phavoc said:
I've always thought that there were some things missing from deckplans, even though things like galley's, mess rooms, storage areas and the like are 100% necessary for playing the game. But to me they have always added more flavor to the game. Which is why sometimes I bitch about the "official" designs not quite reflecting "reality" - YRMBDTM (your reality may be different than mine!).
I totally agree, and in fact CT did address this to a degree. The 1/2 guideline I use is built on the official deckplan guideline for allocating stateroom tonnage from there. Where it is stated* that half the tonnage is the actual room and the rest is for hallways and common spaces. Spaces such as galley, mess, lockers and so on. Up to recreation facilities and such on large ships. Properly laid out you can have quite luxuriously appointed large ships without cheating the tonnage.
* but sadly not well implemented in official deckplans
Further CT Book 5 HG also included other features to be placed in the stateroom allocation. Military ships would have armories, training rooms and so on. Sickbays were also mentioned. None of which had stated tonnage or costs, being simply part of the amenities of staterooms.
I simply applied the 1/2 rule to the rest of the ship features except vehicles, sub-craft, cargo and fuel. But even there vehicles and sub-craft are not full rated tonnage and include some access space around them. Likewise standard shipping containers are rated for the stated tonnage but include some space around them to permit moving them and restricted space to squeeze between them. Fuel is generally ignored in my deckplans, used to fill hull voids to permit optimal use of space while maintaining a desirable hull form. I try to estimate the fuel tonnage close though but don't sweat it much.
So Engineering not only gets the drives (1/2 the tonnage) but also the room to get to and around them, as well as isolation airlocks, tool lockers, repair bays, control stations and so on. Minimal on small ships of course, but quite extensive on large ships.
Ditto the Bridge allocation which after 1/2 the tonnage for the actual bridge workstations (at 1 workstation per ton including access) and displays and such leaves 1/2 the tonnage for access to the bridge, airlocks, ship's lockers, standard gear, sensors, commo, and whatever, including attitude control thrusters, landing gear, and so on.
I keep meaning to update my old 1/2 deckplanning guide. Maybe I'll do it for MGT. If I can muster the interest and time.
Best advice, do what looks right to you, lots of people will appreciate it, and lots will give you grief over every little nitpicking item. Sometiems justified. And odds are good it won't please everybody all the time no matter how exacting you attempt to be and you'll always forget something if you try to specify every little piece of gear... unless you really want to approach it as a real build.
Oh yeah, and my quip about nobody ever using the -20% option for deckplans. Actually there are some instances I seem to recall. Some vehicles and small craft coming first to mind. The iconic CT Fighter for one. The air/raft for another. Both depicted at more like -50% of the stated tonnage. Hence my allowing them to be stated as full tonnage but (generally) being only 1/2 actual vehicle/craft and 1/2 access. But that's me, it won't satisfy everyone. Again do what works for you.
And of course when was the last time you saw someone choose the -20% end of the scale? Right, never.
