- Location
- Canada
If we wanted to add a spinal gun or something would we need to determine that when creating the frame? Or would it just be determined during the Weapon phase?
Star Wars: Ship Designer Quest
- Thread starter Jax
- Start date
We would need to determine that when creating the frame
- Location
- England
We would need a bispoke frame designed to fit and handle the strain.
Not sure if it's a good idea 90% of the time cuz a spinal weapon is hilariously suseptible to ship damage (anything jars the ships spine to badly can break it.
Not to mention the power draw (such weapons would be power hogs)
Finally is that they are hard to lineup a shot with (unless are point blank it's hard to line up)
Unless your designing from ground up a halo frigate not much point (basically a gun with engines)
Last edited:
- Location
- Kiel; Germany
No, if you choose a spinalgun it is asumed you planed the designe from the beginning that way. Compartment Space in a large number would be taken by it.
As I stated before, all of the stats are rather abstract and exsist to give the players a feel for what the ships is cable of. At the same time it frames for me the narative when writting.
So, if you decied to put a spinalgun in the ship that shoots Ewoks at lightspeed at the enemy, thats okay. So long as I think it can be made by the curent in-univers tech and you have enough space in the ship.
I hope that makes sense.
Then we can do a halo corvette (or frigate) right away.
- Location
- Canada
I figure that the main use of a spinal gun is for taking out large targets like capital ships, i agree it will never hit anything that can move quickly. Im sure that some customers could use a ship that is capable of taking out larger class ships with the downside of essentially being useless against fighters/corvettes. Now that i think of it pirates would love that, not that that is really good.
- Location
- California Conservation Corps
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Also, there kinda is a hard cap for spinal gun size without the decades of imperial research. In the current time frame, spinal guns mostly allow smaller guns to above their weight class when fielded in number, usually when holding a blockade. The Munificent-class frigate is a good example of this being done well.
Edit: I should note that spinal mount weapons in Star Wars aren't some massive railguns or plasma weapons going through the entire ship HALO style. It's more of them jamming a weapon meant for a larger ship into a smaller one. Imagine stuffing a ww2 cruiser gun onto a destroyer for a general idea of how it works. HALO-style weapons that go through the entire hull require more power than you can fit in a ship, at least until the Imperial superweapons start taking off and you the Eclipse and Onager classes.
Last edited:
- Location
- England
So basically the Expanse Amun Ra class ship seem like a good idea? (Packs a railgun and highly fast glass cannon ship for capital ship killing)
Only after the war breaks out and we go overkill in keeping records of who owns which example of the class. Maybe even make it a contracted obligation that they can't sell the ship to the private market.
Sir_Travelsalot
Never wakes up tired.
- Location
- At Home
Yeah, especially if we were to put the original's stealth tech into it. And even then, knowing SW's track record with prototype ships that get stolen by pirates, bounty hunters etc., it has the potential to become an epic disaster.
Enthusiast#117
This is not the Profile you are looking for
- Location
- United States
And now my brain won't shut up about what the technical difference is between a really big ship built around a massive spinal gun, and a mobile FTL-capable space station built around a single gigantic weapon.
Was the death star a ship, or a space-station?
Can we please stop talking about railguns and mass drivers. On the one hand, the Star Wars on such small ships are not that good, let alone the limited ammunition in the ships. And the other is that most military ships have both shields at the same time, the only ones who didn't have them at the same time were the Imperials and their stupid 'Tarkin Doctrine'. These ships had no shields at all against solid projectiles.
Last edited:
Could you cite that?
On the other hand, good point about those shields and probable limited usefulness on smaller ships due to ammo constraints. Though nature of anti-projectile shields mean they do have uses.
OK I remembered wrongly the SD has particle shields against projectiles. But that just further points to my point, projectile weapons in space in star wars aren't that effective. And as a result, lasers with their higher ammo capacity are better in comparison. I would use projectile weapons as anti-aircraft weapons (along with energy weapons).
