35 minutes ago, jayc007 said:

In regards to carriers... we could do a frame and a hull. There is a fair bit more flex with having both. And when you build both on a ship you get an added benefit... perhaps an addtional sil-1, perhaps 0 HP cost, twice the carried sil value, maybe even an upgrade to do repairs or build new craft on that ship? It's really not much different than the freighter with extended hold... that's basically a freighter frame and freighter hull.

Ok but how big is a carrier frame type, sil 6 maybe? And the benefit itd provide is not clear to me... maybe it just doubles the number of sil carried (without increasing the number of sil-1's carried)

Each dedicated hanger bay costs 3 hp and provides a total number of carried silhouettes based on the silhouette of the carrier vessel. Each dedicated hanger bay also allows 1 additional carried vessel to be of sil-1, all other carried vessels can individually be no greater than sil-2.

Sil 2: +1

Sil 3: +10

Sil 4: +15

Sil 5: +25

Sil 6: +35

Sil 7: +50

Sil 8: +65

Sil 9: +80

The carrier HULL type and destroyer FRAME type reduces the cost of each dedicated hanger bay to 1 hp. The carrier FRAME type doubles the total silhouette of ships that can be carried but does not double the number of individually sil-1 vehicles that can be carried

30 minutes ago, AeroEng42 said:

Is it frame and hull options missing, or did the devs deliberately make it worse with respect to spending Advantage and Triumph? Looking at your examples, not only does it appear you can't exactly replicate a bulk freighter, but you can't even replicate the low end crew requirement of a CR90 (30 crew). Perhaps we need additional attachments, including 0 hardpoint software programs for something like minimal crew?

Or a second reduce add crew or pax by 1/2 rounded up select 2 times (or select once per sil) so a sil3 could have 5 crew? And a corvette could have 4 crew? Maybe that's a bit much but that does make things better with enough advantage.

3 minutes ago, EliasWindrider said:

Ok but how big is a carrier frame type, sil 6 maybe? And the benefit itd provide is not clear to me... maybe it just doubles the number of sil carried (without increasing the number of sil-1's carried)

Well if doing a dedicated carrier you would use the frame and hull. So in that case you would want to increase the total carried sil# as much as possible. So yeah double the total sil# seems about right. As to the sil of the frame... 6 seems right. Up to 7 or down to 5. A sil8+ would probably have the benefit added in no charge.

So a sil5 carrier frame and hull would make what, 25 x 2 for 50 total?

Or we just do hanger bay attachments similar to the cargo bay you recommended to make the carrier type ship. Might be easier / simpler but would cost more HP to do it that way.

13 minutes ago, jayc007 said:

Well if doing a dedicated carrier you would use the frame and hull. So in that case you would want to increase the total carried sil# as much as possible. So yeah double the total sil# seems about right. As to the sil of the frame... 6 seems right. Up to 7 or down to 5. A sil8+ would probably have the benefit added in no charge.

So a sil5 carrier frame and hull would make what, 25 x 2 for 50 total?

Or we just do hanger bay attachments similar to the cargo bay you recommended to make the carrier type ship. Might be easier / simpler but would cost more HP to do it that way.

Sil 5 carrier frame and hull would be 50 sil per "dedicated hanger bay", each of which would cost 1 hp. But the cargo bay and dedicated hanger bays can be added only at the time of the hull is built, but at that time you're only limited by hp.

I envision a marauder corvette having a corvette frame and maybe a carrier hull so it's 2 dedicated hanger bays would cost 2 hp instead of 4 but that might not be proper incentive to go with a carrier HULL. Maybe a dedicated hanger bay normally costs 3 hp, but costs only 1 for the carrier HULL and destroyer frame. Maybe a carrier hull provides boost dice to repairing carried craft (a free vehicle repair bay that can be modded), otherwise a vehicle repair bay can be added for 3 hp.

Vehicle scaling law

Sil 1: vsl=1

Sil 2: vsl=5

Sil 3: vsl=10

Sil 4: vsl=15

Sil 5: vsl=25

Sil 6: vsl=35

Sil 7: vsl=50

Sil 8: vsl=65

Sil 9: vsl=80

Sil 10: vsl=100

FRAME types, expect this to be repeatedly edited.

