Looks like Cutlass is back on the menu boys

[kilemall]

As to the other options you posit, yes those are valid tactics/content, it was certainly built into CT with the roll on passenger attempts and the antihijack software.

I like the Star Viking raid style too. Bit dangerous on C starports as there may be enough other ships that pitch in to defense.

That all depends on what content the ref wants, but it’s legit functional assuming they are means to their end.

 

[Spinward Flow]

My thought is that most of the time pirates take a shot across the bow, target ships shoot back but miss intentionally to preserve honor, then drop a portion of the cargo and move on. The pirates have their base ship that has superior firepower to most cargo ships, but scoop up the proffered/demanded cargo using small craft with high G.

To take it further, the only reason to board is take the ship and take passengers/crew for nefarious purposes. Under those conditions, idling the ship and taking a boarding action may be preferable to either run and be certain to be disabled, or unilaterally surrendering and be taken to an unknown and unpleasant fate.

That’s a cultural thing refs have to decide as to what adventure content they want.

Sounds a lot like what happened during my "Race to Profitability" challenge that I wrote about almost 4 years back now for a fast trader versus far trader on a subsidized route that ran into a pirate attack at Choleosti/Vilis ... the story for which begins in Post #97 of that thread.

 

[kilemall]

Sounds a lot like what happened during my "Race to Profitability" challenge that I wrote about almost 4 years back now for a fast trader versus far trader on a subsidized route that ran into a pirate attack at Choleosti/Vilis ... the story for which begins in Post #97 of that thread.

Your 3G/4G fast traders make for a compelling alternative vs armament/computer upgrades. Most of the time they can just be too fast to make it worth catching, and if the ship is caught within short range, it could go full agility to avoid being hit or change that range.

 

[Spinward Flow]

Your 3G/4G fast traders make for a compelling alternative vs armament/computer upgrades. Most of the time they can just be too fast to make it worth catching, and if the ship is caught within short range, it could go full agility to avoid being hit or change that range.

Costs a LOT to do it ... but being able to escape from unwanted encounters ... well ... you get what you pay for, no?

To be fair, I'm not the one who came up with the concept of "fast traders" operating out on the fringes of the Imperium. I believe it was a Library Data entry that mentioned the concept first. I just took that idea and ran with it to its logical conclusion to see what would happen.

 

[Enoki]

Big difference in kinetic energy between x knots and ocean waves vs even 1-2 G. That stuff is bolted and secured.

Sorry, but you've clearly never been to sea in any sort of serious way.

 

[Enoki]

Your 3G/4G fast traders make for a compelling alternative vs armament/computer upgrades. Most of the time they can just be too fast to make it worth catching, and if the ship is caught within short range, it could go full agility to avoid being hit or change that range.

I think under most rules sets you couldn't design a profitable merchant that was J2, M4. If it were me, I'd rather have a J2 M1 merchant that is modular enough that when you need firepower you add a bay and you already have like 8 turrets on 1000 dt, give or take, possibly larger, and any pirate would simple think twice about trying to take you on.

Speed is no defense in naval warfare.

 

[Spinward Flow]

I think under most rules sets you couldn't design a profitable merchant that was J2, M4.

You can ... but you have to specialize in order to make it work (financially). Ironically, if you keep your "fast courier" merchant ships under 200 tons, it becomes possible to partake in the "low volume/backwater economies" in ways that larger ships "can't" due to budget pressures.

There's an economic niche for "zippy little merchant ships" that can survive on penny-ante revenues (from mail deliveries) if their operating overhead expenses (crew salaries, life support, maintenance, etc.) are low enough. That way, mail deliveries become your "baseline" source of revenue that can cover all of your operating expenses, leaving your cargo hold "open" for either cargo ticket sales or speculative goods arbitrage.

In terms of gameplay, it winds up being a life of a traveling salesman delivery driver ... but one that has an economic niche which is hard for other starship designs to intrude upon and steal market share from (because the pickings are so meager at the very low end of the spectrum).

