The Rancor Pit Forum Index
Welcome to The Rancor Pit forums!

The Rancor Pit Forum Index
FAQ   ::   Search   ::   Memberlist   ::   Usergroups   ::   Register   ::   Profile   ::   Log in to check your private messages   ::   Log in

Starship Factory Upgrades
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> Ships, Vehicles, Equipment, and Tech -> Starship Factory Upgrades Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
jmanski
Arbiter-General (Moderator)


Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 2065
Location: Kansas

PostPosted: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I can settle for that: +2d Hull with a penalty to Maneuver (and it has to be very expensive)
_________________
Blasted rules. Why can't they just be perfect?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Sun Dec 26, 2010 3:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jmanski wrote:
I can settle for that: +2d Hull with a penalty to Maneuver (and it has to be very expensive)


Actually, since we're talking about factory mods here, it should be two different options: up to +2D with a maneuver penalty, and relatively expensive, or up to +2D without a maneuver penalty and very expensive. Like I said before, an increased hull strength isn't all about just tacking on extra armor plate here and there.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Esoomian
High Admiral
High Admiral


Joined: 29 Oct 2003
Posts: 6207
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

PostPosted: Sun Dec 26, 2010 5:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

crmcneill wrote:
jmanski wrote:
I can settle for that: +2d Hull with a penalty to Maneuver (and it has to be very expensive)


Actually, since we're talking about factory mods here, it should be two different options: up to +2D with a maneuver penalty, and relatively expensive, or up to +2D without a maneuver penalty and very expensive. Like I said before, an increased hull strength isn't all about just tacking on extra armor plate here and there.


Or perhaps it should be based on percentages. +2D to hull is quite a lot if the basic craft only has a hull of 1D. +25% Hull however is probably a more likely situation.

That means a craft with a 4D hull can be upgraded to a 5D hull with no loss of maneuverability but a craft with a 1D hull can only go as high as 1D+1 (rounding up) before it starts to loose maneauverability regardless of how much you spend.

That way you can't just say you're using stronger materials and designing systems with multiple redundancies and get a 200% improvement in hull strength.
_________________
Don't waste money on expensive binoculars.

Simply stand closer to the object you wish to view.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14022
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Sun Dec 26, 2010 7:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Also, you have to look at the cost outlay that a company would have to make to push out all these 'upgrades' and the possible loss in stocks if they get stolen (by say those underground techies that make those upgrades on the black market)... Our companies here, can do it easier, as there are only a few hundred million customers, and only 20-30 or so (max) upgrades that can be chosen from... some as cheep as 20 or so bucks, some up to 900.
With the Starwars realm, you have a few hundred thousand planets worth of people, well into the high hundred trillion people mark, which means those same companies would have to outlay all the cost for making all those upgrades..

NOW i can see some being done... like a few base packages.
Stock - as is
sportster, 1d more maneuverability, 2 more speed. NO weapons. For those who go racing.
Scout - 25% extra range on sensors, extra stores (1 more month of consumables).
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Mon Dec 27, 2010 1:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

garhkal wrote:
Also, you have to look at the cost outlay that a company would have to make to push out all these 'upgrades' and the possible loss in stocks if they get stolen (by say those underground techies that make those upgrades on the black market)... Our companies here, can do it easier, as there are only a few hundred million customers, and only 20-30 or so (max) upgrades that can be chosen from... some as cheep as 20 or so bucks, some up to 900.
With the Starwars realm, you have a few hundred thousand planets worth of people, well into the high hundred trillion people mark, which means those same companies would have to outlay all the cost for making all those upgrades..

NOW i can see some being done... like a few base packages.
Stock - as is
sportster, 1d more maneuverability, 2 more speed. NO weapons. For those who go racing.
Scout - 25% extra range on sensors, extra stores (1 more month of consumables).


