General A Starship is (NOT) a Starship is (NOT) a Starship …

[Grav_Moped]

The Type S is not at all custom. Also, it's not mine. But it is the most likely context in which PCs will be operating a 100Td J2/2G ship.

The other variants are custom, and the additional cargo capacity makes them not the same ship for RPG purposes.

 

[Condottiere]

Travellers Aid Society members might get discounts from participating dealerships.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

The Type S is not at all custom. Also, it's not mine. But it is the most likely context in which PCs will be operating a 100Td J2/2G ship.

Agreed, but a LBB5 custom job with 20 Dt cargo isn't a Type S?

Sorry, I mixed in custom LBB5 ships with the different editions Type Ss.

The other variants are custom, and the additional cargo capacity makes them not the same ship for RPG purposes.

Not the same, but not fundamentally different?

 

[Spinward Flow]

With 20 Dt cargo and a subsidy, it becomes something like this:

A few things aren't adding up for your analysis of the design you posted earlier up thread.

With a fuel purification plant, wilderness refueling will remove the fuel cost from the equation.

Life support is Cr2000 per person aboard every 2 weeks, not per stateroom (occupied or not). So if you've got a "one man scout" operation with no other crew aboard, you're paying Cr2000 per jump (for 1 person), not Cr8000 per jump (for 1 person and 3 unoccupied staterooms).

Crew salaries ought to be Cr3000 per jump, not Cr2400 per jump, to pay the salary of a Pilot (Cr6000 per month) who is the only required crew member aboard a 100 ton Scout/Courier.

Reduce the fuel cost by Cr2200 and the Life Support by Cr6000 while raising the Crew Salaries by Cr600 ... and suddenly you're looking at a break even under subsidy condition with an 80% manifest.

Also, you should be applying an 80% discount for volume production on the variant (so you aren't dealing in "one off" construction pricing) which has multiple knock on effects that push the whole thing towards being a profitable merchant.



Personally, I would drop the tech level back down to LBB5.80 TL=11 (so 20 tons of cargo with 4 staterooms of accommodations).



Of course, the REAL MASTER STROKE BIG BRAIN PLAY would be to use a LBB2.81 Standard Hull with LBB5.80 drives (you waste 1 ton while saving MCr18.1 in construction costs). Fall back to TL=11 so you have 19 tons of cargo capacity with 4 staterooms. Put the Air/Raft Berth back in and you've got 15 tons of cargo capacity (1 major, 1 minor cargo). That then gives you enough room to dedicate 5 tons of cargo capacity to a Mail Vault and ... voila! You have a subsidized starship which can reliably and routinely generate a profit (once you put weapons in the turret and hire a gunner) just from delivering mail around ... any passengers and cargo services become "gravy profits" on top of whatever you're getting from delivering mail.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

A few things aren't adding up for your analysis of the design you posted earlier up thread.

With a fuel purification plant, wilderness refueling will remove the fuel cost from the equation.

Sure, if that's available. It's obviously not worth travelling a week to a gas giant for "free" fuel. You can't reliably assume it's always available.

Life support is Cr2000 per person aboard every 2 weeks, not per stateroom (occupied or not). So if you've got a "one man scout" operation with no other crew aboard, you're paying Cr2000 per jump (for 1 person), not Cr8000 per jump (for 1 person and 3 unoccupied staterooms).

The context an adventuring party so I gave it 4 staterooms and assumed them filled.

Crew salaries ought to be Cr3000 per jump, not Cr2400 per jump, to pay the salary of a Pilot (Cr6000 per month) who is the only required crew member aboard a 100 ton Scout/Courier.

It's an estimate; I estimate kCr 5 average for all bridge crew.

Reduce the fuel cost by Cr2200 and the Life Support by Cr6000 while raising the Crew Salaries by Cr600 ... and suddenly you're looking at a break even under subsidy condition with an 80% manifest.

Sure, and remove a few staterooms for additional cargo. We would still need to pay for fuel some of the time.

Also, you should be applying an 80% discount for volume production on the variant (so you aren't dealing in "one off" construction pricing) which has multiple knock on effects that push the whole thing towards being a profitable merchant.

Sure, but without a mortgage the major effect is gone.

Personally, I would drop the tech level back down to LBB5.80 TL=11 (so 20 tons of cargo with 4 staterooms of accommodations).

Sure, TL-11 or TL-12, there's no difference. The OP said TL-12...

Of course, the REAL MASTER STROKE BIG BRAIN PLAY would be to use a LBB2.81 Standard Hull with LBB5.80 drives (you waste 1 ton while saving MCr18.1 in construction costs).

