| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
wildfire
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 234
Location: Scotland
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2014 1:18 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Okay I choose space 7 as it matched the lambda and sentinel's speed think you'd need a high speed to get the troops from orbit to surface with some speed.
Used the interceptor lasers as they would have been lenticular and readily available to the designers for an easy fit.
Copied the fixed forward mounts from the sentinel more for strafing a LZ if needed than any real self defense purpose, it will always be escorted by fighters it's too big a target not to be 
Rear hatch between engines was based on real world cargo aircraft as you say, if the engines aren't thrusting or at least idle you can exit through such an area in a vehicle, personnel should use the side doors, unless the engines are shut down.
Thanks for the help poking holes in my ideas, makes me think more to explain them better |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16345
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 2:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| wildfire wrote: | | Okay I choose space 7 as it matched the lambda and sentinel's speed think you'd need a high speed to get the troops from orbit to surface with some speed. |
Conventional wisdom in the SWU is that drop ships and combat shuttles are used to get comparatively small numbers of troops on the ground fast, while landing barges carry lots of troops and equipment very slowly. In a ground assault landing, the drop ships and combat shuttles would be used to hit strategic locations and establish a beachhead, then hold it long enough for the landing barges to land and deploy the heavy reinforcements.
I'm not seeing how this thing is supposed to be slow with a Space of 7. That may be slow compared to some ships, but is blindingly fast for a landing barge. At this speed, it's just 1 SU slower than the Millenium Falcon, with a much greater lift capacity.
IMO, justifying this high speed by saying you want it to match with the Lambda and the Sentinel isn't enough; there need to be practical explanations and valid in-game reasons for why this thing can move so fast.
| Quote: | | Used the interceptor lasers as they would have been lenticular and readily available to the designers for an easy fit. |
I'm not sure what lenticular has to do with anything, but if you are looking for ease of adaptation, both the Sentinel and the Lambda are products of Cygnus Spaceworks which, while closely related to Seinar, is still an independent company. If the Conveyor is derived from the Lambda and the Sentinel, it should be a Cygnus Spaceworks product, not a Seinar one. Pursuant to that, weapon systems used to outfit other Cygnus Spaceworks craft would be more likely to interface with the ship's power systems than a product from a different company.
| Quote: | | Copied the fixed forward mounts from the sentinel more for strafing a LZ if needed than any real self defense purpose, it will always be escorted by fighters it's too big a target not to be |
But then, if it is always accompanied by escorting TIEs, why would it need to strafe at all? The TIEs are faster and more maneuverable, and are thus able to make much greater use of their own fixed forward cannon than a big, cumbersome barge. You are, in essence, arming this thing exclusively for a mission it will likely never have to perform, and which it would be ill equipped to perform if it ever did.
Conversely, putting the laser cannon in turrets allows the barge to defend itself should any attacking fighters make it past the escorts (which is a definite concern in combat zones). The same laser cannon would also allow the ship to perform fire support missions both while on landing approach and disembarking troops. Putting the weapons in turrets greatly increases their usefulness and the overall effectiveness of the ship in general.
| Quote: | | Rear hatch between engines was based on real world cargo aircraft as you say, if the engines aren't thrusting or at least idle you can exit through such an area in a vehicle, personnel should use the side doors, unless the engines are shut down. |
I'm still not feeling this one, but I can see you have a visual that you like for this ship that I'm not getting.
| Quote: | | Thanks for the help poking holes in my ideas, makes me think more to explain them better |
No problem. A couple things:
1). Based solely on the stats, what you have here isn't so much a landing craft as it is a Starfighter that just so happens to be able to transport an infantry battalion, which isn't particularly realistic. A good, balanced stat needs some weaknesses, and this ship isn't really all that weak anywhere.
2). Based on the name, there could be some confusion as to whether or not this ship is an Immobilizer-418 derivative. Obviously it isn't, but ship nomenclature would likely have resulted in a different class name to make the distinction.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wildfire
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 234
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 1:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lenticular is an autocorrect that didn't spot and can't remember what it's supposed to be
I'm going to rethink the speed and laser mounts maybe taking the ones from the sentinel as you suggest.
The strafing of the lasers can also be used to remove obstacles on the LZ but it's mainly as I can't see the Empire not accepting a craft that goes into hostile airspace with out any weapons. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16345
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 4:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, not to beat a dead horse, but turreted weapons with their wider field of fire would be even more useful for the exact same purpose. Fixed forward cannon require the entire ship to orient itself to target a specific point, and the pilot will already have a lot going on. A gunner can use his cannon to defend against enemy fighters, engage surface units in the drop zone or clear obstacles from the landing zone while the pilot concentrates on flying the ship.