However, in our world, it is possible to order a specific vehicle from the factory, if you are willing to wait a little bit for delivery. The complexities and vagaries of the automobile industry are outside of my scope of knowledge, but it ultimately boils down to whether or not you are willing to pay for what you get. Also, there are a lot more options available than just the simple basic package. Down at the car dealership you can get just the basic stereo package, or you can shell out for the GPS navigation system with satellite radio, six-disc changed in the dash with Bose Surround Sound speakers. The vehicle you end up with is all in what you are willing to pay for and how patient you are willing to be for it to show up.

It's also noteworthy to consider that certain vehicles may be designed for both commercial or government duty. A Ford Crown Victoria is a full-sized sedan the performs well enough, but is also available with the police interceptor package that includes a heavy-duty suspension system, more powerful alternator (to run the radios, computer and lights), and some other refinements. For such vehicles, redundant backups and other such systems wouldn't be out of place. Perhaps an appropriate step would be to change up the availability code to F or R for some of the higher end options, indicating a system that would normally only be found on a military or government vessel.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14022
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Mon Dec 27, 2010 5:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

True.. heck i could even see some upgrades being flat out only offered to the mil.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426

PostPosted: Mon Dec 27, 2010 6:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Car manufacturers often offer different packages and individual options within a certain range. This is basically determined by what options the manufacturer think will be sufficient in demand and therefore a viable commercial option to include in the program. The next step is that the car dealership can install certain options usually themselves or by an external company. These options often cost considerally more than 'standard' factory options. However the range of options are much larger than the factory options. After this we are more or less working with external companies that custom (re)build the car for you. This is both the most expensive and least restrictive option.

So, basically, if one wants 'cheap' options one have to keep withing certain limits. I cant get a 500 hp BMW 3-series from the factory. I either have to get a different model (M3, much more expensive) and tune it, or 'custom build' my 3-series (swap engines and make other modifications, extremely expensive). However, Im certain I can order such a car and that BMW can arrange for contacts with the correct custom builder.
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Mon Dec 27, 2010 12:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ZzaphodD wrote:
Car manufacturers often offer different packages and individual options within a certain range. This is basically determined by what options the manufacturer think will be sufficient in demand and therefore a viable commercial option to include in the program. The next step is that the car dealership can install certain options usually themselves or by an external company. These options often cost considerally more than 'standard' factory options. However the range of options are much larger than the factory options. After this we are more or less working with external companies that custom (re)build the car for you. This is both the most expensive and least restrictive option.

So, basically, if one wants 'cheap' options one have to keep withing certain limits. I cant get a 500 hp BMW 3-series from the factory. I either have to get a different model (M3, much more expensive) and tune it, or 'custom build' my 3-series (swap engines and make other modifications, extremely expensive). However, Im certain I can order such a car and that BMW can arrange for contacts with the correct custom builder.


Another real world example would be Mercedes-AMG. According to Wikipedia, AMG was founded by a pair of former Mercedes-Benz engineers who maintain close ties to the company and offer vehicles with better performance, handling and stability, along with more aggressive styling.

Mercedes is also an example for our discussion on increasing Hull strength, as Mercedes offers armored variants of its luxury car line, which includes run-flat tires, enhanced suspension to counter the added weight, and a fire-extinguishing system. Normally, military grade small-arms fire and explosives fragments would tear right through a Mercedes, but this beast shrugs them off and keeps right on going. Physics dictate that the car probably isn't as nimble as its unarmored siblings, but there isn't a car in the world that can outrun a well-aimed bullet. Plus, while there are a lot of aftermarket companies that can armor up a car for you, Mercedes builds this one from the ground up (for just shy of $500,000 of course)

It's highly unlikely that every starship construction company in the galaxy has their own performance subsidiary, but it's likely that one or two just might. CEC is probably one of the most likely candidates, since it's a company owned by Corellians, with the Corellian mindset in a Corellian dominated market. Over-the-top luxury and armored vessels would be few and far between, but they would be available to the right customer at the right price.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426

PostPosted: Mon Dec 27, 2010 4:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Also the fluff about CEC products being easy to install into CEC hulls due to standardization (Swapping engines and so forth). This would make a extensive option program more feasible due to lowered costs.
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Mon Dec 27, 2010 6:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

On a related note, regarding the modification rules in Tramp Freighters, every piece of equipment listed has a given volume of weight that it subtracts from the ship's cargo capacity, but it gives no weights for the removal of the stock equipment that the aftermarket part is replacing. It isn't realistic to say that the Space 4 Engine you just removed didn't take up any cargo space at all, but the Corellian Evader-GT Ion Drive you installed (with a Space of 8 ) takes up 16 metric tons.

