Good catch, I didn't think to use a base of 5. Yeah that seems to be a bit better, as a rule of thumb kind of thing.

Z-95s in that Wayfarer using that would be what? 7 fighters? That's kind of a lot. But its better then nothing. I think the rule of thumb would have to be adjusted a bit here and there based on the ship and how big it appears to be, especially since silhouette is so vague.

But that also means that YT can fit in that Wayfarer with room to spare too. =(

Good catch, I didn't think to use a base of 5. Yeah that seems to be a bit better, as a rule of thumb kind of thing.

Z-95s in that Wayfarer using that would be what? 7 fighters? That's kind of a lot. But its better then nothing. I think the rule of thumb would have to be adjusted a bit here and there based on the ship and how big it appears to be, especially since silhouette is so vague.

But that also means that YT can fit in that Wayfarer with room to spare too. =(

like Jegergryte said, the point isn't the numbers. the numbers help give us a rule-of-thumb, but it comes down to what makes sense and what the story needs. the math is just a tool to help the story along.

math is such a tool.

Part of the issue is that the specs in the book are more "guidelines" than specifics. The individual vehicles could differ in size, shape, etc. Maybe you could use the passenger capacity to use as a guideline for fitting vehicles? If it can fit 6 passengers, maybe you could fit 3 speeders/cloud cars (each with a silhouette of 2)?

I don't think that's what I was talking about. Like I said the reason this is bugging me is because I remember guesstimating the enc for x number of heavy rifles in a crate when writing an adventure, then two days later finding the actual rule and going back and changing what I'd written to match. I remember originally thinking for the desired enc I'd put like 5 rifles in a crate and then going back and changing it to like 2 or 3.

It also talks about "10 loosely carried incidental items have an encumbrance value of 1. If they are stored in an effective manner (such as a bowcaster quarrels in a quiver or crystals in a pouch), then 20 incidental items have a value of 1." Is that more what you were thinking of?

No, I checked the adventure and I reduced the enc of the crated blasters by half. I'm now starting to doubt myself. If I didn't remember changing that number I'd say I totally made it up.

If I did make it though I'm fairly happy with it...

Sam Stewart mentioned halving the encumbrance of stored items in an Order 66 episode, I'm pretty sure, so if you never listen to that, it might be the place you didn't hear it. I haven't seen anything about that in the core book, but then, I might be imagining things too.

Sam Stewart mentioned halving the encumbrance of stored items in an Order 66 episode, I'm pretty sure, so if you never listen to that, it might be the place you didn't hear it. I haven't seen anything about that in the core book, but then, I might be imagining things too.

I never listen to the Order 66 podcast, so that's probably where I got that value. Oh well...

Do items carried by crew and passengers count against the vehicle's EC? Either way, things get weird when they are picked up/put down.

This is the image I used to give my estimate of encumbrance based on silhouette:

I think most people have seen this. We have two z-95's in there. So, the 300 per each, and two speeder bikes shown eat up 640 of the 850. Still leaving 210 for Lots of cargo as the picture shows.

Some of the reasons I figured silhouette 3 would be 300 is that You need room for all the gear to keep the fighter up and running/maintenance and fuel. The engines I believe have a backwash so you want some room there (otherwise those rodian bobblehead dolls get all crispy), and the fighter itself if you look at the x-wings in the hangers take up a lot of space.

Now, a silhouette 4 ship taking up 4000 encumbrance is a little high, but keeps the problem of having matryoshka dolls with a fighter in a freighter, in a larger freighter in a capitol ship, or a yt-1300 carrying around an AT-AT.

Here's another pic of a freighter carrying a speeder. A modified yt-1300 with a speeder in it.

Some of the reasons I figured silhouette 3 would be 300 is that You need room for all the gear to keep the fighter up and running/maintenance and fuel. The engines I believe have a backwash so you want some room there (otherwise those rodian bobblehead dolls get all crispy), and the fighter itself if you look at the x-wings in the hangers take up a lot of space.

My only issue with this is it's based off the fighter bay concept, and not the shipping of a vehicle concept. If I want my Z-95 to be launchable in flight you're right. If I want to take off/fold up the wing and shrink wrap the whole thing that Z-95 won't need all that other stuff like fueling, repair space and backblast managemnt.

