I'm having a few issues with the vehicle rules, and right now the limit on taking a second Maneuver for Silhouette 5+ is really bothering me. I can't see a good reason for it. Silhouette 5+ are already barred from many Maneuvers, so what's left:

Accelerate/Decelerate: OK, I can see a possible argument that Silhouette 5+ shouldn't be able to change two Speed in a single turn, but doing so costs Strain, so that's already there. Beyond that, I certainly don't see why this couldn't be combined with Fly/Drive in the same turn if the vehicle takes Strain.

Fly/Drive: Here's a real problem. Since moving takes this Maneuver and the outcome is then based on Speed, we end up having lower Speed Silhouette <5 vehicles outrunning higher speed Silhouette 5+ vehicles. Why can't a bigger vehicle actually travel at the same rate as a smaller vessel with the same Speed?

So, what would the overall effect of allowing Silhouette 5+ vehicles to suffer Strain to perform a second Maneuver in a turn?

1) It would allow them to Accelerate/Decelerate twice in a turn.

2) It would allow them to Accelerate/Decelerate and still Fly/Drive in a turn.

3) It would allow them to keep pace with a lower Silhouette vehicle of the same Speed that is using two Fly/Drive Maneuvers.

4) It would NOT allow them to use Evasive Maneuvers, Stay on Target, or Punch It.

I think that this would be a positive change and I'm likely going to make it a house rule in my games.

I agree with what you say. I wasn't even aware that they couldn't take second manuevers.

The bit about not being able to fly after reducing speed makes no sense. I'd like someone to try to explain how a vehicle stops moving while it takes time to accelerate or decelerrate in physics terms. Even in abstract rules, I expect a certain amount of logic and realism.

The vehicle is still moving without Fly/Drive, but you can't change your position relative to anything else without the Maneuver.

See I looked at this yesterday. Page 231 states they may take two starship manoeuvres, but page 232 states they may only perform one pilot only manoeuvre.

This means, based on what's listed of manoeuvres on pages 232-233 that they can move or accelerate, and angle deflector shields... And then, on page 231, it goes on to say that crew members have their own actions and manoeuvres... Sam Stewart also confused the deal further in an O66 episode, but let's not get into that.

I sent a question concerning this to FFG. Let's see if they answer.

At the same time, I would like to be able to outrun and get out of range of the star destroyer chasing me.

At the same time, I would like to be able to outrun and get out of range of the star destroyer chasing me.

"I've outrun Imperial starships. Not the local bulk cruisers mind you, I'm talking about the big Corellian ships now."

Not saying Han's a completely trustworthy expert, but it sounds like the big one's are pretty fast (at least, in a straight line).

Especially since he used a unit of (distance?) to measure the speed of his freighter during his boast to Kenobi.

Especially since he used a unit of (distance?) to measure the speed of his freighter during his boast to Kenobi.

That one got fan-splained though. The "shorter, more dangerous route" is accepted as fact, right?

True, when you put that way. I suppose the Han controversy will never really extend beyond "who shot first?"

Anyways, apologies for going off-topic. Back to the discussion!

I suppose the Han controversy will never really extend beyond "who shot first?"

Simple. Han shot first, last, and only. Greedo was an idiot and a lightweight who jumped in way, way over his head.

Not according to Lucas; but I do agree that realistically, and in a superior viewing, the smuggler DID fire first.

Like some kind of "player" character... [suspicious]

O_O Holy crap, you're right!

Fly/Drive: Here's a real problem. Since moving takes this Maneuver and the outcome is then based on Speed, we end up having lower Speed Silhouette <5 vehicles outrunning higher speed Silhouette 5+ vehicles. Why can't a bigger vehicle actually travel at the same rate as a smaller vessel with the same Speed?

In normal "combat" yes, but IIRC a Chase would allow a capital ship to keep pace with a smaller vessel.

I'm assuming the discrepancy is part of the whole deal that assumes craft in combat aren't flying in straight lines, where in a chase they are, or at least are flying in a straighter line.

Thinking about it though it's weird, but it does allow them to match the films. Using this method a Star Destroyer can chase the Falcon and keep pace or even catch up, but then when you have an actual big space battle like Coruscant or Endor the big cruisers won't be flying all over the place like the fighters can.

Of course now one of you is probably going to mention the Carrack....

This is a rather strange one though, so I look forward to seeing if we find anything out from FFG.