 

[casquilho]

You can ... but you have to specialize in order to make it work (financially). Ironically, if you keep your "fast courier" merchant ships under 200 tons, it becomes possible to partake in the "low volume/backwater economies" in ways that larger ships "can't" due to budget pressures.

There's an economic niche for "zippy little merchant ships" that can survive on penny-ante revenues (from mail deliveries) if their operating overhead expenses (crew salaries, life support, maintenance, etc.) are low enough. That way, mail deliveries become your "baseline" source of revenue that can cover all of your operating expenses, leaving your cargo hold "open" for either cargo ticket sales or speculative goods arbitrage.

In terms of gameplay, it winds up being a life of a traveling salesman delivery driver ... but one that has an economic niche which is hard for other starship designs to intrude upon and steal market share from (because the pickings are so meager at the very low end of the spectrum).

This reminds me of some of the small bush planes I have read about here on earth today. Small planes with special configurations (short take off and landing for example) that earn their living off small remote location delivery and retrievals. Too small and too remote for the Fed Ex and UPS' of the world.

 

[Condottiere]

One issue with cheap solutions, ingame, is that they have to be on offer.

If capping onboard gravity field to one or two gees was cheaper, and listed, commercial ships would install that.

With a couple of factor six gravity traps scattered about.

 

[whulorigan]

Until you can cite a point of reference, consider your assertion that +/- 3G internal fields can be presumed to be definitively disproven.
The onus is now on you to prove your point with evidence.

To be fair, I don't remember the specific reference cite either, but I also have the ±3.0g internal field in the back of my head as well, going a long way back (all the way back to the 1980's in my memory). It might have been in an adventure module.

 

[mike wightman]

I don't recall±3.0g but A13 states

Grav plates can be adjusted to provide a range from 0.0 to 1.5 g for personal
comfort.

while the Traveller Adventure has

Sections of the internal grav plates can be turned on or
off, or even reversed, locally or by the computer. The
negative grav field is used on the cargo deck to assist in
loading and positioning cargo.

 

[whartung]

I think under most rules sets you couldn't design a profitable merchant that was J2, M4. If it were me, I'd rather have a J2 M1 merchant

For interstellar travel, G rating isn't that much of a differentiator to necessarily make it worth the tonnage to acquire. Jump is the dominant factor, getting to 100D is marginal. For earth, M4 reaches 100D in half the time of M1, but it's still only ~6hrs difference. All told, that could add up to 1 or 2 extra trips a year.

 

[kilemall]

For interstellar travel, G rating isn't that much of a differentiator to necessarily make it worth the tonnage to acquire. Jump is the dominant factor, getting to 100D is marginal. For earth, M4 reaches 100D in half the time of M1, but it's still only ~6hrs difference. All told, that could add up to 1 or 2 extra trips a year.

Strictly tactical motion either determining range or more importantly approach options and time under fire or any chance of matching course even with maneuver shut down or destroyed, or agility/evasion.

 

[kilemall]

Sorry, but you've clearly never been to sea in any sort of serious way.

True, but as violent as that can be it’s not 2G accel, much less sustained or agility/evade pushing the ship in every direction. Reference the rough maneuvers in the Expanse for the consequences of loose/not tied down items or people.

 

[Enoki]

For interstellar travel, G rating isn't that much of a differentiator to necessarily make it worth the tonnage to acquire. Jump is the dominant factor, getting to 100D is marginal. For earth, M4 reaches 100D in half the time of M1, but it's still only ~6hrs difference. All told, that could add up to 1 or 2 extra trips a year.

I agree. But Kilemall was saying it could be desirable to fend off pirate attacks. I disagree. Cargo and passenger capacity is far more important to a merchant ship than saving a few hours on the trip into a planet from 100d. That's particularly true since it takes a week in transit / jump in any case to get there, possibly longer if you have a minor mis-jump and end up further out.

Fast merchants have never been particularly popular in terms of history. The clipper ship lasted about 50 years and was introduced in only small numbers. Merchants that could do upwards of 30+ knots in the last century were equally unpopular for their operating costs versus reduced cargo capacity.

