I dunno if anyone else has seen this but y'all may want to check out this;
RPG Gamer.org CEC Ship Designer
Its a Fun little tool to let you mix and match parts from various CEC YT-series (and some) to build a wacky YT-series of your own.
It can also spit out a set of stats for said ships, but its for D6, but at the very least it gives a spring-board for creating ships for FFG!
How's this beast:
I do wish it had more options than just the YT series.
Useful? Probably not.
Fun? **** yes!!!
I wish it had a randomizer (Or if it does, I missed it)
Yeah its pretty limited, but a solid star and yes lots of fun, which is the reason I shared it!
Here's my attempt...
She might not look like much (the ghtroc engines) but she's got it where it counts kid.
On 3/21/2019 at 4:55 PM, Tramp Graphics said:How's this beast:
Upshaw look at mine
1 minute ago, EliasWindrider said:Upshaw look at mine
The Ghtroc engines kill it. They work on the original, befitting it’s “sea turtle” aesthetic, but they don’t work as well with the YT model aesthetic.
2 light turbolasers, 5 laser cannon (of which only one is a quad), concussion missile launcher and an ion cannon.
That's it?
What kind of pansy pacifist bullpuckey is this ship editor peddling wherever you can't make a ship decently armed enough to protect your family should a coneship full of selonian hoodlums drop by. Shameful that it's even allowed to call itself corellian.
The best ship is just clicking yes for every single option.
3 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:The Ghtroc engines kill it. They work on the original, befitting it’s “sea turtle” aesthetic, but they don’t work as well with the YT model aesthetic.
It's ugly but has awesome stats, I've always been a form follows function kind of guy, and from a functionality perspective it works and even makes sense to put them there, they would help turn the ship better. It's faster more agile (i.e. handles like a star fighter, in particular an t65b xwing), better armed, better sensors, it only has room for 10 passengers but it has 201 tons of cargo, so I'll deal with ugly. I'll be moving so fast when flying that people won't be able to see me anyway and on the ground ugly is a theft deterrent so I'm ok with it. I would totally use that ship in a d6 game. Based on the xwing stats, In ffg it would have speed 5 and +1 handling, I can deal with ugly to get that in a sil 4 ship with probably 200 enc, extreme sensors, 1 light turbolaser a quad turret and ion can turret, 4 ar and 1/-/-/1 defense and 10 passengers while having a crew of only 1 or 2.
14 hours ago, EliasWindrider said:It's ugly but has awesome stats, I've always been a form follows function kind of guy, and from a functionality perspective it works and even makes sense to put them there, they would help turn the ship better. It's faster more agile (i.e. handles like a star fighter, in particular an t65b xwing), better armed, better sensors, it only has room for 10 passengers but it has 201 tons of cargo, so I'll deal with ugly. I'll be moving so fast when flying that people won't be able to see me anyway and on the ground ugly is a theft deterrent so I'm ok with it. I would totally use that ship in a d6 game. Based on the xwing stats, In ffg it would have speed 5 and +1 handling, I can deal with ugly to get that in a sil 4 ship with probably 200 enc, extreme sensors, 1 light turbolaser a quad turret and ion can turret, 4 ar and 1/-/-/1 defense and 10 passengers while having a crew of only 1 or 2.
Yeah, but if you can get both form and function, that's even better. 😝
It's an awesome page. Thanks, @GandofGand !
37 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:Yeah, but if you can get both form and function, that's even better. 😝
Compare the stats of the 2 ships we "engineered" there's a big difference in function that making the ship a little ugly provides.
I tried a "Beholder" trying to fit all the cockpit as possible. But I don't know if it's possible to fit all of them without a lateral view.
43 minutes ago, EliasWindrider said:Compare the stats of the 2 ships we "engineered" there's a big difference in function that making the ship a little ugly provides.
Yeah. Mine has a larger passenger capacity. 😝
Edited by Tramp Graphics"Form" and "function" are weaksauce excuses for a lack of armament. At the best of times they are luxuries you can add once you have enough guns.
If you need to maneuver, it's because there are directions where you don't have guns. If you need to move anywhere it's because your guns don't have enough range. Always remember that root cause of every deficiency on your ship is always that there's not enough gun, and thus, should be addressed in that manner.
The only possible excuses for having parts of your ship not covered in guns is if they fold away to reveal hidden guns, and even then, ideally, your hidden guns should be hidden behind other guns.
"But penpenpen!" you complain in a defeatist whine "What if there's so many guns in my ship that I can't get around to fire them all?"
The solution is easy. Bring a gun to shoot the trigger of the guns you cant reach.
Some would claim that you should leave some space for missiles, but that is just an attempt to preemptively disarm you; instead, you mount guns everywhere, and then mount missiles to your guns (unless your guns have space for more guns).
Edited by penpenpen1 hour ago, Tramp Graphics said:Yeah. Mine has a larger passenger capacity. 😝
Yours is also slower, 3D less agile, carries 58 less tons of cargo (40 of which accounts for the 4 passenger difference, so even the passengers were the same you'd still be down 18 tons of cargo) has much worse sensors, has a single quad turret for weapons (as in you're down a turbolaser and ion cannon).
23 minutes ago, EliasWindrider said:Yours is also slower, 3D less agile, carries 58 less tons of cargo (40 of which accounts for the 4 passenger difference, so even the passengers were the same you'd still be down 18 tons of cargo) has much worse sensors, has a single quad turret for weapons (as in you're down a turbolaser and ion cannon).
I didn’t want turbolasers or Ion cannons. And, believe me I can make an even better version which looks just as good but faster, with a much higher cargo capacity, and probably even better weapons.
7 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:I didn’t want turbolasers or Ion cannons. And, believe me I can make an even better version which looks just as good but faster, with a much higher cargo capacity, and probably even better weapons.
I note you didn't include agility. Btw the system allows you to stack engines on top of each other. I added the constraint of non overlapping engines. But by all means let's see try to make a faster ship.
3 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:
You violated the constraints of non overlapping engines and you had maneuverability of 0D vs. 3D. So nice try but you lost the bet
10 minutes ago, EliasWindrider said:You violated the constraints of non overlapping engines and you had maneuverability of 0D vs. 3D. So nice try but you lost the bet
Nope. First, I was already making my post and had completed this ship before you posted. Besides, there is no reason not to add multiple types of engines. My first ship did too. The only difference is I put all of mine in the rear of the ship where they belong. 😝
Edited by Tramp Graphics