We would leave the books behind...


A LBB2 streamlined standard hull with 10% standard discount, versus a LBB5 config 6 with 20% standard discount isn't all that large a difference:
LBB2 with standard hull:

AL-16222R1-000000-00000-0       MCr 30,0         100 Dton
bearing                                            Crew=1
batteries                                           TL=12
                          Cargo=20 Fuel=40 EP=2 Agility=2

Single Occupancy    LBB2 design                    20        30
                                     USP    #     Dton       Cost
Hull, Streamlined      100 Dt          1          100         
Configuration       Flattened Sphe     6                      3
Scoops              Streamlined                               
                                                              
Jump Drive          A                  2    1      10        10
Manoeuvre D         A                  2    1       1         4
Power Plant         A                  2    1       4         8
Fuel, #J, #weeks    J-2, 4 weeks            2      40

LBB5 with the same LBB2 drives (just for comparison) and 20% standard discount:

AL-16222R1-000000-00000-0       MCr 28,1         100 Dton
bearing                                            Crew=1
batteries                                           TL=12
                          Cargo=20 Fuel=40 EP=2 Agility=2

Single Occupancy                                   20        35,1
                                     USP    #     Dton       Cost
Hull, Streamlined   Custom             1          100          
Configuration       Flattened Sphe     6                      8
Scoops              Streamlined                               0,1
                                                               
Jump Drive          A                  2    1      10        10
Manoeuvre D         A                  2    1       1         4
Power Plant         A                  2    1       4         8
Fuel, #J, #weeks    J-2, 4 weeks            2      40

If we house rule a LBB2 standard hull into LBB5 it would be even cheaper with a lot more cargo space, making canon ships obsolete.
Let's make it TL-15 to really abuse the system:

AL-12222R1-000000-00000-0       MCr 22,5         100 Dton
bearing                                            Crew=1
batteries                                           TL=15
                          Cargo=35 Fuel=22 EP=2 Agility=2

Single Occupancy                                   35        28,1
                                     USP    #     Dton       Cost
Hull, Streamlined      100 Dt          1          100           
Configuration       Cone               2                      3 
Scoops              Streamlined                               0,1

Engineering                                         2           
Jump Drive          A                  2    1      10        10 
Manoeuvre D         A                  2    1       1         4 
Power Plant                            2    1       2         6 
Fuel, #J, #weeks    J-2, 4 weeks            2      22           
Purifier                                    1       3         0,0

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Fall back to TL=11 so you have 19 tons of cargo capacity with 4 staterooms. Put the Air/Raft Berth back in and you've got 15 tons of cargo capacity (1 major, 1 minor cargo).

If we roll for cargo that is unlikely to fill as we can't split lots. You'd have to roll 1 on the size of the major lot to get anything. Minor lots would only have to roll 1-3 to fit, but there are fewer of those, IIRC No, there isn't.

Slightly larger cargo holds are easier to fill.

 

[Grav_Moped]

Not the same, but not fundamentally different?

Fundamentally different.

A Type S with 23Td cargo is a Type J. Except it's one that doesn't need to have the staterooms and air/raft stripped out, or to play games with demountable tanks and hobbled jump range.

The point of a Detached Duty Type S is to give the player party interstellar mobility with both expenses and revenues nerfed (it's for going places and doing things, not running a merchant campaign). A Detached Duty Type S with the expenses nerfed but with a fair revenue potential is an unbalanced money-spinning machine.

 

[Grav_Moped]

Edit: How did that mess happen? Fixed-ish.

Correct and the worst waste of valuable paper space in a LBB for a rule in CT.
That was a TERRIBLE rule ... use this hull (best bargain in the game) or suffer a x10 cost penalty (MCr 20 vs MCr 2) that no other hull size (200+ dTons) suffers.

They should have used the space to add a row for 300 dTon hulls. ... or add clear rules for landing on Size 8+ worlds.

It's to make the Type S "affordable".

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Fundamentally different.

OK, we have different definitions of "fundamentally different".

 

[Grav_Moped]

OK, we have different definitions of "fundamentally different".

In combat mechanics and operation, they're similar -- I get that.

The differences really show up in how they work in RPG situations.

 

[Condottiere]

Try to define exact life support costs per person.

Then stack them high.

I estimate that's another twelve tonnes for cargo.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

In combat mechanics and operation, they're similar -- I get that.

The differences really show up in how they work in RPG situations.

I wasn't thinking about combat.

