Traveller Store CotI Features New Posts Mark Forums Read Register


Go Back TravellerRPG.com > Citizens of the Imperium > Other Versions of Traveller > Mongoose Traveller

Mongoose Traveller Discussion forums for the Traveller rules from Mongoose Publishing.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old February 10th, 2008, 04:18 PM
hunter hunter is offline
Ancient - Absent Friend
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 6,168
Gallery : 18
Visit hunter's Blog
hunter Citizen
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbeard1999 View Post
Amazingly (given numerous other flaws in MGT), the starship design system is pretty good.
IMPOSTER!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ok who are you and what have you done with the real tbeard1999?

__________________
[b]Current Projects[/b][LIST][*][url=http://www.scifigaming.com]SciFi Gaming[/url][*][url=http://www.rpgnow.com/index.php?cPath=129_7888]The SciFi20 Project[/url][*][url=http://www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?products_id=96742]The SciFi20 Rules Bundle[/url] [COLOR="red"][SIZE="1"][b]New![/b][/SIZE][/COLOR][*][url=http://www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?products_id=96744]The SciFi20 Rules Bundle w/Screen[/url] [COLOR="red"][SIZE="1"][b]New![/b][/SIZE][/COLOR]
[/LIST]
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old February 10th, 2008, 04:43 PM
robject's Avatar
robject robject is offline
Marquis
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 13,907
Gallery : 9
Visit robject's Blog
robject has disabled reputation
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbeard1999 View Post
The problem with this (besides trying to distill the table based system into formulae) is that the referee may want to design ships that are not PC craft. In any case, the problem is pretty easy to solve. Simply extrapolate from the drive/hull table and you can go up to any reasonable size
Absolutely, and exactly the difference between Adventure-Class ships and Battle-Class ships. First, note that the tables start to converge to formulae... which is the only sane way to design larger starships anyhow.

In a philosophical strain, once you're in the low thousands, you cross the boundary from player-oriented ship design to wargame-oriented ship design. In the player-ship land, you have an interesting balance between fixed-volume components and proportional components (and ones that are coarsely proportional, like bridges). But once you're designing freighters and destroyers, fixed-size elements become meaningless, and proportion takes over. As you know, that's one reason why Book Two-ers want a 20ton bridge and High Guarders want a 2% bridge.
__________________
Imperiallines magazine
My Helpful Stuff for Traveller5
IMTU tc+ t5++ 3i(+) au ls+ / OTU 44% an+ dt+ ge- j- jf+ n- pi+ pp+ tr+ tv- uwp+ xb+
Tools Link
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old February 10th, 2008, 06:10 PM
Ishmael Ishmael is offline
Citizen: SOC-13
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Moggill
Posts: 910
Gallery : 0
Ishmael Citizen
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbeard1999 View Post
That's not exactly true. By having armor absorb tonnage, you can approximate the *effects* of packing a lot of armor on a hull, without the hassle of fiddling with another major variable.
I disagree mildly. for a given displacement and thrust, a ship with lots of armor+extra gizmo's won't have different performance from a ship stripped to bare bones. A trader hauling a hold full of depleted uranimuim will be just as zippy as if the hold were empty ( an example showing extremes )

I see nothing wrong or overly hard about adding a seperate column list the mass of the equipment. But this is my own personnal taste concerning how starship should be in the game ( I use reaction-based thrust too...nyahh ). There is nothing wrong with displacement based performance, but its not for me and thus a reason I dislike these rules.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbeard1999 View Post
For some reason -- and I admit this is a matter of taste -- having two major variables (tonnage and cost) works well for me. I have an abiding dislike of the more complex (though doubtlessly more "realistic") systems in MT, TNE, T4 and GURPS Traveller. I can sit down and run out a 400 ton ship in a couple of minutes with Book 2 or MGT. Yet the exercise is engaging and does force hard decisions -- range vs. cargo, protection vs cost, etc. Adding a third variable just increases the workload by 50% (or more) and gives me no more enjoyment. YMMV of course.
I think my ideas on complexity are known....
I feel the pre-game setup should have the capability to be insanely complex if wanted. This is to build 'sets' and 'props' for the play; The set of the cockpit of the Nostromo feels better and is more exciting than the cockpit of the airplane in " Plan 9 from Outer Space [a curtain and 2 chairs only ]. Complex FFS style rules can be used to make 'parts' for simpler building systems. My opinion anyways.
The game play itself should be simple and elegant.
Hopefully the pre-game setup which might involve complexity ( detailed crap) will help make the gameplay simple.

like everything else, the balance of simplicity and complex detail is a matter of taste.

Last edited by Ishmael; February 10th, 2008 at 06:12 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old February 10th, 2008, 07:10 PM
tbeard1999's Avatar
tbeard1999 tbeard1999 is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Tyler
Posts: 2,705
Gallery : 0
tbeard1999 Citizen
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hunter View Post
IMPOSTER!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ok who are you and what have you done with the real tbeard1999?

