CT Only: Wasp ship (Eurisko) controversy

[AnotherDilbert]

To the limits, not through the limits…

Quite, so it's an argument about where the limit is.
If a ship is published as a Traveller ship, it's a strong argument that it is not over the limit.

But Eurisko used F(6fib) computer (if it used acomputer 2 it would have been useless in combat)

The Eurisko class had a massive PP to run the jump drive, so had no problem with agility.

The Wasp class had a PP-6 (60 EP) and a comp m/6fib (-5 EP).
So, it has Agility-5 and Emergency Agility-6.
Without power consuming weapons it could routinely use Emergency Agility as SOP, so was effectively Agility-6 at all times.
It's a shortcut in the USP, it has nothing to do with whether the drive is valid.

LBB5 designs use LBB5 rules, even if those same rules allow to use the drives in LBB2, they keep being LBB5 rules and LBB5 designs.

Yes, of course. And LBB5'80 allows LBB2 drives, according to LBB2 rules.

And, as you say, Eurisko was a LBB5 design (as LBB5 allowed limited use of LBB2 rules, but the opposite was not)

Agreed, LBB5'80 explicitly allows LBB2 drives, LBB2 makes no such concessions.

And all officially published ship designs were right and legal, weren't they?

No, but it's a strong argument, especially for such a hotly contested and debated design.

CT generally held a higher quality than later editions. Not only Shattered Ships, but most MT ship designs were somewhat weird, perhaps to degrade them to be similar to CT forebears, cf the Scout.

 

[McPerth]

Agreed, it should have been a "6" in the USP. Does not affect whether it's a valid design.

Agreed, just a side comment...

I can only speculate that the "AI" software originally designed it at a larger size, or perhaps with drop tanks as the other ships in the fleet.

Well, I don't believe it was for drop tanks, having no JD...

The Eurisko class had a massive PP to run the jump drive, so had no problem with agility.

Sorry, I meant the Wasp

Yes, of course. And LBB5'80 allows LBB2 drives, according to LBB2 rules.

I'm afraid I disagree here...

The exact phrasing is:

It is possible to include standard drives (at standard prices) from Book 2 if they will otherwise meet the ship's requirements; such drives use fuel as indicated by the formulas in Book 2.

So, only in fuel they use LBB2 rules. In all other aspects, not explicited as an exception, this is a LBB5 rule, and, as such, subject to LLB5 ruling, inlcuiding TLs.

 

[kilemall]

Next how do you determine the actual EPs produced by a letter drive?

Do you use the largest hull it can fit into for that pp number or do you use the hull size it is in?
Z drive in 800t full ppN6 - EPs = 48
Z drive in 2000t hull ppN6 - EPs = 120

Hmm I see your point. I’d say EP calc off the high size for the power plant value so it’s consistent. Smaller ships therefore have more discretionary EPs to go towards computers, weapons etc.

This solution could also handle things like powering small craft weapons.

 

[McPerth]

All postst to now have been moved from another thread

 

[atpollard]

Then I must be no one. ...

What I know about Eurisko doesn't make me hate it (Side note, I guess "it should be used when refering to Eurisco, while "him when refering to Lenat. My appologies if this is not right). It just pushed to the limit may own saying that is in extreme cases when you find the flaws.



Is not a requirement taht any component must be equal or lower in TL tahn the ship's? If so I musr reread the rules, as I clearly didn't understand them...



And the rules say Drives Z are TL15...

Basic Traveller (what is also called Prototraveller) is a whole, including LBB1-3. Saying "as this is in LBB3 doesn't apply to LBB2 is like saying, for AD&D "as this is in teh DMG doesn't apply to the PH".

Another example would be a Doctor ignoring an adverse effect of a drug because "this is a pharmacologist matter, not a medical one"...

I don't know if this is a factor or not (I don't play TCS or LBB5 Combat enough to really get into the nuances or care about tournaments except as a minor curiosity) ... however, I seem to recall something about drive letters X,Y,Z in the HG USP being redefined for special cases and placed in a note ... so is the "Z" drive a LBB2 "Z-Drive" or a LBB5 "Z" (redefined for a special case) LBB5 Drive?

