Welcome Guest
[Log In]
[Register]
| Welcome to the Devious Tyrant NationStates RP! You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means that you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, create and customize your profile, send personal messages, vote in polls, join alliances, and much much more. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community today! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| [Space] Ideas for ship creation | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 2 2009, 07:13 AM (1,219 Views) | |
| Trostia | Jan 12 2009, 03:39 AM Post #21 |
|
jesus is my friend
|
Oh, good catch. Yeah that was a transcription error.
We could assign a per-fighter point cost. Then it wouldn't matter how many bays, since you could just get as many fighters as you have points and its assumed there's enough hangar space for them. |
![]() |
|
| Nuke | Jan 12 2009, 03:42 AM Post #22 |
![]()
|
That'd work too, although it would need to be a diminutive cost (perhaps .05 points per fighter, so that 20 fighters fighters costs 1 point). |
![]() News Thread: la Confederazione Space Nation: Human Systems Alliance | |
![]() |
|
| Trostia | Jan 12 2009, 04:04 AM Post #23 |
|
jesus is my friend
|
Some testing; I think 0.25 works best. This allows you to get a battleship sized vessel with 180 fighters if you settle with a regular shield generator, basic sensors, flag bridge, large engine and long range FTL, some defenses and a hospital facility. Strip it down to its bare minimum (a System Ship (no FTL), a small engine and a bridge) and you could cram 264 Fighters into it. |
![]() |
|
| Nuke | Jan 12 2009, 04:11 AM Post #24 |
![]()
|
Sounds good to me. Also, I'm curious as to whether it would be wise to increase the point values for the larger ship classes. I'm thinking it would be better to have it set up in the following format: (escorts, frigates, and destroyers would remain the same) Cruiser: 30-45 Battlecruiser: 46-60 Dreadnought: 70-79 Battleship: 90-99 (or 80-89, whichever is preferable) I think the lower-end ships are just a bit too close to the higher-end ones. There should be a more discernible difference, especially with the battleship. At 69 points, it just doesn't quite pack the punch of what you'd expect from a ship of that size. I mean, it can be equaled point-wise by only 3 destroyers! Your thoughts? Edited by Nuke, Jan 12 2009, 04:13 AM.
|
![]() News Thread: la Confederazione Space Nation: Human Systems Alliance | |
![]() |
|
| Trostia | Jan 12 2009, 04:35 AM Post #25 |
|
jesus is my friend
|
Agreed, though that scale isn't all that better with just a tad more than 3 destroyers equiv. to battleship. Maybe some sort of exponential thing, to represent the scaling factor (a cube twice as long has 8 times the volume and mass)? |
![]() |
|
| Trostia | Jan 12 2009, 04:55 AM Post #26 |
|
jesus is my friend
|
OK, proposed new scale. Ship, Min points, Max Points Escort 1-4 Frigate 6-12 Destroyer 13-25 Cruiser 26-50 Battlecruiser 51-99 Dreadnought 100-148 Battleship 149-200 This makes ships progressively meaner as they get bigger: 4 cruisers or 10 destroyers to a battleship. However, now this allows for a stripped-down big battleship-sized carrier (as before) to now be able to carry 788 fighters. Not *too* unreasonable. Updated sheet with all mentioned changes. Here's something else: How about everyone gets a certain number of Points TOTAL, as in for their whole fleet? That way there's some balance to these things, no one can just pull a thousand battleships from nowhere. Ideas for version 2 *Descriptive texts of equipment and classes for handy reference. *A few more ship classes: I think cruisers should be generally the most common class, so maybe to have more of them we could add a "light cruiser" and "heavy cruiser" class. I was also thinking of bumping up points for Escorts, and having a "patrol" class below that. That'd be to include corvettes, gunships, the space equivalents of PT boats. *New number output for the ship's sublight maneuverability (in terms of acceleration), and its FTL speed (in multiples of C), based on the type of engines AND the overall size of the ship. *Similar to what we did with Fighters, let you add a number of Passengers - Troops, Passengers and Marines. (The latter being equipped automatically with marine assault pods.) *also, ships should have crew requirements based on how many weapons, of what type, and other things, and the size of the ship. *Lastly, mass. I like that the Traveller system measures ships in tonnage. Maybe something here. Ideas for version 2 I am not gonna do but could * Instead of the generic "Sublight Engines," we could choose from Fission, Fusion, Antimatter and Gravity drives, and from among those such