If piracy is truly a problem, convoying and a naval escort--like a Spanish treasure fleet--are the answer. Out gun 'em, not out run 'em!

 

[Enoki]

True, but as violent as that can be it’s not 2G accel, much less sustained or agility/evade pushing the ship in every direction. Reference the rough maneuvers in the Expanse for the consequences of loose/not tied down items or people.

I'd say for the average merchant crew / pilot, that fancy maneuvers aren't in the cards. They're driving something like a panel van to an 18-wheeler, not a sports car, and they don't need the skill in handling the ship of a Formula 1 driver. Again, it's better for a merchant ship to have just enough propulsion and maneuver to get the job done and rely on things like escorted convoys if piracy is truly a problem.

 

[Spinward Flow]

This reminds me of some of the small bush planes I have read about here on earth today. Small planes with special configurations (short take off and landing for example) that earn their living off small remote location delivery and retrievals. Too small and too remote for the Fed Ex and UPS' of the world.

Exactly.
Depending on the environment/terrain, a niche role for "small bush operators" can open up which allows smaller/lighter operators to thrive where larger/heavier/higher capacity operators would struggle to survive (and probably go out of business).

Using LBB S3 The Spinward Marches as an example of this type of emergent behavior, where "bush league" tramp operators can turn a profit where the "bigger movers" cannot would be in the Aramis subsector (2 parsec range "required" to play) and along the Spinward Main running through Lanth subsector. These 2 subsectors have the lowest population out of all of the Imperial controlled subsectors in the Spinward Marches.

So what you want to do is create a "minimum crew" starship that will keep overhead expenses to the minimum (crew salary, life support, overhaul maintenance expenses, mortgage payments, etc.) which can wilderness refuel and refine its own fuel (to prevent misjumps) which can haul 5 tons of mail (guaranteed Cr25,000 revenue per port of call) and a modest amount of cargo capacity (enough to dabble in speculative goods arbitrage). If you can do that, you're all set.

Since you're going to be venturing into "unprotected wilderness areas" that lack sufficient system defense patrols to chase off pirates, you're also going to need to be able to deal with the occasional "unwanted encounter" in open space. Being able to Break Off By Acceleration from unwanted intercepts is the safest way to deal with such encounters (by keeping them brief and reducing the risk of damage from exchanging fire).

For interstellar travel, G rating isn't that much of a differentiator to necessarily make it worth the tonnage to acquire. Jump is the dominant factor, getting to 100D is marginal. For earth, M4 reaches 100D in half the time of M1, but it's still only ~6hrs difference. All told, that could add up to 1 or 2 extra trips a year.

When everything is "boring/routine" all the time, this is completely correct. Powerful maneuver drives are "nice to have, but ultimately unnecessary" if the only thing you use them for is planetfall to jump point maneuvering for purely interstellar travel.

As soon as interplanetary voyages within the same star system become "useful places to go" ... that calculus changes.
Interplanetary Travel Distance by Time and Acceleration

Taking 8 days to accelerate to 8AU (so you might as well microjump it) @ 1G ... versus ... taking 4 days to accelerate to 8AU (faster than jumping) @ 4G ... can make quite a difference.

Being able to accelerate away from pirates, so they can't catch you while you're minding your own business is another angle.
Sure, you don't "need" all of those maneuver Gs just to transit 100D ... but if you need to escape from pirates with your ship intact and undamaged, it's better to have more maneuvering power than less (because that's a ship to ship combat scenario).

Cargo and passenger capacity is far more important to a merchant ship than saving a few hours on the trip into a planet from 100d.

If you're talking exclusively about transit times, you're correct.
If you're factoring in the possibility of "loss of entire starship due to it being commandeered and taken as a prize by pirates" because you couldn't fight back and got boarded ... well ... it sucks to be you.

If piracy is truly a problem, convoying and a naval escort--like a Spanish treasure fleet--are the answer.

