• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

[CT Errata] TTB ship designs Review

But that's just the point I was trying to make. If two hulls differ, then they're two different hulls, even if they have the same game strictures. Game rules ought to (appear to) mimic "reality", not the other way around (Not even if it came about the other way around). There's no reason at all why the standard 200T hull around Antares way can't be different from the standard 200T hull round Aldebaran way. Or any reason why you can't have several different standard 200T hulls in Core.

I've no doubt 'the standard hull' started out as a single, Imperium-wide design, the same from one end of the Imperium (or even Charted Space) to the other. But that idea went south the first time GDW published two different standard hulls of the same size.


Hans
This is the WRONG thread to try and make that point, Hans.
 
Yes, we should add that to the clarifications. What was that lab price, and what's the capture tank price in the type K?

lab space works out to about MCr0.2 per ton on the Bk2-'81 design.
 
lab space works out to about MCr0.2 per ton on the Bk2-'81 design.

The capture tank price might be reasonable at MCr0.1 per ton (a little less than stateroom per ton cost). Can't recall if a figure suggests itself from the book cost of the Type K or not.
 
But that's just the point I was trying to make. If two hulls differ, then they're two different hulls, even if they have the same game strictures. Game rules ought to (appear to) mimic "reality", not the other way around (Not even if it came about the other way around). There's no reason at all why the standard 200T hull around Antares way can't be different from the standard 200T hull round Aldebaran way. Or any reason why you can't have several different standard 200T hulls in Core.

I've no doubt 'the standard hull' started out as a single, Imperium-wide design, the same from one end of the Imperium (or even Charted Space) to the other. But that idea went south the first time GDW published two different standard hulls of the same size.

This is the wrong place to suggest clarifications for misleading CT statements?

Hans: I don't see any misleading statements. If I understand you correctly, you're confusing the word hull with design.

In Book 2 ship design, a "standard hull" is has not been published differently (except between the 1977 and 1981 revisions). There are six standard hulls (100, 200, 400, 600, 800 and 1000 ton hulls), and a table which explains this. Using a standard hull forces a designer to a limited amount of drive space in a design, but the hull is cheaper a custom hull.

A standard design uses off-the-shelf design plans, normally defined as the standard type A/S/R/M/Y/C/T/L/K ships, and such ships are so common that they cost less than a ship using a custom design plan.

In this thread, we're trying to make the TTB standard designs actually conform to the TTB ship design and construction rules.

I don't think a clairification between standard hull and standard design is needed -- someone using the Book 2 design system would have the explanation readily available.
 
Please tell me if the draft errata below adequately represents the rebuilds above:

STARSHIPS (Book 2, 1981 edition)
Page 19, Scout/Courier (type S) (correction and omission): Missing notation that this design uses a standard hull. Correct cost should be MCr 28.43 (after discount).
Page 19, Free Trader (type A) (omission): Missing notation that this design uses a standard hull.
Page 19, Subsidized Merchant (type R) (correction and omission): Missing notation that this design uses a standard hull. There is 15 tons reserved for drive upgrades, and 0.5 tons available in the main hull. The correct cost should be MCr 100.035 (after discount).
Page 19, Subsidized Liner (type M) (correction and omission): Missing notation that this design uses a standard hull. There are 2 tons reserved for drive upgrades, and the correct cost should be MCr245.97 (after discount).
Pages 19-20, Yacht (type Y) (clarification and omission): Missing notation that this design uses a standard hull, and 13 tons of cargo space. The yacht does not require a steward unless it is used in commercial service. Correct cost should be MCr 51.057 (after discount).
Page 20, Mercenary Cruiser (type C) (correction and omission): Missing notation that this design uses a custom hull. The description fails to mention that the eight turrets are triple turrets, and that eight tons has been reserved for fire control. The correct cost should be MCr 429.264 (after discount) and the ship takes 28 months to build.
Page 20, Patrol Cruiser (type T) (correction and omission): The fuel tankage should be 160 tons. Pulse lasers are installed. The correct cost is MCr 228.69 (after discount), and the ship takes 16 months to build.

THE TRAVELLER BOOK (201, 1982)
Page 64, Scout/Courier (type S) (correction and omission): Missing notation that this design uses a standard hull. Correct cost should be MCr 28.43 (after discount).
Page 64, Free Trader (type A) (correction): Missing notation that this design uses a standard hull. The fuel sentence should read, “Fuel tankage for 30 tons supports the power plant and one jump-1.”
Page 64, Subsidized Merchant (Type R) (correction and omission): Missing notation that this design uses a standard hull. There is 15 tons reserved for drive upgrades, and 0.5 tons available in the main hull. The ship can only carry 9 low passengers, as there are only 9 low berths. The correct cost should be MCr 100.035 (after discount).
Page 64-65, Subsidized Liner (type M) (correction and omission): Missing notation that this design uses a standard hull. Part of the description is missing: Adjacent to the bridge is a computer Model/3. There are thirty staterooms and twenty low berths. There are 2 tons reserved for drive upgrades, and the correct cost should be MCr 245.97 (after discount).
Pages 65, Yacht (type Y) (clarification and omission): Missing notation that this design uses a standard hull, and 13 tons of cargo space. The yacht does not require a steward unless it is used in commercial service. Correct cost should be MCr 51.057 (after discount).
Page 65, Mercenary Cruiser (type C) (correction and omission): Missing notation that this design uses a custom hull. The description fails to mention that the eight turrets are triple turrets, and that eight tons has been reserved for fire control. The correct cost should be MCr 429.264 (after discount) and the ship takes 28 months to build.
Page 66, Patrol Cruiser (type T) (correction and omission): Pulse lasers are installed. 8 troops can be carried if the gunners and troops are at double occupancy. The correct cost is MCr 228.69 (after discount), and the ship takes 16 months to build.
Page 66, Lab Ship (type L) (correction and omission): Missing notation that this design uses a standard hull. Power plant should be D, and the fuel tankage 100 tons. The ship can carry 15 passengers (35 if double occupancy). Cargo capacity should only be 13 tons, but there is 7 tons of space reserved for drive upgrades. The cost of lab space is MCr 0.2 per ton. Correct cost is MCr 128.16 (after discount).
Page 66, Safari Ship (type K) (correction and omission): Missing notation that this design uses a custom hull. No steward or navigator is required as crew. The cost of the capture tanks is MCr 0.1 per ton. Correct cost is MCr 80.19 (after discount).

