| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
KageRyu
Commodore
Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 1391
Location: Lost in the cracks
|
 Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2012 5:01 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| ZzaphodD wrote: |
2) We still have a galaxy-spanning economy. The company with that tiny (and still cheap) space 8 engine would quickly put other companies out of business or be bought up by said companies to gain access to their technology. |
There are a lot of reasons why this statement is incorrect. I'm not even going to bother trying to explain in detail. These options only apply if all manufacturers are A) part of the larger galactic economy, and B) are available to be bought up. Not likely. Even in the real world this is not the case. Also who says the engines are cheap for the size? I see no prices on those floorplans.
| Quote: | | 3) Its still the only official source we have on engine sizes afaik. Im aware of the poor quality on WEG floorplans. I have the book with the official version of the floorplan were discussing. |
No we have tons of official WEG and official non-WEG floorplans that have a wide variety of contradicotry engine size to speed ratios that I have suggested reviewing repeatedly. Hence why I keep saying "Galaxy full of Technology".
| Quote: | | If you look at 'your' pic (yes I know its not yours, but your the one defending it) |
Yes and I am doing so for several reasons. One being that I don't see an issue with the size of the engines for reasons already stated ad-nauseum, and another being because I see no reason to attack someone's work unless and until those wishing to do so post better.
| Quote: | | And actually, I just made a passing remark that I assumed that a ship powered by to 'dishwashers' would probably be rather slow. It was you that imagined and picked up the proverbial gauntlet... |
No I did not. You and others made remarks and I made an observation on why that need not be the case. It is YOU who have picked up the proverbial gauntlet by continuing to argue every point.
Your Star Wars universe doesn't have diversity or variation, fine.
All of the Tech levels across the Galaxy in your Star Wars universe are the same, fine.
Don't use the deck plan. I say again, no need to keep arguing and criticising it. There is ample evidence in Cannon sources contradictory to your argument - and sure, if you ignore the ones you don't like then you are left with only those supporting your view, it does not make it correct.
If you feel the deck plans are that inadequate and need larger engines to justify it's listed speed, by all means, draw them up and post them. I anxiously look forward to seeing them.
_________________
"There's a set way to gain new Force Points and it represents a very nice system, where you're rewarded for heroism, not for being a poor conductor to electricity." ~Jachra |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cheshire
Arbiter-General (Moderator)
Joined: 04 Jan 2004
Posts: 4834
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2012 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There isn't a perfect corellation between atmosphere and space, though there are general trends. In official sources you can find a space as low as 4 and as high as 7. However, the overwhelmingly vast majority of ships with an atmosphere of 950 has a space rating of 6.
_________________
__________________________________
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 |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2012 6:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cheshire wrote: | | There isn't a perfect corellation between atmosphere and space, though there are general trends. In official sources you can find a space as low as 4 and as high as 7. However, the overwhelmingly vast majority of ships with an atmosphere of 950 has a space rating of 6. |
Which of course is quite realistic, given the different shape of ships and resulting drag (though I suspect theres no such correlation either..). 
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2012 6:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| KageRyu wrote: |
No I did not. You and others made remarks and I made an observation on why that need not be the case. |
I made the passing remark, you started to argue, i answered..
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2012 6:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| KageRyu wrote: | | ZzaphodD wrote: |
2) We still have a galaxy-spanning economy. The company with that tiny (and still cheap) space 8 engine would quickly put other companies out of business or be bought up by said companies to gain access to their technology. |
There are a lot of reasons why this statement is incorrect. I'm not even going to bother trying to explain in detail. These options only apply if all manufacturers are A) part of the larger galactic economy, and B) are available to be bought up. Not likely. Even in the real world this is not the case. Also who says the engines are cheap for the size? I see no prices on those floorplans.
| Quote: | | 3) Its still the only official source we have on engine sizes afaik. Im aware of the poor quality on WEG floorplans. I have the book with the official version of the floorplan were discussing. |
No we have tons of official WEG and official non-WEG floorplans that have a wide variety of contradicotry engine size to speed ratios that I have suggested reviewing repeatedly. Hence why I keep saying "Galaxy full of Technology".
| Quote: | | If you look at 'your' pic (yes I know its not yours, but your the one defending it) |
Yes and I am doing so for several reasons. One being that I don't see an issue with the size of the engines for reasons already stated ad-nauseum, and another being because I see no reason to attack someone's work unless and until those wishing to do so post better.
| Quote: | | And actually, I just made a passing remark that I assumed that a ship powered by to 'dishwashers' would probably be rather slow. It was you that imagined and picked up the proverbial gauntlet... |
No I did not. You and others made remarks and I made an observation on why that need not be the case. It is YOU who have picked up the proverbial gauntlet by continuing to argue every point.
Your Star Wars universe doesn't have diversity or variation, fine.
All of the Tech levels across the Galaxy in your Star Wars universe are the same, fine.
