Starship Speed Class Chart

[Popo]

Okay, specifically I'm talking about making this:

Spoiler

A whole lot clearer. I've been working on ships for a week or two now to submit in the future and the more I use this, the more I'm finding how bloody confusing it is, even when I've had it explained to me. It doesn't state the class system we use on the board, just canon ships as examples. Canon examples are fine, don't get me wrong, but these don't clearly list the length classes and, if you list it out to clearly list the length classes, it looks... off. For example:

1 - Interceptors
2 - Starfighters
3 - Bombers
4 - Freighters, dropships, gunships
5 - Corvettes
6 - Cruisers, Heavy Cruisers, Frigates (as per skype convo in Factory chat)
7 - Light Star Destroyers
8 - Regular Star Destroyers, Command Star Destroyers
9 - Assault Command Star Destroyers, Most Event Tech
10 - Superweapon platforms or Space Stations that should really be immobile and only pulled around by outside power sources (ie. other ships)

As you can see, there's a lot of issues. For example, a frigate should be faster than a cruiser while a light Star Destroyer should be faster than a regular star destroyer. A regular star destroyer should be faster than a command star destroyer and so on. Plus, the chart itself is confusing. Sure, to people who know what canon ship is classified where makes it a bit simpler to understand, but you still have inconsistencies like I stated just now.

So, instead of getting frustrated and ranting and demanding someone to fix it, I'm gonna try and help out and curb my irritability and offer a new chart instead. So, here goes:

1 - Interceptors
2 - Starfighters
3 - Bombers
4 - Freighters, Dropships, Gunships
5 - Corvettes
6 - Frigates
7 - Cruisers, Heavy Cruisers
8 - Light Star Destroyers
9 - Regular Star Destroyers
10 - Command Star Destroyers
11 - Event Tech
12/Immobile - Space Stations/Battlestation Platforms

So... Thoughts?

Also, not trying to bash anyone or get anyone upset. I've just been trying to figure this stuff out for weeks and it's finally frustrating me lol

 

[Valiens Nantaris]

[member="Popo"]
Why are assault star destroyers explicitly mentioned, and why are they +2 regular?

Other than that I agree with your chart.

 

[Popo]

[member="Tamara"]
Typo on my end. Meant Command Assault SDs.

 

[Valiens Nantaris]

[member="Popo"]
Got it, but since they're not explicitly mentioned elsewhere, why is that particular assault variant listed? The rule is that support is -1 and assault is +1 so yeah.

 

[Popo]

Its more for clarification, but if you feel it'll add undue confusion I'll swap it out and just list the +1, -1 thing above or below it.

[member="Tamara"]

 

[Valiens Nantaris]

[member="Popo"]
Yeah do that. Other than that I like it.

 

[Popo]

[member="Tamara"]
Okey doke. Found some time and edited.

 

[Valiens Nantaris]

[member="Popo"]
Not all event tech is 11 though. We've had some Valen light and heavy cruisers made etc.

 

[Ayden Cater]

My only issue with this idea is that it would require that we edit every capital ship above corvettes. Is there any way this can be kept within a 1-10 scale? Frigates move to 6, Heavy Cruisers move to 7, and stations can be a null value? It would technically give us a 1-11 scale then, which lets event tech sit naturally wherever it would on the scale.

 

[Valiens Nantaris]

[member="Ayden Cater"]
You've got a good point there.

 

[Popo]

Actually, you can drop the 11 and 12 values entirely and keep the 12 point system as is and itd still be accurate. Just list stations as immobile and still add the +1 for assault Command SDs and it works out.

Reason why I put cruisers and heavy cruisers together was because on average IRL, both classes had similar speeds. Heavy cruisers just had more guns and armor.

 

[Ayden Cater]

Only problem with making Command ships a 10 is that it leaves Super Star Destroyers no place on the chart.

 

[Valiens Nantaris]

Or Assault SSDs!

 

[Ashin Varanin]

I move we shift everything to MGLT. For physics purposes.

>.>
<.<

 

[Domino]

As much as Id like to, people will be fighting for every mglt point they could get and they wouldn't understand why a fighter can get 140 acc but their SD can only get 14 acc.

 

[Popo]

Thing is if its an assault Command SD it'd be a 10+ and therefore the slowest possible speed on the chart short of a space station that is immobile.

Its not a perfect chart, but it can be worked around to get it to where its more accurate of ship speeds.

 

[Ayden Cater]

[member="Popo"]

• Interceptors
• Fighters
• Bombers, Dropships
• Freighters, Gunships
• Corvettes
• Frigates, Cruisers
• Heavy Cruisers, Light Star Destroyers
• Star Destroyers
• Command Ships
• Super Capital Ship
  Stations​

​
In this scale, Heavy Cruisers would get pushed to the next speed group because, as according to the Anaxes War College System, on which our ship categories are based, Cruisers run up to 600 meters while Heavy Cruisers run up to 1,000. That extra 400 meters of mass could easily explain the difference in speed.

 

[Popo]

*waggles hand back and forth*

Its not as accurate as I'd like, but it's a great middle ground and it gives a good point to go in any direction if it needs to be readjusted. To quote [member="Ayden Cater"] - "I can get behind this."

 

[Popo]

So, what's the verdict on the hybrid/middle ground [member="Ayden Cater"] put up? Is that workable or does it need more tweaking?

 

[Valiens Nantaris]

I like Ayden's newest proposal.