CT Only: LSP Modular Pinnace

[AnotherDilbert]

And then proceeds to make pretty much every 20k+ ship in LBB S9 (with some notable exceptions that the fluff text notes are "failed designs") be a J4/6G ship with Model/9fib computer anyway.

Few ships in S9 or otherwise are actually J-4 & Agility 6 with survivable defences, as that would cost about 100% of the ships tonnage, leaving no space for trivial things like crew or weapons.

The big battleships are either J-3 (Kokirrak, Tigress) or severely lacking defences (Plankwell [5 G]).
The cruisers have basically no defences, and are consequently road-kill. Also none of them has J-4/Agility-6.
The only J-4/6 G ships are escorts, and they lack defences and significant weapons, as expected.


I should hope they all have max computer for the TL, as that is basically a no (significant) cost option for a large ship, with great impact on usability.


The genius of LBB5 is that you have to choose between desirable traits, even at TL-15.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

..., and power plant cost should have been based on EP produced rather than tonnage (TL15 drives being the most powerful and cheapest makes anything but a TL15 pp pointless in the Third Imperium setting - not to mention the huge mess that was made of MT ship construction as a result).

It was a feature, not a bug. It was one of the big reasons higher tech ships were better than lower tech ships, as they should. I expect it was fully intended.

It had some of the same effect in Striker and MT, and was hardly a problem there either.

There were three opportunities to reconcile the ship construction paradigm after the two attempts to get HG "right".

Agreed, having four different ship design systems in the same edition isn't ideal.

T4 decided to do one better and have three simultaneous but different design systems, based on the same assumptions.

 

[atpollard]

It was a feature, not a bug. It was one of the big reasons higher tech ships were better than lower tech ships, as they should. I expect it was fully intended.

It had some of the same effect in Striker and MT, and was hardly a problem there either.

I disagree. A simple change like cost per EP rather than per dTon of PP would have brought the design of LBB2 and LBB5 ships of balanced design (ie. 2G/J2 or 1G/J1 or 3G/J3) within rounding distance of equivalent. (Compare the cost and tonnage of a few Engineering Sections).

As LBB5:80 now functions, the PP is the dominant cost for ACS and crushes break-even profitability at low TLs.
That never felt like a feature in play, it always felt like a straight jacket that your ship NEEDED a TL 15 yard for annual maintenance.

 

[atpollard]

T4 decided to do one better and have three simultaneous but different design systems, based on the same assumptions.

It wasn’t a problem for T4 … nobody could get any of them to work.
[just kidding]

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I disagree. A simple change like cost per EP rather than per dTon of PP would have brought the design of LBB2 and LBB5 ships of balanced design (ie. 2G/J2 or 1G/J1 or 3G/J3) within rounding distance of equivalent. (Compare the cost and tonnage of a few Engineering Sections).

As LBB5:80 now functions, the PP is the dominant cost for ACS and crushes break-even profitability at low TLs.
That never felt like a feature in play, it always felt like a straight jacket that your ship NEEDED a TL 15 yard for annual maintenance.

You can always use LBB2 drives in LBB5, so LBB5 can't be worse...

A LBB5 Free Trader costs MCr 37 and has 82 Dt cargo, just like the LBB2 Free Trader:

AL-2611111-000000-00000-0       MCr 37,8         200 Dton
bearing                                            Crew=4
batteries                                            TL=9
            Pass=6 Low=20 Cargo=82 Fuel=30 EP=2 Agility=1

Single Occupancy                                   82        47,2
                                     USP    #     Dton       Cost
Hull, Streamlined   Custom             2          200          
Configuration       Flattened Sphe     6                     16
Scoops              Streamlined                               0,2
                                                               
Jump Drive          A                  1    1      10        10
Manoeuvre D         A                  1    1       1         4
Power Plant         A                  1    1       4         8
Fuel, #J, #weeks    J-1, 4 weeks            1      30          
                                                               
Bridge                                      1      20         1
Computer            m/1                1    1       1         2
                                                               
