| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10435
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2020 5:05 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Krassh wrote: | | An interesting and a bit more practical ship design for roleplaying purposes for sure... |
Thanks for looking at my ship, but it seems that you didn't look too closely at it because some of your issues with it seem to be based on false understandings. I re-shared the ship info just to make absolutely certain we are even talking about the same ship. Please see below the deckplan for specific replies to your comments.
MC-13v2 main capsule & external image
stock deckplan & deckplan key (standard)
stock deckplan key detail descriptions (standard)
stock stats (standard w/ escape pod stats)
| Krassh wrote: | | Perhaps take a hint from the design of the Firefly, which is ugly but somewhat more practically designed for its purpose. |
I think Serenity was my inspiration for having a big table (which on my ship can hover down from the ceiling on this ship). This common room and table are even bigger than what's in show—This table can comfortably seat 12 with lots of space in the middle for a giant feast of food. It is practical (most beings need to eat), but I don't think that's what you were referring to. Some WEG deckplans don't even have an entrance ramp to get in the ship! (YT-2400, I'm looking at you.)
| Krassh wrote: | | But at least the crew quarters seem a bit more viable in size for a tramp freighter. |
Thanks. Actually, I realized late in the design stage of this ship that the DeepWater deckplan's scale was off a bit, and this ship uses some of the same furnishings (like the beds). So the rooms are all the right size, but the furnishings in them are all slightly too big. It is close enough that I didn't want to bother with adjusting it. So it still works to show you what is all in each room and how they are arranged, but for your mind's eye please just remember that the furniture is all slightly smaller and the rooms are actually a little roomier than what they appear to be on the deckplan. This ship is very roomy, but not ridiculously spacious like the DeepWater.
| Krassh wrote: | | Though what irks me about it a bit is the single deck design and the disjointed small cargo bays. There's just no practical reason to build a transport ship with such an interior layout. How about gunning for a single, easily accessible cargo hold with a central loading ramp/lift/airlock and arrange everything else around and above it? |
This ship design was based on WEG's DeepWater-class (which has two very large cargo bays). The DeepWater is a seriously flawed vessel in multiple ways. The cargo bays of my ship were originally much larger, like the DeepWater's. I invented a deck height and used the WEG formula for cargo capacity and cargo volume in The Far Orbit Project. The arithmetic worked out to be a gigantic cargo capacity (around a whopping 750 metric tons). I didn't want the ship to have that huge of a cargo capacity, and I also didn't want it to have a lot of empty space unused for typical cargos because the ship doesn't have the hauling power to fill the holds, so I intentionally shrunk the cargo bays. I added the two cargo airlocks that wouldn't have cargo stored in them to eat up cargo space. I still ended up reducing the cargo capacity of all four holds beyond what the math provided (container size won't always allow maximizing use of cargo space and there is room for the automated cargo handling system). I got the total cargo capacity down to 370 tons but I still reclassified this ship as a medium freighter. The DeepWater is a gigantic waste of space because most cargos up to its cargo hauling capacity would not come anywhere near filling the holds. (Maybe the DeepWater specializes is hauling light but voluminous cargos like uncompressed hydrogen in the holds, for the very rare places in the universe where hydrogen is not abundant and in demand? lol)
Anyway, it seems your cargo space criticism is largely based on eyeing it and concluding the cargo holds seem to small. I actually used math. The The Far Orbit Project weight/volume formula is slightly updated from Tramp Freighters 1e formula and yields smaller tonnage result, so I went with that. And there are practical in-universe reasons for having compartmentalized cargo holds too, like for hull breaches.
Each hold is individually fully climate controlled too. That gives them a competitive leg up against other tramps that are required to use climate controlled containers. What if a client has a large temperature sensitive cargo and no refrigerated containers? The MC-13v2 can handle the job while captains with some ships would have to turn down the job.
| Krassh wrote: | | This way, that thing could even hold some speeders or other small vehicles... Or is that to be added by the owner later through upgrades? |
The modified ship in my campaign (which I haven't shared yet) stores a swoop on the starboard side of the engine room. The aft wall to that part of the corridor slides away and the swoop can go right down the main entrance ramp (which is wide enough and extends after it starts to lower). If I had thought of designing a dedicated vehicle bay when designing the stock ship, I probably would have done that to help eat up excess cargo space and put a landspeeder in it.
