| 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: Fri Mar 28, 2014 12:01 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Okay, all-in-all, this is a solid design. It's comparable in size to both the Nebulon-B and the Carrack, and is a good blend of the two in capability.
The points I see:Crew: While comparable in size, this ship has about 20-25% of the crew of a Nebulon or a Carrack. If this is your intent, it indicates a high degree of automation and/or lots of droids replacing humans on ship functions, and that should be mentioned in your write-up.
Passengers: In your write-up, you mentioned that the ship normally carries two platoons, and any additional units have to bunk in the hangar bays. However, 180 passenger berths is more than enough to hold the four platoons and a support element that comprise a standard company. IMO, you should either alter your write-up or change the stat to fit.
Proton Torpedoes: I've already mentioned this, and I'm not going to attempt to change your mind. However, if you would like to make this thing an even more formidable anti-starfighter platform, I've recently written up rules for Guided Proton Torpedoes that can track onto their targets and have a much longer range than 7 Long. Just a thought...
Tractor Beam Projector: Your light tractor beam projector has essentially the same stats as the ones mounted on the Carrack and the Nebulon, which mount 5 and 2 of them respectively. Rather than a single turret-mounted projector, you could conceivably mount 2 in the front and 1 each in the other arcs with little difficulty.
Apart from that, as I said, you have a solid ship. I think your decision to change the Hull from 2D to 3D is a good one, as it puts the ship in comparable range with the Nebulon B (which has a stronger hull but weaker shields). I like the degree of detail you include in your description, and while you don't have an actual image for the ship, I picture something like a Carrack, but with a Star Destroyer-ish diamond wedge for the bow and a cluster of Corellian Corvette-style engines in the back.
_________________
"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 |
|
 |
wildfire
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 234
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 12:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | Okay, all-in-all, this is a solid design. It's comparable in size to both the Nebulon-B and the Carrack, and is a good blend of the two in capability.
The points I see:Crew: While comparable in size, this ship has about 20-25% of the crew of a Nebulon or a Carrack. If this is your intent, it indicates a high degree of automation and/or lots of droids replacing humans on ship functions, and that should be mentioned in your write-up. |
The crew comes from the design system I'm using its from this forums Fallon Kell's based on the d20 system I think, with no automation it just gives a very small crew.
| crmcneill wrote: |
Passengers: In your write-up, you mentioned that the ship normally carries two platoons, and any additional units have to bunk in the hangar bays. However, 180 passenger berths is more than enough to hold the four platoons and a support element that comprise a standard company. IMO, you should either alter your write-up or change the stat to fit. |
Will change it to several platoons of stormtroopers and a platoon of naval troopers as carried troops.
| crmcneill wrote: |
Proton Torpedoes: I've already mentioned this, and I'm not going to attempt to change your mind. However, if you would like to make this thing an even more formidable anti-starfighter platform, I've recently written up rules for Guided Proton Torpedoes that can track onto their targets and have a much longer range than 7 Long. Just a thought...
|
Will have a closer look at the rules sounds interesting 
| crmcneill wrote: |
Tractor Beam Projector: Your light tractor beam projector has essentially the same stats as the ones mounted on the Carrack and the Nebulon, which mount 5 and 2 of them respectively. Rather than a single turret-mounted projector, you could conceivably mount 2 in the front and 1 each in the other arcs with little difficulty.
|
Yes but it supposed to be a last minute design add on, need to put something in the fluff about that.
| crmcneill wrote: |
Apart from that, as I said, you have a solid ship. I think your decision to change the Hull from 2D to 3D is a good one, as it puts the ship in comparable range with the Nebulon B (which has a stronger hull but weaker shields). I like the degree of detail you include in your description, and while you don't have an actual image for the ship, I picture something like a Carrack, but with a Star Destroyer-ish diamond wedge for the bow and a cluster of Corellian Corvette-style engines in the back. |
Thanks its taken a fair bit of work to get to even the first draft let alone what is here but it nice to see it getting close to finished. |
|
| 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 Mar 28, 2014 12:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wildfire wrote: | | The crew comes from the design system I'm using its from this forums Fallon Kell's based on the d20 system I think, with no automation it just gives a very small crew. |
I think Fallon did a great job on his system, but if it is generating crew numbers that are a fraction of comparable ships with official stats, there may be a need for some tweaking. Perhaps the number generated could be the number of crew required to run a single duty shift while the rest of the crew is off-duty?
