Some Thoughts on Ship Design
This is Steven Petrick posting.
One of the easiest things to do is to design a supership. We have received designs where someone simply sat down and filled the largest sheet of paper he could find with the largest possible ship outline and maximum number of systems. Most submitted designs are for what amount to "pure combat" ships: designs that quite literally even sacrifice hull for power and weapons, i.e., there is no "padding," every single box is either a control space, a power system, or a weapon. So internal damage destroys power and weapons, but what does that matter when there is just so much more power and weapons, you do not need that hull, it just gets in the way of the power and weapons.
Another design philosophy often submitted is the "BPV" ship: a ship designed to fill a "gap" in the BPV forces of a given fleet. Obviously a ship must be there so that it can duel ships of other empires of a similar BPV.
And of course there is always the simply "perfect" ship. For example, no one ever submits a ship design that has less than a 5-6 breakdown rating. Almost all carrier designs have either multiple hatches (even if they have only six fighters) or launch tubes (even if the empire in question has never used launch tubes previously), or both. This is not to mention the occasional carrier design that has extra deck crews built into the design to turn the fighters around faster. (This includes on design that included two deck crews for every fighter.) The list of perfect ship designs is a long one.
The harder row (and this includes me, i.e., even I find doing this hard to do) is to try to design ships that are simply interesting to play: not perfect, but with character. Now, sure, there are some things that should not be addressed in character. A ship with a better Turn Mode to the left than to the right is not a good way to show character. The Federation destroyer has character (in its original design) because it literally had more weapons than it had power, even the AWR refit did not really fix that problem, but the DDG is probably the best (non-escort) version of the ship. It still has a bad breakdown rating, but it is interesting to fly. The Old Light Cruiser is another in this category with its (relatively) oddball movement cost, but even so the added phaser-1s it got (now has six rather than four) makes it a contender (especially after the "plus" refit) in its weight class.
Try to make the design interesting, and not simply go for perfection.
One of the easiest things to do is to design a supership. We have received designs where someone simply sat down and filled the largest sheet of paper he could find with the largest possible ship outline and maximum number of systems. Most submitted designs are for what amount to "pure combat" ships: designs that quite literally even sacrifice hull for power and weapons, i.e., there is no "padding," every single box is either a control space, a power system, or a weapon. So internal damage destroys power and weapons, but what does that matter when there is just so much more power and weapons, you do not need that hull, it just gets in the way of the power and weapons.
Another design philosophy often submitted is the "BPV" ship: a ship designed to fill a "gap" in the BPV forces of a given fleet. Obviously a ship must be there so that it can duel ships of other empires of a similar BPV.
And of course there is always the simply "perfect" ship. For example, no one ever submits a ship design that has less than a 5-6 breakdown rating. Almost all carrier designs have either multiple hatches (even if they have only six fighters) or launch tubes (even if the empire in question has never used launch tubes previously), or both. This is not to mention the occasional carrier design that has extra deck crews built into the design to turn the fighters around faster. (This includes on design that included two deck crews for every fighter.) The list of perfect ship designs is a long one.
The harder row (and this includes me, i.e., even I find doing this hard to do) is to try to design ships that are simply interesting to play: not perfect, but with character. Now, sure, there are some things that should not be addressed in character. A ship with a better Turn Mode to the left than to the right is not a good way to show character. The Federation destroyer has character (in its original design) because it literally had more weapons than it had power, even the AWR refit did not really fix that problem, but the DDG is probably the best (non-escort) version of the ship. It still has a bad breakdown rating, but it is interesting to fly. The Old Light Cruiser is another in this category with its (relatively) oddball movement cost, but even so the added phaser-1s it got (now has six rather than four) makes it a contender (especially after the "plus" refit) in its weight class.
Try to make the design interesting, and not simply go for perfection.
posted by Federation Commander at 10:13 AM
<< Home