Staterooms                                 10      40         5
Low Berths                                 20      10         1
                                                               
Cargo                                              82          
                                                               
Empty hardpoint                             2       2          
                                                               
Nominal Cost        MCr 47,20            Sum:      82        47,2
Class Cost          MCr  9,91           Valid      ≥0          ≥0
Ship Cost           MCr 37,76                                  
                                                               
                                                               
Crew &               High     3        Crew          Bridge     1
Passengers            Mid     3           4       Engineers     1
                      Low    20                     Gunners     0
                 Extra SR     0      Frozen         Service     2
               # Frozen W     0           0          Flight     0
                  Marines     0                     Marines     0
                                                               
                                                               
Estimated Economy of Ship     Standard                                    
       Ship price     Down Payment         Mortgage       Avg Filled
        MCr 37,76        kCr 7 552          kCr 157              80%
                                                               
Expenses per jump                       Revenue                
Bank                 Cr 75 520          High            Cr 24 000
Fuel                 Cr 15 000          Middle          Cr 19 200
Life Support         Cr 19 600          Low             Cr 16 000
Salaries             Cr  7 200          Cargo           Cr 64 000
Maintenance          Cr  1 510                                  
Berthing             Cr    200                                  
                                                               
Summa               kCr    119                         kCr    123
                                                               
     Income potential per jump     kCr 4                  
  Yearly yield on down payment      1,4%

And you can add a fuel purifier, that would make it more profitable, and usable away from major starports...

 

[AnotherDilbert]

It wasn’t a problem for T4 … nobody could get any of them to work.
[just kidding]

That's more real than a joke, I suspect...

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I disagree. A simple change like cost per EP rather than per dTon of PP would have brought the design of LBB2 and LBB5 ships of balanced design (ie. 2G/J2 or 1G/J1 or 3G/J3) within rounding distance of equivalent. (Compare the cost and tonnage of a few Engineering Sections).

As LBB5:80 now functions, the PP is the dominant cost for ACS and crushes break-even profitability at low TLs.
That never felt like a feature in play, it always felt like a straight jacket that your ship NEEDED a TL 15 yard for annual maintenance.

Let me make a more reasoned answer:

Both LBB2 and LBB5 makes higher tech ships more efficient, LBB5 through the PP and LBB2 by size. In LBB2 bigger ships are more efficient, and can only be built with higher TL components.

TL-9 J-2 LBB2 ship, TL-9 D drives:

AT-43222R1-000000-00000-0        MCr 123         400 Dton
bearing                                            Crew=5
batteries                                            TL=9
                        Cargo=212 Fuel=100 EP=8 Agility=2
                                                            
Estimated Economy of Ship     Standard                                 
       Ship price     Down Payment         Mortgage       Avg Filled
       MCr 123,03       kCr 24 606          kCr 513              80%
                                                            
Expenses per jump                       Revenue             
Bank                Cr 246 060          High           Cr       0
Fuel                Cr  50 000          Middle         Cr       0
Life Support        Cr  10 000          Low            Cr       0
Salaries            Cr  10 080          Cargo          Cr 168 000
Maintenance         Cr   4 921                               
Berthing            Cr     400                               
                                                            
Summa              kCr     321                        kCr     168
                                                            
     Income potential per jump     kCr -153               
  Yearly yield on down payment     -15,6%

Unprofitable; 53% payload, MCr 0.58 per Dt payload.


TL-12 LBB2 J-2 ship, TL-12 N drives:

AT-A3222R1-000000-00000-0        MCr 299       1 000 Dton
bearing                                            Crew=6
batteries                                           TL=12
                       Cargo=625 Fuel=220 EP=20 Agility=2
                                                            
Estimated Economy of Ship     Standard                                 
       Ship price     Down Payment         Mortgage       Avg Filled
       MCr 299,25       kCr 59 850        kCr 1 247              80%
                                                            
Expenses per jump                       Revenue             
Bank                Cr 598 500          High           Cr       0
Fuel                Cr 110 000          Middle         Cr       0
Life Support        Cr  12 000          Low            Cr       0
Salaries            Cr  12 000          Cargo          Cr 500 000
Maintenance         Cr  11 970                               
Berthing            Cr   1 000                               
                                                            
Summa              kCr     745                        kCr     500
                                                            
     Income potential per jump     kCr -245               
  Yearly yield on down payment     -10,3%

Unprofitable, but better; 62% payload, MCr 0.48 per Dt payload.


