| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10434
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
 Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2018 11:36 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
My "Deepwater" deckplans are somewhat done (stock and modified). I ended up detailing most rooms on the ship. I also have an image I can live with to represent my modified ship. It was very time consuming as I learned a new image editor application as I went, but I am fairly pleased with the outcome considering.
I decided that my stock ship is not the DeepWater but another somewhat similar Mon Calamari Light Freighter. That way, anyone can just add my new ship to their universe without it stepping on anyone else's DeepWaters. But as soon as you see the deckplan and ship image, it will look a little familiar. I'm going to do stats and write-ups for the stock and modified ships, so it will end up being like an extended new entry in the Stock Ships book - Everything SS has plus descriptions for each area of the deckplan keys, like they did for The Longshot in The Campaign Pack (1e) and Classic Campaigns (2e).
I'm also still planning on doing some Lantillian deckplans in honor of The Longshot which appeared in many of my campaigns (or a ship very much like it). It will be a series of ship models to help explain some of the various versions of the ship that have come out over the years, a couple with a tweaked deckplans and outer images. And I am still planning on doing the analysis of the Stock Ships deckplans.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Raven Redstar
Rear Admiral
Joined: 10 Mar 2009
Posts: 2648
Location: Salem, OR
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2018 2:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I look forward to seeing everything!
_________________
RR
________________________________________________________________ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10434
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 5:39 pm Post subject: Re: MC-13v2 |
|
|
I started this process to create a modified version of the ship for my campaign and then retro-engineered the stock version of the ship. I strongly feel that there has to be some exterior image to represent the ship. I tweaked my deckplan shape to better match the base exterior image for the ship (the DeepWater exterior image from Stock Ships), but I also tweaked the exterior image to make the ship more symmetric, fix perspective, and reduce the oversized bridge dome to better match the deckplan, so the two met in the middle.
| Whill wrote: | My "Deepwater" deckplans are somewhat done (stock and modified). I ended up detailing most rooms on the ship. I also have an image I can live with to represent my modified ship. It was very time consuming as I learned a new image editor application as I went, but I am fairly pleased with the outcome considering.
I decided that my stock ship is not the DeepWater but another somewhat similar Mon Calamari Light Freighter. That way, anyone can just add my new ship to their universe without it stepping on anyone else's DeepWaters. But as soon as you see the deckplan and ship image, it will look a little familiar. I'm going to do stats and write-ups for the stock and modified ships, so it will end up being like an extended new entry in the Stock Ships book - Everything SS has plus descriptions for each area of the deckplan keys, like they did for The Longshot in The Campaign Pack (1e) and Classic Campaigns (2e). |
So, I ran into some hiccups with the deckplan. My ship's original deckplan had visibly less cargo area than the DeepWater, and the calculation for volume to cargo tonnage from The Far Orbit (which yields a smaller result than the original formula from GG6 1e) worked out to be 750 tons! No, the ship doesn't absolutely have to have the hauling power to use all that cargo space, but I don't feel it would be a logical design to have a lot of mostly unused space (like the DeepWater must have), nor do I want a ship that overloads itself as the norm, nor do I want a ship that specializes in extremely low density cargos. I went back to the drawing board and set out to reduce cargo space and had to come up with something to fill up the space (and I slightly lowered the deck ceiling).
My finished product still has way more cargo space than a YT-1300 because even with the Deckplan Alliance 40% increase in size over WEG (slightly bigger than the current increased canon ship size), my ship is bigger in all three dimensions. There are 4 cargo holds and with a total cargo capacity stats of 370 tons, which is still rounding down a good amount from the cargo volume to weight calculation. I've got the cargo volume figures and there is still some extra cargo space to help organize cargo in a way that makes loading/unloading more efficient, to pack low density cargoes in, or overload the ship a bit (CRM, I know you have some ideas for a rule on this, please).
Then when I finally thought I was done with the deckplan, I began working on the capsule/deckplan details and some other things came up I hadn't thought of. And I created a passenger variant to help explain the escape pod capacity for both ships (14!). And I just came up with a cool idea for my modified ship and just had to go back and put something in the stock version to allow for it, updating all three deckplans. I had to renumber the deckplan key numbers on all three deckplans.
| Raven Redstar wrote: | | I look forward to seeing everything! |
It's getting closer. Finally, at long last, I now have three completed deckplans, a first draft capsule/deckplan details write-up for the main freight variant stock ship, and first draft of stats for the main stock ship. There is a first filter I want to put those three aspects of the main stock ship through, and then make any needed revisions to the capsule and stats (and complete the stock stats). Then there is a second filter I want to put the capsule through, and make any needed revisions. Then the third filter will be to post the main stock stats/capsule/deckplan in a new thread for everyone to see and chime in. Then go back for any final revisions of the main stock ship, complete stats/capsules for the passenger variant and modified example of the main ship (which will just focus on the differences to the main stock ship). Then maybe a final filter before putting it all together in a PDF and sharing it with the world.
