Future Tech Advice and Assistance Thread [O.O.C.]

[The Fedral Union]

Then again my ships where designed for long term operations solo in enemy territory. It really is up to the player but I wouldn't go past 10 km.

[Ferret Civilization]

The general range is between a few meters and around 3 kilometers, in my personal experience. There is wiggle room, of course, so I tend to advise a state's largest vessels to be no larger than 3-4 kilometers. "Plot ships and installations" can, quite evidently, be larger than this, but keeping within that range in the beginning is a good way to avoid problems in most roleplays. Over time, it has sort of grown-out of a similar mindset to that found within the "Three Systems Guideline/Size in Relation to Future Tech."

Hope that helps.

That does, thanks!

On top of this, I find it handy to remember other dimensions than just length, particularly when discussing space stations. A small "length-wise" ship or station can still be enormous depending on its actual engineering. Really, the more accurate description should be "along the longest axis" rather than "length" but that's probably a little overspecific for most people.

For example, though, my ships are spheres. A diameter of 1.5km (way larger than my ships, but still far less than the generally-largest lengths) yields far, far more space than is really necessary. We probably have more tonnage than ships of twice or even thrice the length just because we don't design along a plane.

Well then, that's probably what I wanted my question to be more like then, same with the volume. Because I'm just trying to find out an average, or at least how big is too big. Stuff like that when it comes to FT.

[Kyrusia]

The general range is between a few meters and around 3 kilometers, in my personal experience. There is wiggle room, of course, so I tend to advise a state's largest vessels to be no larger than 3-4 kilometers. "Plot ships and installations" can, quite evidently, be larger than this, but keeping within that range in the beginning is a good way to avoid problems in most roleplays. Over time, it has sort of grown-out of a similar mindset to that found within the "Three Systems Guideline/Size in Relation to Future Tech."

Hope that helps.

On top of this, I find it handy to remember other dimensions than just length, particularly when discussing space stations. A small "length-wise" ship or station can still be enormous depending on its actual engineering. Really, the more accurate description should be "along the longest axis" rather than "length" but that's probably a little overspecific for most people.

For example, though, my ships are spheres. A diameter of 1.5km (way larger than my ships, but still far less than the generally-largest lengths) yields far, far more space than is really necessary. We probably have more tonnage than ships of twice or even thrice the length just because we don't design along a plane.

Quite. UD points-out a particularly important aspect of this to remember. Stations are, especially, prone to this.

For example, one might have a vessel that is longer along a vertical axis, making it's "length" relatively short, but it's "height" rather extensive. So it is, aye, probably more conducive to understanding the general range most people utilize (and thus the guideline) as based on the longest axis, not just strictly "length."

If you're particularly desiring of figuring out your tonnage and/or volume (not really necessary, given the tech in FT is really just window dressing, but some people like to know), of course, most vessels in FT (with some notable exceptions, which usually you can use other geometric solids as a basis for measure) can simply be treated as cylinders for the sake of getting a general volumetric measurement.

Thanks for spotting that, UD.

[The United Dominion]

The general range is between a few meters and around 3 kilometers, in my personal experience. There is wiggle room, of course, so I tend to advise a state's largest vessels to be no larger than 3-4 kilometers. "Plot ships and installations" can, quite evidently, be larger than this, but keeping within that range in the beginning is a good way to avoid problems in most roleplays. Over time, it has sort of grown-out of a similar mindset to that found within the "Three Systems Guideline/Size in Relation to Future Tech."

Hope that helps.

That does, thanks!

On top of this, I find it handy to remember other dimensions than just length, particularly when discussing space stations. A small "length-wise" ship or station can still be enormous depending on its actual engineering. Really, the more accurate description should be "along the longest axis" rather than "length" but that's probably a little overspecific for most people.

For example, though, my ships are spheres. A diameter of 1.5km (way larger than my ships, but still far less than the generally-largest lengths) yields far, far more space than is really necessary. We probably have more tonnage than ships of twice or even thrice the length just because we don't design along a plane.

Well then, that's probably what I wanted my question to be more like then, same with the volume. Because I'm just trying to find out an average, or at least how big is too big. Stuff like that when it comes to FT.

