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

Starfighter compliments for almost any ship
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> Ships, Vehicles, Equipment, and Tech -> Starfighter compliments for almost any ship Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
MrNexx
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 25 Mar 2016
Posts: 2248
Location: San Antonio

PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2018 2:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

garhkal wrote:
Kytross wrote:
It's useless as a starfighter, yes. Though the scale difference makes it incredibly difficult to hit.

I wouldn't say it's useless though. It's a one man speeder that can not only break atmosphere, but can travel to nearby planets, ships and space stations. It's a very interesting design, clearly built to be a starship on a miniature scale..


But where's it getting the engine thrust/power needed to be orbitally capable, when larger airspeeders don't?


Different engines, I imagine.

At that size, it's pretty much "Let's strap an engine and a shield system on a life support pod."
_________________
"I've Seen Your Daily Routine. You Are Not Busy!"
“We're going to win this war, not by fighting what we hate, but saving what we love.”
http://rpgcrank.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
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: Thu Mar 22, 2018 4:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MrNexx wrote:
garhkal wrote:
Kytross wrote:
It's useless as a starfighter, yes. Though the scale difference makes it incredibly difficult to hit.

I wouldn't say it's useless though. It's a one man speeder that can not only break atmosphere, but can travel to nearby planets, ships and space stations. It's a very interesting design, clearly built to be a starship on a miniature scale..


But where's it getting the engine thrust/power needed to be orbitally capable, when larger airspeeders don't?


Different engines, I imagine.

At that size, it's pretty much "Let's strap an engine and a shield system on a life support pod."

IMO, this is beside the point. This entire topic is about having a starfighter complement for almost any ship. Using this particular ship would result in having a starfighter complement in name only. If a ship has four one-man interatmospheric speeders that are manifestly not starfighters, then it doesn't actually have a starfighter complement.
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Mamatried
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 16 Dec 2017
Posts: 1822
Location: Norway

PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2018 4:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:
MrNexx wrote:
garhkal wrote:
Kytross wrote:
It's useless as a starfighter, yes. Though the scale difference makes it incredibly difficult to hit.

I wouldn't say it's useless though. It's a one man speeder that can not only break atmosphere, but can travel to nearby planets, ships and space stations. It's a very interesting design, clearly built to be a starship on a miniature scale..


But where's it getting the engine thrust/power needed to be orbitally capable, when larger airspeeders don't?


Different engines, I imagine.

At that size, it's pretty much "Let's strap an engine and a shield system on a life support pod."

IMO, this is beside the point. This entire topic is about having a starfighter complement for almost any ship. Using this particular ship would result in having a starfighter complement in name only. If a ship has four one-man interatmospheric speeders that are manifestly not starfighters, then it doesn't actually have a starfighter complement.


Good point.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MrNexx
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 25 Mar 2016
Posts: 2248
Location: San Antonio

PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2018 5:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:

IMO, this is beside the point. This entire topic is about having a starfighter complement for almost any ship. Using this particular ship would result in having a starfighter complement in name only. If a ship has four one-man interatmospheric speeders that are manifestly not starfighters, then it doesn't actually have a starfighter complement.


They are like calling a rowboat an aircraft carrier because you launch drones from it, aren't they?
_________________
"I've Seen Your Daily Routine. You Are Not Busy!"
“We're going to win this war, not by fighting what we hate, but saving what we love.”
http://rpgcrank.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Mamatried
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 16 Dec 2017
Posts: 1822
Location: Norway

PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2018 7:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MrNexx wrote:
CRMcNeill wrote:

IMO, this is beside the point. This entire topic is about having a starfighter complement for almost any ship. Using this particular ship would result in having a starfighter complement in name only. If a ship has four one-man interatmospheric speeders that are manifestly not starfighters, then it doesn't actually have a starfighter complement.


They are like calling a rowboat an aircraft carrier because you launch drones from it, aren't they?


That would at least technically be a drone carrier.

I am not saying things become a carrier, what I am saying is that ships like this, and larger even can be fitted reasonably into almost anything the size of a light freighter (again depending on model) to act as armed backup.
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: Thu Mar 22, 2018 8:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Based on the linked stats you have in the OP, then, I would reiterate my earlier position that a single or double laser turret would be a better use of both credits and cargo capacity. The logistics of launch and recovery alone for light freighters would make this more trouble than its worth, even before accounting for the wimpy stats. I mean, where is the hatch on a YT-1300 that’s big enough to accommodate this?

