Was there ever a final ruling on Direct Fire Control Modules, Point Defense Fire Control Modules, and Indirect Fire Control Modules for the Referee Manual? I see an entry on it a couple years back, page 55, looked like it was intended to be final, but it's not in the most recent errata.
Errata - that difficult subject
- Thread starter vraymond
- Start date
Additional issue: Referee's Manual page 78, Pulse Lasers
Much of the weaponry follows Striker design rules. Beam lasers in particular are faithful to the Striker design sequence. Pulse lasers are not: each pulse laser is half the size and price it would be under the Striker design rules. The result is a pulse laser the same size and roughly the same price as an equivalent penetration beam laser but accepting twice the power and with twice the rate of fire - which leaves one wondering why one would buy the beam laser.
I'm pretty sure the pulse laser weight, volume and price are supposed to be double what they presently show.
Much of the weaponry follows Striker design rules. Beam lasers in particular are faithful to the Striker design sequence. Pulse lasers are not: each pulse laser is half the size and price it would be under the Striker design rules. The result is a pulse laser the same size and roughly the same price as an equivalent penetration beam laser but accepting twice the power and with twice the rate of fire - which leaves one wondering why one would buy the beam laser.
I'm pretty sure the pulse laser weight, volume and price are supposed to be double what they presently show.
In RM page 78 table (and also in consolidated errata V2.21, page 36) the RFY-15 gun is given a range of Distant (21), so 21 km, while in PM, page 80 table is given a máximum range of regional (as no number is given, I understand 500 km).
Which one is correct?
Which one is correct?
Wow, they're all wrong: Plasma C through Fusion Z, the lot of them should be "V. Distant". By the way, that Referee Manual RFY-15 entry is "V. Distant (21)," not "Distant."
.The Player's Manual entries are consistent with the original Referee's Manual entries, which gave them an ROF of 160. Looks like the Player's Manual entry hasn't been revised to reflect the Referee' Manual update.
Correct. Note to self: I need to clear the decks for a MegaTraveller day.
That would be a good idea - nothing has been added/modified etc since around pg 43 of this thread.
snrdg082102
SOC-14 1K
Vilani and Vargr: The Coreward Races: The MT Alien, Vol 1 errata submission
Hello Donald McKinney,
My efforts with CT AM 3 sent me to MT to compare the instruction for Vargr word generation. MT Alien Vol. 1 page 87 uses the same example with the same probable errata as written in CT AM 3 page 7.
Page 87, Vargr Word Generation Example Second Syllable (correction): The second syllable vowel according to the example is found by rolling 1D you look on Vowel Tabe 3 and by rolling 2D which gives the combination of 6,5. Cross referencing Table 3 Row 6 with Column 5 the vowel o is returned rather than e as indicated by the example. Two recommendations:
Recommendation 1: Page 87, Vargr Word Generation Example Second Syllable (correction): Change the example to read
The second syllable is type VC. You start with the vowel tables, rolling 1D to select table 3. Rolling 2D on table 3 gives 3,5 for a vowel of e. You roll 1D to select final consonant table 4. Rolling 2D on Table 4 gives 3,1 gives a final consonant of ng. The second syllable is eng.
Your Vargr word,then, is Knaeleng.
Recommendation 2: Page 87, Vargr Word Generation Example Second Syllable (correction): Change the example to read
The second syllable is type VC. You start with the vowel tables, rolling 1D to select table 3. Rolling 2D on table 3 gives 6,5 for a vowel of o. You roll 1D to select final consonant table 4. Rolling 2D on Table 4 gives 3,1 gives a final consonant of ng. The second syllable is ong.
Your Vargr word,then, is Knaelong.
Hello Donald McKinney,
My efforts with CT AM 3 sent me to MT to compare the instruction for Vargr word generation. MT Alien Vol. 1 page 87 uses the same example with the same probable errata as written in CT AM 3 page 7.
Page 87, Vargr Word Generation Example Second Syllable (correction): The second syllable vowel according to the example is found by rolling 1D you look on Vowel Tabe 3 and by rolling 2D which gives the combination of 6,5. Cross referencing Table 3 Row 6 with Column 5 the vowel o is returned rather than e as indicated by the example. Two recommendations:
Recommendation 1: Page 87, Vargr Word Generation Example Second Syllable (correction): Change the example to read
The second syllable is type VC. You start with the vowel tables, rolling 1D to select table 3. Rolling 2D on table 3 gives 3,5 for a vowel of e. You roll 1D to select final consonant table 4. Rolling 2D on Table 4 gives 3,1 gives a final consonant of ng. The second syllable is eng.
