Nerdy Analysis For Fun (NAFF)

[Redspear]

Umm... you seem to be concentrating on the ship size as purely a function of crew/passengers & cargo. I would have thought that fast engines, luxurious FdL interiors, Asp militaristic whatnots etc would all have a part to play too. Quirium is surely dangerous stuff and a quirium engine needs a lot of protection built in to stop it just exploding at whim.

In terms of my 'calculations' yes, you're right. However, I'm not assuming that those calculations be accurate but merely servicable, a 'rule of thumb' if you like.
If I wanted to be accurate then I'd need to factor in engine speed as well as engine mass. Then there'd be fully laden and unladen speeds (plus everything inbetween), perhaps bigger hyperdrives for bigger ships, etc, etc etc. I really DON'T want to do that...

1TC of cargo capacity is likely slightly larger than 1TC of space:

THE CARGO HOLD fills the bulk of the mid-space area, and the cargo bay doors open downwards. The capacity in an unmodified Cobra is 20 1-tonne canisters. Extra cargo space may be acquired by extending the cargo bay, which does not affect maneuverability. Tonne canisters (TC) attach magnetically to the cargo arms within the bay, and 2 AutoShuttles occupy the central space.

The autoshuttles and cargo arms presumably occupy some space and further for them to function selectively one might expect some space between individual cannisters (or at least 1 cannisters worth of space with which to rearrange them in puzzle fashion).

As I explained in the other thread (or at least I meant to...) my assumption that 1 crew member requires 1TC of space (when same could accommodate 10 passengers) might seem nonsensical. However, the assumption was that being required crew there would be some items of equipment ("militaristic whatnots" perhaps) included as well as some acommodation requirements ("luxurious FdL interiors" maybe).

So the 1TC for each crew member is more generous than stingy I think and as such is likely to be inaccurate.
That gives me some more undefined, extra space with which to handwave as occupied by engines, electronics or whatever.

If a ship has neither cargo, nor pilot, nor weapons, nor can it be scooped then I'm going to need to ammend the plan

A size 3 Worm of which 1 of the sizes is the Escape Pod/cockpit/pilot seems to me a tad unlikely as a viable spaceship. I'd expect there to be less of a living quarters/cockpit and more of a spaceship, if I'm explaining myself with any clarity. And a couple of Montana05's spacesuits instead.

I think I understand...

OK, so firstly that ship is (within elite) a "landing craft", explicitly carried by other vessels and as such may not be expected to be fully independent, so there's that to consider but what of the maths?

Well, that 2 size that's left after the cockpit/escape pod is accounted for would be room enough for 20 passengers.
Could that possibly be enough for a small engine and a laser? Maybe?

Again, the goal is not for this to represent full accuracy but rather the illusion of such. If it only breaks down once we get the calculators out then it's done its job (to the extent that it ever had one )

[Cody]

This coffee stuff is a damn nuisance...

<chortles> The coffee stain thing is nagging away at me. I blame lockdown!

[Redspear]

This coffee stuff is a damn nuisance...

<chortles> The coffee stain thing is nagging away at me. I blame lockdown!

When in doubt...

Pros and cons with a lockdown (besides the pandemic itself of course) but when this whole thing's over it might take me some getting used to

[Redspear]

A quick visual representation of 'crude size'.

A question mark indicates that I didn't have all of the data to hand (usually the model's volume) and one or two models were scaled via estimate (worm, shuttle and transporter). They were all scaled around the largest ship (anaconda) in order to minimise work in creating the image. I could have estimated the thargoid but I think my earlier table entry forgot to account for space required to hold thargons (10TC should be plenty).

Exception: I treated the boa as having 100 TC rather than 125 TC. This is because the elite manual specified that it was smaller than the python despite it's larger capacity.

So, one calculator and several cube roots later...

