Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Alfredo B Alves <dghost@****.COM>
Subject: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 22:30:43 -0500
I mean from an in-character point of view. Do you just use it whenever
someone decides to build a LAV from the ground up in their garage or do
you need something special like a vehicle factory (as opposed to a
facility, shop or kit)? The examples in R2 seem to indicate that PCs can
use this for building custom vehicles but doesn't really go into what
kind of requirements (in parts, tools, personnel, skills, etc) need to be
met before you are eligiable to use this system. Any thoughts?

D. Ghost
(aka Pixel, Tantrum, RuPixel)
o/` Trideo killed the Video Star ... o/`

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
Message no. 2
From: Mike Bobroff <Airwasp@***.COM>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 08:38:57 EDT
In a message dated 8/15/98 12:10:06 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
dghost@****.COM writes:

> I mean from an in-character point of view. Do you just use it whenever
> someone decides to build a LAV from the ground up in their garage or do
> you need something special like a vehicle factory (as opposed to a
> facility, shop or kit)? The examples in R2 seem to indicate that PCs can
> use this for building custom vehicles but doesn't really go into what
> kind of requirements (in parts, tools, personnel, skills, etc) need to be
> met before you are eligiable to use this system. Any thoughts?

When doing something with a vehicle, take a look in the customization section
to see what type of kit/shop/facility this should answer your question.
Otherwise go with a facility for whatever you are working on at all times
(especially when building something from the ground up).

-Herc
------ The Best Mechanic you can ever have.
Message no. 3
From: Alfredo B Alves <dghost@****.COM>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 18:56:02 -0500
On Sat, 15 Aug 1998 08:38:57 EDT Mike Bobroff <Airwasp@***.COM> writes:
>In a message dated 8/15/98 12:10:06 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
>dghost@****.COM writes:
>> I mean from an in-character point of view. Do you just use it
whenever
>> someone decides to build a LAV from the ground up in their garage or
do
>> you need something special like a vehicle factory (as opposed to a
>> facility, shop or kit)? The examples in R2 seem to indicate that PCs
can
>> use this for building custom vehicles but doesn't really go into what
>> kind of requirements (in parts, tools, personnel, skills, etc) need
to be
>> met before you are eligiable to use this system. Any thoughts?

>When doing something with a vehicle, take a look in the customization
section
>to see what type of kit/shop/facility this should answer your question.
>Otherwise go with a facility for whatever you are working on at all
times
>(especially when building something from the ground up).
>
>-Herc
>------ The Best Mechanic you can ever have.

I read that section in R2 (before and after you suggested reading it :)
but it doesn't really help ... I mean the examples in the Vehicle Design
section of R2 (Steffi & Rich designing the Light Striker Vehicle and
Johnny Player Special respectively) seem to, IMO, make it appear that any
char can theoretically design a vehicle.

I just want to try and better define the requirements since you can't
really go to Saturn's Matrix site and pick a chassis, power plant, smart
materials, micro turret, and flower vase built into the dash ...

D. Ghost
(aka Pixel, Tantrum, RuPixel)
o/` Trideo killed the Video Star ... o/`

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
Message no. 4
From: Paul Gettle <RunnerPaul@*****.COM>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 23:38:07 -0400
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 06:56 PM 8/15/98 -0500, D.Ghost wrote:
>I read that section in R2 (before and after you suggested reading it
:)
>but it doesn't really help ... I mean the examples in the Vehicle
Design
>section of R2 (Steffi & Rich designing the Light Striker Vehicle and
>Johnny Player Special respectively) seem to, IMO, make it appear that
any
>char can theoretically design a vehicle.

I always understood the R2 design system as intended for GMs and
players (note I say players, not characters) for designing the scores
of vehicles that are on the 205X-6X market, but haven't been given
stats in any FASA publications. After all, the examples talk about
Steffi and Rich checking their designs with their Gamemaster, Diane.
(and what kind of street name would "Steffi" be anyway?)

I don't get the impression that it's the player's characters that are
desiging these vehicles. If they were, Steffi's char would have to be
working for either Lockheed or Chenowth, and I don't think they hire
runners to do design work. The example with Rich is a little harder to
call, what with the example talking about how his rigger got a big
payday, and money isn't an object. However, if you read the example
closely, it talks about how Rich's char is determined to "own the most
amazing car" not "design the most amazing car."

The way I use the design system, is for generating the stats for the
base vehicle that the rigger will then modify. Think of how many, oh,
lets say 4-door sedans are available on today's market. In a word,
"oodles". How many sedans have been developed and published by FASA?
Well, there's the Americar.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.5.3

iQCVAwUBNdZTTKPbvUVI86rNAQE9NQP/RLbz8skfQFX8D2f6FSD1V1ouil+Yy3/0
ysc6J4MWuK0aQJy+mXWjeszsG5TTdTxHDIw8XgXXdeO6xJJZ3y9JE3b1Bw8CC5ym
sOMBbEpYwkEPGvm2mHyiVM/tNgmRtj9JlFWXecMfcj9m3I1tDHabSI2nfIbi9Psm
ananbiHQblE=
=c/nH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
-- Paul Gettle (RunnerPaul@*****.com)
PGP Fingerprint, Key ID:0x48F3AACD (RSA 1024, created 98/06/26)
C260 94B3 6722 6A25 63F8 0690 9EA2 3344
Message no. 5
From: Jon Szeto <JonSzeto@***.COM>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 23:48:01 EDT
In a message dated 98-08-15 20:12:15 EDT, dghost@****.COM writes:

> I read that section in R2 (before and after you suggested reading it :)
> but it doesn't really help ... I mean the examples in the Vehicle Design
> section of R2 (Steffi & Rich designing the Light Striker Vehicle and
> Johnny Player Special respectively) seem to, IMO, make it appear that any
> char can theoretically design a vehicle.
>

No, not really.

The vehicle design system was written so as to allow gamemasters and PLAYERS
(as opposed to player characters) to come up with new vehicles for their
characters to obtain, own, and operate. It "kinda sorta" simulates the
engineering, design, and development process a corp goes through when they
produce (in MASS quantities) a new vehicle model.

> I just want to try and better define the requirements since you can't
> really go to Saturn's Matrix site and pick a chassis, power plant, smart
> materials, micro turret, and flower vase built into the dash ...
>

Correct. If there's anyone "in the Shadowrun universe" that could be
considered as "using" the vehicle design system, it's the companies, like GM,
Yamaha, Federated Boeing, and so on. (Which all happens "off camera.")