Where'd you get that second pic btw? I've always liked the centerline 1300's.

Some of the reasons I figured silhouette 3 would be 300 is that You need room for all the gear to keep the fighter up and running/maintenance and fuel. The engines I believe have a backwash so you want some room there (otherwise those rodian bobblehead dolls get all crispy), and the fighter itself if you look at the x-wings in the hangers take up a lot of space.

My only issue with this is it's based off the fighter bay concept, and not the shipping of a vehicle concept. If I want my Z-95 to be launchable in flight you're right. If I want to take off/fold up the wing and shrink wrap the whole thing that Z-95 won't need all that other stuff like fueling, repair space and backblast managemnt.

Where'd you get that second pic btw? I've always liked the centerline 1300's.

The second pic was from an artist on DeviantArt by the name of boomerangmouth

If you are carrying it as parts, I would say it would be maybe half. But you couldn't assemble it for combat mid-fight. You would need a place with a manufacturing capacity to rebuild it - at which point it is not a fighter, it's merely a macguffin shaped cargo pod. Most fighters are probably either flown to the purchaser, or a bulk freighter is used to carry them, not so much a yt-1300 or what-not. Carrying parts to be assembled, that is a whole other thing, and as I said it is not a fighter (or any vehicle) at that point merely a bunch of cargo containers/scrap metal.

I just use common sense...The PCs in my Beyond the Rim adventure procured 3 speeder bikes to load onto their YT-1300 and I thought that was completely reasonable. I would even say that fitting 6 or 7 would be fine as well if they were prepped for shipment (I'd like to think they would break down somewhat...feet tuck in, front control fins fold back, etc). I suppose it becomes more difficult when you are trying to determine just how many is too many to pack into the cargo hold...10, 12, 14? where does common sense tell you it just is no longer feasible to squeeze more stuff in?

I've been trying to think of some solution here. I've come up with zip... although I was looking at the retrofitted hangar bay ... I mean, if you look at the attachment just as a guideline, and if it could be used on silhouette 4 starships, by default a silhouette 4 could have up to 5 silhouettes worth of silhouette 2 vehicles aboard, that is two bikes - in a ready to go sort of way. Now, when it comes to speeder bikes I think that is a pretty conservative value, but it's a starting point perhaps? Again IF the retrofitted hangar bay attachment could be added to S4 vehicles, then it could also be modified, theoretically fitting up to 10 silhouettes worth of silhouette 2 vehicles. So 5 speeder bikes, ready to go, fuelled and with their own fast exit strategy.

I mean, we could consider this from an encumbrance perspective, but that value is abstract and it is obvious that FFG is using Silhouette to measure vehicles, not encumbrance. There might not be a lot of correlation between them.

Anyway, going back to speeder bikes aboard a YT-1300 or 2400. I'd say, if they're going to be stored there, but still accessible for use, that a silhouette 2 speeder bike should consume about 20 encumbrance. That would be 8 speeders in a YT-1300 with no room to speak of for other cargo.

the problem with the hanger bay is it doesn't seem to make much sense with the other capitals that can already carry ships.

for example, the silhouette 5 Marauder cruiser can carry 12 fighters & 2 shuttles = about 40 silhouette, not 5 as per the attachment. admittedly, this is not a retrofit, but 5 vs 40 is a huge jump.

The problem is the designers at FFG didn't really think this one through very well. We already know why and how the RHB is just wrong but by not putting some sort of "this ship is x encumbrance" they've only managed to complicate the issue.

I'm all for ease of bookkeeping and abstract systems... when I'm not anywhere near the edge.

But when my players raid a pirate base with all sorts of loot, they are going to want to know, exactly, how much they can fit. And I'm not just going to let them take it all (keeping them hungry and all that). But I think some numbers here wouldn't have been a bad idea. Especially when you start thinking about the bigger ships and RHBs.... if they have x number of y silhouette fighters... how much room do they have left?

I don't like guessing on these numbers, or making them up. I hate telling the players they can fit x number of items, then later tell them they can only fit y, and my players go... wait a minute... last time it held x....

Honestly, it would just be assigning an encumbrance value to each vehicle/ship that would go a long way in clearing this up.