_________Oolite sizes __________________________________________________ Sizes using 'Crude size' (from table in first post)

black outline is for 35TC cobra ->

Interestingly, in many cases it doesn't change the scale that much. The annaconda, adder, python and boa for example remain almost identically propotioned to each other. What it does do however is highlight the 'worst offenders' and they were very much the usual suspects: asp, krait, cobra mk III, orbital shuttle and transporter. What did surprise me somewhat however was how little difference a 35TC capacity would make to the cobra mk III - it just looks to have put on some weight (see shadow outline).

In terms of the typical combat worries of ships being shrunk presenting more difficult targets, the only ones that have been shrunk drastically weren't exactly small to begin with (asp & krait). Some have actually increased slightly but it may not be obvious (adder, python, boa).

All could still dock, including the beefed up shuttle.

I'll need to think about the formula some more, maybe include full crew rather than minimum for the larger ships (that might help with the python-boa discrepancy) but this will almost certainly make it's way into the next incarnation of the rescaling experiment.

[Cholmondely]

It highlights the absurdity of the Cobra MkIII scooping up Thargons (unless one is flying backwards, maybe...).

Definitely like your approach... more power to your pencil!

[phkb]

It highlights the absurdity of the Cobra MkIII scooping up Thargons (unless one is flying backwards, maybe...).

I always assumed that the "scoop" operated by firstly dragging the item to be scooped to within range, and then initiating a low-power transmat to transfer the item to the hold. This also matches up with what you see in the game, if you have an external view while scooping items.

[Redspear]

I always assumed that the "scoop" operated by firstly dragging the item to be scooped to within range, and then initiating a low-power transmat to transfer the item to the hold. This also matches up with what you see in the game, if you have an external view while scooping items.

Good point but it still occupies the same space in hold as a standard cargo pod suggesting very similar dimensions. Hard to imagine the ol' mkIII having room for more than a few at the unmodifed size.

It could be doubled of course (2TC) without major game effect I think (for thargons I mean). But then if you eject it you'd find it has somehow been packaged into two seperate pods...

IIRC 1TC of alien items is worth less than 1TC of alloys, which always struck me as odd.

It highlights the absurdity of the Cobra MkIII scooping up Thargons (unless one is flying backwards, maybe...).

Definitely like your approach... more power to your pencil!

Plus, stick lasers on the prongs of the krait now and you might actually hit something

Thanks.

[Redspear]

There's another value(s) assigned to ships in the Elite manual: Hull Stress Factor.

Not much in the way of explanation but perhaps the most revealing is the entry for the anaconda:

Hull Stress Factor - T(ensmann) Ji57 C-Holding Z 22-28

So it looks like there's two values here which would appear to have complexity beyond the simply numerical.
So firstly, why two vaules and what could they mean? The simple answer of course is that I don't know. Speculating, the unit "Tensman" sounds superficially similar to 'tensile' which could relate to response to stress loads. "C-Holding" on the other hand might late to 'c' as in light speed with this clue/red herring from the adder entry:

Maximum Velocity - 0.24 LM (Light Mach)

Making sense yet? Of course it isn't... and I suspect there's a very strong chance that it wasn't meant to, rather it was just a bit of 'fluff' text to look kind of cool in a 1984 computer game manual (mission accomplished). However, that's not good enough reason to stop my investigating

Problem however is that those two values don't always show up together and aren't necessarily consistent when they do...

Hull Stress Factor - T Ko 28...
Hull Stress Factor - T to 84-94 C-Holding JZ20...
Hull Stress Factor - C-Holding A20-B4...
Hull Stress Factor - Not available; C-Holding C50...
Hull Stress Factor - Varies...

So comparison is tricky but... If we look at the latest (sequentially speaking) aphabetical capital letter, ignoring the T for Tensman and C for C-holding (unless their are no other letter available) then we get this:

• B - Krait, Mamba*
• C - Sidewinder
• J - Gecko, Cobra mk I, Fer de lance
• K - Worm, Adder, Orbital Shuttle
• M - Cobra mk III
• T - Asp mk II, Moray
• Y - Python, Boa
• Z - Anaconda

* Could have picked 'K' for the mamba but 2 reasons not to. 1, it's so linked to the krait that this would seem odd. 2, the krait only has the latter of the two valuies and so that presents the only comparison option

So, if referencing the first table of this thread and reading later letters as stronger hulls, then the stronger hulls belong to the largest vessels (python, boa, anaconda) while the weakest are associated with the smallest (krait, mamba, sidewinder). On to something? Well, maybe but there are some exceptions in there.

