• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

Best Ship Design Rules?

Hi there- I've been playing kind of a home-brew / GURPS / MegaTraveller mix for longer than some of my players have been alive, and I just got a serious burr under my blanket about designing some new ships, and that got me looking both for software and rules updates...

Which got me to looking at the new T5 stuff, and wondering, before I plop down a zillion dollars for it, if the ship design rules are awesome or not. I see a lot of reviews either way, for the rules in general.

So, if someone really, really enjoyed ship design, almost enough to think of it as a worthwhile hobby unto itself, which rule set would you say has the best starship design rules, and why?

Thanks in advance for your time and advice / opinions :)
 
So, if someone really, really enjoyed ship design, almost enough to think of it as a worthwhile hobby unto itself, which rule set would you say has the best starship design rules, and why?

Depends on what you're looking for, but if you want to get down to the brass bolts of it, then FF&S 1 or 2 would be to the place to go. They're the most free form, from big ships to small craft to the systems and weapons that you wish to install in them. If you want to have a pintle mounted auto cannon near the airlock door on your Far Trader, FF&S will let you design all of parts.

When you want your starship down to the third decimal place, FF&S is the place to go.
 
For detail you can not beat FF&S, but one of my favourite ship design systems is the one in GT:ISW.
It borrows some of the lessons of FF&S (hardpoints are limited by hull configuration/surface area for example) but is no more complicated to use than High Guard.
 
I stick with CT:HG2, mostly because it has a great tech tree yet is open enough to project my own specifics.
 
My ideal starship design system would combine the simplicity of the classic High Guard system for the core components with more options for customization and specialization.

I don't think I ever got GT:IW and didn't even know it contained it's own design system. Is it related to or a derivative of GURPS Vehicles?

Simon Hibbs
 
My ideal starship design system would combine the simplicity of the classic High Guard system for the core components with more options for customization and specialization.

Well, to be fair, and being of the crotchety "what difference does it make anyway" slant, you may as well stick with high guard, leave some free space for "customization", and in that free space "make stuff up", and be done with it.
 
One of the things I have added over the years to HG2 are rules for building lower TL screens and weapons at higher TLs - thus making them smaller, cheaper and less EP dependent in some cases.
I also adapted the stuff in MT to have stuff above TL15.
 
The best one is capable of being scaled up or down, as per the user's wishes in how complex he wants to make the design process.
 
Well, to be fair, and being of the crotchety "what difference does it make anyway" slant, you may as well stick with high guard, leave some free space for "customization", and in that free space "make stuff up", and be done with it.

A perfectly fine suggestion and I've done it many times, the way I see it there's nothing inherently superior about a rule someone made up months or years ago and a rule I made up just now.

Still, it is useful to have rules for these things because if nothing else they act as a prompt top the memory and imagination. If the rules have options for solar panels, fission reactor power plants, probe launchers, small arms turrets, cargo elevators, escape capsules, etc, etc that could inspire all sorts of design and even scenario ideas I'd not otherwise come up with. It's not so much the rules being realistic or balanced that's the issue, it's how they illustrate and enrich the setting.

Simon Hibbs
 
Still, it is useful to have rules for these things because if nothing else they act as a prompt top the memory and imagination. If the rules have options for solar panels, fission reactor power plants, probe launchers, small arms turrets, cargo elevators, escape capsules, etc, etc that could inspire all sorts of design and even scenario ideas I'd not otherwise come up with. It's not so much the rules being realistic or balanced that's the issue, it's how they illustrate and enrich the setting.

For sure.

In that case, by all means, you just look to FF&S as a shopping list rather than so much as a design guide. It's chock full of steam powered densitometers and stuff.
 
Traveller5 all the way

So, if someone really, really enjoyed ship design, almost enough to think of it as a worthwhile hobby unto itself, which rule set would you say has the best starship design rules, and why?

Thanks in advance for your time and advice / opinions :)


NOTE: you don't need T5 to design ships with T5's rules. You just need a computer. Try before you buy. Send me an email: robert.eaglestone@gmail.com.



I really, really enjoy ship design as a hobby unto itself.

I use it to showcase Traveller. So I like to tune the design of each ship class based on a niche. I ALSO like to port existing canonical designs into Traveller5. So I like to have options; I need options that let me tune designs. Why? Because there are so many older systems, and I want to suck as many of them as possible in under T5, because they're all interesting and all have their uses... and there is always room for one more ship design. And T5 has the flexibility to do it.