As long as I'm talking about things that I find handy, here's another little bit: if you want numbers, then I highly recommend sticking to numbers you can actually visualize. That will make it a lot easier to understand when conceptualizing your ships, stations... or really anything, from population to distances to whatever else you can think of. It also makes everything easier to write and describe without constantly having to deal with a vast array of items that are well out of your scope. That's the primary reason why I never decided on even a range for the ixee population - I know it would be far too large for me to conceptualize and work with.

Of course, you also just plain don't need the numbers. If your ships are just "big" then you can describe them as such to any of your RP partners. We're nice, we'll accept "big" (and synonyms, of course) as a qualifier and RP accordingly.

[Tierra Prime]

This has probably been asked before then, but I'm curious. What is the average size of the different kinds of spaceships out there. Like what is the biggest it can go before being implausible. Same for other things like space stations or other large pieces of equipment.

When it becomes inconvenient to travel from one end of a ship to the other, you've reached your limit.

"Where's the hypershuttle? The three thirty?"

"Down for maintenance, you'll have to walk."

That's not what you want to hear on a thirty kilometre long ship.

[Estainia]

This has probably been asked before then, but I'm curious. What is the average size of the different kinds of spaceships out there. Like what is the biggest it can go before being implausible. Same for other things like space stations or other large pieces of equipment.

When it becomes inconvenient to travel from one end of a ship to the other, you've reached your limit.

"Where's the hypershuttle? The three thirty?"

"Down for maintenance, you'll have to walk."

That's not what you want to hear on a thirty kilometre long ship.

If you can't walk 30km you don't belong in a military organization, just saying...

[Vocenae]

The general range is between a few meters and around 3 kilometers, in my personal experience. There is wiggle room, of course, so I tend to advise a state's largest vessels to be no larger than 3-4 kilometers. "Plot ships and installations" can, quite evidently, be larger than this, but keeping within that range in the beginning is a good way to avoid problems in most roleplays. Over time, it has sort of grown-out of a similar mindset to that found within the "Three Systems Guideline/Size in Relation to Future Tech."

Hope that helps.

On top of this, I find it handy to remember other dimensions than just length, particularly when discussing space stations. A small "length-wise" ship or station can still be enormous depending on its actual engineering. Really, the more accurate description should be "along the longest axis" rather than "length" but that's probably a little overspecific for most people.

For example, though, my ships are spheres. A diameter of 1.5km (way larger than my ships, but still far less than the generally-largest lengths) yields far, far more space than is really necessary. We probably have more tonnage than ships of twice or even thrice the length just because we don't design along a plane.

Both of these. As has been said, the vast majority of players in FT (really the only ones who have not gotten themselves ostracized from the community) typically stay within the 1 to 3 kilometer guideline for standard ships of the line, or any type of installation or megastructure that exists for projecting an attack force. As has also been said, there is the case of plot ships or, for fleet civilizations, ships that exist for housing massive population numbers. These face far less scrutiny as they are more regulated to 'fluff' areas of your nation and thus don't really have to be taken into account for 'balance' when discussing military naval encounters with your RP partner (unless, of course, said population ship is part of the main focus on the RP, which makes it a plot ship), which can be worked out via the last two Cs of the 4C that the actual FT community goes by: Communication and Compromise, which means make sure to talk freely and openly to your RP partner, and be open to compromise (and even losing, because the actual FT community isn't competitive) when and where needed.

Also, yes, there are numbers involved, but try not to focus too much on them. Here in FT, we're far, far, far more interested in telling engaging, interesting, and above all else, entertaining stories than operating on any competitive level where numbers (and to be honest, most science) isn't the primary sticking point. Yes, there is quite the level of 'emulated reality', which is where the FT community lays downs it's guidelines, but once you understand that you only need to make it 'feel' real through your descriptions )Screw the Causes, Show me the Effects), it's pretty easy to just get up and run.

As others have said, I hope this helps. As I've never seen you here in the Advice thread before (and thus can only assume you're new to our great little community), check out The Local Cluster, if you haven't already. The Local Cluster is the primary region for the Future Tech community, and another place (aside from this thread) where you can meet and interact more directly with a wider base of players rather than hunting and pecking here on the forums. Also make sure to check us out on our IRC channel, #NSLegion for real time communication with the vast majority of FT community members (which is basically everyone who hasn't pushed themselves to the point of irrelevance because of poor behavior). Again, please feel free to check The Local Cluster out, and welcome to Future Tech!

