CT+ Ships

[robject]

CT+ SHIPS

I start here. Remove things until it fits:

Book 2 Plus

Attached. This has additions that lets me build most of the classic Traveller small starships, and a couple of rules adjustments that I think have been badly needed.

www.travellerrpg.com

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Not exactly. LBB5 rules as written, a ship flown at 1G acceleration for a month straight uses 1%Td of fuel. A ship left parked in orbit, not maneuvering at all, also uses 1%Td of fuel (under the TCS powerdown rule). So at least 1G of continuous acceleration is literally free, or at least its fuel cost is buried in baseload operational requirements.

Fuel consumption is not proportional to power use. LBB5'79 even has an explanation:

LBB5'79, p17-18:
A power plant uses fuel equal to 1% of the ship's tonnage every four weeks, regardless of actual power drain; this usage is primarily to maintain the fusion bottle and other housekeeping functions. Other fuel requirements are considered inconsequential.

I assume it's just for simplicity.

LBB5'80 has this to say about power:

LBB5'80, p28:
Energy points are used for four purposes: powering weapons, shields, for maneuver drives (for agility), and for computers.
...
Agility: Energy points remaining after weapons, screens, and computers have been installed may be applied toward the ship's agility rating. Dividethe remaining energy points by 0.01M; the result is the number of agility points the ship has. Drop all fractional points.

 

[infojunky]

Quite, but that is inherent in changing systems.

Hance, we don't do it, just talk a lot about it...

I have spent a lot of time deconstructing both Book2 and Book5 There are some interesting bits in there,

One, I like Book5's handling of drives in that Maneuver and Jump drives are subsets of the Power Plant.
Another bit buried in Book2 history is the Power fuel for Maneuver only had two days worth of fuel.

Coupling those two bits leads me to state that Power Fuel is Maneuver Fuel and using the The Book2 formula, but stipulate that water is the working fluid rather than Hydrogen thus the volume in closer to 1% per rather than the 10%.

 

[infojunky]

OK a slightly different angle, How about doubling the number of available drives? instead of 24 to 48 or fifty?

 

[Grav_Moped]

OK a slightly different angle, How about doubling the number of available drives? instead of 24 to 48 or fifty?

No reason you couldn't. Gets you up to 24KTd or so, which lets you approximate the practical low end of High Guard. Also lets you spread out the TLs of the letter drives a bit.

 

[infojunky]

No reason you couldn't. Gets you up to 24KTd or so, which lets you approximate the practical low end of High Guard. Also lets you spread out the TLs of the letter drives a bit.

Those where my thoughts

 

[Grav_Moped]

Fuel consumption is not proportional to power use. LBB5'79 even has an explanation:

LBB5'79, p17-18:
A power plant uses fuel equal to 1% of the ship's tonnage* every four weeks, regardless of actual power drain; this usage is primarily to maintain the fusion bottle and other housekeeping functions. Other fuel requirements are considered inconsequential

I assume it's just for simplicity.

Which is what I was pointing out.

Combining this (though it's not clear that one should) with the '80 fuel use rules (4 weeks, including time in Jump), suggests that maintaining a Jump field after Jump initiation might only Pn=1 rather than Pn=Jn.


-----------
*I assume this led to the TCS power down rule.

 

[kilemall]

OK a slightly different angle, How about doubling the number of available drives? instead of 24 to 48 or fifty?

Needs the small craft drives at a minimum- maybe those are number rather then letter?

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Which is what I was pointing out.

So, whether you manoeuvre or use power for weapons does not affect fuel consumption. Hence, fuel consumption is no indication of how much power is used, e.g. for manoeuvre.

Combining this (though it's not clear that one should) with the '80 fuel use rules (4 weeks, including time in Jump), suggests that maintaining a Jump field after Jump initiation might only Pn=1 rather than Pn=Jn.

There is nothing to suggest the jump needs power during a jump, only to initiate jump. As T5 later made explicit.

*I assume this led to the TCS power down rule.

That was to increase endurance while doing nothing (hiding in the outer system), presumably only needing negligible power for life support.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

OK a slightly different angle, How about doubling the number of available drives? instead of 24 to 48 or fifty?

Instead of 348 different inflexible drives you could use a straight percentage?

 

[Silverhawk]

Instead of 348 different inflexible drives you could use a straight percentage?

