![]() |
![]() |
#41 |
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Oz
|
![]()
How to fill one SM +9 habitat system with 50 brave explorers
1. Cabin for Mission Commander (1)There are some straightforward fixes, starting with (a) put someone in a cabin that is outside the safe, relatively well radiation-shielded forward core section or• I could cut the ship's complement: it is perhaps a luxury to have three flight crews with only two shuttles and to have three complete watches of three technicians (to provide a human damage control worker in each section). On the other hand I'd really like five more academics, and it's silly to let the granularity of a quick-and-handy system dictate the size of the mission in that way. • I could split the other Core system (the Control Room) to get 6 more cabins, upgrade the captain to a luxury cabin (+1), give the 1st lieutenant an unshared cabin (+0.5), give the chief engineer an unshared cabin (+0.5), give the head of Natural Sciences and the Head of Social Sciences unshared cabins (+1), and add three shared cabins for the ambassador's aide, two more researchers, and three research assistants. Then I would have to split something else somewhere else to put in the missing 1/3 system of control room—presumably the control stations and computers are in the core and the basic sensors and attitude controls are outside it. • I could not bother with the formal splitting and hit locations and such, just put 26 cabins into the habitat and slice 1/3 of capacity off some cargo capacity or hangar bay or something. • I could adjust the mass, cost, and refuel cost of the ship a bit to allow for it being a bit bigger, but less than 200% bigger. • I could just never mind the 1.7% adjustment in a system this coarse-grained.
__________________
Decay is inherent in all composite things. Nod head. Get treat. Last edited by Agemegos; 09-06-2013 at 05:31 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#42 | |
Wielder of Smart Pants
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ventura CA
|
![]() Quote:
EDIT: If I were them, I'd rather have the cabins by watch, that way everybody in the same cabin is sleeping at the same time. It's not like petty officers are staff NCOs. Last edited by sir_pudding; 09-06-2013 at 04:22 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#43 | ||
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Oz
|
![]() Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Decay is inherent in all composite things. Nod head. Get treat. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#44 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Europe
|
![]()
You can't split the Control Room, as per the RAW, because much of its mass is maneuver thrusters. It has to occupy 5% of the total mass of the ship, otherwise it's going to have to have poorer maneuvering (and IIRC there's no rule specifying how much poorer).
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#45 | |
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Oz
|
![]() Quote:
__________________
Decay is inherent in all composite things. Nod head. Get treat. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#46 |
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Seattle, WA
|
![]()
Very cool ship. Is this for your Flat Black setting or something else entirely? If it's the latter, do you have a write up somewhere online?
This reminds me of a ship I made and used in a campaign that sounds much like yours. I had a giant spreadsheet of supplies that I made the players mark off as they used it. It was Alternity though, so not nearly as much attention to realistic detail as GURPS provides. Good times though!
__________________
-apoc527 My Campaigns Currently Playing: GURPS Banestorm: The Symmetry of Darkness Inactive: Star*Drive: 2525-Hunting for Fun and Profit My THS Campaign-In the Shadows of Venus Yrth--The Legend Begins The XCOM Apocalypse |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#47 | |||
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Oz
|
![]() Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Postscript: No, here we go. An Excel version. 8,649 items in inventory, from "air conditioner, 20" to "wire, barbed, 100m roll of, 160". 64.574 tonnes. Not counting "frigate, survey, 1".
__________________
Decay is inherent in all composite things. Nod head. Get treat. Last edited by Agemegos; 09-07-2013 at 12:34 AM. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#48 | |
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Yorkshire, UK
|
![]() Quote:
Using split/smaller systems, it seems perfectly reasonable to do what you're suggesting, and an excellent idea when considering layout, either abstract or actual deck plans. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#49 |
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Oregon
|
![]()
I'd have no problem with a ship having a smaller than normal Control Room, at the cost of reduced handling. Maybe -2 Hnd for a -1 SM system, -4 Hnd for a -2 SM system. It would mostly show up on low-performance bulk transports, or as a back-up bridge on warships. You could combine multiple smaller Control Rooms to function as a single larger one. For example, three -1 SM systems would be the equivalent of one full-sized bridge, but if any one of them is knocked out performance will suffer.
EDIT: Actually, I just checked in SS8 where it discusses Smaller Systems, and it does mention Control Rooms as being allowed. A -1 SM system gives -1 to Hnd and SR. I suppose a -2 SM system would be at -2 to both. Last edited by vierasmarius; 09-07-2013 at 01:17 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#50 | |
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Oz
|
![]() Quote:
__________________
Decay is inherent in all composite things. Nod head. Get treat. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Tags |
exploration, flat black, spaceships |
|
|