Beowulf doodle feedback requested

[far-trader]

Thanks all for the good suggestions and kaladorn for your in depth review. In response to your points...

Originally posted by kaladorn:


1) If you're going to do it, do level 2. It is still useful in a game. If find some classic CT plans dont' show internal detail and thus aren't as useful. Showing where berths, desks, etc. are gives some utility. Really though, if you made one of level 1, then added the detail for level 2, you could release both.

My feelings too, and it's easy to do both the level 1 and 2 versions. The photoshop (or other) layers idea above would make it a snap, er, click I'm still trying to decide what tools to do a final version in if I want to style it up a notch. There are many I have but none have I mastered

Originally posted by kaladorn:

2) I'm not a fan of colour on these. Honestly, I'm not trying to distract my players from the game. Stuff like colour tends to do that - it sometimes visually confuses the situation. You want to see the player's miniatures (and hostiles) clearly in this kind of setup. (YMMV)

Yep, again we have the same wants.

Originally posted by kaladorn:


3) I'd love to see Scarecrow style renders... but ONLY if you can do at least as well as MadDog's renders and ideally (in a fantasy world, since not everyone is a professional CGI artist like Scarecrow) as good as the Crow. What I'm getting at here is to feel 'sharp', they need to be done well. Now, maybe you can draw on some of the folks who are pros to help critique and amend initial versions up to a high standard on the final product.

I'd love to do Scarecrow quality renders but my little talents lie elsewhere.

Originally posted by kaladorn:
I think Scarecrow should bleedin' well be hired to do interiors of ANY ship players are meant to play on. His renders are like the interior line art pics of ship stations in SOM brought live, since they include details as funky as views out of staterooms into space, reflections of light off of glass and other reflective surfaces, very interesting lighting, practical design, etc. It is *very* tough to match that level. But yeah, if you come even close, you can show a player and they can *feel* that they are in that scene. Ideally one render for each key locale, just like SOM did.

YES! If I had the money I'd be commissioning him and/or Bryan or some of the other talented folk here to render my gearheading

Originally posted by kaladorn:
I like the design except I'm dubious about what looks like one of the thruster cones at the rear. It looks like a *really small* unit on the bottom right. Unless that's an airlock?

The dark gray hemisphere with the "finned" hull area? That would be (in this case) one of the two thrusters. Total thruster volume for 1G is 4tons. Divided in half is 2tons per thruster. Then, the way I figure components, about half that volume is the actual thruster and the rest is for easy maintenance access around it and to it. So each "thruster" shows as about 1ton, or two squares more or less

It's close. I thought about making it squared to fill in the volume but a dish seemed better, to um, focus the gravitons Well, in truth I was going for simple visual clues for function. Thrusters are bell or cylindrical, Powerplants are squared with trapezoidal faces, and Jump drives are dumb-bell shaped.

Originally posted by kaladorn:


The idea of doing a proper 200 ton design following the old model is fantastic though. I actually have several of them. I found someone either making knockoffs or who had access to the original moulds some time ago, and purchased just about one or two of every traveller ship. I think I have 4 Type As.

Thanks. It's been an ongoing project to do all of them since I have most of the mini's (only 2 of most and I'm still tuning some of them with filler and files, but some day they'll see paint

I actually have most of the deckplans in various stages of doneness, just happened the Type A fell together to "finished"* first so I figured I'd see what the interest level was and if I should be considering other directions.

* If the design system doesn't change again or I run into more problems with the profile

Originally posted by kaladorn:
I did a design for a fast high priority armed cargo transport on a 300 ton hull. I found crew space *cramped* to say the least to get a decent bit of jump engine and a high G M drive in there along with some cargo, lots of fuel (to drive the ridiculous fuel requirements of an MT masking system for that powerful of a ship), etc. It really does have the 'submarine' feel.

That sounds very interesting, any plans to maybe submit it for publication or posting to share?

Originally posted by kaladorn:
Keep up the good work, keep us posted.

