Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 184

Thread: "Starships" Questions

  1. #76
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Omaha,NE
    Posts
    238

    Starships thingummies

    Don: first off, stellar work on this one, though I notice Decipher managed to screw up your authoring credit on yet another book; they're one for three so far...

    Second, I must say I'm annoyed by who/what ever is responsible for the layout snafus in the starship listings. Most are just fine, but some writeups look like they randomly sorted the entries. Someone needs to hunt down that problem and shoot it now, before it gets worse.

    Thirdly, I've got some Prototype edge questions. I was trying to figure out how it works from comparing the wording with how it is used in the ship writeups, and some of it just does not make sense.

    Several ships have Prototype (+1 Missile) to increase their missile offensive value enough to reach the next penetration category, but according to Table 1.25 this is not possible.

    How does Prototyping a weapon work? Is +/-1 a shift up/down one category on either Table 1.17 or 1.18, or does it directly change the offensive value (a 24 into a 25/23, for example)? The Constitution refit has Prototype (+1 Missile), but if the latter case is true, this only increases the Offensive Value to 9, not enough to boost it to 4/4/4/4/4 penetration. The Nova class has Prototype (-3 Beam), but if the former case is true its penetration should be lowered to 3/3/2/0/0 (leaving aside entirely the fact that Table 1.25 only allows a -1 beam Offensive Value shift). Either way one of the Starfleet ships has to be wrong.

    If I'm reading your explanation of Snake's example right, then Prototyping a system is stepping up/down on the appropriate table. If so, how does one explain the Nebula w/ Tactical Pod's Prototype (+1 Sensor) giving it a sensor bonus of +5? One step up on table 1.7 from Class 4 sensors is Class 4a, which has the same set of bonuses; you'd need Prototype (+2 Sensors) to reach a bonus of +5. Similarly, the Sovereign class has Prototype (+1 Warp reliability), giving its LF-44 engines a D reliability (normally C). But one step up Table 1.11 is the LF-45, also reliability C, and one step up Table 1.4 from reliability C is reliability CC. So how does the Sovereign get a D reliability?

    Is Prototype just not well explained in the book, did someone make a lot of errors in utilizing it to create ships, or am I just slow?

    On a closing note, I did notice that someone slipped in mention of Commodore Dan Stack, and the Galaxy-class USS Venture as well. Nice to see the forums becoming part of the game.

    -Chris Landmark
    "Was entstanden ist, das muss vergehen. Was vergangen, auferstehn." -Klopstock & Mahler

    "Only liberals really think. Only liberals are intellectual. Only liberals understand the needs of their fellows." How much viciousness lay concealed in that word! Odrade thought. How much secret ego demanding to feel superior. - Heretics of Dune

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Edina, MN, USA
    Posts
    216

    Quick Related to Reliability Ratings

    Both the NG and Starships write-ups for the Intrepid Class Explorer indicate D reliability ratings for both the NG phaser array [Type X (x3/D)] 5/5/4/0/0 and the Starships [Type X (x4/D)] 6/5/5/0/0

    The point is both NG (30) and Starships (40) offensive values would seem to make the reliability rating at C. I feel I must be missing something... am I?

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

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    2,923

    Lightbulb Re: Quick Related to Reliability Ratings

    Originally posted by ImperialOne
    Both the NG and Starships write-ups for the Intrepid Class Explorer indicate D reliability ratings for both the NG phaser array [Type X (x3/D)] 5/5/4/0/0 and the Starships [Type X (x4/D)] 6/5/5/0/0

    The point is both NG (30) and Starships (40) offensive values would seem to make the reliability rating at C. I feel I must be missing something... am I?
    I have no books with me but it sounds like you're forgetting the rule that to calculate your reliability for your weapons array (both beam and missle) you add their OV together and use that aggregate value to determine their rating.

    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.

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Edina, MN, USA
    Posts
    216
    Thanks... I can't believe I forgot about adding the beam and missile OV together.

    Charles
    "Everything happens for a reason..."

  5. #80
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Miles below the Earth's crust.
    Posts
    281
    Don-

    Are there any rules for building pods for ships (tactical, sensor, etc.) or is a matter of using un-allocated space?

    Will there be anything more specific on building space-stations (I have some ideas for space-dock facilities)?
    Darth Sarcastic

    "Shall I goto 'Red Alert' sir? It does mean changing the lightbulb." - Kryten, Red Dwarf

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    207

    Heavy Explorers

    The classification of pg. 134 of the NG lists Heavy Explorers having min. size of 9 and a max. size 10+. But the soverign class in the Starships book has it listed at size 8. By the books own defintion, it can't not be listed as a heavy explorer.

    Should the Soverign be considered a heavy explorer or a heavy crusier?

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    2,923
    Originally posted by Darth Sarcastic
    Are there any rules for building pods for ships (tactical, sensor, etc.) or is a matter of using un-allocated space?
    Not at this time. I don't feel it's necessary. Simply use unallocated space to build the pods. See the Nebula and Danube for examples.
    Will there be anything more specific on building space-stations (I have some ideas for space-dock facilities)?
    That's a Jesse question. I would presume so at some point.

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    2,923

    Re: Heavy Explorers

    Originally posted by Capt. Anderson
    Should the Soverign be considered a heavy explorer or a heavy crusier?
    Heavy Explorer. I made a command decision and made an exception for the Sovereign.

    Creator's discretion.

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Albertson, NY, USA
    Posts
    1,467
    Got a Question Don, Just recieved Starships today and I Breezed thru it briefly. Is the picture of the Ranger class printed upside down? My reason for this question is, the Shuttle bay on the rear Dovetail looks upside down.

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    2,923
    Originally posted by Karg
    Got a Question Don, Just recieved Starships today and I Breezed thru it briefly. Is the picture of the Ranger class printed upside down? My reason for this question is, the Shuttle bay on the rear Dovetail looks upside down.
    Unless I'm going crazy the Ranger isn't in "Starships"; it's in Ops.

  11. #86
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Iowa City, Iowa, USA
    Posts
    347
    Originally posted by Don Mappin
    Unless I'm going crazy the Ranger isn't in "Starships"; it's in Ops.
    You're right, it is. As for the Ranger's fantail and hangar doors, yes, they are "upside down" compared to the same area on the Constitution. That looked to me like it was true in the LUG TOS core book illustration, too. I don't know (or much worry) whether that is an error or just part of the Ranger's "so-ugly-it's-cute" charm. Easily corrected, however, if one takes umbrage.
    It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the juice of java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
    --Mentat Coffee Mantra

  12. #87
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Albertson, NY, USA
    Posts
    1,467
    Originally posted by Don Mappin
    Unless I'm going crazy the Ranger isn't in "Starships"; it's in Ops.
    oops, My Bad was a long day

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Zha`ha`doon
    Posts
    60
    how would the weapoins tables progresss for higher numbered weapons??ie a ship or station with an OV of 168 for beams?

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Germantown, Maryland
    Posts
    1,241
    I fI am not mistaken it just stays at the highest number that you have for the O-Value. I do not have Starships in front of me though.

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Edina, MN, USA
    Posts
    216

    Clarification ACB & Pulse Options

    Can I have both together?
    It doesn't expressly forbid it in Starships, but I remember that Spacedock does specifically forbid this.

    What does everyone and Don think?

    Charles
    "Everything happens for a reason..."

Posting Permissions

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