| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:54 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| vanir wrote: | | Seriously tone it way down and you may have something. |
Did I miss an edit somewhere? I don't see where it said 30D, and while 30D is a bit excessive, all that available energy that would've been powering the superlaser has to go somewhere in the stats. Hideouts and Strongholds offers two different kinds of shield generators that can be purchased for planetary bases, and the Death Star scale one has a Shield rating of 3D (DS Scale). That's with just 25 crew and small enough to be located within the confines of a surface base. A Guardian Star could mount a dozen of these generators or more (one for every surface sector even?)
It might be fun to combine the two types listed in Hideouts and Strongholds to make extremely versatile Death Star shields, like a DS-scale shutter shield (see Hideouts & Strongholds)
As far as the weaponry and hull rating is concerned, I don't see the need to downgrade. When I originally posted this thread, my concept was of a battlestation designed using the plans of the original Death Star, modified only so far as needed to delete the superlaser and add the planetary shield generator. Therefore, things like hull dice, weaponry and such would remain relatively static.
From the public relations side, I can see why it might be an issue to have such overwhelming normal-scale weaponry, but really, so what? This Empire may be peaceful and ethically opposed to mass-slaughter on a planetary scale, but that doesn't mean they are any less militaristic. Furthermore, when I originally proposed this idea, the battlestation was not just a battle station; it was in essence the mobile capital of this Imperial faction. That makes it a prime target for anyone who might want to destabilize the government, so making it tough as nails and armed to the teeth just makes good tactical and strategic sense.
As far as the stats, I approve wholeheartedly. As far as the name, Guardian Star definitely works. When I played around with name possibilities, I settled on the Avatar. In Hindu philosophy, an Avatar is a physical manifestation of a divine force (which is a pretty good analogy for a battlestation that can protect a planet from almost any conceivable threat while helping to rebuild and recover from a disaster at the same time).
_________________
"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 |
|
 |
Guardian_A
Commodore
Joined: 24 May 2011
Posts: 1654
Location: South Dakota, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 2:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | vanir wrote: | | Seriously tone it way down and you may have something. |
Did I miss an edit somewhere? |
Yeah, he went back and edited his original post when we were talking about it earlier. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vanir
Jedi
Joined: 11 May 2011
Posts: 793
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | ...while 30D is a bit excessive, all that available energy that would've been powering the superlaser has to go somewhere in the stats. Hideouts and Strongholds offers two different kinds of shield generators that can be purchased for planetary bases, and the Death Star scale one has a Shield rating of 3D (DS Scale). That's with just 25 crew and small enough to be located within the confines of a surface base. A Guardian Star could mount a dozen of these generators or more (one for every surface sector even?) |
The standard DS shielding is already catered by numbers of generators in each of the 24 zones. So rather than having 2-3D plus 24 coordinated shielding zones for something like 10D shields at one location on the DS, it has those shield generators spread out across each of the 24 zones so that the entire DS is surrounded by moon sized 2-3D shielding. It must still power literally hundreds of planetary scale shield generators to achieve this.
The "power of the superlaser going somewhere" does with the proposal that this version of a deepspace station can project its shield coverage to a nearby fleet or planet, like the Endor base shield generator. If you like, think of it as the superlaser crater dish being replaced by the Endor shield generator dish, which provided 3D shields around the DSII in orbit of Endor. So, when it is projecting its shields the full power of the core is used to provide a massive planet based shield capability of 3D, and when it is only shielding itself some reserve power can be redirected to the regular shield generators to double power for 6D coverage around the station itself.
Considering as I mentioned 6D is the best planet based shielding of a Dark Empire era fortress world with an Imperial class megalopolis, to have this surrounding an entire plantoid sized station seems both extremely powerful and perfectly reasonable, whilst maintaining canonical balance. IMHO. I concede we are discussing speculative opinions and points of view here, with no true right or wrong versions.
| Quote: | | It might be fun to combine the two types listed in Hideouts and Strongholds to make extremely versatile Death Star shields, like a DS-scale shutter shield (see Hideouts & Strongholds) |
Not written into game mechanics mostly because at the time in 1e DS tech companion it was considered so epic in scale that PCs would hardly need to ponder one-one combat against a Death Star, in the event a particular gaming group chose to it was left to GM ruling to further flesh out the DS technical details based on what amounts to fairly skeletal guidelines published.
