| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
 Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 6:38 pm Post subject: Are there scaling rules to the Space shipsstat? |
 |
|
Well, its a retorical question I guess, as I havent seen any.
-A 1600m ISD Star Destroyer has a sublight speed of Space 6.
-Several Space Transports have a sublight speed of Space 6 (or lower).
(They are not noted as being particularily slow, in fact even the Falcon 'only' has a speed of Space 8).
-An Y-Wing has a speed of Space 7. M-Wing: 6, B-Wing: 6.
Have I missed something. If they all start from zero speed, will the ISD keep up with and outrace a lot of Transports and almost keep up with serveral Rebel fighters? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ankhanu
Vice Admiral
Joined: 13 Oct 2006
Posts: 3089
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
|
| Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 6:41 pm Post subject: Re: Are there scaling rules to the Space shipsstat? |
|
|
| ZzaphodD wrote: | | If they all start from zero speed, will the ISD keep up with and outrace a lot of Transports and almost keep up with serveral Rebel fighters? |
Yes.
Speed is not well handled... nay, space flight/combat is not well handled by RAW.
_________________
Hotaru no Hishou; a messageboard about games, friends and nothing at all.
Donate to Ankhanu Press |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 7:02 pm Post subject: Re: Are there scaling rules to the Space shipsstat? |
|
|
| Ankhanu wrote: | | ZzaphodD wrote: | | If they all start from zero speed, will the ISD keep up with and outrace a lot of Transports and almost keep up with serveral Rebel fighters? |
Yes.
Speed is not well handled... nay, space flight/combat is not well handled by RAW. |
Ok, I suspected as much but it seemed like such a big 'hole' in the rules that no one would miss it... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Orgaloth
Vice Admiral
Joined: 23 Sep 2003
Posts: 3754
Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
| Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That's the thing. The hole was so big everyone went through it, not realising they went through a hole.
_________________
"I take orders from just one person: Me!"
"You know, sometimes I amaze even myself."
Du Cass' Dream |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 9:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Orgaloth wrote: | | That's the thing. The hole was so big everyone went through it, not realising they went through a hole. |
Thats true!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hisham
Commander
Joined: 06 Oct 2004
Posts: 432
Location: Malaysia
|
| Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 9:36 pm Post subject: Re: Are there scaling rules to the Space shipsstat? |
|
|
| ZzaphodD wrote: | | If they all start from zero speed, will the ISD keep up with and outrace a lot of Transports and almost keep up with serveral Rebel fighters? |
I thought this wasn't a bug. Even an Imperial-1 was able to slowly catch up with the Falcon when it was leaving Tatooine. The jump saved them.
I was under the impression, in a straight line any high-end military capital ship would be able to keep up with any of the non-superiority fighters. The only reason why it doesn't is because they already have TIEs to fill the anti-fighter interception role. And fighters' maneuverability outclassed them.
Which was probably why the Rebellion went with fighters with hyperdrives installed for hit-and-fade attacks so against capital ships they had a chance in punching them in the nose then running away fast.
_________________
The Enteague Sector | Cracken's Collection of Crackpots
In D6, of course. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Grimace
Captain
Joined: 11 Oct 2004
Posts: 729
Location: Montana; Big Sky Country
|
| Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 12:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I agree with hisham....I don't view it as a hole. In the movies the Star Destroyers can hustle pretty quick and it takes Han either jumping to hyperspace or flying into an asteroid in order to get away from them (or fancy flying that causes two of them to run into each other). Either way...those big ships aren't slow by any means. Sure, they lack maneuverability, but when they crank those engines up to flank speed, they can move with the best of them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 1:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Its not actually the speed I find a bit weird, its the acceleration. High speed, given a long enough period of thrust in vacuum, can be achieved by even large ships with weak thrusters. However, accelerating all that mass as fast as a small ship takes a huge amount of power (end engines).
One also has to look to what purpose the ship has. With all those TIEs present, is there a reason to have a massive increase in ship cost just to be able to keep up with small ships? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jmanski
Arbiter-General (Moderator)
Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 2065
Location: Kansas
|
| Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And an X-wing is not that much faster than an ISD.... I always wondered about that too....
_________________
Blasted rules. Why can't they just be perfect? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Esoomian
High Admiral
Joined: 29 Oct 2003
Posts: 6207
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
|
| Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ZzaphodD wrote: | | is there a reason to have a massive increase in ship cost just to be able to keep up with small ships? |
Yes, the Empire has massive funds available to it and creating state of the art warships creates more jobs
Actually that's probably not too far from the truth, the Empire is riddled with inefficiencies and some buerocrat decided that with the funds available they could design and build something that tried to do it all rather than something that relied on the ships it carried.
_________________
Don't waste money on expensive binoculars.
Simply stand closer to the object you wish to view. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jmanski
Arbiter-General (Moderator)
Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 2065
Location: Kansas
|
| Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 7:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That and the ISD's are supposed to be super awesome.
_________________
Blasted rules. Why can't they just be perfect? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Random Numbers
Commander
Joined: 12 Jan 2010
Posts: 454
Location: Gladsheim
|
| Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 8:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Acceleration should still be better for a xwing than a isd. But acceleration equals maximum speed in space, so I guess it's a matter of fuel capacity of which one has the highest top speed.
_________________
Random is who random does... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cheshire
Arbiter-General (Moderator)
Joined: 04 Jan 2004
Posts: 4849
|
| Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 8:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I wonder what the top speed on an aircraft carrier is. I know that's classified, but from what I hear, those things can REALLY move. Granted, I'm guessing that a speed boat would have better acceleration.
In the end, it seems unrealistic that things of equal speed would all accelerate at the same rate. But, how much complexity do we really want in our RPG system? Personally, I'm fine with it the way that it is when the alternative is introducing an acceleration mechanic based on scale.
_________________
__________________________________
Before we take any of this too seriously, just remember that in the middle episode a little rubber puppet moves a spaceship with his mind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Random Numbers
Commander
Joined: 12 Jan 2010
Posts: 454
Location: Gladsheim
|
| Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 8:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
But speed and acceleration are the same in game turns. SW speed stat has to be acceleration. After that it's just a matter of how far a ship can go without burning all its fuel.
And even if an ISD could accelerate as fast as the X-wing, the X-wing could just change direction and be done with it.
_________________
Random is who random does... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Grimace
Captain
Joined: 11 Oct 2004
Posts: 729
Location: Montana; Big Sky Country
|
| Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 8:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ZzaphodD wrote: |
One also has to look to what purpose the ship has. With all those TIEs present, is there a reason to have a massive increase in ship cost just to be able to keep up with small ships? |
Yes there's a reason. Let's take a look. The Millenium Falcon can blast TIEs into space dust, there's no way it could do that to a Star Destroyer. The Falcon can withstand the blasts of a TIE fighter for quite some time...not so with a Star Destroyer.
If a Star Destroyer was going after a freighter sized ship that was much faster than it (assuming you reduce the speed of a Star Destroyer) it would have to send fighters and hope that they could shoot out the other ship's engines, otherwise the Star Destroyer's left going "Wait up!" If you make the Star Destroyer capable of keeping up with speed 7 or 8 craft, it becomes capable of handling more sizable problems without having to expend it's fighter compliment against a target that could likely take out quite a few fighters and still get away. A Star Destroyer is also substantially more intimidating than some TIE fighters, so when you see one of the big ships barrelling down on you at flank speed, there's a much greater chance that you'll panic and do something stupid rather than getting away. They just need to disable your craft and tractor you in and the chase is done. Way easier than wasting TIE fighters against something they might not be able to stop unless dispatched en mass. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