details as He3-D fusion versus a pebble-bed fission or a gas-core nuclear thermal rocket versus an antimatter torch. Each of these would have a realistic exhaust velocity, which would be further altered depending on the molar mass of the reaction fluid, and in combination with the specific amount of reaction mass in relation to the overall mass, a maximum delta-V in km/s, a fuel flow rate, a maximum sublight velocity and whether it is capable of a brachistrone mission from the outer planets to the inner and back or not, the reactor temperature and the color of the exhaust and the energy density and the power output of the drive all as from the Atomic Rockets site. Yeah. Cuz I HAVE done that sort of thing. Edited by Trostia, Jan 12 2009, 06:04 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Nuke | Jan 13 2009, 04:20 AM Post #27 |
![]()
|
Descriptions I can take care of descriptions for the ship classes and the weapons. You seem to have an excellent grasp of the equipment technology, so do you want to handle that? Or do you want to switch? You know what, let's just use the damned Wiki for all of this. We can write the articles in there, then link back here. That saves us from having gigantic blocks of text, like I had with the Traveler thread. How's that sound? Points Anyways, I've cranked out a preliminary set of numbers for the ship classes: Patrol: 1-4 Escort: 5-9 Frigate: 9-15 Destroyer: 16-25 Light Cruiser: 26-45 Heavy Cruiser: 46-75 Battlecruiser: 76-109 Dreadnought: 110-149 Battleship: 150-200 If we wanted, we could also throw in medium cruisers (i.e. the Intrepid class from Trek), which could rework the cruiser section to these numbers: Light Cruiser: 26-39 Medium Cruiser: 40-55 Heavy Cruiser: 56-75 What do you think? Engine Output For sublight engines: In the Trek universe, it's been stated that an Intrepid-class ship, which is one of their faster ships, cannot exceed 2/3c (approx. 200,000km/s) using a higher-end impulse engine. Using info taken from the game Star Trek: Starship Creator, which is where I've been pulling some stuff for this, the Federation (to keep in context with my example) uses three principle impulse engine classes (that I remember): A, A10, and A12. The latter should have its speed value ranked at this limit of 2/3; a class A10 engine should have a rating of 1/2c (approx. 150,000km/s); and the class A engine should have a rating of 1/3c (approx. 100,000km/s). To make things interesting, let's add in a super-high-end "hyper-impulse drive," which should be able to approach light speed (perhaps a speed rating of 3/4c or 4/5c, or approx. 250,000km/s), but not exceed it. For warp engines: Again pulling stuff from Starship Creator (and using the Feds to keep my example in context), there are four different types of warp drive that don't exceed the theoretical transwarp barrier: Type II, Type VII, Type XIII, and Type K. Type II is good enough for warp 5; Type VII for warp 7; Type XIII for warp 9; and Type K for warp 9.9. To make things interesting, I think we could throw-in an uber-expensive transwarp or quantum slipstream drive, which I have no idea how fast we should let it go, or if we should even allow it. The other ideas I like the idea of going beyond generic drives, but the rest of that stuff seems really, really, really complicated, and would probably turn-off a lot of people. |
![]() News Thread: la Confederazione Space Nation: Human Systems Alliance | |
![]() |
|
| Trostia | Jan 16 2009, 07:07 PM Post #28 |
|
jesus is my friend
|
OK, ship classes changed. I took the three cruisers idea, only with "Cruiser" instead of "Medium Cruiser" which sounds kind of meh. Added acceleration in Gs to represent maneuverability sub-light, and a number 3 or less for FTL speed. Maybe that last can be used for the map? So like, 3 FTL means you can jump three systems in the same time as someone with a smaller engine could jump 1 or 2. I think maybe uh, yeah. The wiki thing for descriptions of things. Also added a ship output that you can just copy and paste to a forum post:
I'm pretty much over all this right now. Kinda just want to get the Slaar fleet up. How many points should everyone have for their fleets? I think maybe 5000? Edited by Trostia, Jan 16 2009, 08:04 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Nuke | Jan 17 2009, 03:31 AM Post #29 |
![]()
|
That's pretty damn good. I think that's the best we can get it for now. 5000 is good for now. If we need to make it bigger, then it shouldn't be a problem to just tack on a few more points. |
![]() News Thread: la Confederazione Space Nation: Human Systems Alliance | |
![]() |
|
| Trostia | Jan 18 2009, 04:34 PM Post #30 |
|
jesus is my friend
|