Speeder bike: Sil 2

Landspeeder: Sil 2

Airspeeder: Sil 2

Walker: Sil 3: htt=vsl; max armor is sil+1; base enc=5; crew 1; passengers 0;

Starfighter: Sil 3; htt=vsl; max armor is sil+1; base enc=5; crew 1; passengers 0;

Freighter: Sil 4; htt=15+vsl; max armor is sil+1; base enc=20; cargo bays cost 1 hp each instead of 2 hp each; crew 2; passengers 4;

Shuttle: Sil 4; htt=10+vsl; max armor is sil+1; base enc=20; crew 2; passengers 10;

Patrol ship: Sil 5; htt=15+vsl; max armor is sil+1; base enc=20; max speed is +1 compared to table 3-3 on page 78 of fully operational; crew 8; passengers 10; can receive the "integrated improvements" upgrade twice

Corvette: Sil 5; htt=25+vsl; max armor is sil+1; base enc=255; crew 80; passengers 160; can receive the integrated improvements upgrade twice.

Carrier: Sil 6; htt=25+vsl; max armor is sil+1; base enc=?; crew ?; passengers ?; double the total number of silhouette that can be carried, provides a free vehicle repair bay.

Frigate: Sil 6: htt=45+vsl; max armor is sil+1;

Heavy cruiser: Sil 7; htt=45+vsl; max armor is sil+2

Destroyer: Sil 8; htt=60+vsl; max armor is sil+2; dedicated hanger bays cost 1 hp each

Space station

1 hour ago, EliasWindrider said:

Sil 5 carrier frame and hull would be 50 sil per "dedicated hanger bay", each of which would cost 1 hp. But the cargo bay and dedicated hanger bays can be added only at the time of the hull is built, but at that time you're only limited by hp.

I envision a marauder corvette having a corvette frame and maybe a carrier hull so it's 2 dedicated hanger bays would cost 2 hp instead of 4 but that might not be proper incentive to go with a carrier HULL. Maybe a dedicated hanger bay normally costs 3 hp, but costs only 1 for the carrier HULL and destroyer frame. Maybe a carrier hull provides boost dice to repairing carried craft (a free vehicle repair bay that can be modded), otherwise a vehicle repair bay can be added for 3 hp.

So now we are at a carrier frame option, a carrier hull option AND attachment hanger bays? Do you think that might be a bit much? It does add more versatility to the build options but at some point that sil5 would go back up to a sil6 ship.

At the same time I do think things should be kept as simple as possible. If it' too complicated then ppl won' want to do it or use it.

@EliasWindrider need a tank probably sil3

The Patrol ship a sil5? I would think sil4. You could go up or down but a sil6 patrol craft sounds too big whereas a sil3 patrol craft sounds reasonably doable.

Also, and I'm sure you on it but don' forget a personnel transport and bulk freighter... or would that be just a hull type and not a frame type... or just an attachment while or after building the hull?

As to cost which I don' think has been mentioned... I'd think that some things the cost would be per sil. Perhaps an exponential increase perhaps just a multiple. I wouldn' include the frame in that but hull and engines and other attachments probably.

And speed and armour maybe being pushed further with 2T for those exceptional craftsmen?

So if we are completely scrapping the FO crafting rules (aside from the Frame+Engines+Hull approach), has anyone assembled a list of all the stats of all the ships already published to calibrate and balance the new rules against? Or are these house rules not really going to care about balancing?

On a different topic, I was thinking about the complaint that several have voiced regarding the absolute max speeds, especially for ships which already meet that max speed after crafting and would therefore prevent the use of talents like Full Throttle and Push the Specs. It makes imminent logical sense to not allow giant big ships to fly as fast as starfighters, so there should be some sort of max speed, but what if talents were allowed to violate that limit at the cost of system strain? For example, if a silhouette 4 ship would have a max allowable speed of 4 from crafting and attachments, a character with Full Throttle or Push the Specs could push that speed to 5 or 6 (depending if they have the Supreme version of Full Throttle) at the cost of 2 system strain per round the ship stays above its max speed. The narrative reason could be you are frying the electrodes of the ion drives faster than normal or overheating the containment coils in the plasma thruster, and if you do it for too long, the engines will burn out and leave you dead in space. Thoughts?

In a similar vein, I would argue that if you want a silhouette 5 ship that can still Punch It, perhaps you add that as an optional mod to the Sleek hull type? Call it the blockade runner mod (allows the pilot to use Punch It on the ship if Silhouette 5)?