| Quote: | | Will change it to several platoons of stormtroopers and a platoon of naval troopers as carried troops. |
The Nebulon-B description in the Far Orbit project gives it one platoon of each, so for your purposes, two of each might be more reasonable.
| Quote: | | crmcneill wrote: | | Proton Torpedoes: |
Will have a closer look at the rules sounds interesting |
Here ya go. The missile stats and rules are about midway down the page.
| Quote: | | crmcneill wrote: | | Tractor Beam Projector: |
Yes but it supposed to be a last minute design add on, need to put something in the fluff about that. |
Maybe 2 turret (1 top, 1 bottom) to increase the versatility?
_________________
"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: Fri Mar 28, 2014 12:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Also, in your write-up of the TIE Fighter Squadrons, you mentioned Hunter Squadrons. What is this exactly? I'm not familiar with the term.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
wildfire
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 234
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 12:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | Also, in your write-up of the TIE Fighter Squadrons, you mentioned Hunter Squadrons. What is this exactly? I'm not familiar with the term. |
The old Pegasus base had an organisation for imperial small craft which I have used, I'll get it tidied up and posted one day but a hunter squadron is two TIE/fc two TIE/rc and eight TIE/ln if upgraded to interceptor use the interceptor variant of each TIE fighter.
The whole thing needs me to go over it and work out what I want to keep and what I need to update to fit the more modern info and background that's changed over the last decade and a half |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wildfire
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 234
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 1:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Reran the numbers and with a 25% automation it gives my crew figures and no automation of 300ish crew to which I add gunners.
As I'm reworking all ships as I go I think I'll keep this crew for now, I can always up it later.
Thanks for the missile rules link.
I think a company of troops gives lots of options including ground combat and boarding multiple ships at once if needed so I'll keep it at that for now.
I like the limitations of only one tractor beam gives can be too perfect as the design needs some weaknesses. |
|
| 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 Mar 28, 2014 3:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wildfire wrote: | | The old Pegasus base had an organisation for imperial small craft which I have used, I'll get it tidied up and posted one day but a hunter squadron is two TIE/fc two TIE/rc and eight TIE/ln if upgraded to interceptor use the interceptor variant of each TIE fighter. |
Okay. That sounds like a pretty good mix. Of course, if you like my TIE Bomber Modular Pod, I did something similar with the Interceptor, which would allow you to custom fit individual Interceptors for a variety of different missions.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
wildfire
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 234
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | wildfire wrote: | | The old Pegasus base had an organisation for imperial small craft which I have used, I'll get it tidied up and posted one day but a hunter squadron is two TIE/fc two TIE/rc and eight TIE/ln if upgraded to interceptor use the interceptor variant of each TIE fighter. |
Okay. That sounds like a pretty good mix. Of course, if you like my TIE Bomber Modular Pod, I did something similar with the Interceptor, which would allow you to custom fit individual Interceptors for a variety of different missions. |
I have a copy saved along with your bomber mods, just need to work out what I'll make use of and what adjustments I'll be making to fit my universe if any |
|
| 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 Mar 28, 2014 3:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wildfire wrote: | Reran the numbers and with a 25% automation it gives my crew figures and no automation of 300ish crew to which I add gunners.
As I'm reworking all ships as I go I think I'll keep this crew for now, I can always up it later. |
Fair enough.
| Quote: | | Thanks for the missile rules link. |
No problem. I have yet to see how it works out in gameplay, so if you get a chance to use it, let me know how it goes.
| Quote: | | I think a company of troops gives lots of options including ground combat and boarding multiple ships at once if needed so I'll keep it at that for now. |
I agree; my suggestion was more in line with keeping it as two-and-two.
