[Spaceships] Ship design rules - Can you have more or less than 20 systems?

[weby]

Vehicles, that is a great book, though bit too simplified at places, but I guess game books need to be.

Spaceships is good for cinematic games, but atleast with my players in a realistic game the questions it leaves open/the gross simplifications it does make it unusable.

As for having other number than 20 modules, given the simplifications used in spaceships, that is not going to be much more broken than the original if you have few more or less and abjust just the acceleration and armor. (Armor being one of the more broken things allready)

[David Johnston2]

Incidentally, Habitat sections can be divvied up greatly without any modification on large vessels.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by weby

Vehicles, that is a great book, though bit too simplified at places, but I guess game books need to be.

Spaceships is good for cinematic games, but atleast with my players in a realistic game the questions it leaves open/the gross simplifications it does make it unusable.

I have reasons to hope you're being ironic. But something inside says you are not . . .

Originally Posted by weby

As for having other number than 20 modules, given the simplifications used in spaceships, that is not going to be much more broken than the original if you have few more or less and abjust just the acceleration and armor. (Armor being one of the more broken things allready)

Wait, what's broken about armor?

[ericbsmith]

Originally Posted by Molokh

Wait, what's broken about armor?

Don't know what he dislikes, but personally one problem I have is that ships with lots of dense systems (especially multiple Armor Systems) should have less surface area, increasing dDR. Ships with many less dense systems should have increased surface area, decreasing dDR (low density systems would include Open Spaces, Cargo Holds, and some Fuel Tanks esp. Hydrogen tanks).

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by ericbsmith

Don't know what he dislikes, but personally one problem I have is that ships with lots of dense systems (especially multiple Armor Systems) should have less surface area, increasing dDR. Ships with many less dense systems should have increased surface area, decreasing dDR (low density systems would include Open Spaces, Cargo Holds, and some Fuel Tanks esp. Hydrogen tanks).

Well, you can handwave away armor density by claiming that it includes whipple shields.

[nerdvana]

Originally Posted by Molokh

whipple shields

Huh? (ok, the site won't let me just say 'Huh?' so I'll add this little parathetical as I think those for characters speak volumns regarding the confusion this phrase creates in me...)

[Ulzgoroth]

Basic internet homework done for you!

In short, you don't want just a solid armor slab against hypervelocity collisions. A thin outer barrier makes incoming stuff break up a bit.

...and I have no idea why armor would seem broken. Cargo holds rated in terms of mass only, those I could take issue with. But the adjustment for high-density ships has been done before.

[nerdvana]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Basic internet homework done for you!

OH Wow... thanks Ulzgoroth... I didn't even think about looking it up because it just sounded so out there... sorry Molokh. :)

[ericbsmith]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

In short, you don't want just a solid armor slab against hypervelocity collisions. A thin outer barrier makes incoming stuff break up a bit.

For low mass hypervelocity projectiles that kind of armoring makes sense. For heavy guns/missiles, hypervelocity or not, thin whipple shielding isn't likely to do a damn thing. Thick whipple shielding, OTOH, is basically just what a double-hull is, and has been used on maritime vessels for, well, for longer than I can seem to find reference to (I found at least one which showed a double wooden hull). However, even double hulled armor is going to be far more dense than most any other ship system.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Cargo holds rated in terms of mass only, those I could take issue with. But the adjustment for high-density ships has been done before.

Cargo Holds, Fuel Tanks, Hangar Bays, and pretty much anything else where the contents are completely interchangeable.

[weby]

Originally Posted by Molokh

I have reasons to hope you're being ironic. But something inside says you are not . . .

Basically it is a fairly good simplification for most things ans those things that are broken in it are easy to patch in as the basic system gives a result that is reasonable. The only patching I need to do in about every vehicle designed with it is the hull forms/volumes, the rest are more casy by case. (things like sensors and such)

Wait, what's broken about armor?

Since spaceships does not use volume calculations, it thus assumes same density for all ships. A ship mostly hydrogen fuel will be way larger than one that is mostly something dense(say tanks of cadmium) and yet they have same DR for the same armor mass.