A character cannot add design options to a vehicle, put on modifications using
the design point specs, nor get a shadow mechanic to do either of the above.
The vehicle design system "creates" new vehicle models from scratch.

-- Jon
Message no. 6
From: Alfredo B Alves <dghost@****.COM>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 23:28:33 -0500
On Sat, 15 Aug 1998 23:48:01 EDT Jon Szeto <JonSzeto@***.COM> writes:
>In a message dated 98-08-15 20:12:15 EDT, dghost@****.COM writes:
>> I read that section in R2 (before and after you suggested reading it
:)
>> but it doesn't really help ... I mean the examples in the Vehicle
Design
>> section of R2 (Steffi & Rich designing the Light Striker Vehicle and
>> Johnny Player Special respectively) seem to, IMO, make it appear that
any
>> char can theoretically design a vehicle.

>No, not really.

I meant Rich more than Steffi :)

>The vehicle design system was written so as to allow gamemasters and
PLAYERS
>(as opposed to player characters) to come up with new vehicles for their
>characters to obtain, own, and operate. It "kinda sorta" simulates the
>engineering, design, and development process a corp goes through when
they
>produce (in MASS quantities) a new vehicle model.

In that case isn't customization too limited? I mean can't rigger run
down to a mechanic and swap out his/her engine for a new one with
different stats? I mean there is no way (That I can think of, except the
different fuel grades) to improve Econ at the Vehicle Customization stage
... And what about Smart Materials? If my rigger wants a sedan with
smart materials, what are the chances that he can get it? and btw, what
does "increase by 4 the Availibility of the vehicle" mean? I didn't see
anything in R2 about Availabilities, or Street Indices for that matter,
of designed vehicles ... Some of the Design Options really, IMO, sound
like they should be doable as Customization options (ie, why can't you
retrofit medical gear or living amenities onto something?)

>> I just want to try and better define the requirements since you can't
>> really go to Saturn's Matrix site and pick a chassis, power plant,
smart
>> materials, micro turret, and flower vase built into the dash ...

>Correct. If there's anyone "in the Shadowrun universe" that could be
>considered as "using" the vehicle design system, it's the companies,
like GM,
>Yamaha, Federated Boeing, and so on. (Which all happens "off camera.")
>
>A character cannot add design options to a vehicle, put on modifications
using
>the design point specs, nor get a shadow mechanic to do either of the
above.
>The vehicle design system "creates" new vehicle models from scratch.
>
>-- Jon

What I was trying to say in the above was that there some great
advantages to using the design system, not just to get features you can't
get otherwise (like smart materials), but to save on costs (in space, and
load). If there isn't a way for characters to reap the benifits of the
design system, then what the character can acquire in vehicles in a
vehicle is severely limitied. I mean how many sedans are designed with
smart materials?

D. Ghost
(aka Pixel, Tantrum, RuPixel)
o/` Trideo killed the Video Star ... o/`

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
Message no. 7
From: Paul Gettle <RunnerPaul@*****.COM>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1998 00:55:50 -0400
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 11:28 PM 8/15/98 -0500, you wrote:
>What I was trying to say in the above was that there some great
>advantages to using the design system, not just to get features you
can't
>get otherwise (like smart materials), but to save on costs (in space,
and
>load). If there isn't a way for characters to reap the benifits of
the
>design system, then what the character can acquire in vehicles in a
>vehicle is severely limitied. I mean how many sedans are designed
with
>smart materials?

However many the GM allows. That is why the GM gets last call on any
designs built by the R2 system. It's up to the GM to decide what would
and wouldn't be commercially available in his vision of the SR world,
and in what ammounts.

Sure Sedans with Smart Materials would probably be rare, but that's
not to say they wouldn't exist. Look at how rare a feature like
anti-lock brakes were, say 15 years ago. The tech existed, but it was
only available on a very limited selection of cars. Anti-lock is a lot
more common now. Look at a car like the Plymouth Prowler. That car is
a perfect example of how far a comercially avaliable car can deviate
from the norms.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.5.3

iQCVAwUBNdZmSqPbvUVI86rNAQGErQP6A0idan3/y7WNZC+3co5rMmilgzMjEmst
zekzGrzBKkvJ3Nc8yZiSZJeXEM73hpLNP+m63Bs3wUXKn2ouu0UbDlWlSSRXoogU
X7Qm/ZfhvFLWvNF29CY/+B4421MH9pgiFDo/XK33lEVKSfNexCTvWqcVBRYlRzfM
Lpu9WeRbfCE=
=h+Y4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
-- Paul Gettle (RunnerPaul@*****.com)
PGP Fingerprint, Key ID:0x48F3AACD (RSA 1024, created 98/06/26)
C260 94B3 6722 6A25 63F8 0690 9EA2 3344
Message no. 8
From: Greg Symons <gsymons@******.TEMPLE.EDU>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1998 02:07:33 -0400
>I mean from an in-character point of view. Do you just use it whenever
>someone decides to build a LAV from the ground up in their garage or do
>you need something special like a vehicle factory (as opposed to a
>facility, shop or kit)? The examples in R2 seem to indicate that PCs can
>use this for building custom vehicles but doesn't really go into what
>kind of requirements (in parts, tools, personnel, skills, etc) need to be
>met before you are eligiable to use this system. Any thoughts?

I take it as being meant for characters designing their own stuff. The main
reason I've come to this conclusion is the fact that it's impossible to
design the vehicles in the book for the same cost as is published (without
throwing in street index, that is:). For that reason, I came up with my
"Mass Produced Drone" rules which I posted a little while back (and which
will be going on my website when I get _something_ of it finished:)

As far as a PC designing something, I see no reason why they couldn't,
assuming they had the proper build/repair skills (though perhaps they might
need some special skills for designing say, a stealth recon drone).
Granted, those kinds of things are usually designed by teams of engineers,
but with the kind of computer tech available (semi-autonomous knowbots,
simsense design systems, etc.) I don't think it's that much of a stretch.
Hell, often, stock cars are built and designed by the mechanics and the
drivers, rather than engineers.

But, as in everything YMMV.