What would be some good rules of thumb for the amount of weight gained by the removal of stock equipment to make room for aftermarket gear?


Last edited by CRMcNeill on Tue Aug 04, 2015 11:47 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426

PostPosted: Mon Dec 27, 2010 7:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

crmcneill wrote:
On a related note, regarding the modification rules in Tramp Freighters, every piece of equipment listed has a given volume of weight that it subtracts from the ship's cargo capacity, but it gives no weights for the removal of the stock equipment that the aftermarket part is replacing. It isn't realistic to say that the Space 4 Engine you just removed didn't take up any cargo space at all, but the Corellian Evader-GT Ion Drive you installed (with a Space of 8) takes up 16 metric tons.

What would be some good rules of thumb for the amount of weight gained by the removal of stock equipment to make room for aftermarket gear?

I just add the difference between the two. If there is no figure I make one up with existing stats as a reference.
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
jmanski
Arbiter-General (Moderator)


Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 2065
Location: Kansas

PostPosted: Mon Dec 27, 2010 9:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

crmcneill wrote:
On a related note, regarding the modification rules in Tramp Freighters, every piece of equipment listed has a given volume of weight that it subtracts from the ship's cargo capacity, but it gives no weights for the removal of the stock equipment that the aftermarket part is replacing. It isn't realistic to say that the Space 4 Engine you just removed didn't take up any cargo space at all, but the Corellian Evader-GT Ion Drive you installed (with a Space of 8) takes up 16 metric tons.

What would be some good rules of thumb for the amount of weight gained by the removal of stock equipment to make room for aftermarket gear?


Sure it's realistic, the stock space 4 engine is what the ship was designed around. The other one is bigger and takes up more room.... room that was available with the space 4 engine.
_________________
Blasted rules. Why can't they just be perfect?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Mon Dec 27, 2010 10:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jmanski wrote:
Sure it's realistic, the stock space 4 engine is what the ship was designed around. The other one is bigger and takes up more room.... room that was available with the space 4 engine.


Unless you are leaving the original engine in place, there will be some sort of empty space left when you take out the stock engine. That empty space equals cargo space, so the ship temporarily gains that much cargo space, if only for the amount of time required to put the new engine in.

For example, say your characters have a stock Barloz-Class Medium Freighter, with a Space of 5. Your main drive suffers catastrophic failure, and has to be completely replaced. Unfortunately, the only drive available to get you off planet (short of selling your ship for scrap to buy passage elsewhere) is a SoroSuub Boav Ion Drive, with a Space of 4 and a weight of 10 tons. So you make do with what you have, yank the stock drive and slap on the new unit.

Now, logic dictates that the stock drive took up some of the space that the new drive is now occupying, which means that you should lose less than the full volume of the stock drive, simply because that stock drive is no longer present.

After all, if I suffer a tragic accident and lose a limb, I also lose the weight of that limb that I was carrying around. If I get a prosthetic limb to help replace the functions of the limb that I lost, I now have to carry around the extra weight of that prosthetic. I do not, however, have to carry around the weight of both the prosthetic and the limb that I lost originally.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
jmanski
Arbiter-General (Moderator)


Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 2065
Location: Kansas

PostPosted: Mon Dec 27, 2010 11:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't think that analogy fits what is happening in this instance.

Besides, you are assuming WEG meant this as a fact-based answer. Bigger engines taking up cargo space is a standard WEG answer to a complicated issue. To simplify they are taking away an important commodity to a freighter to ensure that you don't add too much stuff.

