MgT2 and T5 computers

[whulorigan]

This begs the question of whether the TLs are relating to the technology advancement on earth (skill + knowledge) or just the skill part as the knowledge is (effectively) universally available.

Not to drift off the thread topic too far, but I would generally go with the latter (though this may be different for a world isolated from the outside Universe which is independently pursing tech innovation). There is no reason why a TL scale should be tied to the TL innovation history of Terra (other than as a handy rule-of thumb and general guide for Referees and Players).

Part of the purpose of a TL scale is to determine what is available to a Traveller on planet, whether produced natively or thru import. If they can build it on-world using the tech at their disposal, then they should at least be classified at that TL, presuming that their effective native production ability is not superseded by imported tech. If you are using T5's TL paradigm, then you need to take into consideration "Stage Effects" of the available tech (e.g. Experimental (Standard TL -3), Prototype (Standard TL -2), Early (Standard TL -1), Standard (= "mature"), etc. ) and assign the TL accordingly.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Similarly, why do TL-5 planets build rifles that are only good at shooting unarmoured TL-5 opponents when all the neighbours are TL-10. At least some of the TL-5 units would be tasked with having big-rifles that could take out those TL-10 guys in armour.

Of course they do; they are just called anti-tank rifles.

 

[whartung]

Of course they do; they are just called anti-tank rifles.

20mm Finnish AT Rifle

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lahti_L-39

Kind of a beast.

Of course, one can also reference what a bunch of crazy teddy bears did with just rope and logs in a far away forest encounter against a higher TL enemy.

 

[kilemall]

Of course they do; they are just called anti-tank rifles.

The LBB4 LAG is clearly an updated ATR.


I've gone with the theme of ATR/AMRs in CT/Striker, giving them a penetration rating equal to TL, they go caseless at TL10, then gauss from TL12 on.


Not as good a range as the higher tech lasers or PG/FGMPs, but a nice low cost option to deal with the CA in particular.

 

[Condottiere]

As I understand how these things are used nowadays, fifty calibre are anti material against thin skinned vehicles.

Anything with real armour gets tagged with a man portable guided missile.

 

[whartung]

The guns just get pretty unwieldy after awhile.

Bang/Pound I'm guessing missiles are a better fit.

You lose round count (can only carry so much), but at least they can do damage.

Apparently .50 AP can penetrate our modern vehicles (MRAP and such), but not regular .50.

Small arms just make dents otherwise.

 

[Condottiere]

It's a question of, let's say, convenience.

Tanks, like aircraft, are getting more expensive and numbers dwindle, so a more or less guaranteed one shot one kill is more attractive.

I wonder how many militaries are still dragging around medium or heavy anti tank guns.

Another option is a howitzer or mortar guided top down shell.

The last one is rocket propelled, whether grenade launcher, or recoilless.

 

[aramis]

Canonically, TL is what's available. Not what's made, not what's theoretically possible.

 

[kilemall]

As I understand how these things are used nowadays, fifty calibre are anti material against thin skinned vehicles.

Anything with real armour gets tagged with a man portable guided missile.

Mostly they use them for killing artillery at range, disabling a whole battery by shooting off bits of the guns and coincidentally scaring heck out of the crew, for the risk/cost of a sniper team.


I expect infantry in CA and BD end up being though of as light vehicles and treated accordingly.


The bigger question is all those RAM GL penetrators, that's the real secret sauce for low tech BD hunting.

 

[Condottiere]

When in doubt, chuck in a grenade.

Precision has to do with efficiency, economy of force, and minimizing collateral damage.

Having said that, I'd err on the side of more force, ensuring the target is actually neutralized.

 

[robject]

Having said that, I'd err on the side of more force, ensuring the target is actually neutralized.

"Point the gun in the direction of the activity which you would like to cease."

 

[BackworldTraveller]

Canonically, TL is what's available. Not what's made, not what's theoretically possible.

Black powder land mines at TL1!

 

[Condottiere]

 

[whartung]

Whatever this was, all I got was a Shutterfly logo.

 

[BackworldTraveller]

It was a logo to remind one of the existence of Greek Fire

 

[coliver988]

current ship computers

Interesting view of an Airbus avionics & computer system - there are more computers below deck than I thought! Youtube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=241-5DZyons

Stuck in this thread as it dealt w/computers, and there is an entire server room on the jet that reminds me of the avionics compartment in the classic Scout

 

[whartung]

I read an anecdote the other day that said that modern cars have 100-150 different computers on them (the vast majority specialized micro controllers), and millions of lines of code in software spread out among them.

 

[Condottiere]

The chip crunch has just made us more aware of them, and most of them aren't cutting edge, and in interests of costs, not even manufactured in the most advanced machinery.

 

[rzg6f]

So the question I ask myself is ... how would this practically apply to my game?

My own dilemma is that I would like to run a CT Traveller game in the near future - actually I would love to run a proto-Traveller game but the German translation of Traveller is starting with The Traveller Book.

The problem is, as I see it, much the same as older science fiction and contemporary reality. Younger generations of players (or readers) are going to have a hard time with the suspension of disbelief if we have 5 tons dedicated to a ship's computer when they grew up on smart phones and pads.

I think that is the crux of the matter.

On the other hand, does modifying the ships' computer (like, for example MgT) take away from the Traveller aesthetic, the Traveller "feel" or "experience" that we all love from our first introduction in the late 70s and early 80s? That's the whole point of playing Classic Traveller or even proto-Traveller - to satisfy that nostalgia of the joy we all first experienced then.

Or so it seems to me.

There is certainly a dissonance between classic Traveller and today's technological reality (not to mention its trajectory into the Far Future) - but does closing the dissonance gap take away from Traveller?

Mongoose Traveller does this, it closes the gap, or "updates" Traveller. I like Mongoose Traveller a lot, I find it an excellent sci-fi (at least version 1 that I have). But it doesn't satisfy my "nostalgia" itch, one big reason I wish to revert to CT.

 

[kilemall]

So the question I ask myself is ... how would this practically apply to my game?

My own dilemma is that I would like to run a CT Traveller game in the near future - actually I would love to run a proto-Traveller game but the German translation of Traveller is starting with The Traveller Book.

The problem is, as I see it, much the same as older science fiction and contemporary reality. Younger generations of players (or readers) are going to have a hard time with the suspension of disbelief if we have 5 tons dedicated to a ship's computer when they grew up on smart phones and pads.

I think that is the crux of the matter.

On the other hand, does modifying the ships' computer (like, for example MgT) take away from the Traveller aesthetic, the Traveller "feel" or "experience" that we all love from our first introduction in the late 70s and early 80s? That's the whole point of playing Classic Traveller or even proto-Traveller - to satisfy that nostalgia of the joy we all first experienced then.

Or so it seems to me.

There is certainly a dissonance between classic Traveller and today's technological reality (not to mention its trajectory into the Far Future) - but does closing the dissonance gap take away from Traveller?

Mongoose Traveller does this, it closes the gap, or "updates" Traveller. I like Mongoose Traveller a lot, I find it an excellent sci-fi (at least version 1 that I have). But it doesn't satisfy my "nostalgia" itch, one big reason I wish to revert to CT.

I had a problem working on the computer room floor and looking at the machines I was running in 1982 with the computer rules. I was already 'fixing' the rules then.



OTOH I don't have a problem with the large dtons and power usage. Doubly so using the pure CT rules with how many hits they can soak up compared to the actual drives and power plants and weapons. They can take hits that would eliminate your entire engineering bay.


Explain they are the full electronics of the ship AND sensors, that should cover any qualms younger players have with it.