I didn't originally set out to design a new class of ship. I started making a deckplan for a modified DeepWater, but as I went, I realized more and more how stupid the DeepWater is, so I decided mid-deckplan that this would be a new class of ship. So I designed the stock deckplans (there is also a passenger variant I haven't shared yet) and the modified ship simultaneously from that point.
Some small speeders may be small enough to fit down a cargo airlock lifts, so one could use the stock ship and store such a vehicle in one of the cargo bays, if they wanted to. Or they can modify their stock ship.
| Krassh wrote: | | Generally, i would design the ideal player group adventure transport in a way which makes it as practical, variable, modular and upgradable as possible. With enough room to serve as a mobile base of operations and home in the stars. And with an interior layout which allows certain spaces to be utilized for varying tasks depending on circumstance. |
This ship can easily be that. It is longer, wider, and taller than the YT-1300. There is an escape pod capacity of 14. Look at that giant common room where the table can disappear into the ceiling and the furniture can be moved around. The table is a holotable for tactical displays and holomovies. The Engine Room is spacious and has room for a lot of things to be added, including even an engineer's quarters. This is a "Deluxe" ship with luxuries not available on most ships, so there is a lot of room for making changes.
In the modified ship for my campaign, the Aquatic Chamber has been replaced with an expanded medical bay with two bacta tanks (their legit business is bacta dealing but will also haul whatever they can). But the original ventral hatch still works so there it now serves as emergency access directly to the medical bay from under the ship. Smaller secret cargo holds have been added (you can't always stand up in them but there are nooks to shove illicit cargo). One of them connects to the captain's shower so it can be used a secret passage to get behind boarding pirates or to escape. The stock Natural Habitat had been expanded by a former Ithorian captain to also take the place of the old medical bay. Now it serves as a living quarters for the Ewok gunner (He grows food and keeps his animals in there with him). There is a second opening to the dorsal gunnery bay from the ceiling of his "quarters" and he can literally climb up a living tree to access the dorsal turret!
Talk about PC ship customizability. This is not just a mobile base of operations. This is the home of the crew who have no other residence.
| Krassh wrote: | | Better a bit too roomy than too small. And with more than one single deck, because a space ship gains nothing from being low profile. |
I did not design this ship from scratch. Having an external image of the ship is important to me, so the deckplan has to fit the external image. My basis ship, the DeepWater is problematic. The external image provided for the ship does not match the deckplan. Since these ships are unique works of art, they could both be DeepWaters, but they could not the same DeepWater. I had to photoshopped both the deckplan and the external image until they met in the middle to an acceptable degree of satisfaction considering my poor photoshop shills. What I have to work with does not allow for a full second deck, but I did take advantage of not seeing the bottom of the ship on the external image and put things under the deck, like escape pods, etc.
And even if I had room for a second deck, I wouldn't have added it here because I was actively trying to fill up the space, not add more. If I knew when I started that I was going to end up with a new class of ship, I would have made the ship a bit smaller. That would have actually made the external issues easier to deal with.
| Krassh wrote: | especially that single gun turret only. Maybe give it at least a single fixed forward firing gun for the pilot or copilot to shoot and perhaps also an option for an additional rear firing turret, mounted on the underside?
I mean, having a rear firing gun to deter pirates is pretty much a no brainer, since pursuing pirates would focus at taking out the engines first to prevent their prey from fleeing.
That way, you can give at least a crew of 4 something to participate in combat with. |
If you look at the stats, there are actually two gun turrets, a dorsal and a ventral gun. The capsule mentions there being two weapons, and the deckplan details explain how you get to each one (the ventral one is under the deck at the same part of the ship where the dorsal one is over the deck—on the deckplan see j. Turret access (ceiling and floor)).