Finally, if Carrier is a sil6 frame, are you still planning on max silhouette of a carried vehicle to be sil-1? I understand that makes sense for a sil5 ship like the Marauder to carry shuttles, but to my knowledge, we have not seen precedent for a sil6 ship to carry a CR90. We have only seen the ISD and MC75 (flagship from Rogue One) carry a sil5 ship, correct?

10 hours ago, AeroEng42 said:

Is it frame and hull options missing, or did the devs deliberately make it worse with respect to spending Advantage and Triumph? Looking at your examples, not only does it appear you can't exactly replicate a bulk freighter, but you can't even replicate the low end crew requirement of a CR90 (30 crew). Perhaps we need additional attachments, including 0 hardpoint software programs for something like minimal crew?

Or a second reduce / add crew or pax by 1/2 rounded up select 2 times (or select once per sil) so a sil3 could have 5 crew? And a corvette could have 4 crew? Maybe that's a bit much but that does make things better with enough advantage. There are some examples of WAY over powered ships using these rules and examples of WAY UNDERPOWERED ships using these rules. I mean a sil3 fighter having 9 armour is crazy but a a sil4 freighter not ever being allowed to go speed5 even with talents!?!?!?!?!?!? That's just crazy weird.

Also, i don' believe that an exact compilation has been done but I think we are trying to balance things out a fair bit. With speed the rule maxing speed is worded poorly in FO so that needs to be fixed. The top speed of some ships is off so that needs to be fixed. I don't think we are trying to have a sil6 ship go max speed 6 but there are some sil4 freighters that have a 5 speed and there are attachments or talents to let you get more.

As for sil6 carriers there may not be examples of carrying sil5 ships but I don't think it's much of a stretch for one to carry the ghost which is sil5.

7 hours ago, jayc007 said:

@EliasWindrider need a tank probably sil3

The Patrol ship a sil5? I would think sil4. You could go up or down but a sil6 patrol craft sounds too big whereas a sil3 patrol craft sounds reasonably doable.

Also, and I'm sure you on it but don' forget a personnel transport and bulk freighter... or would that be just a hull type and not a frame type... or just an attachment while or after building the hull?

As to cost which I don' think has been mentioned... I'd think that some things the cost would be per sil. Perhaps an exponential increase perhaps just a multiple. I wouldn' include the frame in that but hull and engines and other attachments probably.

And speed and armour maybe being pushed further with 2T for those exceptional craftsmen?

Repulsor Tanks are land speeder but weeled/tracked vehicles should be added.

As for why a sil 5. I wanted to be able to recreate the mc30c from strongholds of rebellion. A speed 4 sil 6 frigate. And a sil 3 patrol boat could be built as a star fighter with a gunship hull.

Gunship hulls let you mount one oversized (sil+1 requirement) weapon and let you add crew to get more hp, and have the strongest hull.

By the way transport hulls (let you carry a lot of people cheaply) and racing hulls are also on my list. I'm going to drop the max speed of sil 3's and let them add a racing hull to get back up to 6 so interceptors are speed 6. Also if a patrol boat was sil 4, you could use elegant design to make it sil 3, and add a racing hull to get it to a max speed of 7 and I didn't want to go there at least not without high output ion turbines and talents.0

2 hours ago, AeroEng42 said:

So if we are completely scrapping the FO crafting rules (aside from the Frame+Engines+Hull approach), has anyone assembled a list of all the stats of all the ships already published to calibrate and balance the new rules against? Or are these house rules not really going to care about balancing?

On a different topic, I was thinking about the complaint that several have voiced regarding the absolute max speeds, especially for ships which already meet that max speed after crafting and would therefore prevent the use of talents like Full Throttle and Push the Specs. It makes imminent logical sense to not allow giant big ships to fly as fast as starfighters, so there should be some sort of max speed, but what if talents were allowed to violate that limit at the cost of system strain? For example, if a silhouette 4 ship would have a max allowable speed of 4 from crafting and attachments, a character with Full Throttle or Push the Specs could push that speed to 5 or 6 (depending if they have the Supreme version of Full Throttle) at the cost of 2 system strain per round the ship stays above its max speed. The narrative reason could be you are frying the electrodes of the ion drives faster than normal or overheating the containment coils in the plasma thruster, and if you do it for too long, the engines will burn out and leave you dead in space. Thoughts?