A 100 Dt J-2 ship with 30 Dt payload is slightly better than a similar ship with 20 Dt payload.
A Free Trader with 100 Dt cargo is slightly better than one with 50 Dt.
There is no fundamental difference.

A 100 Dt Scout with J-4 and 50 Dt payload for MCr 5 might be fundamentally different, to me...
Or a ship that uses no fuel, so can jump a few times, with no compromises.

 

[atpollard]

Edit: How did that mess happen? Fixed-ish.

It's to make the Type S "affordable".

What is the point of making a ship “affordable” that a scout will get for FREE?
It doesn’t get much more affordable than “Here, have a free ship.”

 

[Grav_Moped]

I wasn't thinking about combat.

A 100 Dt J-2 ship with 30 Dt payload is slightly better than a similar ship with 20 Dt payload.
A Free Trader with 100 Dt cargo is slightly better than one with 50 Dt.
There is no fundamental difference.

A 100 Dt Scout with J-4 and 50 Dt payload for MCr 5 might be fundamentally different, to me...
Or a ship that uses no fuel, so can jump a few times, with no compromises.

A 100Td J-2 ship with 3Td cargo is a very different from a similar ship with 31Td cargo* (specifically, when you're not allowed to remodel it because it's only on loan).

Running a Type J (S4) as a pocket freighter isn't a very good way to make money.
Running a Type S from LBB2 as a cargo hauler is pretty much pointless.
Running a Type S that has an extra 20 tons or so of cargo* capacity like the Type J, but which gets free fuel and maintenance, might be a way to make a few credits on the side.


The typical campaign built around a Type S is "Murderhobos As A Service," not "Advanced Spaceships and Spreadsheets." The latter starts with a Free Trader and works up from there.
-----------------
*ballpark estimate, not worth the math.

 

[Grav_Moped]

What is the point of making a ship “affordable” that a scout will get for FREE?
It doesn’t get much more affordable than “Here, have a free ship.”

Prices on the used market.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

A 100Td J-2 ship with 3Td cargo is a very different from a similar ship with 31Td cargo* (specifically, when you're not allowed to remodel it because it's only on loan).

OK:

OK, we have different definitions of "fundamentally different".

The maths are already done:

LBB2: 100 Dt, MCr 29 (4 state, 3 Dt cargo)
LBB5: 100 Dt, MCr 41 (4 state, 15 Dt cargo) [TL-11]
LBB5: 100 Dt, MCr 31 (4 state, 23 Dt cargo) [TL-15]
MT: 100 Dt, 900 tonnes, MCr 29 (4 state, 3 Dt cargo) [TL-15]
TNE: 100 Dt, 700 tonnes, MCr 50 (4 state, 11.5 Dt cargo) [TL-15]

The humble LBB2 100 Dt standard hull ship can have 20 Dt cargo if we clear out some unnecessary clutter, like staterooms and vehicles. I wouldn't call that fundamentally different from the Scout, it's just the disposition of the payload.

QT-12222R1-000000-00000-0       MCr 27,0         100 Dton
bearing                                            Crew=1
batteries                                            TL=9
                          Cargo=20 Fuel=40 EP=2 Agility=2

Single Occupancy    LBB2 design                    20        30 
                                     USP    #     Dton       Cost
Hull, Streamlined      100 Dt          1          100           
Configuration       Cone               2                      3 
Scoops              Streamlined                                 
                                                                
Jump Drive          A                  2    1      10        10 
Manoeuvre D         A                  2    1       1         4 
Power Plant         A                  2    1       4         8 
Fuel, #J, #weeks    J-2, 4 weeks            2      40           
                                                                
Bridge                                      1      20         0,5
Computer            m/1bis             R    1       1         4 
                                                                
Staterooms                                  1       4         0,5
                                                                
Cargo                                              20

 

[Grav_Moped]

The humble LBB2 100 Dt standard hull ship can have 20 Dt cargo if we clear out some unnecessary clutter, like staterooms and vehicles. I wouldn't call that fundamentally different from the Scout, it's just the disposition of the payload.

I already noted that, by way of mentioning the Type J.

 

[Grav_Moped]

I think I see the problem here.

You're not distinguishing between a build system that almost deliberately handicaps small ships, and one that does not.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I already noted that, by way of mentioning the Type J.

The Seeker only has fuel for J-1. It's hardly a fundamental difference, but a larger difference than a few staterooms of a few dT cargo more or less.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I think I see the problem here.

You're not distinguishing between a build system that almost deliberately handicaps small ships, and one that does not.

No.

OK, we have different definitions of "fundamentally different".