Warship Design Philosophy (RP Perspective)

[KiloZulu]

Offtopic point of contention, there are indeed federation warships in some of the canonized book series, they generally resemble a larger stockier 4 naceleed (2 above 2 below) constelation class; they're not common though as klingons regard the constelation class itself as a battlecruiser; when a real federation warship does show up klingons and romulans have been seen going great lengths to avoid confrontation, even with 3:1 numbers on their side.

The only one described in great detail was operating under the flag of vulcan though it was still part of starfleet and predomenantly of human design with some vulcan elements.

I always thought the Excelsior from ST3 was considered a warship (battlecruiser?)

 

[AtraUnam]

I always thought the Excelsior from ST3 was considered a warship (battlecruiser?)

Nah its still technically not a dedicated combat vessel; the type I mentioned is actually unique in that its still somewhat similiar to a constelation class, the typical -and less well described- pure combat vessels are about as cramped as a modern day submarine and make kilingon ships look like works of art, they're basically the startrek equivelent of doom-cubes. In fact the only reason the vessel I mentioned wasn't the same is because it was both a flagship and designed to accomodate crew members up to 3 times the size (linear size so that would be 3 times the height) of the more common humanoids in the series.

 

[DrTarDIS]

...I've been wondering what others might prioritize(spellcheck bro) in their designs in terms of what would be functional layouts and components in a space-faring warship. Be advised that I'm speaking mainly in the context of building ships designed for roleplaying purposes and not those built solely for PvP gameplay.

I'd think that any "warship" would prioritize functionality first. That is the Role it Plays. (see what I did there?)

To elaborate: Firstly, One must prioritize between speed, firepower, and defense. The order of these three variables determines 90% of the rest of the ship.
If firepower is priority, one muse sacrifice speed or durability, or compromise on both. The term "glass cannon" aptly describes a ship heavily leaned towards firepower. It may be a tough and slow "Mike Tyson" glass cannon if defense is second priority, or it may be a fragile but agile one with thrust as second priority.
If speed is a priority, firepower or durability must be sacrificed, or compromise on both. If firepower is your second priority, you're creating a Muhammad Ali of ships. If durability is your second priority you'll be creating a Rhino of sorts: speed(the charge) with damage in a very specialized area(the horn) and thick skin.
If defense is your priority, either firepower or speed must be sacrificed, or compromise on both. If firepower is your second priority you're effectively creating a "guard" or "peacekeeper" Slow but powerful hitters have their place, and usually as an emplacement. They're not going to catch anything running away, but they will damn-well stop anything from getting to what they are guarding and do it for a LONG time. If howerever Their second priority is speed over firepower, their job directly becomes a "Tank" or "Sponge" to use the MMO terms. They would lead the charge and draw the firepower (aggro) and then kite the trash-mobs back to a fleet. Hoping to keep the aggro on themselves so the glass cannons can fire with impunity by drawing targets though a killbox. Artificial Stupidity makes this a rather lucrative role.

I'll start with some thoughts on the positioning of crew quarters under the hull. My idea is that crew quarters would ideally be situated in the ship's least-protected areas. This is because, I reasoned, that when the crew is called to action stations none of them should be in their quarters. It stands to reason that they would instead be elsewhere performing their important duties. So if the crew quarters were hit, resulting in a hull breach, nothing aside from material and valuables would be lost.

This is a very viable thought process for secondary roles. In an action situation, nobody is going to be caught sleeping. I might personally have slept through a train wreck, but no way would I sleep through shots fired in my vicinity. "battle stations" on star trek comes with a "wake up you scrubby enlisted" siren for a reason. Nobody is off duty when a breach might need sealing, a blown out power conduit bypassing, boarders held or rebuffed, etc.

I personally consider all the "wetware dependencies" to be "soft armor" for the Hardware. Mess halls, sleeping quarters, meeting rooms, clerical, all of it is just "spaced armor" like you would find on a modern tank. In the end, if it doesn't make you shooty, it's something you would prefer get shot first. Even a triage area is less important than what keeps you in the fight, as no body is going to get their bullet holes patched-up to win the war if you lose this battle hard enough.

