Warships in a Small Ship Universe.

[CliffBates]

I have been thinking, why would people use the terminology of battleship and dreadnoughts when talking about 5000 ton ships? Why not revert to the older pre-steal type of naval vessels.

Follow the old English navy tradition:

Primary
Ship of the Line >3000tons Fully Armored, Fully Loaded wpns
1st Class 5000-6000tons Low M and Low Agility
2nd Class 4000-5000tons
3rd Class 2800-4000tons

Heavy Frigates 1000-2700tons Less Armored, Fully loaded wpns
Frigate 500-900 High to Mid M and same in Agility
Corvettes 300-500
Brig 100-300

Courier 100-400 Fast J and/or M Lightly armed
Scout 100-400 like Courier

Naval Merchantmen --- although in fact merchants but used by the navy to
Brigantines 600-1000tons patrol and enforce. Carries cargo but
Sloops 400-600tons also FULLY ARMED.. AND ITS CARGO
Schooner 200-400tons HOLD could hold fighters and missile boats

Heavy Fleet Tender 4000-6000tons Tenders carry non-jump craft, esp
Fleet Tender 1000-4000tons Fighters and Attack Craft or
Light Tender 800-1000tons Missile Boats or Attack Boats

Monitors 600-1000tons Non Jump, heavily armed+Armored
Boats 300-600tons
Attack Craft 50-100tons

Heavy Fighter 50-60tons NonJ High M + Agility
Light Fighter 10-15tons

Heavy Attack Drone 20-30tons
Attack Drone 10-20tons
Recon Drone 5-20tons

Cutters 50-100 Lightly Armed, Non Jump
Pinnace 40-60 (passanger)
Ship's Boat 30ton
Gig 20ton (transport)


This makes a good list.

Now many of these can have SubTypes based on its function.

Battle Major Combat with other Capital Ship
Strike Long Rand Deep Penetration
Raider Attacking Commerce
Escort Escort
Patrol Patrol
Interdiction To Blockade or Interdict a system
Pickett Pickett or stand watch
Q Decoy or Masked Ship (looked as a unarmed merchant)

Just to name a few

 

[Condottiere]

Forms follow function.

 

[mike wightman]

If you are using CT LBB1-3 TL progression for drives then you have maximum hull sizes for each TL.

If you want decent drive performance (3-4g, jump 3-4) then you find the optimal size for warships, maximum is for the biggest jump 1 maneuver 1 ship you can build at that TL:
TL...hull....maximum
9....200....800
10...400...1000
11...600...2000
12...600...2000
13...800...3000
14..1000...3000
15..3000...5000

 

[nobby-w]

I have been thinking, why would people use the terminology of battleship and dreadnoughts when talking about 5000 ton ships? Why not revert to the older pre-steal type of naval vessels.
...

Depending on the version of Traveller you use, you could use bay weapons as 'main' armaments, although you might need to pimp them up somewhat if you wanted to use CT/High Guard.

Vanilla HG combat for many 'small ship' engagements tends to be very attritional (combat can take 50+ turns to resolve) as the weapons are somewhat underpowered. Some stuff I did^* for a 'small ships' CT/HG setting included:

• 2t and 3t laser barbettes. 2t barbettes gave an additional -2 to damage (2t pulse lasers got -4 for +2 overall) and +1 to the battery factor. 3t got -3 on damage and +2 to battery factor. The weapons are 2x or 3x size, cost and power consumption.
• Missile bays got -3 (+3 overall) to damage for HE rounds. Factor stays the same. To balance this, I enforced the 'three loads' rule and did rules for magazines (an additional 3 loads weighs half the weight of the bay). I also did some rules to conserve missiles - fire half a load for -1 to factor, quarter for -2 to factor.
• Missile turrets got -2 (+4 overall) to damage for HE rounds.
• Bay mounted meson guns and particle accelerator weapons got -4 to damage (+2 overall)
• Fusion gun turrets got -2 (+4 overall) to damage.
• I did some rules for 200t and 300t particle accelerator and meson gun bays, essentially behaving as low-factor spinal mounts.¹
• I did some rules for point defence lasers that had bonuses to factor at the expense of much reduced damage if used to engage a ship. They were, however, quite nasty against ground targets (250MW, 16-lens pulse laser).²
• I did a rule allowing a ship of under 1000 tons (or larger) to fit a single 50t bay weapon, for a cost of 5 turret slots. This was largely to facilitate system defence boats armed with a single missile bay.
• Sandcasters are actually quite effective against low-factor batteries. Try fitting some batteries of 4 triple SC turrets to lower tech ships.