Greg

***********************************************************************
* *
* \ (__) Greg Symons <gsymons@******.temple.edu> *
* \\(oo) Seanchai/ and Follower of Bri\de *
* /-----\\\/ *
* / | (##) "Hearken closely and you shall hear the *
* * ||----||" sound of cows and bagpipes upon the heath" *
* ^^ ^^ *
* *
* PGP Fingerprint: 694E 3B0B 4834 7831 BBCA C9E8 4299 0765 15F5 E599 *
* *
***********************************************************************


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQA/AwUBNdcOYEKZB2UV9eWZEQLYfACgiRaAmKPZSjWjF8bHeLstmyI2D5oAn2SG
M3IepOAcc8DAkOLM3wSc+Hgz
=qC2p
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Message no. 9
From: Jon Szeto <JonSzeto@***.COM>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1998 15:25:19 EDT
In a message dated 98-08-16 00:35:15 EDT, dghost@****.COM writes:

> On Sat, 15 Aug 1998 23:48:01 EDT Jon Szeto <JonSzeto@***.COM> writes:
> >The vehicle design system was written so as to allow gamemasters and
> PLAYERS
> >(as opposed to player characters) to come up with new vehicles for their
> >characters to obtain, own, and operate. It "kinda sorta" simulates the
> >engineering, design, and development process a corp goes through when
> they
> >produce (in MASS quantities) a new vehicle model.
>
> In that case isn't customization too limited? I mean can't rigger run
> down to a mechanic and swap out his/her engine for a new one with
> different stats? I mean there is no way (That I can think of, except the
> different fuel grades) to improve Econ at the Vehicle Customization stage
> ... And what about Smart Materials? If my rigger wants a sedan with
> smart materials, what are the chances that he can get it? and btw, what

Customization is hardly limited, I should think. If you look at the list of
available design options and the list of vehicle modifications, there are far
more modifications than design options (69 modifications to 15 design
options). When characters modify a vehicle, they can access the 69
modifications. When companies design new vehicles, they have access to those
same 69, as well as the additional 15. Comparing 69 to 84, I find it hard to
say that customization is "limited."

> of designed vehicles ... Some of the Design Options really, IMO, sound
> like they should be doable as Customization options (ie, why can't you
> retrofit medical gear or living amenities onto something?)
>

It's not as simple as that. For example, when you put in medical treatment
gear, you're not simply throwing a bunch of medkits in the back of a van.
You're also sealing the cabin to ensure a COMPLETELY sterile environment,
putting in advanced climate control, retrofitting power ports and fluid ports
for certain equipment, and so on. AND you have to do it in a way that meets
local, state, and national standards for such equipment (never mind the
certification requirements for the vehicle itself). Companies who make this
stuff for a living can do this, because they have the manpower and budget for
it. A shadow mechanic, one person with a budget of only a few thousand nuyen,
cannot.

> What I was trying to say in the above was that there some great
> advantages to using the design system, not just to get features you can't
> get otherwise (like smart materials), but to save on costs (in space, and
> load). If there isn't a way for characters to reap the benifits of the
> design system, then what the character can acquire in vehicles in a
> vehicle is severely limitied. I mean how many sedans are designed with
> smart materials?

The whole point of the design system is that there are some things that car
companies can build into a vehicle that shadow mechanics cannot, simply
because of the fact that car companies have better design facilities, better
production facilities, highly skilled engineers (and a B/R skill is NOT the
same as design engineering, let me tell you), and millions of nuyen.

Another point worth mentioning, is that the design system also can provide a
measure of control for the gamemaster. Say the GM is (understandably)
concerned about the firepower of vehicle weapons, and Joe Munchkin wants to
fit his Eurocar Westwind with a turret mounting a Victory autocannon. The
gamemaster can then turn around and say to Joe, "Sorry, but in this campaign,
turrets are considered a design option."

-- Jon
Message no. 10
From: Jon Szeto <JonSzeto@***.COM>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1998 15:25:25 EDT
In a message dated 98-08-16 12:45:28 EDT, gsymons@******.ocis.temple.edu
writes:

> I take it as being meant for characters designing their own stuff. The main
> reason I've come to this conclusion is the fact that it's impossible to
> design the vehicles in the book for the same cost as is published (without
> throwing in street index, that is:). For that reason, I came up with my
> "Mass Produced Drone" rules which I posted a little while back (and which
> will be going on my website when I get _something_ of it finished:)
>

I hate to repeat myself again, but it seems I must: the vehicle design system
was designed for gamemasters and players to simulate companies in the
Shadowrun universe MASS producing new vehicle models.

As far as the numbers not matching up, I may have an explanation or two. At
the time that I was backwards-designing existing vehicles, the vehicle
development system was currently in editing at FASA. By the time I got done,
the edited draft got back to me. I noticed that there were one or two
significant changes to the design point cost for certain options (for example,
I had originally pegged a straight Acceleration increase as 25 pts per +1
Acceleration, but in the final draft, it was 2 points per +1). Let me tell
you, I spent a painful 3 months trying to reverse-engineer 169 vehicles,
drones, and variants, and I was in no mood to go back and change the numbers
again. (The fact that it was June, and that we were still shooting at the time
for an August release at GenCon, also played a part.)

Additionally, I did a considerable amount of rounding up or rounding down, so
that the numbers would come out somewhat evenly (tried to keep the final cost
in two or three significant digits).

The point is, the vehicle design system is not an exact system. It's not
supposed to be. It's supposed to be a simple system, usable by both
gamemasters and PLAYERS, to get a "close enough" value.

> As far as a PC designing something, I see no reason why they couldn't,
> assuming they had the proper build/repair skills (though perhaps they might
> need some special skills for designing say, a stealth recon drone).
> Granted, those kinds of things are usually designed by teams of engineers,
> but with the kind of computer tech available (semi-autonomous knowbots,
> simsense design systems, etc.) I don't think it's that much of a stretch.
> Hell, often, stock cars are built and designed by the mechanics and the
> drivers, rather than engineers.

I disagree. Sure, maybe some stock cars are designed by mechanics and drivers,
but that's a VERY small percentage of the automobiles out there. And it's
practically impossible to build modern aircraft in the back of someone's shed.
True, computer-aided design and manufacturing increases by leaps and bounds
from year to year, but it's still just a tool. Take it from me, a working
engineer, there is a LOT of brainpower and school trained knowledge that no
computer can replicate, not now, not ten years from now, not sixty years from
now.

-- Jon
Message no. 11
From: Alfredo B Alves <dghost@****.COM>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1998 16:29:11 -0500
On Sun, 16 Aug 1998 15:25:25 EDT Jon Szeto <JonSzeto@***.COM> writes:

>In a message dated 98-08-16 12:45:28 EDT, gsymons@******.ocis.temple.edu
>writes:
<SNIP>

>I hate to repeat myself again, but it seems I must: the vehicle design
system
>was designed for gamemasters and players to simulate companies in the
>Shadowrun universe MASS producing new vehicle models.