- Location
- California Conservation Corps
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Yeah, mass drivers seem to be a catch 22 in terms of usefulness. I genuinely can not find ANY evidence of mass drivers larger than flak-gun or destroyer guns existing in Star Wars, outside Empire at War. They genuinely only seem to be used in the 80 to 150 mm range (or the rough equivalent, Star Wars weapons don't really use calibur) never any larger. They also don't actually seem to be any more effective than turbolasers, and really only seem to be used for the specific advantages projectile weapons provide:
- Fragmentation Rounds (Flack)
- Indirect Fire
- Specialty Warhead Types
- The ability to launch missiles
Edit: Guys, please stop thinking that everyone in the star wars universe is an idiot who doesn't realize something big about ship or weapon design that's incredibly obvious to you. Odds are, there's probably a good explanation as to why things are done that way. Now that doesn't mean that you can't pick flaws in designs -- thousand years of peace and all -- but try and focus on how technology is used compared to similar designs.
For example, the ARC-170 is a terrible starfighter not because of its technology, but because for just about any mission it is given, a Y-wing or Z-95 Headhunter can do better with fewer clones risked.
Last edited:
- Location
- England
- The ability to launch missiles is worth developing it for as a capital killer though (ion warheads could cripple a capital ship easily... I mean, it happens multiple times in universe)
Last edited:
From the other conversations about it, they can be good at locking down a ship because the particle shield prevents the ship from attacking just as well as it protects the ship from outside attacks. They have their uses, but I think it might be best on durable ships that can stand up to punishment while locking down capital ships by forcing them to use the particle shield or get destroyed.
- Location
- England
Two things I DO feel needs developing though are (for larger capital grade ships when we get there):
1.Internal CIC/internal bridge system (as if your capital ship can be taken down by a droid or piloted Starfighter kamikazing a single pidly metallic window then something's gone wrong somewhere... Preferably expanse donnager style CIC which is hilariously hard to breach given the vacuum seal and heavy armour and such)
2. Ion shielding/better anti-ion countermeasures (as while cannon showed that there are backup systems incase a ship gets ioned they didn't really help in rogue one as the Star destroyer in question got used as a butter knife before it recovered system function... That needs addressing if your using tech to control the ship from an internal CIC as joining means losing vision of the battle when sensors die)
1.Internal CIC/internal bridge system (as if your capital ship can be taken down by a droid or piloted Starfighter kamikazing a single pidly metallic window then something's gone wrong somewhere... Preferably expanse donnager style CIC which is hilariously hard to breach given the vacuum seal and heavy armour and such)
2. Ion shielding/better anti-ion countermeasures (as while cannon showed that there are backup systems incase a ship gets ioned they didn't really help in rogue one as the Star destroyer in question got used as a butter knife before it recovered system function... That needs addressing if your using tech to control the ship from an internal CIC as joining means losing vision of the battle when sensors die)
Sir_Travelsalot
Never wakes up tired.
- Location
- At Home
This doesn't actually require development on our part, just using it in our designs and thus normalising it. this was a feature in a ship as old as the Dreadnought-class heavy cruiser, which was notably obsolete in terms of its computer systems and still worked just fine.
We have even earlier examples for why having warships with robust ion shielding would be very beneficial.
The Dreadnought Class Heavy Cruiser has an internal bridge.
- Location
- England
I'll be honest I forgot about that one... Still, don't think any "modern" clonewars or empire ship had one (the bloody executor superstar destroyer could have used one...)
Sir_Travelsalot
Never wakes up tired.
- Location
- At Home
It is dumb that so few of them have it, even as a backup. But the technology clearly already exists.
Last edited:
The reasons for exposed bridges in canon mainly has to do with psychological effects on the crew and enemies. An exposed bridge on a star destroyer makes a statement that it fears nothing and that nothing can get passed their shields. And in terms of rail guns, their limited ammunition is offset by their extreme damage potential and that most ships are designed against energy weapons or DEW's, not kinetic energy weapons. In combat the rail gun is essentially a high powered sniper rifle in comparison to the other assorted weapons on the ship. It is meant to either deliver a killing blow or a crippling blow to an enemy ship. And for those against the rail gun system we can create it as an optional part package for custom orders.
Proposed nickname for optional part equipment package: The Spear of Light
Requires at least 3 compartments to function, 1 for the actual weapon itself, 1 for additional power source to fuel it, and the ammo compartment. Additional compartments can possibly include additional sensors and ECM packages.
Proposed nickname for optional part equipment package: The Spear of Light
Requires at least 3 compartments to function, 1 for the actual weapon itself, 1 for additional power source to fuel it, and the ammo compartment. Additional compartments can possibly include additional sensors and ECM packages.