TNE help requested

[snrdg082102]

Hello all,

Working with Striker Book 3 prompted me to also work on TNE FF&S which is where I posted my first TNE request for help. If someone here has dabbled in using FF&S I would appreciate the help.

Thanks in advance.

 

[sabredog]

I "dabbled", but then put the brush away and just went back to Striker.

FF&S seemed nice but was too much effort and time for things that I realized wouldn't be used as often as anything else I made with Striker - certainly not by the players.

 

[snrdg082102]

Evening sabredog,

I "dabbled", but then put the brush away and just went back to Striker.

FF&S seemed nice but was too much effort and time for things that I realized wouldn't be used as often as anything else I made with Striker - certainly not by the players.

Yep, Striker has requires more effort in designing than Striker which is more detailed than High Guard and all three are more complex than Book 2 Starships.

That being said, I've become more of a gear head since I haven't found any groups nearby to get in on a campaign.

Thanks for the reply.

Have you had an opportunity to go over the three weapons I've posted?

 

[Icosahedron]

I dabbled in FF&S, too, but as Sabredog says, it was a bit too gearheady on the whole. My main use for it was in designing sidearms for my characters. Anything bigger than a sidearm was just too much trouble.

Even Striker's CPR system (and its aircraft system) was too much like hard work - hence I haven't really been following your CPR designs. I preferred designing vehicles, lasers and energy weapons.

A word of warning on designing FF&S sidearms, though - the rules are made for longarms - if you want to design realistic pistols you'll have to ignore minimum receiver and barrel lengths and then make up some sensible figures for muzzle energy, etc. The thing is definitely broke for pistols.

Once I figured these things out though, I had great fun designing weapons and then drawing them up with... Drat, what was the name of that online gun designer? - you can tell it's been a while.

 

[snrdg082102]

Morning Icosahedron,

I dabbled in FF&S, too, but as Sabredog says, it was a bit too gearheady on the whole. My main use for it was in designing sidearms for my characters. Anything bigger than a sidearm was just too much trouble.

Yep, FF&S is an even more gear head version of Striker and a more extreme version of the design systems found in CT: Starships and High Guard.

To be honest I've only figured out bits and pieces of Striker (until now anyway ), MT: COACC, and FF&S for TNE and T4. I've even figured out bits and pieces of the MT: Wet Navy (Challenge Issues 53, 54, and 60) and early tech design (Challenge 61) supplements.

I've been using a combination of GT: Starships and GURPS: Vehicles a lot more to design custom and modify standard systems. Of course the designs have not been imported into CT, MT, TNE, T4, T20, or MGT. I tried and decided the process was too much of a headache for me and I'm just too lazy.

Even Striker's CPR system (and its aircraft system) was too much like hard work - hence I haven't really been following your CPR designs. I preferred designing vehicles, lasers and energy weapons.

I'm going differ and say that Design Sequence 1 Vehicles is the one that is like too much work and that the twelve other design sequences are just varying levels of work.

To me the design process for an aircraft appears to be less time consuming than a vehicle, while determining the ratings appear to be about the same level. Of course I'm still working on through Design Sequence 1: Vehicles and got side tracked on Step F. Weapons.

Don't worry, I'll be putting up tests for lasers and energy weapons in the future which appears to be in any area you have experience and interest in.

A word of warning on designing FF&S sidearms, though - the rules are made for longarms - if you want to design realistic pistols you'll have to ignore minimum receiver and barrel lengths and then make up some sensible figures for muzzle energy, etc. The thing is definitely broke for pistols.

Thanks for the heads up that the small arms design sequence focuses on long arms. I think that Guns, Guns, Guns, 3G^3 for short, by BTRC maybe worth a look for pistol design. I know the book has a section on converting 3G^3 to Traveller. Specifically the first printing of the 3rd edition has the process to convert to MT and the second printing can be converted to both TNE and T4. MT was dropped in the second printing.

Of course compared to Striker 3G^3 is a lot of work. The design system may even surpass TNE/T4 FF&S.

Once I figured these things out though, I had great fun designing weapons and then drawing them up with... Drat, what was the name of that online gun designer? - you can tell it's been a while.

If you recall what the name and where the online gun designer application/program might be found can you please let me know.

Thanks for the reply,

 

[DonM]

Do you have a copy of the MT conversion? I've been looking for that for years... I have the later edition, but wanted the MT one...

 

[Icosahedron]

Morning Icosahedron,

I'm going differ and say that Design Sequence 1 Vehicles is the one that is like too much work and that the twelve other design sequences are just varying levels of work.

To me the design process for an aircraft appears to be less time consuming than a vehicle, while determining the ratings appear to be about the same level. Of course I'm still working on through Design Sequence 1: Vehicles and got side tracked on Step F. Weapons.

The actual vehicles are relatively simple, as you've found, it's the stuff that goes in them that takes the time. You can design an air-raft or a grav bike in a few minutes, but a TL7 MBT with CPR main gun, autocannon, MRL on the turret, etc, etc, is much more awkward.

I found aircraft a nightmare of iterative processes - you get partway through a design and find that the components fit the frame but are overweight and your proposed Hyper-fighter can't even make Mach-1. So you start again, increase the power, then it won't fit the frame, so you start again...
There was much less of that in Vehicles, IMO.

Don't worry, I'll be putting up tests for lasers and energy weapons in the future which appears to be in any area you have experience and interest in.

Hmm, don't expect any miracles - I did a lot of 'tweaking' in Striker. Much of my 'experience' could be in house rules.

