Warp Points, Take 2

Discussions about Cosmic Starfire.

Moderators: SDS Members, SDS Owner

Forum rules
Cosmic Starfire is being designed by Fred Burton (aka 'Crucis'). Please direct all inquiries to him.

1. Nothing obscene.
2. No advertising or spamming.
3. No personal information. Mostly aimed at the posting of OTHER people's information.
4. No flame wars. We encourage debate, but it becomes a flame when insults fly and tempers flare.

Try to stick with the forum's topic. Threads that belong to another forum will be moved to that forum.

Re: Warp Points, Take 2

Postby Crucis on Sat 05 Jan 2013 21:36

AlexeiTimoshenko wrote:I would treat an OWP's station keeping DF as being similar to the sidewall generators in the Honorverse. They wouldn't provide motive power, but would provide protection from incoming weapons fire.

Crucis wrote:Does the use of d6's rather than d10's in the distance process bother you any? I've tried to only use d10's in the sysgen process, for the most part, but I've made the assumption that d6's are so common that players probably have access to some. Also, I wanted to use a bell curved result distribution in the distance determination process. Somehow it felt right. But I don't think that using 1d10 instead of 2d6 would seriously hurt things.


D6's don't bother me at all. Virtually everyone has easy access to them. In fact I could see potential cases where you could combine d6 + d10 to simulate a 2-16 variable if desired.


I'd have to do a little analysis of the probabilities of a d6-d10 combo to see what it looks like. I imagine that it's a bit interesting....

Crucis wrote:Actually, Alexei, I wouldn't assume that the star systems in the various scenario modules were holy writ. I assume that Dave Weber manually created the star systems to fit his narrative (though obeying the sysgen rules). In theory, the old ISF type 15 WP (500 HS capacity) should have been the most common type of WP, since whenever you entered a previously surveyed system (and hence the WP was automatically a closed one), you were supposed to add something like 74 to the WP type die roll. The effect of this would mean that types 12-14 would exist for about 6-7% each, but type 15 would exist on the remaining 80-ish% of the time, which is why I think that the type 15's distance is 1-360 LM. It was so common that DW gave it a distance that allowed it to exist anywhere in the star system.

So if it seems that type 15's don't occur that often in SAW, it doesn't mean all that much, because its star systems wouldn't have been generated in the same way as an as-needed player campaign. Trust me, in an actual player campaign with as needed system generation, type 15's would be the most common type of closed WP.


I don't take the scenarios as writ, but as framework to base my own setting/fiction on. Actually, the ISF type 15 wp is very close to the values on the latest table.


Yes, they are, and for essentially the same reason (as least as I logically perceive whatever reason existed for why type 15's are the way they are). They can be anywhere and of pretty much any size.


Crucis wrote:I should also point out that I never got much in the way of feedback on the idea of making the Supermonitor the largest allowed hull type. If this were the case, I'd probably tweak the WP capacities so that the max capacity was somewhere in the vicinity of 300 HS, rather than 500 HS. Any thoughts on this? Anyone?


I would say 300 HS as the maximum to be able to move at speed 3 on the tactical scale. I would put a limit of speed one at tactical for ships 301-500 HS with no boost for (It). I know that it's' larger than canon, but it does fit with the theme of the chapter "Fortress" in Insurrection. My idea is that TFNS Sergei Ortega was a modified BS7 with very limited movement on the tactical scale. Ships from 301-500 HS would be mobile but not wp capable.


Well, actually, what is or isn't Canon, depends on how one views the 2 latest Starfire novels, Exodus and Extremis. In those novels, the 500 HS Devastator and 1000 SuperDevastator are used. And I do happen to know that while Dave Weber didn't actually write those novels, the general plot of them and the new tech in them is what Dave originally intended. So, I could see the DV and SDV as canonical hull types, if I chose to.

My problem is that I don't particularly like the overall direction that Exodus and Extremis took things because the Arduan's generational colony ships and the system defense ships (from the broken down colony ships) are sooooooooooo huge that you need massive fleets of DV's and SDV's to take them on, which causes any potential scenario module based on the novels to require those huge fleets, which are simply unwieldy for players. So, I see the general plot of Exodus and Extremis as nice for a novel, but not so good for game play... which is why I've been leaning towards limiting the max hull size to 300 HS.