Your Vargr word,then, is Knaeleng.
Recommendation 2: Page 87, Vargr Word Generation Example Second Syllable (correction): Change the example to read
The second syllable is type VC. You start with the vowel tables, rolling 1D to select table 3. Rolling 2D on table 3 gives 6,5 for a vowel of o. You roll 1D to select final consonant table 4. Rolling 2D on Table 4 gives 3,1 gives a final consonant of ng. The second syllable is ong.
Your Vargr word,then, is Knaelong.
Last edited:
For me this is a 20 page thread... (that's configurable). Around which # post are you thinking I should look?
Post 393
One of the items listed there:
Travel times to ten diameters (Chart 5): Corrections
World Size 0 - 3G is 8m
World Size 1 - 5G is 18m
World Size LLG - 5G is 2.6h
These corrections also apply to Chart 11.
As a separate item - In the Players' Manual - Chapter 2 (Characters) the odd number header is the Players' Handbook, instead of the Players' Manual.
Last edited:
Errata to the errata.
Page 53, right column, Step 3, Tech Level Effects (clarification): The price formula for cargo should be calculated as:
P = p + [p × (St – Dt)], where:
P = final price
p = adjusted price so far
St = source world TL ×0.10
Dt = destination world TL ×0.10
Using both P & p makes it easier to confuse. I would recommend changing one of them. How about changing p to ap.
Page 53, right column, Step 3, Tech Level Effects (clarification): The price formula for cargo should be calculated as:
P = p + [p × (St – Dt)], where:
P = final price
p = adjusted price so far
St = source world TL ×0.10
Dt = destination world TL ×0.10
Using both P & p makes it easier to confuse. I would recommend changing one of them. How about changing p to ap.
More errata to the errata.....
Now that we have the Robots book, do we really need this anymore?
Page 58, right column, Locomotion Section, Contact-Based (clarification and addition): The following clarifications will make the design of contact-based locomotion easier:
Legs (Ordinary Robots): Suspension: Each leg requires 5% of chassis volume; 8 or more legs always require 40% of the chassis volume. Transmission: One unit of transmission is required for each kilowatt of power plant output. The transmission volume is external to the chassis volume; divide the transmission volume by the number of legs, to determine the transmission volume for each individual leg.
Legs (Contoured and Pseudo-Biological Robots): Suspension: Each leg requires between 10% and 20% of chassis volume, with 15% as the average size. Transmission: One unit of transmission is required for each kilowatt of power plant output. The transmission volume is internal to the chassis volume; divide the transmission volume by 2 to determine the transmission volume for each individual leg.
Now that we have the Robots book, do we really need this anymore?
Page 58, right column, Locomotion Section, Contact-Based (clarification and addition): The following clarifications will make the design of contact-based locomotion easier:
Legs (Ordinary Robots): Suspension: Each leg requires 5% of chassis volume; 8 or more legs always require 40% of the chassis volume. Transmission: One unit of transmission is required for each kilowatt of power plant output. The transmission volume is external to the chassis volume; divide the transmission volume by the number of legs, to determine the transmission volume for each individual leg.
Legs (Contoured and Pseudo-Biological Robots): Suspension: Each leg requires between 10% and 20% of chassis volume, with 15% as the average size. Transmission: One unit of transmission is required for each kilowatt of power plant output. The transmission volume is internal to the chassis volume; divide the transmission volume by 2 to determine the transmission volume for each individual leg.
I was updating my MT starship design spreadsheet and noticed ....
When calculating agility of a planetoid hulled starship, what is it's weight? Table states NA.
When calculating agility of a planetoid hulled starship, what is it's weight? Table states NA.
Should be about 6 to 7 tons per kL.
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
Question, Don.
In the COACC, under Fixed-Wing Aircraft Design on page 32, the weights for Airframe per Metric Ton of Final Aircraft Weight are as follows.
TL 4 (assume should be 5) Simple 0.01 or 10 Kilograms.
TL 6 Fast Subsonic 0.05 or 50 Kilograms
TL 6 Transonic 0.10 or 100 Kilograms
TL 6 Supersonic 0.20 or 200 Kilograms
TK 6 Hypersonic 0.30 or 300 Kilograms
Are those the correct figures?
The reason that I ask is that the following is taken from US Navy Bureau of Aeronautics Airplane Characteristic Charts.
F4F-4 had an empty weight of 5895 pounds, and a loaded weight of 8762 pounds. Applying the 0.01 figure would give the F4F-F an airframe weight of 87.62 pounds.
