LBB 3 Tech level

[spank]

I could see there being a "lumpiness" designed into the chart, IF the cargo chart mirrored it. Instead it a fairly smooth progression, much smoother than the passenger chart.

The chart would be far better if you simplified it by

1) Simplifying the rolls, IE changing 3D-2D or 3D-1D to a modified 2D roll meaning less dice. Note that this does not have a meaningful reduction in complexity the extreme, for 3D-1D 12-17 occurs only 5% of the time. And the average is 7.003 instead of 7. It is the illusion of complexity.​

2) Making the chart flow more naturally.​

Consider that the very fact of that "unevenness" is not a bug, it's a feature.
It means that the demand for tickets to depart do not rise/fall in a steady (predictable) way. Instead, the demand for insterstellar transport is "lumpy/bumpy" rather than "smooth" as population codes increase.

An analogous way to think of this is that different population codes are at different phases of economic growth waves. Just like with an export business, if you plot growth of exports on a curve over time, that curve is not going to be "smooth" ... instead there's going to be some noise in the results and there are going to be "growth waves" where exports rise and fall as conditions and circumstances change. When there is a major capital investment going on to develop new facilities for new products (for example), exports can potentially fall ... until the new facility center can be brought online and ramped up to full capacity, at which point export potential can "spike" relative to what was happening previously. My point being that growth is not "smooth/linear" but rather "spiky/lumpy" if you plot it on a graph (like you have).

Finding a profitable route for your ship is the easy part, not getting distracted by easy money is the hard part. Last night I looked up a random sector to see how hard it would be to find two POP 5+ world with close TLs, In picked Massilia and found a few good candidates. Among them was this example which is very instructive.
The Shimmer-Damz-Santaw-Virm run would be an excellent location to set up shop. It is not very glamourous, serving only POP 5 worlds. But each one is only 1 TL off the other, and if you stay in the center, Damz - Santaw, you will always have atleast 2 options. But at Santaw there the danger of picking a run to Sempir, because there is a "good" load of cargo. If you take the "good" load of cargo you'll be setting yourself up for a -5 DM on whatever cargo you generate for the return trip, and because it's a POP 4 world the table will be worse than at Santaw.
You could well end up in a similar situation trying to pick the cargo that best fills your hold, Maybe the combination of cargos to Virim leaves you 20 tons short, but the combination to Sempir will fill you completely up. But you're still better off in the long run sticking to he better route.

 

[kilemall]

I’d want extra cargo space precisely for speculation and the opportunity to go 2+ jumps to maximize profit pairs. Especially given the random nature of what is available on any given trip.

 

[spank]

I’d want extra cargo space precisely for speculation and the opportunity to go 2+ jumps to maximize profit pairs. Especially given the random nature of what is available on any given trip.

From what I'm seeing something on the order of a Fat Trader or something even larger would be much better than a far trader. The smaller ships pay a big space penalty for both the bridge and the small drives. 17% for a Far Trader VS 11% for a 400 ton hull. From what I see the Subsidized Merchant might actually a pretty good choice, although there is a bit of bloat and waste.
.
I'm looking at you 20 ton launch.
.
I need to sit down a build a 400 and 600 dTon J1 and J2 Trader and see what the cost and cargo space looks like. I'm sure the Subsidized Trader can be improved on, +20 tons by ditching the launch, and +15 tons and +10 tons by dropping the drives from B to C. --No idea why it has size C drives.
.
But I want to finish this first.

 

[Rupert]

I need to sit down a build a 400 and 600 dTon J1 and J2 Trader and see what the cost and cargo space looks like. I'm sure the Subsidized Trader can be improved on, +20 tons by ditching the launch, and +15 tons and +10 tons by dropping the drives from B to C. --No idea why it has size C drives.

Because in 1977 that was the smallest size drive that would give a 400 DTon hull M-1 and J-1.

 

[TamsinP]

Because in 1977 that was the smallest size drive that would give a 400 DTon hull M-1 and J-1.

