975, passengers 90
Light Cruiser crew 3770, passengers 650

Sil 7:
Frigate crew 1100, passengers 850
Heavy Cruiser crew 2551, passengers 400
Heavy Cruiser crew 2807, passengers 80
Carrier crew 4000, passengers 800
Heavy Cruiser crew 16000, passengers 3000

Sil 8:
Star Cruiser crew 5400, passengers 1200
Star Destroyer crew 6107, passengers 1600
Star Destroyer crew 37085, passengers 9700
Carrier crew 40000, passengers 14000
Battlecruiser crew 45000, passengers 15000

Sil 9:
Star Cruiser crew 5480, passengers 1200
Dreadnought crew 109000, passengers 14000
Dreadnought crew 125000, passengers 20000

@EliasWindrider

Found a few more items of note:

A) The Gunship Hull still mentions the Oversize Weapon Mount from Dangerous Covenants.

B) I the new Oversize External Weapon Mount, perhaps add Mods like in the Gunship entry to allow linked weapons?

1 hour ago, salamar_dree said:

@EliasWindrider

Found a few more items of note:

A) The Gunship Hull still mentions the Oversize Weapon Mount from Dangerous Covenants.

B) I the new Oversize External Weapon Mount, perhaps add Mods like in the Gunship entry to allow linked weapons?

Thanks for the last several posts... they are helpful. I think the carriers with transport hull will need to get passenger berths for 1 hp each. And/Or maybe receive 2× VSL passengers per dedicated passenger berth and/or they can have 3x Sil dedicated bays and berths instead of the normal Could you add total silhouette of carried craft to the list of crew and passengers above?

I will. I thought about it late last night after I finished.

8 minutes ago, salamar_dree said:

I will. I thought about it late last night after I finished.

Carrier frame like gunship and ship of the line hulls is going to need a few double crew to add sil hp. And I don't see much chance of getting 40,000 crew, and 14,000 passengers and * carried craft.... by itself the 14,000 passengers is doable but not when combined with the other two.

VSL just doesn't cut it for passengers for very large ships. And comparison of the star destroyer personal and size to a Nimitz class aircraft carrier is pretty reasonable/not excessive.

I'd have to create a passenger berths capacity table and I'm not sure that I want to do that, it's adding complexity that I'm not sure I want to add. Probably need to bite the bullet and just do it though.

The volume of an ISD is (order of magnitude estimate, from sticking 4 tetrahedrons that are 1600×400×150 in length width height together) something like 4/6*1600*400*150=64M cubic meters. Dealing with stuff that big...

@EliasWindrider

Here's the update. I added Cargo and the specific ship/book as well. Note: The "crew" often includes pilots, etc.

I'm not sure how to handle "numerous shuttles, etc." Some ships carry a bunch of extras that aren't given specific quantities or sizes.

Sil 5:
Assault Corvette (Marauder, EotE CRB 267)
crew 177, passengers 80, cargo 175, hangar (minimum of 2 bays, Sil 44)

Sil 6:
Carrier (Quasar Fire, SoT 61)
crew 250, passengers 150, cargo 5000, hangar (Sil 144+ numerous shuttles, etc)
Assault Carrier (Starbolt, DC 70)
crew 800, passengers 250, cargo 4000, hangar (Sil 116)
Frigate (Surveyor, LbE 53)
crew 900, passengers 80, cargo 3700, hangar (Sil 36+ numerous shuttles, etc)
Frigate (EF76 Nebulon-B, AoR CRB 278)
crew 920, passengers 75, cargo 4000, hangar (Sil 72)
Frigate (Ubrkkian Kossak, LoNH 117)
crew 975, passengers 90, cargo 3500, hangar (Sil 52)
Light Cruiser (MC40a, SoR 119)
crew 3770, passengers 650, cargo 5000, hangar (Sil 36)

Sil 7:
Frigate (Munificent, LbE 52)
crew 1100, passengers 850, cargo 10000, hangar (Sil 36 to 108 dep. on config.)
Heavy Cruiser (Vindicator, AoR CRB 280)
crew 2551, passengers 400, cargo 7500, hangar (Sil 72)
Heavy Cruiser (Interdictor, AoR CRB 280)
crew 2807, passengers 80, cargo 6500, hangar (Sil 72)
Carrier (Ton-Falk, SoT 61)
crew 4000, passengers 800, cargo 9000, hangar (Sil 216+ numerous shuttles, etc)
Heavy Cruiser (Dreadnought, AoR CRB 279)
crew 9000 to 16000, passengers 3000, cargo 7500, hangar (Sil 36)