<SNIP Why the numbers in the back of R2 for old vehicles don't match with
the Design System>

Ok, I thought it because you were trying to make them match the old
numbers better ... Eek ... 169 vehicles? ouch ... my sympathies. :)

>The point is, the vehicle design system is not an exact system. It's not
>supposed to be. It's supposed to be a simple system, usable by both
>gamemasters and PLAYERS, to get a "close enough" value.

I tend to use the straight value that results from the design system that
way I don't have to worry too much about things being balanced or not
(since, in general it seems that the results are overpriced ...)

>> As far as a PC designing something, I see no reason why they
couldn't,
>> assuming they had the proper build/repair skills (though perhaps they
might
>> need some special skills for designing say, a stealth recon drone).
>> Granted, those kinds of things are usually designed by teams of
engineers,
>> but with the kind of computer tech available (semi-autonomous
knowbots,
>> simsense design systems, etc.) I don't think it's that much of a
stretch.
>> Hell, often, stock cars are built and designed by the mechanics and
the
>> drivers, rather than engineers.

>I disagree. Sure, maybe some stock cars are designed by mechanics and
drivers,
>but that's a VERY small percentage of the automobiles out there. And
it's
>practically impossible to build modern aircraft in the back of someone's
shed.
>True, computer-aided design and manufacturing increases by leaps and
bounds
>from year to year, but it's still just a tool. Take it from me, a
working
>engineer, there is a LOT of brainpower and school trained knowledge that
no
>computer can replicate, not now, not ten years from now, not sixty years
from
>now.
>
>-- Jon

I think he meant that with nifty tools available in 205x, someone with
the right skills could design a lot ... and I tend to agree ... Okay so
how about a different approach ... First, what would it take for an
individual (or group of individuals) to design a vehicle, reaping the
benifits of the design system rather than customization?

I was thinking, first a special skill Engineer (In SR it would probably
be Engineering then concetrated in field of study [Aerospace, Automotive,
Computer, Electronics, etc], but for realism, I sugest making the field
of study the general skill) in the appropriate field(s) of study. (ie,
designing a car with autonav would probably, IMO, require Aerospace
Engineering, Automotive Engineering, Computer Engineering, and Electrical
Engineering)

Second, you need factory level resources ... I was thinking of designing
some assembly line drones to allow for a variable assembly line but that
still doesn't take care of being able to create custom parts. A Vehicle
Facility might though. Just in case multiply the cost of thefacility by
10 (making it 1 mil ... ouch) and say it's more flexible ...

Lastly, you'd have to modify the final cost to mimic that big
corporations can crank out cheaper vehicles than the little guys ... how
about x10 to x50 cost?

Granted I don't know much about engineering (I was an Aerospace
engineering major for 1 yr [tough classes!]) but the above seems
reasonable to me ... How does it sound to everyone else?

D. Ghost
(aka Pixel, Tantrum, RuPixel)
o/` Trideo killed the Video Star ... o/`

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
Message no. 12
From: "G.H. Metz" <wolfstarrn@****.COM>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1998 17:47:10 -0400
On Sun, 16 Aug 1998 15:25:25 EDT Jon Szeto <JonSzeto@***.COM> writes:

>I disagree. Sure, maybe some stock cars are designed by mechanics and
drivers,
>but that's a VERY small percentage of the automobiles out there. And
it's
>practically impossible to build modern aircraft in the back of someone's
shed.
>True, computer-aided design and manufacturing increases by leaps and
bounds
>from year to year, but it's still just a tool. Take it from me, a
working
>engineer, there is a LOT of brainpower and school trained knowledge that
no
>computer can replicate, not now, not ten years from now, not sixty years
from
>now.

Okay bear with me and don't tear your hair out at the fact that no one
is listening to you Jon, but I have a character who can and has designed
vehicles. He's a paraplegic Rigger with a Vehicle Facility AND Shop in
one place(a factory that he renovated), and he has the flaw Day Job all
the way up. Basically, he owns a car company. Now, if a CHARACTER can be
in a position to own a car company(and yes this is an experienced
character) then I see no reason why they couldn't design one. But it had
better be a sellable car, and turrets aren't capable of inclusion as a
design option in that case. =)

Overall, though, I agree that a shadowmechanic with a few thousand - or
a few hundred thousand - nuyen isn't gonna be able to get smart
materials, much less have the tech to use it.

--
Wolfstar - wolfstar@shoelace.digivill.net/wolfstar@****.com
Home Page Under Construction!

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1
GAT/! d- s+:+ a-- C++(++++)>$ U+ P? L>++ E? W++(--) N- o? K- w(--) O>+ M
!V PS+ PE+ Y+ PGP t+ 5+++ X R++ tv+ b+(+++) DI++ D--- G e h!-- r*
y+/-(--)
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
Message no. 13
From: David Foster <fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 08:56:39 -0400
On Sun, 16 Aug 1998, Alfredo B Alves wrote:

->I think he meant that with nifty tools available in 205x, someone with
->the right skills could design a lot ... and I tend to agree ... Okay so
->how about a different approach ... First, what would it take for an
->individual (or group of individuals) to design a vehicle, reaping the
->benifits of the design system rather than customization?
->
->I was thinking, first a special skill Engineer (In SR it would probably
->be Engineering then concetrated in field of study [Aerospace, Automotive,
->Computer, Electronics, etc], but for realism, I sugest making the field
->of study the general skill) in the appropriate field(s) of study. (ie,
->designing a car with autonav would probably, IMO, require Aerospace
->Engineering, Automotive Engineering, Computer Engineering, and Electrical
->Engineering)

I'll agree on the general skill as long as you're not saying they
HAVE to concentrate like the SR2 Etiquette skill. There are generalized
engineers, they just don't get paid as much as if they specialized so tend
not to do it.

->Second, you need factory level resources ... I was thinking of designing
->some assembly line drones to allow for a variable assembly line but that
->still doesn't take care of being able to create custom parts. A Vehicle
->Facility might though. Just in case multiply the cost of thefacility by
->10 (making it 1 mil ... ouch) and say it's more flexible ...

I'd say make it a normal vehicle facility and purchase drones
seperately and give each a man/hour workload (factoring in 25% down-time).
There were rules (it's been a while, SR1 or SR2) on dividing the cost of a
particular item by (100,200,500?) to determine the number of man/hours it
would take to build it. Can someone refresh my memory or put the real
rules for it up here?

->Lastly, you'd have to modify the final cost to mimic that big
->corporations can crank out cheaper vehicles than the little guys ... how
->about x10 to x50 cost?

Owch! I've studied economies of scale but I believe 50 times cost
is a bit too much.

