4th Edition Vehicles

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by David L Pulver

The system is similar in nature and scope to the last edition of Vehicles (plus some of the expansion material). I believe it is a bit more realistic in its results. In particular, some performance formula have better physics engine - for instance, water and land speed calculations are more accurate. Realistic delta-V rules are there; underwater crush depth seems to work better, etc.

Complexity level is about the same, but there are a few more dials and switches, optional rules, etc. to cover various issues (like big ships dying too easily, or different interpretations of beam weapon lethality, or how superscience affects stuff).

You can build robots and so on fairly well - I did try designing a "human being" android w hose power to weight ratios, sizes, areas, weight of internal frame, etc. matched a human to make sure the resulting performances also work. Most of my testing suggested that historical vehicle designs come out pretty well with a lot less fudging then before. You don't get problems like 16-inch naval guns weighing only 30,000 lbs. instead of 270,000 lbs., for instance. Some of the fringe cases like hovercraft and sea planes work better.

There's still some finickiness due to the nature of the underlying design assumptions and some core abstractions common to both versions. And, of course, it's possible that things may change during the editorial or publication process.

That sounds excellent, cheers for all the work you've already put into this (and the work still to come on it)!

Originally Posted by Kromm

Quoted and emphasized, because:

1. The manuscript is very, very long.
   
   
2. The manuscript is very, very complex, full of tables and formulas to check, edit, and lay out.

1. Aw yeah!
   
   
   

   Originally Posted by Kromm

   We presently have just one editor for all of GURPS: me! PK has a full-time writing project, Steven has Pyramid to edit and all the projects to manage, and Nikki has all the projects to lay out. Nobody else at SJ Games works on GURPS.
   
   

   This project has a long history that includes significant resources having been expended on an earlier edit that didn't work out, so affording an edit of this length and complexity on current in-house or freelance editorial budgets is a phenomenal headache.

Originally Posted by Kromm

Sooo . . .

I'd really appreciate the GURPS community's complicity in not spreading rumors like "The final draft is in, so we should see the book any month now!" For a manuscript of this length and complexity, just having the final draft barely brings us to the halfway mark even when we can drop it directly into editing . . . which we cannot in this case. I know that's disappointing, but I'd rather a little short, sharp, but honest disappointment up front than a lot of broken promises that drag out into months or years of disappointment.

No worries it get's here when it get's here, it's got a long way to go but it's moving along, that is the important thing!

Cheers

TD

[Dragondog]

Any forward motion on this project is great news. And this is awesome news! We understand that it will take time, but this is the kind of project that deserves to be done right.

I had much more use of the 3e version of this than I've had with Spaceships and this will most definitely be something I buy as soon as it is published.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Rupert

The problem is that there isn't a simple way of knowing the freeboard when you only know those (plus presumably volume and mass), because you don't know the exact shape of the underwater hull and nor do you know the shape of the waterline cross-section. If you knew the latter and were willing to make a few assumptions you could take a guess at freeboard.

Your best best would probably be to make some guesses as to the hull form based on lines/streamlining.

In real life the complexity of this sort of thing was why pre-19th century ship-builders were generally very conservative about changes to their hull forms, and why 20th century navies spent a lot of money on tank testing and on skilled designers before they even thought about laying a keel. Even so, from time to time people get it wrong.

Well, yes. But GURPS Vehicles gave us a simple figure for draft, bypassing those issues. The trouble was that the total hull volume was partly below and partly above the waterline, and it didn't give a way to get a simple figure for freeboard. And using just length x beam x draft as the starting point for hull volume implied that the ship's body was entirely below the waterline, which is almost never the case (though the Monitor was nearly an exception, I believe).

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by whswhs

Well, yes. But GURPS Vehicles gave us a simple figure for draft, bypassing those issues. The trouble was that the total hull volume was partly below and partly above the waterline, and it didn't give a way to get a simple figure for freeboard. And using just length x beam x draft as the starting point for hull volume implied that the ship's body was entirely below the waterline, which is almost never the case (though the Monitor was nearly an exception, I believe).

Did you not have a keel-to-deck dimension? Because otherwise, freeboard would be that minus draft, wouldn't it?

[Derrick_rp]

Originally Posted by David L Pulver

The idea, however, was that Vehicle Design would appeal to the hardcore gear head who had been ignored through much of the 4e line. At the same time, the books are definitely NOT intended to replace simpler options such as Spaceships, just to provide an extra detail alternative.

GURPS Vehicles was the very first GURPS book I bought, and it got me hooked on the system. Thank you for sticking with this passion project!

[The_Ryujin]

Originally Posted by Phantasm

Sounds very promising! I'll finally be able to make my 45-ton strike starfighter, 75-ton combat mech, and 500 ton civil defense/counter-insurgency frigate. I'll definitely be using the "hull first, components after" approach for a lot. Thanks for including that.

75ton combat mech eh?

Try this one on for size.

