Page 5 of 13 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 184

Thread: "Starships" Questions

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Manhattan High Security Detention Center
    Posts
    720
    You starship designers will have to determine what's better for your vessels.
    so if I have an impulse system rated at D and a warp engine rated CC I can either rule that D is better than CC and make them both 'CC's or go the other way around and slap'em with 'D's (?)

    I believe the column shift is meant to shift the entire set of values to the next favorable one in the table
    ok so if I decide to have a class 3 cloak (rating 20) with the protoype edge do I pick the next highest value in the table (class 4 cloak 22) and make it '22' or do I award a simple +1 bonus (21)? If I award a +1 bonus it'll cost me 2 space pts- but if I choose the enhanced system (cloaking device) edge I get a +2 but at a cost of 5 space.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Salinas, Calif., USA (a Chiefs fan in an unholy land)
    Posts
    3,378
    Originally posted by Don Mappin

    In your example the PB-32 Mod 3 WD with a Speed +1 shift would alter that engine's speed ratings to 6/7/12 and only its speed rating...
    Okay, then the Delta Flyer may have a typo in its warp rating. So, just for clarification, we are counting the net shift in functionality (+2 to -6 in the case of WD speed ratings) of the prototype device. And, that when the speed rating of the WD is shifted, it shifts all three values together (cruising, max. sustainable, and maximum emergency).

    On a side note: I have a size 5 ship (okay, it's the Mediterranean-class frigate) that has a separation system. If I wanted to install the FIG impulse engine (requiring me to purchase two units), do I have to purchase two units for each section if I want both separated systems to have impulse capability?

    Or, by virtue of the fact that the component parts are likely at least a size smaller than the original vessel, will one pair of impuse engines...one unit on the saucer, the other on the stardrive...be sufficient to drive both sections when separated?
    Davy Jones

    "Frightened? My dear, you are looking at a man who has laughed in the face of death, sneered at doom, and chuckled at catastrophe! I was petrified."
    -- The Wizard of Oz

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    2,920
    Originally posted by Snake_Plissken
    so if I have an impulse system rated at D and a warp engine rated CC I can either rule that D is better than CC and make them both 'CC's or go the other way around and slap'em with 'D's (?)
    You took my comment entirely out of context. I was referring to choices that starship designers have when installing systems with these new Reliability ratings.

    The chart of ratings and their scale from worst to best is on page 9.
    ok so if I decide to have a class 3 cloak (rating 20) with the protoype edge do I pick the next highest value in the table (class 4 cloak 22) and make it '22'
    Correct.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    2,920
    Originally posted by Sea Tyger
    Okay, then the Delta Flyer may have a typo in its warp rating.
    Yep, this is a known typo. The Delta Flyer should have an LF-9X4.
    So, just for clarification, we are counting the net shift in functionality (+2 to -6 in the case of WD speed ratings) of the prototype device. And, that when the speed rating of the WD is shifted, it shifts all three values together (cruising, max. sustainable, and maximum emergency).
    Correct.
    On a side note: I have a size 5 ship (okay, it's the Mediterranean-class frigate) that has a separation system. If I wanted to install the FIG impulse engine (requiring me to purchase two units), do I have to purchase two units for each section if I want both separated systems to have impulse capability?
    Yes. See the rules on page 10 for more details. You can get a space reduction if the components can only be used when separated, however.
    Or, by virtue of the fact that the component parts are likely at least a size smaller than the original vessel, will one pair of impuse engines...one unit on the saucer, the other on the stardrive...be sufficient to drive both sections when separated?
    Nope. Nice try.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Canyon, TX, USA, Sol III
    Posts
    1,778
    Oi. I can see the Federation-class is going to give me a headache just because of the emergency separation system....
    Patrick Goodman -- Tilting at Windmills

    "I dare you to do better." -- Captain Christopher Pike

    Beyond the Final Frontier: CODA Star Trek RPG Support

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Salinas, Calif., USA (a Chiefs fan in an unholy land)
    Posts
    3,378
    Originally posted by Don Mappin
    Nope. Nice try.
    Well, I had to make the attempt. Oh, and for the record, I'm now finished with all of my 23rd Century starships and the Starfleet 2300-2339 ships. Only the 2340-present Starfleet ships and the 24th Century Romulan and Gorn fleets to go....
    Davy Jones

    "Frightened? My dear, you are looking at a man who has laughed in the face of death, sneered at doom, and chuckled at catastrophe! I was petrified."
    -- The Wizard of Oz

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Manhattan High Security Detention Center
    Posts
    720
    call me slow but I just want to confirm if I've gotten the prototype rule correctly:

    the numbers (like +2 or -4) do NOT represent the actual numerical value you grant to a system but the # of systems you go up/down within a given chart (like alien sublight engine chart or the sensors chart). So if you have the following on (say) the shield table:

    shield A: 17 2/5
    shield B: 17 2/5
    shield C: 18 2/6

    then you have a ship with shield A at 17/4 (you bought 2 extra treshold pts); you want to 'prototype' the treshold value of the shield to a '6'- the next highest treshold value after shield A on the table is shield C. Now, does that mean you have to purchase the prototype edge twice?
    Also, if you have shield C, which is the end of the chart, that means you cannot 'prototype' shield C?

    also, regarding the reliability ratings- in cases like weapons and propulsion taking the lowest of the 2, does that apply to reliability tests? Can you make a reliability test specifically for (say) the impulse engines or the torpedo launchers? If so then I could see why both reliability ratings (say for impulse + warp if they're different) would be indicated.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    2,920
    Originally posted by Snake_Plissken
    So if you have the following on (say) the shield table:

    shield A: 17 2/5
    shield B: 17 2/5
    shield C: 18 2/6

    then you have a ship with shield A at 17/4 (you bought 2 extra treshold pts); you want to 'prototype' the treshold value of the shield to a '6'- the next highest treshold value after shield A on the table is shield C. Now, does that mean you have to purchase the prototype edge twice?
    Prototype is a variable cost Trait; you never buy it multiple times unless for different systems, as outlined in the book.

