CT Only: Fleet Scout (Type SF) 199.5Td, J4/4G

[Spinward Flow]

In the extreme case, look at what High Guard did to the OTU (Big Ship Universe vs Small Ship Universe).

To be fair, it's hard to build the Enterprise, Battlestar Galactica or Star Destroyers (all of which took on renewed prominence in the late 70s/early 80s for some reason) on a measly 5000 ton budget with nothing more than lasers, missiles and sandcasters in loads of piddly little turrets.

The Small Ship Universe was the right place to START with Traveller concerning the Player facing aspects of things, but it was a disservice to think that the Small Ship Universe was the "be all/end all/there is no more" ENDING with Traveller. As the saying goes, You Have To Start Somewhere ... and LBB publishing had limited page and word counts to work with (unlike today's online internet and desktop publishing).

A J4=4G 1250Td ship was a first-rate, line-of-battle ship

I personally still prefer to think of the Kinunir class of ships as "top of the line LBB2.77 starship designs" for a Small Ship Universe which a PC could conceivably command (with a crew, of course) and feel pretty awesome. For an LBB2.77 frontier warship, it's really difficult to do better than the Knunir.

then "suddenly" it was a slow escort to ships twenty times its size* that had somehow simply materialized out of the void of space.

The Kinunir was an awesome starship when it was designed using LBB2.77.
Then the goalposts moved (with LBB5.80) ... and suddenly the Kinunir-class wasn't quite so awesome anymore.

Still, to be fair ... there's a bit of a step change between the Kinunir (LBB2.77 small ship universe) and a Tigress Dreadnought (LBB S9 big ship universe). Having over 400x the tonnage to work with (along with armor, spinal mounts, bay weapons, hangar bays stocked with fighters, etc.) will tend to have that kind of scales tipping effect on things.

That didn't happen -- they re-wrote how ships could scale up (and specifically that they could), and those bigger ships had been there all along.

New rules mean new opportunities.

How many people tried to backport/stuff a spinal mount or a bay weapon into a LBB2 starship design?
I'm guessing "not many" since there wasn't much point. For Big Ship Universe stuff, LBB5 was the preferred paradigm of choice (for somewhat obvious reasons).

How about a fourth option: A TL-10 HG XBoat:

You're doing a mix & match between LBB2.81 Jump-B standard drive and a LBB5.80 Power Plant-4 custom drive.
Speaking just for myself, I do not approve of this kind of cherry picking and if I was the Referee for a campaign I would not allow it.
Other people no doubt have different opinions on this point, enough so that the standard disclaimer of Your Mileage May Vary definitely applies.

 

[Grav_Moped]

How about a fourth option: A TL-10 HG XBoat:

Edit to add: oh, you intermixed drives. Eh. Less interesting.

That said, it's defensible. Other than the lower TL required, there's a significant tonnage penalty (and cost parity) compared to the HG equivalent jump drive.

ETA: added a like to AD's post, even though I'm generally not keen on intermixing LBB2 and HG drives (mostly because it allows exploiting the small LBB2 maneuver drives while avoiding the counterbalancing fuel requirement penalty in small ships)

ETA2: the m-drive exploit is self-limiting as ships get bigger due the TL cap on drive rating*tonnage.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

If you want to waive the Drive Tech Level Table on page 23, sure.

And that's probably not a terrible idea -- if the drives in LBB2 can provide a specified level of performance in a specific hull, you can get that performance from LBB5 drives regardless of TL? I'll have to think about that...

LBB5'80, p22:
Custom-built drives must be produced and installed while observing restrictions as to tech level and interior space. It is possible to include standard drives (at standard prices) from Book 2 if they will otherwise meet the ship's requirements; such drives use fuel as indicated by the formulas in Book 2.

Custom (LBB5) drives use the LBB5 TL limits, standard (LBB2) drives apparently does not. Presumably standard drives use the LBB2 Drive Potential Table and TLs from LBB3.

