Wedgie - Scarecrow style!

[kaladorn]

Poorly scaled? How so? (I never bothered checking that... didn't seem worthwhile and I sort of assume they got it right....)

Yeah, I think DGP was on the way down at the time. Too bad, because I was anxious to see Vol 2.... I'd hoped they'd do the Empress Marava. I wish someone would do a good version of it with interior images and a good set of reasonably accurate and workable deckplans (Hey, Scarecrow, you aren't doing anything for the next 6 months eh?).

I think the ability of players to see the interiors of ships - to see their duty station, to see their stateroom, to see the galley - these kinds of things add a *lot* to the visualizations.

It's a pity it isn't easier to import models.... games like Ghost Recon and their forum at Ghost Recon.net have done a lot to create neat skins with many modern camos (I've even got a Canadian Mod with Bob and Doug Mackenzie skins) and lots of neat looking firepower and ground vehicles. They're done in 3dsmax, and then imported into the game somehow. But I imagine in a non-portable way.

This is seemingly one of the great failures of the 3D modelling world when it comes to re-use of objects. People put a lot of work into a tree model, so you have to pay stupid amounts of money for a nice, high resolution, well done, library of tree models. It is a pity a large open standard and a large open repository didn't exist. It would make a lot of things for both hobbyists and professionals more pleasant. But I worked briefly (indirectly) for Disney, and they have Mark XV Attack Lawyers the likes of which I don't want to contemplate...

As to the deckplans in SOM, I just liked the 'blueprint' feel.

 

[kafka47]

While on the topic of blueprints how does Seeker fair? I see their hediously ugly coloured sets on eBay every so often.

But, their MegaTraveller line seemed quite decent...

What also gives with the Seeker Gaming Systems website ?

As they promise that they are releasing things but thus far only limited offering on eBay and promises of much more...but never delievering. As they promised above, all else that we would see reprints of Classic & MegaTraveller titles plus added bonuses such as the sequels to Escape and a revised Lords of Thunder. Has anyone cornered them?

 

[far-trader]

Originally posted by kaladorn:
Poorly scaled? How so? (I never bothered checking that... didn't seem worthwhile and I sort of assume they got it right....)

As to the deckplans in SOM, I just liked the 'blueprint' feel.

I quite agree with the blueprint style being cool, and had mine on the wall for some time and even thought of getting it framed, but that leads to another little gripe. Here's this nice suitable for framing piece of art in a center trifold but they go and print pages for the book on the back of it

Anyway the volume issues:

Deck 1

the passenger area shows ~40dT for 6 staterooms and common space (~66% over)

Deck 2

the crew area shows ~24dT for 4 staterooms and common space (~50% over)

EDIT - ok looking at the uncorrected listing for the type A I guess in MT this is 2 staterooms (total 8) so maybe that helps but...

the low berth area shows ~10dT for 20 low berths (how they got that right I don't know but it screws up any simple scale change handwave which may be the best thought since as drawn all the beds are 3m long

)

EDIT - ...the listing shows only 8 low berths, so the deckplan runs over a bit here...

...or not since the interior drawing and deckplan seem to support the 20 count.

ugh, I begin to recall why I hated this rules edition...

...

...it even spawns errata in a simple post about it

Deck 2-3

the cargo area shows ~120dT while rated as 82dT (~46% over)

the engineering area shows ~55dT but I don't have my corrected design handy and the MT version is screwed (and iirc the cargo has to be less to fit in the proper fuel load)

Total displayed area ~249dT listed above and another ~21dT for bridge, turrets, air/raft, cargo office and airlocks. That's 270dT NOT INCLUDING FUEL crammed into a 200dT hull

I guess if one were feeling generous they could say that is within the 20% over slop for deckplans, if you ignore the fuel issue and the fact the beds are made for giants. I think what is most likely is a simple scaling error, that's pretty much the way I ended up fixing it ages ago by redrawing it.

Anyway I guess it's only an issue if for example the PC's start loading standard cargo containers on the deckplans and after they fill the listed 82dT they find room for almost another 40dt

 

[TJP]

Wow, excellent stuff! This is just what we need to "advertise" Traveller. The picture just oozes coolness. More please!

 

[kaladorn]

Well, I think the game ship designers used 'the alternate design sequence'.

Truth is, if you never try gearhead stuff, MT is a *great* rules set. (Well, let me add many bugs in chargen charts, esp expanded merchant). But the construction rules had so many errata that using them is like pulling your insides out with a large meathook while still conscious.

Of course, I just use Ships for Windows and don't worry much about the output being 'right'. If it is somewhat internally consistent, and the official ships are all broken anyway, then it is all good. Who is going to discard great deckplans for the game for minor issues like 'scale' and 'correctness'?

I used GRIP's mapping engine to do some deckplans, then sampled them over into JPEGs. It turns out most ships that cram in big drives and EMM Masking, etc, can't carry much cargo and the crew lives like sardines.