Thanks much for the encouragement, it's needed everytime I look at what some of the real talents are putting out here

 

[flykiller]

Basically I'm wondering what would people (as player and referee) like in a deckplan package, style wise?

if the game is the focus then for each deckplan feature, just ask if it contributes to the player's perceptions. most of a game takes place inside the player's head, but when a player says his character searches a room it helps if he can see what's in the room. I've seen players pull out a ruler and lay it on a deckplan to check a line of sight. and if a player wants to hide in engineering it helps to know just where the equipment is and where the accessible spaces are, whether or not the control panel can be seen from the hidey-hole, etc.

deckplan features can also contribute to the referee's perceptions of his world. some cabin shapes cannot be double-occupancy, some components turn out to be double-stacked, the pilot cannot see the ground directly, etc.

from a business perspective detailed computer graphics are a given, a necessary first without which you don't even get a glance. if you intend your deckplans to be shared with existing fans who are already practiced in using their imaginations then anything decent will do, but if you want to attract new players you'll need something on the level of star wars and star trek. so, you'll have to ask who your deckplans are for. once you answer that you'll be set to go.

 

[Scarecrow]

Dan,

Sorry it's taken two pages for me to post on this thread. I like what you've got so far very much. Pixel drawing is how I started out. Way back when, all I had was 'Windows Paint' and I used all sorts of cunning ways to make it work for me. (I actually did a perspective drawing once using it!!!!) It's very time consuming but highly rewarding. The results are very clean images and you also have a lot more control over your designs than you would with a point-and-click map-maker, allowing you to be more creative with your designs and with your use of space.
You must by now be familiar with the master of pixel-painted deckplans, Frank Bonura: Deckplan Alliance. If not, have a look at some of his tips and tricks. The colours he uses can be eye-watering but the results are undeniably effective. He's also acutely aware of the third dimension - an uncommon trait in deckplan designers.

With regards to your Beowulf, I like the look and feel of what you've drawn so far. From a purely practical point of view, they are varied enough in their textures to be interesting and easily read but not so much that they would kill a printer to print out.
I'm looking forward to seeing where you go with this. Especially as the Beowulf is pretty much the only canon ship design I don't despise. I've got a half-finished Beowulf deckplan of my own somewhere. It was the beginnings of the project which became the Florian 100 tonner instead.

Crow

 

[kaladorn]

Scarecrow, are you telling me you don't like the Dragon? I always thought it had clean, sleek lines and a predatory look to it.

I wasn't terribly fond of the Safari ship, the Basketball (Broadsword), or the Subsidized liner. I didn't mind Suleiman or the Serpent class scouts, nor the Marava. I have to admit I was not fond of the type T patrol cruiser nor many of the ships from supplement 9.

As to Dan's comment about a thruster taking up a limited amount of space:

I agree, but I can't help but thinking that some amount of the powerplant space should be applied near it. I sort of view powerplant as including the conduits, breakers, substations, cutoffs, patch points, etc all around the ship, so I tend to distribute that mass around the ship. I'd think a fair amount of juice would be going to the thruster plates. I'm not really bummed out by the semicircular look, but I just think they should be a bit meatier.

As to my paltry efforts:
The Haaka Vilaaru (Star Wind)

The link to the deckplan is about a fourth of the way down the page on the right (where it says 'deck plans are here').

 

[kaladorn]

Layout comment:
Top Deck - Bottom Right
Second Deck - Top Right
Third Deck - Top Left
Fourth Deck - Bottom Left

Inspired By: The miniature for the ship Amidala used to fly around in in the first movie - long, pointy, flattened out, with SR71-esque nacelles.

Interestingly, for some reason, I can't see the darn green that shows up in the originals. I'll have to try for a different export. The compensators, life support, and the huge masking screen and electronics package and main powerplant were a green in the deck plans, and for some reason they have come out in black after the conversion to JPEG. You can see where equipment intrudes into the two nacelles on the second deck from the sides and into the engineering space forward of the cargo hold - and it is all black in the one I just DL'd. It used ot be dark green. Have to see if I can fix that.