In addition, I've also used Book 2 computer rules instead of the +/- computer, - agility rule from High Guard. This works quite well for role-playing level encounters, but it's a bit unwieldy for TCS.

Under this type of setting, a ship's size is a function of the payload you want to carry - for example, something armed with 1-2 of the large super-bay weapons listed above would run to several thousand tons, probably 5000+. A 500-1000 ton corvette might carry 2-4 2t laser barbettes as its main armament.

Later versions fix many of the balance issues from HG, so this tends not to be such a big deal for Mongoose etc - they seem to do a better job of small ship settings.

¹ It's worth noting that I mostly used these with a TL11-12 fall-of-second-imperium setting, so the large energy weapons carried significant overhead in power plant. For a TL15 setting, these may have balance issues as the associated power plant overhead is much lower. However, the much better armour and screens that can be fitted at higher tech levels may well offset those issues.
² I've also dabbled with reducing the CT/Striker integration rule of 250MW per EP down to 100MW per EP as 250MW/EP makes starship armament way overpowered against ground targets. I also substantially reduced the HG-Striker armour mapping to match.
^* Yes, I have no life - I've lost count of the number of times I've done re-balancing exercises on the CT rules over the last 35 years.

 

[CliffBates]

I apologize for the formatting of my post... I wrote something that looks good then online it looks horrible. My purpose here was to try to modify the way people who wish to create Small Ship Universes for their pocket Empire talk about the types of ship they are designing. The Traveller OTU isn't a small ship Universe... although small ships are part of it and play a very important part of the role playing function of the game.

I am a big fan of High Guard (CT Book 5, 1980).. and usually always used it to design my ships. And military style ships ought to use it rather than CT Book 2, which I have always took to be for commercial and private craft. Although MT and T4 and T20 brought in changes in design, that I only wish was added to High Guard form rather then replace it. I have never liked to design the ship via Book 2 CT... and when I tried to build a ship using T5 recently (even using http://eaglestone.pocketempires.com/ships/t5shipyard/T5Shipyard.htm ) it reminded me why I loved High Guard, especially when you have things like the High Guard Ship Yard or the TCS CT Ship Designer (found at https://tca-2014-12.herokuapp.com/ ).

When I discovered the GRUPS Traveller's Interstellar Wars book, I fell in love with this period as well.. (but I don't like the GRUPS system and I am told soon SJG will stop servicing Traveller). I also found Orbitial and see that these very much tied up the Traveller trajectory from the past to the 3rd Imperium (and its two alternative timelines). It was there where I first ran into the concept that the early Terrans used somewhat different terms for ships.. something I saw in Andrea Vallance's Prometheus Rising ( http://www.downport.com/amv/Promrise/index.htm) pages.

I also have been strongly disagreeing with the idea you can call a dreadnought or even Cruisers in the OTU ships that are 5000tons. To call the 400 ton T class a Patrol Cruiser is very much a misnomer--in fact in the T5 literature its referred in the designs as a Corvette. What I presented above was my attempt to give a wholly another set of names for classes of ships, to distinguish them from what the OTU will envision them being much much larger in mass.

I think that abandoning the terminology for the purposes of the pocket empires would be rather helpful. Yes function does inform design and even size. This is why a dreadnought at 5-6Ktons is a contradiction in terms.

 

[RandyB]

I think that abandoning the terminology for the purposes of the pocket empires would be rather helpful. Yes function does inform design and even size. This is why a dreadnought at 5-6Ktons is a contradiction in terms.

"Contradiction in terms" relative to what within a small ship universe? Or should those who prefer a small ship universe submit their language use to those who prefer a large ship universe?

