Discrepencies between ship size and crew needed...?

[Jimmy]

I'm going to dump some more change into this conversation.

"Multi-classing" as some here have called it is more prevalent in submarines, where crews are highly trained and the loss of one compartment probably means that whole section of the crew is dead. It's nice to have a few spares. In WWII it was said that each German U-boat crewman knew how to do the job of every other crewman on board his submarine, and they only earned your Dolphins badge (think Able Seaman) until they could demonstrate this to an officer. They also had to re-qualify for each different submarine they served on.

Keep in mind ship design as well. Western ships tend to have so much crew because they're designed to be serviced and repaired at sea if need be. All of them are designed to be replenished at the very least. Also, fleets tend to keep large volumes of specialized technical staff on hand for things from fixing forklifts to supply organization. This is feasible because of the high degree of education available in the West and the typically higher level of motivation from volunteers.

Meanwhile, you have the Russian design mindset. Since Russia has a navy mainly made up of poorly educated conscripts (who are severely underpaid) their ships lack the highly trained technical staff required to service them constantly. Instead, these specialists are kept in naval bases and ships are used for relatively short-ranged missions before coming back to port. Because the ship isn't expected to do repairs underway this also allows Russian ships to be a lot smaller as systems are packed closer together without the engineering space to allow crewmen to service them efficiently.

Keep this in mind when comparing crew sizes as well. A navy is typically an extension of its home nations will and character and will be designed around such.

 

[Abwehran Commander]

I'm actually pondering creating a program for calculating Crew Requirements of SARP vessels based upon each nation's standards (training, technology, culture, etc.)

Only sticking point is that I'm torn between what programming language to write this thing in. I currently have Visual Studio 2010, which gives me access to Visual Basic, C++, C#, and F#. Any thoughts on using one of those or should I ponder some other language (Java, etc.)

 

[Wes]

I was thinking that it would make more sense to make a spreadsheet. The rules would be fairly simple. Like "for every 20 people, add 1 cook" and "If unit size exceeds X, attach a specialist Z." It would have to be different for each faction, since they all have different occupational specialties.

 

[Fred]

I'm not too fond of the idea of making it formulaic like this.

Simply because I enjoy having the freedom of thinking things through by myself to come up with a scheme I think I'll like.

 

[Nashoba]

I think a set of basic suggestions for crews per faction would be sufficient, it gives GM's the option to customize to suit their needs.

 

[Kyle]

I like Nash's suggestion, each faction has their own policies when it comes to the amount of crew a ship may have, which means what might be proper for one faction wouldn't be for another... and some factions might multi-class their occupations (The Neshies, for example, will soon be having their infantry learning damage control routines, medical assistance classes, and gunnery classes; which allows them to serve as part of a ships damage control team, work in the infirmaries as medical assistants, and also operate a ships weaponry or even operate turreted weaponry onboard fighters and bombers) this in turn would allow player characters who play infantry to do more =)

But yea, in the case of the Neshies, they don't rely on automation much; so their ships would traditionally have a lot of crew onboard along with redundancy in that crew as well.

 

[Fred]

Basic suggestions became rules in regard to the Damage Rating system.

I'm not really reassured here.

 

[Kyle]

Which is why these shouldn't BE rules and why I wouldn't support it to begin with.

 

[Nashoba]

Well, I'm fine with creating them for the Hidden Sun Clan, so I guess folks who want to create them as guidelines for their ships can do so, and others don't need to.

 

[Wes]

I didn't mean RP rules, I meant rules as in Star Army of Yamatai policies that would be used to generate crew size proportions. Like "for each ship system, assign 2 appropriate technicians to maintain it" and such. Using these types of logic, we could build a system where we could enter a ship's data and it would generate and ideal crew arrangement for it.

 

[Fred]

But you see, that worries me. I have several people in this thread saying "Well, for my faction, I think these kind of crew accomodations would be required". The moment that happens makes me feel that a lot of design freedom is going to be curtailed. Submissions have, amongst their requirements, FM approval. If someone makes a ship and that he intentionally didn't stick to the guidelines you took the pains to lay down, are you really going to feel inclined to give your thumbs up? I'm imagining a "I set the standards, I don't see why you're not following them" kind of entitlement coming into play in the future.

I'd much rather see people observe trends, study designs of the manufacturers they are submitting for, and then produce something inspired from it, but perhaps having its own (potentially) progressive spin on this. I think it's part of the fun in the design process, in part of the creativity it foster; and I'm still persuaded that friendly guidelines are going to become rules a year from now... because everyone has egos and a sense of ownership to the brands they shoulder... and if they take the pains to set down guidelines, most will want them followed to the letter; especially if any automatic system is done on top of that.

I think this was a great thread to cover this issue, and answer to some confusion, misinformation or simply lack of information. I'm grateful it came up because what it mostly gave was real world references and considerations in building starships, as well as ideas depending on quality-of-life/lifestyle. It was good "food for thought".

But this is where I'd stop.

 

[Nashoba]

Interesting concept, but I would see it only as a suggested number. Or even something that could be use to provide a random crew present on a ship.

 

[Edto Xar'Sivaree]

I feel with advanced enough AI, most of the mundane stuff that most people would do could be overseen by said AI. This means that There would only need to be one set of bridge crew, as if the AI noticed anything off it could change the readiness of the ship to alert all personnel.

If anything were to go wrong on a minor level, the AI could just notify the personnel required for the problem. "Hey, Engineer... Wake up. The Engine is making that KATHUNK sound again. You need to fix it!" sorta deal. This is for a small ship, though.

Large ship? Under the same situation? I would say it would only really need enough to run a full crew and a skeleton crew at most. Again, you can have one or more AI doing most of the monitoring. You can definitely do this on a Yamatai ship. Everyone can communicate with the MEGAMI telepathically. Have one set of bridge crew again, and the Megami does the rest overseeing wise. Inform required personnel when things go wrong. It would be a breeze.