The idea is the middle two decks have the cargo bay with a double height clamshell door at the back.

Turret accesses are from the floor hatch halfway along the spinal corridor on Deck 3 (down through deck 4 into the turret) and through the roof hatches at the tops of both nascelles on deck 2.

Outside accesses are to the topdeck to the Forward Dorsal airlock from the Electronics bay (accessed via the Spinal Corridor from the rest of the ship) , from the 2-floor clamshell doors on the back of the cargo hold, and from the main airlock portside on the top deck.

By making the accesses top deck, even if she bellies in or water lands, you can still access the two main exit methods. You might not be able to open the clamshell doors on the hold if you are worried about flooding, but you can certainly use the two locks.

The two engineering officers have their duty stations in the nascelles near their quarters.
Their is a workstation in the comms/EW bay to monitor the sensors and the masking system. There are 7 workstations on the bridge. The left side has the gunnery pod for the 3 gunners, the front has the pilot and navigator, the captain sits in the middle of the bridge, and a comms officer sits at the front right.

Note, you only need a crew of 8. And 3 of those are gunners. So pilot, navigator, ship CO and the two engineers are all that is really necessary. But the extra sensor/commo crew is a real asset when you are playing hide and go peak with pirates or hostile military vessels.

Her 3-G won't outrun dedicated combat vessels without a good headstart, but that plus her masking systems and armament give her a decent chance of getting out to jump range. She has jump-2 to give her J-1 in, J-1 out options without refueling. She has a reasonable sensor suite. She can skim fuel though she'll take two runs and processing time to finish the whole tankful. She'll get enough for J-1 usually in one run. And with her masking system on, she's a ghost in space. She's also an AF for the fast getaways from unpleasant downwell locations. And she can jam the transmissions of enemy ships that might find her (to prevent them summoning help until she jumps or takes them out).

This is (or I tried to make it) the ship Han Solo would have had in a TU. Fast diplomatic courier, fast secure cargo carrier, ideal smuggling ship... when it has to get there quick (Jump 2 is not too bad for a cargo ship, and 3G helps you make the in-system legs pretty decently quick) AND securely (she can defend herself), then this is a good choice of ship (I think).

 

[Scarecrow]

Originally posted by kaladorn:
Scarecrow, are you telling me you don't like the Dragon? I always thought it had clean, sleek lines and a predatory look to it.

That's exactly what I'm telling you. Like most Traveller ships, it's unimaginative, angular, box design did nothing for me what-so-ever. But, hey! That's just me.

Crow

 

[clementk]

Originally posted by far-trader:
Basically I'm wondering what would people (as player and referee) like in a deckplan package, style wise?
2 - Something like that but with some minimal details, like stateroom features (beds, fresher, etc.) and such. That's the level I'm aiming at with the above?

4 - Or photo-relistic style like Scarecrow's full color renderings?

2 especially for interiors. Easier to make out contrasting details and easy on the printer. For tabletop I'd use a dry erase map for detail if I need more than a printout.

4 is good for exteriors if possible or teaser/promo shots of an interior. Good for description.

 

[Spud]

Far-Trader-thanks for the references! I like your stuff.

Bryan Gibson-sorry I couldn't place you; I do read your posts (and everyone elses). I recognized your artwork, of course.

Scarecrow-Ditto.I've admired your work before, too.

 

[GypsyComet]

I'm a fan of good line work, as I do want the plans to be useful in play, not blinding. If you're doing this as a shiny dead-tree release, full color details that have been screened down to about 30% while the walls (and other immovable features) remain at 100% is a useful medium. The stuff you *need* to move around is obvious...

The other option is the bare line base with color inserts as a tile set. That way you can present more than one option for furniture, etc, and even vary the walls a bit (as in: these two staterooms are now a suite, so the intervening wall is either gone, moved, or has a door).