In a similar vein, I would argue that if you want a silhouette 5 ship that can still Punch It, perhaps you add that as an optional mod to the Sleek hull type? Call it the blockade runner mod (allows the pilot to use Punch It on the ship if Silhouette 5)?

Finally, if Carrier is a sil6 frame, are you still planning on max silhouette of a carried vehicle to be sil-1? I understand that makes sense for a sil5 ship like the Marauder to carry shuttles, but to my knowledge, we have not seen precedent for a sil6 ship to carry a CR90. We have only seen the ISD and MC75 (flagship from Rogue One) carry a sil5 ship, correct?

Not completely scrapping it, most of the crafting upgrades would remain unchanged with the exception of limiting armor, the max speed with sil 3 will decrease to speed 5, but the racing hull (replaces sleek carapace) increases max speed by 1 and will allow a sil 5 to punch it. I think the ability to carry sil-1 should be a mod on a dedicated hanger bay.

I think hangar should be a hull and not a frame.

3 hours ago, AeroEng42 said:

On a different topic, I was thinking about the complaint that several have voiced regarding the absolute max speeds, especially for ships which already meet that max speed after crafting and would therefore prevent the use of talents like Full Throttle and Push the Specs.

2 hours ago, EliasWindrider said:

Not completely scrapping it, most of the crafting upgrades would remain unchanged with the exception of limiting armore, the max speed with sil 3 will decrease to speed 5, but the racing hull (replaces sleek carapace) increases max speed by 1 and will allow a sil 5 to punch it. I think the ability to carry sil-1 should be a mod on a dedicated hanger bay.

I'm 99% sure that the max speed is meant to apply solely to the crafting process. Saying that a custom built ship could never under any circumstances go faster when there are talents and after-market attachments that do just that is silly. I do think that the game needs a top speed to limit silliness, but to say that those talents & attachments don't work is even more silly IMO. I also think vessels like the HWK are special cases and should not be looked at as a standard.

I've sent a question to FFG last week but I haven't gotten a response yet. If anyone else would like to as well we may be able to get an answer sooner.

41 minutes ago, Ahrimon said:

I think hangar should be a hull and not a frame.

I'm 99% sure that the max speed is meant to apply solely to the crafting process. Saying that a custom built ship could never under any circumstances go faster when there are talents and after-market attachments that do just that is silly. I do think that the game needs a top speed to limit silliness, but to say that those talents & attachments don't work is even more silly IMO. I also think vessels like the HWK are special cases and should not be looked at as a standard.

I've sent a question to FFG last week but I haven't gotten a response yet. If anyone else would like to as well we may be able to get an answer sooner.

I always thought that speed is hard limited to 6 and handling at +-3. I could be wrong but hey. Mind you Poe does punch his X-wing to probably 7 or 8 in the last jedi

3 minutes ago, jayc007 said:

I always thought that speed is hard limited to 6 and handling at +-3. I could be wrong but hey. Mind you Poe does punch his X-wing to probably 7 or 8 in the last jedi

That I wouldn't be surprised if there was. But when the book first came out, some posters took the wording of table 3-3 to mean that those ships could never, under any circumstances go faster. So a silhouette 4 ship could never go faster than speed 4. It wouldn't matter if you put the ion-drive attachment on or used supreme full throttle. The ship was limited to 4. I believe those limits are for construction purposes only. If there's another hard limit in the game, I'm simply not aware of it because I don't follow the ship rules too much.

1 hour ago, Ahrimon said:

That I wouldn't be surprised if there was. But when the book first came out, some posters took the wording of table 3-3 to mean that those ships could never, under any circumstances go faster. So a silhouette 4 ship could never go faster than speed 4. It wouldn't matter if you put the ion-drive attachment on or used supreme full throttle. The ship was limited to 4. I believe those limits are for construction purposes only. If there's another hard limit in the game, I'm simply not aware of it because I don't follow the ship rules too much.

I think you're right but they wrote it in a way that was unclear, when I write these house rules I'm going to write in a way that is clear (and allows the high output turbines and talents).

Hulls

Carrier : can add dedicated hanger bays for 1 hp each instead of 3 hp, handling -2, armor 1, two +1 armor mod, one +1 defense to all arcs mods, 1 free repair bay attachment.