Now, something like the Phantom from Rebels, in a semi-recessed docking point, would be a bit more believable, but if you are intent on using the ISP-6, I suggest bumping it up to Starfighter Scale and either reducing the Shields to 1D or removing them altogether. Frankly, it doesn’t make a lot of sense to call this thing a “shuttle” at all, since it has no carrying capacity apart from the pilot.
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14021
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2018 1:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:
Based on the linked stats you have in the OP, then, I would reiterate my earlier position that a single or double laser turret would be a better use of both credits and cargo capacity. The logistics of launch and recovery alone for light freighters would make this more trouble than its worth, even before accounting for the wimpy stats. I mean, where is the hatch on a YT-1300 that’s big enough to accommodate this?

Now, something like the Phantom from Rebels, in a semi-recessed docking point, would be a bit more believable, but if you are intent on using the ISP-6, I suggest bumping it up to Starfighter Scale and either reducing the Shields to 1D or removing them altogether. Frankly, it doesn’t make a lot of sense to call this thing a “shuttle” at all, since it has no carrying capacity apart from the pilot.


But at 2.2 meters, how would one Bump it up to SF scale?
_________________
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: Fri Mar 23, 2018 6:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don’t really care; I’m not planning on using it. But if this thing is supposed to constitute a starfighter complement, it had better be able to starfighter.
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Sutehp
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 01 Nov 2016
Posts: 1797
Location: Washington, DC (AKA Inside the Beltway)

PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2018 1:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:
I don’t really care; I’m not planning on using it. But if this thing is supposed to constitute a starfighter complement, it had better be able to starfighter.


Congratulations, CRM, that might be the very first instance of anyone using the word "starfighter" as a verb. I salute you, sir. 8) Razz Laughing

That being said, I have to agree that this "shuttle pod" fails at both being a starfighter and being a shuttle. Its crappy stats (holy jumping sarlaacs, only 1D maneuverability for a starfighter??? That's even worse than a B-wing!) guarantee that 1) it's useless as a starfighter because it can't defend itself and 2) it's useless as a transport (as CRM pointed out above) because it only carries a pilot and no passengers. Just who is this thing supposed to transport if it only has room for a pilot? This thing is little more than a 1-man escape pod with a useless pair of guns.

I mean, FFS, just look at its stats: It's less maneuverable, less armed and less armored than a B-wing so it utterly fails at any sort of assault role because of the lack of armor and weapons, it fails at the interception role because it's so relatively slow (this thing has a Space of 6 when proper interceptors have twice that speed), and it completely fails at space superiority because practically all other starfighters are going to be able to fly rings around it. If you get outmaneuvered by a B-wing, you're not gonna be controlling any sort of area of freedom of action in a space battle.

Jeebus, Mariana and Jehosephat, I'd sooner climb into a TIE Fighter. At least then, I'd have a small fighting chance of survival. Shocked Mad Shocked

CRM is right: this "starfighter" can't starfighter at all. Not to mention that this "shuttle" can't shuttle very well either. Just what the hell is this thing supposed to do?
_________________
Sutehp's RPG Goodies
Only some of it is for D6 Star Wars.
Just repurchased the X-Wing and Tie Fighter flight sim games. I forgot how much I missed them.


Last edited by Sutehp on Fri Mar 23, 2018 5:14 pm; edited 6 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Raven Redstar
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 10 Mar 2009
Posts: 2648
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2018 4:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's what happens when you base stats off of a toy from the 80s.
_________________
RR
________________________________________________________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sutehp
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 01 Nov 2016
Posts: 1797
Location: Washington, DC (AKA Inside the Beltway)

PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2018 5:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sutehp wrote:
CRMcNeill wrote:
I don’t really care; I’m not planning on using it. But if this thing is supposed to constitute a starfighter complement, it had better be able to starfighter.


