I'm at a loss for ship design for a little sci-fi single-ship game I'm running.
Nothing as outrageous as Star Trek, more Firefly-level tech. I don't have a direct equivalent, but whatever.
Picture related, USG Ishimura from Deadspace.
I don't think I need a complete map, as in every table and chair, but I can't make up my mind about things like where what sections should go and what should be included in those sections.
That aside, space vehicles discussion?
Its important to make sure your command and control section is as far from the section you point at things to move that way as is possible without leaving it fully at the rear.
Engines could be out front, chariot style, keeping them safer from rear ambushes.
The middle area of the ship could contain the crew living quarters, cargo hold etc. It should have some turrets maybe for defence.
Life support etc should be largely central and heavily defended internally and extrernally.
Doorways should be low enough to require crouching to enter them as this gives the defenders and advantage if boarded.
>>43773877
What's the tech level like?
>>43773877
I think Traveller has spaceship floor plans. Maybe some kind anon will dump some.
>>43773877
At first I thought you were looking for a design system, in which case GURPS Spaceships.
If you just mean deck plans? We need to know not just the overall tech level, but also what cinematic technologies exist in the setting. A hard sci fi ship will have a nuclear reactor (probably aft), then a radiation shield, and then well forward the habitation module. Plus lots of radiator fins. It will need a shuttle bay since a realistic design won't be able to do planetary landings.
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/
That's your resource for all things space.
I suggest you google "deckplans" and you'll find star trek, star wars, Traveller, etc. Pick one and adapt it. In the DVD producer notes from Firefly, Joss Whedon goes into detail about the lighting and effects for Serenity and why/how she's arranged as she is. It's driven entirely by drama, since it's reasonably soft sci fi. Somewhere between Winchell Chung's science-first advice and Joss Whedon's drama-first advice you can find a happy believable medium.
>>43774074
>Its important to make sure your command and control section is as far from the section you point at things to move that way as is possible without leaving it fully at the rear.
That reminds me. The first concept images for Mandate had a massive bridge on a ship kinda like the Star destroyers on Star wars. The next version of those pictures had the "bridge" labeled as observation deck and the actual bridge located deep inside the ship with massive computer screens instead of windows.
Because honestly, you are not going to pilot a spaceship by looking out of the windows. If you don't have sensors and cameras that help you pilot the ship you are crippled already.
>>43773877
How about the Von Braun from System Shock 2?
I'll dump a few if you're interested.
Engines in back. Radiators to dissipate heat. If mass is important (i.e. most hard scifi) putting the life support in a strut far away from the engine cuts shielding mass a lot through the inverse-cube law.
>>43773877
What's the gravity situation like? Because that's basically the single largest influence in a ship's layout.
If you have classic sci-fi artificial gravity, where gravity works in a normal up/down direction throughout the ship, a ship will probably have a layout comparable to a submarine.
If there is artificial gravity but it is all concentrated in a single point, the decks will be arranged in a series of concentric spheres surrounding that point.
If there is no artificial gravity, a large ship will be designed similarly to a skyscraper, with the decks perpendicular to the direction of travel. A steady 1G acceleration will provide simulated gravity. At the midpoint of the journey, the ship turns around and decelerates at 1G, continuing the simulated gravity all the way to the destination.
>>43774892
Even if you have classic artificial gravity, you would still want to lay it out with the decks perpendicular to the direction of travel, and more arguably still like a skyscraper.
>>43774250
Most are firmly space opera style designs.
>artificial gravity generators
>"air plane" configuration for smaller ships, and nautical configuration for larger ones
>engines that take up less space proportionally than they do in cars or airplanes
>private staterooms for the whole crew with heavy metal bulkheads between them
I won't pitch a fit if people like that stuff, but if I'm running a scifi game I like to get across a little more of the weirdness of being in space.
>>43775399
>>"air plane" configuration for smaller ships
Aren't they made to fly in atmo too, though?
>>43773877
I think I can give you a hand with that! There are some things you want to think about first:
>How long is this ship supposed to spend between ports?
This has a large affect on how much stuff you need to support you crew - a dedicated medical area, mess hall, or recreational space will likely be unnecessary for shorter voyages, for instance. The longer you're out, the more space you need to give your crew per person, and the more stuff you need to support them.
>How many crew is this ship supposed to have?
Again, has a big effect on how much stuff you need and how big it is.
>What is this ship supposed to do?
Really important. Affects everything.
>What are the characteristics of the technologies I'm using?
For instance, if the engine is radioactive, you'll want it as far from crew as possible and behind a layer of shielding; depending on your engine technology and efficiency you may need very large tanks of fuel or small ones; depending on your life support technology you may have hydroponic greenhouses or algae tanks, or not; your artificial gravity has a big effect on deck planning; etc, etc.