Of course, such a limit doesn't do anything to prevent mega-huge colony ships or merely huge system defense ships that can't use WP's (as long as WP's have hard and fast capacity limits). Of course, if early drive field based engines can only move hulls up to a certain size before the DF collapses, that still creates limited hull sizes. That said, even in Ex/Ex the Arduan colony ships didn't use normal DF based engines, so DF based limitations wouldn't have applied.


And speaking of the "ship" you mention from Insurrection, that was an idea of Dave Weber's for a mobile fortress. I don't recall if they were meant to be able to transit WP's or not. I think that the idea was for them to have sufficient mobility to not require tugs to get from a planet's shipyard out to the WP's within the same star system.
User avatar
Crucis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 1888
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27

Re: Warp Points, Take 2

Postby Cralis on Sat 05 Jan 2013 21:57

Crucis wrote:Well, actually, what is or isn't Canon, depends on how one views the 2 latest Starfire novels, Exodus and Extremis. In those novels, the 500 HS Devastator and 1000 SuperDevastator are used. And I do happen to know that while Dave Weber didn't actually write those novels, the general plot of them and the new tech in them is what Dave originally intended. So, I could see the DV and SDV as canonical hull types, if I chose to.

My problem is that I don't particularly like the overall direction that Exodus and Extremis took things because the Arduan's generational colony ships and the system defense ships (from the broken down colony ships) are sooooooooooo huge that you need massive fleets of DV's and SDV's to take them on, which causes any potential scenario module based on the novels to require those huge fleets, which are simply unwieldy for players. So, I see the general plot of Exodus and Extremis as nice for a novel, but not so good for game play... which is why I've been leaning towards limiting the max hull size to 300 HS.


It is pretty easy to say that the Arduan ships are the result of centuries of construction, so you can mostly ignore them. As for a 300 HS limit, the problem you're going to run into is that people are going to question why there are no engine or construction advances after a certain point that allows for larger ships. I don't see any non-arbitrary way you can explain that NO advance will ever again be possible to allow larger ships.

Of course, such a limit doesn't do anything to prevent mega-huge colony ships or merely huge system defense ships that can't use WP's (as long as WP's have hard and fast capacity limits). Of course, if early drive field based engines can only move hulls up to a certain size before the DF collapses, that still creates limited hull sizes. That said, even in Ex/Ex the Arduan colony ships didn't use normal DF based engines, so DF based limitations wouldn't have applied.


Exactly. And conveniently, the Arduan's large ships provide the excuse you need for "why" ... why didn't they build new large ships with DFs? Because they can't (duh)....

And speaking of the "ship" you mention from Insurrection, that was an idea of Dave Weber's for a mobile fortress. I don't recall if they were meant to be able to transit WP's or not. I think that the idea was for them to have sufficient mobility to not require tugs to get from a planet's shipyard out to the WP's within the same star system.


I believe that was the inspiration for mobile bases in ULTRA. But I think Marvin went the route of allowing them to transit WPs.
Image
User avatar
Cralis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 11158
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27
Location: Oregon, USA

Re: Warp Points, Take 2

Postby Crucis on Sat 05 Jan 2013 22:58

Cralis wrote:
Crucis wrote:Well, actually, what is or isn't Canon, depends on how one views the 2 latest Starfire novels, Exodus and Extremis. In those novels, the 500 HS Devastator and 1000 SuperDevastator are used. And I do happen to know that while Dave Weber didn't actually write those novels, the general plot of them and the new tech in them is what Dave originally intended. So, I could see the DV and SDV as canonical hull types, if I chose to.

My problem is that I don't particularly like the overall direction that Exodus and Extremis took things because the Arduan's generational colony ships and the system defense ships (from the broken down colony ships) are sooooooooooo huge that you need massive fleets of DV's and SDV's to take them on, which causes any potential scenario module based on the novels to require those huge fleets, which are simply unwieldy for players. So, I see the general plot of Exodus and Extremis as nice for a novel, but not so good for game play... which is why I've been leaning towards limiting the max hull size to 300 HS.


It is pretty easy to say that the Arduan ships are the result of centuries of construction, so you can mostly ignore them. As for a 300 HS limit, the problem you're going to run into is that people are going to question why there are no engine or construction advances after a certain point that allows for larger ships. I don't see any non-arbitrary way you can explain that NO advance will ever again be possible to allow larger ships.


