"Common sci-fi buildings" Topic

I am working on my set of 6mm sci-fi skirmish rules after being overjoyed at discovering the FUBAR rules but wanting to flesh them out a bit.

Right now I am looking at buildings.
I am designing the system for damaging buildings and want to include a good few examples.
I have of course various categories:

Light = shacks, small MHU, medium Junker dwellings
Medium = large MHU, big Junker dwellings
Heavy = Huge Junker dwelling, small pillbox style bunker
Reinforced = Big ass bunkers

However I am wondering what other sort of buildings people use in sci-fi incase I have missed something very obvious.

Michael.

EDIT- oooh bridges.

Depends on the setting, but for near future/post apoc,

you could list large farm buildings (barns etc), grain silos and water towers. Energy sources such as power stations, towers and even wind turbines could be worth fighting for, large industrial units such as desalinisation plants, oil refineries etc. Large civic building usually over build, so would be over use in post apoc as fortifications. Even metal shipping containers could be stacked as dwellings or even blockades.

Phil

Oh yes, energy things that go bang.
Have to be careful what you blow up, good thinking.

Shame on me for not thinking of shipping containers either!

I like those ideas. Still, you need to come over to the Darkside and produce 15mm!

Multi storey car parks, blow out the supports for collapsable fun….

I like those ideas. Still, you need to come over to the Darkside and produce 15mm!

Nah, you 15mm chaps have plenty of cool stuff as it is!

Light = shacks, small MHU, medium Junker dwellings
Medium = large MHU, big Junker dwellings
Heavy = Huge Junker dwelling, small pillbox style bunker
Reinforced = Big ass bunkers

I think that covers just about all. I think it would be up to the individual to decide. Most 6mm builds/scenery should fall within those generic examples of yours.

For example, I have Brigade desert building for my Mars table. You would expect those buildings to be tough. So I would class them as reinforced. A farm with wood buildings I would class as light etc..

Maybe focus on the construction type rather than by size?

Light- shacks and ad hoc provisional/temporary shelters, containers, junker structures etc

Medium- more permanent types, MHU's, structures built for civilian use etc

Heavy- Industrial types, lots of ferro-concrete (or equivalent!) built for durability and strength

Military- bunkers and structures built to withstand attack. Oki-Cor walls for instance

I'm just thinking out loud based on the integrity of structures to resist assault, for instance a junker structure of varying components would have more 'soft points' that could fail whilst a purpose built MHU would have some all round strength to hold it together a bit longer…..(a good advert for Oki-Cor)

That does make more sense, but then a massive shack would be harder to destroy than a smaller shack.

But then I do like your summary..
Are you in my Yahoo playtest group?

No I'm not on the Yahoo group – but I'll give it a go!
I wasn't necessarily thinking of total destruction but more the level of protection for the inhabitants/occupiers/pbi stuck inside! A simple quotient for resistance to multiple damage such as 'hitpoints' or just the use of a blast template for damage versus the target inside and the building itself (cover part of the building with 'smoke' or a marker and render it 'ruined' for gameplay).

Well my idea was to give each building a set value of SP – Structure Points.

Once half the original SP are lost due to damage, the building ceases to offer the same level of protection from incoming fire, and the cover value is downgraded.
Once all SP are gone the building collapses.

Here is the Yahoo group for those interested:

link

I have applied to join the ABRAD 'Round Table'..

Edit- I'm in ….#13!

Unlucky for no-one I hope.

oooh this is the 13th post too…

Elevated lines, IE for elevated railway lines or road overpasses? Like a bridge but much longer and may not all collapse at the same time.

Given that many current hi tech weapons that are probably going to come into use over the next 50 years or so are going to need to be connected to a hefty power supply, I think power generators are a good bet. I expect these weapons to be static mounted or at best they will have limited mobility. I'm thinking of coil/rail gun artillery and most high energy beam and plasma weapons. Of course further away in time the static nature of these weapons is no longer an issue as power sources improve. I would also go with some point defence items linked to these generators.

Btw I will try to join your Yahoo group if that's OK.