Fixer --------------} The easy I do before breakfast,
the difficult I do all day long,
the impossible only during the week,
and miracles performed on an as-needed basis....

Now tell me, what was your problem?
Message no. 14
From: Jon Szeto <JonSzeto@***.COM>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 11:19:06 EDT
In a message dated 98-08-16 17:59:57 EDT, dghost@****.COM writes:

> I think he meant that with nifty tools available in 205x, someone with
> the right skills could design a lot ... and I tend to agree ... Okay so
> how about a different approach ... First, what would it take for an
> individual (or group of individuals) to design a vehicle, reaping the
> benifits of the design system rather than customization?
>
> I was thinking, first a special skill Engineer (In SR it would probably
> be Engineering then concetrated in field of study [Aerospace, Automotive,
> Computer, Electronics, etc], but for realism, I sugest making the field
> of study the general skill) in the appropriate field(s) of study. (ie,
> designing a car with autonav would probably, IMO, require Aerospace
> Engineering, Automotive Engineering, Computer Engineering, and Electrical
> Engineering)
>

You would need several engineers in several engineering specialties.
Technology in the 1990s (never mind the 2060s) is so advanced that companies
require several engineers, each specializing in an area of specialty. So, for
example, a car company would need mechanical engineers specializing in
engines, drive trains, control systems, structural frames, and so on. Also,
because electronics plays an integral part nowadays, you'd also need
electrical engineers specializing in precision controls, display systems,
diagnostic systems, electromechanical actuators, etc.

And that's just only talking about design engineers. For each design engineer,
you'd need about two or three manufacturing engineers that work on nothing but
developing the manufacturing process. And for each factory, you'd need a team
of quality control/quality assurance engineers, safety engineers,
environmental engineers, and so on. And let's not forget the technicians,
either! (One tech for each engineer, as a general rule).

Also, not only is the expertise requirement so detailed nowadays, the grunt
work of drawing plans, establishing manufacturing processes, costing
estimates, and so on makes it physically impossible for one engineers, or even
a dozen engineers, do come up with a design in a reasonable amount of time.

> Second, you need factory level resources ... I was thinking of designing
> some assembly line drones to allow for a variable assembly line but that
> still doesn't take care of being able to create custom parts. A Vehicle
> Facility might though. Just in case multiply the cost of thefacility by
> 10 (making it 1 mil ... ouch) and say it's more flexible ...
>

Not just one factories, but several factories. A single factory is incapable
of manufacturing each and every widget that goes into a single vehicle. Very
often factories often subcontract manufacture of complex sub-assemblies to
other factories (either in the same company, or another company altogether).

For example, take the General Motors strike at Flint, Michigan, a month or so
ago. All that factory produced were parts for the main assembly plant at
Janesville, Wisconsin. When the strike stopped the flow of parts at Flint,
that eventually halted production at Janesville. And when Janesville shut
down, that caused more than a dozen plants in the Midwest to shut down,
because those plants were supplying parts (everything from window seals to
safety valves to fuel injectors) to GM.

> Lastly, you'd have to modify the final cost to mimic that big
> corporations can crank out cheaper vehicles than the little guys ... how
> about x10 to x50 cost?
>

Even x50 is way too small IMHO. I don't know about the production rates for
the big manufacturers, but I know that the smaller companies that supply the
complex sub-assemblies churn out anywhere from 10 to 100 thousand parts per
day. Mass production allows you to reduce the additional cost for operational
and indirect overhead per part.

For example, say a factory spends about $5,000 per day in overhead, (which is
probably a bit on the low side). If it turns out 50 parts a day, the overhead
comes to about $100 per part. If it turns out 5,000 parts a day, the overhead
comes out to about $1 per part. And if it turns out 500,000 parts a day, the
overhead cost comes out to a penny per day.

-- Jon
Message no. 15
From: Adam Getchell <acgetchell@*******.EDU>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 09:37:25 -0700
>You would need several engineers in several engineering specialties.
>Technology in the 1990s (never mind the 2060s) is so advanced that companies
>require several engineers, each specializing in an area of specialty. So, for
>example, a car company would need mechanical engineers specializing in
>engines, drive trains, control systems, structural frames, and so on. Also,
>because electronics plays an integral part nowadays, you'd also need
>electrical engineers specializing in precision controls, display systems,
>diagnostic systems, electromechanical actuators, etc.

This is all very true. However, I went up to visit Boeing (job interview)
and got a tour of their manufacturing, design, and testing facilities. The
new 777 was designed completely by computer, with parts fitting,
manufacturing, testing, etc. worked out via software. They still required
numerous engineers on the project but it was much, much less than before.
Their main problems seemed to be to get the older engineers to use the
cussed program. [Hilarious anecdote about over engineered tail strut, due
to not using the program, snipped]

I think CAD/CAM and CNC can progress to the point where it is possible for
someone owning one of these "autofactories" to crank out firearms parts, or
other high-tolerance low-part amount (compared to vehicles, anyways)
mechanisms. I'd hope that the Cannon Companion would have a set of Firearms
design rules. I have my own, that replicated damage codes quite well, but
produced designs that were quite a bit better than the book. So I ended up
not using them because I didn't want to go too far off canon ... [pun
intended]

>Also, not only is the expertise requirement so detailed nowadays, the grunt
>work of drawing plans, establishing manufacturing processes, costing
>estimates, and so on makes it physically impossible for one engineers, or even
>a dozen engineers, do come up with a design in a reasonable amount of time.

Well, this sort of grunt work was made much easier via computers. The 777
and design plans/specs exist electronically. No more draftsman ...


>Not just one factories, but several factories. A single factory is incapable
>of manufacturing each and every widget that goes into a single vehicle. Very
>often factories often subcontract manufacture of complex sub-assemblies to
>other factories (either in the same company, or another company altogether).

Agree. Boeing's plant is absolutely huge (largest building in the world or
something like that). It does final assembly, wings, and control systems.
They subcontract out for engines, fuselage, and cabin accomodations.

Even a "mass-produced" airliner like the 777 is essentially hand-crafted.
The customers have their selection of fueslage length, cabin accomodations,
engines, cargo spacing, fuel tankage ... these modifications are not
insignificant. Even so, Boeing manages a rate of 7 or so planes a month
(which equates to a line production shift every 5 days). Some of the
smaller designs like the 737 are cranked out at the rate of 20 per month.

Did I mention that manufacturing plant (manufacturing only) employs 20,000?

>-- Jon

--Adam

acgetchell@*******.edu
"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu
Message no. 16
From: Tim Kerby <drekhead@***.NET>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 12:50:46 -0400
On 17 Aug 98, at 9:37, Adam Getchell wrote:

> mechanisms. I'd hope that the Cannon Companion would have a set of
> Firearms design rules.