In this vein it is described within that the shielding zones of the Death Star do work like shutter shields, each of the 24 zones has independent shield generators and command/control centres, as well as independent gunnery coordination centres and effectively each zone operates as an individual vessel for combat/coordination purposes. It describes each zone shielding as a flat plate which is angled and adjusted for specific threats within that zone and prone to small gaps, so that starfighter scale spacecraft can manoeuvre between the coverage of individual shielding zones in order to attack the hull directly (and primarily capital and starfighter scale structures on the surface), where a capital ship would have to face the full shielding during their approach and attack run. It is left for GMs to flesh out these details in mechanical terms within their game however.
| Quote: | As far as the weaponry and hull rating is concerned, I don't see the need to downgrade. When I originally posted this thread, my concept was of a battlestation designed using the plans of the original Death Star, modified only so far as needed to delete the superlaser and add the planetary shield generator. Therefore, things like hull dice, weaponry and such would remain relatively static.
From the public relations side, I can see why it might be an issue to have such overwhelming normal-scale weaponry, but really, so what? This Empire may be peaceful and ethically opposed to mass-slaughter on a planetary scale, but that doesn't mean they are any less militaristic. Furthermore, when I originally proposed this idea, the battlestation was not just a battle station; it was in essence the mobile capital of this Imperial faction. That makes it a prime target for anyone who might want to destabilize the government, so making it tough as nails and armed to the teeth just makes good tactical and strategic sense.
As far as the stats, I approve wholeheartedly. As far as the name, Guardian Star definitely works. When I played around with name possibilities, I settled on the Avatar. In Hindu philosophy, an Avatar is a physical manifestation of a divine force (which is a pretty good analogy for a battlestation that can protect a planet from almost any conceivable threat while helping to rebuild and recover from a disaster at the same time). |
As mentioned however diplomacy does play a role in how the station will be received and which systems are good with it and those which aren't.
The measure is as a famous quote goes, power corrupts so then absolute power corrupts absolutely. The problem for independent and allied democratic systems is self rule and the potential for military dictatorship with a monopoly on superweapons like a death star style of battle station. It is not combatable. Therefore, despite that the current administration of the craft maybe benevolent that is not the issue. The issue is when, not if but when a disagreement arises, the owner of the station is the final authority in all disputes, their point of view becomes by default correct, any alternative such as self government with fundamental disagreement becomes by default incorrect and seditious.
Every dictator is benevolent, according to them. The problem is not whether you think you're good or bad, it's whether you have absolute power and authority upon others. That's the secret of diplomacy: self rule by facts like there's not a damn thing you can do about it even if you wanted to, not by assertion or claim or assurances. That's when foreign governments sign your treaties or enter collective representation and alliances. The only other alternative is by fear, which by definition is not benevolent rulership.
Again we're dealing with no right/wrong answers in speculating about galactic affairs in an RPG, however I feel that a galactic civilisation at large will not take well to a militant battlestation qualifying the term superweapon (as a siege weapon rather than destructive one in this case).