Freighter : each cargo bays provides more enc (see the description of cargo bay), handling-2, armor 1, two +1 armor mod, two +1 defense to 1 arc mods

Gunship : two +Sil hp mods that each tripples the crew requirements (getting both makes it the base x10 instead of x9) , handling-2, armor 3, one +1 armor mods, two +1 defense to all arcs mods, two can mount one weapon that is normally restricted to a sil+1 vehicle or increase the linked on such a weapon mods, two +1 adjacent fire arc to all weapons mods (different extra fire arcs can be given to different weapons), one +1 handling mod.

Raceship : increases maximum speed by 1, handling 2, armor zero, two armor +1 mod, two +1 defense to two arcs mods, one +1 to handling mod, 1 a sil 5 ship can "punch it" mod, two +Sil to sst mods.

Scoutship : handling 2, armor 2, one +1 defense to all arcs mods, one +2 hp mod, one a sil 5 ship can punch it mod, one can double or halve crew requirements mod (round remainders up), one can double or halve the number of passengers mod (round remainders up), one +3 months of consumables mods, one cargo bays cost 1hp instead of 2 hp mod.

Transport : *sil passengers, cargo bays cost 1 hp instead of two, handling -2, armor 1, one +1 armor mods, two +1 defense to one arc mods, one +1 handling mod, 1 *Sil passenger mod (multiplicatively stacks with base increase)

What else?

11 minutes ago, EliasWindrider said:

Hulls

Carrier

Freighter

Gunship

Racing

Transport

What else?...

Some sort of average/mediocre at a bunch of things/multi-role hull? What would it be called?

How would each of these compare to the ones in the book? As for a multi-role hull, why not use the Lightly Armored hull as a base, but perhaps add a mod or two for increasing defense?

34 minutes ago, AeroEng42 said:

How would each of these compare to the ones in the book? As for a multi-role hull, why not use the Lightly Armored hull as a base, but perhaps add a mod or two for increasing defense?

The hulls in the book are about protection vs. Maneuverability vs. Minor boost to carrying cargo, and there really isn't a great deal of distinction in terms of capability in terms of protection because layered armor upgrade can boost even the sleek carapaces armor pretty darn high, and the maneuvering fins upgrade can make anything as agile as a ship with sleek carapace (handling is capped at 3). The encumbrance boost is pretty minor too. I think that the sleek carapace stands out under RAW only because it only takes 2 hp.

The vision I have for hulls is they make a ship stand out in a particular role. Freighter hugely boosts capability to haul cargo, carrier hugely boosts ability to haul smaller ships (and it's going to be in combat so it needs more armor than a freighter), transport hugely boosts ability to haul passengers with maybe minor boosts to haul cargo and smaller ships, racer boosts SPEED and handling but is weak in terms of defense, gunship has high defense and offense (ability to mount bigger and more weapons) at the cost of a larger crew,

scoutship... boosts handling but not speed, minor boost to cargo, minor boost to defense, a little more flexibility on crew/passenger sizes, maybe a few extra hp in terms of free sensors or hyperdrive or something.

Maybe a prototype hull where you get to select features from a list?

Scout and or prototype would have a huge number of mods, so many that the mechanics checks to get them all would be impossible (as in you have to spend a DP to attempt a 5 purple check).

Cost could be based on sil, but I think that the assembly stage cost is better for handling stuff whose costs depends on sil.

I'm just not seeing Hull as the piece that determines the craft's role. I'm starting to reverse my train of thought and think that it should go into the frame... but even then, it doesn't feel right. What about a 4th module? Say, Systems or something along those lines. Then you could have Cargo, Carrier, Gunship, Transport, etc separate from the frame and hull. That way one person may build a heavily armored transport, while another builds a sleek gunship. Something like that.

I think one of the big things that should be done is that each module should have a primary effect on a couple of aspects and a secondary effect on others.

7 minutes ago, Ahrimon said:

I'm just not seeing Hull as the piece that determines the craft's role. I'm starting to reverse my train of thought and think that it should go into the frame... but even then, it doesn't feel right. What about a 4th module? Say, Systems or something along those lines. Then you could have Cargo, Carrier, Gunship, Transport, etc separate from the frame and hull. That way one person may build a heavily armored transport, while another builds a sleek gunship. Something like that.

I think one of the big things that should be done is that each module should have a primary effect on a couple of aspects and a secondary effect on others.

The hull, isn't just the metal on the outside of a starship, it's the space that people and systems inhabit inside that metal sheath, and what functions that space was designed to support. The frame is structural support (how much load it can take).