Mike Mulvihill said in one of the FASA seminars that there would
indeed be firarms design rules in the Cannon Companion.

--

=================================================================
- Tim Kerby - drekhead@***.net - ICQ-UIN 2883757 -
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Reality is the only obstacle to happiness." - Unknown
Message no. 17
From: Greg Symons <gsymons@******.TEMPLE.EDU>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 15:10:03 -0400
[snip]
>I hate to repeat myself again, but it seems I must: the vehicle design system
>was designed for gamemasters and players to simulate companies in the
>Shadowrun universe MASS producing new vehicle models.

Ooops. Sorry Jon... I must've missed that:)

[snip explanation one for numbers not matching]

Makes sense, especially if they changed things on you:)

>
>Additionally, I did a considerable amount of rounding up or rounding down, so
>that the numbers would come out somewhat evenly (tried to keep the final cost
>in two or three significant digits).

I always assumed you rounded things. My problem with the costs, however, is
not explained by rounding errors, though. My problem is that a vehicle
designed with the straight system equivalent to any of the vehicles in the
book ends up somewhere in the vicinity of _twice_ the price. Doesn't sound
like a rounding error to me:)

>The point is, the vehicle design system is not an exact system. It's not
>supposed to be. It's supposed to be a simple system, usable by both
>gamemasters and PLAYERS, to get a "close enough" value.

Don't worry Jon:) I didn't make it any more complex... I just added another
secondary multiplier:) I really _do_ like the system. It's just some of the
prices I have a problem with:) And it is very simple.

[snip]
>
>I disagree. Sure, maybe some stock cars are designed by mechanics and drivers,
>but that's a VERY small percentage of the automobiles out there. And it's
>practically impossible to build modern aircraft in the back of someone's shed.
>True, computer-aided design and manufacturing increases by leaps and bounds
>from year to year, but it's still just a tool. Take it from me, a working
>engineer, there is a LOT of brainpower and school trained knowledge that no
>computer can replicate, not now, not ten years from now, not sixty years from
>now.

I agree. It _does_ take a lot of skill and know how to design something. I
never said it didn't. I meant (maybe I didn't make this clear enought:)
simply that as long as the character in question _did_ have the training
(in the form of the proper B/R and other skills) _and_ the equipment _and_
the design tools (CAD, AI, whatever), he could design the thing himself.
Granted there's gotta be some reality checking on the part of the GM;
nobody's gonna be able to design and build a fighter jet in their
backyard... but an attack drone? I can see that.

Another thing I think would make this possible would be the availability of
prefab parts. I see a lot of this stuff being already built, and a large
part of the design simply bringing all the parts together. Granted, you're
not going to be able to do this for everything, but look at the home-built
airplane industry today... people are building well-designed
fiber-composite aircraft without _really_ knowing anything about design,
simply because the parts are already built.

Greg


***********************************************************************
* *
* \ (__) Greg Symons <gsymons@******.temple.edu> *
* \\(oo) Seanchai/ and Follower of Bri\de *
* /-----\\\/ *
* / | (##) "Hearken closely and you shall hear the *
* * ||----||" sound of cows and bagpipes upon the heath" *
* ^^ ^^ *
* *
* PGP Fingerprint: 694E 3B0B 4834 7831 BBCA C9E8 4299 0765 15F5 E599 *
* *
***********************************************************************


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQA/AwUBNdiAZEKZB2UV9eWZEQJTNgCg3XKHvXz4HT3m5e8ZSHjmEb6mfJoAnRCm
ne8eqsR7o4VaLCfH+It4ufTr
=eOSv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Message no. 18
From: Mongoose <evamarie@**********.NET>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 14:18:19 -0700
>Not just one factories, but several factories. A single factory is incapable
>of manufacturing each and every widget that goes into a single vehicle. Very
>often factories often subcontract manufacture of complex sub-assemblies to
>other factories (either in the same company, or another company altogether).
>

And prototypers find new uses for off the shelf components, and inovative
manufacturing techniques. Diffrent concept entirely.
Custom designed and built vehicles, chasis and engine included, are not
impossible. For example, the motorcycle world grand prix several years back
was won by a man who owned a small engeneering firm. He built a bike with a
kevlar / carbon fiber front swingarm frame and no chassis- the custom designed
engine was the mointing point for suspension and seat. The custom engine used
some stock parts, but the case and heads wer totaly new (he built the the
heads out of clay on a flowbench , and then took a mold). It did use off the
shelf progrmable injection / ignition sytem and brakes.

Her later marketed copies of the bike at about $200,000 a piece. It was
about 200 HP and about 300 lbs, with a 1200 cc v twin 4 stroke (chosen because
it was a light, fuel efecient design compared to other legal, and more
popular, engine types allowed in that class).


>Even x50 is way too small IMHO. I don't know about the production rates for
>the big manufacturers, but I know that the smaller companies that supply the
>complex sub-assemblies churn out anywhere from 10 to 100 thousand parts per
>day. Mass production allows you to reduce the additional cost for operational
>and indirect overhead per part.
>

"Manufacturing" in factories is the wave of the past. Think CNC custom
milling, 3d lithogrphy to mold procesing, programable composite spinners and
shapers (Composite materils dont offer econmies of scale that metal does, and
can be built by robots that will switch to another program when done).
Bicycle companies and motorcycle parts supliers use thes techniques already,
as do small run car manufactures. Hell, if you can make a mechanical design
it in CAD (which already handle all the fancy materials stress analysis pretty
well), somebody can make it as a "prototype" or limited prodution from either
a cast, a mill, or a composite sheet. None of those require a big leadtime or
custom assembly.
As for electronice, those are reprogramable, right? Hell, most of the
ones needed in a vehicle today are. As all the really fancy ones can be added
as cutomization, I'd assume they are off the shelf, adaptable gear, like
certain ABS pachkages, fuel computer, and nave sytems today.