75 ton Mech
TL: 10
ST/HP: 260
Hnd/SR: +1/4
HT: 11
Move 10/11 (5/22 in wheel mode)
Lwt.: 75
Load: 4
Occ: 1
DR: 1,500/1,000 (Laminated)
Cost: $15M
Locations: 2A2Lt

Has Computerized Control Center, Harden C7 computer, Large Radio, Large laser comm. In the "head" turret is has a medium ladar, medium radar and Hyperspectral Imaging Sensor that has two mode optics, either 32× with no peripheral vision or 16× with full binocular vision. Has hard points/internal bays that can hold another 3.8 tons of goodies.

[Phil Masters]

Originally Posted by Kelly Pedersen

The intent for 4th edition is to publish a number of smaller, more focused catalogs, each detailing a number of vehicles of a given type, from a particular era, or appropriate to a specific genre. So far, one of these, Steampunk Conveyances, has been published.

Incidentally, I imagine that SJGames would be happy to see more of these, and it wouldn’t be hard for a moderately gear-headed GURPS writer to put such together. Steampunk Conveyances wasn’t my hardest writing job ever, though it involved some odd research tasks.

I’ve thought of attempting another such myself, but the problem, frankly, is thinking of a thematic list of vehicles that’d be varied enough to be interesting, fill 10-20 pages, and be reasonably useful in games.

[Kelly Pedersen]

Originally Posted by Phil Masters

I’ve thought of attempting another such myself, but the problem, frankly, is thinking of a thematic list of vehicles that’d be varied enough to be interesting, fill 10-20 pages, and be reasonably useful in games.

Personally, I think Steampunk Conveyances took the right approach (and I enjoy the heck out of it, so thanks for that!) - rather than a collection of similar vehicles, it was a collection unified by genre/setting. I'd rather see a book of "Old West Vehicles", for example, that had two or three locomotives, a stagecoach or two, a riverboat, and so forth, than a book of "Steam Locomotives, 1840-1900". The former is much more likely to be useful to me, as I'm more likely to use one or two examples of several different types of vehicles in a milieu, rather than several examples of the same type of vehicle. The wishlist, however, right now strongly suggests the second type of book is what they're looking for.

[Refplace]

Originally Posted by Phil Masters

Incidentally, I imagine that SJGames would be happy to see more of these, and it wouldn’t be hard for a moderately gear-headed GURPS writer to put such together. Steampunk Conveyances wasn’t my hardest writing job ever, though it involved some odd research tasks.

You don't have to imagine. Its on the wishlist
They even provide some sample titles!
Vehicles: Biremes and Triremes
Vehicles: Carts, Coaches, and Wagons
Vehicles: Classic Roadsters
Vehicles: Cold War NATO Fighter Jets
Vehicles: Enchanted Flying Machines
Vehicles: Fantasy War Wagons
Vehicles: Modern Motorbikes
Vehicles: Modern U.S. Fighter Jets
Vehicles: Patrol Boats
Vehicles: Sports Cars of the 80s, 90s, and 00s
Vehicles: TL10 Space Marine Strike Vehicles
Vehicles: WWII Axis Tanks 1944-1945
Transhuman Space Vehicles items use the same specs, with the additional requirement of being consistent with setting canon.

Trouble is many of those seem very niche and not widely usable, though I bolded the ones I think most likely to have broader application.

I would like to see a UT personal conveyances set for various TLs. Grav vehicles for instance.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by whswhs

Well, yes. But GURPS Vehicles gave us a simple figure for draft, bypassing those issues. The trouble was that the total hull volume was partly below and partly above the waterline, and it didn't give a way to get a simple figure for freeboard. And using just length x beam x draft as the starting point for hull volume implied that the ship's body was entirely below the waterline, which is almost never the case (though the Monitor was nearly an exception, I believe).

What I was trying to say is that the underwater hull form affects how much volume will be above water, and thus freeboard. Thus without knowing what the hull's shape is, freeboard is unknowable.

For example, if a ship of 100' length, 20' beam, and 5' draft, with a volume of 15,000 cubic feet, is a simple block (above and below water), we can calculate free board as: [Total volume] - [Submerged Volume] / [Waterline Area] or 15,000 - (100 x 20 x 5) / (100 x 20) = 15,000 - 10,000 / 2000 = 2.5 feet freeboard.

However, if the ship is some complex shape that fills only part of that block and that area (and the vast majority are), we can't do this, even if we assume that the above-water shape is simple with vertical sides (which is close enough for most modern ships, but way off for such shapes as strong tumblehomes).

With some research and a lot of guesswork one could assign coefficients to volume and area to match each level of fineness of lines and degree of streamlining. As I recall most WWI-WWII warships' waterline area filled about 70-75% of the 'square' area. A battleship filled about 75-80% of the 'block', and a destroyer about 50-55%. Thus a destroyer, being not very dense and filling little of their submerged block volume, will have a high freeboard for their displacement. Meanwhile a battleship, being dense and blocky, will have a much lower freeboard for their displacement.

EDIT: All this also ignores things like a modern yacht's deep keel, which adds a great deal of draft but doesn't noticeable affect flotation or freeboard.