A sleek gunship could be made as a patrol ship frame with a scoutship hull. A heavily armormored transport could be a shuttle or corvette or other frame that has the transport hull and multiple applications of the layered plating upgrade.

@EliasWindrider

So I might have missed a post or something but I don't think I saw a description of cargo bay or hanger bay or the transport's passenger capabilities. Is that still to come?

I realize things need more fleshing out but so far things seem much improved over FO'S RAW. Don't get me wrong ppl... I thing the raw aren't terrible... Just that they need improvements

And count me as one who saw the speed limit and realized there is no clear exemptions for talents or attachments. And many would say since there is no exemptions there is no exceptions.

On 4/5/2018 at 10:24 PM, EliasWindrider said:

Ok but how big is a carrier frame type, sil 6 maybe? And the benefit itd provide is not clear to me... maybe it just doubles the number of sil carried (without increasing the number of sil-1's carried)

Each dedicated hanger bay costs 3 hp and provides a total number of carried silhouettes based on the silhouette of the carrier vessel. Each dedicated hanger bay also allows 1 additional carried vessel to be of sil-1, all other carried vessels can individually be no greater than sil-2.

Sil 2: +1

Sil 3: +10

Sil 4: +15

Sil 5: +25

Sil 6: +35

Sil 7: +50

Sil 8: +65

Sil 9: +80

The carrier HULL type and destroyer FRAME type reduces the cost of each dedicated hanger bay to 1 hp. The carrier FRAME type doubles the total silhouette of ships that can be carried but does not double the number of individually sil-1 vehicles that can be carried

Here's the revious post on the dedicated hanger bay, this is really just the vehicle scaling law, vsl, but since each hanger bay can hold at most one sil-1 vehicle, that means a sil 2 vehicle can carry at most 1 sil 1 vehicle. I was thinking of changing the description of the dedicated hanger bay so that carrying a sil-1 vehicle was a mod, and that a sil-1 vehicle takes up twice it's sil in capacity, so a sil 5 with a modded dedicated hanger bay would have 25 sil of capacity but a sil 4 shuttle would take up 8 of that 25. If so, i'd add a +1 capacity mod on a dedicated hanger bay. So that a sil 5 dedicated hanger bay could carry up to 26 sil of smaller craft, is mostly to shoehorn in a marauder corvette with 2 dedicated hanger bays which would need a total of 52 capacity if each sil 4 shuttle took up 8 sil of capacity. And then the sil 2 dedicated hanger bay would get upgraded to 2 sil of capacity.

On 4/5/2018 at 10:19 PM, EliasWindrider said:

Each cargo bay costs 2 hp and increases encumbrance by an amount that depends on silhouette and hull type, for the freighter HULL type, enc increase is

Sil 1: +4

Sil 2: +15

Sil 3: +65

Sil 4: 255

Sil 5: 1025

Sil 6: 5000

Sil 7: 16500

Sil 8: 65500

Sil 9: 265000

For all other hull types a cargo bay increases enc by

Sil 1: +3

Sil 2: +10

Sil 3: +30

Sil 4: +80

Sil 5: +245

Sil 6: +730

Sil 7: +2200

Sil 8: +6600

Sil 9: +20000

For the freighter FRAME type a cargo bay costs 1 hp instead of 2 hp

This is the post on the cargo bay

13 hours ago, EliasWindrider said:

Transport: *sil passengers, cargo bays cost 1 hp instead of two, handling -2, armor 1, one +1 armor mods, two +1 defense to one arc mods, one +1 handling mod, 1 *Sil passenger mod (multiplicatively stacks with base increase)

Here's the transport hull, I admit it probably needs revision. It does potentially too much for small sils and maybe not enough for large sils.

BTW I've been going back and editing previous posts with updated info.

11 hours ago, Ahrimon said:

I'm just not seeing Hull as the piece that determines the craft's role. I'm starting to reverse my train of thought and think that it should go into the frame... but even then, it doesn't feel right. What about a 4th module? Say, Systems or something along those lines. Then you could have Cargo, Carrier, Gunship, Transport, etc separate from the frame and hull. That way one person may build a heavily armored transport, while another builds a sleek gunship. Something like that.

I think one of the big things that should be done is that each module should have a primary effect on a couple of aspects and a secondary effect on others.

Also, if hulls have a lot of MODifications that can be fluffed as installing system MODules. That is the approach I've decided to go with (but I'd be willing to adopt a better idea).