Which is why having WP's be the limiting factor on hull size would do the trick, but also why allowing for multiple impulse transits would make such a limit useless. Would having WP's set a limit be arbitrary? Yes. But is a decision to allow multiple impulse transits also arbitrary? Also yes. Almost everything dealing with WP's is arbitrary to some degree or other. So in this instance, I think that I'd prefer to go with an arbitrary solution that leaned more towards limiting hull sizes.


Of course, such a limit doesn't do anything to prevent mega-huge colony ships or merely huge system defense ships that can't use WP's (as long as WP's have hard and fast capacity limits). Of course, if early drive field based engines can only move hulls up to a certain size before the DF collapses, that still creates limited hull sizes. That said, even in Ex/Ex the Arduan colony ships didn't use normal DF based engines, so DF based limitations wouldn't have applied.


Exactly. And conveniently, the Arduan's large ships provide the excuse you need for "why" ... why didn't they build new large ships with DFs? Because they can't (duh)....


Well, actually, the Arduans did install I-drives and Desai Drives into their huge system defense ships (SDS), though IIRC, they were dirt slow under I-drives.


And speaking of the "ship" you mention from Insurrection, that was an idea of Dave Weber's for a mobile fortress. I don't recall if they were meant to be able to transit WP's or not. I think that the idea was for them to have sufficient mobility to not require tugs to get from a planet's shipyard out to the WP's within the same star system.


I believe that was the inspiration for mobile bases in ULTRA. But I think Marvin went the route of allowing them to transit WPs.


Yes, I noticed. And I'm not entirely sure if DW's mobile bases could or couldn't transit WP's. It's possible that he intended them to be able to do so. I'd have to rummage through a pile of old letters, etc. to see if he ever said so.

I have no problem with the idea of a mobile OWP as long as they're slow and their mobility is really mostly for strategic reasons, not tactical ones.
User avatar
Crucis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 1888
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27

Re: Warp Points, Take 2

Postby AlexeiTimoshenko on Sat 05 Jan 2013 23:51

Crucis wrote:Yes, I noticed. And I'm not entirely sure if DW's mobile bases could or couldn't transit WP's. It's possible that he intended them to be able to do so. I'd have to rummage through a pile of old letters, etc. to see if he ever said so.

I have no problem with the idea of a mobile OWP as long as they're slow and their mobility is really mostly for strategic reasons, not tactical ones.


The mobile OWP concept is how I would handle vessels beyond 300 HS. They can move slowly within a system but their drives can't handle wp transits. The LN/JG size ships would be limited to the system that they were constructed in, but could move within that system under their own power. The BS9 and BS10's would be immobile unless towed by tugs.
Charles Rosenberg.

Alexei Timoshenko is the name of my protagonist in the fanfics, although I wish it could have been me.
AlexeiTimoshenko
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
 
Posts: 1634
Joined: Sun 05 Sep 2010 21:16
Location: Baltimore MD

Re: Warp Points, Take 2

Postby Crucis on Sun 06 Jan 2013 00:11

AlexeiTimoshenko wrote:
Crucis wrote:Yes, I noticed. And I'm not entirely sure if DW's mobile bases could or couldn't transit WP's. It's possible that he intended them to be able to do so. I'd have to rummage through a pile of old letters, etc. to see if he ever said so.

I have no problem with the idea of a mobile OWP as long as they're slow and their mobility is really mostly for strategic reasons, not tactical ones.


The mobile OWP concept is how I would handle vessels beyond 300 HS. They can move slowly within a system but their drives can't handle wp transits. The LN/JG size ships would be limited to the system that they were constructed in, but could move within that system under their own power. The BS9 and BS10's would be immobile unless towed by tugs.


Not sure that there should even be any listed starship and FT hull types above supermonitor. I'm less concerned about bases...
User avatar
Crucis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 1888
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27

Re: Warp Points, Take 2

Postby tmul4050 on Sun 06 Jan 2013 03:12

If you say that after a certain hull size drives don't work, how do tugs function. I mean say the limit was 300hs and the vessel for some reason lost its drives. Could a tug tow it as the overall mass is higher than 300hs.

My preference is to let hull size drift up to 500hs or even higher (for bases), mostly because I like the idea of seathstar style ships :twisted: . Maybe you could increase maintenence costs on these vessels so that simply running is only for rich empires (or economically suicidal ones).

