Traveller Mongoose Supplement 5 Armor

[seaeagle23]

Greetings,
I have been trying for few weeks to figure out how to make armor for the "Mongoose Traveller Supplement 5 Civilian Vehicles" book.

"ARMOUR EXAMPLE
Following on from the previous example, our van (made from advanced composites) has a Base Armour of 4 and a Base M3 of
26. We will allocate 2% of the van’s M3 to additional armour made from Light Alloys. This will use up 0.52 M3 (2% of 26 M3), has
a mass of 832 kg (0.52 x 1,600), costs Cr. 1,300 (0.52 M3 x 2,500), and gives our vehicle a further 8 points of armour (2 x 4).
The van now has 12 armour (4 + 8), but because we chose the Box confi guration in Step Two we get an armour multiplier of
0.8. This gives a total of 9.6 armour points, which rounds up to 10. We also added Refl ec Coating which gives a +5 armour
bonus against lasers for a total of 15."

That's a quote from the book. My problem is where does the value of 1600 used in finding the weight of armor come from.

Regards,
SeaEagle
P.S.:This is my first post on any website. Please forgive me if i did post this in the wrong place

 

[infojunky]

The short answer is ditch it and get Vehicles 5-6. i.e. the working second try at vehicles rules by Mongoose.

The answer for that design system might be in book 6 the Military vehicles book.

 

[seaeagle23]

The short answer is ditch it and get Vehicles 5-6. i.e. the working second try at vehicles rules by Mongoose.

The answer for that design system might be in book 6 the Military vehicles book.

Thanks for the reply but sup 6 uses the same example

 

[infojunky]

Thanks for the reply but sup 6 uses the same example

Figures... I seem to recall trying to use the system when it came out and very rapidly hitting a wall also. I was pleasantly surprised with the usability of Vehicles 5/6.

Also Note Vehicles 5/6 is in the SRD as well.

 

[Brandon C]

That's a quote from the book. My problem is where does the value of 1600 used in finding the weight of armor come from.

I think the example is in error and the 1600 should be 4800. I'll look and see if there was some reason to multiply the 4800 by 1/3.

P.S.:This is my first post on any website. Please forgive me if i did post this in the wrong place

Welcome!

 

[seaeagle23]

Greetings,
Thank you for your response...as i will be waiting for your reply
Regards,
seaeagle23

 

[seaeagle23]

Greetings,
Thank you for your response...as i will be waiting for your reply
Regards,
seaeagle23

 

[Brandon C]

Thank you for your response...as i will be waiting for your reply

Okay, it looks like the 1600 should be 4800. My guess is that there were different armor weights when the example was written, but when they were changed the number in the example was missed.

 

[seaeagle23]

Greetings,

Thanks for the help. My brain can finally get a break.
I have spent a week looking for answers.

Regards,
seaeagle23

 

[infojunky]

I'm glad someone knew the answer. I went looking for the book, and it is filed really deep.

 

[seaeagle23]

I am amazed. I have seen on other boards where the population
usually crucifies anyone looking for help.

Again thanks for the help

seaeagle23

 

[infojunky]

I am amazed. I have seen on other boards where the population
usually crucifies anyone looking for help.

Oh we have our opinions, just we all are here for the same thing. The real problem here is that there might be 5 different opinions about how a passage reads and how we deal with it. The key thing to remember is that we have 40 years worth of rules in play and many groups play with hybrid rules from them all.

 

[kilemall]

I am amazed. I have seen on other boards where the population
usually crucifies anyone looking for help.

Again thanks for the help

seaeagle23

Perhaps also the whole Traveller topic is vast given all the versions, and anyone who thinks they have it all down is both delusional and due for an inevitable comeuppance.

We are ALL in your shoes at one point or another.

We're just old enough to know we don't have all the answers, but the answers are out there with someone else.

As to post location, since this was a specific Mongoose question I'd think about posting future specific version questions in that version's forum. But Lone Star is kind of a catchall, and some questions may start with a version and get into wider scopes. It's not cut and dry.

 

[Timerover51]

I am amazed. I have seen on other boards where the population
usually crucifies anyone looking for help.

Again thanks for the help

seaeagle23

If someone is really looking for help on this forum, they will get it. They might get several different ideas in the help, but they will get it. Most of us subscribe it think to the idea that the only stupid question is the one not asked.

 

[aramis]

If someone is really looking for help on this forum, they will get it. They might get several different ideas in the help, but they will get it. Most of us subscribe it think to the idea that the only stupid question is the one not asked.

On the gripping hand, you're likely to get bunch of different answers here...

 

[Brandon C]

On the gripping hand, you're likely to get bunch of different answers here...

For example, of the Traveller sets I have (CT, MT, TNE*, GT and MgT1e), the set I find best for starship and vehicle design is GT

* Specifically FF&S

 

[aramis]

For example, of the Traveller sets I have (CT, MT, TNE*, GT and MgT1e), the set I find best for starship and vehicle design is GT

* Specifically FF&S

Don McKinney, Dr Skull, and I tore Hunter's draft to shreds, the rebuilt much of it. Make me happy when others like it!

 

[Brandon C]

Don McKinney, Dr Skull, and I tore Hunter's draft to shreds, the rebuilt much of it. Make me happy when others like it!

Original GT, not GT:IW.

 

[mike wightman]

The one with power slices rather than a power plant and US Imperial units rather than metric?

No thanks.

GT:ISW remains one of my favourite design systems though since it incorporates lessons learned from FF&S

 

[Brandon C]

The one with power slices rather than a power plant and US Imperial units rather than metric?

Yes. Didn't say it was perfect.

GT:ISW remains one of my favourite design systems though since it incorporates lessons learned from FF&S

It's also 4e. I am far too heavily invested in 3e (over 150 books and, at the time, 15 years of accumulated little tweaks) to be worth it to me to change editions.