Sil 8:
Star Cruiser (MC80 Liberty, AoR CRB 284)
crew 5400, passengers 1200, cargo 70000, hangar (Sil 108+ numerous shuttles, etc)
Star Destroyer (Victory, AoR CRB 284)
crew 6107, passengers 1600, cargo 6500, hangar (72+ numerous shuttles, etc)
Star Destroyer (Imperial I, AoR CRB 281)
crew 37085, passengers 9700, cargo 15000, hangar (Sil 216+ numerous shuttles, etc)
Carrier (Secutor, SoT 62)
crew 40000, passengers 14000, cargo 28000, hangar (Sil 432+ numerous shuttles, etc)
Battlecruiser (Maelstrom, LbE 57)
crew 45000, passengers 15000, cargo 12500, hangar (Sil 288+ numerous shuttles, etc)

Sil 9:
Star Cruiser (MC80A Home One, LbE 54)
crew 5480, passengers 1200, cargo 85000, hangar (Sil 360+ numerous shuttles, etc)
Star Battlecruiser (Preator II, AoR CRB 283)
crew 109000, passengers 14000, cargo 78000, hangar (Sil 360+ numerous shuttles, etc)
Dreadnought (Assertor, LbE 56)
crew 125000, passengers 20000, cargo 145000, hangar (Sil 360+ numerous shuttles, etc)

I was fidgeting with numbers and what if dedicated passenger berths provided

Sil 0: -

Sil 1: -

Sil 2: 1

Sil 3: 2

Sil 4: 10

Sil 5: 35

Sil 6: 140

Sil 7: 525

Sil 8: 2000

Sil 9: 7600

Sil 10: 29000

passengers?

These are basically 3.81^(sil-2)*2.494 but rounded to simple/clean/easy to remember numbers for a table

That seems better.

Also, I'm really confused about how to quantify how many "crew" some of these ships should have.

At Sil 9 we have crews of 5480 all the way to 125,000. Some of those are pilots and such, but still, it's ridiculous how much of a spread there is.

The sil 8 carrier would have 3x (double crew to gain silhouette hp) and 2x double crew for larger scope. Leaving 40000/8 = 1250 <= crew + passengers. Crew <= 800 so 450 <= passengers.

At sil 5 we have 177.5 crew +80 passengers

(177.5+80) × 8 =2060 which is greater than 1250 so we can make this work for the upper and lower end of the spectrum provided we can get all the passengers we want from passengers berths.

If as a guess we tried 800 crew and 470 passengers and we did elegant design, that would take us to 400 crew and 235 passengers. If we did integrated improvements to reduce the crew to 200 and used officer's quarters to move 155 passengers to crew, we'd have 355 crew and 80 passengers. If we then installed the highly automated systems attachment (or used a second integrated improvements) we'd have 177.5 crew and 80 passengers.

So what if we did 800 crew and 500 passengers but moved over 30 passengers before the integrated improvements?

Elegant design takes us to 400 crew and 250 passengers. We use officer's quarters to make that 430 and 220. Integrated improvements makes that 215 and 220. Officers quarters again moves over 140 to have 355 and 80. With a highly automated systems that gets us 177.5 and 80. It also lets us do the starbolt.

That sounds like it's feasible.

Again, some of those ships aren't "officially" carriers in their descriptions, but I think that puts us on the right track to make the official ships buildable!

😊

For the quasar fire we could use officer's quarter to move over 200, use integrated improvements to reduce to passengers 150, then use two of the following integrated improvements, transport hull mod, or highly automated systems attachment and mod thereof to get crew to 250.

Translation... using a carrier frame with 800 crew and 500 passengers and the transport hull, the marauder Corvette and the 2 sil6 "official carriers" can meet their crew and passenger specs exactly without purchasing any passengers berths.

The secutor will be able to meet its crew requirements exactly and with the new passenger berth capacities will be able to get close to the official number of passengers.