Edit to add: oh, you intermixed drives. Eh. Less interesting.

Sure, why not? There is no requirement in LBB5'80 to do otherwise.

 

[Grav_Moped]

Sure, why not? There is no requirement in LBB5'80 to do otherwise

Between HG 80 and LBB2 81, HG powerplants would have been incompatible with LBB2 maneuver drives.
LBB2 77 implied they were fusion rockets fed by power plant exhaust, HG 79 made it explicit. HG 80 made their m-drives into grav drives that took energy points, not power plant exhaust.

LBB2 81 seemed to do likewise, but since it did not change any other characteristics of the maneuver drives, maybe not. In any case, the m-drive size differential is severely unbalancing in small ship designs and I disapprove of exploiting that.

 

[Spinward Flow]

Edit to add: oh, you intermixed drives. Eh. Less interesting.

You're doing a mix & match between LBB2.81 Jump-B standard drive and a LBB5.80 Power Plant-4 custom drive.
Speaking just for myself, I do not approve of this kind of cherry picking and if I was the Referee for a campaign I would not allow it.
Other people no doubt have different opinions on this point, enough so that the standard disclaimer of Your Mileage May Vary definitely applies.

That said, it's defensible. Other than the lower TL required, there's a significant tonnage penalty (and cost parity) compared to the HG equivalent jump drive.

Custom (LBB5) drives use the LBB5 TL limits, standard (LBB2) drives apparently does not. Presumably standard drives use the LBB2 Drive Potential Table and TLs from LBB3.

Sure, why not? There is no requirement in LBB5'80 to do otherwise.

Having taken some more time to think about the question ... you are essentially correct, @AnotherDilbert.

I was thinking about the question in terms of a battle damage replacement option, or even a "peaceful retrofit hotrodding" kitbash type of circumstance. Could you take an otherwise "stock" starship with LBB2 (77 or 81) standard drives ... pull one of the drives out at a starport shipyard ... and replace that standard drive with a LBB5 custom drive instead (for whatever reason, including the possibility that the "right kind of standard drive isn't currently in stock" among other potential supply chain complication issues)?

And then I remembered the most recent sci-fi pop culture touchstone that so brilliantly demonstrated exactly this particular idea. Some people on these forums will no doubt recognize the source (and remembering how GOOD it was watching this the first time).

In any case, the m-drive size differential is severely unbalancing in small ship designs and I disapprove of exploiting that.

My response to that point would be that Maneuver+Power Plant MUST be sourced from the same rules paradigm, but Jump+Power Plant can be mix & match between rules paradigms.

This would mean that the example above provided by @AnotherDilbert ought to pass muster ... since it's a LBB2.81 standard jump drive and a LBB5.80 custom power plant. If you wanted to add a maneuver drive to the mix it would HAVE TO BE a LBB5.80 custom maneuver drive, because the build is using a LBB5.80 power plant.

Conversely, if the design was using a LBB5.80 custom jump drive but a LBB2.81 standard power plant, if you wanted to add a maneuver drive it would HAVE TO BE a LBB2.81 standard maneuver drive.

Same deal yet again if using LBB2.77 drives ... maneuver and power plant MUST come from the same rules paradigm source in order to avoid exploiting the maneuver drive size differential.

Bottom line: Maneuver and Power Plant drives must be "linked" but the Jump drive is not required to come from the same rules paradigm

That makes a decent enough compromise, I reckon.

 

[mike wightman]

Technically you should only use LBB2 77 drive hybridisation with HG80 since 81 hadn't been invented yet

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Between HG 80 and LBB2 81, HG powerplants would have been incompatible with LBB2 maneuver drives.
LBB2 77 implied they were fusion rockets fed by power plant exhaust, HG 79 made it explicit. HG 80 made their m-drives into grav drives that took energy points, not power plant exhaust.

LBB2'81 and LBB5'80 both had magical m-drives that used power but no propellant to produce thrust, with no operating principle specified. I can't see why that would be incompatible?