 

[atpollard]

If you are using CT LBB1-3 TL progression for drives then you have maximum hull sizes for each TL.

If you want decent drive performance (3-4g, jump 3-4) then you find the optimal size for warships, maximum is for the biggest jump 1 maneuver 1 ship you can build at that TL:
TL...hull....maximum
9....200....800
10...400...1000
11...600...2000
12...600...2000
13...800...3000
14..1000...3000
15..3000...5000

I like the data, but what makes it 'optimal'?

 

[GypsyComet]

I like the data, but what makes it 'optimal'?

That really depends on the weapon systems available in the model/edition you use. If nothing but turrets are available and power is not a design consideration outside of drive matching, there is no "optimization" to be had because there are no trade-offs when armament is involved; any hull can carry any assortment to the maximum hard points of the hull.

If there are power concerns, or if bays are introduced, or if surface area becomes a constraint (ala TNE), then weaponry becomes another path toward maximum use of the hull at the cost of other paths (like strategic speed, armor, or payload (passengers, subcraft, and cargo). This can all still be done at 5000 tons and below, but you really do need to move beyond Book 2, which has only two paths available (speed vs payload) with a nod toward "armor" (buying bigger drives than necessary)

 

[mike wightman]

I like the data, but what makes it 'optimal'?

For the purpose of the analysis I did I considered a warship to require at least a 3g maneuver drive, 4g is preferable. The optimal hull size is the biggest hull at that TL that can achieve that drive performance.

Ideally you want your power plant to be one letter higher than your maneuver drive so you can use the double fire option to upgun your ship.

In LBB2 small ship universe the only other way to upgun your ships is to carry smallcraft - a mix of 10t fighters and 30t ship's boats are my usual choice.

 

[CliffBates]

"Contradiction in terms" relative to what within a small ship universe? Or should those who prefer a small ship universe submit their language use to those who prefer a large ship universe?

No its simple reality. These concepts are not as relative. A Dreadnought needs to be a killer of large sized ships. You can't put a ship killing weapon--a spinal mount--on anything smaller than 15-20k. A Cruiser needs to do the same, but with not as much protection but with more speed and range. Your bay weapons are limited at best to Factor 9 when at the higher TL, but at TL 12-13 you will often have to load up with 100 ton bays rather than 50 ton bays to get a factor 9 missile. Factor 9 don't cause a critical hit on ships over 1000 tons.

I just spent the day trying to build a working fleet--addressing all the functions that a operational fleet in war would require. And in a small ship universe, you can't do a lot of needful things.

1. Move Fuel in mass to support areas where refueling will be limited. To leave your Tankers only at 6000 ton makes resupplying fleets hard..

2. Moving Ground Troops. The most I have been able to fit on a 5000ton TL 13 jump 2 level troop is 1500 men.. and at best I could fit only 10-12 50 ton cutters on it. This is simply not enough to land that many forces.

3) Ok so then a 5000 ton tender to carry a whole lot of 50 ton assault landers.. at 2J 1M and only sandcasters to protect itself and even here 60 50 ton cutters, which can carry about 30 troopers down. A 50 ton cutter making an opposed assault landing on a planet will most likely have a 2/5 survival ratio, less if it can't be armored. Now a 80 ton Cutter heavily Armored carrying the same amount of troops will fair better 3.5/5.. but then you would not be able to carry the same amount.

Look a planetary assault would take up at least 20-30 Divisions (with aprox 20k of men in each) at the least. With the limit of 5000 tons transports of 1500 men you would need 267-400 transports alone. And if you then take in the 267-400 pilots needed for each transport.

Like I said I have been trying to go through with logistics and the things needed... and the amount of ships in a small ship assumption would actually force the building of larger ships.. its just the economics of the thing that needs to be done to do what needs to be done.

 

[CliffBates]

For the purpose of the analysis I did I considered a warship to require at least a 3g maneuver drive, 4g is preferable. The optimal hull size is the biggest hull at that TL that can achieve that drive performance.

Ideally you want your power plant to be one letter higher than your maneuver drive so you can use the double fire option to upgun your ship.