And since these are turrets, they both cover all fire arcs. They can have gunners or they can be controlled from the bridge at a loss of fire control.
I did originally only have one gun turret but realized with the large cargo capacity that this small medium freighter would be pirate bait, so a second weapon seems justifiable. And more campaign friendly at the same time.
| Quote: | | Also it seems to have too few action stations in combat situations for a larger crew |
Too few action stations? There are 6-7. That is too few? How big of PC parties do you play with?
There are the pilot and copilot stations. The are two gunnery stations. And the deckplan, key, and details show there are also two customizable auxiliary stations on the bridge as well. That's six. Then there is a station in the engine room where someone could be involved in the action if they are rerouting power. And even without that, someone there could be doing emergency repairs/jury rigs during combat.
The other thing to keep in mind is, this is just the stock ship. Ships can be modified. This stock ship is a great basis for a PC ship in the game (and understandably very expensive), but in my experience PCs almost never fly stock freighters. They can be modified and upgraded with replacement systems. Stock ships should not be too OP or they would never be approved for commercial use in the Empire. Being a smuggler or rebel means your freighter modifications likely have to be hidden so you can keep pretending to be a law abiding citizen.
Krassh, since you have a critical frame of mind for Star Wars ship design, if you have the time I'd appreciate for you to go back and read all the details, and then ask any questions or report anything you still have issues with. Thanks. And if you have any ships you've designed, please start a new thread and share them. I'd love to see them.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage
Last edited by Whill on Wed Jan 27, 2021 8:28 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Krassh
Cadet
Joined: 26 Nov 2020
Posts: 20
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2020 6:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Krassh, since you have a critical frame of mind for Star Wars ship design, if you have the time I'd appreciate for you to go back and read all the details, and then ask any questions or report anything you still have issues with. |
Not necessary Whill, your explanation was extensive and satisfactory in general.
Guess you did with the ship's design as good as you reasonably could. pity only that, as i previously said, most SW ship designs are most often done without even basic practicability and functionality in mind.
Unlike the ones in Star Citizen for example, which are designed from the ground up with fully functional interior spaces by actual product designers.
Only one thing: when you did calculate the size of the cargo holds and general capacity of the ship, what standard volume did you assign to a metric ton of weight? Because there are goods which may have a relatively larger volume to the weight unit than others. A metric ton of Gold is significantly more compact than a metric ton of meat or clothing. Also, one needs to be able to still maneuver with a repulsor sled or similar in a cargo hold, so the nominal area or volume is rarely the actually usable one.
Also, at this occasion, i would want to share with you the deck plan of the ship i am using right now in my current campaign with a crew of 6.
I find this pretty much an optimal design, though it is an exceptional and quite expensive, custom built ship like no other.
But i don't know where the images are originally sourced from and i don't seem to be able to upload pictures here myself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10435
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2020 7:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The Far Orbit Project, p.22.
This is "in general." Of course cargo densities will vary, so sometimes you will have 100 ton cargoes that take up less space than this, and sometimes they will take up more. But this is a base figure to go by. Sometimes you will take on denser cargos up to your max cargo capacity (hauling power) and still have empty space left over, and sometimes you will fill your cargo holds full of less dense cargoes and still not be up to your max hauling power. In my campaigns, this minutia doesn't matter that much, but I wanted the cargo space to be ball parked to the tonnage. I didn't want a ship with cargo holds too big to ever fill up full, like the DeepWater.
As far as the ship image, if you can't use the image tags then just share a link to the image. Thanks.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Krassh
Cadet
Joined: 26 Nov 2020
Posts: 20
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2020 10:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Alright, found the original source images.
Let's see if these links work:
CLICK HERE FOR LARGE IMAGE - External
CLICK HERE FOR LARGE IMAGE - Deckplan
As you can hopefully see, this ship is quite sizable and lavishly equipped.
But even a ship with only half the space dedicated to crew comforts would still be a rather comfy home for space travelers.
