Errata - that difficult subject

[sfchbryan]

Email me at don.mckinney@gmail.com. I have an idea....
:devil:

I'll do that when I get home from work this afternoon.

 

[DonM]

And in the meantime, I'm starting to work from the end here and see what I've missed errata-wise.

:rofl:

 

[sfchbryan]

Referee's Manual:
Pg 76, Step 21 & pg 77 Step 22

Strike the following sentence:
"It may either indirect fire or direct fire, but not both; designate the weapon as direct or indirect when designing it."

Most artillery pieces are can do both, even if they didn't start out that way. The best example I can think of off hand is the German 88. Started out as a Flak gun & the Germans found out it worked quite well in the AT role during the Spanish Civil War.

 

[sfchbryan]

Imperial Encyclopedia

pg 62 - Navigator, Inertial
2nd row (TL 10) missing Volume & Weight.

 

[sfchbryan]

Imperial Encyclopedia pg 68.

Portable Life Support Systems - Volume - liters or kiloliters?
Oxygen Tanks - Volume - liters or kilolters?
Body Pressure Suit - Volume - liters or kiloliters?

 

[sfchbryan]

Errata pg 44
Additional weapons:

GL is an abbreviation for????
All items are missing descriptions in Imperial Encyclopedia.

 

[atpollard]

GL = Grenade Launcher?

 

[sfchbryan]

GL = Grenade Launcher?

That is what I am guessing, but is it a single shot weapon (M-79?) or more like a multi-round launcher? crew served or individual weapon.

 

[Swiftbrook]

Errata the Errata

I am questioning the 1988 Errata for RM page 74 Fusion Gun table.

Fusion Gun Turrets                     ----------UCP Factor---------
TL Type           Power  Wt  Price       1  2  3  4  5   6   7   8   9   A
12 Fusion Turret  500    5    2000000    -  -  -  1  4  10  16  20   -   -
14 Fusion Turret  500    5    2000000    -  -  -  -  1   4  10  16  20   -
17 Fusion Turret  500    5    2000000    -  -  -  -  -   1   4  10  16  20

Why was the weight changed to 5 for all TL? The original TL 12: 5, TL 14: 4 and TL 17: 3 is consistent with all other turret weight figures.

Should it be:

Fusion Gun Turrets                     ----------UCP Factor---------
TL Type           Power  Wt  Price       1  2  3  4  5   6   7   8   9   A
12 Fusion Turret  500    5    2000000    -  -  -  1  4  10  16  20   -   -
14 Fusion Turret  500   [b]_4_[/b]   2000000    -  -  -  -  1   4  10  16  20   -
17 Fusion Turret  500   [b]_3_[/b]   2000000    -  -  -  -  -   1   4  10  16  20

Thoughts?

-Swiftbrook

 

[DonM]

I am questioning the 1988 Errata for RM page 74 Fusion Gun table.

Why was the weight changed to 5 for all TL? The original TL 12: 5, TL 14: 4 and TL 17: 3 is consistent with all other turret weight figures.

Should it be:

Fusion Gun Turrets                     ----------UCP Factor---------
TL Type           Power  Wt  Price       1  2  3  4  5   6   7   8   9   A
12 Fusion Turret  500    5    2000000    -  -  -  1  4  10  16  20   -   -
14 Fusion Turret  500   [B]_4_[/B]   2000000    -  -  -  -  1   4  10  16  20   -
17 Fusion Turret  500   [B]_3_[/B]   2000000    -  -  -  -  -   1   4  10  16  20

Thoughts?

-Swiftbrook

This is some of the oldest errata... but that certainly doesn't make it perfect. But I would want some more input on this.

 

[aramis]

This is some of the oldest errata... but that certainly doesn't make it perfect. But I would want some more input on this.

The descending mass sounds about right, to me.

 

[Swiftbrook]

Imperial Encyclopedia page 78, Launch.

The Fusion = 200 Mw is physically impossible with the design tables.

At TL 15, 13.9 Kl of power plant x 6 Mw output x 2 scale efficiency = 166.8 Mw power produced.

14.0 Kl of power plant x 6 Mw output x 3 scale efficiency = 252 Mw power produced.

Sorry, no solution suggested. Just noticed the error while working on another design. Fuel capacity of 70 Kl supports a 200 Mw output for 30 days.

-Swiftbrook

 

[Swiftbrook]

RM page 81 Step 3:
6/fib computer should have a volume of 18. Double volume of a standard computer as all the rest are.

 

[Swiftbrook]

Don,

A suggestion to enhance your excellent MT Errata document. In the footer of the document, on one side put the book that page errata deals with and on the other side put the overall page number. As I quickly scroll through the document, I often get lost as to which book a particular page is referencing.

-Swiftbrook

 

[Swiftbrook]

Errata the Errata #2

On Starship design maintenance crew formula:

Cm=(H+A)/C/400 (drop fractions)

Maintenance Crew formula (Cm): A=Hull displacement divided by 100, H=Hull CP.