In LBB2 small ship universe the only other way to upgun your ships is to carry smallcraft - a mix of 10t fighters and 30t ship's boats are my usual choice.

I am sorry but you can't really have a 10 ton fighter.. its one of those Book 2 problems (like Jump Torpedoes). I have spent a whole day using High Guard Ship yard and I could not get a 10 ton fighter.. not even a 1g and with .2 of a day of fuel for the powerplant and without a gun. The closest I could get was a 15 ton fighter...6g agility 6 but with missiles..

 

[GypsyComet]

No its simple reality. These concepts are not as relative.

You may be coming at this backwards. You can't necessarily use the Big Ship definitions straight in a Small Ship setting. Instead of asking "can a dreadnought work at only 6000 dtons?" the question may be "what is a dreadnought in a 6000 dton universe?"

 

[mike wightman]

I am sorry but you can't really have a 10 ton fighter.. its one of those Book 2 problems (like Jump Torpedoes). I have spent a whole day using High Guard Ship yard and I could not get a 10 ton fighter.. not even a 1g and with .2 of a day of fuel for the powerplant and without a gun. The closest I could get was a 15 ton fighter...6g agility 6 but with missiles..

Then HG shipyard is bugged because I can build 6t fighters with HG2 the old fashioned way.
Besides the 10t fighter is a standard design in LBB2.

 

[aramis]

I have been thinking, why would people use the terminology of battleship and dreadnoughts when talking about 5000 ton ships? Why not revert to the older pre-steal type of naval vessels.

Because those are the terms most people can related to, unlike the old Spanish/English SOL/Frigate/Sloop model.

A model, which, by the way, changed about every 20 years in period. Therefore, it's less stable overall in what people understand of it. Also, it's much more vague as to mission.

 

[Matt123]

I am sorry but you can't really have a 10 ton fighter...

It is doable, maybe not the best fighter in the OTU, but doable.

Fighter, Light Fighter
10 ton, TL 9 Civilian Design, 20.62 MCr
1 crew (Command: 1+0)

_Ton.____MCr.____EP.____
| __.__ | _1.10 | _.__ | Cone, streamlined, fuel scoops
| _0.50 | _0.03 | _.__ | 1 x control couch, no bridge
| _1.00 | _2.00 | _.__ | computer model 1, rated as model 0 (no bridge) 
| _1.70 | _0.85 | _.__ | drive maneouver #6 
| _4.80 | 14.40 | _.__ | power plant #G 
| __.__ | __.__ | 0.60 | agility #6
| _1.00 | __.__ | _.__ | fuel, PP endurance 2 weeks (40 weeks powered down)
| _1.00 | _2.25 | _.__ | HE missile (turret) #2 x1
‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒
| 10.00 | 20.62 | 0.60 EP used, PP generates 1.60 EPs

20.83 MCr (first ship, includes architect fees) built in 24 weeks
16.50 MCr (20% discount in volume, TCS) built in 20 weeks
CT Ship Designer by Matt. Visit https://tca-2014-12.herokuapp.com

 

[aramis]

Then HG shipyard is bugged because I can build 6t fighters with HG2 the old fashioned way.
Besides the 10t fighter is a standard design in LBB2.

Minimum possible tonnage is, given the rules of HG, which specify a minimum 1 ton each for MD, PP, Fuel, and fire control.

1.0 MD
1.0 PP
1.0 computer model/1
0.5 pilot couch
1.0 fuel
1.0 fire control

TL15, 5.5 tons, 6G, P6, 4 weeks fuel, 1EP, agility 6 if missile armed, agility 0 if single laser. Nice little popcorn unit. sucks 7.15 tons in a maintenace-capable slot, 5.5 in an external cradle.

TL13, 6.5 tons, 5G, Agility 5, EP, Missile rack.


Bringing it to a more useful cockpit design...
4.0 Bridge (P/G)
1.0 Computer
1.0 MD
1.0 PP
1.0 Fuel
1.0 Armament

TL 15, 9.0 total tonnage, Model 1. 4G, Agility 4 (0 with a single laser).