There's also the issue of the drive compartment of the 400 ton standard hull, which can only be used for drives - at 50 tons it could accommodate a full set of Type D drives, with 5 tons still available. Therefore, if you reduce all the drives to Type B, you wouldn't gain any cargo space (but would reduce the cost); or you could use a non-standard hull and gain 25 tons of cargo space, but it would cost MCR 2 more.

 

[Spinward Flow]

I’d want extra cargo space precisely for speculation and the opportunity to go 2+ jumps to maximize profit pairs. Especially given the random nature of what is available on any given trip.

If you're designing for double jumping (triple jumping is probably "too expensive" to be worth the effort), being able to carry the passengers and freight of 2 destinations simultaneously starts making more sense. Longer range makes speculative goods arbitrage a LOT more practical, even if you have to J2+2 (via empty hexes) in order to achieve it.

But doing that requires a larger (and therefore, more expensive) hull form factor, which in turn has knock on effects on the minimum number of tickets "required" to break even on every jump. So larger starships get biased towards larger markets/higher population worlds in order to keep their shipping manifests full. Thus, the larger class designs "bump" them into a +1 higher bracket of ticket demand in order to make it all work.

 

[spank]

Because in 1977 that was the smallest size drive that would give a 400 DTon hull M-1 and J-1.

Thanks,
I figured it might be something like that,
Unfortunately I only have a hardcopy of the 77 books so they are harder to reference.

 

[spank]

There's also the issue of the drive compartment of the 400 ton standard hull, which can only be used for drives - at 50 tons it could accommodate a full set of Type D drives, with 5 tons still available. Therefore, if you reduce all the drives to Type B, you wouldn't gain any cargo space (but would reduce the cost); or you could use a non-standard hull and gain 25 tons of cargo space, but it would cost MCR 2 more.

But if you ditch the launch you gain 20 more tons, and hack 20 MCr off the price.
Total net gain of 45 tons of cargo,
Net savings of 18 MCr
IDK what the exact total cost would be, but if you work backwards from the Subsidizes Trader's cost you can guestimate 83 MCr.
So, 245 tons at 83 MCr equals 338,000 Cr per financed per ton of cargo, vs a Far Trader, 82 ton at 37MCr equals 451,000 Cr.
.
That's 25% less overhead.

 

[Spinward Flow]

So, 245 tons at 83 MCr equals 338,000 Cr per financed per ton of cargo, vs a Far Trader, 82 ton at 37MCr equals 451,000 Cr.
.
That's 25% less overhead.

"We make it up in volume."

However, that's only true if there's enough demand for your supply of volume your Fat Trader can provide.
So the Fat Trader may have higher maximums, but because it's larger (and more expensive) it also has higher minimums ... meaning that there's going to be a bias in preferences by operators in favor of higher population worlds, because low population worlds just don't generate enough demand/supply for ticket revenues to go there economically on tickets alone (speculative goods arbitrage is a different question).

 

[Grav_Moped]

But if you ditch the launch you gain 20 more tons, and hack 20 MCr off the price.
Total net gain of 45 tons of cargo,
Net savings of 18 MCr
IDK what the exact total cost would be, but if you work backwards from the Subsidizes Trader's cost you can guestimate 83 MCr.
So, 245 tons at 83 MCr equals 338,000 Cr per financed per ton of cargo, vs a Far Trader, 82 ton at 37MCr equals 451,000 Cr.
.
That's 25% less overhead.

The Suby's launch and wasted drive bay space were to nerf its revenue margin relative to the Type A. The oversized drives were a carryover from 1st Ed. that was either overlooked or deliberately left there to further nerf it (and maybe help hide the wasted space too).

The oversize drive bay in the 400Td standard hull sets up built-in upgrade path for the Type R, as well.

As a side note, the oversized drives may (as a point of retcon) be an answer to "how do 1G starships take off from Size 8 worlds?"

 

[Spinward Flow]

The oversize drive bay in the 400Td standard hull sets up

Ironically, a 50 ton engineering section is a PERFECT FIT ... for 2 sets of B/B/B drives (main+backup) ... all of which will yield code: 1/1/1 in a 400 ton form factor.