The asp and moray have seemingly remarkably strong hulls (T) based on their size and arguably so does the worm. At the other end the shuttle might be expected to be a little stronger but again based on size alone. Can this be handwaved using the original sources?

The Asp:

Galactic Navy vessel designed and manufactured in government workshops... The Asp II has room for powerful shield generators, but only one missile port.

So it's a military vessel that can equip strong shields; maybe that explains it. Although to couter my earlier explanation around it's curve factor rating it is also described as "maneuverable"
Anyway, this at least suggests an unusually tough ship.

The Moray:

hull is able to withstand the pressures of depths of up to 5500 fathoms

The only expicitly aquatic vessel, the above quote would appear to explain it.

Aso for the others, the worm has the latest inservce date of any vessel besides the mamba (and little else going for it) whilst the orbital shuttle clearly isn't expected to engage enemies (no weapons, auto-ejects cargo and is built in "every planetary system".

So howw could this be represented ingame and what could it affect?
Energy Banks?
Shield strength (essentially the same as energy banks for non-player ships)?
Maneuverability?

Energy banks is perhaps the obvious one as it's the most related to surviving on burst or solitary impact.
Really like the idea of a tougher moray (and the smaller asp not losing it's toughness) but the worm thenwould be too strong.

Hmm...

[hiran]

There's another value(s) assigned to ships in the Elite manual: Hull Stress Factor.

Not much in the way of explanation but perhaps the most revealing is the entry for the anaconda:

Hull Stress Factor - T(ensmann) Ji57 C-Holding Z 22-28

So it looks like there's two values here which would appear to have complexity beyond the simply numerical.
So firstly, why two vaules and what could they mean? The simple answer of course is that I don't know. Speculating, the unit "Tensman" sounds superficially similar to 'tensile' which could relate to response to stress loads. "C-Holding" on the other hand might late to 'c' as in light speed with this clue/red herring from the adder entry:

Maximum Velocity - 0.24 LM (Light Mach)

Hmmm. If the hull stress factor were identical to physical material stress factor, we might need five values already:
https://www.linearmotiontips.com/mechan ... nd-strain/

Then on spaceships we have the pressure from inside, the solar wind from outside, the witchspace jumps on top of the maveuvering along 3 axes.
Maybe there is stome standardized test or rating which compiles so many values into only two. And as standards usually come in multitudes to pick from, each of them has different units and ratings - thus you still cannot compare the ships.

[Cholmondely]

Just to mention 4 further sources on Ships' Hulls:

*Chomwitt's post: https://bb.oolite.space/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=20958 (2021) - I never found his "emergency loops" reference
*New wiki page: http://wiki.alioth.net/index.php/Ship%27s_Hull
*Cim's Ship's Manual has a short essay on the hull
*Cim's New Cargoes has a few things to say about Duraluminium

[Redspear]

Hmmm. If the hull stress factor were identical to physical material stress factor, we might need five values already:
https://www.linearmotiontips.com/mechan ... nd-strain/

I note the 'if' there but really, in terms of ingame activity we only really have laser hits and impacts/explosions.
So of the 5 that would probably be best represented by (very crudely) tension (excitiation of molecules from intense energy - lasers) and compression (sudden external pressure whilst maintaining internal pressure).

Then on spaceships we have the pressure from inside, the solar wind from outside, the witchspace jumps on top of the maveuvering along 3 axes.
Maybe there is stome standardized test or rating which compiles so many values into only two. And as standards usually come in multitudes to pick from, each of them has different units and ratings

If all ships had values for 'C-Holding' then that's roughly what I'd imagine it to be, Tensman being two values I described above.

- thus you still cannot compare the ships.

Why not? It's not about accuracy for me rather I'm seeing if I can interpret what's there in new and potentially interesting ways.