[Transvaal Vrystaat]

When it becomes inconvenient to travel from one end of a ship to the other, you've reached your limit.

"Where's the hypershuttle? The three thirty?"

"Down for maintenance, you'll have to walk."

That's not what you want to hear on a thirty kilometre long ship.

The real problem here is that your 30km warship only has a single shuttle.

[Stormwrath]

When it becomes inconvenient to travel from one end of a ship to the other, you've reached your limit.

"Where's the hypershuttle? The three thirty?"

"Down for maintenance, you'll have to walk."

That's not what you want to hear on a thirty kilometre long ship.

The real problem here is that your 30km warship only has a single shuttle.

I don't think anyone would design a 30 km warship with room for only one shuttle. That would be stupid.

But yeah, generally FTers have ships ranging to a maximum of 3-4 kilometers (though you could just as easily RP ships larger than that provided you know how to suspend others' disbelief). To most FTers, 5-6 kilometer ships would be absurd — and are often used as plot settings — but in reality it is up to you on how you want to pull it off. In my personal opinion you could have your larger ships double as mobile space stations where smaller ships can dock and resupply. Perhaps it could be self-sustainable as well, able to produce its own food (because food makes the crew happy). However, it will still have to go to a waystation to fill up on fuel and other cargo.

[The Fedral Union]

at 5.5 x 1.5 x .5 km a ship made of stainless steel witch is 8000kg^2 you're mass would be 33.0*10^6.... Now that said; many items in FT weigh in the MEGA-TONNES.. as in unit or kilo tonnes... now since were in space we don't care about mass that much right? Now if you construct a ship of mine (not made of steel by the way just an example) you would find the resources EASILY in your own system. How much do you think that thing can carry in the form of armaments if missiles are what ? 15 meters long? and then you have engines, life support. repair facility's, machine shops. Launch and recovery bays, barracks.

For a moment lets get rid of oh this is the standard you must abide by it ... and consider if a ship a dreadnought is meant to do most anything, launch fighters, recover smaller craft to repair, two fellow craft home open remote jump points like in eve; and fight, plus conduct operations, act as medical ships, and act as a core capital ship much like a carrier.... I think 5-6 km is a reasonable size. For capital ship . Now I don'''t advocate anything above 8 km unless its a freighter or a mobile dock.

[Kyrusia]

For a moment lets get rid of oh this is the standard you must abide by it ...

No one has said, ever, you must abide by it. It's said to come from the "Three Systems Guideline" for a reason; it is also, in general, simply what has been adopted by most of the community. It is no lie that, in most cases, a vessel's longest axis found in FT tend to run between 1-3 kilometers.

Ultimately, however, players may do as they wish. FT, like the rest of NS roleplaying, is entirely based upon voluntary consent: no one can be forced to do anything they don't desire. That being said, "It does mean, however, that while you, as a player, can do what you wish, when you wish, that everyone else also has the exact same right to do that. This means, as it relates to Future Technology, [...] and while anyone will tell you that is fine, you - as a player - are often not also told that, as a consequence of the collaborative and community-based nature of roleplaying here, people have the power to simply ignore you if they so choose [...]." (Source) That applies to everything, hence why collaboration and compromise are so valuable and important in this community.

People will play how, and with whomever, they so desire. As it is outlined in the original post of this thread, and countless times in this thread, however, its purpose is meant to assist players by providing them general approximations of what is most likely to be accepted, and assist them if they are concerned it isn't, as to maximize the amount of players they can potentially roleplay with. A part of that is telling players what is most commonly accepted in the community and, importantly, why that is most commonly accepted.

Hope that helps.

[Tierra Prime]

Logistics is an aspect of warfare most seem to forget in FT. Ships are going to need to be refueled, whether they run on antimatter, hypermatter, or whatever it is you use. I actually put down ranges for my ship's hyperdrives specifically so I have an excuse to bring a support fleet and fit a post in somewhere that focuses on fleet logistics. It can be even more interesting if your ships are biological in nature. In Stargate: Atlantis, one of the main enemies uses ships made of biological components that do not like FTL travel. Unless stops are made during an FTL journey for the ships to recover, they will literally die.

