 December 29, 2007 - 4:43pm | Is there any interest in comming up with standard hull designations for the ships herein? Below is something I created as a first pass internal use, losely based on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hull_classification_symbol Not all rulesets might implement all classes, but those that do be consistent.... And can include differences in different rulesets in one doc as below, or seperate ones (I'd prefer a single doc, with different columns for different rulesets, at least until it gets too un-wieldy, but more maintainable short term in one doc, IMO.) (BTW, can't paste XHTML or HTML as generated by OpenOffice.... Gotta figure out how to enter HTML / edit HTML.)
|
 December 29, 2007 - 5:23pm | Star Frontiers has enough abbreviations as is. I think we can leave the abbreviations out. However, I like the ship classification stuff. Bombers and passenger shuttles are definitely better designations for Size 2 hulls. A "privateer" is simply a ship for hire. A "yacht" is simply a small to largish civilian frigate/transport (HS 13 seems to be the largest they have in the Dragon articles. I'd say 4-13). |
December 29, 2007 - 6:05pm |
How is this for a new ship type: Infiltrator (or Subvisor?). Acts like a submarine in that it runs silent and performs sneak attacks. This ship gains momentum off the radar, and then glides in with engines silent. Its hull absorbs light and sensors. Of course, with the new cloaking technology recently discovered, I don't think it would be that hard, 400 years in the future, to having cloaked ships that, like the Romulans and Klingons, uncloaks and fires (as the technology completely ingulfs the object and the object can't see out. Since the technology exists today, I don't think it should be withheld from Star Frontiers. However, if I remember correctly, it requires anti-matter to operate. |
December 29, 2007 - 6:23pm | FWIW, I think that there are times that a short designation is very handy. (I'm using it in a spreadsheet I'm working on....) As for an infiltrator, if there were Stealth technology, wouldn't most military ships have it / be purchaseable by different classes of ships? Maybe not when it first comes out, but over time, new ships are stealthier than the prior generation.... Seems like a natural for scout (Assault Scout) type ships, as well as attack craft or E-boats (PT boats) equivalent ships. Modern day, first F-117 type craft, to now in F-22A's to new "Frigates" comming out of Europe to the the Zumwalt if it ever comes out.... Although there could be a space for a scout / spy / special op type classification.... |
December 29, 2007 - 6:27pm | Dingy, Slip, Shooner -- Would dingy / slip be seperate from Launch or Shuttle? Shooner a type of Yacht or Cutter / Patrol Craft? Or indicate purely non-military? |
December 29, 2007 - 10:05pm | Pardon the use of "slip". For some reason my mind had considered it the name of a long narrow sailboat, but after looking it up just now, it seems that I'm mixing another boat with the term for a small ferry port. What I was thinking was that slips would be more system ships. Shuttle-sized transports able to go long distances within a system, and relatively quick. As for a schooner, look at the schooner page on Wikipedia. It gives you the pronunciation and information. These are essentially small, fast cargo ships, and I invision them with engines in the front and the back somehow. It's like a cutter, but it is for more pedestrian purposes, though could make excellent smuggling ships. And you can stop saying "if there were stealth technology". It is now fact. We're just not able to apply it at the moment because of its reliance on anti-matter (I think, or some super-powerful conductor), and has a radiation within the field that they haven't yet overcome. But since it is brand new tech (either earlier this year or last year, I don't remember) there's still plenty of time to figure out those issues (400 years of progress from now would certainly reveal the way around such things). I suppose a dingy is essentially a shuttle. Traditionally, dingies were used for all jobs like a shuttle, but in this instance, I was thinking of it more as a large escape craft. It should fit 10-20 people rather closely, whereas escape pods only hold a few people at best. A dingy can also be operated for longer distances than an escape pod. A dingy would be lighter than a shuttle, as it doesn't have the same capability to enter or exit an atmosphere. It's a one-way craft away from an exploding ship, designed to save more lives. |
December 29, 2007 - 11:19pm | Dingy == lifeboat? Shooner sounds fine -- a ship for a pleasure cruise.... ;-) Should we put a document up and edit there? was wanting to see comments from more folks before putting a document up.... |
December 29, 2007 - 11:21pm | PS The "if there were stealth" is a "If one could buy stealth in Star Frontiers", what would the impact be. And even without Anti-matter, given current 'stealth' systems, different ships are sure to be detectable at different ranges (funky angles and materials, shielding, heat sinks, .. |
December 29, 2007 - 11:30pm | I'm afraid you've misinterpreted my meaning of "cloak". I don't mean "stealth". I mean "cloak". Bending light around an object to make it appear invisible. While the technology currently exists, it has not yet been applied to objects because of the seminal dangers. Also, as a matter of my own nit-pickiness, it's "schooner" (phonetic: skooner), not "shooner". |
December 29, 2007 - 11:57pm | Or mount camera screen all around, screen showing what the camera on the other side picks up... easier in space 'cause less stuff around? |
 December 30, 2007 - 12:12am | That would work for visual, but what about radar? not to mention energy emissions Time flies when your having rum. Im a government employee, I dont goof-off. I constructively abuse my time. |
December 30, 2007 - 12:26am | And can you capture a laser on camera and send it a screen on the other side? ;-) yeah, would need something else for Radar. Shielding and heat sinks for the energy sensor. Although if having to power all those screen... Yeah, not feasable, but if you could spoof those other items, could project that you were something you ain't.... |
December 30, 2007 - 8:26am | If you're invisible, there's no need for shielding if you stay on the move while firing. Also, you wouldn't want the ship to be such a pain in the butt that eveyone wants one. It needs to be an item that serves a specific purpose in game balance. Besides, without shielding, it just makes more sense, especially considering the power requirements needed for the cloak. Armor, yes, Screens, no. |