It's kind of like CPR and emergency room triage: they stress the ABCs of Airway, Breathing, and Circulation. Can you breath, Are you breathing, will you bleed out. In that order. For ships it's "can you do damage, can you avoid damage, will you overheat if you take damage".

I also had thoughts on the positioning of munitions magazines in ships that don't use energy weapons. Though I haven't quite worked out where would be the optimal place for those to sit, aside from somewhere near the weapon systems themselves. I wonder whether or not it would be wise to place them simply near the weapons, but then rely on thicker armour/shields on that section to protect them. I even had thoughts of simulating a magazine using warhead blocks or something. So that when a ship's magazine is hit, the expected result actually occurs.

As others have said, Aux Power serves the magazine role perfectly in every way. It IS ammo in the form of energy, and it goes boom if someone shoots it. The wisdom of placing them near the weapons is lacking in SM engineering, unless you go for "all or nothing" armoring philosophy, in which case it is VERY important to do just that.

Effectively a warship should always be, and look like it was designed and optimized, for one role. Anything that "keeps it ready" between filling that role is bolted on or wedged-in as an afterthought. Crew bunks slotted in between magazines "because there's space", mess stations just outside of a pressure door, and lavatories nestled between ballast and coolant reservoirs, are things you'll readily see in RL warships.

Now in a flighty fancy space-opera like anything Gene Roddenberry a "warship" will often be anything BUT a warship. Andromeda (a titular Warship) more often resembles a pleasure yacht pressed into service as an afterthought. Even the "warships" of StarTrek more closely resemble flying office buildings or industrial R&D wings. A warship has hallways you must plaster your back against a wall to get past another person, not a walkway where four people can walk abreast with room to do the chicken-dance.

As Edymnion pointed out, the Defiant-class is about as close as ST gets to a true warship (depending on which of the several "official deck plan" you go by) but even it's philosophy seems to be more of a picket ship than a true warship.

StarWars is equally guilty of treating commercial-zones-with-wings or cruise liners as "warships" and "carriers". Just look at the hallways on the deathstar or an Imperial Battle-cruiser. Again, room to tango while walking both ways.

If you want to see a Warship in cinema "The Hunt for Red October" would be a good reference, or MAYBE "2001"(despite it's lack of weaponry).

In the end, "warship" is synonymous with "cramped and stuffy" even for an agoraphobic. It would be hard to tell the difference between an "RP warship" and a bare-bones PvP ship for this reason.

 

[Dandy]

I'd think that any "warship" would prioritize functionality first. That is the Role it Plays. (see what I did there?)

To elaborate: Firstly, One must prioritize between speed, firepower, and defense. The order of these three variables determines 90% of the rest of the ship.
If firepower is priority, one muse sacrifice speed or durability, or compromise on both. The term "glass cannon" aptly describes a ship heavily leaned towards firepower. It may be a tough and slow "Mike Tyson" glass cannon if defense is second priority, or it may be a fragile but agile one with thrust as second priority.
If speed is a priority, firepower or durability must be sacrificed, or compromise on both. If firepower is your second priority, you're creating a Muhammad Ali of ships. If durability is your second priority you'll be creating a Rhino of sorts: speed(the charge) with damage in a very specialized area(the horn) and thick skin.
If defense is your priority, either firepower or speed must be sacrificed, or compromise on both. If firepower is your second priority you're effectively creating a "guard" or "peacekeeper" Slow but powerful hitters have their place, and usually as an emplacement. They're not going to catch anything running away, but they will damn-well stop anything from getting to what they are guarding and do it for a LONG time. If howerever Their second priority is speed over firepower, their job directly becomes a "Tank" or "Sponge" to use the MMO terms. They would lead the charge and draw the firepower (aggro) and then kite the trash-mobs back to a fleet. Hoping to keep the aggro on themselves so the glass cannons can fire with impunity by drawing targets though a killbox. Artificial Stupidity makes this a rather lucrative role.


This is a very viable thought process for secondary roles. In an action situation, nobody is going to be caught sleeping. I might personally have slept through a train wreck, but no way would I sleep through shots fired in my vicinity. "battle stations" on star trek comes with a "wake up you scrubby enlisted" siren for a reason. Nobody is off duty when a breach might need sealing, a blown out power conduit bypassing, boarders held or rebuffed, etc.