TL13 Missile	TL13 Laser
4.0 Bridge (P/G) 1.0 Computer Model 1 1.4 MD 5G 1.0 PP 0.5PP 1.0 Fuel 1.0 Fire Control	4.0 Bridge (P/G) 1.0 Computer Model 1 1.6 MD 5G 2.4 PP 10, 1.2EP 1.0 Fuel 3 weeks. 1.0 Fire Control
9.4	11

So
TL13, 9.4 Td, 5G, Agility 5, Model 1, missile rack (triple, technically, can be used). Cannot mount a laser. has SC bridge. Has factor 3 missile.

TL 13, 11, 5G, Agility 1, Model 1, Laser, 1x missile, 1xSC, has SC bridge.
Laser is factor 2, Missile is factor 2, SC is factor 3.

Not a great threat in and of itself, but it takes a battery to shoot it under strict HG2 rules...

So, if building a Bk5 SSU, they are reasonably potent.

(There are no canonical Bk2 small craft design rules, but the above HG designs show that it's reachable.)

 

[CliffBates]

Minimum possible tonnage is, given the rules of HG, which specify a minimum 1 ton each for MD, PP, Fuel, and fire control.

1.0 MD
1.0 PP
1.0 computer model/1
0.5 pilot couch
1.0 fuel
1.0 fire control

TL15, 5.5 tons, 6G, P6, 4 weeks fuel, 1EP, agility 6 if missile armed, agility 0 if single laser. Nice little popcorn unit. sucks 7.15 tons in a maintenace-capable slot, 5.5 in an external cradle.

TL13, 6.5 tons, 5G, Agility 5, EP, Missile rack.


Bringing it to a more useful cockpit design...
4.0 Bridge (P/G)
1.0 Computer
1.0 MD
1.0 PP
1.0 Fuel
1.0 Armament

TL 15, 9.0 total tonnage, Model 1. 4G, Agility 4 (0 with a single laser).

TL13 Missile	TL13 Laser
4.0 Bridge (P/G) 1.0 Computer Model 1 1.4 MD 5G 1.0 PP 0.5PP 1.0 Fuel 1.0 Fire Control	4.0 Bridge (P/G) 1.0 Computer Model 1 1.6 MD 5G 2.4 PP 10, 1.2EP 1.0 Fuel 3 weeks. 1.0 Fire Control
9.4	11

So
TL13, 9.4 Td, 5G, Agility 5, Model 1, missile rack (triple, technically, can be used). Cannot mount a laser. has SC bridge. Has factor 3 missile.

TL 13, 11, 5G, Agility 1, Model 1, Laser, 1x missile, 1xSC, has SC bridge.
Laser is factor 2, Missile is factor 2, SC is factor 3.

Not a great threat in and of itself, but it takes a battery to shoot it under strict HG2 rules...

So, if building a Bk5 SSU, they are reasonably potent.

(There are no canonical Bk2 small craft design rules, but the above HG designs show that it's reachable.)

Thanks.. your post does clarified things. I went back and re-read Book 5 High Guard. Thus there is something amiss in the High Guard Shipyard... cause I was hitting a problem with anything smaller than 15tons. But with the online TCS website--I was making a rather well armored 10ton missile fighter...

Check.

FF-00100 10 ton Fighter FF-0206701-C00000-00002-0 MCr 16.43 10.00 tons
batteries bearing 1 Crew=1
batteries 1 TL=12
Passengers=0 Low=0 Cargo=0 Fuel=1.0 EP=0.7 Agility=6
Emergency_agility=6 Def_mod=8 Architects_fees=MCr0.16 Discounted_cost=MCr13.14


10 ton Fighter, Fast Fighter
10 ton, TL 12 Military Design, 16.43 MCr
1 crew (Command: 1+0)

