MGT Only: 300-ton stretched refitted Free Trader

[AnotherDilbert]

no, he means two triple turrets, six racks total, with one missle rack (factor 2) plus one missile rack (factor 2) plus another missile rack (factor 2) plus another missile rack (factor 2) plus one sandcaster rack (factor 3) plus one sandcaster rack (factor 3). which I wouldn't allow, but that's up to you.

Why not? You can obviously arm a turret that way, and that is the result according to the rules.

 

[Redcap]

Core, p151, Software table.

Thanks.

*mutters off into the distance, something about crudily-laid-out rules books, no indexes, and it apparently having been written by Martian children using crayons...!*

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Right, k, follow. Back in the CT days, Missile, Sand, and a beam laser meant that you could carry on firing if you ran out of missiles and still had power. I've continued that tradition over the versions, and it seemed to work out well enough

It was good in the LBB2 system, not really in the LBB5 system. Unless you have oversized power plants (which standard commercial designs don't have) you have to choose between firing lasers and manoeuvring (evade attacks).

 

[AnotherDilbert]

In CT, yeah, but let's avoid flattened spheres, too many K'Kree connotations...

Freighters cannot afford to pay tens of megacredits to look cool...

 

[AnotherDilbert]

heh. and you're assuming full pax/cargo loads with each run.

Yes, that is a rather large problem. The bigger the ship, the more difficult it is to fill it every jump...

 

[kilemall]

Skipping the launch, going HG-80 TL11 for frontier level support.

40 MCr 400 tons Hull
8 MCr Streamlined Needle
14 MCr M-drive 2 (20 tons)
48 MCr J-drive 2 (12 tons)
72 MCr Power Plant 2 (24 tons)
- Jump Fuel (80 tons)
- Ops Fuel (8 tons)
9 MCr Model/2 Computer (2 tons)
7 MCr 14 Staterooms (56 tons)
.5 MCr 10 Lowberths (5 tons)
2 MCr Bridge (20 tons)
.034 MCr Fuel Purifier (7 tons)
- 4 Hardpoints + FC (4 tons)

238 tons, leaving 162 tons for cargo.

Cost- 200.534 MCr.

Yowsers.

That is the true cost of getting the TL11 ship, much more 'frontier-friendly' TL wise. It's the hull cost, plus power plant of course- the TL13 version saves 8 tons and 24 MCr, which is 100,000 Cr on the mortgage, but limits the ship's activities on the frontier to within range of going back to a TL13 A starport for maintenance.

The way I handle CT vs. HG, the CT version would be better for frontier work as letter drives are maintained universally at all A and B starports. So let's cost out a letter D-drive LBB2-81 version.

16 MCr 400 ton standard hull
4 MCr Streamlining
40 MCr D Jump Drive (25 tons)
16 MCr D M-drive (7 tons)
32 MCr D Power Plant (13 tons)
- Engineering Wastage (5 tons)
- Jump Fuel (80 tons)
- Ops Fuel (20 tons)
9 MCr Model/2 computer (2 tons)
2 Mcr Bridge (20 tons)
7 MCr 14 Staterooms (56 tons)
.5 MCr 10 LowBerths (5 tons)
.4 Hardpoints (4 tons)

110.9 MCr- ahhhh much more like it.

237 tons used, leaving us 163 tons plus 5 tons wasted space. The main capability 'lost' is fuel purification.

Interesting point on the standard 400 ton hull- engineering space either allows for an upgrade of the power plant and m-drive, or the j-drive, but not both. Effectively able to take more damage, the philosophy choice would be 'able to take more jump drive damage and jump away' vs. 'able to take maneuver/power weapons damage'.

Since external performance would not give away which was chosen, a pirate looking to disable such a ship might get a surprise.

Another CT choice would be to just up the power plant to E or F and use the DoubleFire program- another nasty surprise that becomes more viable at this hull size. Keep it at E and you don't incur more fuel space cost. If you aren't tracking on computer software packages or running a different Traveller version, still could be an extra rule to keep in the back pocket.

Assuming you did not go that direction, the 'wasted space' could be used for two things- a machine shop/fab right there in Engineering, helpful to keep those parts coming for repairs which is VERY handy for frontier ships, and/or smuggling compartments hidden amongst the equipment.

Also, the 400-ton standard 50-ton engineering compartment allows for B Jump and G PP/Mdrive- a Jump-1/Maneuver 3 ship. Not in OP's spec, but viable for being a Fast Trader. Go F-drive, and it's a DoubleFire ship.

If I were going CT and figuring on some leeway to up the cost to 130-140 MCr, I would consider the powerplant upgrade, upping the computer as that gives serious combat advantage, and/or more staterooms if this could be a part time merc boat/expedition ship.

I wouldn't bother with small craft, streamlining is far cheaper and I can land the whole boat to disgorge cargo or equipment. If planetary craft are needed, G-carriers are the way to go.

A cursory glance over the MgT1E rules shows the economics of drive letter ships should yield a similar price tag. I am gathering this is not an option in MgT2E.

 

[kilemall]

Freighters cannot afford to pay tens of megacredits to look cool...