I personally consider all the "wetware dependencies" to be "soft armor" for the Hardware. Mess halls, sleeping quarters, meeting rooms, clerical, all of it is just "spaced armor" like you would find on a modern tank. In the end, if it doesn't make you shooty, it's something you would prefer get shot first. Even a triage area is less important than what keeps you in the fight, as no body is going to get their bullet holes patched-up to win the war if you lose this battle hard enough.

It's kind of like CPR and emergency room triage: they stress the ABCs of Airway, Breathing, and Circulation. Can you breath, Are you breathing, will you bleed out. In that order. For ships it's "can you do damage, can you avoid damage, will you overheat if you take damage".

As others have said, Aux Power serves the magazine role perfectly in every way. It IS ammo in the form of energy, and it goes boom if someone shoots it. The wisdom of placing them near the weapons is lacking in SM engineering, unless you go for "all or nothing" armoring philosophy, in which case it is VERY important to do just that.

Effectively a warship should always be, and look like it was designed and optimized, for one role. Anything that "keeps it ready" between filling that role is bolted on or wedged-in as an afterthought. Crew bunks slotted in between magazines "because there's space", mess stations just outside of a pressure door, and lavatories nestled between ballast and coolant reservoirs, are things you'll readily see in RL warships.

Now in a flighty fancy space-opera like anything Gene Roddenberry a "warship" will often be anything BUT a warship. Andromeda (a titular Warship) more often resembles a pleasure yacht pressed into service as an afterthought. Even the "warships" of StarTrek more closely resemble flying office buildings or industrial R&D wings. A warship has hallways you must plaster your back against a wall to get past another person, not a walkway where four people can walk abreast with room to do the chicken-dance.

As Edymnion pointed out, the Defiant-class is about as close as ST gets to a true warship (depending on which of the several "official deck plan" you go by) but even it's philosophy seems to be more of a picket ship than a true warship.

StarWars is equally guilty of treating commercial-zones-with-wings or cruise liners as "warships" and "carriers". Just look at the hallways on the deathstar or an Imperial Battle-cruiser. Again, room to tango while walking both ways.

If you want to see a Warship in cinema "The Hunt for Red October" would be a good reference, or MAYBE "2001"(despite it's lack of weaponry).

In the end, "warship" is synonymous with "cramped and stuffy" even for an agoraphobic. It would be hard to tell the difference between an "RP warship" and a bare-bones PvP ship for this reason.

I prioritise British spellings of words. We invented the language, we'll damn well use it the way it was meant to be used.

I think I agree with your thoughts in general. It's interesting to see that my theory on the placement of crew quarters and other areas not essential to the fighting capacity of the ship is considered sound. Cramped surrounds are definitely a feature in my warships, though I tend to widen corridors enough that I can fill them with enough detail to avoid them looking like bland, hollow tunnels. Coolant reservoirs are something I might incorporate where there's spare room around the engineering compartments. I might use something like water blocks or something glowy and window the areas to make them visible for aesthetic purposes.

 

[aRottenKomquat]

I do wish we could get a preview of how NPCs and crew will work, to give me some ideas on designing ships that won't be 100% worthless when that particular update lands.

 

[Lord_Greyscale]

I do wish we could get a preview of how NPCs and crew will work, to give me some ideas on designing ships that won't be 100% worthless when that particular update lands.

The current Dev build seems to be about just that, it's certainly got NPC fleets running around.

 

[KiloZulu]

Crew on a ship have schedules when they are on and off duty. In the event of combat, the crew that is off duty act as support personnel, and have assigned duties for that role. Some common roles are as fire fighters, repair crews, and first aid. In a protracted engagement, when combat is continuous, or has the potential to occur in the near future, it becomes important to stand down these crews and cycle them through rest periods in order to maintain alertness and functionality.

Every modern military values the well-being of its military personnel, and wants to either keep them in the fight, or return them to the fight, rather than losing them. Modern fighting equipment places crew survivability as a top priority, although crew comfort may not always be a top consideration. Crew comfort becomes more important depending on how long the crew is expected to remain on task, on mission. While the crew of a tank can be in the field for months at a time, they will have ample opportunity to disembark. Instead, the tank may be expected to provide enough comfort for the crew to remain inside and on the job for most of a day.