TL-15 LBB2 J-2 ship, TL-15 Z drives:

AT-E3222R2-000000-00000-0        MCr 976       5 000 Dton
bearing                                           Crew=50
batteries                                           TL=15
                    Cargo=3409 Fuel=1020 EP=100 Agility=2
                                                            
Estimated Economy of Ship     Standard                                 
       Ship price     Down Payment         Mortgage       Avg Filled
       MCr 976,05      kCr 195 210        kCr 4 067              80%
                                                            
Expenses per jump                       Revenue             
Bank              Cr 1 952 100          High         Cr         0
Fuel              Cr   510 000          Middle       Cr         0
Life Support      Cr   100 000          Low          Cr         0
Salaries          Cr    72 000          Cargo        Cr 2 724 000
Maintenance       Cr    39 042                               
Berthing          Cr     5 000                               
                                                            
Summa            kCr     2 678                      kCr     2 724
                                                            
     Income potential per jump     kCr 46               
  Yearly yield on down payment      0,6%

Even better, profitable: 68% payload, MCr 0.28 per Dt payload.


LBB5 just decoupled TL from size.

 

[kilemall]

One of the underlying issues to all this handwringing about profitability is the lower tech stuff isn’t cheaper or at least cheaper when built at a higher tech level.

Sure there are bits in different versions where some gear or vehicles are done, but the interstellar working ships are not.

If just some of the generic notes on pricing dropping per TL or the Striker currency model were applied, those ships would be considerably cheaper and run at a profit, assuming the fee structure remains the same.

IND worlds should also be able to churn out standard ships for quite a bit off.

 

[atpollard]

You can always use LBB2 drives in LBB5, so LBB5 can't be worse...

A LBB5 Free Trader costs MCr 37 and has 82 Dt cargo, just like the LBB2 Free Trader:

So, LBB5 PP TL isn’t a problem if you don’t use LBB5 PPs … is that your final answer?
(I can’t argue with that, but I think you may have made my point that LBB5 PP TL Progression rendered Low TL LBB5 PPs unusable in the game - quite an interesting “feature”.)

 

[atpollard]

One of the underlying issues to all this handwringing about profitability is the lower tech stuff isn’t cheaper or at least cheaper when built at a higher tech level.

That is not my complaint.
I complain about TRIPLING the cost of the Scout Ship PP because it was built at TL12 vs TL 15. As I stated earlier, Per EP pricing would allow all PP-2 to cost the same with higher TL offering size savings and make LBB5 ships nearly compatible with LBB2 ships (as they are at TL 15, but not at other TLs).

200 dTon J1 Free Trader:

TTB:82 Free Trader
JD-A = 10 dT, MCr 10
MD-A = 1 dT, MCr 4
PP-A = 4 dT, MCr 8
FUEL = 30 dT
TOTAL ENGINEERING = 45 dT, MCr 22

LBB5:80 Free Trader TL 15
JD-1 = 4 dT, MCr 16
MD-1 = 4 dT, MCr 6
PP-1 = 2 dT, MCr 6
FUEL = 22 dT
TOTAL ENGINEERING = 32 dT, MCr 28
*TOTAL WITH PER EP PRICING = 32 dT, MCr 28

LBB5:80 Free Trader TL 13-14
JD-1 = 4 dT, MCr 16
MD-1 = 4 dT, MCr 6
PP-1 = 4 dT, MCr 12
FUEL = 22 dT
TOTAL ENGINEERING = 34 dT, MCr 34
*TOTAL WITH PER EP PRICING = 34 dT, MCr 28

