• 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.

Vote Your Canon #4: Jump Torpedos (consensus: NOT)

Are jump torpedos canon?

  • Total voters
    43
  • Poll closed .
Grav_Moped said:
Navigators? /shrug/
Click to expand...
Navigators are superfluous ... until you need one.

To be fair, the the navigator "job" and skill are about as open ended and nebulous as possible, giving Referees maximum flexibility in how important they are. The thing is, what they do amounts to little more than "aiming" and being an orienteer (we're HERE, go THERE by THAT course) which in actual gameplay is usually handwaved away in a "set course, engage!" kind of way.

I mean, gunners do things that make an obvious difference (they shoot stuff!) but navigators are basically glorified map folders.

Of course, anyone who has watched the movie Hidden Figures will understand that the mathematics for navigation, launches and landings (in space) is anything BUT simple ... but in the Traveller universe it's one of those things that's just taken for granted (like gravitics and fusion power being "easy" technologies in the setting) because Computers Aren't Humans anymore.

And then the one other thing specifically called out by the Navigator skill in LBB1 ... reading and interpreting results on the long range sensors ... gets completely glossed over and forgotten about by pretty much everyone. Probably because Spock usually did that job, not Checkov, so no one really thinks about the navigator as the Sensor Ops Officer.
 
Spinward Flow said:
Navigators are superfluous ... until you need one.
Click to expand...
Rules as written, you only need a warm body with Nav-1.
Don't even need that in a Type S.
They (in game mechanics terms) literally have no effect on operations.
In RPG terms, there's a lot they can and should be doing.
Subsequent rules versions addressed this oversight.
Spinward Flow said:
navigator as the Sensor Ops Officer
Click to expand...
There wasn't a Sensor Ops Officer position in CT, nor rules to support it.
Which is fine, as it's then up to the ref as to how to handle those tasks. Given the lack of rules, it'd been ref fiat back then anyhow. Probably still is for many campaigns.
 
Grav_Moped said:
There wasn't a Sensor Ops Officer position in CT, nor rules to support it.
Click to expand...
CT didn't need Sensor Ops.
Bridges had WINDOWS !!! :oops:

Besides, how long range do your sensors need to be when your ships almost never engage in interplanetary travel (since 100D is all you ever need to go, and you can do that in any ol' direction)?
 
Spinward Flow said:
how long range do your sensors need to be
Click to expand...
1.5 meters, 3 if they're milspec -- in either case, maybe 9 meters if it's not a surprise.

LBB2 '81, p.32: Civilian and military detection ranges, and the range you can track a previously-detected ship.

Outside of combat, the sensors' capabilities are whatever the plot calls for.
 
Condottiere said:
That had to do with the Tarkin Doctrine, as well as cost cutting.

Apparently, there was a black budget project that was sucking up all the funding.
Click to expand...
I had a story prepared for Hunter Gordon about a fighter-bomber squadron (checking Travellermap) in either the Vanguard Reaches or Far Frontiers, and their vessels were a kind of four man fighter-bomber ... eh, kind of a B-17 or B-24 Liberator fuselage sized hull that was essentially the Comet fighter from Starfleet Wars (a Colonial Viper knock off). I called the thing a Banshee, and they were a strike group operating off of a carrier deployed to the region by the Imperium. The tale was going to be encountering an ancient automated "robotic" fleet from an empire vanquished many millenia ago by another race (something I had planned for an SFB - ADB submission, but got soured on the idea for a number of reasons).

Anyway, I thought about making the strike craft "jump capable", and just writing it up as a Customized Traveller Universe (CTU) write up or adventure that essentially broke the 100dT limit and rewrote it, but ... I just got busy with MBS tweaking my life from a distance, and so never followed through with it. However, personally, I think it's a cool idea, and I'm thinking letting small craft do mini-jumps is a pretty nifty ATU where carriers are deployed to systems, and strike craft and fighter squadrons like make micro-jumps to various worlds from the carrier to perform strikes, recon, or other missions.

As for Star Wars ... eh, well, as per mister Lucas's caveat it is more of a fantasy fiction than actual scifi, so fighter sized craft going through hyperspace ... it seems okay and in line with the general fiction of that setting. I don't know the details, and not really interested in it, but think that Star Wars' itself added a much needed energy to a genre that was mired in a lot of mass media that was not action oriented and needed to be. To me it adds to Traveller, and I think a good ATU would have jump capable small craft of all kinds.
 
Last edited:
1. They can build micro jump drives in Star Wars, though I'm a tad unclear about the actual range.

2. Failing that, they have a hyper jump drive ring attachment, which could have also been an add on for a TIE Fighter, had they chosen to make it an option during design.

