View Single Post
Old 09-25-2013, 11:38 PM   #1
PTTG's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2011
Default Alternatives to base Spaceships?

I admire the Spaceship ruleset for making rocket science something that can be done with no counting device more complicated than fingers (and, potentially, toes). It's quite flexible, as well; I think the basic system might serve for naval vessels, zepplins, or whatever thematic vehicles people invent for various other settings.

However, there are a few flaws... Firstly, small vessels, particularly extremely small fighters and mechs, are too fine for the granularity of the system. Second, extremely large vessels are forced to be somewhat specialized. In fact, this is most notable with medium ships; the Millenium Falcon (A smuggling, cargo, combat, passenger speedster) is harder to simulate than the Death Star (A really big gun).

Those are more thematic issues than practical ones. The only real practical issue with Spaceships might be the difficulty of figuring out loaded weight vrs. unloaded weight and effective speed. The fact that the rocket equation is built into the fuel tank system is impressive and useful, but not entirely accurate, especially with modern, realistic ships that are mostly fuel and have much higher accelleration empty than full.

These are certainly reasonable sacrifices! It would be formidable to say the least to have players calculate acceleration and delta-V over time for their ships, and recalculate for their current cargo and missile loads...

I've seen the Spaceships Spreadsheet, and it looks good, but it doesn't address these shortcomings. Is there are similar spreadsheet or computer program that allows for a more fine-grained spaceship simulation? I'm imaging that it would allow a ton-by-ton breaktdown of systems aboard a ship (300 tons of fusion pulse engine, 10 tons sensor equipment...) and a results tally (Ship is SM +8, X00 yards long, 700 dHP, has following attacks...).

If not, does anyone else want a more detailed ship building system?
PTTG is offline   Reply With Quote