Fortunately, this bizarre aberration ended as soon as I tried to read the starship combat system. Crap, crap, crap.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old February 11th, 2008, 03:29 AM
aramis's Avatar
aramis aramis is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Anchorage, AK, USofA
Posts: 29,111
Gallery : 53
Visit aramis's Blog
aramis has disabled reputation
Send a message via ICQ to aramis Send a message via AIM to aramis Send a message via Yahoo to aramis
Default

Ishmael:

In general, about 10 Tons Metric per TonDisplacement is typical under MT and TNE.

Armor represents not only Hull Shell, but also bracing, etc.

And depending which OTU flavor you go with, drives may be mass-reaction-thrusters (TNE, T4), reactionless thrusters against mass (T4, MT-DGP_SSOM), Gravitic Thrusters operating against volume (MT), Fusion Torches (HG1), or unspecified (CT Bk2 & HG2)...

Ty:
If one likes the personal combat system, the space combat system works pretty well... and the damage table is easily memorized. It was decisive on skill of the characters and good tactical choices, aside from the power issue. (which said, I've suggested a fix for of producing 1 power point per drive letter, and taking one per letter for Manuver and 5 per letter to jump...)

Then again, I've run a dozen SFB tourneys...
__________________
~ Aramis
aramis.hostman.us /trav
Smith & Wesson: The Original Point and Click interface!

Archduke of Sylea (CORE 2118)
Duke of the Third Imperium (SPIN 0534)
Count Terra (SOLO 1827)
Count Gorod (REFT 1302)
Count of the Third Imperium (SPIN 2232)
Viscount of Adabicci (SPIN 1824)
Marquis of the Solomani Rim (SOLO 0606)
Marquis of the Third Imperium (SPIN 2410)
Baron of the Third Imperium (SPIN 2231)
Knight of the Iridium Throne (CORE 1434)
Sir William Hostman (OLDE 0512)
Sir William Hostman (DAGU 0622)
Knight of Deneb (REFT 2239)
Knight of Deneb (Spin 2532)
SEH w/Diamonds for Extreme Heroism - Battle of Boughene
MCG - Battle of Boughene
TAS: William Hostman (CORR 2506)
TAS: Bearer (DAIB 1326)
IMTU ct+ tm++ tne tg-- tt+ tmo+ t4- t20+ to ru+ ge+ 3i+ c+ jt au ls pi+ ta he+ st+
Wil Hostman 0602 C539857-9 S A724
OTU: 95% 3i an+ au+ br- cpu dt f+ fs++ ge ih- inf j jf+ jm+ jt+ ls- n= nc+ pi+ pp-- tp+ tr+ tv- vi-- xb+-
Unless there is bold red text, presume my posts to be my personal material only.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old February 11th, 2008, 07:14 AM
Ishmael Ishmael is offline
Citizen: SOC-13
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Moggill
Posts: 910
Gallery : 0
Ishmael Citizen
Default

Aramis:
I'm aware generalities in those rules ( I have been playing Trav since '77 and use MT with TNE gearhead stuff ), but considering how easy it is to add a column to a sheet for mass, I prefer to be more exact than a generality. Its an over-simplification that does not appeal to me. It makes chuck'o'bsd as zippy as stripped bare hi-perf craft.

bracing does not prevent a hit from penetrating the hull...it only keeps the hull from ripping apart. I use bracing to also cap acceleration. Huge heavy ships need more of it or they crumple.

but I do understand the point you're making...I just do not like how it makes ships so...generic..in performance.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old February 11th, 2008, 10:13 AM
tbeard1999's Avatar
tbeard1999 tbeard1999 is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Tyler
Posts: 2,705
Gallery : 0
tbeard1999 Citizen
Default

Quote:
If one likes the personal combat system, the space combat system works pretty well... and the damage table is easily memorized. It was decisive on skill of the characters and good tactical choices, aside from the power issue. (which said, I've suggested a fix for of producing 1 power point per drive letter, and taking one per letter for Manuver and 5 per letter to jump...)

Then again, I've run a dozen SFB tourneys...
Well, I like SFB just fine. Been playing it since it was a Task Force minigame. But if I wanna play SFB, I'll play SFB. And the designers of MGT failed to steal the other half of SFB that makes it work -- the impulse movement system. Cobbling a half-baked SFB-like energy system on top of the mindless initiative system is the worst kind of kludge. Crap, crap, crap.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Anyone ever tried to design a ship design system? SGavorsky The Fleet 37 February 19th, 2006 04:25 PM
MT Vehicle Design System Ranger The Fleet 2 January 9th, 2003 06:18 PM
House rules for T20 – Posting and Evaluation Bishop Odo The Lone Star 4 January 4th, 2003 07:36 PM
T20 Design System AllenS The Fleet 2 November 4th, 2002 10:51 PM
New Ship Design System samdx The Fleet 0 March 31st, 2002 12:12 AM

This website and its contents are copyright ©2010- Far Future Enterprises. All rights reserved. Traveller is a registered trademark of Far Future Enterprises .
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright (c) 2010-2013, Far Future Enterprises. All Rights Reserved.