Pointless to do that ... but still, a perfect fit ... because B/B/B drives add up to 25 tons for a single set of them.



Of course, now that I've said that, the only thing I can think of is "read 'em and weep" for how dumb that is ...

 

[spank]

It's more than just volume.
It a better operating margin.
For a Far Trader your going to be paying 154,000
Vs a cargo revenue of 164,000 max.
With the Fat Trader you be paying approx 345,00 vs a cargo revenue of up to 490,000.
There is a lot more surplus margin built into the Fat Trader.
You could run empty a lot more often than the Far Trader as long as you run approx 180 tons of freight you are on the same economic footing as the Far Trader.
For two POP 5 worlds there should be an average of approx 150 tons of major cargo, 95 tons of minor cargo. Which means on average you will fill your cargo, even if there is a short fall of 25% you will "only" be doing as bad an optimally operating Far Trader.
It will be much easier to build an operating reserve to get you thru the occasional bad month. The biggest risk will be in the first few months, from there it should be much smoother sailing than a Far Trader.

 

[Grav_Moped]

Ironically, a 50 ton engineering section is a PERFECT FIT ... for 2 sets of B/B/B drives (main+backup) ... all of which will yield code: 1/1/1 in a 400 ton form factor.

Pointless to do that ... but still, a perfect fit ... because B/B/B drives add up to 25 tons for a single set of them.



Of course, now that I've said that, the only thing I can think of is "read 'em and weep" for how dumb that is ...

Yes, but the best upgrade that fits is D/D/E (yeilds Pn-2.5 for double-fire) with a couple of Td left over to hide that this was a game-mechanic-driven choice.

I've said it before, but the Standard Hull at each tonnage should have a drive bay sized for J1/1G/Pn1 drives, as this will be the layout most used for the hull. Maybe the 100Td standard unstreamlined hull would be designed for the XBoat (leaving open the question of which XBoat you're talking about, though.)

 

[spank]

Yes, but the best upgrade that fits is D/D/E (yeilds Pn-2.5 for double-fire) with a couple of Td left over to hide that this was a game-mechanic-driven choice.

I've said it before, but the Standard Hull at each tonnage should have a drive bay sized for J1/1G/Pn1 drives, as this will be the layout most used for the hull. Maybe the 100Td standard unstreamlined hull would be designed for the XBoat (leaving open the question of which XBoat you're talking about, though.)

But, at D/D/E you are up to two engineers.
Anything above C/C/C which would work for a 600 ton Extra Fat Trader.
No idea what the profitablity for cargo is on that.

 

[mike wightman]

PC scale speculative traders need a 60t cargo hold - that allows shipping of 6x10t AFV/ATV.

Guesstimating the typical number of passengers available is a bit more tricky, for that you need to study the group of worlds you are going to use for speculative trading and work the averages for passenger availability.

 

[Spinward Flow]

It's more than just volume.
It a better operating margin.

This is the KEY insight.
Getting a "large enough" operating margin (to "somewhat reliably" turn a profit on tickets only) while trading through Population: 5 worlds makes for a really decent best/worst case of min/max conditions that starship designs need to build around.
Population: 4- worlds become "outliers" which are best served by a different "market segment" of starship classes optimized for profits under such austere market conditions.

For a Far Trader your going to be paying 154,000
Vs a cargo revenue of 164,000 max.
With the Fat Trader you be paying approx 345,00 vs a cargo revenue of up to 490,000.
There is a lot more surplus margin built into the Fat Trader.

And that difference comes down to J1 vs J2, functionally.
J2 capability "eats up" more revenue tonnage (drives, fuel, staterooms for engineering crew), reducing the potential profit margins a starship can generate relative to its operational overhead expenses.

The trick is to build the "smallest big" (or the "biggest small") starship that is (more or less) balanced around the "ticket demand" signal average-ish of a Population: 5 world, if you're aiming for a "mainstream" trader class starship.
The same is true again for Population: 4- worlds, but for them the balance point of the "ticket demand" signal average is shifted significantly lower, hence a different class of starship optimized to operate profitably in those lower end markets is going to be better/more efficient from a merchant operator's viewpoint (and balance sheet ledger).