For example, there doesn't need to be a whole A-Z scale of Hull Strength Factor, rather I can simply rank the ships according to their scores e.g,

• 1 energy bank - Krait, Mamba
• 1 & 1/2 energy banks - Sidewinder
• 2 energy banks - Gecko, Cobra mk I, Fer de lance
• 3 energy banks - Worm, Adder, Orbital Shuttle
• 4 energy banks - Cobra mk III
• 5 energy banks - Asp mk II, Moray
• 7 energy banks - Python, Boa
• 9 energy banks - Anaconda

So I'd still need to explain how that worm got so tough but meanwhile all those newly shrunk and extra jinky fighters, once hit, are taken out relatively easily (the sidewinder being slightly tougher as it was "built to galactic navy specifications"). The cobra mk I and the fer de lance are no worse off than before but the moray just became a much more viable option for a starting ship and the 7TC cargo bay slows the rapid progression possible to a 20-35TC mk III, making arguably the most fun period of the game last longer.

Thinking back to the krait and mamba with their suspiciouly large cargo, had they been written up along with the viper then the 10 TC could possibly have been meant to be 10 people, which the transporter entry suggests equates to 1TC.

Of course as the asp discrepancy (maneouvrable yet not) suggests, the original manual is likely error strewn partly because it may not have been expected that 35 years later someone would attempt to make sense of the 'fluff text' of the last few pages...

Just to mention 4 further sources on Ships' Hulls:

*Chomwitt's post: https://bb.oolite.space/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=20958 (2021) - I never found his "emergency loops" reference
*New wiki page: http://wiki.alioth.net/index.php/Ship%27s_Hull
*Cim's Ship's Manual has a short essay on the hull
*Cim's New Cargoes has a few things to say about Duraluminium

Thanks but it's 'primary' sources for me unless someone's already tried to reinterpret, rather than simply replace, the old data.

[Redspear]

So I'd still need to explain how that worm got so tough...

If I use the typo excuse then the "Ki" unit listed in the manual perhaps could have been the more common "Ji" unit (as with "ergon"/"ergan") to grant the worm 2 energy banks insted of three, making it more curious than suspicious.

Meanwhile, back to CF (curve factor). Just as I've based the proposed values for energy banks on existing standards (or else I'd need to change weapon damage as well), I'm doing similar with pitch and roll so that the game wouldn't feel completely different when piloting a ship. Looking at the values on the wiki, a few things stand out:

• The anaconda has far and away the worst handling of any core ship
• The cobra mk III is actualy one of the least manoevrable
• The boa mk II is good in seemingly all departments
• The middle ground is fairly similar
• The vipers (interceptor in particular) are very agile

So based on oolite values, here's a potential conversion table:

____ Pitch __ Roll ___

CF 3 - 0.75 ___ 0.4
CF 4 - 2.0 ____ 1.0
CF 5 - 2.1 ____ 1.4
CF 6 - 2.5 ____ 1.5
CF 7 - 2.8 ____ 1.6
CF 8 - 3.0 ____ 1.75
CF 9 - 3.6 ____ 2.0

That would place the oolite cobra mk III at cf4 and the oolite viper at (approx) cf7. The boa and python have always seemed far too sprightly to me, so it was no surprise to find that both boas are superior in this regard to the mk III and the python only slightly inferior - the above would change that and significantly so. The adder would be quite sluggish if this were to be implemented but then it is the smallest ship with both cargo space and a hyperdrive, so maybe that makes sense.

The real loser would be the cobra mkI at cf3 but swapping its value with that of the boa (cf4) seems both minor (in terms of faithfulness) and fairly logical. Then the big ships would be lumbering giants and, like slowing station rotation, this would to help create an improved sense of scale.

The real sticking point is that the asp has cf4 (a value which would simulate it's in oolite as ity would for the mk III) and the mk III's cf8 which would make transform it from one of the least to one of the most agile (i'm getting tired of typing manouevrable and spelling it differently nearly every time ). I think the most logical thing to do would be to swap the two values, making both ships at least fairly man agile for their size. Drawback is that the asp would now be more formidable, especially with its smaller size, but there may be a way for the asp to pay for that...

