• 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.

Does the OTU have Cruise Ships?

The Oz said:
Big ships, whether civilian or military, should be adventure settings, not player-owned and operated.

I think.
Click to expand...
that's exactly how the King Richard worked in my adventure (it was 1 leg of the journey): steal the MacGuffin from the SolSec agents on board. Printed out the deck plans (not quite 15mm scale but close) so they could review the entire ship & make plans. Fortunately, I have a tabloid-sized printer (and this was one of the reasons I got that - I like printing out maps and things. Sometimes big maps!)

In fact, while I do love me some deck plans, the large ships really only need the points of interest to be mapped. I have the Mongoose Element Class Cruiser deck plans, and pretty much have opened them once to look at them laid out on the floor, and never since then (plus they simply mirrored the left & right sides, a lot of the plans really make no sense, and I am still not sure how those modules map to the pods)
 
The Oz said:
Big ships, whether civilian or military, should be adventure settings, not player-owned and operated.

I think.
Click to expand...
The key point is that ships of that scale will be on dedicated routes and/or missions. They're too expensive to just be wandering around in search of adventure!

There's A4: Leviathan, but that's still a mission under a separate owner. Doesn't mean you can't have a character or party that's managing this all on their own, but even so, there isn't much to be gained by detailing the exact cargo unless the referee makes the choice to make it interesting.
 
I’ve been planning a series of cross posts between here and the Star Citizen forums, highlighting differences endemic to the sort of audience both are appealing to and opportunities to use elements of one for the other.

One of them is the concept of Touring- going to see and party at gorgeous and unusual sights and sites.

They have a series of ships dedicated to this sort of travelling. But it’s a lot more individualistic, the postulate is smaller cheaper ships that can be owned readily by individuals or small groups. So super passenger liners are not on the horizon. Think more coastal or super rich yacht, not mobile amusement/gourmet mega box.

Examples-

Not luxury rides in some of the first video, but they do fit the affordable touring roles.

There are passenger ships coming, but they will be more in the way of airliners as no player has patience for a week long trip real-time. Most of the sleep accommodations are for military, miners and explorers.

One thing that PC gaming has over TTRPG is pretty pictures. So I expect players to literally go to pretty places just to see the sights.

A tour of the current system they have developed by way of example-

I believe they already have many gorgeous places to visit intended.

Also I can see dangerous places exploratory tourism as a thing. And of course hunting is a Traveller example of that.

So maybe your players are not into touring, but it certainly would be an industry and potentially a backdrop to adventures or patrons.
 
Grav_Moped said:
The Cruise Liner would, as I noted above, have to be a destination resort in its own right ...
Click to expand...

I would suggest that the Cruise Liner would fall under the category of a Long Liner - a Liner dedicated to or chartered for a multi-jump long-haul passage from one place to another that is separated by perhaps one or more subsectors, where the Long Liner itself is designed to be a lavish entertainment facility in and of itself to keep its passengers occupied and happy for the entire long journey.
 
whulorigan said:
I would suggest that the Cruise Liner would fall under the category of a Long Liner - a Liner dedicated to or chartered for a multi-jump long-haul passage from one place to another that is separated by perhaps one or more subsectors, where the Long Liner itself is designed to be a lavish entertainment facility in and of itself to keep its passengers occupied and happy for the entire long journey.
Click to expand...
Sounds like a subsidized merchant that runs a route of 2D (2-12 star systems) with passenger services rather than cargo as its primary revenue stream. In a CT context, if you add enough life support reserves (150 person/weeks per ton @ MCr0.15 per ton in CT terms) so you don't need to worry about "topping up" the life support systems at every port of call (just the home port where the venture is based out of), you could potentially come up with some kind of dedicated liner starship that ROUTINELY runs this route between these specific star systems multiple times per year (almost like clockwork, but not quite since jump durations vary, but you get the idea).

Make it something that happens repeatedly on a regular cycle (so no tramp merchant moves) and you'll have your cruise liner.

After that, it's just a matter of working out the (repeating) itinerary, how long it ought to take to run the entire route ... and then what it would cost in terms of overhead expenses to run the entire route so as to get an idea of what your revenues would need to be in order to break even (as an operator), after which you can then start working out how many passengers you are going to need to have on board in order to exceed that break even profit point. Set things up so that passengers taken on at the homeport are expected to remain aboard for the entire trip (although they can disembark before the end so someone else can board and take their place).

Do the whole thing up as a government subsidy (so in wartime the liner can be requisitioned as a troop transport) and you're mostly set for cruise liner style operations. The whole thing is pre-scheduled, rather than being done on a "catch as catch can" basis like how tramp merchants operate (since they have no future plans nailed down beyond their next destination).
 
I wonder if perhaps we are mixing terms here.

Historically, ocean liners existed to move people (and cargo, but mostly people) from one continent to another. These liners competed mostly on speed (the famed 'Blue Riband'), but also on luxury (both of which drove up the size of liners). This lasted until the advent of affordable transoceanic air travel. No waterborne vessel could compete with the speed of an aircraft, and speed trumped luxury, so ocean liners went extinct.

Cruise ships, OTOH, do not, as a general rule, move people from one place to another. The cruise starts and ends at the same place, and the cruise ship merely visits (often for a day or less) other places while it is cruising. As has been said, the ship is the attraction, with the other places a bonus.

