Tom Kalbfus
Mongoose
So lets say there is a pirate floating out in space and a starship with warp drive impacts upon him, how much damage would be done to the pirate?
Impact of Warp Drive on Pirates of Drinax
- Thread starter Balfuset790
- Start date
Balfuset790
Mongoose
Yeah, converting the other ships is something that needs to be done to work out how, if at all, trade routes across the Reach would change. Oddly enough the Harrier becomes a high-performance FTL ship to match it's already high spec maneuvering drive with added warp, as the existing fuel capacity gives it 4 weeks of operation PLUS 4 weeks of warp travel.
Assuming the doubled fuel consumption also covers keeping the lights on, as it were, then the Harrier can make an 8 parsec warp jump and bum around for a month before needing to refuel. I actually quite like that image as it warps in from 4 parsecs away, attacks its target, steals its cargo and warps out another 4 parsecs and probably leaves all but the more advanced security vessels impotently scanning it's Warp Wake and thinking 'We can't follow that thing without running out of fuel...'
Assuming the doubled fuel consumption also covers keeping the lights on, as it were, then the Harrier can make an 8 parsec warp jump and bum around for a month before needing to refuel. I actually quite like that image as it warps in from 4 parsecs away, attacks its target, steals its cargo and warps out another 4 parsecs and probably leaves all but the more advanced security vessels impotently scanning it's Warp Wake and thinking 'We can't follow that thing without running out of fuel...'
Reynard
Emperor Mongoose
The Harrier was my next concern as it's the heart of PoD. From my reading, and I now believe I misread when I described the scout, "Warp travel consumes twice the normal rate for the power plant", that means there is no Jump fuel per se. Still, calculate how much fuel you want for Jump operation and determine your fuel need by taking the PP code to find tons of fuel per two weeks then double. The Harrier's Jump converts to Warp at no change in displacement or cost and now runs at 2PC/week. Power plant E consumes 10 tons per two weeks so Warp drive consumes 10 tons per week of travel. With 40 tons fuel already, you have 8PCs in 4 weeks. Not bad except you will run out of power for lights, life support and maneuver by the time you reach your last destination and still need to reach a fuel source under maneuver drive. I'd say you are running at 6PC endurance with two in reserve so you have a week's PP operation for in system maneuvering once you enter and drop out of Warp. The reserved Warp fuel extends this a bit.
Since I goofed on the Scout, it's PP consumption is 2 tons per 2 weeks and the Warp drive would be 2PC per week at 2 tons fuel per week. The original Jump fuel is 20 tons so the Scout's warp endurance is 10 weeks and 20PCs! Again, you need to plan fewer parsecs so you don't outrun your power plant operation. Three weeks flight would actually be 6PCs.
In both cases, that lost endurance in warp fuel could be converted to cargo or other space. Someone please check my numbers in case I goofed again.
Since I goofed on the Scout, it's PP consumption is 2 tons per 2 weeks and the Warp drive would be 2PC per week at 2 tons fuel per week. The original Jump fuel is 20 tons so the Scout's warp endurance is 10 weeks and 20PCs! Again, you need to plan fewer parsecs so you don't outrun your power plant operation. Three weeks flight would actually be 6PCs.
In both cases, that lost endurance in warp fuel could be converted to cargo or other space. Someone please check my numbers in case I goofed again.
Balfuset790
Mongoose
The way I worked it out was assuming that the power plant was still keeping the lights on while at warp, but at the cost of doubled consumption.
Therefore, with 60 tons of fuel and a class E Power Plant consuming 10 tons per 2 weeks the Harrier has the following:
4 weeks of sub-light ops @ 20 tons total
4 weeks of Warp ops (8 parsecs) @ 40 tons total
By the same measure a Class S scout with 34 tons of fuel and a Class A Power Plant consuming 2 tons per 2 weeks has the following
14 weeks of sub-light ops @ 14 tons
10 weeks of Warp ops (20 parsecs) @ 20 tons
Which to me makes sense for a scout craft, having a long range to go out into 'wild space' and chart the unexplored. Granted, that makes the effects of things like the Great Rift less noticable within the OTU, and systems like Browne and Villane in the Reach need more than just 'very far away' as reasons why they are or have been cut off from society for so long.
Therefore, with 60 tons of fuel and a class E Power Plant consuming 10 tons per 2 weeks the Harrier has the following:
4 weeks of sub-light ops @ 20 tons total
4 weeks of Warp ops (8 parsecs) @ 40 tons total
By the same measure a Class S scout with 34 tons of fuel and a Class A Power Plant consuming 2 tons per 2 weeks has the following
14 weeks of sub-light ops @ 14 tons
10 weeks of Warp ops (20 parsecs) @ 20 tons
Which to me makes sense for a scout craft, having a long range to go out into 'wild space' and chart the unexplored. Granted, that makes the effects of things like the Great Rift less noticable within the OTU, and systems like Browne and Villane in the Reach need more than just 'very far away' as reasons why they are or have been cut off from society for so long.
Balfuset790
Mongoose
I have now discovered the one major issue with Warp, by converting the existing ships from the core rulebook changing nothing about their statlines
The Gazelle Close Escort - a ship type that appears several times throughout the campaign - has the following performance with a Warp Drive
2 weeks sublight @ 16 tons
10 weeks Warp (40(!) parsecs) @ 160 tons
Maybe in a universe with warp drive ships would be designed to use more of their fuel for sublight operations, but it's a question of how much time a ship really needs to spend in one system as part of its designated role.