Aircraft are no different, but their role may create compromises. A jet fighter that won't be in the air for more than an hour or two requires much less investment in crew space than a transport plane expected to refuel and stay aloft for a day or more. In a pinch, a military transport can have jump seats for carrying troops, which aren't comfortable. If troop transport is a dedicated priority, however, passenger airliners will get drafted into service to maintain troop comfort - even including the airline staff.

When we get into naval vessels, modern ships designed to cross oceans tend to be quite spacious, and livable, for the betterment of the crew that has to live and function at sea for months at a time. You'll no doubt have heard aircraft carriers referred to as "floating cities" due to the fact that they provide all kinds of services and amenities beyond what is needed for combat. Really, the cramped spaces of submarines are an outlier, and even modern nuclear subs are quite spacious for a crew that has to spend so much time in a dark and isolated environment.

The modern ship is designed for the amount of crew on board, the ship's task, and its expected periods of operation. Corridors may be tight on a smaller vessel with a limited crew, but they will be much more open on a vessel with a large crew or where there is a lot of expected traffic. I believe that kind of philosophy should play a critical part in the design of a role play ship. As such, I don't think that ships from Star Trek or Star Wars are out of place at all, although I lean more towards BSG in my own designs.

 

[Jojomo]

Corridors may be tight on a smaller vessel with a limited crew, but they will be much more open on a vessel with a large crew or where there is a lot of expected traffic.

(Very) large naval ships may have a small number of wide arterial corridors - I don't know whether they do or not, but I do know that they have many small tight corridors.

No space is wasted on a ship (I design them for a living), especially naval ships, because it increases weight which degrades performance.
No corridor has excess capacity.

 

[Tamren Shade]

This is a perfect example of what I mean when I say that RP ships do not have to be total wimps in a fight. Tamren Shade is clearly designing his ships to 'both' be RP consistent 'and' combat capable. I dare say however with all those bulkheads, his ships are probably pretty slow.

Kind of, my primary goal when making a ship is to make it both interesting and effective. I do like to include a decent amount of interior, but I also want my ships to hold their own in a fight. I'd say my building style tends to be right between the extremes of carefully optimized PVP ships and lovingly detailed and very open RP ships.

And actually, my ships tend to be on the faster side of the spectrum compared to other ships in their weight class off the docks. I've been known to compromise a bit on shields to get my ships a really good T/M Ratio, and from a resources cost/benefit perspective, thrusters are a LOT cheaper than shields

 

[AtraUnam]

If we want pvp ships with RP I'd suggest cramped submarine style corridors as thats what you'd probably find in a real warship. It would also save on interior space if everything was spartan and cramped.

 

[KiloZulu]

(Very) large naval ships may have a small number of wide arterial corridors - I don't know whether they do or not, but I do know that they have many small tight corridors.

No space is wasted on a ship (I design them for a living), especially naval ships, because it increases weight which degrades performance.
No corridor has excess capacity.

Agreed - but the StarMade player aesthetic is to fill in every gap on a ship with systems, whereas in real life, crew need to be able to get to every part of a ship for repairs and maintenance. Those areas are tight - no larger than is necessary for the access needed. The corridors of the regularly crewed and lived-in areas are generally more spacious. That's not even mentioning the outer decks - something that a spaceship may want to capture through viewing lounges and the like so that crew doesn't feel so confined.

Here is a photo from the new 158-man Zumwalt frigate:

[doublepost=1481561528,1481561120][/doublepost]

If we want pvp ships with RP I'd suggest cramped submarine style corridors as thats what you'd probably find in a real warship. It would also save on interior space if everything was spartan and cramped.

My only problem with that logic is that it kind of assumes that PvP takes place between two ships of equal size, so the person that crams the most into the space has the advantage. Really, none of that matters unless you have limited resources or your server has size caps that you're up against. Otherwise, you build your ship with an idea of what you want to be able to comfortably combat, and your interior can be as spacious or cramped as you like once you've met your other goals.