Don't use the deck plan. I say again, no need to keep arguing and criticising it. There is ample evidence in Cannon sources contradictory to your argument - and sure, if you ignore the ones you don't like then you are left with only those supporting your view, it does not make it correct.
If you feel the deck plans are that inadequate and need larger engines to justify it's listed speed, by all means, draw them up and post them. I anxiously look forward to seeing them. |
If you want to have an engine the size of a golfball power a rather normal light freighter, by all means, go ahead. Its your game... 
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vanir
Jedi
Joined: 11 May 2011
Posts: 793
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2012 7:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ZzaphodD wrote: | | cheshire wrote: | | There isn't a perfect corellation between atmosphere and space, though there are general trends. In official sources you can find a space as low as 4 and as high as 7. However, the overwhelmingly vast majority of ships with an atmosphere of 950 has a space rating of 6. |
Which of course is quite realistic, given the different shape of ships and resulting drag (though I suspect theres no such correlation either..). |
There's also some limiting factors such as most ships use repulsorlifts in atmosphere, and don't use their shields which limits achievable safe speeds in atmosphere.
It is stated canonically that spacecraft like the X-Wing can actually achieve atmospheric speeds of tens of thousands km/h when the front deflector shields are active and the main ion engines engaged for full thrust. This is effectively a climbout from starport to orbit and thus takes only a few seconds to achieve, or in game terms 2-3 combat rounds from starport exit to low orbit in vacuum, at full engine thrust with front deflector shields on.
The purpose of the repulsorlift installation on an X-Wing is for taxiing purposes and speed reduction during final approach (the landing cycle is more like atmospheric braking to help get down to those speeds). The atmospheric rating is effectively the maximum safe speed to manoeuvre and cruise in atmosphere without shields active, using the repulsorlift drives.
Other craft, like TIE are a special case because they have neither repulsorlift drives so manoeuvre in atmosphere only ballistically (ie. using vectored engine thrust alone like a missile), and therefore require tractor beams for landing approach cycles; and they have no shields which limits their safe atmospheric speeds to the listed value. TIE take time to exit a land based Garrison hangar and make orbit, spacecraft with shields don't. Hence systems defence TIE wings are always better placed on moonbases or space stations than on a planet surface, things like Skipray Blastboats often substitute numbers of TIE in a starfighter wing when planetbound craft for systems defence/patrol are necessary.
Space transports, shuttles and yachts or personal craft and scouts all work the same. It comes down to accessories installation and piloting decisions.
A TIE pilot could engage full thrust in atmosphere and try to chase an X-Wing, but he's going to die. In the gaming environment it also brings older craft like the Z-95 back into prominence as a systems defence craft against things like TIE, what they lack in space performance they clearly make up for in atmospheric qualities due to installed equipment that TIE don't have.
The way I work it in game terms is you enter an atmosphere at thousands of km/h and "airbrake" naturally to your maximum listed atmospheric rating as you descend to thicker air, and either engage your repulsorlift engines during final approach or are grabbed by a starport tractor beam and release the controls for automated landing sequence.
This means effectively TIE are useless in sustained atmospheric combat, they can only dip in and out of upper atmospheres (unless entering a landing sequence under starport control), or otherwise the Star Destroyer sends out a pair of Skiprays it has on board for just such an occasion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fallon Kell
Commodore
Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 1846
Location: Tacoma, WA
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My alternate theory is that Star Wars ships are much slower than the books tell us, and much closer to how the movies show them. In that school of thought, the atmospheric speeds are with the main drive on, albeit at low power, and the speeds could be variable depending on whether and how well the engines can utilize air.
_________________
Or that excessively long "Noooooooooo" was the Whining Side of the Force leaving him. - Dustflier
Complete Starship Construction System |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vanir
Jedi
Joined: 11 May 2011
Posts: 793
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2012 12:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well the presumption is that small starships use their main engines as the main power supply (same way jet fighters do to power their systems), so the main engines are on but at idle when the repulsorlift engines are being used, to power them drawing from the main engine fuel supply. Then you have redundant backup generators for things like life support in the event of engine failure but these are limited and use rechargable batteries, just for emergencies or main engine start up (umbilicals to a ground power supply is preferred so backups aren't worn out during routine operations).
But there is no reason to assert this perspective which I really use mostly to fit well with the modular nature of WEG technology in game. Gives a simple, component based starship engineering that is common between ship types and easy to figure out and for Players to use as a starship engineering system for custom ships. The engine intakes for example are fuel scoops in our game, so an X-Wing can dip into atmospheres to top up its fuel supply without having to dock at a starport.
Using the movies themselves as a guide, quite true that visibly repulsorlifts on X-Wing and Y-Wing starfighters are only seen in action during taxiing within Yavin base, just moving the starfighters around the bays with the engines off. And atmospheric flight scenes like at Bespin the spacecraft appear to be using the main engines and just at slower than space speeds, sort of cruising through the atmosphere.