Congratulations, CRM, that might be the very first instance of anyone using the word "starfighter" as a verb. I salute you, sir. 8) Razz Laughing

That being said, I have to agree that this "shuttle pod" fails at both being a starfighter and being a shuttle. Its crappy stats (holy jumping sarlaacs, only 1D maneuverability for a starfighter??? That's even worse than a B-wing!) guarantee that 1) it's useless as a starfighter because it can't defend itself and 2) it's useless as a transport (as CRM pointed out above) because it only carries a pilot and no passengers. Just who is this thing supposed to transport if it only has room for a pilot? This thing is little more than a 1-man escape pod with a useless pair of guns.

I mean, FFS, just look at its stats: It's less maneuverable, less armed and less armored than a B-wing so it utterly fails at any sort of assault role because of the lack of armor and weapons, it fails at the interception role because it's so relatively slow (this thing has a Space of 6 when proper interceptors have twice that speed), and it completely fails at space superiority because practically all other starfighters are going to be able to fly rings around it. If you get outmaneuvered by a B-wing, you're not gonna be controlling any sort of area of freedom of action in a space battle.

Jeebus, Mariana and Jehosephat, I'd sooner climb into a TIE Fighter. At least then, I'd have a small fighting chance of survival. Shocked Mad Shocked

CRM is right: this "starfighter" can't starfighter at all. Not to mention that this "shuttle" can't shuttle very well either. Just what the hell is this thing supposed to do?


Raven Redstar wrote:
That's what happens when you base stats off of a toy from the 80s.


We thank you, Raven, for that lampshade hanging. 8)
_________________
Sutehp's RPG Goodies
Only some of it is for D6 Star Wars.
Just repurchased the X-Wing and Tie Fighter flight sim games. I forgot how much I missed them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Raven Redstar
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 10 Mar 2009
Posts: 2648
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2018 7:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just figured I'd jump in with a small bash. Laughing

In all seriousness, though: the size and armament is based off of a toy design, which if we pay attention to many of the Star Wars toys from way back when, they were designed to be able to fit an action figure sitting in the cockpit and little else. Even my massive AT-AT toy that I had could barely fit 3 figures in the passenger section, which is nowhere near the cargo/troop capacity that has been established in universe.
_________________
RR
________________________________________________________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14021
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 24, 2018 1:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Raven Redstar wrote:
Just figured I'd jump in with a small bash. Laughing

In all seriousness, though: the size and armament is based off of a toy design, which if we pay attention to many of the Star Wars toys from way back when, they were designed to be able to fit an action figure sitting in the cockpit and little else. Even my massive AT-AT toy that I had could barely fit 3 figures in the passenger section, which is nowhere near the cargo/troop capacity that has been established in universe.


Just like my ole Milennium falcon. I could barely fit 3 in the cockpit (though it said you could fit 4), and 4 in the lounge area (though iirc it said 6).
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sutehp
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 01 Nov 2016
Posts: 1797
Location: Washington, DC (AKA Inside the Beltway)

PostPosted: Sat Mar 24, 2018 2:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Granted, this thing is based off a toy, but I'm just wondering what the hell the guy who wrote up the stats was thinking when he made this design. You all know I'm rubbish when it comes to stat-crunching and figuring out game balance in the D6 system, but even I was able to discern that this "shuttle pod" performs poorly as a starfighter in any role (either Assault, Space Superiority or Interceptor) just by comparing its stats to the B-Wing in the main rules. And that was without me knowing previously about it being Speeder Scale rather than Starfighter scale, which makes it even weaker than the tiny A-wing.

Again, did the writer of these stats have an end-goal in mind when he made these stats for this ship? Or did he just decide on some random numbers, throw them into a SW starfighter sheet willy-nilly and then post it on RPGGamer.org just because he could?
_________________
Sutehp's RPG Goodies
Only some of it is for D6 Star Wars.
Just repurchased the X-Wing and Tie Fighter flight sim games. I forgot how much I missed them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mamatried
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 16 Dec 2017
Posts: 1822
Location: Norway

PostPosted: Sat Mar 24, 2018 7:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I see it as very likely that who ever statted out the shuttlepod was somehow trying to make this.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/YT-XC
At a mere 3 meter length I assume this could be used as a fighter. it is a fighter.

Seems the isp-6 stats could have been an attempte to stat out an imperial side micro fighter like the YT

And this IS supposed to be carried on board YT-1300s, yet I sti wonder how to launch these
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
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  Next
Page 2 of 5

 
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