OK sounds good. So let's make this official and get some ship designs and fleets and then we can shoot each other with laser death rays. PEW PEW |
![]() |
|
| Nuke | Jan 18 2009, 07:24 PM Post #31 |
![]()
|
Sounds good to me. Oh, and already I'm thinking 10,000 points would be better. Let's get some massive fleets out there. More fun that way, wouldn't you agree? |
![]() News Thread: la Confederazione Space Nation: Human Systems Alliance | |
![]() |
|
| Trostia | Jan 18 2009, 07:34 PM Post #32 |
|
jesus is my friend
|
Sure. Also, added a sheet for fleets. Edited by Trostia, Jan 18 2009, 10:56 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Nuke | Jan 19 2009, 03:35 AM Post #33 |
![]()
|
Nice, very nice. |
![]() News Thread: la Confederazione Space Nation: Human Systems Alliance | |
![]() |
|
| The Dragon | Jan 20 2009, 06:56 PM Post #34 |
![]()
|
just a FYI manuvering engines (sublight) should be bulky but not take much fuel. FTL engines should be rather small but need large fuel (especially for long jumps) has this been factored in to the sizes yet? I don't see fuel or powerplants (to power weapons and engines) listed yet |
|
DT RP: Draki (old nationstates page) - Wiki - News (old news thread) - Image Gallery Space: Nth'ch (old nationstates page) - Nth'ch images - Bug Ships - Note, Original space race was De Dragon but changed to the Nth'ch to create an insect race. | |
![]() |
|
| Trostia | Jan 20 2009, 07:54 PM Post #35 |
|
jesus is my friend
|
it should actually be the opposite, since sublight drives are usually reaction mass propulsion systems constrained by the limits of specific impulse. Anyway, I didn't add in power and fuel and propellant and coolant and all cuz it was just too complicated and didn't seem necessary. One assumes there's usually enough fuel to go around, not an infinite amount and needing resupply, but basically enough for most normal situations. |
![]() |
|
| Hawkeye | Feb 18 2009, 01:00 AM Post #36 |
|
I have a question about something I came by while designing my ships. Why are missiles listed as Light Weapons when they can be fitted with nuclear or chemical/biological warheads or any other weapons of mass destruction you can think of for devastating effect? |
![]() |
|
| Nuke | Feb 18 2009, 02:56 AM Post #37 |
![]()
|
We have missiles available for medium weapons (listed as "missile racks") in addition to the smaller version of the weapon. The medium ones were intended to represent what you would probably find on a standard starship (i.e. a battlestar). As with photon and micro-photon torpedoes, we added a smaller, less powerful version of the weapon that could be fitted to smaller ships, which we felt was logical. We haven't really entertained the idea of using nuclear weapons as of yet, although I do admit that I think we overlooked including them in designing the sheet. You've probably seen that Trostia and I have been at war with each other, and upon its conclusion it's very likely that we'll go through and evaluate how everything we've set up has worked out, up to and including possibly reworking the chart. I welcome any suggestions and ideas you have for stuff we could add to the chart. |
![]() News Thread: la Confederazione Space Nation: Human Systems Alliance | |
![]() |
|
| Hawkeye | Feb 18 2009, 05:26 AM Post #38 |
|
Edited my Armaments Manual accordingly. |
![]() |
|
| Britannia | Feb 21 2009, 04:42 PM Post #39 |
![]()
|
Something unique to my race, but something absent from the Weapons list, are Gravitic Hooks. Basically, I want to be able to include a component that allows my larger FTL capable ships to "tow" non-FTL capable ships of escort or destroyer size, thus allowing me to build significant fireplatforms that are otherwise incapable of FTL. This seems like a neat idea, and I think it should be included as a type of Strike Craft or Weapon, as it basically allows a ship to 'drag' a smaller ship into FTL and out of it. Thoughts? |
![]() |
|
| The Dragon | Feb 21 2009, 05:47 PM Post #40 |
![]()
|
I'd say you'll need to do what I did for my Jump Tender (bassically a large craft that carries smaller non jump ships). Thier system doesn't work for it well so I'm using the traveler and we are currently fudging on the conversion factor. I'll be posting the traveler stats shortly in my fleet thread. |
|
DT RP: Draki (old nationstates page) - Wiki - News (old news thread) - Image Gallery Space: Nth'ch (old nationstates page) - Nth'ch images - Bug Ships - Note, Original space race was De Dragon but changed to the Nth'ch to create an insect race. | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
|
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Space Map, Ship Builder, and Other Resources · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
12:19 AM Jul 11
|







Ship_Design_v1.xls (32 KB)


12:19 AM Jul 11