EDIT: MC-13v2 Deluxe Freighter
_________________
*
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: Fri Feb 11, 2022 2:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | Frank Bonura posted the following on the Star Wars D6 Facebook page. It's the length conversion chart they use over at the Star Wars Deckplans Alliance:If a freighter's WEG length is < 53.4 meters long: 140%
If a freighter's WEG length is 53.5 to 106.7 meters long: 120%
If a freighter's WEG length is 106.8 to 213.5 meters long: 110%
If a freighter's WEG length is >= 213.6 meters long: No change
So, take the listed WEG length of a ship, compare that to the above list, then multiply accordingly.
For example, the 26.7 meters listed for a YT-1300 falls into the 140% range, so multiply 26.7 by 1.4 to get 37.38 meters.
Obviously most freighters that characters will be using fall into the 140% range.
EDIT: Added "WEG length" to the above table, to clarify which length to use as a base in (the EU being what it is, a ship can easily have multiple "official" lengths). |
Cool! Good to know!
Is this why the Imperial Gozantis from Rebels are bigger than the WEG Gozantis?
In my headcanon, i was using the WEG sizes as civilian Gozantis, and the larger size as military issue only. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16320
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 11, 2022 2:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There's no such thing as a WEG Gozanti. WEG lost the Star Wars RPG license just before Phantom Menace was released; any ships introduced to the canon past that point have nothing to do with WEG. Any D6 stats for such ships are either fan-made or conversions from WotC or FFG.
The above applies only to ships with stats published in official WEG books.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Inquisitor1138
Captain
Joined: 28 Nov 2021
Posts: 607
Location: Hoth. Or Ilum...
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 11, 2022 4:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | There's no such thing as a WEG Gozanti. WEG lost the Star Wars RPG license just before Phantom Menace was released; any ships introduced to the canon past that point have nothing to do with WEG. Any D6 stats for such ships are either fan-made or conversions from WotC or FFG.
The above applies only to ships with stats published in official WEG books. |
I guess i stand corrected. I could've sworn i'd seen it in a WEG sourcebook, prior to TPM. Perhaps i am confusing it with something similar. One of the later books or maybe the Adventure Journal... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10434
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 11, 2022 9:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Inquisitor1138 wrote: | | CRMcNeill wrote: | Frank Bonura posted the following on the Star Wars D6 Facebook page. It's the length conversion chart they use over at the Star Wars Deckplans Alliance:If a freighter's WEG length is < 53.4 meters long: 140%
If a freighter's WEG length is 53.5 to 106.7 meters long: 120%
If a freighter's WEG length is 106.8 to 213.5 meters long: 110%
If a freighter's WEG length is >= 213.6 meters long: No change
So, take the listed WEG length of a ship, compare that to the above list, then multiply accordingly.
For example, the 26.7 meters listed for a YT-1300 falls into the 140% range, so multiply 26.7 by 1.4 to get 37.38 meters.
Obviously most freighters that characters will be using fall into the 140% range.
EDIT: Added "WEG length" to the above table, to clarify which length to use as a base in (the EU being what it is, a ship can easily have multiple "official" lengths)
....
The above applies only to ships with stats published in official WEG books. |
Cool! Good to know!
Is this why the Imperial Gozantis from Rebels are bigger than the WEG Gozantis?
In my headcanon, i was using the WEG sizes as civilian Gozantis, and the larger size as military issue only. |
Let me know if you see any justification on his website for applying his Falcon size increasing formula to all WEG ships. If the ship doesn't appear in the films, we have no basis to say that the WEG size was too small by a specific degree. It's taking a known issue with a single class of ship and overgeneralizing it. YMMV. Some WEG ships may be too small or too big, but each ship's size should be addressed individually. Some ships may also have bad stats and need restatted, which is something we do all the time here.