Your theory is perfectly sound if that's working in game. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KageRyu
Commodore
Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 1391
Location: Lost in the cracks
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2012 2:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ZzaphodD wrote: | | KageRyu wrote: |
No I did not. You and others made remarks and I made an observation on why that need not be the case. |
I made the passing remark, you started to argue, i answered.. |
No I offered an explanation, and you started to argue just as you ar now arguing about who started to argue - just as you continue to keep the argument going, your statements getting more and more extreme in it.
Just for the sake of argument though, explain to me how this is starting an argument and not merely offering a view-
| KageRyu wrote: |
In a galaxy with technology that can break the light barrier and create Laser Swords and Laser Whips, I think the physical size of the engines is really irrelevent of their power output. |
How this isn't turning it into an argument-
| ZzaphodD wrote: | Well, as there are engines that are massive, I think you are wrong.
Even if you can make an engine rather small and still have a massive output, why would you in a light freighter? |
and how this is not only not argumentative but not insulting-
| crmcneill wrote: | | Of course! All vehicles in Star Wars must be powered by wishful thinking. |
I really think there are some on this forum, who like to claim injury at the smallest, but are so eager to dish out insults and arguments and claim neutrality and they really need to step back, check themselves, and take a good hard look at their own actions.
Really - a golfball sized engine? Talk about becoming more extreme.
If you chose to ignore all the existing canon and official material and deckplans fine. As I said it's your game.
If you just want to keep arguing I am done. You are just being obstinate for obstinancy's sake.
_________________
"There's a set way to gain new Force Points and it represents a very nice system, where you're rewarded for heroism, not for being a poor conductor to electricity." ~Jachra |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2012 3:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fallon Kell wrote: | | My alternate theory is that Star Wars ships are much slower than the books tell us, and much closer to how the movies show them. In that school of thought, the atmospheric speeds are with the main drive on, albeit at low power, and the speeds could be variable depending on whether and how well the engines can utilize air. |
I always preferred this instead of the 50.000 G or so acceleration on the wookie..
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2012 3:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| KageRyu wrote: | | ZzaphodD wrote: | | KageRyu wrote: |
No I did not. You and others made remarks and I made an observation on why that need not be the case. |
I made the passing remark, you started to argue, i answered.. |
No I offered an explanation, and you started to argue just as you ar now arguing about who started to argue - just as you continue to keep the argument going, your statements getting more and more extreme in it.
Just for the sake of argument though, explain to me how this is starting an argument and not merely offering a view-
| KageRyu wrote: |
In a galaxy with technology that can break the light barrier and create Laser Swords and Laser Whips, I think the physical size of the engines is really irrelevent of their power output. |
How this isn't turning it into an argument-
| ZzaphodD wrote: | Well, as there are engines that are massive, I think you are wrong.
Even if you can make an engine rather small and still have a massive output, why would you in a light freighter? |
and how this is not only not argumentative but not insulting-
| crmcneill wrote: | | Of course! All vehicles in Star Wars must be powered by wishful thinking. |
I really think there are some on this forum, who like to claim injury at the smallest, but are so eager to dish out insults and arguments and claim neutrality and they really need to step back, check themselves, and take a good hard look at their own actions.
Really - a golfball sized engine? Talk about becoming more extreme.
If you chose to ignore all the existing canon and official material and deckplans fine. As I said it's your game.
If you just want to keep arguing I am done. You are just being obstinate for obstinancy's sake. |
Whatever
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2012 4:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Aside from arguing I actually found the stats for the ship the deckplan was made for. Nothing in its description or modifications indicates this is some kind of military grade engine small as a dischwasher but powerful as Millenium Falcon. They are actually quite ordinary...
_________________
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: Fri Jul 06, 2012 4:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| KageRyu wrote: | | I really think there are some on this forum, who like to claim injury at the smallest, but are so eager to dish out insults and arguments and claim neutrality and they really need to step back, check themselves, and take a good hard look at their own actions. |
You are describing yourself to a T, so the irony is really delicious here. I'm sure you won't see it that way, so I eagerly await your outraged denial in response.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
KageRyu
Commodore
Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 1391
Location: Lost in the cracks
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2012 4:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ZzaphodD wrote: | | Aside from arguing I actually found the stats for the ship the deckplan was made for. Nothing in its description or modifications indicates this is some kind of military grade engine small as a dischwasher but powerful as Millenium Falcon. They are actually quite ordinary... |
There are three sets of official stats based on this hull and none of them are stock models. All of them have different space speeds.
Aside from argument I have pointed to the fact that there are official Deck Plans in both WEG and other official sources with small engines for vessels with High speeds in the RPG. Not all small and powerful engines need to be military or experimental when you look at how vast the galaxy in Star Wars is, or the variation of Races and technology.
_________________
"There's a set way to gain new Force Points and it represents a very nice system, where you're rewarded for heroism, not for being a poor conductor to electricity." ~Jachra
Last edited by KageRyu on Fri Jul 06, 2012 5:10 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
