OTU Only: Gypsy Queen Class Fast Merchant, LBB2, 199Td, J26GP7

[Spinward Flow]

Also, just for a bit of comparative funzies ... here is the LBB2.81, p22 Drive Performance Table (again) ...

And here is the LBB2.77, p10 Drive Performance Table ...

Curious point of note ... the 2000 ton row has eleven entries of 1 on it in LBB2.77, but they're shifted to the right by 1 column.
The 2000 ton row has eleven entries of 1 on it in LBB2.81, but this gives the Drive-J a performance result it shouldn't have.

The W-Z drives look to be "botched" in a different way in the LBB2.77 table than they are in the LBB2.81 table.

With the LBB2.77 table it's actually HARDER to reverse engineer a formula that works consistently across the A-V drives. I suspect this due to the fact that the numbers for each row aren't being determined by a formula, but instead by a "that looks good" kind of Rule of Thumb that winds up not being all that internally consistent. It's MOSTLY correct if you compute what the values "ought to be" the way I've been doing, but there wind up being some really weird edge cases in the LBB2.77 table.

 

[Grav_Moped]

Would anyone be interested in seeing that bit of research (by me)?

Sure.

Snarky answer: Isn’t that just T5?

Sensible answer: Anyone who really wants to see it, could do it themselves based just on that description. So, only do it if you feel like it for your own amusement.

 

[Spinward Flow]

Sensible answer: Anyone who really wants to see it, could do it themselves based just on that description.

Granted ... but that's because this isn't something that ought to be kept secret, only known to and understood(?) by the select few acolytes (of the faith). The point is to be Intellectually Honest & Consistent ... rather than to obfuscate and confuse the issue.

 

[Grav_Moped]

IIRC GravMoped made one a few years ago because it was slightly more efficient than other J-1 ships?

Yes, noted as an artifact output from my "most efficient LBB2 ships by TL (by jump range)" project, where I was trying to determine minimum cargo cost/operating expenses by TL.

 

[Grav_Moped]

Also, just for a bit of comparative funzies ... here is the LBB2.81, p22 Drive Performance Table (again) ...

And here is the LBB2.77, p10 Drive Performance Table ...

Curious point of note ... the 2000 ton row has eleven entries of 1 on it in LBB2.77, but they're shifted to the right by 1 column.
The 2000 ton row has eleven entries of 1 on it in LBB2.81, but this gives the Drive-J a performance result it shouldn't have.

The W-Z drives look to be "botched" in a different way in the LBB2.77 table than they are in the LBB2.81 table.

With the LBB2.77 table it's actually HARDER to reverse engineer a formula that works consistently across the A-V drives. I suspect this due to the fact that the numbers for each row aren't being determined by a formula, but instead by a "that looks good" kind of Rule of Thumb that winds up not being all that internally consistent. It's MOSTLY correct if you compute what the values "ought to be" the way I've been doing, but there wind up being some really weird edge cases in the LBB2.77 table.

That aligns with my current theory: '77 was made from arbitrary patterns, '81 from a formula that was closest to the patterns of '77 (improving internal consistency), and both just had the right edge stuffed with bennies to make 5K ships (and 2K+ ships that weren't just barges) possible.

 

[Grav_Moped]

Just taking a moment to observe that at least 6 of this thread's 12 pages are pretty much dedicated to discussing one table in one rulebook? And it wasn't even about that table?



Carry on.

 

[kilemall]

If GDW knew we would be arguing this stuff decades later they might have cleaned it up- or gone even weirder on some ‘consistent’ theory.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

It comes as no surprise that a LBB2/5 chimera is the best option. I was wondering how a LBB2 RAW ship and a 2000 dT LBB5 (only) ship compared. I figured that LBB5 would be more expensive to build (except maybe at TL 15 which is a flaw in the LBB5 PP price per dTon instead of price per EP … but them is the RAW and predate me). I was thinking the LBB5 ability to use UNREFINED FUEL might lower operating cost enough to actually make it more profitable. I also remembered that the gap between LBB 2 and LBB 5 got smaller as the ships got larger, but didn’t remember where the turnover was (if LBB 5 ever became cheaper).