Mongoose
Message no. 19
From: Jon Szeto <JonSzeto@***.COM>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 18:37:45 EDT
In a message dated 98-08-17 12:37:15 EDT, acgetchell@*******.EDU writes:

> This is all very true. However, I went up to visit Boeing (job interview)
> and got a tour of their manufacturing, design, and testing facilities. The
> new 777 was designed completely by computer, with parts fitting,
> manufacturing, testing, etc. worked out via software. They still required
> numerous engineers on the project but it was much, much less than before.
> Their main problems seemed to be to get the older engineers to use the
> cussed program. [Hilarious anecdote about over engineered tail strut, due
> to not using the program, snipped]
>
> I think CAD/CAM and CNC can progress to the point where it is possible for
> someone owning one of these "autofactories" to crank out firearms parts,
or
> other high-tolerance low-part amount (compared to vehicles, anyways)
> mechanisms. I'd hope that the Cannon Companion would have a set of Firearms
> design rules. I have my own, that replicated damage codes quite well, but
> produced designs that were quite a bit better than the book. So I ended up
> not using them because I didn't want to go too far off canon ... [pun
> intended]
>

Granted. But there's still a point of diminishing returns where you need human
oversight. There are a lot of factors that you just can't program into a
computer (such as, "Is this manufacturing process too hard to do?") There's
also the human interface to factor in, also. Who's going to explain all these
technical details to management (the Dilbert Principle probably isn't alive in
2060, it's epidemic.) And who's going to convey technical requirements and
specifications to vendors or customers when they come for a plant visit?

> >Also, not only is the expertise requirement so detailed nowadays, the grunt
> >work of drawing plans, establishing manufacturing processes, costing
> >estimates, and so on makes it physically impossible for one engineers, or
> even
> >a dozen engineers, do come up with a design in a reasonable amount of
time.
>
> Well, this sort of grunt work was made much easier via computers. The 777
> and design plans/specs exist electronically. No more draftsman ...
>

But someone still has to do it. Instead of a draftsman with a pencil and T-
Square, you need a draftsperson with a workstation. I used AutoCAD R13 at
work, and while it's a lot easier than the mechanical drawing classes I took
in high school, it's still downright TEDIOUS.

> Agree. Boeing's plant is absolutely huge (largest building in the world or
> something like that). It does final assembly, wings, and control systems.
> They subcontract out for engines, fuselage, and cabin accomodations.
>
> Even a "mass-produced" airliner like the 777 is essentially hand-crafted.
> The customers have their selection of fueslage length, cabin accomodations,
> engines, cargo spacing, fuel tankage ... these modifications are not
> insignificant. Even so, Boeing manages a rate of 7 or so planes a month
> (which equates to a line production shift every 5 days). Some of the
> smaller designs like the 737 are cranked out at the rate of 20 per month.
>
> Did I mention that manufacturing plant (manufacturing only) employs 20,000?
>

Which gets back to the point I was trying to make: to design, develop, and
produce a vehicle, you're going to need a lot more than a small team of
shadowrunners and a rinky-dink Vehicle Facility.

-- Jon
Message no. 20
From: Jon Szeto <JonSzeto@***.COM>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 18:38:31 EDT
In a message dated 98-08-17 15:14:49 EDT, evamarie@**********.net writes:

> And prototypers find new uses for off the shelf components, and
> inovative
> manufacturing techniques. Diffrent concept entirely.
> Custom designed and built vehicles, chasis and engine included, are not
> impossible. For example, the motorcycle world grand prix several years
back
> was won by a man who owned a small engeneering firm. He built a bike with
a
> kevlar / carbon fiber front swingarm frame and no chassis- the custom
> designed
> engine was the mointing point for suspension and seat. The custom engine
> used
> some stock parts, but the case and heads wer totaly new (he built the the
> heads out of clay on a flowbench , and then took a mold). It did use off
> the
> shelf progrmable injection / ignition sytem and brakes.
>

Not impossible, but how often does it happen? And what percentage of all
vehicle models Out of all the hundred planes, trains, and automobile models in
operation today, how many of them are custom built by one person working out
of the back of a garage?

> "Manufacturing" in factories is the wave of the past. Think CNC custom
> milling, 3d lithogrphy to mold procesing, programable composite spinners
and
> shapers (Composite materils dont offer econmies of scale that metal does,
> and
> can be built by robots that will switch to another program when done).
> Bicycle companies and motorcycle parts supliers use thes techniques
already,
> as do small run car manufactures. Hell, if you can make a mechanical
design
> it in CAD (which already handle all the fancy materials stress analysis
> pretty
> well), somebody can make it as a "prototype" or limited prodution from
> either
> a cast, a mill, or a composite sheet. None of those require a big leadtime
> or
> custom assembly.
>

But how many tons of these composites can you supply a manufacturer PER DAY?
And how much does it cost, compared to metals, or injection-molded plastics?
Significantly less? Slightly less? And how much does it cost to switch
programs? Not just in dollars and cents, but also in production down time and
maintenance labor?

Sure, manufacturing as it's done today is going away. But that doesn't mean
mass production is going away. Rather, it's CHANGING. True, these changes
might make it easier for individuals or small groups of individuals to produce
custom models, but the large majority of manufactured goods out there will
still be produced in big factories by mass-manufacturing techniques.

-- Jon
Message no. 21
From: Jon Szeto <JonSzeto@***.COM>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 18:41:39 EDT
It seems that I'm not going to be able to win this debate (that, or I'll lose
more than I win). I'm going to bow out now under the premise of "we agree to
disagree," but I'll still reiterate my point: The vehicle design system, as I
wrote it, was intended to simulate MASS production by the corps.

If you want your characters to design vehicles from scratch, well, there's
nothing I'm going to do to stop you (nothing I CAN do, really). But if you do,
I would say you would need at LEAST a high engineering skill (in SR1/SR2, this
would have been the Physical Sciences (Engineering) Concentration) and a TON
of startup capital. I'd also recommend jacking up the Markup Modifier an
obscene amount, and I'd also suggest requiring the Prototype Quality Factor
(p. 84 of Rigger 2).

-- Jon
Message no. 22
From: Max Rible <slothman@*********.ORG>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 15:50:37 -0700
At 18:37 8/17/98 -0400, Jon Szeto wrote:
>Which gets back to the point I was trying to make: to design, develop, and
>produce a vehicle, you're going to need a lot more than a small team of
>shadowrunners and a rinky-dink Vehicle Facility.

However, having your brilliant-but-erratic-designer-who-fled-the-corp-into-
the-shadows do the work of swapping in stock designs from security models
fo vehicles, then sending the penetration team to take the expert decker
into the vehicle plant to alter the specifications for a preordered vehicle,
so the just-in-time customized production line creates your souped-up
vehicle to order with no one the wiser until it's too late... is the
stuff of shadowruns!

(And so is having the plant manager discover this rather unusual creation
on a surprise visit, plant several active-on-demand locator bugs
and the occasional explosive charge at very inaccessible points throughout
the vehicle, and send minions to ask the runners how they did that, would
they care to offer some insight into just *how* they managed to bypass
plant security, and what kind of favors they can do the plant manager
if they would like to *keep* that vehicle, and their hides...)