---
But, no matter what, you'll need
>A place for the crew to sleep, eat, and put stuff - either individual crew cabins or several shared rooms
>A place to pilot the ship from, which is traditionally in front but really needn't be
>A place to put the life support
>Fuel tanks
>A place for the engines/reactors/etc
Places that people are going to want to move between most frequently should be closer together, and ideally on the same deck. Generally speaking the propulsion should be clustered together, to save on weight and complexity.
>>43774172
2003 BSG is the closest I've come across so far.
>>43774283
"Deckplans"
Thanks, I was using other terms that weren't quite cutting it.
>>43774634
Dump away, I forgot SS2 was a thing.
>>43774892
I hadn't given it much thought beyond "artificial gravity".
I am thinking more of a submarine style for the ship, because I like to think that space travel is closer to undersea travel than air travel.
>>43776225
>Duration
They're mainly relying on food storage, but limited recycling and hydroponic capability.
>Crew size
I don't have a sense of what a good number would be, so I'll look at US navy numbers.
>Mission
The first game is going to be government/military mining - so big cargo and mechanic bays?
>Technology
A rough step-up from modern.
Nuclear, if not fusion - open to ideas.
Not sure about fuel.
Thanks guys, so far this is helping.
>>43776213
That's a bit silly too, if you want to at least make a nod to realistic physics.
The smallest ship capable of interstellar flight needs
>space and provisions for the whole crew for the duration of the journey
>storage for fuel
>whatever space magic gets it between star systems
>maneuvering engines that can push all that shit around
Tossing in airfoils, heat shields, and structural reinforcement for all that shit seems like a waste, if it's possible at all--why not just have a ship's boat of some kind?
It's a bit like trying to make a train engine that's also an airplane, or a car that's also a submarine.
What you want to do in terms of the kind of map you make kind of depends on the size of the ship. If you've got a very, very large ship creating deck plans for the whole thing might be a bit dumb.
But if you've only got one ship, and the ship is comparatively small it may be valuable to create detailed deck plans for the whole thing.
>>43776451
Well that's why I started with the Ishimura pic.
It has the main sections set out, but not so much detail for the contents of each section.
Like I would put Sleep, Food, Rec, and Visitation in the Crew Section - but I'm not confident to say that it's too much or not enough.
My problem is like city planning and forgetting to account for roads.
>>43776542
You might be sweating it too much.
People need a place to eat, sleep, shit, and work. It's up to you whether you like the aesthetic of a separate "engine room" or "sensor bay" or whatever--I think there's not much reason for it. Are you going to crawl into an antimatter reactor with a crescent wrench when things go awry? If not, then you're not going to be doing anything but operating a computer console, and that could be anywhere on the ship (or even a portable unit that's handheld or installed in your freaking skull).
One thing I include in my bigger SF ships is private spaces that can be booked like a hotel room. You get x hours per week on your own in a comfortable state room to have sex, stretch out and read, or just be away from other people.
Otherwise, people bunk up like in a submarine, with maybe a thin plastic wall for privacy, and eat in a common room. If they're awake the whole time, there's a common area designed as a flexible lounge and meeting area
People will need less open space if they are hooked up to VR in their off hours or in a hibernation pod.
>>43776815
People don't need open space period. See submarines.
>>43773877
Babylon 5 ships are usually pretty good for this sort of thing- ships with big rotating assemblies so the crew can have simulated gravity, fighters with realistic engine placement (pic related).
>>43775249
If you have artificial gravity, there is one benefit to aeroplane-style layout with the floors perpendicular to the acceleration - you can land like a plane on a planet without fucking with everything.
>>43777073
I loved those freaking fighters man.
I still think they look freaking nifty.
I'll read up on the B5 ships, but the Omega Destroyers seem to fit the bill.
As far as Artificial Gravity goes - real-world means involve linear or rotational movement, or large mass.
A decent amount of SciFi uses some form of material or field that simulates gravity.
Such as Gravity Plating in DeadSpace, or MEFs from Mass Effect.
I guess I'll go with some sort of McGuffin for it, and say that the tech is still being developed.
>>43777951
Gravity generators could replace engines really- just create a gravity well in the direction you want to go and the ship will "fall" towards that direction.
>>43778522
That doesn't necessarily work. Artificial gravity need not violate Newton's third law.
>>43779272
Here's one everyone should remember fondly
>>43779009
Space magic, I ain't gotta explain shit
I got this from the Traveller thread.
http://www.ftlgame.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=24901
It might make for less detailed but easier to understand whip plans.
>>43782315
I've played some FTL, but utilizing it didn't cross my mind.
Honestly, that might be my best option.
Keep it simple and expand upon shit that I need to.
>>43779432
Groovy dood.