LBB2'77 had reaction drives that barely used any propellant, but did use a lot of power; I would guess some sort of ion drive? Absolutely no detail about how they worked was included. The word "fusion" is not used in LBB2'77.

LBB5'79 was similar (using even less propellant), but added "Fusion Drives As Weapons".

From 1980 any hint of reaction drives are purged. No other explanation is substituted. IIRC gravitic M-drives are explicit in MT.

LBB2 81 seemed to do likewise, but since it did not change any other characteristics of the maneuver drives, maybe not. In any case, the m-drive size differential is severely unbalancing in small ship designs and I disapprove of exploiting that.

I get why you don't like it, but it's not LBB5 that mandates it.
It is, dare I say it, a house rule.

 

[Grav_Moped]

wouldn't call the LBB2.77 Scout/Courier "slapdash" in its execution for the game, but it pretty clearly wasn't something that people were thinking "deeply" about at the time. As a First Draft it was functional as a "runabout" to go have adventures in, which was all it needed to be.

It literally dropped into their laps from the ship construction system. Hulls in 200Td increments are "normal", and the S is what you get when you stuff the smallest drives into a hull half the size of the smallest "normal" hull. 100Td is an edge case -- and has other exceptions made for it as well (crew, standard hull discount level).

It can't haul Cr1000/Td freight or passengers profitably, but as a subsidized (free resupply at Scout bases) mobile hotel suite it's very useful in-game.

 

[Grav_Moped]

My response to that point would be that Maneuver+Power Plant MUST be sourced from the same rules paradigm, but Jump+Power Plant can be mix & match between rules paradigms.

Yep. RAW does not mandate it, but from a game balance standpoint, it makes sense. Otherwise, TL gives far too much of an advantage in that size range (LBB2 m-drives are bounded by TL at exactly the same rate as j-drives) because the low-TL alternatives from HG are so much larger.

 

[McPerth]

How about a fourth option: A TL-10 HG XBoat:

In HG you need TL 13 to be able to jump 4...

As per making ships that merge LBB2 and HG drives, I'd never allow them in any game I refree, as IMHO it's kind of cheating allowing you to choose the ones with less tonnage (MD(JD tonnage needs are swapped, JD needing more tonnage than MD in LBB2 and reversing it in HG) or allow those larger jumps than the setting allows at a specific SL, or fully change teh PP fuel needs (a 2000 ton ships with PP2 would need 20 dtons of fuel, instead of the 40 needed in HG, just to give an example, or a scout given a HG PP would only need 2, instead of the 20 defined).

Allowing the use of those longer jumps than the HG TL limitys by using LBB2 fully breaks the setting's history, as the Vilani could have ahd J5 ships (being TL11, their limit would have been the computer, whose maximum would have been 5), fully changing the Interstellar wars. Also, the fact the Solomani could take advantage of their J3 ships when they reached TL12 would be void too.

Of course, all of this is MY view, as I guess rules are made to be consistent with themselves, not with other versions, but YMMV

 

[Grav_Moped]

Allowing the use of those longer jumps than the HG TL limitys by using LBB2 fully breaks the setting's history, as the Vilani could have ahd J5 ships (being TL11, their limit would have been the computer, whose maximum would have been 5), fully changing the Interstellar wars.

On the other hand, LBB2 says they could have done it anyway -- not at capital ship scale, of course. HG rewrote the setting.

 

[mike wightman]

I've never understood why they didn't use HG80 as the basis for shipbuilding in CT81 LBB:2.

The letter drives were removed from MT onwards until brought back by T5 and MgT1e. It is noticable that MgT2e drops them in favour of their HG design system.

There is a "simple" way to rationalise the jump potential of the letter drives with the HG TL progression.

Letter drives are limited to jump 1 until the polity advances to TL11, jump 2 until they achieve TL12 etc. The thing is once the higher jump dimensions are understood a TL of 9 can build the letter drives.

 

[McPerth]

HG rewrote the setting.