VSL seems to work for hanger bays.

here are the changes we worked through

http://www.mediafire.com/file/2w9oicv7s63dhmg/TheNubianDesignCollectivesWholeVehicleCraftingHandbook.pdf/file

I added a second integrated improvements to the carrier frame, and cut the passengers in half. I'm thinking that I may need to decrease hard points since no it won't need dedicated passenger berths for sil 6 or less.

preface this with modified carrier frame to remove the double crew and add silhouette hp mods (which forces the secutor to use the ship of the line hull), to have only VSL hp instead of 10+VSL, and have 100 base enc.

I also modified the weapon bank to impose a cumulative-1 to sst per weapons bank. But now I'm thinking that it should be a -2 to sst per bank but the frigate, heavy cruiser, destroyer, and space station frames would discount that by 1, as would the ship of the line and gunship hulls. Consider that eratta (not yet included in the link below), modified quasar fire build below to match.

Also thinking of making engine crafting upgrade: fine tuned circuits cost 1 adv instead of 2, not sure that's a sufficient price though.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/2w9oicv7s63dhmg/TheNubianDesignCollectivesWholeVehicleCraftingHandbook.pdf/file

Assault Corvette (Marauder, EotE CRB 267)
crew 177, passengers 80, cargo 175, hangar (minimum of 2 bays, Sil 44)

Carrier Frame: Elegant design => 50 htt, 25 hp, 400 crew, 125 passengers; integrated improvements, => 250 passengers; officer's quarters => 432 crew, 218 passengers; integrated improvements => 216 crew, 218 passengers; officer's quarters => 354 crew, 80 passengers

Ion Turbine Engine: 22 hp, speed 1; 25 sst; def 1/0/0/0; 2x strain threshold => 35 sst, 1 speed mod => speed 2; crafting upgrade enhanced output => speed 3

Transport hull 1 armor, -2 handling; mods: halve crew => 177, increase defense in all arcs by 1 => 2/1/1/1, 2x armor=> 3, 1x handling=> -1; crafting upgrades 2x layered plating => armor 5, 1x maneuvering fins => handling=0, 1x cargo pods => 180 enc

life support, 3x modded => 21 hp, 100 days of consumables

11 weapons => 10 hp left

hyperdrive => 9 hp left

navicomputer (still 9 hp)

2x dedicated hanger bays => 7 hp left

sensors => 6 hp left

3x reinforced frame => 65 htt, 0 hp left

1 customization hp (needed to get +1 hp from a frame, hull, or assembly crafting check)

so also 10 too many days of consumables and 5 too many enc

Carrier (Quasar Fire, SoT 61)
crew 250, passengers 150, cargo 5000, hangar (Sil 144+ numerous shuttles, etc)

carrier frame: 60 htt, 35 hp, 800 crew, 250 passengers, integrated improvements => 400 crew, officer's quarters => 500 crew, 150 passengers, integrated improvements => 250 crew

Ion turbine engine: 32 hp, speed 1, 35 sst, 1/0/0/0 defense; mods: 2x strain threshold => 47 sst, 2x defense => 1/1/1/0, 1x speed=> 2

transport hull: 1 armor, -2 handling; mods 1 increase defense in all arcs by 1 => defense 2/2/2/1, 1 increased armor => 2, crafting mods 3x layered plating => 5 armor, 2x cargo pods => 590 enc (assuming starting from a base of 100)

either too big to hurt on frame crafting or too tough to hurt on hull crafting to gain massive 1

3x life support=> 29 hp

6x dedicated hanger bays => 23 hp

6x dedicated cargo bays => 11 hp, 4970 enc

sensors => 10 hp

hyperdrive => 9 hp

navicomputer (still 9 hp)

4x weapons (1 weapon bank) => 7 hp, 45 sst

4 customization hp

=> 3 too many hp (but it could have been done less efficiently, i.e. mounting 4 weapons instead of 1 weapon bank which would have made it 1 too many hp and if they did 4x fine tuned circuits it'd still come out with the right sst) 30 too little enc, 350 or 385 day of consumables vs 365 or so, close enough to call a 95% quality match.