[Redspear]

TLDR - exploring the idea that additional crew indicates additional standard equipment and that some equipment takes up significant space.

Concluding with not only consequences for smaller ships but also with potentially more interesing upgrade options including slower yet more even upgrade progression

The spacious hull is mainly given over to sophisticated weaponry, defences and navigation equipment at the expense of cargo capacity. Cabin accommodation is large and luxurious

So this suggests that equipment requires cargo space and possibly (given the high crew of this particular ship and the other specilalised medium ship - FdL & moray) that crew indicates installed equipment.

Cabin interiors are mentioned but not really reflected in the game (elite). In oolite a pasenger cabin occupies 5TC, so to continue with the formulae I've been using that should mean that if it were stripped of fittings then it should be able to seat 50 people. Would that be an outragous number for a hotel room? Depends on the hotel I suppose but the best rooms in a fancy hotel (if stripped bare) could comfortably seat 50 I would suggest, so maybe 5TC is reasonable.

Fer de Lance - 12 crew

1 - escape pod (if a ship has room for a pilot seat then that can be converted into an escape pod as discussed earlier)
2 - docking computers (what self-respecting FdL pilot would want to have to put down his/her/its Martini in order to do something as mundane as docking)
3 - ecm ("defences")
4 - extra energy unit
5 - fuel scoops
6 to 10 - passenger cabin
11 to 12 - ?

Compared to the oolite FdL, the following would be missing (along with anoth 10TC of space...)

another passenger berth
advanced space compass
witch fuel injectors
scanner targeting enhancement
shield boosters

I've marked only two in bold as the're the ones both not already represented and most likely to take up space. It's hard to justify the advanced space compass taking up 1TC and the same with the scanner targeting enhancement. One could perhaps argue the same for the docking computers and even the ecm but they are core elite items (and one a luxury) so maybe any loss from fitting those is occupied by all the other targeting gizmos.

So.

11 - witch fuel injectors
12 - shield boosters

Meaning it could stil have all of the standard equipment that it does in oolite (with thoses additional items not occupying space.


Does it work for the Moray, the other ship with a big crew but relatively small CT capacity?

Standard fittings include: highpower seal locks, 2 torpedo tube/ single missile pods and flood-lock cabins for subaquatic life-forms.

Moray - 7 crew *

1 - escape capsule (every player ship has at least 1 crew member, right?)
2 to 6 - passenger cabin ("flood-lock" cabin with "highpower seal locks" might conceivably take up extra space)
7 - ?

The wiki entry might suggest external heat shielding for the last spot but the 'external' part doesn't sound like it should occupy cabin space. Who cares? 7 crew is enough equipment space for its specialist standard fittings and maybe the last one is for witch drive injectors (many player's first investment).

I think the only other ship mentioned to have extra equipment (that isn't a freighter and relates to standard oolite equipment) is the asp with its "room for powerful shield generators".

The asp has no cargo space but (fortunately) 2 crew. Escape pod + shield boosters. Sorted.


What would/could this mean for the (individual's) game?

Small ships couldn't be upgraded very much as they just don't have the room.
If you started in a sidewinder then that's it, once you've upgraded your weapons then your next upgrade would have to be a ship. A krait or mamba pilot might have room for injectors but that's about it.

Geckos and adders fare a little better but only one has a hyperdrive and the other is a little slow. Speed isn't the asp's problem but space would be. It does have a hyperdrive however so if that freed up 2TC (as my earlier calculations have suggested then that's significantly more options for a wormhole hopping opportunist. So if you've upgraded from one of the smallest ships then not only are you now experiencing a new ship but you've also got the chance to experience new equipment items.

The next size up gets more suitable. They all have at least 11TC of room (including cockpit/escape pod) and only the transporter doesn't have a hyperdrive (although it does have room for one). So room to equip almost everything but at a big cost to trading options (and consequently the most conventional route to buying a bigger ship).

