Travellers Needed! High Guard Updates

[MarcusIII]

My highly simplified example was intended to include ALL life support, not just food. Just spitballing and trying to have some fun as a game nerd.

There's not much else for except for some water and air handling. And those items are built in machinery and tanks. Not anything you can stock up. Just so you don't put aside toomuch space that can be used for cargo or living space

 

[mavikfelna]

There's not much else for except for some water and air handling. And those items are built in machinery and tanks. Not anything you can stock up. Just so you don't put aside toomuch space that can be used for cargo or living space

Food is usually considered to be part of stores and spares allocation. For most game needs I think that works fine.

 

[Geir]

As I was supposed to be doing something else, I decided to take a look at updating the Spinward Extents books to the 2022 High Guard standard and then decided to do the entire Corellan League Star Fleet and one thing I really noticed: Ships between 2000 and 5000 tons are not optimal: You need to be 5001 tons to get a crew size reduction (which actually is a bit silly - making the minimum exactly 5000 tons would be better. Same applies to Military Hulls and Distributed Arrays. All the ships I started at 4000 tons ended up being much better designs at 6000 tons, with about the same sized crew. And exactly 5000 tons really sucks. Also, the sensor operator thing for 7500 tons seems unnecessarily one-off - making that 5000 tons as well would be less obscure.

(Didn't go though all 19 pages of this thread, so I apologize if these issues have already been brought up)

 

[MarcusIII]

Food is usually considered to be part of stores and spares allocation. For most game needs I think that works fine.

right. One can stock up on food for longer voyages. Air & water can be recycled, for the most part

 

[Condottiere]

You can always fast.

And there's water recycling.

 

[wintertraveller]

As I was supposed to be doing something else, I decided to take a look at updating the Spinward Extents books to the 2022 High Guard standard and then decided to do the entire Corellan League Star Fleet and one thing I really noticed: Ships between 2000 and 5000 tons are not optimal: You need to be 5001 tons to get a crew size reduction (which actually is a bit silly - making the minimum exactly 5000 tons would be better. Same applies to Military Hulls and Distributed Arrays. All the ships I started at 4000 tons ended up being much better designs at 6000 tons, with about the same sized crew. And exactly 5000 tons really sucks. Also, the sensor operator thing for 7500 tons seems unnecessarily one-off - making that 5000 tons as well would be less obscure.

(Didn't go though all 19 pages of this thread, so I apologize if these issues have already been brought up)

I've noticed the same break points being problematic.

For example, a 1,990 ship:
- cannot be targeted by spinal mounts but a 2,000 ship can be.:
- at less of DM disadvantage in being targeted by attack rolls
- less of a signature DM to being detected with sensors.

A 2,000 to ship is not immune to turret crits but a 2,001+ is immune.

Basically, you're better off with any ship size greater than 2,000 or less than 2,000. The 5,000 ton ships have a similar set of weakness.

The 1980 HG has some useful language regarding ship size and tonnage codes that could be useful in handling these break points " Hull tonnage for both metal hulls and planetoids is expressed as a code given on the tonnage table. Each specific tonnage level includes all values between it and the next highest stated level. Thus, tonnage code A includes all tonnages from 1,000 to 1,999 tons.

It seems like the break points in advantages and disadvantages should be linked in similiar patterns without leaving these two specific sizes as the worst of both worlds.

 

[Condottiere]

Depends on doctrine and assigned role(s).

Navally, I've decided to leave a gap between one and five kilotonne primary hulls, for the Confederation starwarships.

 

[MongooseBella]

Life support could also include things like hygiene (toothpase, toothbrushes, basic medicines), not that they would take up a ton. Unless you're NASA and get confused about women

 

[Sigtrygg]

I've noticed the same break points being problematic.

For example, a 1,990 ship:
- cannot be targeted by spinal mounts but a 2,000 ship can be.:
- at less of DM disadvantage in being targeted by attack rolls
- less of a signature DM to being detected with sensors.

A 2,000 to ship is not immune to turret crits but a 2,001+ is immune.

Basically, you're better off with any ship size greater than 2,000 or less than 2,000. The 5,000 ton ships have a similar set of weakness.

The 1980 HG has some useful language regarding ship size and tonnage codes that could be useful in handling these break points " Hull tonnage for both metal hulls and planetoids is expressed as a code given on the tonnage table. Each specific tonnage level includes all values between it and the next highest stated level. Thus, tonnage code A includes all tonnages from 1,000 to 1,999 tons.

It seems like the break points in advantages and disadvantages should be linked in similiar patterns without leaving these two specific sizes as the worst of both worlds.

There will always be breakpoints, it is the nature of the system. It is the reason there are so many 1,999t escort class missile boats, 19,999t battleriders, 74,999t cruisers in HG80 threads. Moving the goalposts for MgT will just put the breakpoints where you want them to be rather than where the author wants them to be.