As demand for ticket services go down (due to lower Population codes in UWPs), starships need to become increasingly "lean and efficient" in order to survive (profitably) under such underdeveloped market conditions. This is where the "guaranteed" revenue of mail delivery comes in, to create a "higher minimum" of revenue per delivery to sustain profits as the demand for tickets (passengers and freight) withers and dies back to almost nothing.

You could run empty a lot more often than the Far Trader as long as you run approx 180 tons of freight you are on the same economic footing as the Far Trader.

Empty ... or ... that margin can be used for the transportation of speculative goods.

What I typically do with a starship operating under subsidy that is carrying speculative goods is that I have the starship operator "buy tickets" (from themself) for the transport of the speculative goods, just like any third party would for third party freight.

So if a subsidized starship operator buys up 10 tons of speculative goods and wants to take those goods offworld, the starship operator buys 10 tons worth of cargo freight tickets (worth Cr10,000 on the spot market) from themself. 50% of the revenue from those 10 tons of freight tickets gets earmarked for the subsidizing government and 50% comes back to the operator ... so really the operator is only "paying" C500 per ton for the transportation of speculative goods to the subsidizing government (at the operator's expense). That way, the operator gets to claim ALL of the profits/losses on the arbitrage of speculative goods ... rather than needing to pay the subsidizing government 50% of the profits made on speculative goods arbitrage. If speculative goods are sold at a net loss, the operator has to "eat" 100% of the loss, either way.

For two POP 5 worlds there should be an average of approx 150 tons of major cargo, 95 tons of minor cargo. Which means on average you will fill your cargo, even if there is a short fall of 25% you will "only" be doing as bad an optimally operating Far Trader.
It will be much easier to build an operating reserve to get you thru the occasional bad month. The biggest risk will be in the first few months, from there it should be much smoother sailing than a Far Trader.

And this is where "rollover" of profits and losses into the bottom line of a balance sheet over time is helpful. You don't have to make a (healthy) profit on every jump to every destination, but you DO need to be making a profit every quarter/semi-annual/year in order to remain in business over the long haul of multi-year (and therefore, multi-decade) operations. Having a larger cushion of potential profit margin helps keep the merry-go-round of revenues and expenses spinning in your favor.

"It doesn't matter if you Win or Lose ... so long as you can PLAY AGAIN."

Applies to both individual soldiers in foxholes who just want to survive ... and to merchants who don't want to go bankrupt.
Also applies to gamblers, but that's a slightly different game of musical chairs.

 

[Spinward Flow]

But, at D/D/E you are up to two engineers.
Anything above C/C/C which would work for a 600 ton Extra Fat Trader.

• TL=9 C/C/C = 35 tons = 1 engineering crew position
• TL=9 D/D/D = 45 tons = 2 engineering crew position
• TL=10 F/F/F = 65 tons = 2 engineering crew positions
• TL=10 F/F/G = 68 tons = 2 engineering crew positions
• TL=10 G/G/G = 75 tons = 3 engineering crew positions
• TL=11 K/K/K = 105 tons = 3 engineering crew positions
• TL=12 L/L/L = 115 tons = 4 engineering crew positions
• TL=12 N/N/N = 135 tons = 4 engineering crew positions
• TL=13 N/N/P = 138 tons = 4 engineering crew positions
• TL=13 P/P/P = 145 tons = 5 engineering crew positions
• TL=14 S/S/S = 175 tons = 5 engineering crew positions
• TL=14 T/T/T = 185 tons = 6 engineering crew positions
• TL=15 V/V/V = 205 tons = 6 engineering crew positions
• TL=15 V/V/W = 208 tons = 6 engineering crew positions
• TL=15 W/W/W = 215 tons = 7 engineering crew positions
• TL=15 Z/Z/Z = 245 tons = 7 engineering crew positions

Bold text indicates "most efficient utilization" of engineering crew requirements when all drives are (nearly) equal.