I guess most of the setting (Interstellar wars among it) were written after HG, and so based on it.

In any case, the fact Vilani communications were slow (J2) and the Solomani gained advantage by developing J3 is set in stone in IW, so allowing longer ships, even if only in small ships, is, IMHO, setting breacking.

 

[McPerth]

The letter drives were removed from MT onwards until brought back by T5 and MgT1e. It is noticable that MgT2e drops them in favour of their HG design system.

IMHO the main advantage of percentage based drives (HG style) over letter drives (LBB2 style) is avoiding the 199 dton ships (ot other just under threshold) ships

 

[Grav_Moped]

I guess most of the setting (Interstellar wars among it) were written after HG, and so based on it.

In any case, the fact Vilani communications were slow (J2) and the Solomani gained advantage by developing J3 is set in ston in IW, so allowing longer ships, even if only in small ships, is, IMHO, setting breacking.

Agreed, but it's how LBB2 works. Even '81 enables 400Td J6 xboats (illegal RAW, but mechanically functional) at TL-12. (See HERE -- disregard the m-drive I stuck in there...)

The only nonstandard bit is that it has only enough power plant fuel for the week in Jump at Pn=6, plus 10% for the high end of the jump time variance -- there's nothing from HG. Then again, if you're bringing HG into it, drop tanks are also TL 12 and that changes everything.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

In HG you need TL 13 to be able to jump 4...

Yes, with HG (custom) drives.

LBB5'80, p22:
Custom-built drives must be produced and installed while observing restrictions as to tech level and interior space. It is possible to include standard drives (at standard prices) from Book 2 if they will otherwise meet the ship's requirements; such drives use fuel as indicated by the formulas in Book 2.

LBB2 drives presumably follow LBB2 rules.

As per making ships that merge LBB2 and HG drives, I'd never allow them in any game I refree, as IMHO it's kind of cheating allowing you to choose the ones with less tonnage...

Of course we all do as we wish in our own campaigns.

 

[McPerth]

LBB2 drives presumably follow LBB2 rules.

Depending on how do you read the words "while observing restrictions as to tech level"... In HG, one of the restrictions for TL is the maximum jump, so you could install a lette rdrive allowing your ship to J5, but, if your TL is 11, it will only have J2 capability, according those same rules you pointed (or at least my interpretation of them). I guess that's what Mike means too:

Letter drives are limited to jump 1 until the polity advances to TL11, jump 2 until they achieve TL12 etc.

Of course we all do as we wish in our own campaigns.

Of course. As I said, the fun Police is just an urban legend.

But if we look for a comon reference, things change a little...

 

[Condottiere]

Alphabet drives are not a bad concept.

And being able to couple them together allows greater performance.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Depending on how do you read the words "while observing restrictions as to tech level"... In HG, one of the restrictions for TL is the maximum jump, so you could install a lette rdrive allowing your ship to J5, ...

Read the quoted rule again:

LBB5'80, p22:
Custom-built drives must be produced and installed while observing restrictions as to tech level and interior space. It is possible to include standard drives (at standard prices) from Book 2 if they will otherwise meet the ship's requirements; such drives use fuel as indicated by the formulas in Book 2.

Custom (HG) drives are limited by TL.
Standard (LBB2) drives are apparently not.

...but, if your TL is 11, it will only have J2 capability, according those same rules you pointed (or at least my interpretation of them).

I would agree with that, but not by HG, by the 3I campaign setting.
LBB2 certainly allows high jump at low TL, but the 3I setting does not.

 

[Grav_Moped]

Read the quoted rule again:

Custom (HG) drives are limited by TL.
Standard (LBB2) drives are apparently not.

The drives themselves are TL-limited (LBB3), but their performance is only limited by what will fit into a hull. Scale efficiencies in the rules do the rest.

I would agree with that, but not by HG, by the 3I campaign setting.
LBB2 certainly allows high jump at low TL, but the 3I setting does not.

Yep.