    In the example above you did two shifts (+2) for a total cost of 4 space.

    It's worth pointing out that as per page 27 a Defensive System can only have a maximum positive shift of +1 for your Threshold so your above example is illegal (although you understand the process).
    Also, if you have shield C, which is the end of the chart, that means you cannot 'prototype' shield C?
    Yes you can but only down the chart in a 'negative' fashion. Prototype also allows you to take deficencies in a system. Again, as outlined in the book. As as per Table 1.25 only Protection and Reliability can have negative shifts.
    also, regarding the reliability ratings- in cases like weapons and propulsion taking the lowest of the 2, does that apply to reliability tests?
    You never take the lowest of the two for weapons. See the NG page 142 for how to calculate weapon reliability ratings. This rule has not changed.
    Can you make a reliability test specifically for (say) the impulse engines or the torpedo launchers?
    No. A Reliability test for the weapons systems reflects the systems as a whole; not individual components. That's why you use the aggregate OV to calculate weapon reliability ratings.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Manhattan High Security Detention Center
    Posts
    720
    thanks for the clarifications;

    You never take the lowest of the two for weapons. See the NG page 142 for how to calculate weapon reliability ratings. This rule has not changed.
    DOH! I knew I was doing something out of whack !!! I thought it was really weird when you had a lot of (say) beam weapons and a low launcher value, by taking the lowest of the two I often ended up with 'A' or 'B' ratings even though I had like 6 beam weapons.

    It's worth pointing out that as per page 27 a Defensive System can only have a maximum positive shift of +1 for your Threshold
    so basically you cannot improve Shield A's treshold value with the prototype edge, but you cold do it for Shield B (?)

    Thanks again (!)

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Manhattan High Security Detention Center
    Posts
    720
    I have another Q (hey guys why are you wielding those bricks?)

    I was looking at the Ambassador and it says it has a beam penetration of 6/6/6/0/0 but above it says that it has only a pair of type IX phasers, which should give 4/4/4/0/0. ?

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    2,920
    Originally posted by Snake_Plissken
    I was looking at the Ambassador and it says it has a beam penetration of 6/6/6/0/0 but above it says that it has only a pair of type IX phasers, which should give 4/4/4/0/0. ?
    Your figures are correct, however I looked at my handwritten build sheet (that I built all the ships with) and I show the Ambassador having Type IX x6 phasers for an OV of 54 and a 6/6/6/0/0 beam penetration. So, until I reverse-engineer the ship against my notes I'm tempted to say that line of "Type IX (x2/E) is a typo and should read "Type IX (x6/E)". The rest of the ship appears to be correct.

  12. #72

    Hey Don, i hope you can answer some of my questions

    Hi Don,

    I wanna say thank you and your crew for Starships. Its great and i love it. I'm looking forward to more .

    Questions:

    1. Will there be an errata thread, like the one for NG and PG?

    2. I was wondering if there's any typos in the Romulan BOP section? If i'm reading that section right... the modified BOP has no cloaking device..is this correct?

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Edina, MN, USA
    Posts
    216

    Quick Questions

    Do the space limits based on Ship Size (Table 1.3) indicate a hard maximal limit. If so, what about the spaces between any two given sizes (i.e. Size 6 has 81, Size 7 has 99 spaces)?

    Finally, if one were going to add an extra system (say an extra Phaser X to an Intrepid Class Explorer that the PCs have their campaign based around) would they pay for 6 spaces AND the 5 picks to install the new system, OR just the five picks?

    Thanks.
    Charles
    "Everything happens for a reason..."

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    2,920

    Re: Hey Don, i hope you can answer some of my questions

    Originally posted by Space_Cadet
    1. Will there be an errata thread, like the one for NG and PG?
    I have a copy of the book at last and am reviewing for potential errata. I'll then submit that list to the Line Developer (Jesse) to evaluate and then it'll be made available to Doug to post.
    2. I was wondering if there's any typos in the Romulan BOP section? If i'm reading that section right... the modified BOP has no cloaking device..is this correct?
    I haven't made it that far so I'll have to review.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    2,920

    Re: Quick Questions

    Originally posted by ImperialOne
    Do the space limits based on Ship Size (Table 1.3) indicate a hard maximal limit. If so, what about the spaces between any two given sizes (i.e. Size 6 has 81, Size 7 has 99 spaces)?
    For abstraction purposes we don't track the amount of space between two sizes. As a rule of thumb (it may even be in the NG or Starships) a vessel should fall within two dimensions of a size (height, beam, or width) to qualify for that size.
    Finally, if one were going to add an extra system (say an extra Phaser X to an Intrepid Class Explorer that the PCs have their campaign based around) would they pay for 6 spaces AND the 5 picks to install the new system, OR just the five picks?
    If their vessel has enough excess space they pay just the 5 picks. However, if they don't have space then they'll need to purchase that first (6). Remember that any systems 'refunded' count towards their available space. This doesn't matter if they're keeping the existing systems.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •