• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

New Product Idea for Far Futures Enterprise

By the by Hal, before you get too far into it check the designs in the "Ships" folder of HGS. Some may be usable (I'm just taking a look at the P. F. Sloan now) for this project. They'll still need checking and voting of course, and I'm not sure what some of them are just by the names, but it might save a little work.

Also a search of here and CT-Starships will turn up more "corrections". I'll hunt up my own as I can. I'm sure I have some on the compy too. Some I meant to (or did?) pass on to someone as well. I'm too disorganized for this :)
 
Alternate crazy proposal 1:

Design contests!

Pick a design. State the required bits. Goal is to make it work in legal HG2 using HGS. Deckplans optional*.

I say we draw the Yahoo CT-Starships group in as well by copying the contests there as some there don't come here and vice versa.

Judges robject and DonM (they's gonna kill me now :) ). Alternatively (to avoid me getting killed by robject and DonM) we put the finalists to votes of the Citizens of the Imperium right here.

* What would be nice, very very nice, is trapping some artist (Hey! I saw Andrew hiding under his bed earlier! He's already half trapped!) and having them make the deckplans all pretty and include a nice 3D render too (might as well have three hunting me down with blood in their eyes as two :D )

Winners get their "fixed" version immortalized in the definitive CT Starships book. Just bragging rights and a credit on the front page :cool:

Just idea tossing here.
 
FWIW I dropped a note about this thread over on the Yahoo CT-Starships group.

I saw - I'm there too ;)

I took a look at the PF SLOAN file, and found that the crewing requirements listed in the HGS file doesn't match that given in Supplement 9, which of course, now means I have to take the time to build a spreadsheet to see what the numbers should be, and what they are, and take it from there - as I suggested in the thread earlier. Perhaps this is one case where HGS is wrong. But, if it isn't wrong, it is good to check to see why the other version is wrong, and whether the spreadsheet approach matches the one method or the other. I'll make it a point to work on this tomorrow and see what comes up.
 
While I'm thinking about it, the Supplement 9 version of the Colonial Cruiser (the Kinunir class) has a major problem based on the description. Page 19 of Supplement 9, the statement on offensive weaponry is:

"Eight dual laser turrets organized into two batteries"

That works out to 16 lasers total, of which 8 are divided into each of the two batteries. This number is between 6 and 10, which means that the 8 Lasers get treated as being 6 for purposes of the USP code. Per High Guard, this makes the Pulse Laser USP value equal to 3 (modified to 4 for TL bonus), or USP 4 for beam lasers (modified to 5 due to TL bonus). Yet, in the book, the laser component value for the ship is listed as being a 2. The only way you can get a "2" value via the USP code, is if the Kinunir had 8 single turret laser mounted weapons, with 8 batteries of said weapons.

Yet another that needs to be fixed. This one however, looks pretty simple and straight forward.
 
While I'm thinking about it, the Supplement 9 version of the Colonial Cruiser (the Kinunir class)...

Yet another that needs to be fixed. This one however, looks pretty simple and straight forward.

Don't you believe it!

:)

There's a few "problems" with it. Another transitional hybrid HG1 design. Actually iirc there are two versions in canon, one HG1 and one HG2. It's one I've done some details on and think I posted around here somewhere a while back (and iirc others have too). I'll try to find the threads later.
 
I saw - I'm there too ;)

I took a look at the PF SLOAN file...

Perhaps this is one case where HGS is wrong.

I don't think HGS is wrong on this one, or not much anyway. There's no way I can see to get 40 crew with any of the ship rules. Even Book 2 rules would mean 50 crew and HG1 and HG2 both mean more crew. Unless you want to start imagining it is undercrewed or perhaps double-duty crewed. The good news is there's lots of room for the extra staterooms needed. My tweaks seem to work ok without too much diversion.
 
Bizarre! Last week I completed HGS designs for all the bk5 designs in Fighting Ships. I think I enjoyed the challange more than I should have :)

The conclusion I came to was that Fighting Ships must be Imperial propaganda on the Navies capacities. There are too many discrepancies and most inflate cababilities. I was not troubled by crewing issues as in most cases adding more staterooms wasn't an issue.

If I had a criteria or point of interest it was in monitoring the cost of each vessel, a hangover from my interest in TCS. It surprised me that the majority of the ships worked out cheaper.

I'd be pleased to contribute my efforts to this, I was wondering how to offer the work publicly without running foul of 'fair use' restrictions - in that I essentially wanted to 'publish' a revised version of an entire supplement.

The most troublesome ship was the Azhanti, but it also helped form my view that Fighting Ships is propaganda and was never intended to be accurate. To mention just one aspect the ship description for the Azhanti names and describes the re-fitted version, the Frontier Cruiser, but supplies the stats for the old Fleet Intruder. Mistake, error, stuff-up or deliberate mis-direction?

The Kinunir didn't give me any troubles, the agility dropped to 0 & it gained backup computer & nuclear damper. Errors included mis-rated missile-2 (should be missile-3) and miscalculating EP use (uses 83EP of 87.5 available - hence agility 0...) . Crew was under (45 to 69) but all the Fighting Ships under-estimated crew and price went up (1079.99 to 1,153.345 MCr) probably because I like back-ups. Cargo capacity is essentially the same (63.5tn vs 63tn).

The PF Sloans crew, like all the other ships crew was understated (40 vs 65), yet adding staterooms caused no problems. The changes were adding a backup computer, adding a fuel purification plant and dropping cargo to 1tn. Cost goes from 3334.526 to 3,334.608MCr.

Cheers
Matt
 
Last edited:
On HGS, I am up to 16 bugs. None of them are 'serious' and several may be discarded by Andrew once he reviews them. A list is attached for those that are interested.

The version I am using is HGS v1.14.

0. f7 tab, 50tn bays. TL15 50tn Repulsor bays are showing as #3 rather than #5. It does show the correct stat on the data card.
1. Purification Plants do not take into account Drop Tank Fuel. Drop tanks do not need to be dropped.
2. Turrets batteries fill up all turrets, using more Mcr & EP's than necessary in some circumstances. (eg: Beam-5 requires 10 Beam Lasers,
HGS allocating with 4 triple turrets forces 12 Beam lasers to be purchased rather than 10 plus 2 empty mounts.)
3. Set small craft bridge = yes, book 2 crew, options-autocalc accommodations = y & one crew (pilot). Couches autocalc to -1.
4. Mixed turrets = y, does not reset turrets menu. Can result in the exported USP showing shadow batteries. Set ton = 50, turret = 1x single
turret beam. Then set mixed turrets = y, set one double turret, one sand, one missile. Ship card is ok. Export USP adds 1 laser battery factor-0
5. Crew settings "Other". Autocalc accomodations ignores "Other" when setting crew accomodations "Actual" (not "Minimum" but "Actual").
6. Won't allow mixed turrets with standard turrets.
7. Emergency low berths not charged for in small craft.
8. Mixed turrets, set laser "number" to 1. Click "ok" then re-open (f8), lasers reset to factor 0. Ships card reads ok.
9. Staterooms, no option to not have staterooms in large craft. eg 400tn fuel shuttles or 1200tn assault landers.
10. Fractional PP not supported, forces PP to reflect an arbitrary stat not the ships EP needs (USP factor is the fractional PP rounded down)
11. Mixed turrets get 1 gunner per turret, should require 1 gunner per battery. (Differant rules for small craft)
12. User defined components should be listed in Ship card & exported USP
13. Low berths cost 150,000Cr, should be 50,000Cr
14. Refit option doesn't work
reported ct-starships 300509
15. Mixed turrets should include mixed Energy Weapon turrets (ie: Fusion gun + Sandcaster)
 
LOL Andrew unfortunately has to struggle with working 70+ hours a week, three rather demanding teenagers, a wonderfully long suffering partner who appreciates a little attention, two dead laptops in the past year and the fact that Vista and Delphi 7 don't exactly like one another.

However I am SLOWLY plugging away at a proper HGS version 2.0 (hopefully with full support for T20, allowing for refit and other goodies I can't go into right now).
 
On HGS, I am up to 16 bugs. None of them are 'serious' and several may be discarded by Andrew once he reviews them. A list is attached for those that are interested.