 

[Tobias]

It's definitely Book 2 drive shenanigans. I crunched the numbers, the ship can't work with Book 5 drives.
By my calculations, it should be actual Z-drives. (One ton over-tonnaged then, but then again, you could use half-staterooms for some of the crew, so no issue.)
Strange thing: The price. It's listed as almost MCr 900, a full 100 more than the ship would have even with Z-Drives.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I don't know if this is a factor or not (I don't play TCS or LBB5 Combat enough to really get into the nuances or care about tournaments except as a minor curiosity) ... however, I seem to recall something about drive letters X,Y,Z in the HG USP being redefined for special cases and placed in a note ... so is the "Z" drive a LBB2 "Z-Drive" or a LBB5 "Z" (redefined for a special case) LBB5 Drive?

Yes, Z can mean 33, or any large number needed, but I doubt the Wasp has an M-drive 30...

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I'm afraid I disagree here...

The exact phrasing is:

Custom-built drives must be produced and installed while observing restrictions as to tech level and interior space. It is possible to include standard drives (at standard prices) from Book 2 if they will otherwise meet the ship's requirements; such drives use fuel as indicated by the formulas in Book 2.

So, only in fuel they use LBB2 rules. In all other aspects, not explicited as an exception, this is a LBB5 rule, and, as such, subject to LLB5 ruling, inlcuiding TLs.

Yes, we disagree, both on this and LBB2 drives in LBB2 ships.

So, we have to look for other evidence.

The Wasp class is the only example of an LBB5 ship explicitly with LBB2 drives I can recall. It gives a clue...

 

[Spinward Flow]

Next how do you determine the actual EPs produced by a letter drive?

Solved that one over a year ago.

LBB2.81 standard drives follow a formula for drive throughput of Code: 1 @ 200 ton increments and the "yield" of the drive is simple multiplication/division (dropping fractions) for different hull sizes.

1. Drive-A = Code: 1 in a 200 ton hull (Free Trader)
2. Drive-A = Code: 2 in a 100 ton hull (Scout/Courier)
3. Drive-A = Code: 3 in a 66 ton hull
4. Drive-A = Code: 4 in a 50 ton hull (Cutter)
5. Drive-A = Code: 5 in a 40 ton hull (Pinnace)
6. Drive-A = Code: 6 in a 33 ton hull (Ship's Boat)

So in the context of a starship using LBB2.81 drives, when skipping the letters I and O (to avoid confusion with the numbers 1 and 0 in printed LBBs), Drive-E equates to a multiple of 5, yielding a performance of Code: 1 in a 1000 ton hull. This then means that the performance for Drive-E (jump and maneuver) has the following Code yield breakpoints (200 * multiple / hull displacement, drop fractions):

1. Drive-E = Code: 1 in a 1000 ton hull
2. Drive-E = Code: 2 in a 500 ton hull
3. Drive-E = Code: 3 in a 333 ton hull
4. Drive-E = Code: 4 in a 250 ton hull
5. Drive-E = Code: 5 in a 200 ton hull
6. Drive-E = Code: 6 in a 166 ton hull

Pretty simple really.

So a Power Plant-Z drive is Z=24.
24*200=4800
4800 tons @ code: 1 = 48 EP ... regardless of the hull size you're installing that LBB2 standard drive into.

Shortest possible answer is that each letter drive adds +2 EP.

• A = 2 EP
• B = 4 EP
• C = 6 EP
  • [...]
• X = 44 EP
• Y = 46 EP
• Z = 48 EP

 

[McPerth]

Solved that one over a year ago.

And this is official or a house rule you use?

 

[AnotherDilbert]

So a Power Plant-Z drive is Z=24.
24*200=4800
4800 tons @ code: 1 = 48 EP ... regardless of the hull size you're installing that LBB2 standard drive into.

Unless we use LBB5 rules, instead of your house rules.

Note: A Z-drive power plant produces up to 120 EP, e.g. potential 6 in a 2000 Dt hull.

 

[mike wightman]

Solved that one over a year ago.

Pretty simple really.

So a Power Plant-Z drive is Z=24.
24*200=4800
4800 tons @ code: 1 = 48 EP ... regardless of the hull size you're installing that LBB2 standard drive into.

Shortest possible answer is that each letter drive adds +2 EP.

• A = 2 EP
• B = 4 EP
• C = 6 EP
  • [...]
• X = 44 EP
• Y = 46 EP
• Z = 48 EP

It didn't work then and it doesn't work now.

A Z drive in an 800 ton ship has a performance number of 6, according to the HG EP formula 0.01xxhull displacement x power plant number we get 48
Put the same Z drive in a 2000 ton ship and it still has a performance number of 6 but now has an EP output of 120.