PC scale speculative traders need a 60t cargo hold - that allows shipping of 6x10t AFV/ATV.

• 100 tons of cargo capacity will be sufficient for MOST speculative goods lots, while also being sufficient to transport more than one set of speculative goods (if needing to travel in order to find buyers you can profit from).
• 60 tons of cargo capacity is a very NICE TO HAVE starting point.
• 40 tons of cargo capacity makes for an ACCEPTABLE amount to work with as a speculative goods trader, since there are only a few cargo lots that will exceed this size (and some of those that do won't be very profitable to transport).
• 30 tons of cargo capacity should really be seen as a MINIMAL capacity for any speculative goods trading opportunity (and even then, you'll be leaving some potential profits on the table).

That's my own personal "reading of the tea leaves" on the topic, when dealing with LBB2.81 speculative goods tables and rules.

 

[kilemall]

One minor point- the mail contract is usually meant for subsidized ships that are armed with a gunner in crew running regular routes, and subsidized ships are 600 tons or larger.

I’ve no objection to altering rules of course if that’s more fun for your table, just that the RAW doesn’t have short term/adhoc mail hauling in sub-600 ton hulls as something normal.

The subsidizing entity may take a dim view of the cargo ton buy dodge to keep subsidized profits, but may overlook to attract/maintain people willing to provide the service.

Further thoughts…..

The subsidized ship route means a definite set of destinations. They can plausibly pick up a LOT more tonnage to ship and shippers have reasonable confidence they will go that route and they are paying proper value. Therefore subsidized ships can be bigger in general then either the financed or paid off ships. Downside is they cannot change destinations to pay off on immediate speculative opportunities, or be adventurous in general.

More efficient to ship perhaps by direct J3+ shipping if using the per jump shipping fee, but the subsidized route exists to ensure at least some multi week service to planets not getting it by market forces and thus slower more expensive shipping will happen.

OP analysis should be useful for this brand of merchanting.

In the matter of passenger bumping and multi destination runs, the classic high vs mid passenger bumping may still exceed capacity. I’d suggest the multi destination high passenger that has the largest number of jumps paid for up front bumps lesser guaranteed money.

IMO subsidized ships are the build a frontier line branch of the advanced merchant game as opposed to the free trader/adventurer branch. IMO that’s an element of the OP project to explore.

 

[mike wightman]

It may well have been the first contradiction in canon, the rules state 600t ship minimum for subsidy:

"Subsidies: The government may subsidize larger commercial vessels (built on type 600 hulls or larger), primarily to assure consistent service to specific worlds.
These subsidized merchants are generally assigned a specific route connecting from 2 to 12 worlds of varying characteristics. The route will generally be determined before a subsidized merchant is purchased, to allow tailored design features as may be necessary. When a subsidized merchant is ordered, the character himself must make the 20% down payment, with the government assuming responsibility for the payments
upon delivery, and taking 50% of the gross receipts of the ship while in service. The character is responsible for all expenses and costs of operation.
Subsidized merchants are also subject to mobilization (and use as auxiliaries) in the event of emergency or hostilities. At the end of 40 years, the vessel is completely paid off, and full title passes to the character himself, but the vessel remains subject to mobilization in case of government need"

We then get a canonical 400t subsidized merchant...

May as well quote exactly what the rules say about mail as well:

"Mail. Subsidized merchants may receive mail delivery contracts, usually as an adjunct to the established route to which it is assigned. Five tons of ship cargo capacity must be committed to postal duty on a full time basis, the ship must be armed, and a gunner must be a part of the crew. The starship is paid CR 25,000 (CR 5000 per ton of postal cargo area) for each trip made, regardless of the actual mail
tonnage carried. Such tonnage may not exceed 5 tons per trip.
Other ships may be approached to deliver private messages, at times through the ship's owner or captain, and at times clandestinely through a crew member. This private mail is usually intended for delivery to a specific point (such as the Travellers' Aid Society building, or a tavern keeper), and is generally accompanied by a CR 20 to 120 honorarium. Throw 9+ for a private message to be awaiting transmittal, and then determine randomly which crew member is approached to carry it. Serving as a carrier for private messages also serves as an introduction to the recipient as a dependable, trustworthy person."