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | There's no such thing as a WEG Gozanti. WEG lost the Star Wars RPG license just before Phantom Menace was released; any ships introduced to the canon past that point have nothing to do with WEG. Any D6 stats for such ships are either fan-made or conversions from WotC or FFG. |
Seeing as WEG stopped publication of the Star Wars D6 RPG 24 years ago and there are so many fan publications and conversions since then, I guess we are now entering the age where lines are blurring between official and fanmade stats for some fans.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16320
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 11, 2022 10:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As I understand it, the decision had a lot to do with comparing WEG-assigned lengths to things like the deck plans in Stock Ships and the silhouettes in Pirates & Privateers, combined with external views from the films and WEG material wherever possible. Using CGI, the collective team on Frank's website determined, in general, that the ships as shown had too little volume to be able to fit the stats as written. They didn't just make up numbers off the tops of their heads.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10434
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 12, 2022 2:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | As I understand it, the decision had a lot to do with comparing WEG-assigned lengths to things like the deck plans in Stock Ships and the silhouettes in Pirates & Privateers, combined with external views from the films and WEG material wherever possible. Using CGI, the collective team on Frank's website determined, in general, that the ships as shown had too little volume to be able to fit the stats as written. They didn't just make up numbers off the tops of their heads. |
I've studied Stock Ships, and each ship is its own case. And there is no basis for making those crappy deck plans be the constant while the outer size is the variable of that in all cases. Some of the deck plans need changed. Since Frank makes deck plans, I'm sure even he would not praise the deck plans of Stock Ships so much that they should determine the size in all cases.
In the case of the one of the two ships there I know best so far, the DeepWater-class, I have a strong case that the original intention was to make it the class of the Nautical Star from AJ#9, which was a 30m ship (and that did not seem bad for the stats and external image). But for Stock Ships, you had an artist making the external images, graphic designers making the deck plans, and an author writing the fluff text and stats: At least three different people involved in every ship. The DeepWater's external image and deck plan each look like uncoordinated attempts at making a stock version of the Nautical Star from AJ#9, except the deck plan totally messed up on the scale and there is no way it could be only 30m, so the author quickly expanded the size of the ship with a rough guess of 45m. The end result was a ship with a cargo volume such that most of it would be empty with a max cargo weight being hauled. And not only that, but the scale of the final deck plan was still off compared to the ship's length – the ship is slightly too big. The ship would have to be shrunk a little bit to make the scale of the furniture inside the ship right.
I'm seriously considering slightly shrinking both my version of the DeepWater and my original ship MC-13v2 to make the scale of the furniture correct on the deck plans, which would require me to recalculate the volume of the cargo holds and possibly tweak the cargo capacity of my ships. The end result would have slightly reduced lengths.
Applying Frank's formulas to all WEG ships is just lazy. Even if the formula could improve the scale of more than half of all WEG ships, it will still make some ships that are already too big even worse, so it should be not be applied to all WEG ships in the size ranges.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16320
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 12, 2022 11:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I won't presume to speak for Frank, but having had the opportunity to observe his methodology (not to mention his hesitancy to make statements that he can't support when it comes to ship stats), I am confident that he wouldn't have made a blanket increase in length without good reason.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10434
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FVBonura
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 137
Location: Central PA
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 28, 2024 11:10 am Post subject: UPDATE! |
|
|
My studies of Professor Robert Brown's work continues.
http://deckplans.00sf.com/Forum/Scale_Study_Section-DD.jpg
This YouTube video surfaced recently and got me thinking.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WdmLf8HhdA
I have discovered we don't just need to upscale Light Freighters by +40% but its looking more like +60%. The 11" footwell in the full-size cockpit set was added not for Chewbacca but for the actors sitting in the back seats behind Harrison, and Peter. Actors like Carrie Fisher and Anthony Daniels. I met Daniels personally and shook his hand. He is a rather petite chap. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FVBonura
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 137
Location: Central PA
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 28, 2024 11:47 pm Post subject: History of our Work |
|
|
OK let me try to give some historical context and expand on my previous post.
The reasoning for why I have made the recommendation to increase all Light Freighters by +40% was because of the work of Robert Brown in discovering the 26.7 meter full-size set of the Millennium Falcon is only a 2:3 scale model and many including Mr. Brown assumed the cockpit set was a 1:1 full scale. My associate Paul Cargile 3D modeled the falcon and came up with the same +40% correction for the 26.7 meter set. This would make the Falcon around 37.38 meters.
Clearly West End Games used the 26.7 meter set blueprints as a baseline for their RPG created Light freighters. As I built these Light Freighters I was encountering all manner of sizing problems trying to make the game stats fit the size specified. Common problems included insufficient cargo hold size for forklift-like cargo loaders as well as load lifter and cargo loading droids. Cargo holds with this size had difficulty accommodating ground vehicles Players enjoy hauling to adventure locations. I also was discovering cockpit modules were way too small to fit crews of specified size.
I suspect my deckplan efforts forced or embarrassed WEG into making "Stock Ships". We see these tiny tracked load lifters appearing in all the artwork to compensate for the low headroom their 2:3 scale ships created. Working with former WEG employee John Paul Lona I have tested 3D models of the +40% rescaling. On our SoroSuub Nestt model it generated a more proportioned ship with 3.1 meter head room in the cargo holds to allow for articulation of 3 meter cubes of freight. 3.1 meters of headroom also allow for loading vehicles and cargo droids with plenty of clearance.