 

[atpollard]

And this is official or a house rule you use?

I am almost CERTAIN that there is no "official" answer.

I "GUESS" the comment in LBB5 about using LBB2 drives was to allow PLAYERS/REFEREES to create Adventure Class Ships for PCs & NPCs for IYTU using LBB5 components in LBB2 sized ships (so you could add a Fuel Purifier, for example).

 

[AnotherDilbert]

It's definitely Book 2 drive shenanigans. I crunched the numbers, the ship can't work with Book 5 drives.
By my calculations, it should be actual Z-drives. (One ton over-tonnaged then, but then again, you could use half-staterooms for some of the crew, so no issue.)

I see no problem with size.

Strange thing: The price. It's listed as almost MCr 900, a full 100 more than the ship would have even with Z-Drives.

Agreed, way off, or we're missing something.

IL-A9066F2-J00000-00009-0        MCr 794       1 000 Dton
bearing               1                           Crew=19
batteries             1                             TL=12
                         Cargo=30 Fuel=60 EP=60 Agility=5

[SPOILER="design"]

Dual Occupancy                                       30       794
                                     USP    #      Dton      Cost
Hull, Unstreamlined Custom             A          1 000      
Configuration       Buffered Plane     9            350         1
Armour              18                 J            260       390
                                                             
Manoeuvre D         Z                  6    1        47        96
Power Plant         Z                  6    1        73       192
Fuel, #J, #weeks    J-0, 4 weeks                     60      
                                                             
Bridge                                      1        20         5
Computer            m/6fib             F    1        14        83
                                                             
Staterooms                                  4        16         2
Staterooms, Half                           15        30         4
                                                             
Cargo                                                30      
                                                             
Bay                 Missile, 100 t     9    1       100        21
                                                             
Nominal Cost        MCr 793,50           Sum:        30       794
Class Cost          MCr 166,64          Valid        ≥0        ≥0
Ship Cost           MCr 634,80                                
                                                             
                                                             
Crew &               High     0        Crew          Bridge     2
Passengers            Mid     0          19       Engineers     4
                      Low     0                     Gunners     2
                 Extra SR     0      Frozen         Service     1
               # Frozen W     0           0          Flight     0
                  Marines     0                     Marines     0

[/SPOILER]
Crew is over-sized, it should use LBB2 crew rules.



Can't use LBB5 drives:

IL-A9066F2-J00000-00009-0      MCr 1 130       1 000 Dton
bearing               1                           Crew=15
batteries             1                             TL=12
                       Cargo=-192 Fuel=60 EP=60 Agility=5

[SPOILER="design"]

Dual Occupancy                                   -  192     1 130
                                     USP    #      Dton      Cost
Hull, Unstreamlined Custom             A          1 000       
Configuration       Buffered Plane     9            350         1
Armour              18                 J            260       390
                                                              
Manoeuvre D                            6    1       170        85
Power Plant                            6    1       180       540
Fuel, #J, #weeks    J-0, 4 weeks                     60       
                                                              
Bridge                                      1        20         5
Computer            m/6fib             F    1        14        83
                                                              
Staterooms                                  4        16         2
Staterooms, Half                           11        22         3
                                                              
Cargo                                                         
                                                              
Bay                 Missile, 100 t     9    1       100        21
                                                              
Nominal Cost        MCr 1 129,50         Sum:    -  192     1 130
Class Cost          MCr   237,20        Valid        ≥0        ≥0
Ship Cost           MCr   903,60                               
                                                              
                                                              
Crew &               High     0        Crew          Bridge     2
Passengers            Mid     0          15       Engineers    10
                      Low     0                     Gunners     2
                 Extra SR     0      Frozen         Service     1
               # Frozen W     0           0          Flight     0
                  Marines     0                     Marines     0

[/SPOILER]
Way too expensive, and about 200 Dt overtonnage.

 

[McPerth]

Next how do you determine the actual EPs produced by a letter drive?

(Maybe I just say a foolishness, and if so feel free to just laught at it and ignore the idea)

There would be another, HG compatible way to calculate the EPs given by a LBB2 PP, depending on the TL of the ship (as they need EPs they are HG designs, and so have TL): Take the tonnage of the PP, divide by the tonnes needed to generate 1EP at its TL and that would be the EP generated

So:

• At TL 7-8 1 EP per 4 tons of PP
• At TL 9-12 1 EP per 3 tons of PP
• At TL 13-14 1 EP per 2 tond of PP
• At TL 15 1 EP per ton of PP

So, a PP A would produce from 1 to 4 EPs, depending on the TL, while a Z would produce 73 EPs (as it must be TL15)

I have not really made the numbers, so I don't really know if the efficiency (both, in EPs produced and in fuel needed for them) would be superior or inferior, though I guess it would depend mostly on TL...

