Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-02-2018, 01:13 PM   #41
Phoenix_Dragon
 
Phoenix_Dragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Default Re: [Spaceships] Paying more for better system?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Brackin View Post
The Enterprise doesn't have any use for oint defense batteries. You can't use those on warp missiles which is what their Photon Torpedoes are.
Depends on the Enterprise, I suppose. The "newest" one has point defense that shoots down torpedoes pretty well, as I recall.

Also, torpedoes travelling at warp speed seems like about the most "informed attribute" thing ever, which is saying a bit for Trek.
Phoenix_Dragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2018, 02:30 PM   #42
Fred Brackin
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Default Re: [Spaceships] Paying more for better system?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phoenix_Dragon View Post
Depends on the Enterprise, I suppose. The "newest" one has point defense that shoots down torpedoes pretty well, as I recall.
I wouldn't use anything associated with J.J. Abrahms as a source for technical accuracy and/or good design.
__________________
Fred Brackin
Fred Brackin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2018, 12:14 AM   #43
Phoenix_Dragon
 
Phoenix_Dragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Default Re: [Spaceships] Paying more for better system?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Brackin View Post
I wouldn't use anything associated with J.J. Abrahms as a source for technical accuracy and/or good design.
As much as I like Trek, I don't think I'd go to almost anything Star Trek for technical accuracy or good design.
Phoenix_Dragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2018, 10:18 AM   #44
Varyon
On Notice
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Default Re: [Spaceships] Paying more for better system?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericbsmith View Post
These are probably quite realistic, but also could be undesirable. One of the ways to avoid the problems with shields is to assume that an attack that doesn't penetrate the shields doesn't weaken it, but that just shifts the problem slightly up the scale where you need to have weapons of a certain size to reliably penetrate the shields of of a ship of a given size, and once the shields start getting warn away they will be penetrated more and stirpped quicker.
IIRC, the old d20 Revised Star Wars (or whatever the official name was, the edition just before SAGA) actually had armor give characters and ships DR, and the force fields of the system also had their own DR before you could start stripping them away. Essentially, the shields had DR and HP, and only once you "killed" the shield (depleted its HP) could you start harming the ship. Personally, I favor that version of force fields over the GURPS semi-ablative DR model. Well, sort of - my ideal shield setup is one where the above is typically true, but a really powerful shot can punch through even without completely depleting the shield's HP, and really well-aimed/lucky shots are able to hit outside of their "weight class" with regards to this, but I'm still working out what the mechanics of such a scheme would look like.
__________________
GURPS Overhaul
Varyon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2018, 07:05 PM   #45
YankeeGamer
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Default Re: [Spaceships] Paying more for better system?

Very small guns in large quantities should start running into surface area limits. Look at a late world war 2 warship, and you'll see that there's nowhere to cram in more guns. That should probably be GM fiat, with fewer small guns available on streamlined ships. Note that many real world ships had tertiary or smaller guns mounted on top of primary turrets simply because there was space there. (Mounting secondaries on top of main turrets, like the Kearsage, didn't work well...)
YankeeGamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2018, 01:55 AM   #46
PTTG
 
PTTG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Default Re: [Spaceships] Paying more for better system?

Going back to the OP, I'd generally caution that one should treat systems as written as the most highly engineered, most expensive version of the system. Variants should be worse than stock in performance and cost-effectiveness.

I base that on TL8 and TL9 spacecraft design -- for the near-term, spaceflight is so expensive that it makes little sense to skimp on the vehicle itself, aside from reductions in weight. A well designed contemporary spacecraft is as expensive per kg as possible.

Future advances will make space more accessable, and thus the spacecraft itself will (eventually) become the primary cost, at which point cost reductions become relevant, but for the most part costs seem extrapolated from TL8 stuff.

That said, contemporary spaceship design is bespoke and one-off, so you probably need to multiply costs by a factor of maybe (1000/(total number of ships in the production run)+1)? I'd have to actually do research to say for sure, but it's something like that.

Presuming that remains consistent into the future, paying more for a better system really means both getting a one-of-a-kind ship that's built for your needs specifically, and expressedly not buying low-cost components to do the job.
PTTG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2018, 06:58 AM   #47
mlangsdorf
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Default Re: [Spaceships] Paying more for better system?

I think there is room in the design system for more advanced components, even at TL8 or TL9. A TL covers a long time, and a design that is state of the art in 2020 is not going to be state of the art in 2050.

Fine and Very Fine components help smooth the transition between TLs: a TL9 Fine (efficient) fusion torch doesn't have nearly the performance of a TL 10 fusion torch, but it begins to bridge the gap.
__________________
Read my GURPS blog: http://noschoolgrognard.blogspot.com
mlangsdorf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2018, 08:46 PM   #48
AlexanderHowl
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Default Re: [Spaceships] Paying more for better system?

I think that there is room for better quality vehicles (including spacecraft) and I suggest the following modifications. Cheap components would inflict a -1 to skill to operate, +1 skill to repair, and would have a CF of 0.6. Good components would give a +1 to skill to operate, -1 skill to repair, and would have a CF of 4.0. Fine components would gives a +2 to skill to operate, -2 skill to repair, and would have a CF of 19.0. Best components would give a +(TL/2, rounded down) to skill to operate, -(TL/2, rounded down) to repair, and would have a minimum CF of 99.0 (if it is available at all). Repair costs would be modified by the CF of the quality of the component.

Instead of modifying skill, Cheap Armor would have -20% DR, Good Armor would have +20% DR, Fine Armor would have +40% DR, and Best Armor would have (+[TL/2, rounded down] * 20%) DR. Force Shields would receive a similar modification while Defensive ECM would modify the penalty to the enemy and the dodge bonus (rounded down).

So, in the case of a TL10 SM+8 streamlined spacecraft, it could purchase Cheap Nanocomposite Armor for $4M per component and receive only DR 15 per component, Good Nanocomposite Armor for $25M per component and receive DR 18 per component, Fine Nanocomposite Armor for $100M per component and receive DR 21 per component, or Best Nanocomposite Armor for $500M per component and receive DR 30 per component. Of course, only experimental spacecraft would probably benefit from Best Quality components.
AlexanderHowl is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
spaceships

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.