3. It depends on what our definition of fighter would be, mostly it has to do more with figuring out movement and manoeuvre penalties gleaned from the rules, which tend to make cut off points at forty nine, ninety nine, one hundred nine, and so on, tonnes.
 
Grav_Moped said:
The idea is to bounce it back to a friendly star system (or at least one with friendly traffic) where it just sits at 100D (because it can't maneuver or anything) and yells for help.
Click to expand...

If you were under attack, which would you rather do:

1. Make a run for the jump point. Let the navigator do his thing and pray you make it.

2. Let the navigator prep the torpedo. Launch it under fire. Pray it doesn't get popped or that the navigator didn't botch the job. Then still deal with somebody shooting at you.

3. Yes. You have better faith in the dice than I.
 
Deldarius said:
If you were under attack, which would you rather do:

1. Make a run for the jump point. Let the navigator do his thing and pray you make it.

2. Let the navigator prep the torpedo. Launch it under fire. Pray it doesn't get popped or that the navigator didn't botch the job. Then still deal with somebody shooting at you.

3. Yes. You have better faith in the dice than I.
Click to expand...
Use cases:
- Ship's primary (and backup, if you're talking Leviathan) jump drives got shot up.
- We found something really interesting but don't want to spend two weeks going back to friendly space and then returning to here, just to keep our corporate overlords in the loop.
- J-Torp has more range than the ship, and can reach friendly space even though the ship can't. Call for help and let them know you'll be running to Planet X, and will probably need aid when you get there.
 
Last edited:
Grav_Moped said:
Use cases:
- Ship's primary (and backup, if you're talking Leviathan) jump drives got shot up.
- We found something really interesting but don't want to spend two weeks going back to friendly space and then returning to here, just to keep our corporate overlords in the loop.
- J-Torp has more range than the ship, and can reach friendly space even though the ship can't. Call for help and let them know you'll be running to Planet X, and will probably need aid when you get there.
Click to expand...
Those make sense.

Analogues to a carrier pigeon in the golden age of sail. Probably as reliable too.
 
Spinward Flow said:
The entire concept of FTL via Jump enforces a Carrier Pigeon Packet Protocol on ALL communications across interstellar distances.
The only difference is ... how big does the carrier pigeon need to be in order to carry the message(s)? :unsure:
Click to expand...
I always though the real reason for a navigator was to have a sentient being as the the final decision maker for entrance/exit from jump. The computers are really doing the heavy lifting, but you need a meatbag to put their booger hook on the bang switch.

An unattended jump would be nothing more than an ordnance launch, albeit one with significant range.
 
You don't really need a navigator, and in theory, to get your master's certification, presumably that requires astrogation zero.
 
Condottiere said:
You don't really need a navigator, and in theory, to get your master's certification, presumably that requires astrogation zero.
Click to expand...
Astrogation 0 is still a measurable skill. It would qualify the person as the ships astrogator as far as regulations and insurance purposes go.

You are driving a multi Mcr vessel around. One would think some regulatory agency would want someone accountable if something went wrong.
 
Deldarius said:
Astrogation 0 is still a measurable skill. It would qualify the person as the ships astrogator as far as regulations and insurance purposes go.

You are driving a multi Mcr vessel around. One would think some regulatory agency would want someone accountable if something went wrong.
Click to expand...
Navigation-0 is only useful on small ships (those above 200Td need Navigator-1, though CT don't provide a game mechanic where it's used for starships), and there's an implication that Pilot-1 incorporates Navigator-0. Since it's a subset of Pilot (for small ships only), it doesn't trigger the dual-role skill penalty when used there.
 
Deldarius said:
Astrogation 0 is still a measurable skill. It would qualify the person as the ships astrogator as far as regulations and insurance purposes go.

You are driving a multi Mcr vessel around. One would think some regulatory agency would want someone accountable if something went wrong.
Click to expand...
To qualify as a Coxswain in the USCGAUX one of the courses you have to pass is a Navigation exam. So, to be a starship pilot you would think (I would) that you would need Nav-1.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Jetrock
MGT Only: 150-ton Wind-class SX Scout/Courier
Replies
6
Views
693
Jetrock
Jetrock
C
Space craft classification societies’ in Traveller?
2 3
Replies
55
Views
6K
Chris Barlow
C
C
Why Were There Not Multiple Settings for Classic Traveller?
2 3
Replies
59
Views
5K
Hyphen
H
aramis
Before the OTU...
2 3
Replies
42
Views
4K
aramis
aramis
D
Don's Hermeneutic
Replies
0
Views
4K
DonM
D
Back
Top