STARTER TRAVELLER (251, 1983)
Page 35, Scout/Courier (type S) (correction and omission): Missing notation that this design uses a standard hull. Correct cost should be MCr 28.43 (after discount).
Page 35, Free Trader (type A) (correction): Missing notation that this design uses a standard hull. The fuel sentence should read, “Fuel tankage for 30 tons supports the power plant and one jump-1.”
Page 35, Subsidized Merchant (Type R) (correction and omission): Missing notation that this design uses a standard hull. There is 15 tons reserved for drive upgrades, and 0.5 tons available in the main hull. The correct cost should be MCr 100.035 (after discount).
Page 35, Subsidized Liner (type M) (correction and omission): Missing notation that this design uses a standard hull. There are 2 tons reserved for drive upgrades, and the correct cost should be MCr 245.97 (after discount).
Pages 35-36, Yacht (type Y) (clarification and omission): Missing notation that this design uses a standard hull, and 13 tons of cargo space. The yacht does not require a steward unless it is used in commercial service. Correct cost should be MCr 51.057 (after discount).
Page 36, Mercenary Cruiser (type C) (correction and omission): Missing notation that this design uses a custom hull. The correct cost should be MCr 429.264 (after discount) and the ship takes 28 months to build.
Page 36-37, Patrol Cruiser (type T) (correction and omission): Pulse lasers are installed. The correct cost is MCr 228.69 (after discount), and the ship takes 16 months to build.
Page 37, Lab Ship (type L) (correction and omission): Missing notation that this design uses a standard hull. Power plant should be D, and the fuel tankage 100 tons. The ship can carry 15 passengers (35 if double occupancy). Cargo capacity should only be 13 tons, but there is 7 tons of space reserved for drive upgrades. The cost of lab space is MCr 0.2 per ton. Correct cost is MCr 128.16 (after discount).
Page 37, Safari Ship (type K) (correction and omission): Missing notation that this design uses a custom hull. No steward or navigator is required as crew. The cost of the capture tanks is MCr 0.1 per ton. Correct cost is MCr 80.19 (after discount).

And, lastly, do we need to reconcile the standard small craft designs?
 
Thread resurrection...

Two quick notes for the moment:

STARSHIPS (Book 2, 1981 edition)
Page 19, Scout/Courier (type S) (correction and omission): Missing notation that this design uses a standard hull. Correct cost should be MCr 28.43 (after discount).
THE TRAVELLER BOOK (201, 1982)
Page 64, Scout/Courier (type S) (correction and omission): Missing notation that this design uses a standard hull. Correct cost should be MCr 28.43 (after discount).

STARTER TRAVELLER (251, 1983)
Page 35, Scout/Courier (type S) (correction and omission): Missing notation that this design uses a standard hull. Correct cost should be MCr 28.43 (after discount).

Error: There seems to be a mistake I missed in checking Wil on this one. The price in the books is correct at MCr29.43 (after discount). No errata on this issue is needed. The errata doc will need to be corrected. Errata in the errata, how Traveller ;)

THE TRAVELLER BOOK (201, 1982)
Page 66, Lab Ship (type L)...

Addition: The text states "Fuel tankage for 90 tons supports the power plant and one jump-1." It should read "...and two jump-1." Probably the same for:

STARTER TRAVELLER (251, 1983)
Page 37, Lab Ship (type L)...

...but I haven't checked it yet.



And, lastly, do we need to reconcile the standard small craft designs?

Somehow I missed this first time around, it seems. How do you mean this? Rebuild them using High Guard to get more reasonable prices? Or something else?
 
The small craft are inconsistent in various places. I don't know that rebuilding in HG is the answer, I just know what we have is pretty inconsistent.
 
There are rebuilds in first printing High Guard (pg 29) of many of the small craft, with more variations as well, and a note that "Prices given in the table here supercede prices shown in Book 3 and Book 2 where any discrepency occurs." That might be a precedent for doing it.

I seem to recall a few scattered elsewhere too. Some in second printing HG, others in adventures, supplements and such. Agreed though that there is indeed inconsistency. I think a consensus rebuild with HG is the way to go. I've always thought that even the originals in Book 2 were built with a pre-release version of HG, or at least the small craft rules section of it, what with the references to power plant fuel and energy available for computers and weapons being such a match with HG energy points.
 
Back
Top