Would the world have responded well to Hitler having nukes in 1938? According to Chamberlain and many politicians at the time he was a very reasonable man and had done wonders for Germany with the best interests of his nation at heart, the knee jerkers in international media were quite a bit more reserved and deeply concerned or disconcerted, as it turned out they were right but at the time he was arguably a benevolent ruler among certain influential circles. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lostboy
Commander
Joined: 22 Aug 2008
Posts: 384
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2012 4:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Don't know if anyone has thought of this but wouldn't something as big a death star be very easy to spot on sensors? Apply scale ratings as bonuses for anyone trying to detect it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Lostboy wrote: | | Don't know if anyone has thought of this but wouldn't something as big a death star be very easy to spot on sensors? Apply scale ratings as bonuses for anyone trying to detect it? |
I've considered something similar, but I'm not sure how well scale would factor in. Size is definitely a factor in detection (IMO) but would also be counterbalanced by the fact that the larger a vessel is, the more powerful it's sensors will be. I would use hull dice (plus shields, if active) as the base detection difficulty for a ship, with a modifier for space transports and bulk freighters to reflect their larger mass than would be indicated by their hull dice.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Lostboy wrote: | | Don't know if anyone has thought of this but wouldn't something as big a death star be very easy to spot on sensors? Apply scale ratings as bonuses for anyone trying to detect it? |
If you build a death star, hiding isnt your no 1 priority.. 
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ZzaphodD wrote: | | Lostboy wrote: | | Don't know if anyone has thought of this but wouldn't something as big a death star be very easy to spot on sensors? Apply scale ratings as bonuses for anyone trying to detect it? |
If you build a death star, hiding isnt your no 1 priority.. :lol: |
LOL. However, if someone else builds a Death Star...
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Darth_Hilarious
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 17 Apr 2013
Posts: 129
Location: Somewhere over there --------->
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 29, 2013 7:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: | | Fallon Kell wrote: | | Bren wrote: | I just like the image of the Asteroid-Devastators saving a world by spitting out a continual stream of the Star Wars equivalent of house hold appliances.  |
Thus began Hardware Wars... |
I wish I had thought of that. |
C3-P0 insulting R2-D2............................... Your Mother was a Can Opener and your Father was a Toaster Oven!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dhawk
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 27 Sep 2009
Posts: 191
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun May 05, 2013 7:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Not quite how I pictured it, but still pretty cool.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun May 05, 2013 9:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| vanir wrote: | Again we're dealing with no right/wrong answers in speculating about galactic affairs in an RPG, however I feel that a galactic civilisation at large will not take well to a militant battlestation qualifying the term superweapon (as a siege weapon rather than destructive one in this case).
Would the world have responded well to Hitler having nukes in 1938? According to Chamberlain and many politicians at the time he was a very reasonable man and had done wonders for Germany with the best interests of his nation at heart, the knee jerkers in international media were quite a bit more reserved and deeply concerned or disconcerted, as it turned out they were right but at the time he was arguably a benevolent ruler among certain influential circles. |
Sorry about the delay in replying. Darth Reallife (and his apprentice, Darth Harddrivecrash) had me in his clutches for a time.
The problem with this example is that the various other galactic governments would be none too happy about the construction of such a station regardless of what the Hull rating is. It makes no sense for a government that is willing to risk the bad publicity of building a station like this in the first place to turn around and under-build it in the interests of public opinion. To quote your Hitler example, its the equivalent of Pre-WWII governments being okay with Hitler having nukes, just so long as they are kiloton grade, not megaton grade.
Furthermore, since the stats as written are for an era long after the Classic Era, technology advances would argue in favor of increased hull dice, in the form of improvements in electronics and control systems, improved damage control, etc. Even if the actual number of weapons were decreased, the effectiveness of the individual weapons would be increased to offset the reduced coverage.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Sun May 05, 2013 9:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, a government that was building something like that openly would probably be considered to be provoking war or even attacked as a preventive strike. And everybody else would want one.
Building one in secret would be tricky, and then once the cat was out of the bag all hell would break loose. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DougRed4
Rear Admiral
Joined: 18 Jan 2013
Posts: 2259
Location: Seattle, WA
|
| Posted: Tue May 07, 2013 1:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It does look impressive. Beautiful art for your commissioned piece, dhawk! 8)
_________________
Currently Running: Villains & Vigilantes (a 32-year-old campaign with multiple groups) and D6 Star Wars; mostly on hiatus are Adventures in Middle-earth and Delta Green |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DB 2.0
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 03 Sep 2012
Posts: 208
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 8:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Just got through skimming this, and it's the Freaking "Peace Moon" as the Darths & Droids GM intended it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