Assault Carrier (Starbolt, DC 70)
crew 800, passengers 250, cargo 4000, hangar (Sil 116)

Carrier frame 60 htt, 35 hp, 800 crew, 250 passengers, 100 enc, 3x reinforced construction, extra hp => 63 htt, 36 hp (could have gotten the hp from assembly)

Ion turbines 33 hp, speed 1, 35 sst, defense 1/0/0/0, mods 2x defense => 1/1/1/0, 3x system strain => 53 sst. Crafting upgrades 2x enhanced output => speed 3, enhanced power to deflectors => 1/1/1/1

Transport hull 1 armor, -2 handling, modded for defense => 2/2/2/2, armor=>2, handling => -1, 35 days of life support. Crafting upgrades 4x layered plating => 6 armor, 1x cargo pods => 345 enc, integrated systems reinforced frame => 69 htt

5x life support => 28 hp

2x weapon banks, 24 hp, 49 sst,

2x auxiliary generators, 20hp, 61 sst

Sensors 19 hp,

Hyper drive 18 hp,

Navicomputer (still 18 hp)

5× cargo bays => 3,995 enc 8 hp,

4x hanger bays => 4 hp

Reinforced frame => 2 hp, 75 htt

2 customization hp.

=> so 1 too many sst, off by 5 enc.

Carrier (Ton-Falk, SoT 61)
crew 4000, passengers 800, cargo 9000, hangar (Sil 216+ numerous shuttles, etc)

carrier frame with larger scope: 75 htt, 50 hp, 1600 crew, 500 passengers, 2xintegrated improvements => 3200 crew, 1000 passengers, officers quarters => 4000 crew, 200 passengers

ion turbine engines=> 47 hp, speed 1, 50 sst, defense 1/0/0/0, mods: 2x strain threshold => 64 sst, 2x increase defense in 1 arc => 1/1/1/0, increase speed => speed=2; enhanced power to deflectors => defense is 1/1/1/1

transport hull: 1 armor, -2 handling, crafting: flies like a brick => -3 handling +2 advantage (via shipwright talent) 2x layered plating=>armor=3 , mods: add 1 defense to all arcs => 2/2/2/2, 1x armor => 4,

either too big to hurt on frame crafting or too tough to hurt on hull crafting to gain massive 1

2x life support=> 45 hp

6x dedicated hanger bays => 39 hp

4x dedicated cargo bays => 31 hp, 8900 enc

1x dedicated passenger berths => 29 hp, 725 passengers (vs 800)

sensors => 28 hp

hyperdrive => 27 hp

navicomputer (still 27 hp)

1 reinforced frame attachment => 25 hp, 82 htt

15 weapons (2 weapon banks and a loose weapon)=> 20 hp, 62 sst

3 customization hp

=> 17 too many hp and this seems to be part of the 5% we can't replicate with a 95% quality match... this is a incredibly weak design compared to other carriers. Maybe someone could check my math on this one.

Carrier (Secutor, SoT 62)
crew 40000, passengers 14000, cargo 28000, hangar (Sil 432+ numerous shuttles, etc)

carrier frame with 2x larger scope => 90 htt, 65 hp, 3,200 crew, 1,000 passengers, integrated improvements => 2,000 passengers, officer's quaters => 5,000 crew, 200 passengers, integrated improvments => 10,000 crew

ion turbine engines: 62 hp, 1 speed, 65 sst, defense 1/0/0/0, modded for speed=>2 and 2x defense => 1/1/1/0

ship of the line hull: massive 1, 5 armor, -2 handling, 2x modified to double crew and add Silhouette hp => 78 hp, 2x modified to increase defense in all arcs by 1 => defense 3/3/3/2, crafting: 2x flies like a brick => -4 handling, +4 advantage, 3x layered plating => armor=8, 1 cargo pod => 2,300 enc

either too big to hurt on frame crafting or too tough to hurt on hull crafting to get to massive 2

5x reinforced frame attachments => 130 htt, 68 hp

7x passenger bays => 54 hp, 14,200 passengers

9x weapon banks => 36 hp & 56 sst

3x life support => 33 hp

4x cargo bays => 21 hp, 28,700 enc

8 hanger bays => 5 hp

sensors => 4 hp

hyperdrive => 3 hp

navicomputer (still 3 hp)

2 customization hp

=> 1 hp too many, 700 enc too many, 1 sst too many, and these were some very easy crafting checks (other than needing the triumph on the frame or hull to get to massive 2). so i'll call that a 95% quality match