A jump drive replacement for T5

[Spaceresearcher]

If there's one pet hate I have about Traveller, it's the confounded jump drive.

Not only does it make the whole getting around issue lengthy and sometimes annoying, it also results in extreme arguments about how long it actually takes to get to planets once you jump into a system etc.

What I've been wondering and possibly this would be an interesting idea for the T5 revision, is a jump drive replacement. After all if there's a far far future, why on earth wouldn't there have been advancements in all that time. The ancients had teleportation for crying out loud, so surely humanity being how it is, would have invested considerable time into establishing new star drive technologies.

How about a telohyperbolic drive or something which makes a jaunt/jump through space simply 1 day as opposed to a week no matter how long the length? So you could simply replace Jump drive capability with telohyperbolic capability and simply replace week/s with day/s?

That would certainly change a lot of the dynamics of the game and truly be a far far future to this Traveller.

How much space junk would have accumulated in the far far future and how much faster are navigation computers etc?

Possibly a weird concept in Traveller is that no matter which setting, you can still find a good old Free or Far trader??? Wouldn't they eventually become antiques? So far Traveller doesn't seem to be about progression and more about actually establishing the very first aspects of Traveller. Some say there well established but if that's the case why are there so many different versions all talking about the same tech etc? Anyway that's my rant for the day.

Travel on Travellers.

 

[Mace]

Jump drive is major canon of Traveller and actually informs the starship design sequences, so doing away with it completely means that the game system isn't Traveller anymore, IMHO.

That being said a few drive options wouldn't hurt, so the ref can use whatever best suits his campaign.

 

[Vladika]

MgT provided just what you are looking for. Teleport Drive is available, as is "Warp" Drive.

As for the ancients? Well, they were WAY past TL15.

Free Traders are built to lower TLs for good reason; On the edges of the Empire, there aren't many high tech shipyards to build or repair. A secondary consideration is the much cheaper cost when using Credit Exchange values from the trading systems or TCS.

 

[Licheking]

There are already different versions of the Jump Drive in T5, they are called the Hop and Skip Drives. Although they don't change the time frame, they do make the jumps way bigger. If you want alternative FTL systems then check out Fire, Fusion and Steel for Traveller: TNE this had loads of alternative Drives both maneuver and FTL.

 

[atpollard]

One IMTU variant that I played with goes back to the CT LBBs ...
What if an isolated world never developed jump drive (their homeworld was 7 parsecs from the next nearest star, and a lot farther from the next nearest inhabited star system). So they just kept on advancing in TL (without Jump Drives) but ever improving the MD. To keep the math simple, I ignored the speed of light issues (they worked it out somehow - insert hand wave here) and just used the in-system travel formula for interstellar travel.

It has some interesting results ... short 'jumps' take a while, but longer 'jumps' take only a little longer than a short 'jump' ... at some distance, they can actually travel faster than a Jump 6 Starship. It tended to make trips longer (in both time and distance) which encouraged much larger ships ... sort of a mobile city.

I realize that you are looking for shorter travel times for short jumps, but the point still stands as "Do what you want for YTU, and have fun with the differences." Of course, the OTU already has rules that describe how things work in Marc's Traveller Universe.

 

[rancke]

Not only does it make the whole getting around issue lengthy and sometimes annoying, it also results in extreme arguments about how long it actually takes to get to planets once you jump into a system etc.

Why in space would you have any kind of argument about how long it takes to get anywhere in a system? As long as you know the distance and the maneuver drive rating it's just a matter of plugging numbers into a simple equation.

What I've been wondering and possibly this would be an interesting idea for the T5 revision, is a jump drive replacement. After all if there's a far far future, why on earth wouldn't there have been advancements in all that time. The ancients had teleportation for crying out loud, so surely humanity being how it is, would have invested considerable time into establishing new star drive technologies.

Oh, they have. They just haven't had much luck.

How about a telohyperbolic drive or something which makes a jaunt/jump through space simply 1 day as opposed to a week no matter how long the length? So you could simply replace Jump drive capability with telohyperbolic capability and simply replace week/s with day/s?

Whatever works for you is fine for your TU.

That would certainly change a lot of the dynamics of the game and truly be a far far future to this Traveller.

Except it wouldn't be this Traveller anymore. Some people wouldn't even accept that it was Traveller at all.

Possibly a weird concept in Traveller is that no matter which setting, you can still find a good old Free or Far trader???