The version I am using is HGS v1.14.

I think my beta is now up to 1.18 or 1.19 ;->

0. f7 tab, 50tn bays. TL15 50tn Repulsor bays are showing as #3 rather than #5. It does show the correct stat on the data card.

yeah its an annoying little error I've not been able to hunt down and kill in several iterations.

1. Purification Plants do not take into account Drop Tank Fuel. Drop tanks do not need to be dropped.

Version 2.0 will hopefully fully support drop tanks with alternate stats for attached and dropped

2. Turrets batteries fill up all turrets, using more Mcr & EP's than necessary in some circumstances. (eg: Beam-5 requires 10 Beam Lasers,
HGS allocating with 4 triple turrets forces 12 Beam lasers to be purchased rather than 10 plus 2 empty mounts.)

This is to do with the way things are calculated. It's a tricky one to fix

3. Set small craft bridge = yes, book 2 crew, options-autocalc accommodations = y & one crew (pilot). Couches autocalc to -1.

Oppps will mark that for the next iteration

4. Mixed turrets = y, does not reset turrets menu. Can result in the exported USP showing shadow batteries. Set ton = 50, turret = 1x single
turret beam. Then set mixed turrets = y, set one double turret, one sand, one missile. Ship card is ok. Export USP adds 1 laser battery factor-0

There are several MAJOR problems with mixed turrents I'm currently working on (try setting mixed turrets, then resetting to normal, make the hull bigger than 1,000 Td and go to the bays and you'll see what I mean)

5. Crew settings "Other". Autocalc accomodations ignores "Other" when setting crew accomodations "Actual" (not "Minimum" but "Actual").

Mmmmm will have to look at that

6. Won't allow mixed turrets with standard turrets.

no you can't mix standard and mixed turrets. I think this is actually in the HG rules

7. Emergency low berths not charged for in small craft.

Another for the next iteration thanks

8. Mixed turrets, set laser "number" to 1. Click "ok" then re-open (f8), lasers reset to factor 0. Ships card reads ok.

Same thing as error 0. Something I'm aware of but can't seem to track down where its going wrong yet

9. Staterooms, no option to not have staterooms in large craft. eg 400tn fuel shuttles or 1200tn assault landers.
10. Fractional PP not supported, forces PP to reflect an arbitrary stat not the ships EP needs (USP factor is the fractional PP rounded down)

These two both stem from what HGS originally was. When I wrote it, it was actually as an assignment for my degree (helps having a tutor who's a Trav fan). And as such it had to rigidly follow the rules in High Guard. I've been gradually working in more flexibility since, but the origin of the program still shows some places.

11. Mixed turrets get 1 gunner per turret, should require 1 gunner per battery. (Differant rules for small craft)

Because each turret is a battery. Its another example of HGS following the rules rigidly

12. User defined components should be listed in Ship card & exported USP

They are in the detailed export, but will see about getting them into the quick export

13. Low berths cost 150,000Cr, should be 50,000Cr

Opps

14. Refit option doesn't work

Not yet, adding it is leading to an increase of about 70% in the code!

reported ct-starships 300509
15. Mixed turrets should include mixed Energy Weapon turrets (ie: Fusion gun + Sandcaster)

Again I think this is HGS rigidly reflecting the rules :-)
 
Last edited:
(1) HG3 / HG2 Contest; (2) Fixing HG2 Designs

(1) High Guard 3 / HG2 Contest

I suggest discussion about HG3 be a new, separate thread. Similarly for a HG2 contest.


(2) Fixing HG2 Designs

Hmmmm. Well, I have long since "fixed" to my satisfaction all the HG2 designs I know of [...]

But the trouble is the consensus, as we've already determined.

No trouble at all: to the victor goes the spoils, and the criticism. In other words, if someone is motivated to do it, then "get it done" trumps all warm fuzzy feelings.

Steve is an excellent HG ship designer. I'd take his set at face value.
 
Last edited:
No trouble at all: to the victor goes the spoils, and the criticism. In other words, if someone is motivated to do it, then "get it done" trumps all warm fuzzy feelings.

Steve is an excellent HG ship designer. I'd take his set at face value.

Sheesh....:o

Talk about your "warm fuzzy feelings."

I'm blushing just reading those words.
 
Hi Andrew, great to hear you are on the case.

A couple of your responses expressed doubt on aspects of the rules relating to mixed batteries. I've added a response/referances below. Keep up the good work.

Time to release those later versions :)


6. Won't allow mixed turrets with standard turrets.
no you can't mix standard and mixed turrets. I think this is actually in the HG rules

HG pg29, 'Batteries' paragraph, last sentance. "Mixed turrets are allowed". Doesn't preclude also having non-mixed turrets. For example a 200tn Free Trader mounting a triple missile turet and a dual turret with a sandcaster and pulse laser.

11. Mixed turrets get 1 gunner per turret, should require 1 gunner per battery. (Differant rules for small craft)
Because each turret is a battery. Its another example of HGS following the rules rigidly

HG pg29, 'Batteries' paragraph, last sentance. "in such cases, each weapon in a battery."


14. Refit option doesn't work
Not yet, adding it is leading to an increase of about 70% in the code!

Ouch!!

15. Mixed turrets should include mixed Energy Weapon turrets (ie: Fusion gun + Sandcaster)
Again I think this is HGS rigidly reflecting the rules :-)

HG pg29, 'Batteries' paragraph, last sentance. No restrictions mentioned on the type of turret referred to (& it seems illogical to suggest a sandcaster won't fit into a 2 ton turret!).
 
Sorry all, I'd forgotten (or failed to find) my old work on the Kinunir I promised up thread to track down. Wow, it was a while ago (2003). Rather than resurrect that ancient thread I'll repost them (as they originally appeared) following...
 
(originally post 25 here http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=3465&page=3)

Hi Thierry Maitrejean. I figured the community would be along shortly to help you out with some T20 stats so I wasn't in a huge hurry with this.

I too started converting the Kinunir a couple months back and ran into a few snags so I put it away for a bit. When your post surfaced a few days ago I went hunting for it thinking it'd be a good time to tackle it again.

Unfortunately I've not yet found most of it and the same problems are still there to bedevil me
See, I'm taking a slightly different tack than the majority (heck, it's different than anyone else I've ever seen ;) ). I'm trying to make it all work out to the original specs from Adventure 1 and HG v1 (I know both are a little broken but I like the pure gearheaded challenge and uniqueness, and the preservation of canon for it's own sake even after it's been officially 'corrected'
)

So, just in case you (or anyone else) are interested, here's my HG v1 version of the Kinunir class as my starting point and brief notes (marked by [#] ) for the elements. I hope to have the T20 one worked up some day but as I said there are some issues...

_______


BC-9514 Kinunir BC - A2444G2 - 000010 - 50202 - 0 Mcr1232.16 before discount 1200.0T
batteries bearing 2 2 2 Crew 45
batteries total 2 2 2 TL13
Passengers 0 Lowberths 0 Cargo 63.0T Fuel 0.0T EP 0.0 Agility 0 Marines 35

+1200.0T Hull - Cone - Streamlined Mcr132.000 [1]

-40.0T Bridge - Standard Mcr6.000 [2]
-40.0T Bridge - Auxiliary Mcr6.000 [3]
-60.0T Jump Drive - 4P Mcr240.000
-480.0T Jump Fuel - 4 parsecs
-144.0T Maneuver Drive - 4G Mcr86.400
-48.0T Power Plant - 4P Mcr192.000
-48.0T Power Fuel - 4 weeks [4]
-5.0T Computer - Model 7 Fib Mcr90.000 [5]
-40.0T Officer Staterooms - 10 single occupancy Mcr5.0 [6]
-140.0T Crew Staterooms - 35 double occupancy Mcr17.5 [6]

-10.0T Black Globe - F1 Mcr400.000[7]

-8.0T Beam Laser - Double Turrets - 2 batts F5 Mcr20.000
-2.0T Particle Accelerator - Single Turrets - 2 batts F2 Mcr6.400 [8]
-2.0T Missile Launcher - Triple Turrets - 2 batts F2 Mcr6.500 [9]
-6.0T Missile Magazine - 1 batt Planetary Bombardment F6 Mcr0.060 [A]