Also amagine this. Take a asteroid (say Ceres) and convert it into a superfort. No drive field but 1000's or even 10000's of points of armor and shields. Huge amounts of point defence and weapons and...well you get the point. Move it into position by the WP the slow way; various methods will work without the need for drives. Watch the invading fleet admiral change his pants 8-)

Ok a little extreme.

BTW do warp points orbit their primaries. I think they should, as they do orbit the galactic centre with their system, otherwise zip...away goes the system at 18km/s away from it :geek: .
tmul4050
Commander
Commander
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Sun 27 Dec 2009 20:28

Re: Warp Points, Take 2

Postby Crucis on Sun 06 Jan 2013 03:29

tmul4050 wrote:If you say that after a certain hull size drives don't work, how do tugs function. I mean say the limit was 300hs and the vessel for some reason lost its drives. Could a tug tow it as the overall mass is higher than 300hs.


Good point about tugs, tmul. That one hadn't occurred to me.

The truth is that my preference would be for WPs to be the limiting factor rather than engines. But of course, I also believe in WP capacities being hard limits, not soft ones that can be evaded with multiple impulse transits. But I suppose that that's my old school ISF attitude talking.



My preference is to let hull size drift up to 500hs or even higher (for bases), mostly because I like the idea of deathstar style ships :twisted: . Maybe you could increase maintenence costs on these vessels so that simply running is only for rich empires (or economically suicidal ones).

Also amagine this. Take a asteroid (say Ceres) and convert it into a superfort. No drive field but 1000's or even 10000's of points of armor and shields. Huge amounts of point defence and weapons and...well you get the point. Move it into position by the WP the slow way; various methods will work without the need for drives. Watch the invading fleet admiral change his pants 8-)

Ok a little extreme.


Yes, using Ceres is more than a little extreme, given that it's just barely below my standard for what qualifies as a moon. "That's not a moon. That's a space station!" :o

Seriously though, I guess that I just think that the game would be better off if ship sizes weren't quite so large. Supermonitors seem quite large enough for me. :|

BTW do warp points orbit their primaries. I think they should, as they do orbit the galactic centre with their system, otherwise zip...away goes the system at 18km/s away from it :geek: .


They never have orbited their primaries in Starfire, and I don't really see much reason to change that. Besides, I get the impression that the number of people who actually bother to move planets along their orbital paths in their campaigns is rather small.
User avatar
Crucis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 1888
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27

Re: Warp Points, Take 2

Postby tmul4050 on Sun 06 Jan 2013 03:38

Except of course for the thebans and their planetoid bases ;) . But they were crazy I suppose.

I wonder if we will ever see what they were like before being shredded by SBMhawks. :)
tmul4050
Commander
Commander
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Sun 27 Dec 2009 20:28

Re: Warp Points, Take 2

Postby AlexeiTimoshenko on Sun 06 Jan 2013 06:13

tmul4050 wrote:Except of course for the thebans and their planetoid bases ;) . But they were crazy I suppose.

I wonder if we will ever see what they were like before being shredded by SBMhawks. :)


That's an unusual case. The wp was in an extremely dense AB. Not surprising that there were several planetoid size bases close to the wp.

Tugs are a very good question. How do you effectively tow a 750 HS BS10? If your tugs are 300 HS, your average ship size is obviously beyond 300 HS. You would need entire fleets of SD(Tg)'s just to move the bigger OWP's (3 tugs to move a single 750 HS OWP)
Charles Rosenberg.

Alexei Timoshenko is the name of my protagonist in the fanfics, although I wish it could have been me.
AlexeiTimoshenko
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
 
Posts: 1634
Joined: Sun 05 Sep 2010 21:16
Location: Baltimore MD

Re: Warp Points, Take 2

Postby Dawn Falcon on Sun 06 Jan 2013 11:23

Cralis wrote:I believe that was the inspiration for mobile bases in ULTRA. But I think Marvin went the route of allowing them to transit WPs.


Actually, I believe it was my fault they reappeared :)

I thought of them as basically forts which could crawl into position themselves, and hence wouldn't need to be assembled on the front line. I was thinking of the bug Derringer/Danger ships.
User avatar
Dawn Falcon
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
 
Posts: 1703
Joined: Thu 02 Jul 2009 17:26

PreviousNext

Return to Cosmic Starfire

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron