GURPS Spaceships Design Spreadsheet

[Refplace]

Originally Posted by ericbsmith

I don't recall where I got the stats for the Hydroponics Bay from; I think I cribbed the basic stats from another book, or maybe based them on a similarly sized "Open Space." I don't honestly recall.

I recall some talk about it on the Forums. Maybe that's the source? (For all I know could still be you)

[DaltonS]

Originally Posted by ericbsmith

Both are from my Unofficial Rules, and you need that option selected in the Campaign Options to use them.

Okay, that seems to work. I designed my ERV from scratch but my lander/ascent vehicles were based on the Lowell-class (SS5 p.13-14) and so they didn't use the Unofficial Rules.

Originally Posted by ericbsmith

I don't recall where I got the stats for the Hydroponics Bay from; I think I cribbed the basic stats from another book, or maybe based them on a similarly sized "Open Space." I don't honestly recall.

It seems reasonable to me, which leads me to believe I heard the reasoning behind it at one point. (Maybe you equated it with "Total Life Support" so the production equaled one bunkroom's food requirements.) I still think the "production" should be subtracted from the life-support requirements when calculating food stores duration, and the "staff" added to the crew count. (I can "reduce" them out if I have to.)

Dalton “who is glad he got hydroponics working” Spence

[vicky_molokh]

A question on SM+3 systems:

Mecha Operations (Pyramid 3/40, page 7) say that an SM+3 Control Room costs 10% of an SM+5 one, and has one control station. But when I add a Control Room to an SM+3 craft, it has 0 Control Stations. Can this be fixed on my side, or is this a bug?

Currently checking with the Excel 2000 version of the latest one.

[ericbsmith]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

A question on SM+3 systems:

Mecha Operations (Pyramid 3/40, page 7) say that an SM+3 Control Room costs 10% of an SM+5 one, and has one control station. But when I add a Control Room to an SM+3 craft, it has 0 Control Stations. Can this be fixed on my side, or is this a bug?

Not exactly a "bug" as such, more a choice I made and never noted. There's an issue with Mecha Operations with regards to Control Rooms, Passenger Seating, and Life Support. The article states that SM+3 Passenger Seating has no Life Support but doesn't mention the same for SM+3 Control Rooms. This means that, by the rules, a SM+3 Passenger Seat contains only the Seat & Passenger while a SM+3 Control Room contains a seat, the operator, control thrusters/surfaces, a computer, sensors, and life support.

There's a disconnect there, and initially I fixed that disconnect by having a SM+3 Control Room contain 0.5 seats - so adding two Control Rooms would add 1 Control Station. Now I'm unsure if I want to address it in this manner or not, but I really don't like that inconsistency.

[Krinberry]

In my own fiddling, I ended up treating SM+3 extrapolations for control rooms as also having 0 stations - basically, it's a dash with a set of controls or a computer that can run programs to do what needs to be done, but if you want a human to be messing with those controls, assign a passenger seat to it.

To that end, the house rules I've been using for passenger seating are that you can use a design switch to Passenger Seating to allow installation of a Harness, which allows for a very simple strap-in system with only 1/3 the builtin life support (8 hours) but with 3x the capacity, so in a SM+3 vehicle you could use 1 harness per location. It's not a perfect solution, but I think it's a fair trade against the stats for SM+4 and up.

[ericbsmith]

Originally Posted by Krinberry

To that end, the house rules I've been using for passenger seating are that you can use a design switch to Passenger Seating to allow installation of a Harness, which allows for a very simple strap-in system with only 1/3 the builtin life support (8 hours) but with 3x the capacity, so in a SM+3 vehicle you could use 1 harness per location. It's not a perfect solution, but I think it's a fair trade against the stats for SM+4 and up.

The rules in Pyramid 4/40 for Passenger Seating actually mesh alright with the rules from Pyramid 3/34 for the No Life Support Option. In Pyramid 3/34 No Life Support doubles the number of seats in Passenger Seating; in Pyramid 4/40 a SM+3 system has 1 seat per system but with no Life Support; which means that if you treat SM+3 Passenger Seats as having 0.5 seats per system they can either have 1 seat per two systems installed with Life Support or 1 seat per system if it has No Life Support. The problem arises when you throw in the Control Room rules from Pyramid 4/40, which don't mesh with the Passenger Seating from the same article.

[Celti]

Is there any chance we could get an updated copy of the Optional Rules PDF? It's currently at RC13, which doesn't include Energy Banks at the very least. I honestly don't really use the spreadsheet, it's complicated enough that I prefer my own tooling — but the optional rules are great!

[ericbsmith]

I've been intending to release this update for a while, but real life got in the way. There aren't a lot of big changes, just a few small ones and a few minor improvements. In addition to updating the Excel sheet I've released the Optional Rules PDF to the latest version.

Version 2.0 Release Candidate 21
-Added Gravitic Focus option for Comm/Sensor Arrays per Pyramid 35, p. 20.
-Added Solar Power Options allowing you to set Solar Luminosity and Solar Distance. This will multiply Power Points produced by a Solar Array or Solar Boiler; PP are rounded down to the next lower Power Point (or 1/3 of a Power Point if Combining Larger & Smaller Power Points).
-Added option for Armor Facing from Pyramid #3/34, p. 8.
-Added footnote for Exposed Systems
-Added Ship Option/Switch for Spin Tethers (note: Cost is based on loaded mass of both ships, and per 100 yards of tether)
-When Resetting the Design Table the ship TL will only reset if Campaign Options is selected; conversely the TL will not be reset if Campaign Options is unchecked. However, when Loading a ship the ship TL will still be loaded with Ship Systems, not Campaign Options.
-The Troop Strength checkbox will now be saved, loaded, and reset with Campaign Options. It will still default to checked when reset; however if you Reset the Design Table and uncheck the Campaign Options checkbox then the Calculate Troop Strength checkbox will remain in whatever state you choose for the last ship you were working on. Similarly, if you load the Campaign Options from a previous ship the Calc Troop Strength checkbox will be loaded along with the other Campaign settings from the previous ship. Note that this only affects the Calc Troop Strength checkbox; the individual Mass Combat option checkboxes remain a part of the Ship Switches & Features, and will be reset and loaded with that section of the ship.
-Ships without Space Performance will have Hnd/SR & Move of Air Performance displayed on the stat table, then Ground, then Water.
-When installing Habitat cabins in the Habitat portion of the Design Table the sheet will now list the number of slots used by the chosen item and number that are installable under the notes until you add the quantity, after which it will display the standard notes.

You can download the spreadsheet here:

Excel 2000 (RC20)
http://gurpsland.no-ip.org/zip/SpaceshipsV2.zip (5.1 MB)
http://gurpsland.no-ip.org/zip/SpaceshipsV2.7z (~2.5 MB)

Excel 2007 (RC20)
http://gurpsland.no-ip.org/zip/SpaceshipsV2-2007.zip (~6.3 MB)
http://gurpsland.no-ip.org/zip/SpaceshipsV2-2007.7z (~6.2 MB)

OpenOffice 3.3.0 (RC9)
http://gurpsland.no-ip.org/zip/SpaceshipsV2-Ooo.zip (~2.1 MB)
http://gurpsland.no-ip.org/zip/SpaceshipsV2-Ooo.7z (~1.9 MB)

[KeniGT]

I have problem with "Output". When the sheet starts, its values are removed. With what it can be connected?

[Rupert]

For whatever reason, ticking the 'Electromechanical Computers' box does nothing. This is in the latest Excel 2007 version (and it's been the case since forever). I can't tell if the OpenOffice/Libre Office version doesn't do anything too, because my Libre Office 6 install doesn't like the sheet at all - it's not formatting it correctly.