LBB5:80 Free Trader TL 9-12
JD-1 = 4 dT, MCr 16
MD-1 = 4 dT, MCr 6
PP-1 = 6 dT, MCr 18
FUEL = 22 dT
TOTAL ENGINEERING = 36 dT, MCr 40
*TOTAL WITH PER EP PRICING = 36 dT, MCr 28

*With per EP pricing, there would still be an advantage in cost for LBB2 over LBB5 at a penalty in displacement. For LBB5, there is still a dTon advantage to higher TL Power Plants (or a dTon penalty for lower TL Power Plants) but not the staggering cost penalty and not the radical cost difference from LBB2.

 

[mike wightman]

I agree with your analysis, per EP costing would harmonise things. At the risk of adding more needless complexity the cost of a pp could be determined by tonnage and EP, but I really think that per EP is the best (i.e. simplest) solution.

It may even pave the way to finally fixing MT ship construction...
but that is for another thread.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

So, LBB5 PP TL isn’t a problem if you don’t use LBB5 PPs … is that your final answer?

No; LBB5 has a choice of drives, one of them standard LBB2 drives, so the LBB5 system can't produce worse results, but can potentially produce better results.

If you want a cheaper, more capable ship, make it at TL-15, and accept the logistical downside.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

LBB5:80 Free Trader TL 15
JD-1 = 4 dT, MCr 16
MD-1 = 4 dT, MCr 6
PP-1 = 2 dT, MCr 6
FUEL = 22 dT
TOTAL ENGINEERING = 32 dT, MCr 28
*TOTAL WITH PER EP PRICING = 32 dT, MCr 28

LBB5:80 Free Trader TL 13-14
JD-1 = 4 dT, MCr 16
MD-1 = 4 dT, MCr 6
PP-1 = 4 dT, MCr 12
FUEL = 22 dT
TOTAL ENGINEERING = 34 dT, MCr 34
*TOTAL WITH PER EP PRICING = 34 dT, MCr 28

LBB5:80 Free Trader TL 9-12
JD-1 = 4 dT, MCr 16
MD-1 = 4 dT, MCr 6
PP-1 = 6 dT, MCr 18
FUEL = 22 dT
TOTAL ENGINEERING = 36 dT, MCr 40
*TOTAL WITH PER EP PRICING = 36 dT, MCr 28

So, there should barely be any difference between a TL-9 ship and a TL-15 ship? Why?

Both LBB2 and LBB5 says high tech ships are better, which I find reasonable. Why would a 19th century coal steamer, a 20th century oil turbine, and a 21st century diesel be the same cost?


Now compare higher performance ship (200 Dt, J-4, M-2):

AF-2242441-000000-00000-0        MCr 151         200 Dton
bearing                                            Crew=3
batteries                                           TL=13
                          Cargo=42 Fuel=88 EP=8 Agility=2

Single Occupancy                                   42       150,7
                                     USP    #     Dton       Cost
Hull, Streamlined   Custom             2          200         
Configuration       Cone               2                     22
Scoops              Streamlined                               0,2
                                                              
Jump Drive                             4    1      10        40
Manoeuvre D         B                  2    1       3         8
Power Plant                            4    1      16        48
Fuel, #J, #weeks    J-4, 4 weeks            4      88         
Purifier                                    1       5         0,0
                                                              
Bridge                                      1      20         1
Computer            m/4                4    1       4        30
                                                              
Staterooms                                  3      12         1,5
                                                              
Cargo                                              42         
                                                              
Nominal Cost        MCr 150,73           Sum:      42       150,7

vs only standard drives:

AF-2242441-000000-00000-0        MCr 135         200 Dton
bearing                                            Crew=4
batteries                                           TL=13
                          Cargo=0 Fuel=120 EP=8 Agility=2

Single Occupancy                                   -6       135,2
                                     USP    #     Dton       Cost
Hull, Streamlined   Custom             2          200         
Configuration       Cone               2                     22
Scoops              Streamlined                               0,2
                                                              