[The Fedral Union]

Sorry for being snippy it just felt like one was forcing the issue; I didn't mean to sound grouchy either. I'll end with this; people will accept things as long as its written well and as long as the player your with doesn't mind it. You can still be accepted in the general community with ships that size but they shouldn't be your entire fleet... Now for me I have smaller ships a lot of smaller ships, that dreadnought is the biggest I got, its role is to well blow things to hell and support the fleet.

[Storm Gard]

at 5.5 x 1.5 x .5 km a ship made of stainless steel witch is 8000kg^2 you're mass would be 33.0*10^6.... Now that said; many items in FT weigh in the MEGA-TONNES.. as in unit or kilo tonnes... now since were in space we don't care about mass that much right? Now if you construct a ship of mine (not made of steel by the way just an example) you would find the resources EASILY in your own system. How much do you think that thing can carry in the form of armaments if missiles are what ? 15 meters long? and then you have engines, life support. repair facility's, machine shops. Launch and recovery bays, barracks.

For a moment lets get rid of oh this is the standard you must abide by it ... and consider if a ship a dreadnought is meant to do most anything, launch fighters, recover smaller craft to repair, two fellow craft home open remote jump points like in eve; and fight, plus conduct operations, act as medical ships, and act as a core capital ship much like a carrier.... I think 5-6 km is a reasonable size. For capital ship . Now I don'''t advocate anything above 8 km unless its a freighter or a mobile dock.

Dude, you do realize that while you were talking about getting rid of a standard you endorsed another set of standards?

Anyways, first off why is this theoretical ship made out of stainless steel is it supposed to cook eggs on its surface while in a space battle?

Secondly, the spiel with the numbers is next to impossible to understand, beyond the overarching theme of ships have more than shooty bits.

Lastly, dreadnought doesn't mean what you seem to think it means, while people might have different IC understandings of it, what it actually describes is actually a class of battleship that usually consists of all 'big guns' along with thick armor, so its actually pretty far from your description of a dreadnought which honestly seems less of a ship and more a gangbang of capabilities with engines.

Now, actual opinion bit addressing the question. And note that this my personal opinion so take of it as you will, while I see the allure of a huge ship with massive guns and huge complement of parasite craft and other such bits, you generally run into an issue that the ship is too much of a generalist, and that it is so much of a generalist that it actually costs more to produce due the fact that you're in effect trying to cram the capabilities of multiple hull into that of one. Which means everything on it will always be substandard compared to a dedicated specialist, it won't gun as hard as a gun focused ship, its going to have less parasites that a dedicated carrier, its not going to have as thick and armor belt and so on and so forth. So yeah, generalist ships are generally not all that great.

Still though like I said opinion, take of that what you will.

[The Fedral Union]

Fair point. And not bad advice either; I might be over thinking things a bit here. You're right jack of all trades master of none.. Technically in modern terms Dreadnought is a battleship but I digress.. I forgot that things should be based on role and not name. I think both standards can apply, YMMV though many people play FT so who knows but its safe to say I think we all would agree anything above 5 km would be crazy go nuts if not a freighter.. And it would be expensive to maintain; I got most of mine in reserve or mothballed..

[Senkaku]

This is strictly operationally speaking, because I will acknowledge giant ships are really cool and fun. However.
Given how little relative space a single bomb-pumped xaser (a fairly powerful weapon- you could replace it with some sort of missile or RKV, too) takes up and the ease of targeting in space (since you can't hide without handwavium), as well as the mechanics of acceleration in a vacuum and the unfeasible mass of armor required to protect from heavy weapons without handwavium, it seems to me that multi-kilometer lengths are suitable more for freighters or logistical vessels, while combat craft can be made much smaller. It's harder to hit a two-hundred-foot pinnace than a six-kilometer battlecruiser, and the pinnace can carry more than enough nukes to really, really wreck your day. Employing the same number of them equivalent to the resources of a giant battleship (perhaps even with a logistics vessel to carry them, if your FTL tech works like that) would probably get you a lot more bang for your buck, as well as the ability to strike at multiple targets and generally greater operational versatility. And then, if you lose one, you don't lose a major and possibly critical component of your task force.