If you used the better engine = cargo space rule for starfighters how would you increase their engines? Is a Z-95 stuck being slow because of this rule?
_________________
Blasted rules. Why can't they just be perfect?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16163
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Tue Dec 28, 2010 12:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

jmanski wrote:
I don't think that analogy fits what is happening in this instance.

Besides, you are assuming WEG meant this as a fact-based answer. Bigger engines taking up cargo space is a standard WEG answer to a complicated issue. To simplify they are taking away an important commodity to a freighter to ensure that you don't add too much stuff.

If you used the better engine = cargo space rule for starfighters how would you increase their engines? Is a Z-95 stuck being slow because of this rule?


I think the rules in GG6 were specifically designed for Space Transports, and rules for upgrading other vehicles would need to be covered by an alternate set of rules. Perhaps starfighters are only possible to upgrade via modification, or the introduction of improvements from the manufacturing company's R&D department.

Besides, by WEG's rules in GG6, if you have, say, a SoroSuub Nella 342 Light Freighter with a Space of 4 and a Cargo Capacity of 50 metric tons, and you buy the SoroSuub Boav Ion Drive for aftermarket installation in your freighter, you are essentially losing 10 metric tons for no gain in performance whatsoever.

Let's take the ridiculousness a little further. Let's say you have a SoroSuub Jermaguim-Class Light Freighter with a Space of 6 and a Cargo Capacity of 85 metric tons. Installing the same drive cuts your speed by 1/3, and still costs you 10 metric tons.

It's a simple fact. If you have a container with a limited volume, and that volume is already partially filled, you have a limited amount of space available to put other things in. Now, if you remove something from the original used volume, this creates more usable volume. Unless you are planning to keep the original engine, removing said engine frees up some internal volume. Period. Now, internal volume is a rather nebulous currency, and WEG has always shown a tendency to play fast and loose with numbers, so they used the most readily available number they had: cargo capacity. But the numbers have to cut both ways: if you put something in, you lose internal volume. If you take something out, on the other hand, you gain internal volume. WEG seems to have ignored that possibility.

It wouldn't even be limited just to engines, either. Any sort of equipment removed leaves an empty space behind that can be used for something else. A freighter captain in the well-protected and relatively crime-free Core Worlds might be tempted to dump his shield generators to pick up some extra cargo. By your way of thinking, he wouldn't gain any cargo space if he pulled the shield generator, but he would lose 6 tons of cargo capacity by installing a 1D replacement just to get him back to stock (GG6 page 40). GG6 specifically states that cargo space can be used for passenger transport if the space is properly converted. By that standard, a freighter captain could reverse the formula and convert all of his passenger cabins into cargo holds and gain more cargo capacity that way.

Here's a more appropriate example. My dad inherited a Mustang from my grandfather, his dad. It had a V6 engine in it. My dad decided to fix the car up and put a 351 V8 in it. To put that engine in, he had to remove the V6. Once the V6 was out, he was left with an empty engine compartment. Now, that empty engine compartment has a lot of wide open space for things (translation: Cargo Capacity), but unless he wants to convert the muscle car into a giant flower pot for my mom, he needs to put another engine in there. Luckily, he has the 351 V8, which he installs post-haste. The V8 is a bigger engine, and takes up more room, and weighs more. Fortunately, however, my father removed the original engine so that he had the extra space available to put the aftermarket engine in. Luckily, he doesn't have to worry about lugging around the weight of that redundant V6 engine just because Ford Motor Company forgot to include the exact weight of the stock V6 in the owner's manual.

I think we can all agree that WEG didn't get everything right. I'm sure we can all point to at least one example in the WEG material where they got something wrong (the actual size of the Executor comes to mind). It's a fallacy to assume that this is the way things are just because WEG said so.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> Ships, Vehicles, Equipment, and Tech All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Page 2 of 10

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group


v2.0