The PB4Y-2 Privateer patrol bomber, a single tail version of the B-24 Liberator, shows an empty weight of 37,464 pounds and a max take-off weight of 64,000 pounds. Applying the 0.01 figure would give the Privateer an airframe weight of 640 pounds.
The F9F-2 Panther jet fighter shows an empty weight of 9303 pounds and a max take-off weight, land air field only, of 19,494 pounds. Applying the 0.05 factor for fast transonic aircraft, gives the Panther an airframe weight of 974.7 pounds.
I have the data for US Air Force fighters and bomber for the Post-War period up to 1973, with in some case the cost for each major aircraft component. The weights get a bit closer with the later aircraft with the 0.30 figure, but the early ones are maybe just a bit "strange".
If you want, I could get out my books on civil aircraft to for comparison, but based on the R4D-5 Skytrain, the Navy's version of the DC-3, those are going to be as bad. The Skytrain shows an empty weight of 17,057 pounds and a max take-off weight of 29,000. Applying the 0.01 figure, as the DC-3 flew for the first time in 1935, would give the airframe weight as 290 pounds.
Edit Note: I have information on 1920s airships and also early helicopters if you want it. Those airframe weights for early ones are strange as well. Then there is also the case of massive differences in performance between aircraft using the same power plant. I assume that you do not want information on those.
In the COACC, under Fixed-Wing Aircraft Design on page 32, the weights for Airframe per Metric Ton of Final Aircraft Weight are as follows.
TL 4 (assume should be 5) Simple 0.01 or 10 Kilograms.
TL 6 Fast Subsonic 0.05 or 50 Kilograms
TL 6 Transonic 0.10 or 100 Kilograms
TL 6 Supersonic 0.20 or 200 Kilograms
TK 6 Hypersonic 0.30 or 300 Kilograms
Are those the correct figures?
The reason that I ask is that the following is taken from US Navy Bureau of Aeronautics Airplane Characteristic Charts.
F4F-4 had an empty weight of 5895 pounds, and a loaded weight of 8762 pounds. Applying the 0.01 figure would give the F4F-F an airframe weight of 87.62 pounds.
The PB4Y-2 Privateer patrol bomber, a single tail version of the B-24 Liberator, shows an empty weight of 37,464 pounds and a max take-off weight of 64,000 pounds. Applying the 0.01 figure would give the Privateer an airframe weight of 640 pounds.
The F9F-2 Panther jet fighter shows an empty weight of 9303 pounds and a max take-off weight, land air field only, of 19,494 pounds. Applying the 0.05 factor for fast transonic aircraft, gives the Panther an airframe weight of 974.7 pounds.
I have the data for US Air Force fighters and bomber for the Post-War period up to 1973, with in some case the cost for each major aircraft component. The weights get a bit closer with the later aircraft with the 0.30 figure, but the early ones are maybe just a bit "strange".
If you want, I could get out my books on civil aircraft to for comparison, but based on the R4D-5 Skytrain, the Navy's version of the DC-3, those are going to be as bad. The Skytrain shows an empty weight of 17,057 pounds and a max take-off weight of 29,000. Applying the 0.01 figure, as the DC-3 flew for the first time in 1935, would give the airframe weight as 290 pounds.
Edit Note: I have information on 1920s airships and also early helicopters if you want it. Those airframe weights for early ones are strange as well. Then there is also the case of massive differences in performance between aircraft using the same power plant. I assume that you do not want information on those.
1. Players' Manual Pg 95:
COMBAT TOPICS COVERED IN THE REFEREE'S GUIDE
Change Title to:
COMBAT TOPICS COVERED IN THE REFEREE'S MANUAL
2. "Certain combat related topics are also covered by the Referee's Manual in the world design section:
Effects of Planetary Environment on Combat
Effects of Weather on Combat
Designing Planetary Defenses
None of these are actually in the Referee's Manual - They are in the World Builder's Handbook.
Effects of Planetary Environment on Combat - Pg 96
Effects of Weather on Combat - Pg 93
Designing Planetary Defenses - Pg 93
COMBAT TOPICS COVERED IN THE REFEREE'S GUIDE
Change Title to:
COMBAT TOPICS COVERED IN THE REFEREE'S MANUAL
2. "Certain combat related topics are also covered by the Referee's Manual in the world design section:
Effects of Planetary Environment on Combat
Effects of Weather on Combat
Designing Planetary Defenses
None of these are actually in the Referee's Manual - They are in the World Builder's Handbook.
Effects of Planetary Environment on Combat - Pg 96
Effects of Weather on Combat - Pg 93
Designing Planetary Defenses - Pg 93
Similar threads
MT Only:
My MT Errata Odyssey