I have an idea for you on that:
-Outfit one of the naval infantry platoons as an assault platoon (2 line squads, 2 heavy weapons)
-Outfit the other as a repulsorlift squad, using either Army troops or Naval Infantry cross-trained to operate the vehicles.
The heavy weapons can be used to support the stormtrooper platoon during boarding actions. Alternately, the naval platoon can mount up on the repulsorlifts to provide a deployable mobile strike force, with the stormtroopers available as rapid reinforcement using the ship's shuttles.
Just a thought...
| Quote: | | I like the limitations of only one tractor beam gives can be too perfect as the design needs some weaknesses. |
Sometimes, a weakness can be written into a backstory without having to include it in the stats. IMO, a ship that is this good would have the primary weakness of being expensive, which would be the main reason it didn't get picked up by the Navy (as in, the Nebulon B was slower, but pretty good for what they needed it for, and they already had the Carrack for scouting, which was even faster). If you feel the need to deliberately handicap your design, that's up to you, but as picky as I am about stuff, I wouldn't squawk at all if you added more normal tractor beams (hell, the Nebulon B has two of them).
_________________
"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 |
|
|
wildfire
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 234
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 3:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Haven't really put much thought into the troops make up but am currently thinking one platoon of naval troopers and three platoons of stormtroopers, two normal platoons and one platoon of space troopers, the rest of the troop space filled out with augments.
It's actually just under half the cannon cost if a Nebulon B which is given at 20 million in one module about the b-wing one strike force shantipole I think. |
|
| 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 Mar 28, 2014 3:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wildfire wrote: | | It's actually just under half the cannon cost if a Nebulon B which is given at 20 million in one module about the b-wing one strike force shantipole I think. |
That's another reason I have to be leery about the design system, because a ship this much better than a Nebulon B should absolutely not be 1/2 the cost.
Also, spacetroopers are supposed to be pretty rare (around one platoon per star destroyer), so putting a platoon on each one of these ships doesn't sound particularly realistic to me...
_________________
"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
Last edited by CRMcNeill on Fri Mar 28, 2014 4:08 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wildfire
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 234
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 4:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | wildfire wrote: | | It's actually just under half the cannon cost if a Nebulon B which is given at 20 million in one module about the b-wing one strike force shantipole I think. |
That's another reason I have to be leery about the design system, because a ship this much better than a Nebulon B should absolutely not be 1/2 the cost.
Also, spacetroopers are supposed to be pretty rare (around one platoon per star destroyer), so putting a platoon on each one of these ships doesn't sound particularly realistic to me... |
Ah but if when I run the neb B through the system I'll get a comparable price which might help, with the costings, though the few checks I've run give similar prices for canon ships.
Ah I have space troopers a lot more common as I see boarding actions as more common than canon, for example a least two companies on each Star Destroyers. |
|
| 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 Mar 28, 2014 4:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
On a related note, since most of your other ship classes have a Mk. I and II variant, with the Mk. I having a x2 Hyperdrive, is this version of the Castle a Mk. II?
_________________
"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: Fri Mar 28, 2014 4:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wildfire wrote: | | Ah but if when I run the neb B through the system I'll get a comparable price which might help, with the costings, though the few checks I've run give similar prices for canon ships. |
I'll wait to see what you come up with, as I'm not sure there is an official price for a Nebulon B anywhere. I usually just list is as NAFS.
| Quote: | | Ah I have space troopers a lot more common as I see boarding actions as more common than canon, for example a least two companies on each Star Destroyers. |
But you don't need space troopers for every boarding action. For most, regular stormies will do the job, especially if you want the ship relatively intact. Spacetroopers are great for the tough ships like cruisers and such when you don't particularly care about mass casualties. Different missions, different tools.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
wildfire
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 234
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 4:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Strike force Shantipole had a price is some of the fluff for the Neb-B but it's the only time I've seen a price anywhere I can remember.
I'm working on my description of the mission roles for the specialise stormtroopers as I see them right now so it's in flux a bit with me they might also be used for boarding operations that don't require their specialised armour as marine operations do need certain skill sets. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