[Kyrusia]

This is strictly operationally speaking, because I will acknowledge giant ships are really cool and fun. However.
Given how little relative space a single bomb-pumped xaser (a fairly powerful weapon- you could replace it with some sort of missile or RKV, too) takes up and the ease of targeting in space (since you can't hide without handwavium), as well as the mechanics of acceleration in a vacuum and the unfeasible mass of armor required to protect from heavy weapons without handwavium, it seems to me that multi-kilometer lengths are suitable more for freighters or logistical vessels, while combat craft can be made much smaller. It's harder to hit a two-hundred-foot pinnace than a six-kilometer battlecruiser, and the pinnace can carry more than enough nukes to really, really wreck your day. Employing the same number of them equivalent to the resources of a giant battleship (perhaps even with a logistics vessel to carry them, if your FTL tech works like that) would probably get you a lot more bang for your buck, as well as the ability to strike at multiple targets and generally greater operational versatility.

This makes a good point, and one I have seen portrayed by a few players in the past.

To use a related example: there are several star-states that heavily utilize antimatter as an anti-shipping munition. Many use torpedo buses to help negate the dangers of carrying such a potentially volatile bit of mass aboard capital ships; others, I have seen, use specially-designed, anti-shipping frigates or corvettes (or other small, harrier craft) in the event of a volatility incident that, say, your flagship doesn't suddenly get cracked in-two.

I think a big part of a general attraction to larger combat vessels, however, has less to do with tech, much less the physics behind them, and more to do with the aesthetic and storytelling setting of such a place. It's all a fairly, at times, eclectic combination of a player's chosen aesthetic, the relative level of their "advancement" (as this usually relates to miniaturization and automation of technology), and combat doctrine.

[Stormwrath]

This is strictly operationally speaking, because I will acknowledge giant ships are really cool and fun. However.
Given how little relative space a single bomb-pumped xaser (a fairly powerful weapon- you could replace it with some sort of missile or RKV, too) takes up and the ease of targeting in space (since you can't hide without handwavium), as well as the mechanics of acceleration in a vacuum and the unfeasible mass of armor required to protect from heavy weapons without handwavium, it seems to me that multi-kilometer lengths are suitable more for freighters or logistical vessels, while combat craft can be made much smaller. It's harder to hit a two-hundred-foot pinnace than a six-kilometer battlecruiser, and the pinnace can carry more than enough nukes to really, really wreck your day. Employing the same number of them equivalent to the resources of a giant battleship (perhaps even with a logistics vessel to carry them, if your FTL tech works like that) would probably get you a lot more bang for your buck, as well as the ability to strike at multiple targets and generally greater operational versatility. And then, if you lose one, you don't lose a major and possibly critical component of your task force.

Nukes may not probably be the best weapons to hit a ship with, because ships travel at FTL, and the smallest particle of dust would serve to punch a large hole if your exterior and hull isn't strong enough. But I do get your point.

[Senkaku]

This is strictly operationally speaking, because I will acknowledge giant ships are really cool and fun. However.
Given how little relative space a single bomb-pumped xaser (a fairly powerful weapon- you could replace it with some sort of missile or RKV, too) takes up and the ease of targeting in space (since you can't hide without handwavium), as well as the mechanics of acceleration in a vacuum and the unfeasible mass of armor required to protect from heavy weapons without handwavium, it seems to me that multi-kilometer lengths are suitable more for freighters or logistical vessels, while combat craft can be made much smaller. It's harder to hit a two-hundred-foot pinnace than a six-kilometer battlecruiser, and the pinnace can carry more than enough nukes to really, really wreck your day. Employing the same number of them equivalent to the resources of a giant battleship (perhaps even with a logistics vessel to carry them, if your FTL tech works like that) would probably get you a lot more bang for your buck, as well as the ability to strike at multiple targets and generally greater operational versatility. And then, if you lose one, you don't lose a major and possibly critical component of your task force.

Nukes may not probably be the best weapons to hit a ship with, because ships travel at FTL, and the smallest particle of dust would serve to punch a large hole if your exterior and hull isn't strong enough. But I do get your point.

I was suggesting nukes as mechanisms to pump x-ray lasers or relativistic kill vehicles (which, as you say, could be very small).


