I could have different volumes and densities for each component but that would be a lot of work to add a level of complexity that probably doesn't add a lot in terms of gameplay. I have to draw a line somewhere.
Steve
I know you've probably reached a decision there, but for the sake of argument, I'm not quite dropping it yet.
I can accept the argument that modeling the density of materials would go too far, in the same sense that you didn't want to incorporate regular materials for the sake of not getting it overly complicated.
However, you could easily abstract it.
Given the current code, you could just reduce the mass of the ship by a percentage, based on an arbitrary value, for example the weight to volume ratio of a space shuttle.
Given the raw data
here, I've calculated a base value for it, using the following assumptions:
As length, I picked 32 meters, which is close enough given it's obviously not a cube, and omits part of the fins and all that jazz.
Given the rather inaccurate data provided by that site, I just assumed it to be 5x5 in height and width, which is probably a rather generous assumption.
With 32*5*5 (I have this mad feeling of totally missing something right now), I got a total of 800 cubic meters; given that I fully expect to miscalculate something here, let's just assume half of it.
However, the full load of the shuttle seems to be, according to wikipedia, around 109 tons.
So, to take the middleground between what is in game now and the cheap calculation I just pulled off, you could reduce the weight of a ship by roughly 35%.
This would change the given freighter from:
Atlas class Freighter 9,393 tons standard 35,393 tons full load 28 Crew 431.1 BP
Length 220m Armour 1-176 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 0
to:
Atlas class Freighter 6,105 tons standard 32,105 tons full load 35,393 tons volume 28 Crew 431.1 BP
Length 220m Armour 1-176 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 0
Now, I obviously don't know too much about the subject, but I think this wouldn't be too much coding effort, and as with the exhaust problem before, you could just change the fuel consumption to account for that; In this case it would probably go down a bit again.
Though, now that I think about it, crew spaces should probably handle only half as many persons after that model, maybe 2 or 3 per ton.
As for railguns, does that mean we'll have to expect the muzzle velocities to go down by an order of magnitude? After all, a somewhat similar change was enacted on engines to keep with the realism.