Bottom line, fixed forward weaponry is only ever useful on small, fast, maneuverable vehicles (like Starfighters) or for installing very heavy weaponry on a ship or vehicle that would normally be too small to mount it.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Corise Lucerne
Lieutenant
Joined: 02 Jan 2014
Posts: 78
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Landing craft seems to be the most popular, debated subject here in the ship section. I don't think we're all going to completely agree on fanon designs like this, but I'd like to make a few asides.
| Quote: | | Okay I choose space 7 as it matched the lambda and sentinel's speed think you'd need a high speed to get the troops from orbit to surface with some speed. |
While that's a fair speed for a transport, it's not necessary for a ship primarily designed to go from orbit to the ground, and back up. A lot of this has to do with the engines, as ion engines typically aren't used for in atmospheric use (their exhaust is radioactive), so its repulsorlifts that actually do most of the work during the drops. Secondly, a ship doesn't really need (any)engines to make fast atmospheric entries (though repulsorlifts are great for quickly stopping them); the ship could basically plummet to the ground on gravity alone (for most worlds) with repulsorlifts cushioning the landing.
| Quote: | | Used the interceptor lasers as they would have been lenticular and readily available to the designers for an easy fit. |
| Quote: | | The TIEs are faster and more maneuverable, and are thus able to make much greater use of their own fixed forward cannon than a big, cumbersome barge. You are, in essence, arming this thing exclusively for a mission it will likely never have to perform, and which it would be ill equipped to perform if it ever did. |
"Fixed" is probably a word I wouldn't use for SFS cannons, notably because the chin cannons in Darth Vader's Tie Advanced, appear to be capable of adjustment of fire vectors despite being "fixed" per se. It might be beneficial for commonality of parts to use the same laser cannons as the Tie series too.
That being said, I tend to agree with the rest of crmcneill's assessment on weaponry. Turrets would seem to make more sense to me on a large craft like this for reasons already mentioned. It's worth noting that the Sentinel-class Landing Craft has retractable repeating blaster cannon turrets (like the Millenium Falcon's) to provide covering fire on the ground while landing its troops. Something like that might be useful for the Conveyor as well.
_________________
A Game of Galactic Conquest: http://rebelfaction.org/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16345
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 7:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Regarding the fixed forward remark, my solution for that in my SWU was to say that Vader's TIE was fitted with auto-blasters instead of lasers, and that auto-blasters automatically adjust their firing angle to correct for missed shots when firing multiple times at the same target.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wildfire
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 234
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
At work so limited net access for the next week (oil rig) but am planning on reworking the speed and weapons in light of these comments soon but will have to wait until I get home to post them
Will drop the speed to 5 most likely and use the sentinels weapons as well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16345
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 10, 2014 9:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Another question...
If you are using my scale system, that puts this thing at +4D over starfighters, correct?
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wildfire
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 234
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2014 2:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | Another question...
If you are using my scale system, that puts this thing at +4D over starfighters, correct? |
Correct |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16345
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2014 9:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
So, at 60 meters long with 5D Hull and 3D Shields, this thing is tougher than a 300 meter long Nebulon B Frigate?
EDIT: in fact, equally as tough as an Interdictor or an Assault Cruiser?
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wildfire
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 234
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2014 12:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ah didn't think about that, well I'm back to the drawing board anyway |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16345
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2014 1:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No prob. That's one of the great things about this forum when it comes to stats; you get multiple fresh perspectives. You may not agree with everything they say, but it is great for catching stuff you may not have thought through as well as you could.
Just in case, we were discussing landing barges in another topic and came across the following stat for a Barge in the Death Star Technical CompanionCapital-Scale
Skills:
-Capital Ship Gunnery 3D
-Capital Ship Piloting 3D
Maneuverability: 0D
Space: 2
Atmpsphere: 225
Hull: 2D
Weapons: 2 twin laser cannon (FC 1D, Dmg 2D) While no direct connection was made with the landing barge described in the Star Destroyer capsule in the Star Wars Sourcebook, it is a reasonable stat for a barge that can carry 4 AT-ATs and 1,000 troops.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wildfire
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 234
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2014 2:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Am thinking of
space speed 5
Hull 4D
Shields 1D
And yes this forum is great for bouncing ideas off |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16345
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2014 3:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| wildfire wrote: | Am thinking of
space speed 5
Hull 4D
Shields 1D
And yes this forum is great for bouncing ideas off |
So, still tougher than a Nebulon B, just with weaker shields? I'd be okay with the stats as written if the thing were Starfighter or Walker scale...
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wildfire
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 234
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2014 12:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I'm using set length mean certain scales automatically, in this case longer than 50m means starship scale, might have to drop it down to 2D hull. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