We use this ship as a luxury yacht and high security transport adapted to Star Wars stats. It is quite a powerful ship in capable hands and extremely nice to live on. Our Herglic pilot is particularly partial to the whirlpool in the gym, which my Barabel shock boxer uses frequently and extensively.
As apparent from the oversized engines, it is fast as heck and maneuverable like a significantly lighter craft, able to outrun almost everything it cannot outgun. And its ablative armor and strong shields make it quite tough.
Also doesn't look too shabby i'd say.
Only downside is, that since it's such a high end custom built ship with only the most exclusive materials and components, it is almost impossible to modify beyond bolting something to the hull.
Also its fuel consumption and running costs are about twice as high as most other ships of the same size, which we luckily managed to compensate for with a good universal fuel converter. But should that thing get damaged seriously, the repair costs should be ruinous, not even talking about finding a space port capable of doing it.
But i would advise to take good note of the deck plans and the general structure of the ship, which maximizes internal space and arranges it most sensibly.
Only flaw we found is the severely limited cargo space and the ridiculous overabundance of toilets on the ship. Seriously, who needs so many 'loos for such a small crew? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10435
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Krassh
Cadet
Joined: 26 Nov 2020
Posts: 20
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2020 11:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Whill wrote: | Nice. I'd love to see the stats for that ship.
| Krassh wrote: | | Only flaw we found is the severely limited cargo space |
Well the ship was designed to be a reconnaissance scout ship, so that might be why it doesn't have a bigger cargo space. |
Certainly, as said, we play it as a luxury yacht and high security VIP transport with focus on highest comfort. Though compare this to the scout ships offered by legacy Star Wars and the RPG system and you'll notice the stark contrast in design and focus.
But if the hangar is unused, there's quite a bit of room in there for cargo.
As for stats, here's what i can do:
Cargo: 50 tons
Consumables: 3 months
Hyperdrive Class 1
Backup Class 4
Maneuver 2D+2
Space: 8
Atmosphere 365, 1050 km/h
Hull: Czerka ablative 5D
Shields: 4D
Weapons: 4x Kuat Arms quad laser turrets - damage 6D; fire control 2D
1 Kuat Arms heavy laser cannon - damage 5D; fire control 3D
As you can see, a VERY capable and well rounded ship. Our GM really did an exceptional job finding and adapting this model to Star Wars D6.
If you wanna have some serious fun with your crew, i can heartily recommend it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10435
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10435
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 06, 2021 3:57 am Post subject: Xebel-class Mini-Sub |
|
|
My philosophy for escape craft on starship-scale transports is that the Empire officially requires that a ship's escape pod capacity must equal the sum of the number of crew plus the number of gunners plus the number of passengers, which means that the number of passengers is limited by the escape craft capacity. Not that captains can't get around the safety guidelines.
Being that the MC-13v2 is a space/atmo/aquatic vehicle, it made sense to me that the escape pods would also be aquatic as well, so I statted them that way. However the hull on these is not as strong as the main ship and there are no shields, so the escape pod's crush depth should be much less than the main ship. If they launch too deep, maybe they have a feature of a quick burst straight up, hopefully maintaining enough hull integrity for long enough to get the pod to the surface of the water before the escape pod is crushed or the ship takes on too much water for the occupants to survive. At max speed it would take a little under a minute to get to the surface of the water if it started at the MC-13v2 maximum depth, so maybe the pod would be wrecked but it could get the passengers to the surface in that time. And maybe it has inflatable puncture-proof pontoons like the main ship to keep the pod (or wreck that's left) afloat while they are waiting on being rescued. Actually, it would make sense that all escape pods had inflatable pontoons for water landings.
When I was statting out the modified example ship of the MC-13v2, I got the idea that I could replace the larger escape pod with a reusable mini-sub that did a couple more aquatic things than the ship did. Losing the passenger capacity that the larger escape pod provided is perfect for standard version of this ship which has too high of an escape pod capacity anyway. Of course, the mini-sub is even better then an escape pod if needed to escape the starship deep underwater because it is a fully functional sub with a depth rating equal to the main ship. Then I thought, why not make this something generally available with the stock ship instead of just being a custom made upgrade for the modified ship?