It could be that in TRAVELLER terms, a liner (like the Type M Subsidized Liner) transports people from one system to another (needing a jump drive and jump fuel) while a cruise ship (boat) takes people on excursions that start and end at the same mainworld and may or may not have jump drives/fuel.
 
One other point- Phloston Paradise wasn’t a star liner or even an interplanetary cruiser. It was a grav ship.

As we know grav vehicles cost far less then starships, so if you have a pretty pleasant planet to cruise over and the ship IS the destination, may be more profitable to have a planetary atmo cruise ship and pull the beautiful people in. Then you might have passengers in the mega box 1000s.

Another thought just occurred- I don’t recall trade codes for Rich and Poor planets affecting passenger rolls. I would think Rich should get at least 1D more high passengers as they are well travelled. Then Poor planets would get 1D less high passage and maybe 1D mid passage, but 2D more low berth.

Finally, another wrinkle on the passenger die roll- perhaps +1D per jump number per passenger category, to reflect higher desirability of a fast/direct connection. That supports the dedicated Liner a lot better with more staterooms filled and high passage.

I suppose the same principle could apply to freight lots. Even an A2 can get a nice guaranteed +16 tons minimum and an average +45 tons with a J2.
 
kilemall said:
One other point- Phloston Paradise wasn’t a star liner or even an interplanetary cruiser. It was a grav ship.

As we know grav vehicles cost far less then starships, so if you have a pretty pleasant planet to cruise over and the ship IS the destination, may be more profitable to have a planetary atmo cruise ship and pull the beautiful people in. Then you might have passengers in the mega box 1000s.

Another thought just occurred- I don’t recall trade codes for Rich and Poor planets affecting passenger rolls. I would think Rich should get at least 1D more high passengers as they are well travelled. Then Poor planets would get 1D less high passage and maybe 1D mid passage, but 2D more low berth.

Finally, another wrinkle on the passenger die roll- perhaps +1D per jump number per passenger category, to reflect higher desirability of a fast/direct connection. That supports the dedicated Liner a lot better with more staterooms filled and high passage.

I suppose the same principle could apply to freight lots. Even an A2 can get a nice guaranteed +16 tons minimum and an average +45 tons with a J2.
Click to expand...
only the origin and destination system population effect the rolls for passengers (and freight). However, at work so can't check, rich & poor may have some aspect of population baked in so may have a bit of an affect.

As I just did the population part (and corrected the freight part) on my little world explainer software it is still fresh in my brain.

If so (the rich/poor classification being partially designated by population) it is yet one more thing pointing to the elegance of the Classic system: it is a vastly simplified system with a lot of built-in aspects driving that simplicity.
 
coliver988 said:
only the origin and destination system population effect the rolls for passengers (and freight). However, at work so can't check, rich & poor may have some aspect of population baked in so may have a bit of an affect.
Click to expand...
LBB S3, p39-40
  • Agricultural Worlds must have an atmosphere 4 through 9, a hydrographic percentage of 4 through 8, and a population of 5 through 7.
  • Non-agricultural Worlds must have an atmosphere of 3 or less, a hydrographic percentage of 3 or less, and a population of 6 or more.
  • Industrial Worlds must have an atmosphere of 0, 1, 2, 4, 7, or 9 (vacuum, trace, or tainted), and a population of 9 or greater.
  • Non-industrial Worlds must have a population of 6 or less. The term non-industrial is a good clue to low population worlds.
  • Rich Worlds must have a government type 4 through 9, an atmosphere or 6 or 8 (untainted), and a population of 6 through 8.
  • Poor Worlds must have an atmosphere of 2 through 5, and a hydrographic percentage of 3 or less.
 
kilemall said:
I suppose the same principle could apply to freight lots. Even an A2 can get a nice guaranteed +16 tons minimum and an average +45 tons with a J2.
Click to expand...
Might work as a game mechanic. In practice though, I see the effect of increased jump range to be providing a smaller quantity of cargo/passengers but with a substantial speed/promptness bonus.

"...when it absolutely, positively, has to be there next week."
 
coliver988 said:
only the origin and destination system population effect the rolls for passengers (and freight). However, at work so can't check, rich & poor may have some aspect of population baked in so may have a bit of an affect.

As I just did the population part (and corrected the freight part) on my little world explainer software it is still fresh in my brain.

If so (the rich/poor classification being partially designated by population) it is yet one more thing pointing to the elegance of the Classic system: it is a vastly simplified system with a lot of built-in aspects driving that simplicity.
Click to expand...
Rich/Poor I would interpret as resources of the biosphere vs population straining it. Pop up front does affect the RAW rolls, but my proposed mods would be covering the relative prosperity and travel accommodations likely to flow from that.
 
Grav_Moped said:
Might work as a game mechanic. In practice though, I see the effect of increased jump range to be providing a smaller quantity of cargo/passengers but with a substantial speed/promptness bonus.

"...when it absolutely, positively, has to be there next week."
Click to expand...
I can see that, but this is a simple mechanic to do mostly the same and take the higher jump number edge off of empty staterooms/cargo bay, especially if you stick with per jump not per parsec.

The 600 ton Liner doesn’t make sense otherwise.

But I think if it’s a per jump costing, that there would be MORE demand for that pricing to avoid literally paying 2-6x more to go the slow boat to the same destination.
 
The passenger table gives the number of people seeking passage on a tramp trader, not the number of passengers that have booked through their local travel agent for a holiday cruise or a business trip. They are the leftovers, not the sum total of every passenger available on a TL9+ world with a population of tens of millions to tens of billions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top