If one is using CT:HG, those more costly hulls yield an advantage against meson bays- a cheap defensive build while allowing for direct planetary landing.

Of course, the ultimate cheap freighter is the distributed structure, which is why I am big on externally mounted containers. Orbit-to-orbit delivery, drop off containers en masse for quarantine then distribution, fast load and prep to move out-system in 12 hours.

Not exactly the OP's spec or game idiom though.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

If one is using CT:HG, those more costly hulls yield an advantage against meson bays- a cheap defensive build while allowing for direct planetary landing.

That is important for a cruiser, but if a few billions worth of warship is shooting at a small trader it is toast.

Of course, the ultimate cheap freighter is the distributed structure, which is why I am big on externally mounted containers. Orbit-to-orbit delivery, drop off containers en masse for quarantine then distribution, fast load and prep to move out-system in 12 hours.

Not exactly the OP's spec or game idiom though.

I agree that is better for the major trade routes, but not for the marginal systems where Free Traders roam.

 

[Redcap]

Well, this is what I've got from the spreadsheet; apologies for this being in a PDF, but there doesn't appear to be a way to export this thing into a standard Traveller presentation format.

Please, as you have done of late, pick this bugger to bits - I mean pieces!

 

[flykiller]

I can't make heads or tails of the pdf.

 

[Redcap]

That's one of the problems of that darn spreadsheet, sadly. It appears I have a lot of bloody typing to do, dammit. Unless anyone knows a good or better way of automating the process of generating a ship under MgT HG2e?

 

[flykiller]

Unless anyone knows a good or better way of automating the process of generating a ship under MgT HG2e?

probably be better to make your own. great learning exercise.

but seriously, you're working too hard at this. just draw up something reasonable, put a reasonable backstory to it, then see what the players do with it. and enjoy.

 

[nobby-w]

I had a concept for a twinked free trader that was more of a stock hull fitted out with some goodies. Co-incidentally, MTU also has a 'stretched' A300 class trader, although note that my stuff was CT so not so relevant here.

Essentially, the A300 trader was a J2 ship, and IMTU I had 2G and 3G variants of both the A200 and A300. The 'twinked' version had an uprated electronics suite, essentially a model/4 computer.

This computer was an avionics package sold as an 'export' model, mainly aimed at light warships such as system defence boats, heavy fighters or patrol craft. It was a (relatively) low maintenance package sold to satellite nations or client states that was somewhat effective in combat but relatively cheap and easy to maintain. Obviously it was less effective than a state-of-the-art system.

Even with a relatively modest weapons fit-out, pimping the electronics does surprisingly good things for the capabilities of your ship in combat. It will give you bonuses to hit, bonuses to defend, better sensors, ECM and so forth - the specifics depend on which rule set you're using.

You could possibly also go for a milspec hull, which adds some armour, much as your ship has, but I decided against that.

This concept gets away from the notion of a specific 'frontier' trader and goes more for the idea of what one might do with a standard design.

Of course, if some rifraff like pirates were to get hold of one of these avionics packages the party might be in for a nasty surprise ...

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Well, this is what I've got from the spreadsheet; apologies for this being in a PDF, but there doesn't appear to be a way to export this thing into a standard Traveller presentation format.

Please, as you have done of late, pick this bugger to bits - I mean pieces!

You have no staterooms and no low berths.

M-Drive cost is incorrect. Should be 6 × 80% × 2 × 150% = MCr 14.4.

The Cargo Crane is dimensioned for more than 150 dT cargo, but you do not have that. 3 dT is enough.

Salaries are monthly.


You use TL15 drives, the Req. Spec. earlier called for low tech.

You produce more power than you need, but that is fairly cheap.

You can save a lot of money with a Light hull and Budget drives. (Adjust cell G4, G14, and G17?)

Evade/2 requires 15 Bandwidth, your computer only has 10 Bandwidth.

I can't see any craft or vehicles?

Mixed turrets are not a good idea in MgT2. Place the Missile racks on fixed mounts, does not require Gunners.

Beam Lasers do very little damage, consider Pulse Laser instead?

 

[Redcap]

blimey. Here's a first. Blink, Linux notebook suddenly flies to the lock screen, no apparent reason (I must have hit a key or something, only explanation I can find) and whoops, on re-entering my password, I find all the typing I'd done to a lengthy reply to comments on the previous page were, you guessed it, gone.

Time to do even more (repeated) bleedin' typing :rant:

 

[Redcap]

It was good in the LBB2 system, not really in the LBB5 system. Unless you have oversized power plants (which standard commercial designs don't have) you have to choose between firing lasers and manoeuvring (evade attacks).

Yep, completely agree. Gawd knows why they changed the system, that worked nicely right out of the box. Oh well.

Freighters cannot afford to pay tens of megacredits to look cool...

Improbability Ship Heart of Gold *bites lip*

Yes, that is a rather large problem. The bigger the ship, the more difficult it is to fill it every jump...

Sooooo true

Skipping the launch, going HG-80 TL11 for frontier level support.