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Non-related, but I believe this would be much more difficult to damage, except by PA spinals.
Larger and more expensive, but would take a lot more attacks to degrade.

IL-A9066F2-J51100-34009-0      MCr 1 092       1 400 Dton
bearing     1     11  1                           Crew=35
batteries   1     11  1                             TL=12
                          Cargo=1 Fuel=60 EP=84 Agility=4

[SPOILER="design"]

Dual Occupancy                                        1     1 092
                                     USP    #      Dton      Cost
Hull, Unstreamlined Custom             A          1 400         
Configuration       Buffered Plane     9            490         1
Armour              18                 J            364       546
                                                                
Manoeuvre D         Z                  6    1        47        96
Power Plant         Z                  6    1        73       192
Fuel, #J, #weeks    J-0, 4 weeks                     60         
                                                                
Bridge                                      1        28         7
Computer            m/6fib             F    1        14        83
                                                                
Staterooms                                  4        16         2
Staterooms, Half                           31        62         8
                                                                
Cargo                                                 1         
                                                                
Bay                 Missile, 100 t     9    1       100        21
Triple Turret       Beam               3    1         1         3
Single Turret       Fusion             4    1         2         2
Triple Turret 2/bat Sand               5    1         2         2    2 mounts organised into 1 battery.
                                                                
Nuclear Damper                         1    1        50        50
Meson Screen                           1    1        90        80
                                                                
Nominal Cost        MCr 1 092,30         Sum:         1     1 092
Class Cost          MCr   229,38        Valid        ≥0        ≥0
Ship Cost           MCr   873,84                                 
                                                                
                                                                
Crew &               High     0        Crew          Bridge    10
Passengers            Mid     0          35       Engineers     2
                      Low     0                     Gunners    18
                 Extra SR     0      Frozen         Service     5
               # Frozen W     0           0          Flight     0
                  Marines     0                     Marines     0

[/SPOILER]

 

[AnotherDilbert]

There would be another, HG compatible way to calculate the EPs given by a LBB2 PP, depending on the TL of the ship (as they need EPs they are HG designs, and so have TL): Take the tonnage of the PP, divide by the tonnes needed to generate 1EP at its TL and that would be the EP generated

LBB2 drives are not evaluated by tonnage, but by the Drive Potential Table. Drive performance is not linear to tonnage.

EP ∝ potential.

 

[Tobias]

I see no problem with size.

I used HGS, it seems to be off by 1 ton. (Probably due to not having any drives or fuel. EDIT: Yep. HGS does not accept engineering sections of 0 tons.)
The original design used full staterooms for the entire crew I think. In that case, cargo would be 0 as given in the original.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

The original design used full staterooms for the entire crew I think. In that case, cargo would be 0 as given in the original.

Ok, that makes sense. Wasteful, but so is the oversized drives.
Not really a problem, as there is no other need for the tonnage.

 

[Spinward Flow]

There would be another, HG compatible way to calculate the EPs given by a LBB2 PP, depending on the TL of the ship (as they need EPs they are HG designs, and so have TL): Take the tonnage of the PP, divide by the tonnes needed to generate 1EP at its TL and that would be the EP generated

Also known as the "fish out of water" strategy for solving the problem.

It didn't work then and it doesn't work now.

Yet another example of my providing a correct answer on a silver platter ... only to watch it get dropped on the floor in complete non-comprehension.

And this is official or a house rule you use?

Unless we use LBB5 rules, instead of your house rules.

I'm going to demonstrate ... repeatedly ... that this the pattern that LBB2 uses.
Watch carefully and see if you can discern the same things that I have.

LBB2.81, p22 snippet (that should be familiar):

Postulate: each drive letter is code: 1 @ +200 tons of hull displacement.
Italics are results that do not appear in the table.
Bold are results that do appear in the table.