 

[Spinward Flow]

the mail contract is usually meant for subsidized ships that are armed with a gunner in crew running regular routes, and subsidized ships are 600 tons or larger.

It may well have been the first contradiction in canon, the rules state 600t ship minimum for subsidy

We then get a canonical 400t subsidized merchant...

There are two ways to "square this circle" ... both of which require a bit of flexibility, as opposed to fundamentalism, with regards to RAW.

The first solution is to view the quote about 600 tons or larger as effectively a (fat fingered) typo that never got corrected.
It should have said 400 tons or larger (so as to include the 400 ton Subsidized Fat Trader).



The other solution is to take a more expansive view concerning how mail contracts with postal unions get done.

If a starship is subsidized, then the subsidizing government handles all of the "setup" required to register the starship with the postal unions within the remit of the subsidized worlds grouping. If there are 4 worlds in the subsidy group, then the subsidizing government for the starship does all the paperwork and setup getting the subsidized starship registered with the postal unions on those 4 worlds. From an operator's perspective, this is the "easy" way to do it ... by letting someone else (the subsidizing government) do all the paperwork and registration.

My thought is that that's ONE WAY to do it, rather than it being the ONLY WAY to do it.

A non-subsidized starship could actually GO to each mainworld and register in person with the postal union for that world. Following an inspection of the starship (to verify it meets regulations and is up to code) and filling out some paperwork, a starship CAN BE registered with a postal union as eligible to carry mail TO and FROM that world's postal union to other postal unions in other star systems. So registering with ONE postal union in ONE star system isn't going to do much of anything for you ... you need to be registered in TWO+ star systems in order to transport mail between them. In other words, if you're a non-subsidized starship operator you have to do the legwork and paperwork yourself to get yourself registered with the postal unions in a particular region.



So let's say that I'm an operator of a non-subsidized starship working the Vilis Trace in the Vilis Subsector of the Spinward Marches.

If as a private/corporate merchant I want to get into the mail courier business, I would need to GO to Frenzie, Stellatio, Arkadia, Garda-Vilis, Choleosti and Vilis in order to register with EACH postal union and be inspected/approved as meeting regulations for carrying mail to other postal unions I've registered with (so basically, keeping "it in the family" so to speak). If I departed from the Vilis Trace to go somewhere else (such as Lanth/Lanth, for example) my starship would NOT be registered with the postal unions along the way there, so I would not be eligible to pick up and deliver mail when departing from my "home range" of standard operations in the Vilis Trace.

It's a bit like how Fast Travel Teleport works in a lot of computer games. You have to GO THERE FIRST before you can go back there quickly. Same deal with postal unions. You have to GO THERE FIRST to register with them before they'll give you mail to carry to other world postal unions that you have ALSO already registered with.

In a subsidized starship arrangement, the subsidizing government handles all of the inspection+registration admin for you, so when the starship rolls off the line at the shipyard, everything is set up for mail delivery within the 2-12 worlds of the subsidy contract remit. So the subsidy route is kind of a "shortcut" to being able to carry mail, rather than an EXCLUSIVE path for being able to do so (all other options are banned).



In both cases (subsidized vs private) a starship must be armed and a gunner must be a part of the crew.
I take this one step further by interpreting it as a starship must be "defended" ... either by armament on the starship's hull directly or by means of an organic fighter escort (basically an "even more mobile turret") that travels with the starship through jumps, where the fighter is armed and has a gunner on the crew roster.

So theoretically speaking, to further illustrate the point, an unarmed starship with an armed 30 ton Ship's Boat and a dedicated crew for both (so they can fly concurrently, in formation together) would qualify for the purposes of being "armed with a gunner as part of the crew" as far as postal union regulations and code requirements go.



Hope that makes sense.