(MASSIVE SNIPPAGE)

Since we're now looking at finalising on MgT, this is kinda redundant, but I did follow your reasoning. Sadly, the new MgT rules make it kinda academic barring hull size, fuel, and plant sizes

I wouldn't bother with small craft, streamlining is far cheaper and I can land the whole boat to disgorge cargo or equipment. If planetary craft are needed, G-carriers are the way to go.

I refer the honourable gentleman to my previous answer regarding hull sizes and carried craft.

A cursory glance over the MgT1E rules shows the economics of drive letter ships should yield a similar price tag. I am gathering this is not an option in MgT2E.

Nope, not in the slightest, darn it

If one is using CT:HG, those more costly hulls yield an advantage against meson bays- a cheap defensive build while allowing for direct planetary landing.

Of course, the ultimate cheap freighter is the distributed structure, which is why I am big on externally mounted containers. Orbit-to-orbit delivery, drop off containers en masse for quarantine then distribution, fast load and prep to move out-system in 12 hours.

Not exactly the OP's spec or game idiom though.

Wouldn't be the first time PCs had dropped cargos from orbit, "just to be sure"

That is important for a cruiser, but if a few billions worth of warship is shooting at a small trader it is toast.

I agree that is better for the major trade routes, but not for the marginal systems where Free Traders roam.

Exactly.

 

[flykiller]

You could possibly also go for a milspec hull

a decommissioned milspec hull. jewell is tech 12, but as the front-line world against the perfidious zhodani would be on a crash course to upgrade to tech 13. "I want the scout fleet upgraded to tech 13, sell the old hulls as they are replaced and get them out of here to make room."

 

[Redcap]

probably be better to make your own. great learning exercise.

but seriously, you're working too hard at this. just draw up something reasonable, put a reasonable backstory to it, then see what the players do with it. and enjoy.

I'd like it to be as plausible (within game rules) as possible, of course. Hence the thrice-be-quadruple-damned maths. Good point, though

I had a concept for a twinked free trader that was more of a stock hull fitted out with some goodies. Co-incidentally, MTU also has a 'stretched' A300 class trader, although note that my stuff was CT so not so relevant here.

Essentially, the A300 trader was a J2 ship, and IMTU I had 2G and 3G variants of both the A200 and A300. The 'twinked' version had an uprated electronics suite, essentially a model/4 computer.

This computer was an avionics package sold as an 'export' model, mainly aimed at light warships such as system defence boats, heavy fighters or patrol craft. It was a (relatively) low maintenance package sold to satellite nations or client states that was somewhat effective in combat but relatively cheap and easy to maintain. Obviously it was less effective than a state-of-the-art system.

Even with a relatively modest weapons fit-out, pimping the electronics does surprisingly good things for the capabilities of your ship in combat. It will give you bonuses to hit, bonuses to defend, better sensors, ECM and so forth - the specifics depend on which rule set you're using.

You could possibly also go for a milspec hull, which adds some armour, much as your ship has, but I decided against that.

This concept gets away from the notion of a specific 'frontier' trader and goes more for the idea of what one might do with a standard design.

Of course, if some rifraff like pirates were to get hold of one of these avionics packages the party might be in for a nasty surprise ...

INteresting. But not for thios time, sadly. For another adventure, that hasn't got to fit in a certain plot and ruleset, certainly, it's a damned fine idea.

You have no staterooms and no low berths.

Whoops. Fixed

M-Drive cost is incorrect. Should be 6 × 80% × 2 × 150% = MCr 14.4.

again, fixed

The Cargo Crane is dimensioned for more than 150 dT cargo, but you do not have that. 3 dT is enough.

Fault with the spreadsheet, only has the one set of figures?! Manually fixed.

Salaries are monthly.

Noted.

You use TL15 drives, the Req. Spec. earlier called for low tech.

Yeah. leaning away from that now, due to the cargo space issue, but good point, none the less.

You produce more power than you need, but that is fairly cheap.

Noticed that, but yeah

You can save a lot of money with a Light hull and Budget drives. (Adjust cell G4, G14, and G17?)

Forgot about that; fixing (useful we have that spare power availability!)

Evade/2 requires 15 Bandwidth, your computer only has 10 Bandwidth.

Looking at expert systems (for that, and other things)

I can't see any craft or vehicles?

Fixed. Added that excellent 10-ton utility Boat design of yours from earlier in this thread

Mixed turrets are not a good idea in MgT2. Place the Missile racks on fixed mounts, does not require Gunners.

I'll look at that, thanks Double turrets for the lasers and sand alright still?

Beam Lasers do very little damage, consider Pulse Laser instead?

IIRC, That's a 180 degree flip from CT and MT! I'll change those, thanks.

More to follow, folks, once I've fixed the issues on the current version

 

[Redcap]

a decommissioned milspec hull. jewell is tech 12, but as the front-line world against the perfidious zhodani would be on a crash course to upgrade to tech 13. "I want the scout fleet upgraded to tech 13, sell the old hulls as they are replaced and get them out of here to make room."

Interesting. I'll pursue that on a later design, thanks

 

[Whipsnade]

Whipsnade, what version is that?

Sorry, late to the party.

It was done with HGS ver1.0.5.8 and, yes, it would be hard to make work.