Drive-A:

• code: 6 @ 33 tons
• code: 5 @ 40 tons
• code: 4 @ 50 tons
• code: 3 @ 66 tons
• code: 2 @ 100 tons
• code: 1 @ 200 tons

Drive-B:

• code: 6 @ 66 tons
• code: 5 @ 80 tons
• code: 4 @ 100 tons
• code: 3 @ 133 tons
• code: 2 @ 200 tons
• code: 1 @ 400 tons

Drive-C:

• code: 6 @ 100 tons
• code: 5 @ 120 tons
• code: 4 @ 150 tons
• code: 3 @ 200 tons
• code: 2 @ 300 tons
• code: 1 @ 600 tons

Drive-D:

• code: 6 @ 133 tons
• code: 5 @ 160 tons
• code: 4 @ 200 tons
• code: 3 @ 266 tons
• code: 2 @ 400 tons
• code: 1 @ 800 tons

Drive-E:

• code: 6 @ 166 tons
• code: 5 @ 200 tons
• code: 4 @ 250 tons
• code: 3 @ 333 tons
• code: 2 @ 500 tons
• code: 1 @ 1000 tons

Drive-F:

• code: 6 @ 200 tons
• code: 5 @ 240 tons
• code: 4 @ 300 tons
• code: 3 @ 400 tons
• code: 2 @ 600 tons
• code: 1 @ 1200 tons

Drive-G:

• code: 6 @ 233 tons
• code: 5 @ 280 tons
• code: 4 @ 350 tons
• code: 3 @ 466 tons
• code: 2 @ 700 tons
• code: 1 @ 1400 tons

Drive-H:

• code: 6 @ 266 tons
• code: 5 @ 320 tons
• code: 4 @ 400 tons
• code: 3 @ 533 tons
• code: 2 @ 800 tons
• code: 1 @ 1600 tons

Drive-J:

• code: 6 @ 300 tons
• code: 5 @ 360 tons
• code: 4 @ 450 tons
• code: 3 @ 600 tons
• code: 2 @ 900 tons
• code: 1 @ 1800 tons

Drive-K:

• code: 6 @ 333 tons
• code: 5 @ 400 tons
• code: 4 @ 500 tons
• code: 3 @ 666 tons
• code: 2 @ 1000 tons
• code: 1 @ 2000 tons

Drive-L:

• code: 6 @ 366 tons
• code: 5 @ 440 tons
• code: 4 @ 550 tons
• code: 3 @ 733 tons
• code: 2 @ 1100 tons
• code: 1 @ 2200 tons

Drive-M:

• code: 6 @ 400 tons
• code: 5 @ 480 tons
• code: 4 @ 600 tons
• code: 3 @ 800 tons
• code: 2 @ 1200 tons
• code: 1 @ 2400 tons

Drive-N:

• code: 6 @ 433 tons
• code: 5 @ 520 tons
• code: 4 @ 650 tons
• code: 3 @ 866 tons
• code: 2 @ 1300 tons
• code: 1 @ 2600 tons

You can even approach the question from the opposite direction.

200 ton hull codes with drive letters (note: 1 letter steps)

1. @ A
2. @ B
3. @ C
4. @ D
5. @ E
6. @ F

400 ton hull codes with drive letters (note: 2 letter steps)

1. @ B
2. @ D
3. @ F
4. @ H
5. @ K
6. @ M

600 ton hull codes with drive letters (note: 3 letter steps)

1. @ C
2. @ F
3. @ J
4. @ M
5. @ Q
6. @ T

800 ton hull codes with drive letters (note: 4 letter steps)

1. @ D
2. @ H
3. @ M
4. @ R
5. @ V
6. @ Z

It's all just straight multiplication at increments of 200 tons per drive letter.
There were some "liberties" taken with the table assignments for codes to permit "rounding up" in a few cases (mostly in the X/Y/Z range), but for MOST CASES in the table, the code: 1 per 200 tons of hull displacement multiplication formula postulate aligns distressingly closely with the results printed on the table ... enough so as to convince me that I've "found" (or at least, reverse engineered) the formula thinking that went into generating the LBB2 letter drive performance table in the first place.

It didn't work then and it doesn't work now.

OH REALLY?

Okay, granted ... the logic of the argument and the (double!) proofs that I've presented will "never work"

A Z drive in an 800 ton ship has a performance number of 6, according to the HG EP formula 0.01xxhull displacement x power plant number we get 48
Put the same Z drive in a 2000 ton ship and it still has a performance number of 6 but now has an EP output of 120.

Use the wrong paradigm formulation to generate the wrong answers ... with confidence.