Jump Drive          D                  4    1      25        40
Manoeuvre D         B                  2    1       3         8
Power Plant         D                  4    1      13        32
Fuel, #J, #weeks    J-4, 4 weeks            4     120         
Purifier                                    1       5         0,0
                                                              
Bridge                                      1      20         1
Computer            m/4                4    1       4        30
                                                              
Staterooms                                  4      16         2
                                                              
Cargo                                                         
                                                              
Nominal Cost        MCr 135,23           Sum:      -6       135,2

Is the extra MCr 15 worth the extra 48 Dt payload, that makes the ship usable? I would say yes.

Would the system be all that much better if the LBB5 drives were cheaper as well as smaller?

 

[atpollard]

Dammit … I want a 250 dT M2/J1 ship at TL 12 … is that so unreasonable?

 

[Grav_Moped]

Per EP pricing would allow all PP-2 to cost the same with higher TL offering size savings and make LBB5 ships nearly compatible with LBB2 ships (as they are at TL 15, but not at other TLs).

This is pretty much what LBB2'81 actually does. Drive cost tracks EPs (input or output) -- or what would be EPs if LBB2 used them. The relation of cost per ton of drives is... well, I could simplify the math but it ends up being cost per EP anyhow.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Dammit … I want a 250 dT M2/J1 ship at TL 12 … is that so unreasonable?

No, why would it be?

The difference between LBB2 and LBB5 would be minimal:

LBB2, MCr 101, Payload 133 Dt:

AN-2212211-000000-00000-0        MCr 101         250 Dton
bearing                                            Crew=4
batteries                                           TL=12
                         Cargo=133 Fuel=45 EP=5 Agility=2

Single Occupancy    LBB2 design                   133       100,8
                                     USP    #     Dton       Cost
Hull, Streamlined   Custom             2          250           
Configuration       Cone               2                     27,5
Scoops              Streamlined                                 
                                                                
Jump Drive          B                  1    1      15        20 
Manoeuvre D         D                  2    1       7        16 
Power Plant         D                  2    1      13        32 
Fuel, #J, #weeks    J-1, 4 weeks            1      45           
                                                                
Bridge                                      1      20         1,3
Computer            m/1                1    1       1         2 
                                                                
Staterooms                                  4      16         2 
                                                                
Cargo                                             133           
                                                                
Nominal Cost        MCr 100,75           Sum:     133       100,8

LBB5, MCr 107, Payload 150 Dt.

AN-2212211-000000-00000-0        MCr 107         250 Dton
bearing                                            Crew=4
batteries                                           TL=12
                         Cargo=150 Fuel=30 EP=5 Agility=2

Single Occupancy                                  150,5     106,8
                                     USP    #     Dton       Cost
Hull, Streamlined   Custom             2          250           
Configuration       Cone               2                     27,5
Scoops              Streamlined                               0,3
                                                                
Jump Drive                             1    1       5        20 
Manoeuvre D                            2    1      12,5       8,8
Power Plant                            2    1      15        45 
Fuel, #J, #weeks    J-1, 4 weeks            1      30           
                                                                
Bridge                                      1      20         1,3
Computer            m/1                1    1       1         2 
                                                                
Staterooms                                  4      16         2 
                                                                
Cargo                                             150,5         
                                                                
Nominal Cost        MCr 106,75           Sum:     150,5     106,8

The LBB5 design is a few MCr more for 17 Dt more payload. Is that so bad?
With a standard rebate, the LBB5 ship would be cheaper.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Let's make it a standard design, with per EP pricing for the LBB5 ship:

LBB2:

AN-2212211-000000-00000-0       MCr 90,7         250 Dton
bearing                                            Crew=4
batteries                                           TL=12
                         Cargo=133 Fuel=45 EP=5 Agility=2

Single Occupancy    LBB2 design                   133       100,8
                                     USP    #     Dton       Cost
Hull, Streamlined   Custom             2          250         
Configuration       Cone               2                     27,5
Scoops              Streamlined                               
                                                              