Ton.____MCr.____EP.____
| _.__ | _1.10 | _.__ | Cone, streamlined, fuel scoops
| 2.60 | _3.90 | _.__ | hull armour #C
| 0.50 | _0.03 | _.__ | 1 x control couch, no bridge
| 1.00 | _2.00 | _.__ | computer model 1, rated as model 0 (no bridge)
| 1.70 | _0.85 | _.__ | drive maneouver #6
| 2.10 | _6.30 | _.__ | power plant #7
| _.__ | __.__ | 0.60 | agility #6
| 1.00 | __.__ | _.__ | fuel, PP endurance 5 weeks (39 weeks powered down)
| 1.00 | _2.25 | _.__ | HE/Nuc missile (turret) #2 x1
‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒
| 9.90 | 16.43 | 0.60 EP used, PP generates 0.70 EPs

16.59 MCr (first ship, includes architect fees) built in 24 weeks
13.14 MCr (20% discount in volume, TCS) built in 20 weeks
CT Ship Designer by Matt. Visit https://tca-2014-12.herokuapp.com

But notice that the TCS website give the 3x missiles a factor 2.. where as above Aramis points out it should be factor 3. Odd.

 

[CliffBates]

It is doable, maybe not the best fighter in the OTU, but doable.

Fighter, Light Fighter
10 ton, TL 9 Civilian Design, 20.62 MCr
1 crew (Command: 1+0)

_Ton.____MCr.____EP.____
| __.__ | _1.10 | _.__ | Cone, streamlined, fuel scoops
| _0.50 | _0.03 | _.__ | 1 x control couch, no bridge
| _1.00 | _2.00 | _.__ | computer model 1, rated as model 0 (no bridge) 
| _1.70 | _0.85 | _.__ | drive maneouver #6 
| _4.80 | 14.40 | _.__ | power plant #G 
| __.__ | __.__ | 0.60 | agility #6
| _1.00 | __.__ | _.__ | fuel, PP endurance 2 weeks (40 weeks powered down)
| _1.00 | _2.25 | _.__ | HE missile (turret) #2 x1
‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒
| 10.00 | 20.62 | 0.60 EP used, PP generates 1.60 EPs

20.83 MCr (first ship, includes architect fees) built in 24 weeks
16.50 MCr (20% discount in volume, TCS) built in 20 weeks
CT Ship Designer by Matt. Visit https://tca-2014-12.herokuapp.com

I stand corrected.. yes TCN does allow it and Aramis's post below confirms its possible. There must be a bug in the High Guard Shipyard Program when you get under 15 tons things don't work.. it has to do with the power plant.

Also the TCS online design program requires you to increase PowerPlant by one when using just missiles cause something other than the computer is eating a bit of EP somewhere.

 

[CliffBates]

Because those are the terms most people can related to, unlike the old Spanish/English SOL/Frigate/Sloop model.

A model, which, by the way, changed about every 20 years in period. Therefore, it's less stable overall in what people understand of it. Also, it's much more vague as to mission.

I agree that the terms did shift.... yet in terms of function, you are limited in what you can do with a 5000ton ship. No spinal mounts and only 5 bay weapons with a max of factor 9 when at high tech levels for PA and Meson bays. And a Factor 9 will not cause critical hits or kill 5000 ton ship. And a Capital Ship ought to Crush its lesser ships. Here a 5000 will have not the destructive impact on a 1000 ton, as it would a 900 ton or less.

So the best strategy in this SSU is go build up to 1000tons.. and thus insure you ship can't get a critical hit.. and armor up.

 

[McPerth]

No its simple reality. These concepts are not as relative. A Dreadnought needs to be a killer of large sized ships. You can't put a ship killing weapon--a spinal mount--on anything smaller than 15-20k. A Cruiser needs to do the same, but with not as much protection but with more speed and range. Your bay weapons are limited at best to Factor 9 when at the higher TL, but at TL 12-13 you will often have to load up with 100 ton bays rather than 50 ton bays to get a factor 9 missile. Factor 9 don't cause a critical hit on ships over 1000 tons.

Sure, there are not such one hit/one kill weapons in HG2/MT (other versions make those small ships more letal), but neither were there in big ships in the Battleship era (WWI/WWII) in wet navies (the closer was the torpedo, but it was used by small ships, and there's no equivalent in Traveller anyway). Few large ships were killed by a single hit of their big guns (and when so, it usually was a critical hit).