This would make the Gazelle a ship for the pirates to be absolutely terrified of. It can outrun and outgun them, unless they stick to sublight, where the Harrier's Thrust of 5 slightly edges out the Gazelle's 4. Hmm, tricky...
The Gazelle Close Escort - a ship type that appears several times throughout the campaign - has the following performance with a Warp Drive
2 weeks sublight @ 16 tons
10 weeks Warp (40(!) parsecs) @ 160 tons
Maybe in a universe with warp drive ships would be designed to use more of their fuel for sublight operations, but it's a question of how much time a ship really needs to spend in one system as part of its designated role.
This would make the Gazelle a ship for the pirates to be absolutely terrified of. It can outrun and outgun them, unless they stick to sublight, where the Harrier's Thrust of 5 slightly edges out the Gazelle's 4. Hmm, tricky...
Reynard
Emperor Mongoose
Yeah, the wording is confusing but, as Maneuver drives still exist, I was assuming Warp drive is a separate fuel concern. You might be right, it SOUNDS reasonable but it becomes a new record keeping headache keeping track of amount of fuel used for warp operation and that use for sub-light operation. We need a consensus. Again remember the alternate drives should not be superior to jump with advantages overshadowing any disadvantage for balance. I was under the assumption you gained freedom of movement from the warp but with a high fuel cost while both still share other features such as the 100D limit.
Nathan Brazil
Banded Mongoose
Not saying that you cannot have Warp Drive in the OTU or in YTU, but things to consider:
A.Can you interact with other ships i.e. do your sensors work while using your Warp Drive?
B.Do your weapons work at Warp Speeds?
My take is that if your sensors work while in warp there would be little need for maneuver drive except for when "micro" maneuvers are needed like docking or getting into stable orbits. Changing course in warp is easy.
If they do not, Warp Drive would be more like point and shoot. Point in the right direction, compute, and then turn on the warp drive. Drop out every so often to get a position bearing. Rinse and repeat.
If sensors work at Warp Speeds maybe warp speed combat is possible. However, lasers, plasma weapons, particle weapons are by definition are not really FTL, unless you are getting a little more fantasy-like. The work at at around light speed or slightly slower. Have to redfine the "flavor text".
Missiles may be less a problem perhaps as one could say they have small warp-capable drives that "burn out". However, that may mean that craft smaller than 100 tons could be warp capable. Why can the missile have it and not the spacecraft?
A.Can you interact with other ships i.e. do your sensors work while using your Warp Drive?
B.Do your weapons work at Warp Speeds?
My take is that if your sensors work while in warp there would be little need for maneuver drive except for when "micro" maneuvers are needed like docking or getting into stable orbits. Changing course in warp is easy.
If they do not, Warp Drive would be more like point and shoot. Point in the right direction, compute, and then turn on the warp drive. Drop out every so often to get a position bearing. Rinse and repeat.
If sensors work at Warp Speeds maybe warp speed combat is possible. However, lasers, plasma weapons, particle weapons are by definition are not really FTL, unless you are getting a little more fantasy-like. The work at at around light speed or slightly slower. Have to redfine the "flavor text".
Missiles may be less a problem perhaps as one could say they have small warp-capable drives that "burn out". However, that may mean that craft smaller than 100 tons could be warp capable. Why can the missile have it and not the spacecraft?
Balfuset790
Mongoose
My original assumption was sensor blindness and no weapons at Warp. However, I'm now looking at the conversions of core book starships and realising how much of a difference it makes.
I'm actually looking back at my initial reasons for considering it instead of Jump drive and wondering 'can I live with those hiccups in order to deal with less headaches all round'
We'll see how that debate goes
I'm actually looking back at my initial reasons for considering it instead of Jump drive and wondering 'can I live with those hiccups in order to deal with less headaches all round'
We'll see how that debate goes
Reynard
Emperor Mongoose
Since no details were given for special functions at warp speeds, it seems the only change to a ship is Warp replacing Jump so Maneuver is still there for sub-light and Warp and Jump handle faster than light speeds. That means light speed lasers are ineffective as well as sensors not effective for anything but macrostellar objects which should already be well documented on routine space lanes. Using warp within a stellar system is suicide and, since there is no mention of a change, warp is affected by gravity.
Tom Kalbfus
Mongoose
I think that depends of how great a volume of space you have to warp in front of and behind the starship.Reynard said:
This picture describes the theory behind warp drive. Now the speed of light is around 300,000 km/second, so to go faster than the speed of light, you ship needs to collapse a volume of space roughly 300,000 km in diameter ahead of the ship down to nothing in less than a second, and also create a volume of space behind the ship that is also 300,000 km in diameter behind the ship. Now it stands to reason that there can't be any significant masses ahead of the ship within that volume, which we can say is a sphere for the sake of argument., this volume contains 14,100,000,000,000,000 cubic kilometers of space, lets say the requirement is that volume cannot not contain mass greater than the mass of the warp drive, if it does, the warp drive suddenly stops or it fails to engage.
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
Reminds me of surfing.