The "big boys" can do that ... but not the little tramp starships operating as free traders. Small ACS that can barely turn a profit with a full manifest haven't got the margin to hire "protection" to follow them wherever they might want to go.

The closest you can come to that ideal is to bring your own high G, high agility fighter escort/screen which can act as "convoy escort" and can vector off to intercept (block and tackle engagement to trade fire) while the parent ship maneuvers away from the furball to safety (while remaining in the "reserve" position). It's the reason why I've been so keen on adding remarkably capable (light) fighter craft to my starship designs, rather than just "piling on the turrets" onto the main starship itself. When the objective is ESCAPE rather than SHOOT 'EM UP ... it makes more sense to invest in maneuver drives and power plants than it does to invest in power plants, turrets, gunners and life support (the latter 2 of which rapidly increase operational overhead costs).

Out gun 'em, not out run 'em!

While I appreciate the "Come and get them!" sentiment ...

... not to put too fine a point on things, but that's an inherently risky proposition. Any time that a craft is exchanging fire with an adversary, the opportunities for "bad stuff" to happen become NOT ZERO. Battle damage is expensive to repair and can easily wipe out a small time operator's profit margins for most of a year, depending on what got hit and what needs to be repaired.

Besides, if you're going "fight" unwanted interlopers, having a starship that "wallows like a garbage scow" does not make for the best platform to fight from. Taking crippling damage from an exchange of fire can bankrupt small time operators, who are then unable to recover.

So while it SOUNDS like a great idea to be able to "clear the sky" with your turrets and gunners such that NONE SHALL PASS ... there's also the Black Knight Effect to worry about.

By contrast, this response tends to be more reliably successful (if you can do it).

 

[whartung]

When everything is "boring/routine" all the time, this is completely correct.

Well that's the nut.

When it's not boring and routine, its VERY expensive and VERY dangerous to the point people won't play. The people that do play would need to be paid extraordinary prices to justify taking on the costs and risk, which just dampens trade all the more to the point that if the trade is truly necessary, out comes the subsector fleet to work police actions so the "boring and routine" traders and fly their goods and still get home to their families.

 

[kilemall]

Or surrender, which is how a lot of the RL pirates operated precisely to maximize profits and reduce risk. That means carefully managing reputations and following through on safe passage/no ransom/no slaving surrender terms.

That 100 ton Corsair bay becomes more an ersatz boarding/fighter/loot carrier standing off at a safe distance and less a swallow up scout ship and leave.

 

[aramis]

Are US Marine Corps sabres "purely ceremonial" these days or can one actually train in it for combat use while in the service. As in not in your spare time?

The USMC enlisted blade is a mamluke-hilt cutlass, not a saber. Source: USN Landing Party Manual circa 1985.
USN Petty Officers' blade is a cutlass, with quarter to half basket. same source.

The only USN Petty Officer cutlass showing up on a search is for Chiefs, and labeled ceremonial.

I can assure you that, while ceremonial only is the intent, they're still useful as a weapon... during an exebition drill with sword practice, a fellow cadet, going to "reverese-carry" didn't stop soon enough and badly sliced the pinna of his right ear. (Carry sword is standing at attention or marching with the blade exposed and the backblade on the front of the right shoulder; reverse carry is holding it by the basket so the blade is against the back of the right shoulder. Transition from carry is done by dropping the blade forward while extending the right arm, and catching the hilt so it swings under the arm, then returning the arm to starting position. Rev. Carry to carry is swing the arm forward and let the sword hilt rotate until the blade is in line with the arm, then sharply bringing the hand down and snapping the blade to the shoulder.)

The combat blade of the USMC is the K-Bar; it's also used by the USN for certain situations, but isn't standard issue AFAICT.

The last time I've read of issuing cutlasses to USN personnel for combat duties was WW II.
Note that ship's company fielding Naval Infantry units, per the USN History site, continued until 1970. https://www.history.navy.mil/resear...abetically/s/sailors-as-infantry-us-navy.html