The mini-sub just as easily works with the as-yet unreleased passenger variant of the MC-13v2, but it wouldn't really make sense to reduce the passenger complement of the passenger variant unless it was repurposed from what it was designed to be. And since the mini-sub's hull was designed to survive the same deep underwater pressure that the main ship can survive in, I would even allow the mini-sub to be launched in space and its occupants could survive if needed. Of course there is no drive on the mini-sub that works anywhere but in water, so it would just be floating helplessly in space.
This is my first submarine I have created. Speeder-scale seemed most appropriate for a small but sturdy 4-person sub about the size of a 6-person escape pod. I got the power launcher stats from the RAW snowspeeder harpoon stats and halved the range since this is underwater. Plus, I found that Alliance Intelligence Reports p.43 has an "aquaspeeder" which is a T-47 airspeeder converted into a submarine, and it's harpoon has half the range. But on my sub, the harpoon is a not magnet. It's an actual harpoon.
Thoughts?
Xebel-class Mini-Sub
The Xebel-class Mini-Sub was designed as an aftermarket add-on for the MC-13v2, and it later became a factory upgrade available at purchase. This small submersible vehicle is the same size as the 6-person escape pod and replaces it, which reduces the MC-13v2's official passenger complement by as many persons. Purchasing the Xebel-class as a factory upgrade adds 5,000 credits the MC-13v2 price, and buying the mini-sub as an aftermarket add-on will often have a reduced price with a trade-in of the existing escape pod the sub replaces. The Xebel-class is also sometimes just purchased and operated independently of an MC-13v2.
Craft: Mon Calamari Shipyards Xebel-class Submersible
Type: Stock Minisub
Scale: Speeder
Length: 3.6 meters
Skill: Aquatic vehicle operation: Xebel-class
Crew: 1
Passengers: 3
(Each passenger has auxiliary access to the one of the following pilot functions: com-scan, power launcher, grasper arms)
Cargo Capacity: 100kg
Consumables: 4 days
Cover: Full
Depth: 1 km
Cost: 20,000 (new)
Maneuverability: 2D
Move: 33; 95 kmh
Body Strength: 6D+2
Sensors:
Passive 750m/0D
Scan 1.5km/2D
Search 3.25km/2D+2
Focus 250m/3D
Weapon:
1 Power Launcher (Harpoon/Magnetic Stun Net)
Fire Arc: Front
Crew: 1
(pilot or passenger)
Skill: Missile weapons
Ammo: 2 harpoons and 2 magnetic stun nets
Fire Rate: 1
Fire Control: 2D
Range: 25m/50m/100m
Damage: 3D
Weapon Game Notes: The harpoons and magnetic stun nets are both launched with a retractible tow cable attached (up to 100m length). The harpoons, magnetic stun nets, and tow cables all have body strength of 3D. A successful attack with the magnetic stun net captures the target (only effective on targets not much bigger than a human). A captured character or creature suffers a one-time stun of 3D. Anything captured by harpoon or magnetic stun net can get pull back to the minisub versus a tractor damage value of 3D. (At GM discretion the target may be too tangled in the net to resist the tractor.) At any time the tow cable can be released from the sub.
Grasper Arms: The minisub has two retractible arms with graspers at the ends, one coming out of each side of the vehicle midway along the hull. At full length they can each extend 2m. The grasper arms have a 3D body strength and grasping strength (each). Operating the grasper arms requires an aquatic vehicle operation or Mechanical check, with difficulties determined by GM based on what is being attempted with them.
Other Vehicle Game Notes: The minisub has a small floodable airlock big enough for one person.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Inquisitor1138
Captain
Joined: 28 Nov 2021
Posts: 607
Location: Hoth. Or Ilum...
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2021 11:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Cool! Lots of neat ideas here!
I think i may mod a couple of these for my Empire Commandos! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