Thanks for the heads up that the small arms design sequence focuses on long arms. I think that Guns, Guns, Guns, 3G^3 for short, by BTRC maybe worth a look for pistol design. I know the book has a section on converting 3G^3 to Traveller. Specifically the first printing of the 3rd edition has the process to convert to MT and the second printing can be converted to both TNE and T4. MT was dropped in the second printing.

Of course compared to Striker 3G^3 is a lot of work. The design system may even surpass TNE/T4 FF&S.

Unlike much of my other Traveller material, I've never yet found 3G^3 in the bargain bin at a convention...

If you recall what the name and where the online gun designer application/program might be found can you please let me know.

Thanks for the reply,

It's here:

http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=20992

Fingers are itching again, just from looking at that thread, but I don't have time!

 

[snrdg082102]

Howdy DonM,

Do you have a copy of the MT conversion? I've been looking for that for years... I have the later edition, but wanted the MT one...

Yes, I've got both 3G^3 3rd ed. 1st printing and 2nd printing. I'll contact BTRC to get permission to provide you with the MT conversion essay. Hopefully, the answer will be yes and I'll get them to you.

 

[snrdg082102]

Howdy Icosahedron,

The actual vehicles are relatively simple, as you've found, it's the stuff that goes in them that takes the time. You can design an air-raft or a grav bike in a few minutes, but a TL7 MBT with CPR main gun, autocannon, MRL on the turret, etc, etc, is much more awkward.

To be honest, in my recent attempt I completed DS 1 Step A and Step D, which prompted a question about weight and price calculation waiting until Steps N and O. The answers supported the reasons for the way the design system works, unfortunately I still don't like not having the chassis and/or turret dimensions not having weight or cost. Of course, I'll follow the desing rules, but I don't have to like the result.

Some of my earlier attempts, back in 2003, got as far as Step F.

I found aircraft a nightmare of iterative processes - you get partway through a design and find that the components fit the frame but are overweight and your proposed Hyper-fighter can't even make Mach-1. So you start again, increase the power, then it won't fit the frame, so you start again...
There was much less of that in Vehicles, IMO.

I've only qucikly read through the aircraft design sequence which is similar to, in my opinion, the progess in CT Book 5 and CT Book 2. In the aircraft's case the maximum size is 400. Of course my opinion may change after I go through the sequence.

Hmm, don't expect any miracles - I did a lot of 'tweaking' in Striker. Much of my 'experience' could be in house rules.

I'm not expecting miracles, however an honest effort to get me on track would be a great help

Unlike much of my other Traveller material, I've never yet found 3G^3 in the bargain bin at a convention...

I understand the concept, however at the time I could buy the items brand new off the show room floor. Right now, I have a wish list of stuff I would like to buy in the future.

It's here:

http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=20992

Fingers are itching again, just from looking at that thread, but I don't have time!

Thanks for the link to the thread and getting me to the gun design application.

Catch you later.

 

[snrdg082102]

Update 3G^3 Conversion Essay #5 3G^3 to MegaTraveller

DonM I just heard back from Greg Porter from BTRC and I have permission to provide you with the conversion process. I' ll scan and email them to you hopefully by Saturday 9/29/12.

Howdy DonM,

Yes, I've got both 3G^3 3rd ed. 1st printing and 2nd printing. I'll contact BTRC to get permission to provide you with the MT conversion essay. Hopefully, the answer will be yes and I'll get them to you.

 

[DonM]

Cheers.

A couple of years ago I had a series of discussions with Greg Porter (originating in a search for T4 errata), and asked about the MT conversions, and he didn't have it then, and my nosing around his board didn't get any hits.

Now I need my notes for what it was I wanted this for. It's on my want list, and I've got the e-mails...

Oh, it's on my Traveller Bucket List. I'll put it on the MT errata stack for the moment.

 

[snrdg082102]

Looking at my records I think that I joined the BTRC forum in January of this year. I'm fairly certain I purchased both printings over two years ago.

I've got lots of gaming related material like 3G^3, if you are looking for something game related provide me with a title and I'll dig through my stacks and books to see if I have a copy. Heck, I'll probably find stuff I don't remember buying.

Catch you later,

Cheers.

A couple of years ago I had a series of discussions with Greg Porter (originating in a search for T4 errata), and asked about the MT conversions, and he didn't have it then, and my nosing around his board didn't get any hits.

Now I need my notes for what it was I wanted this for. It's on my want list, and I've got the e-mails...

Oh, it's on my Traveller Bucket List. I'll put it on the MT errata stack for the moment.

 

[Timerover51]

I finished the artillery effective burst radius table, but the unit of fire data is going to take a bit longer. It varies depending on the division, with armored and infantry divisions showing different values. I may just use the highest one, and adjust that based on experience.

Is there any particular format that you want it in? Also, I would appreciate it if you did not share this will people. I put it together from a variety of sources.

 

[snrdg082102]

Morning timerover51,

I finished the artillery effective burst radius table, but the unit of fire data is going to take a bit longer. It varies depending on the division, with armored and infantry divisions showing different values. I may just use the highest one, and adjust that based on experience.

I can believe that the unit of fire table varies and using the highest value sounds like a good plan.

Is there any particular format that you want it in? Also, I would appreciate it if you did not share this will people. I put it together from a variety of sources.

PDF, Excel, Word, or OpenOffice will work for me. No problem as you noticed I got permission before providing material to DonM.