Ahh, you beat me to it. I was thinking the same thing. Simplifies the process especially if you figure the drives should be a percentage of the hull size.

 

[PVernon]

???? You mean T4 system?

No, It was a project of Don and the old yahoo Starship group. I suspect parts of it ended up in the T4 system but I don't know for sure.

 

[infojunky]

Needs the small craft drives at a minimum- maybe those are number rather then letter?

currently I am using the Osmanski's Smallcraft Design system system that was posted here years ago, it is somewhere between Book2 and Book5 in function. From it I took the EP functionality.

It's in this thread:

https://www.travellerrpg.com/index.php?threads/book-2-small-craft-design-system.38716/#:~:text=https%3A//www.travellerrpg.com/index.php%3Fthreads/book%2D2%2Dsmall%2Dcraft%2Ddesign%2Dsystem.38716/

 

[infojunky]

Instead of 348 different inflexible drives you could use a straight percentage?

My I point out that "real" ships cars and other mechanical contrivances to discreet engines to provide motion. In general Standard Engines are how they work.

 

[infojunky]

No, It was a project of Don and the old yahoo Starship group. I suspect parts of it ended up in the T4 system but I don't know for sure.

Gotcha. And docs survive?

 

[kilemall]

Oh, heck.

The core of my hybrid LBB2/LBB5 hybrid is ton damage and handling relative damage after. Thought I was clever.

My method is to use the EP black globe damage calcs as ton damage, with each EP translating into 10 tons.

Then each hit gets divided by 2, first hit goes to surface hit in most cases, internal for meson weapons and whole damage table for spinal PA/nukes, then second hit goes total table.

Totally redone table, singular, with modifiers for surface, internal and radiation.

Hull is a damage ton thing with losses to streamlining, otherwise risking fuel/control/power/life support lines and ultimately structural support for possible G limits to avoid breaking up the ship.

LBB5 to hit and batteries for the most part, but distance reduces battery strength and thus damage/hit #/armor pen/ultimate range. Missile vee affects practical battery damage, armor is total pen/no pen, bays can be arranged in batteries to get spinal-like damage/pen, and critical hits disable but do not destroy unless the hit has as much or more then the system.

Damage can be resolved two ways- proportionate by system tonnage divided by system value number, or roll at damage percentage value for chance of reduction and ultimately failure.

Repair is per crew living per ton per turn. This is where the frozen watch shines, get the ship screened/wake em up/ get to repairing.

 

[Grav_Moped]

There is nothing to suggest the jump needs power during a jump, only to initiate jump. As T5 later made explicit.

There's no fuel use "credit" for time spent in Jump by high Jn ships. No maneuver, no weapons use, and they still use fuel at the full powerplant consumption rate.

(This is similar to the argument that means a Type-S in TCS-rules powerdown that ramps up to 2G for 1 combat turn burns 10Td of fuel to do so.)

 

[mike wightman]

I still think the easiest fix to pp fuel is the 0.01xMxn formula - but have you considers making the formula 0.05xMxn?

This would preserve the 10t pp fuel for the scout courier and the 200t free trader.

And stick with only requiring pp to equal m-drive.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

There's no fuel use "credit" for time spent in Jump by high Jn ships. No maneuver, no weapons use, and they still use fuel at the full powerplant consumption rate.

Agreed, but there are no "fuel use credits" for anything. Normal acceleration = full fuel use, parked in orbit = full fuel use, etc.

LBB5'79, p17-18:
A power plant uses fuel equal to 1% of the ship's tonnage* every four weeks, regardless of actual power drain; this usage is primarily to maintain the fusion bottle and other housekeeping functions. Other fuel requirements are considered inconsequential

(This is similar to the argument that means a Type-S in TCS-rules powerdown that ramps up to 2G for 1 combat turn burns 10Td of fuel to do so.)

That is a consequence of the 4 weeks period for power-down, presumably to avoid exploits like routine powering down in jump.

What the rules actually say is that you have to power down for a full four weeks. If you do J-2, you didn't power down, and if you do power down, you can't do J-2.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

My I point out that "real" ships cars and other mechanical contrivances to discreet engines to provide motion. In general Standard Engines are how they work.

Sure, but how many "drives" do exist on our little world for a single TL?

Do you really want a giant table with hundreds or even thousands of "standard" drives?