@Kyru, yeah, I understand that. Aesthetics will always be more important than RL operational viability (which is not really very interesting to write or read, in all honesty ).

[OMGeverynameistaken]

When it becomes inconvenient to travel from one end of a ship to the other, you've reached your limit.

"Where's the hypershuttle? The three thirty?"

"Down for maintenance, you'll have to walk."

That's not what you want to hear on a thirty kilometre long ship.

If you can't walk 30km you don't belong in a military organization, just saying...

This is why the Russian Empire maintains such a large agricultural population. None of this prissy whining after a five mile walk. They walk to work ten miles every day. In the rain. Uphill both ways because the local noble installed a device that moves the hills around to maximize the oppression his peasants feel.

[Imperial Nalydya]

This is strictly operationally speaking, because I will acknowledge giant ships are really cool and fun. However.
Given how little relative space a single bomb-pumped xaser (a fairly powerful weapon- you could replace it with some sort of missile or RKV, too) takes up and the ease of targeting in space (since you can't hide without handwavium), as well as the mechanics of acceleration in a vacuum and the unfeasible mass of armor required to protect from heavy weapons without handwavium, it seems to me that multi-kilometer lengths are suitable more for freighters or logistical vessels, while combat craft can be made much smaller. It's harder to hit a two-hundred-foot pinnace than a six-kilometer battlecruiser, and the pinnace can carry more than enough nukes to really, really wreck your day. Employing the same number of them equivalent to the resources of a giant battleship (perhaps even with a logistics vessel to carry them, if your FTL tech works like that) would probably get you a lot more bang for your buck, as well as the ability to strike at multiple targets and generally greater operational versatility. And then, if you lose one, you don't lose a major and possibly critical component of your task force.

Alternatively, one could argue that, once you reach a certain speed (xasers go near light speed, if not at light speed) it becomes next to impossible to actually dodge incoming fire due to sensor lag and your detection methods being about the same speed as what's coming at you.

This of course assumes you're not using FTL sensors.

But, with that assumption out of the way, if we proceed from the premise that it is indeed nearly impossible to dodge or even detect incoming fire at certain ranges, then it stands to reason that you would want to build larger, simply because if you're going to get shot anyway, might as well attempt to boost your survivability by having larger vessels that are capable of absorbing horrendous amounts of punishment. I mean, I shouldn't need to remind people just what an RKV or even xaser can potentially do to a ship if it hits...

For obvious reasons, these sorts of vessels are much more suited to offensive operations than defensive ones where the opposing side does not necessarily need to close with you. We (the Pords) get around this by having a mixture of vessels - large behemoth warships for offensive missions (large, Culture-esque types, multiple hundreds of kilometers in size, and crewed by millions who live out their lives on them) supported by a plethora of smaller types, more in line with what have been mentioned here, equipped for supporting their larger brethren and operating from rift.

[Jullin]

One thing to consider when building 'big ships' is that in engineering, you can't just scale everything up and hope for the best. Mass and load-bearing requirements will increase considerably faster than area when going big, and you'll need to build a ship that can withstand the forces of gravity and acceleration. Essentially, you'll have to build a ship that can tolerate its own weight. There is also a fuel consideration, though for energy-rich FT cultures this is doubtlessly no longer a serious problem in most people's eyes.

I also don't know how you would keep a 30km ship - and its accompanying systems - cool very easily. By cool, I mean not cooking its inhabitants. The slightest problem with its air conditioning and its core areas would heat up faster than Jesus would fall through the water's surface. Shoot the radiators off and it will boil its occupants quite nicely, quite quickly.

[The Fedral Union]

One thing to consider when building 'big ships' is that in engineering, you can't just scale everything up and hope for the best. Mass and load-bearing requirements will increase considerably faster than area when going big, and you'll need to build a ship that can withstand the forces of gravity and acceleration. Essentially, you'll have to build a ship that can tolerate its own weight. There is also a fuel consideration, though for energy-rich FT cultures this is doubtlessly no longer a serious problem in most people's eyes.

I also don't know how you would keep a 30km ship - and its accompanying systems - cool very easily. By cool, I mean not cooking its inhabitants. The slightest problem with its air conditioning and its core areas would heat up faster than Jesus would fall through the water's surface. Shoot the radiators off and it will boil its occupants quite nicely, quite quickly.

i Live in numbers like that so trust me I know.