I assumed the maneuver penalty was due to the fact that Sil 1-4 ships were analogous to jets and planes, while Sil 5+ ships were the carriers, transports, and ocean liners of the galaxy. Even the slowest prop plane on earth is going to fly circles around the fastest sea-going ship.

Penalizing the maneuvers on the big ships makes it so that we don't need a third, "capital class" range/speed scale.

A few other thoughts that came to mind:

In comparing the DP20 to the YT-1300, the DP has greater straight-line speed, while the YT is lighter and, thus, would have a smaller turning radius.

Mechanically, I think the system simulates this well. In a flat out chase, the DP20 has a slight advantage over the YT. But if they were going toe-to-toe (something I would never consider as the YT pilot), the YT would likely be pulling maneuvers that would allow it to strafe the DP (Move-Shoot-Move). The DP, on the other hand, can only move once per turn, demonstrating that it can't match the YT's every zig and zag.

I think the single Pilot-Only Maneuver reflects the massiveness of the 5+ ships. It's going to be a lot harder for them to change speeds or direction, due to momentum. If they had the opportunity to make that second maneuver, they'd start resembling dog fighters in their maneuverability.

If they had the opportunity to make that second maneuver, they'd start resembling dog fighters in their maneuverability.

No, they would not. They still wouldn't be able to perform Maneuvers like Evasive Maneuvers, Stay on Target, and Punch It. They still wouldn't be able to perform the flying that allows them to select which defense zone is targeted (instead they use relative positioning).

In my first post I highlighted what this change would allow, and having 'dogfighting' capital ships was not the outcome.

If they had the opportunity to make that second maneuver, they'd start resembling dog fighters in their maneuverability.

No, they would not. They still wouldn't be able to perform Maneuvers like Evasive Maneuvers, Stay on Target, and Punch It. They still wouldn't be able to perform the flying that allows them to select which defense zone is targeted (instead they use relative positioning).

In my first post I highlighted what this change would allow, and having 'dogfighting' capital ships was not the outcome.

I never said a 5+ ship could do any of those things either. I'm saying a dogfighter can move to a location, pull a hard U-turn, and end up back where he started by the end of his turn. A 2-maneuver capital ship would be able to do the exact same thing, which would allow it to behave like a dogfighter in that regard. Personally, I think it defies the laws of physics, but then again we're debating fictional space combat.

I got rid of speed tracking in my house rules altogether. Waste of time and too specific for an abstract system. FWIW I did send feedback to FFG during the beta that it's silly not to be able to move as far in the same round you accelerate as in one where you don't accelerate.

If they had the opportunity to make that second maneuver, they'd start resembling dog fighters in their maneuverability.

No, they would not. They still wouldn't be able to perform Maneuvers like Evasive Maneuvers, Stay on Target, and Punch It. They still wouldn't be able to perform the flying that allows them to select which defense zone is targeted (instead they use relative positioning).

In my first post I highlighted what this change would allow, and having 'dogfighting' capital ships was not the outcome.

I never said a 5+ ship could do any of those things either. I'm saying a dogfighter can move to a location, pull a hard U-turn, and end up back where he started by the end of his turn. A 2-maneuver capital ship would be able to do the exact same thing, which would allow it to behave like a dogfighter in that regard. Personally, I think it defies the laws of physics, but then again we're debating fictional space combat.

OK, so it can dip into range and then pull back in the same turn. That's hardly impossible, even for a large ship, so long as you don't narrate it as 'pulling a u-turn' it works fine. And what good would that kind of act do for a capital ship anyhow? It's not like the gunners can insert their actions between the Maneuvers of the pilot.

size

Out of curiosity, HappyDaze, what are the circumstances in which you are using Silhouette 5+ vessels? Do the PCs have a silhouette 5 ship?

You've mentioned some general things, but can you give some specific examples that you find are unrealistic given the rules?

Out of curiosity, HappyDaze, what are the circumstances in which you are using Silhouette 5+ vessels? Do the PCs have a silhouette 5 ship?

You've mentioned some general things, but can you give some specific examples that you find are unrealistic given the rules?

Specific examples include not being able to keep pace with Sil 4 ships moving at Speed 3 despite the Wayfarer having Speed 4 (with High-Output Ion Turbine) since the smaller ships move just as far with a Maneuver and can use two such Maneuvers in a turn.