One more size category up and we'd be with the mk III, the default ship, how would this change the player's experience. Crucial difference would be that every time the player bought one of the non-console items of equipment, their ship would lose 1TC of capacity. With 20TC that's quite a bit of room so the player would be unlikely to run out of space but each time they upgraded (with CT occupying equipment) their ability to generate profit from each trade run would be reduced. I think this effect could actually be good for the game.

As it stands, with 100 credits and an empty cargo bay, it's going to take several trade runs before the player can afford to fill it with the good stuff but once they do (in a mk III) then the upgrades come thick and fast. There are more to save up for in oolite and some of them are really expensive but once you've got your first your second isn't far away. However, if some of them cost cargo space then that upgrade speed is reduced. An alternative would be to increase the prices of some of the upgrades but that forces the players hand somewhat in terms of which upgrade to choose next.


So which upgrades would cost space?

Cobra mk III - 20 TC (one crew gives sace for escape pod)
Imagined purchase history

witch fuel injectors - 19TC left
ecm - 18 left
fuel scoops - 17 left
extra energy unit - 16 left
docking computers - 15 left (profit per trade run now down to 75%)
front military laser - 13 left (good reason for not every ship to have it if it occupies 2TC... 65%)
rear military laser - 11 left (55%)
quirium cascade mine - 6 left (what, you think every ship should have one? 5TC stops geckos carrying them... 30%)
shield boosters - 5 left (25%)
military shield enhancement - 4 left (20%)

And that's without all the other console equipment (wormhole scanners, advanced navigation array etc.) that wouldn't take up space but would require investment. Repair costs? If they're proportinal to the item costs then we'd no longer need a few much more expensive items as were added for oolite. Not enough cash? Get yourself on those courier runs, go bounty hunting, there's money to be made and (still) some challenge to be had...


Want a small ship that can still equip everything?

Cheat/load an oxp/edit the shipdata file to add another 15TC to its cargo capacity/ignore this thread entirely.
Remember: It's not 'cheating', it's 'oxp-ing'

I just think that this makes for an interesting interpretation and possibly throws up some interesting game elements.


* EDIT: actually the moray has 6 crew, so cockpit/escape pod + passenger berth = done... This is working even better than I'd hoped

[Redspear]

I would have thought that fast engines... have a part to play too. Quirium is surely dangerous stuff and a quirium engine needs a lot of protection built in to stop it just exploding at whim.

Damn it man (/woman/whatever/none of my business really), you're right!

As I've said already my interpretation of crew as reflective of size (at 1TC per member) gives me potentially quite a bit of spare room (if a standard passenger only occupies 0.1TC of space). However if a ship has both tough shields and fast engines (e.g. asp) then that suggests further bulk. Rather than engage in the kind of complex calculations I alluded to in my previous answer to your point, I could just play the two things off against each other and create a simple modifier from that.

I've already got an updated table but that might be a bit premature.

[Redspear]

OK, I think I'm nearly there. Adjusted for 'Hull Stress Factor' (energy banks) max speed and max crew for all vessels (halved for python and doubled for boa to meet criteria of boa being the smaller ship)

Two size charts:
earlier attempt - - - > all (known) data accounted for




Silhouettes represent either ships I don't have accurate data for (but could be estimated as in earler depiction) or the the orignal size of ships that would become smaller.

The Boa mk II is just too good IMHO, it makes the mk III look like a specialist ship rather than the awesome all rounder it is.
It's not as fast as its cobra counterpart but it's got it beat near everywhere else and often by some distance.

It doesn't really suit this set for three main reasons:

• It wasn't an original oolite ship
• It's got one of the least inspiring polygonal models
• Shipping 175TC grants it more capacity than the anaconda

Re ships being smaller, some would be harder to hit but they'd be consistently more fragile too.

The way to really make this work is to scale around the mk III but that requires bigger stations (fine if using the rescaling experiment, less so if not). It would need to increase by upto 1/3 I think. Maybe the answer is to pick a compromise ship to scale around. The Moray was the other ship with a speed adjusted player version for oolite, maybe that's the solution. If I can get this right then I can fully separate ship and system rescaling from each other whilst still being able to accommodate both.