-40.0T Pinnace - 1 Mcr21.000
-12.0T Heavy Grav APC - 1 Mcr1.500 [C]
-12.0T Air/Rafts - 3 Mcr1.800
-63.0T Cargo Hold

_______


"Whoa," you say, "where do you get TL13 from? It doesn't list a TL in the design in Adventure 1." Right you are, in fact it doesn't even have a USP (well not in my copy anyway). OK, so I can't dodge the question ;) No worries


I get TL13 from the descriptive text, the required HG v1 components (excepting the noted special items), and a little sleuthing. The descriptive for the Kinunir notes it was built by General (Shipyards or Products) in the Spinward Marches c1074. General is described as having 3 shipyards. One on Regina capable of 5,000T builds at TL10. Regina is listed as the building yard for the ship. The other two are smaller 600T build capable yards, at Pixie and Efate, both at TL13. Clearly General imported the required TL13 materials to the yard at Regina for assembly (not quite kosher but hey it was a competitive market that General was desperate to crack at the time, so they bent the rules).

[1] The shape is more a wedge than a cone but HG v1 didn't have wedge and later HG v2 lumped wedge with needle rather than cone for some reason even though it describes the Kinunir as a "slightly flattened" cone. Isn't that a wedge? At least more so than a needle? Ah well...

[2] Yes. HG v1 says 20T per 1000T of hull, hence 40T, no messy % calculations. Trust me, though this is an obvious error per later editions it does make it add up right (and allows a little more leeway for the roomy deckplans in the bargain).

[3] As noted in the deckplan and key.

[4] Unfortunately there is no way to fit the described 200 days endurance of 320T fuel. This has to be an error or figures using some of the Jump fuel which still doesn't add up. In any case 4 weeks does add up.

[5] Yes it was actually a model 7.3 but the stats are the same as a standard model 7. The model 7 is TL13. The AI personality programming is an experimental TL15+ import from Core. (Definite shades of Virus in the computer in Adventure 1)

[6] Equivalent to at any rate. It seems to work with the descriptions, including all the other noted extra functions.

[7] The only screen listed in the original is the black globe, no nuke damper or meson screen as I've seen in some. The cost is factored just for maintenance because its an experimental or salvage piece and was essentially free.

[8] The trickiest bit of reasoning is here. The description says PA Beam turrets yet HG v1 does not have PA Beam turrets. It does have 10T PA Bays at TL13 but these are too big. All HG v1 turrets use 1.0T (including Fusion and Plasma but they are limited in number per) which does add up. HG v2 does have PA Beam turrets but at TL15 and 3.0T. So I figure it must have been another experimental platform courtesy "the powers that be" and I used the HG v2 USP and cost but in a single turret mount needing only the standard 1.0T fire control. Interestingly the major weapon table for Particle Accelerators in HG v1 hints at PA Beam turrets.

[9] Using the point value table of HG v1 a triple missile launcher has 3 points, divided by 1.2 is 2.5, rounds to 3, for USP F2 (no TL bonus in HG v1)

[A] Determined using the option rule of 1.0T per unaveraged points of all missile launchers, 6 in this case. This would imply a planetary bombardment option that is not described with a USP F6. I leave it to you to use it or not. Otherwise I'd say it's just 20 reloads for the turrets.

The Pinnace is described as a standard model with certain features. Using the base Book 2 version with 22.4T open dedicated to 8 seats (fold for 4.0T cargo) and 8.0T cargo (12.0T total cargo option) we can fit in the single beam laser fire control of 1.0T and have 9.4T left for added fuel (close to the listed 12.0T total listed, close enough for me). Why does it need 12T (11.4T actually) of fuel? Because the original Kinunir has no fuel scoops. In a dire emergency the Pinnace can be used as a slow refueler. Otherwise the Kinunir class is reliant on fuel tenders or stations, noting it also has no fuel purifiers. Yet another tragic design flaw perhaps relevant to the ships' penchant for explosive accidents.

[C] Cost guess based on size and equal volume of G Carrier from Book 2
 
Last edited:
Back
Top