LBB2:

MT-B611112-000000-00000-0        MCr 416       2 000 Dton
bearing                                           Crew=20
batteries                                           TL=11
                      Cargo=1564 Fuel=210 EP=20 Agility=1

Spoiler:

Single Occupancy    LBB2 design                   1 564       462
                                     USP    #      Dton      Cost
Hull, Streamlined   Custom             B          2 000         
Configuration       Flattened Sphe     6                      220
Scoops              Streamlined                                 
                                                                
Jump Drive          K                  1    1        55       100
Manoeuvre D         K                  1    1        19        40
Power Plant         K                  1    1        31        80
Fuel, #J, #weeks    J-1, 4 weeks            1       210         
                                                                
Bridge                                      1        40        10
Computer            m/1                1    1         1         2
                                                                
Staterooms                                 20        80        10
                                                                
Cargo                                             1 564         
                                                                
Nominal Cost        MCr 462,00           Sum:     1 564       462
Class Cost          MCr  50,82          Valid        ≥0        ≥0
Ship Cost           MCr 415,80                                   
                                                                
                                                                
Crew &               High     0        Crew          Bridge     7
Passengers            Mid     0          20       Engineers     3
                      Low     0                     Gunners     0
                 Extra SR     0      Frozen         Service     2
               # Frozen W     0           0          Flight     0
                  Marines     0                     Marines     0

Estimated Economy of Ship     Standard                                     
       Ship price     Down Payment         Mortgage       Avg Filled
       MCr 415,80       kCr 83 160        kCr 1 733              80%
                                                                
Expenses per jump                       Revenue                 
Bank                Cr 831 600          High         Cr         0
Fuel                Cr 105 000          Middle       Cr         0
Life Support        Cr  40 000          Low          Cr         0
Salaries            Cr  28 800          Cargo        Cr 1 248 000
Maintenance         Cr  16 632                                   
Berthing            Cr   2 000                                   
                                                                
Summa              kCr   1 024                      kCr     1 248
                                                                
     Income potential per jump     kCr 224                   
  Yearly yield on down payment      6,7%

LBB5:

MT-B611122-000000-00000-0        MCr 473       2 000 Dton
bearing                                           Crew=20
batteries                                           TL=11
                      Cargo=1510 Fuel=220 EP=20 Agility=1

Spoiler:

Single Occupancy                                  1 510       591
                                     USP    #      Dton      Cost
Hull, Streamlined   Custom             B          2 000         
Configuration       Flattened Sphe     6                      160
Scoops              Streamlined                                 2
                                                                
Jump Drive                             1    1        40       160
Manoeuvre D                            1    1        40        60
Power Plant                            1    1        60       180
Fuel, #J, #weeks    J-1, 4 weeks            1       220         
Purifier                                    1         8         0
                                                                
Bridge                                      1        40        10
Computer            m/2                2    1         2         9
                                                                
Staterooms                                 20        80        10
                                                                
Cargo                                             1 510         
                                                                
Nominal Cost        MCr 591,04           Sum:     1 510       591
Class Cost          MCr 124,12          Valid        ≥0        ≥0
Ship Cost           MCr 472,83                                   
                                                                
                                                                
Crew &               High     0        Crew          Bridge    11
Passengers            Mid     0          20       Engineers     2
                      Low     0                     Gunners     0
                 Extra SR     0      Frozen         Service     7
               # Frozen W     0           0          Flight     0
                  Marines     0                     Marines     0

Estimated Economy of Ship     Standard                                     
       Ship price     Down Payment         Mortgage       Avg Filled
       MCr 472,83       kCr 94 566        kCr 1 970              80%
                                                                
Expenses per jump                       Revenue                 
Bank                Cr 945 664          High         Cr         0
Fuel                Cr  22 000          Middle       Cr         0
Life Support        Cr  40 000          Low          Cr         0
Salaries            Cr  40 320          Cargo        Cr 1 208 000
Maintenance         Cr  18 913                                   
Berthing            Cr   2 000                                   
                                                                
Summa              kCr   1 069                      kCr     1 208
                                                                
     Income potential per jump     kCr 139                   
  Yearly yield on down payment      3,7%

Less profitable...

 

[AnotherDilbert]

No one is saying that it wasn't PUBLISHED that way.
The problem is that the data entries in the table have errors which just keep getting perpetuated ... because no one questions The Most Holy RAW.

That is the definition of RAW vs. house rule:
If it's printed, it's Rules as Written.
It anyone else says it, it's a house rule.

No one is saying that it wasn't PUBLISHED that way.

So you agree it's RAW?

 

[AnotherDilbert]

If GDW knew we would be arguing this stuff decades later they might have cleaned it up- or gone even weirder on some ‘consistent’ theory.

People like us have argued about it continuously for almost 50 years, why stop now?

I don't think anyone could have imagined that...

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Isn’t that just T5?

Both MgT1 and T5 did that decades ago.

MgT1 even did it twice, once for ACS and once again for small craft.

 

[mike wightman]

Sure.

Snarky answer: Isn’t that just T5?

Sensible answer: Anyone who really wants to see it, could do it themselves based just on that description. So, only do it if you feel like it for your own amusement.

Or look at the thread from twenty years ago where it was already done, before MgT, before T5.
Shame the board formatting changes over the years corrupted the tables.