Honestly, I don't find it very problematic. I see where you're coming from, but I don't think it is a failing of the game really, nor FFG. Unless trusting players to think and make decisions for themselves is a failing. In which case they have failed, but not in my book.

the problem with the hanger bay is it doesn't seem to make much sense with the other capitals that can already carry ships.

for example, the silhouette 5 Marauder cruiser can carry 12 fighters & 2 shuttles = about 40 silhouette, not 5 as per the attachment. admittedly, this is not a retrofit, but 5 vs 40 is a huge jump.

Two things:

1. Silhouette is a size *category*, not a particular size. The Marauder (195 meters), is significantly larger than the Wayfarer (82 meters). Based on the available measurements, you could likely fit upwards of 8 Wayfarers inside the volume of a single Marauder.
2. There's a huge difference between a) stocking craft in a purpose-built hangar, and b) modifying a craft that was never intended to *have* a hangar such that it can launch, and land craft at a moment's notice. That difference is an enormous part of why a retrofitted hangar gives so little capacity compared to purpose-built carriers.

the problem with the hanger bay is it doesn't seem to make much sense with the other capitals that can already carry ships.

for example, the silhouette 5 Marauder cruiser can carry 12 fighters & 2 shuttles = about 40 silhouette, not 5 as per the attachment. admittedly, this is not a retrofit, but 5 vs 40 is a huge jump.

Two things:

1. Silhouette is a size *category*, not a particular size. The Marauder (195 meters), is significantly larger than the Wayfarer (82 meters). Based on the available measurements, you could likely fit upwards of 8 Wayfarers inside the volume of a single Marauder.
2. There's a huge difference between a) stocking craft in a purpose-built hangar, and b) modifying a craft that was never intended to *have* a hangar such that it can launch, and land craft at a moment's notice. That difference is an enormous part of why a retrofitted hangar gives so little capacity compared to purpose-built carriers.

i get what you're saying, but the difference just seems so huge.

like shadai said, i'd prefer something a little more concrete. i get the abstraction to some extent, but i think they went a little too far that way. but, that's my preference, not ffg's failing.

That's fair. But considering the variable sizes of starships of all silhouettes, although perhaps particularly silhouettes 5+, a concrete value would be problematic.

This is where sound reasoning and judgement comes in, whereas an A-wing is silhouette 3, so is a B-wing, although an A-wing can probably fit into smaller vessels than a B-wing...

the problem with the hanger bay is it doesn't seem to make much sense with the other capitals that can already carry ships.

for example, the silhouette 5 Marauder cruiser can carry 12 fighters & 2 shuttles = about 40 silhouette, not 5 as per the attachment. admittedly, this is not a retrofit, but 5 vs 40 is a huge jump.

Two things:

1. Silhouette is a size *category*, not a particular size. The Marauder (195 meters), is significantly larger than the Wayfarer (82 meters). Based on the available measurements, you could likely fit upwards of 8 Wayfarers inside the volume of a single Marauder.
2. There's a huge difference between a) stocking craft in a purpose-built hangar, and b) modifying a craft that was never intended to *have* a hangar such that it can launch, and land craft at a moment's notice. That difference is an enormous part of why a retrofitted hangar gives so little capacity compared to purpose-built carriers.

i get what you're saying, but the difference just seems so huge.

like shadai said, i'd prefer something a little more concrete. i get the abstraction to some extent, but i think they went a little too far that way. but, that's my preference, not ffg's failing.

The difference *is* huge. That's kind of the point.

From a length perspective, the two ships are akin to a basic cargo van and a semi with a dedicated car trailer.

Sure, you can probably cram a 4-wheeler and a quick-deploy ramp, and have room for some basic tools and a can of gas, but the semi can fit a full-size car, a few 4-wheelers, and 4 motorcycles, and still have room for fuel, a fully-equipped tool box and some dedicated maintenance space for the smaller vehicles.

I just use my own method which seems to be working, but not accurate.

The YT-1300 has a silhouette of 4, and i will allow one vehicle of silhouette 2 or

two vehicles of silhouette of 1 each to be allowed to be stored aboard the ship.

The encumbrance is used specifically for equipment so the players know how to better stock the ship.

Like i said, it's not accurate, but has been working really well in my games.

Since this topic has not really been covered by FFG, i guess there really is no wrong answer.