For its selective attention to detail at the game level, and for its sheer representational strength, I love T5. I can whip up a simple trader in five minutes from the text. Example: a 300 ton almost-no-frills trader:

  • 300 ton hull, Unstreamlined. MCr 11. TL 10.
  • Default landing gear (skids), no optional fittings or wing configurations. Free, no volume.
  • Jump 1, Maneuver 1, Power 1. 25 tons, MCr 28.
  • Fuel (one month power + one jump): 33 tons. No refueling tech.
  • No frills armor == TL (10). Free, no volume.
  • Computer Model/1. 1 ton, MCr 1.5. Don't trust it to jump for you, but you could have it pilot you between the mainworld and the 100D limit, and in a pinch it could operate ship's guns (if you later decide to buy some).
  • Default, basic sensors. Free, no volume.
  • No weapons or defenses at this time.
  • Standard life support. 1 ton, MCr 1.
  • Three crew staterooms, commons, fresher. 15 tons, MCr 1.3.
  • Spacious bridge, 6 tons. Throw in one control console and two operational consoles. Cr 400,000.
  • 20 passenger states, with commons and freshers. 82 tons, MCr 4.
  • 20 low berths. 10 tons, MCr 2.
  • 80 tons cargo.
  • Capture tank, 7 tons, MCr 0.7.
  • Vault, 1 ton.
  • Fast Boat + hangar overhead. 40 tons, MCr 15.

Or, I can take some time to craft a 2400t SDB with a mini-spine, bristling with weapons and various specialized layers of armor. I can design an Ancients' ship with a stasis globe defense and Skip drives that can move it between galactic arms, powered by Collectors.

No two ships need be alike: even ships from the same class with the same equipment can have quality differences, or can show drive improvements as the TL timeline advances. A lucky ship might have a bump in quality that means it only needs a checkup every other year.

There are rules for aging a ship. The rules explain how landing, launch, and atmospheric operations work. Interested in cutting-edge Darrian technology? Antimatter power plants are explained. Want to explore ships related to the ANNIC NOVA? The elements are there. How about MegaTraveller technology? White globes, disruptors, jump inducers, and more.

I've used T5's ship design system to port 80+ classic ship designs. To help me do this, I wrote ship design software that runs on Adobe Air. It helps me curate designs, and produces text and HTML design sheets of them.

The output of my example 300t ship above in my design program is:


Trader A-CU11 Locust MCr63.4

Crew comfort: +0
Passenger demand: +0

Code:
   Tons	 Component                          	  MCr	Notes
-------	 -----------------------------------	-----	--------------------
    300	 Unstreamlined Hull, lifters, 3 a/l 	   11	U, lifters, 3 a/l free
     30	 Jump Fuel (1  parsec)              	    0	1 parsec jump, at 30t per parsec
      3	 Plant Fuel (one month)             	    0	one month
      3	 Maneuver Drive-1 (B)               	    6	1 G
     15	 Jump Drive-1 (B)                   	   15	J 1
      7	 PowerPlant-1 (B)                   	    7	P 1
      1	 Life Support Standard              	    1	10 person-months
      6	 Spacious Bridge                    	  0.4	1cc 2op 0ws
      6	 3x Crew Stateroom                  	  0.3	#3 1 crew
      8	 2x Crew Commons                    	    0	#2 
      1	 Crew Common Fresher                	    1	10 crew
     80	 Cargo Hold Basic                   	    0	
     10	 20x Low Berth                      	    2	#20 1 passenger
      7	 Capture Tank                       	  0.7	atmospheric controlled
      1	 Mail Vault                         	    0	for express contracts
      2	 2x Common Fresher                  	    2	#2 10 passengers
     40	 20x Standard Stateroom             	    2	#20 1 passenger
     40	 10x Passenger Commons              	    0	#10 
     40	 Fast Boat + hangar                 	   15	m1bis 3



One thing to note is that T5 steps back into the Book 2 mold: ship design is primarily for adventures. Ships larger than 2400 tons are only implicitly supported. That said, my program supports ships up to 2.6 million tons.
 
Last edited:
I am biased...

But I do adore the T5 ACS Design process. Nice amount of crunchy with not so much HG math required, more soul, less math, win-win!
 
I don't like it at all. Too many pages of tables, and contradictions galore.

CT LBB2 for speed, HG2 for capitals, FF&S for PC ship.
 
Why FF&S for PC ship?
What does it provide of benefit to PCs?

Particular players, probably, who need to define each rivet. They exist.


I don't like it at all. Too many pages of tables, and contradictions galore.

It is definitely on the MegaTraveller spectrum of tables. Because there are lots of things.

I have already noted that T5 approaches Book 2 speeds for simple ships - BUT you have to know what to ignore. That's a learning curve thing, until we get my "ACS Zero" rules in Imperiallines anyway (it's not dead - it's just pining for the fjords).

The "contradictions" bit alarms me. I know there is errata, and I know there are challenges with some of the exotica, and I have a personal problem with the TL of the Proton Screen. But I need context, Mike. Contradictions against the OTU (probable), or internal contradictions (possible)? And I apologize if you've listed them before, but can you email me the list?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top