[Ferret Civilization]

As others have said, I hope this helps. As I've never seen you here in the Advice thread before (and thus can only assume you're new to our great little community), check out The Local Cluster, if you haven't already. The Local Cluster is the primary region for the Future Tech community, and another place (aside from this thread) where you can meet and interact more directly with a wider base of players rather than hunting and pecking here on the forums. Also make sure to check us out on our IRC channel, #NSLegion for real time communication with the vast majority of FT community members (which is basically everyone who hasn't pushed themselves to the point of irrelevance because of poor behavior). Again, please feel free to check The Local Cluster out, and welcome to Future Tech!

Yeah, this is all helping, thank you all very much. I've looked over everything. And unfortunately I can't do live chat things (Filters and stuff, since I don't have internet.) So I'm stuck here, and I'm making the most of it, everyone seems so very helpful and nice. I just don't want to mess up somewhere, since that's the one thing I can avoid since I'm not a good RPer when it comes to writing stuff. And thanks for the welcome, I kind of got thrown into it and I'm loving it and trying to work things out with it.

One thing to consider when building 'big ships' is that in engineering, you can't just scale everything up and hope for the best. Mass and load-bearing requirements will increase considerably faster than area when going big, and you'll need to build a ship that can withstand the forces of gravity and acceleration. Essentially, you'll have to build a ship that can tolerate its own weight. There is also a fuel consideration, though for energy-rich FT cultures this is doubtlessly no longer a serious problem in most people's eyes.

I also don't know how you would keep a 30km ship - and its accompanying systems - cool very easily. By cool, I mean not cooking its inhabitants. The slightest problem with its air conditioning and its core areas would heat up faster than Jesus would fall through the water's surface. Shoot the radiators off and it will boil its occupants quite nicely, quite quickly.

And, the reason why I'm so concerned with size, volume and length and whatever... Is because I'm not trying to make the biggest thing out there, I'm trying to figure out how to scale it down to match proportions with my people's size.

[Neornith]

As others have said, I hope this helps. As I've never seen you here in the Advice thread before (and thus can only assume you're new to our great little community), check out The Local Cluster, if you haven't already. The Local Cluster is the primary region for the Future Tech community, and another place (aside from this thread) where you can meet and interact more directly with a wider base of players rather than hunting and pecking here on the forums. Also make sure to check us out on our IRC channel, #NSLegion for real time communication with the vast majority of FT community members (which is basically everyone who hasn't pushed themselves to the point of irrelevance because of poor behavior). Again, please feel free to check The Local Cluster out, and welcome to Future Tech!

Yeah, this is all helping, thank you all very much. I've looked over everything. And unfortunately I can't do live chat things (Filters and stuff, since I don't have internet.) So I'm stuck here, and I'm making the most of it, everyone seems so very helpful and nice. I just don't want to mess up somewhere, since that's the one thing I can avoid since I'm not a good RPer when it comes to writing stuff. And thanks for the welcome, I kind of got thrown into it and I'm loving it and trying to work things out with it.

One thing to consider when building 'big ships' is that in engineering, you can't just scale everything up and hope for the best. Mass and load-bearing requirements will increase considerably faster than area when going big, and you'll need to build a ship that can withstand the forces of gravity and acceleration. Essentially, you'll have to build a ship that can tolerate its own weight. There is also a fuel consideration, though for energy-rich FT cultures this is doubtlessly no longer a serious problem in most people's eyes.

I also don't know how you would keep a 30km ship - and its accompanying systems - cool very easily. By cool, I mean not cooking its inhabitants. The slightest problem with its air conditioning and its core areas would heat up faster than Jesus would fall through the water's surface. Shoot the radiators off and it will boil its occupants quite nicely, quite quickly.

And, the reason why I'm so concerned with size, volume and length and whatever... Is because I'm not trying to make the biggest thing out there, I'm trying to figure out how to scale it down to match proportions with my people's size.

You 't have to go big to have cool ships, you can have a sensible sized ship and still use them to have fun with players that are willing to compromise with you on your size and collaborate with you in telling a story. Plenty of people that play well with the community and aren't shunned by others don't need large ships to stroke their egos.