There were a couple of reasons to do it, but the most obvious was so that there was a consistency from 100t hull to 5000t hull in 100t increments, this lead to discussions of an underlying formula, but there isn't one. The other thing to point out is that you really have two drive potential tables, a 100t to 1000t table and then a step change of 1000t to 5000t.

 

[Spinward Flow]

So you agree it's RAW?

The RAW has errors in it.

So you agree it's RAW?

The RAW has errors in it.

So you agree it's RAW?

The RAW ... as published ... has errors in it.

Clear enough for you?

 

[Spinward Flow]

Would anyone be interested in seeing that bit of research (by me)?

Sure.

Snarky answer: Isn’t that just T5?

Sensible answer: Anyone who really wants to see it, could do it themselves based just on that description. So, only do it if you feel like it for your own amusement.

LINK

 

[Spinward Flow]

Fun Fact side note of my revision to the LBB2 drive tables research ... a 1200-1250 ton hull uses Drive-W (5000 drive tons) to achieve J4/4G performance.

Always wondered what drives were installed on that ship class ...
Huh.

 

[McPerth]

Just to clarify:

• RAW means Rules As Written. Any deviation from then is a House rule. Period.
• House rules are nothing bad, and I guess most (if not all) of us use them, but are not RAW
• RAW importance is as reference for every player. They may have inconsistencies, but they allow any of us to play together with a common reference, while if players of different groups try to use their House Rules in a common game, they will probably not coincide, and so they cannot play together (even if all those House Rules really improve the game).

To put an example on another field:

Orthographic rules in all languages I know have inconsistencies. The same graphic may mean different sounds, and the same sound may be written with different graphics, but are the accepted rules that allow us to understand what another one writes.

You may disagree with them because those inconsistencies (Juan Ramón Jimenez, and Spanish writer an Nobel Prize of literature in 1956 disagreed in the use of the “G” before “E” and “I” having the same sound than “J” in Spanish, and always used “J” to represent it, so he wrote “jeneral” instead of “general”, just to give an example), but if you use your own version in school test, you will fail it, even if your view has more logic.

This said:

All opinions have their merit and must be respected, even if not shared.

Any disrespect to other users, claiming for them to be intellectually dishonest, RAW fanactic, or anything similar will be infracted on sight as attack "ad hominem"

 

[mike wightman]

	200	400	600	800	1000	1200	1400	1600	1800	2000	2200	2400	2600	2800	3000	3200	3400	3600	3800	4000	5000	6000	8000	12000
	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H	J	K	L	M	N	P	Q	R	S	T	U	V	W	X	Y	Z
100	2	4	6	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
200	1	2	3	4	5	6	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
300	-	1	2	2	3	4	4	5	6	6	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
400	-	1	1	2	2	3	3	4	4	5	5	6	6	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
500	-	-	1	1	2	2	2	3	3	4	4	4	5	5	6	6	6	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
600	-	-	1	1	1	2	2	2	3	3	3	4	4	4	5	5	5	6	6	6	-	-	-	-
700	-	-	-	1	1	1	2	2	2	2	3	3	3	4	4	4	4	5	5	5	6	6	-	-
800	-	-	-	1	1	1	1	2	2	2	2	3	3	3	3	4	4	4	4	5	5	6	6	6
900	-	-	-	-	1	1	1	1	2	2	2	2	2	3	3	3	3	4	4	4	5	6	6	6
1000	-	-	-	-	1	1	1	1	1	2	2	2	2	2	3	3	3	3	3	4	5	6	6	6

 

[mike wightman]

This used the formula that each drive was 200 performance units larger than the one before it, with A starting at 200. It all goes pear shaped at the W drive, so we postulated that W and above can actually be tuned to different ratings.

So the formula was performance units/hull size=n, round down.
Less than 1 then dash -
7 or higher is outside then then accepted range (not MgT and T5 now go all the way to 10)

It does not reproduce the 81 drive potential table, but comes close. I worked out the numbers in 100t increments all the way to 5000 but there is really not much point reproducing that (the original twenty year old thread has it), it trivial to work it out.

The W drive appears to be in the range 4000 to 5000 (why isn't the 800t hull given a peformance of 6 with this drive otherwise?), the X drive ranges from 4800 to 6000, the Y drive has a range of 5500 to 8000 (any more than 5500 and it would be too powerful for the 800t hull), and the Z drive from 5500 to 12000.

Oz nailed it with:

"W-drive = 5000 units
X-drive = 6000 units
Y-drive = 8000 units
Z-drive = 12000 units"

 

[Grav_Moped]

This used the formula that each drive was 200 performance units larger than the one before it, with A starting at 200. It all goes pear shaped at the W drive, so we postulated that W and above can actually be tuned to different ratings.

Not sure I can buy off on the "tuned to different ratings" part, but otherwise, yes.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Always wondered what drives were installed on that ship class ...

LBB5'79, obviously.