On the Maintenance Crew formula (Cm), Cm = (A ÷ C) ÷ 400 (drop fractions), where A=Hull displacement divided by 100.

Unfortunately on a million displacement ton hull the Consolidated Errata formula work out like this:

1,000,000/100 = 10,000
10,000/5 = 2,000 (5 is the smallest Computer CP multiplier)
2,000/400 = 5

That's a maintenance crew of 5 for a million ton ship run by a TL 5 computer. Much too low.

If you add back in the CPs for the hull, roughly 5,000,000 you get
1,000,000/100 + 5,000,000 = 6,000,000
6,000,000/65 = 92,000 (for a type 7 computer)
92,000/4 = 23,000

Which is too high.

Any ideas?

Edit: An idea. On the Maintenance Crew formula (Cm), Cm = (A ÷ C) (drop fractions), where A=Hull displacement divided by 100.
I dropped the ÷ 400. A 100,000t hull with a type 6 computer (mult of 45) will have about 22 maintenance crew.

-Swiftbrook

 

[McPerth]

Errata the Errata #2

On Starship design maintenance crew formula:




Unfortunately on a million displacement ton hull the Consolidated Errata formula work out like this:

1,000,000/100 = 10,000
10,000/5 = 2,000 (5 is the smallest Computer CP multiplier)
2,000/400 = 5

That's a maintenance crew of 5 for a million ton ship run by a TL 5 computer. Much too low.

You forget here the minimum computer your ship needs (represented by the maximum CPs a computer may handle). A 1000000 dton ship could never be handled by a model 0 computer. It would need probably (I've not run the numbers) a model 8 or 9 (probably not even those computers would be able, if it is heavily armed). So numbers would be even lower...

If you add back in the CPs for the hull, roughly 5,000,000 you get
1,000,000/100 + 5,000,000 = 6,000,000
6,000,000/65 = 92,000 (for a type 7 computer)
92,000/4 = 23,000

Which is too high.

I'm afraid your numbers are not fully correct here:

1,000,000/100 + 5,000,000 = 5,010,000
5,010,,000/65 = 77,077(for a type 7 computer)
77,077/400 = 192

And if run by a computer 8, they will be 132, and with computer 9, 104

Of course, to that you must add the command and medical crew generated by them, but with the errata on command crew, they will only amount 1-2 officiers and 1-2 medical more.

So number are not so high, are they?

Any ideas?

Edit: An idea. On the Maintenance Crew formula (Cm), Cm = (A ÷ C) (drop fractions), where A=Hull displacement divided by 100.
I dropped the ÷ 400. A 100,000t hull with a type 6 computer (mult of 45) will have about 22 maintenance crew.

-Swiftbrook

I guess the formula I like the most is the original from MT, at least in this case

 

[Swiftbrook]

I'm afraid your numbers are not fully correct here:

1,000,000/100 + 5,000,000 = 5,010,000
5,010,,000/65 = 77,077(for a type 7 computer)
77,077/400 = 192

I guess it was way too late for me. I'm generally not that bad. Sorry folks. Oh, I did intentionally ignore minimum computer size.

I guess the formula I like the most is the original from MT, at least in this case.

Me too.

-Swiftbrook

 

[aramis]

I also like the crew formulae in MT as published. No errata needed on them IMO.
Well, actually, they can be SIMPLIFIED...

 

[Swiftbrook]

MegaTraveller Journal #4 page 79, Custom Starship Additions

Medical Bay is listed as Wt. 205, Vol. 35

A standard stateroom has a Vol. 54 and Wt. 4

I can see a Medical Bay being heavier than a stateroom, but not that much heavier at that size.

Suggestion: Medical Bay 202.5 Kl (15 dton) and Wt. 35

Other suggestions? Now I understand, really you can make a Medical Bay any size you want. What do sized would be appropriate for a +0 modifier to a medical skill roll (as apposed to a negative modifier because of no facility) and how big for a positive modifier?

Notes of interest from T20:
Sickbay 8 dtons and 5 MCr
Laboratory 8 dtons and 5 MCr
Autodoc 0.5 dtons and 1 MCr
Engineering Shop 6 dtons and 1 MCr
Vehicle Shop 10 dtons and 2 MCr

-Swiftbrook

Edit: Revised Suggestion

Item                      Volume    Weight   Cost
===================================================
Sickbay/Medical Bay       108       8        5 MCr
Laboratory                108       8        5 MCr
Autodoc                    13.5     1        1 MCr
Engineering Shop           81       6        1 MCr
Vehicle Shop              135      10        2 MCr

 

[McPerth]

Solomani and Aslan, page 31, skills tables for Home Guard.

The skills on the tables, as they stand on the book are:

For Army: Exploratory, Environ, Space tech, Space combat, Technical, Leader

For Navy: Special Combat, Vehicle, Gun Combat, Technical, Environ, Leader

I guess the tables for Navy HG and Army HG were swapped, as I feel the skills that appear on them would be more logical on the other table.