--
%% Max Rible %%% max@********.com %%% http://www.amurgsval.org/~slothman/ %%
%% "Don't keep all your bats in one belfry." - me %%
Message no. 23
From: Adam Getchell <acgetchell@*******.EDU>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 18:45:42 -0700
>It seems that I'm not going to be able to win this debate (that, or I'll lose
>more than I win). I'm going to bow out now under the premise of "we agree to
>disagree," but I'll still reiterate my point: The vehicle design system, as I
>wrote it, was intended to simulate MASS production by the corps.

I don't know about winning, but I would agree with you from the engineering
standpoint. However, sometimes it seems downright unfashionable to invoke
physics and engineering as a yardstick for reality to be reflected in the
game.

;-)

A long time ago, I started a threadwar about Quantum Cryptography on fiber
optic lines just by mentioning casually that the idea that someone could
break the cipher on such a system was fundamentally impossible, given the
principles of Quantum Mechanics. This went in direct opposition to the idea
that "any code can be broken". I made my point, but believe me, I know the
feeling ...

>-- Jon

--Adam

acgetchell@*******.edu
"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu
Message no. 24
From: David Foster <fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 21:59:52 -0400
On Mon, 17 Aug 1998, Max Rible wrote:

->At 18:37 8/17/98 -0400, Jon Szeto wrote:
->>Which gets back to the point I was trying to make: to design, develop, and
->>produce a vehicle, you're going to need a lot more than a small team of
->>shadowrunners and a rinky-dink Vehicle Facility.
->
->However, having your brilliant-but-erratic-designer-who-fled-the-corp-into-
->the-shadows do the work of swapping in stock designs from security models
->fo vehicles, then sending the penetration team to take the expert decker
->into the vehicle plant to alter the specifications for a preordered vehicle,
->so the just-in-time customized production line creates your souped-up
->vehicle to order with no one the wiser until it's too late... is the
->stuff of shadowruns!
->
->(And so is having the plant manager discover this rather unusual creation
->on a surprise visit, plant several active-on-demand locator bugs
->and the occasional explosive charge at very inaccessible points throughout
->the vehicle, and send minions to ask the runners how they did that, would
->they care to offer some insight into just *how* they managed to bypass
->plant security, and what kind of favors they can do the plant manager
->if they would like to *keep* that vehicle, and their hides...)

I like the way you think. <Fixer hastily makes notes on the next
time a character wants to use VR2 designing rules>

Fixer --------------} The easy I do before breakfast,
the difficult I do all day long,
the impossible only during the week,
and miracles performed on an as-needed basis....

Now tell me, what was your problem?
Message no. 25
From: Alfredo B Alves <dghost@****.COM>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 23:51:11 -0500
On Mon, 17 Aug 1998 18:41:39 EDT Jon Szeto <JonSzeto@***.COM> writes:
>It seems that I'm not going to be able to win this debate (that, or I'll
lose
>more than I win). I'm going to bow out now under the premise of "we
agree to
>disagree,"

Eep, I didn't mean to hound you to frustration (For lack of a better
phrase :) ... I found the discussion most enlightening. This thread
greatly expanded my personal knowledge of engineering and manufacturing.

>but I'll still reiterate my point: The vehicle design system, as I
>wrote it, was intended to simulate MASS production by the corps.

I agree. I've tried to use the vehicle design system to create vehicles
that might exist in 205x ... I kind of cheated in one area though. I
have have 4 characters (Me, personally, not counting any of my players).
Collectively the 4 chars have 7 vehicles, 3 (IIRC) of which have smart
materials ... not very representative, is it? (and only one has a good
reason :/ [unless, smart materials being just plain nifty is reason
enough ;])

>If you want your characters to design vehicles from scratch, well,
there's
>nothing I'm going to do to stop you (nothing I CAN do, really). But if
you do,
>I would say you would need at LEAST a high engineering skill (in
SR1/SR2, this
>would have been the Physical Sciences (Engineering) Concentration) and a
TON
>of startup capital. I'd also recommend jacking up the Markup Modifier an
>obscene amount, and I'd also suggest requiring the Prototype Quality
Factor
>(p. 84 of Rigger 2).
>
>-- Jon

I'm a fan of the independent inventor thing and so I want my rigger char
to be able to design & build new and nifty designs. The above sounds
good ... Hmmm... Let's in my games I would say:
1) Engineering required for design.
1a) Base time for design [arbitrarily] equal to the design point cost of
the vehicle not counting secondary multipliers)
2a) Target Number for Design Task is determined by GM (For guideline
perhaps 6 Square root of the design cost before secondary multipliers -
number of people assigned to task?)
2) Let's go with an arbitrary x100 to cost. (upfront)
3) Mandatory Prototype Quality Factor with no markup mod (ie all the
penalties but none of benefits of the Quality Factor)
4) A vehicle facility is required to manufacture vehicles at this level.
5) Each vehicle takes an arbitrary time of 1 day per design point to
build divided by the number of facilities dedicated to the task.

Ok, this very crude and probably a little generous but it should suffice
(especially since my rigger is no where near being able to design
anything with this system ... :)

Hmmmm ... might also be interesting to have a shadow automobile industry
possibly owned/controlled by the Family/Yak/Triad/Seoupla Ring/all of the
above ... Nah ... that'd be stretching even THEIR ressources ...

(Another warped post sent by)
D. Ghost
(aka Pixel, Tantrum, RuPixel)
o/` Trideo killed the Video Star ... o/`

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
Message no. 26
From: "Ubiratan P. Alberton" <ubiratan@**.HOMESHOPPING.COM.BR>
Subject: Re: When do you use the R2 Design System?
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 21:18:29 -0300
Adam Getchell wrote:
>
>
> I think CAD/CAM and CNC can progress to the point where it is possible for
> someone owning one of these "autofactories" to crank out firearms parts, or
> other high-tolerance low-part amount (compared to vehicles, anyways)
> mechanisms. I'd hope that the Cannon Companion would have a set of Firearms
> design rules. I have my own, that replicated damage codes quite well, but
> produced designs that were quite a bit better than the book. So I ended up
> not using them because I didn't want to go too far off canon ... [pun
> intended]

I think that if you could get the parts for something (perhaps not
exactly
a vehicle), along with a database with their specs, you could have a
"mini-autofactory" or a facility to assemble it. Of course, not at
mass-production rates, either. What if that was the most popular way
to buy clothes? Have they assembled at the spot? :)

Bira

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about When do you use the R2 Design System?, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!