Jump Drive          B                  1    1      15        20
Manoeuvre D         D                  2    1       7        16
Power Plant         D                  2    1      13        32
Fuel, #J, #weeks    J-1, 4 weeks            1      45         
                                                              
Bridge                                      1      20         1,3
Computer            m/1                1    1       1         2
                                                              
Staterooms                                  4      16         2
                                                              
Cargo                                             133         
                                                              
Nominal Cost        MCr 100,75           Sum:     133       100,8
Class Cost          MCr  11,08          Valid      ≥0          ≥0
Ship Cost           MCr  90,68

LBB5:

AN-2612211-000000-00000-0       MCr 55,4         250 Dton
bearing                                            Crew=4
batteries                                           TL=12
                         Cargo=150 Fuel=30 EP=5 Agility=2

Single Occupancy                                  150,5      69,3
                                     USP    #     Dton       Cost
Hull, Streamlined   Custom             2          250          
Configuration       Flattened Sphe     6                     20
Scoops              Streamlined                               0,3
                                                               
Jump Drive                             1    1       5        20
Manoeuvre D                            2    1      12,5       8,8
Power Plant                            2    1      15        15
Fuel, #J, #weeks    J-1, 4 weeks            1      30          
                                                               
Bridge                                      1      20         1,3
Computer            m/1                1    1       1         2
                                                               
Staterooms                                  4      16         2
                                                               
Cargo                                             150,5        
                                                               
Nominal Cost        MCr 69,25            Sum:     150,5      69,3
Class Cost          MCr 14,54           Valid      ≥0          ≥0
Ship Cost           MCr 55,40

And now the LBB5 ship is much cheaper and has more payload, even with the "huge" low-tech power plant.
Is that really what's required for the system to not be considered broken?

 

[atpollard]

Let's make it a standard design, with per EP pricing for the LBB5 ship:

LBB2:

LBB5:

And now the LBB5 ship is much cheaper and has more payload, even with the "huge" low-tech power plant.
Is that really what's required for the system to not be considered broken?

When discussing what made something “broken”, one man’s FEATURE is another man’s FLAW.
So (100% my opinion) the FLAW in LBB2 (actually TTB:82 for me) is the Standard Hull sizes of 200 dT or 400 dT that I may choose from and the MATCHING DRIVE PERFORMANCE TABLE that offers a 200 dT row and a 400 dT row for the LBB2 Drives from which I may select that greatly restricts the design choices (or imposes draconian penalties on many choices like a 250 dT custom hull).

The FEATURE that seemed to offer an opportunity to free up the creative possibilities from the draconian penalties was the LBB5:80 change from a fixed lookup table of preset choices to a percentage based system.

The FLAW in the LBB5:80 FEATURE that stood in the way of it working in practice the way it worked in theory was the REALITY that LBB2 offered an ACS that could be built and maintained at TL 10 (Imperial Average) that was identical to the same ship built and maintained at TL 15 (Imperial Maximum) [setting aside customizable options like computer], while LBB5:80 imposed a large penalty on the lower TL ship over its identical higher TL counterpart.

Cost per EP for the PP offered a very simple change that corrected this perceived flaw in LBB5 and shattered the draconian penalties of LBB2 for being creative.

We have exchanged enough posts to probably agree that my FLAW is your FEATURE and we must ultimately agree to disagree. [Now on to arguing about something REALLY IMPORTANT … like Jump Torpedoes.]

 

[kilemall]

Shrug, the LBB2 costing is balanced off by the fuel/space loss and at least IMTU universal parts/replacement vs. TCS-style limited support for higher TL custom drives. I’m satisfied to leave it there and not try to outclever two different engineering paradigms.

 

[atpollard]

Just as an aside, I went and read the LBB5 1979 edition … boy is the Ship design problematic at low TLs (where you can build a MD but cannot build any PP.)

(GO AHEAD, CONVINCE ME THAT IS A ”FEATURE”)