 

[aRottenKomquat]

Yes, a large part of the interior of real warships is composed of a ton of cramped access paths for maintenance and repair work. Like I alluded to earlier (I think it was this thread), Space Engineers designs typically incorporate that because you need to have direct access to blocks to weld or repair them. StarMade does not.

Any opinions on having NPC crewman do repair work? That would require direct access to any blocks requiring repair, so maintenance tunnels would be essentially required for any warship that wants the ability to perform some degree of self-repair in combat. Your crew can't repair your shield blocks if they can't get to them. This would be one solution to the (or rather, my) issue of ship interiors not really being a requirement for a good ship.

 

[AtraUnam]

My only problem with that logic is that it kind of assumes that PvP takes place between two ships of equal size, so the person that crams the most into the space has the advantage. Really, none of that matters unless you have limited resources or your server has size caps that you're up against. Otherwise, you build your ship with an idea of what you want to be able to comfortably combat, and your interior can be as spacious or cramped as you like once you've met your other goals.

This is the kind of thinging that promotes the 'just build bigger' mentality, With efficient systems you can create ships that can take on a 'just add more systems' ship, twice its size, even one built by an otherwise good builder. Even if you do have near limitless recources its still better to build your ships to work well in addition to making it big; you never know when you'll come across something you won't expect.

 

[KiloZulu]

This is the kind of thinging that promotes the 'just build bigger' mentality, With efficient systems you can create ships that can take on a 'just add more systems' ship, twice its size, even one built by an otherwise good builder. Even if you do have near limitless recources its still better to build your ships to work well in addition to making it big; you never know when you'll come across something you won't expect.

I'm not quite so sure. The "build it bigger" mentality is more about simply adding more weapons/shields in order to dominate. I'm only saying that making comfortable living space on your ship doesn't have to undermine performance. Yes, your ship will be larger, but if it's caused by widened hallways and roomier, er, rooms, you're not falling victim to the titan trap. Until both you and your enemy are trying to fit components into the exact same hull, there's little reason to sweat the size of corridors, imho.

I do acknowledge that size impacts turn rate, and if I'm building a ship where I want maneuverability, space is definitely going to be at a premium.

 

[Panpiper]

Spaced armor is a highly effective defense when combined with a proper armor shell and defensive passives that can give an armored ship the edge it needs. RP space most certainly can be slotted into such spaces between armor. Far from RP space being a hamper to effective combat design, done properly it will have no deleterious effect whatsoever. That said, I have yet to see a single ship built this way... Virtually every 'RP' ship I have ever seen has been built with no thought to it's combat effectiveness whatsoever. The sole exception that I can recall has been Drakkart's Destroyer, which is the proof that an RP ship can be made eminently combat worthy.

 

[KiloZulu]

Spaced armor is a highly effective defense when combined with a proper armor shell and defensive passives that can give an armored ship the edge it needs. RP space most certainly can be slotted into such spaces between armor. Far from RP space being a hamper to effective combat design, done properly it will have no deleterious effect whatsoever. That said, I have yet to see a single ship built this way... Virtually every 'RP' ship I have ever seen has been built with no thought to it's combat effectiveness whatsoever. The sole exception that I can recall has been Drakkart's Destroyer, which is the proof that an RP ship can be made eminently combat worthy.

Unless someone is building a ship with combat in mind, I can understand why this might be. I'm not big on PvP, and as such I don't have to build them to any particular standard. When I build a ship for RP use, the performance capabilities are part of the RP. That is, I may not want the fastest, combat effictive vessel. I mean, some of my mining and cargo ships aren't even armed, and in some instances could be considered "lumbering." When I want to build a combat vessel, I make sure it meets all of my criteria for combat, and the amount of RP space scales with it. Sometimes the crew gets a galley, other times they have to settle for a microwave.

 

[Shadow2Lead]

The corridors of the regularly crewed and lived-in areas are generally more spacious. That's not even mentioning the outer decks - something that a spaceship may want to capture through viewing lounges and the like so that crew doesn't feel so confined.

Here is a photo from the new 158-man Zumwalt frigate:

Fyi, assuming that's the corridor that I think it is on the Zumwalt, that's a uniquely spacious corridor in modern ship design built with the idea of being able to operate a forklift in it, possibly for the ammunition* for its gun battery - i don't really remember. So I wouldn't read too much into it's spacious dimensions if your objective is to base your StarMade ship design on 20th-21st century naval ship design.