Fast Forward to Today
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WdmLf8HhdA
Harrison ford explains fitment of actor Peter Mayhew in his Chewbacca costume in the cockpit set of the Millennium Falcon. This revelation got me to thinking about the problematic 11" footwell observed in the blueprints and built into the cockpit set. I realized we may need to upscale even more. I am now trying to compute a compromise proportion somewhere between +40% and +60% to include these new facts into a working size that can make a Wookiee enter a Light Freighter cockpit with some semblance of feasibility.
http://deckplans.00sf.com/Forum/Scale_Study_Section-DD.jpg
Thoughts? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10434
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 17, 2024 8:25 pm Post subject: Re: History of our Work |
|
|
| FVBonura wrote: | | Thoughts? |
Thanks for chiming in and providing some math. I appreciate it.
I don't have any reasons to disregard the conclusions of your analysis of the Falcon scale (even your newer one that it should be even bigger than previously stated). We can logically apply that to YT-1300s in general.
| Quote: | | Clearly West End Games used the 26.7 meter set blueprints as a baseline for their RPG created Light freighters. |
I disagree that this is clear. I remain skeptical that WEG used the Falcon set blueprints as a strict basis for all their light freighter deck plans. I feel you give them too much credit, as I am skeptical that there even was any basis used at all.
| Quote: | | As I built these Light Freighters I was encountering all manner of sizing problems trying to make the game stats fit the size specified... |
I had the same issues. I'm sure Stock Ships was rushed to deadline like most published WEG works. As I previously observed about Stock Ships, there were at least three people involved in the creation of each ship: an author of the fluff/stats, a graphic designer of the deck plan, and an artist for the external image. It is quite evident that, in the creation of that published work, these three aspects were not that well coordinated. In some cases, it is impossible that the external artwork and the deck plan could actually even represent the same ship. Also, the scale of the deck plan furniture seems off from the scale determined by the ship stats' length, but it is not off by a consistent amount for each ship — it varies depending on the ship.
Instead of a flawed unified system, it looks a lot more willy nilly. That means there wouldn't be a unified mathematical formula you can just apply to all published ships (that never even appeared in films) to "correct" them. Each ship would require a unique solution, and each solution could go in multiple directions, such as re-statting the ship (length, cargo capacity, hull, etc.), designing a better deck plan, altering the external art, or combinations thereof. A single size-upgrade formula to apply to all WEG ships would be an gross oversimplication of the problems.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FVBonura
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 137
Location: Central PA
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 17, 2024 11:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thank you Whill, lets study what my organization has found.
Kazellis-class light freighter: We tried to build this ship at 28 meters long and we discovered that using the semi-side view drawn by Christina Wald, the cockpit neck was too small and there was not sufficient headroom for a human, a Twi'lek, or much less a Wookiee to walk to the cockpit/bridge standing erect. Likewise there was insufficient headroom in the cargo hold to accommodate loading droids and cargo containers. Rescaling the Kazellis-class by +40% or +50% solves both of these problems.
Starfield Industries Z-10 Seeker-class scout ship and ZH-25 Questor-class light freighter: Scaled at their published lengths of 20.3 meters, and 22.4 meters respectively, their identical cockpit modules were too narrow in diameter to accommodate seating for two. Just like the YT-1300 an increase of +40% or +50% easily provided enough room to enter and occupy the bridge as well as furnishing cargo headroom for loading equipment.
SoroSuub Nestt-class and the Ghtroc Class-720 Light Freighters: both have low headroom in their respective cargo holds. Again a rescaling of +40% or +50% adds feasibility to the holds of these two ships considering an X-wing was shoehorned into the Class-720 for Luke Skywalker and his Covert Shroud gambit.
Baudo Star Yacht: This sporting Yacht was used as a light freighter by Rollo Morsai, named the Gilded Lily, and despite multiple attempts to model and build this ship there was no way of getting the mechanical systems fitted much less a 35 metric ton cargo hold. Yes the Pulsar Skate utilizes an external cargo pod but this artwork was was drawn much later, and not produced by WEG. We originally only had the official WEG artwork from Galaxy Guide 6 to build from. Even at +50% or 48 meters long making a Space: 10 Yacht haul 35 tons of cargo will be an exercise in extreme room economy.
I would argue WEG used the 26.7 meter 2/3rds scale Falcon movie set as a benchmark for a series of underscaled ships based on our modeling of the above examples as well as others we have attempted to build with great frustration. I agree there will be exceptions to these findings and a case-by-case study is appropriate for each project, however I have yet to find a WEG created ship that has not improved significantly from upscaling.
_________________
Star Wars Deckplans Alliance
Star Wars Prequel Commentary |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
