Re: [Space] FTL Ideas/Thoughts
 

It's just a name, but I have trouble seeing how players wouldn't scrunch their faces up to the idea that FTL drives aren't really FTL drives.
You can call the power level of drive anything you want. Warp Drive is nice and perfectly vague as heck. Individual companies may use their own names.
Sure Federation Limited calls theirs FTL 1, 2, 3, but their drives happen to be slightly slower than Hegemony Incorporated's Warp 1, 2, 3. With Warp 1 = FTL 0.9 or something.

Re: [Space] FTL Ideas/Thoughts
 

Flyndaran, the FTL-x system is a GAME MECHANICS one, if two ships have the same FTL number they go at the same speed

Re: [Space] FTL Ideas/Thoughts
 

Spaceships can be tricky to work with. It trades flexibility for simplicity. Still working with Ve2 numbers for TL7 RTGs are roughly 6 x massive as comparable Fission reactors for the same output. A ratio of 5 or 6 to 1 tends to remain between RTGs and comparable nuclear power plants at higher TLs.

This would have RTGs producing less than 1 pp per 5% of ship's mass in Spaceships if being fully realistic (which Spaceships isn't always about marginal power plants and drives).

Refreshing my memory the Ve2 rule of thumb was that a RTG's power output dropped 10% per period of 14 years. Old Ve2 hands tended to install RTGs large enough to power the life support systems as emergency/back up power plants.

Not only can rtgs run for long times but they have no moving parts or even much in the way of weakpoints in their structure. They are ideal for long term/emergency uses that don't have high power requirements.

I once gave the PCs a ship that had an RTG that was 120% of what was needed for life support when new. That meant it produced enough power for 42 years. Their ship was older than that though and the back up RTG was only capable of powering 90% of life support. :)

Re: [Space] FTL Ideas/Thoughts
 

It's not real or written in stone. But that would make it fall back on the silliness of Faster Than Light drives being much slower than light.
It would be like making jets that travel in units of 100 MPH but each MPH is really Miles Per Day.

Re: [Space] FTL Ideas/Thoughts
 

Only the very inefficient bottom line forms have no moving parts. Some of the more advanced versions are Stirling radioisotope generators that produce 4 times the energy of basic RTGs.
I do love bulkier petering out generators bought on the cheap for those not willing to process its purity back up.

Re: [Space] FTL Ideas/Thoughts
 

From what I understand of the drive, FTL-1 DOES enable FTL travel. Travel at .25c will give you speed that's truely faster than light. FTL-1 technically enables just under 5 times the speed of light.

Re: [Space] FTL Ideas/Thoughts
 

This part makes no sense. "Travel at a quarter of the speed of light is faster than light"... wut?

Re: [Space] FTL Ideas/Thoughts
 

Normal-space travel that would be .25c, but with an FTL-1 drive, means to multiply the speed by 5, so net speed is 1.25 c. It's the Fast Forward drive; everything just speeds up.

Re: [Space] FTL Ideas/Thoughts
 

Because the FTL drive system I proposed is like the one in David Weber's Honorverse, a velocity multiplier, it doesn't impart speed.

Re: [Space] FTL Ideas/Thoughts
 

That's still worse than fission/fusion at the same TL and a _lot_ less reliable than the ones with no moving parts. Appears like a solution looking for a problem to me.