But, as GypsyComet said, if in your univers there is a limit (for any reasons given, in fact because the referee so decrees in his TU) on what can you build that can be moved in space (let's say 5-6 Kdton), you build the best you can at this tonnage or lower. Off course larger ships could be more efficient, and they sure are a dream for engineers, but the "realities" of the physics in that TU preclude it.

I just spent the day trying to build a working fleet--addressing all the functions that a operational fleet in war would require. And in a small ship universe, you can't do a lot of needful things.

1. Move Fuel in mass to support areas where refueling will be limited. To leave your Tankers only at 6000 ton makes resupplying fleets hard..

Yes, a small ship TU has its own challenges. You cannot augment the payload of your fleet by making larger ships, so you must make more compromisos, and usually you need more ships. That's what makes it interesting for some of us.

In any TU (be it large ships or small ships), the most a tanker can carry as distribution fuel is about 20-25% of its tonnage¹ at J3 (assuming it needs fuel for 2 jumps by itself, as it will need to be used when other refuelling means are not available and it's assumed you want to recover them). In a large ships universe, you make them larger, in a small ship universe, you build more. In both cases resupplying fleets is a nightmare (and if you add missiles, replacements, etc. to the equation, it becomes even worse).

In MT, due to reduced jump fuel needs, some more​

2. Moving Ground Troops. The most I have been able to fit on a 5000ton TL 13 jump 2 level troop is 1500 men.. and at best I could fit only 10-12 50 ton cutters on it. This is simply not enough to land that many forces.

3) Ok so then a 5000 ton tender to carry a whole lot of 50 ton assault landers.. at 2J 1M and only sandcasters to protect itself and even here 60 50 ton cutters, which can carry about 30 troopers down. A 50 ton cutter making an opposed assault landing on a planet will most likely have a 2/5 survival ratio, less if it can't be armored. Now a 80 ton Cutter heavily Armored carrying the same amount of troops will fair better 3.5/5.. but then you would not be able to carry the same amount.

Look a planetary assault would take up at least 20-30 Divisions (with aprox 20k of men in each) at the least. With the limit of 5000 tons transports of 1500 men you would need 267-400 transports alone. And if you then take in the 267-400 pilots needed for each transport.

Like I said I have been trying to go through with logistics and the things needed... and the amount of ships in a small ship assumption would actually force the building of larger ships.. its just the economics of the thing that needs to be done to do what needs to be done.

Planetary invasions are a true logistical nightmare in any TU. Just the cost of carrying the troops awake (at 2 kCr/person/fourthnight just in life support) will guive your quartermaster a peptic ulcer, and carring them in cold sleep will mean some casualties just for transport (about 8% in CT, few to none fatal, but some injuried in MT, unspecified AFAIK in MgT, IDK enough of other versions).

As for the landing itself, the cutters, as you suggest, are a good way, but also a costly one, both in tonnage needed and casualties (as you explain quite well).

But there are other ways:

1. Drop capsules: discussed in other threads. Personally not my favorite
2. Landing the transport itself: in CT there is no clear upper limit for a ship to land, but at least a 1000 dons one can land (as is the limit given in the NI bases to be servicied by ground facilities).
3. Combat landers: similar to 2, but with specific ships. A ship in the 400-1000 dton range, heavily armored, with high MD and no JD (being carried by a tender) can carry quite a lot of troops (no need for staterooms, at most couches) or supplies in their interface trips
4. Grav belts: a mix among 1 and 2-3. The ship makes the atmospheric reentry but, instead of landing, drops the CA/BD, grav belt equiped, troops for grav controlled descent.

Options 1 and 4 would be the equivalent to paradrop assaults, with all their advantages (no specially designed ships, no tonnage needed for landers...) and drawbacks (troop dispersion, need for specially trained troops, low supplies at landing, no way out if worse comes to worse, ...).

Options 2 and 3 would be the equivalent to beach landings, with all their advantages (concentrated troops at landing, posibility to carry supplies, direct support by the landers themselves, no need for specially trained troops...) and drawbacks (need for specialized crafts, mostly in option 3, risk for the crafts/ships themselves...)

See that in a large ship universe, option 2 is probably not available (but 3 is easier, as you can carry more such crafts).