That said, I think how strongly a ship is a RP design really is a function of how well the design fits the "story" behind the universe in which it lives. So a doomcube is a stand up example of a RP design in the current StarMade universe. A star trek ship with it's wide corridors, jeffries tubes and extensive lift shafts is a great RP design for that universe. So on and so forth.

That all said, I think one of the best ways to enhance the RP quality of your ship is via text either on the upload page or on cleverly placed/designed in-universe display blocks on the ship that can explain design choices that you made that on first glance look "unrealistic" from a 21st century naval perspective. Two examples from current warships:

• That extra wide corridor in the Zumwalt is an unrealistic feature if you compare it to other US destroyers or modern frigates from around the world, but by explaining it and giving it purpose you can change it from a suspension of disbelief problem to a RP bonus. (You could explain it visually without any text by designing a vehicle which can transit the space.)
• Take a look at the mission bay on the Independence class LCS, or even the Freedom class, that sort of gigantic open space is unheard of in modern naval warship design (excepting aircraft carriers) because of how vulnerable it is, but various financial and mission factors made it seem like a good idea. If you can communicate those factors you've created story that explains what at first glance seems absurd.

TLDR; form follows function. So long as the function is clear within the world design your ship is following (and the player doesn't instantly see a better way of designing the form within that world) I think you are good to go from an RP perspective.


I think something that is easy to forget about is that un-ideal design decisions can be good design from an RP perspective. If you can work in story that explains things in your ship as being driven by financial restraints, pet projects by an admiral, pork by a politician etc, I think that can go a long way to making a ship feel real. Every warship design is the result of thousands of compromises, some military in nature, some political, some financial, some tradition driven, etc.

Also, if you've got time, take a look at some naval documentaries on YouTube, they cover modern designs in remarkable depth if you want to design interiors to look realistic from a 20th/21st century design perspective, and have given me a lot of ideas for spaces I'd like to include in interiors once the quarter system is added.

*As an aside, that is ammunition that is no longer being produced so those nice super modern guns aren't actually going to have anything to shoot after something like the first 500 rounds. Truth can be stranger than fiction and that has great RP value if you find ways to incorporate the absurd into your ship's design/story.

 

[KiloZulu]

I don't think that we're very far apart on design requirements. Not all of the corridors on my ships are going to be grand avenues, and I hope I didn't give that impression. The corridor should fit the purpose, and so I have wider, more elaborate corridors in heavy traffic areas, and tight corridors for maintenance access. The photo from the Zumwalt was simply the first example I came across when I punched in "naval ship corridor" in google, but your description of that particular hallway's purpose matches with what I've been saying, I believe. It's size is not an anomaly in ship design, but rather practical for its purpose, and not uncommon.

I do not believe that anyone designs a ship hallway to be purposefully tight, but rather it is only as tight as it has to be. Nor is it going to be any larger than it has to be.

 

[Shadow2Lead]

Oh definitely not far apart at all. I just wanted to elaborate on that photo (and various other related thoughts) because I think it neatly illustrates a lot of different design ideas and trade offs that can be applied to RP spaces in StarMade.

 

[Jojomo]

I think your impression of that photo is a bit inaccurate.
Also don't forget the distortion you get at the edges of the photo: things become stretched there.

We can do a couple of rough checks:

I drew a red box from the guy's head to his heel, and laid a copy sideways across the bottom. If we assume he's 6 feet tall, we can say that that the width of the grey area, of the corridor and alcove together, is approximately a bit over (a couple of shoe widths) 6 feet (1.8m)

I did a second check with the fire extinguisher in the foreground. I copy/pasted it across the corridor. The grey area is about 6.5 times the width of the extinguisher. I did a quick search for the dimensions of a 9kg (20lb) extinguisher (that's a large one) and used the first one I got. The diameter of the cylinder is 180mm. Multiplied by 6.5 that's 1.17m (3.8 feet).

Not enough for two people to pass each other without some maneuvering around each other.

So in Starmade, even if we were being generous, the corridor space width would be represented by 1.5 blocks at the most.