Not every setting. In some settings populations are too low or the invention of jump drive too recent for anything other than state- or company-owned ships.

Wouldn't they eventually become antiques?

Any specific free trader would eventually wear out. Any specific class of free trader may or may not become obsolete, but if it did, it would just be replaced by another class with roughly the same performance specs. Free traders as a type would exist in any time and space where there is a niche for them to fill.


Hans

 

[whulorigan]

What I've been wondering and possibly this would be an interesting idea for the T5 revision, is a jump drive replacement.

How about a telohyperbolic drive or something which makes a jaunt/jump through space simply 1 day as opposed to a week no matter how long the length? So you could simply replace Jump drive capability with telohyperbolic capability and simply replace week/s with day/s?

Also, keep in mind that one of the future planned publications for T5 is BCS: Battle Class Ships . While focussing on designing hulls larger than 2500 dtons and fleet/naval engagement, it is quite possible that alternate technologies (including drive systems) for starships may be included in the supplement.

EDIT: Or, since this supplement has not been produced yet, perhaps someone might "suggest" that alternate drive technologies be included in the book.

 

[Spaceresearcher]

See this is a definite disagreement.

Saying it can't be canon if it's more advanced than the 1 week per jump, jump drive isn't really fair to Traveller.

Marc always said that Traveller is about being able to do anything in a Science Fiction setting. Alright, it may not be third Imperium canon, but why couldn't it fall under TNE(if that works) or Galaxiad canon? At the time of writing, surely no reason at all?

To me, saying it can't be 'Traveller Canon' full stop, is to say, there are many who would limit what Traveller can and can't be. Why would you want to do that?

 

[rancke]

Saying it can't be canon if it's more advanced than the 1 week per jump, jump drive isn't really fair to Traveller.

It could be canon if Marc Miller made it canon. But it isn't canon, because he hasn't.

To me, saying it can't be 'Traveller Canon' full stop, is to say, there are many who would limit what Traveller can and can't be. Why would you want to do that?

Because I know what 'canon' means in the context it is used when talking about Traveller canon. I'm not dictating what canon can and can't be; I'm pointing out what canon is and isn't.


Hans

 

[Reban]

In the T5 Beta there was an Inertialess Drive that was FTL with a speed of between 10 and 90 Parsecs per Hour.

IMTU I use all the design specs for the T5 Jump Drive but give it a speed of Parsecs per Day. However I use a bigger Sector the C Sector from GT which is 100 parsecs across.

My point is that you can use the existing rules adjusting the figures to suit YTU as long as you are conscious that changing the speed of travel has a major affect on Traveller assumptions, i.e for me going to Parsecs per Day meant that I could expand Sectors and the over all size of my Imperium.

Also, keep in mind that one of the future planned publications for T5 is BCS: Battle Class Ships . While focussing on designing hulls larger than 2500 dtons and fleet/naval engagement, it is quite possible that alternate technologies (including drive systems) for starships may be included in the supplement.

EDIT: Or, since this supplement has not been produced yet, perhaps someone might "suggest" that alternate drive technologies be included in the book.

This gets my vote too, and I want alternate maneuver drives such as the selection of reaction drives that were in the T5 Beta but got chopped. Up thread someone mentioned that with Traveller you should be able to do all kinds of Science Fiction settings. I agree wholeheartedly with this and I think the lack of reaction drives is a huge hole in the T5 system, if nothing else but for TL7 to TL9 spacefarers.

 

[whulorigan]

This gets my vote too, and I want alternate maneuver drives such as the selection of reaction drives that were in the T5 Beta but got chopped. Up thread someone mentioned that with Traveller you should be able to do all kinds of Science Fiction settings. I agree wholeheartedly with this and I think the lack of reaction drives is a huge hole in the T5 system, if nothing else but for TL7 to TL9 spacefarers.

Agreed. I want to see HEPlaR and/or Fusion Torch detailed for lower TL, and am also quite intrigued by an Inertialess Drive for Ultratech settings or Ancients relics. I am also curious as to the difference between a "Thruster" (as mentioned briefly in the T5 text under "How Maneuver Works") and the standard M-Drive. Details for T5's take on Stutterwarps would be nice as well. I hope BCS details them all.

 

[Vladika]

It could be canon if Marc Miller made it canon. But it isn't canon, because he hasn't.


Because I know what 'canon' means in the context it is used when talking about Traveller canon. I'm not dictating what canon can and can't be; I'm pointing out what canon is and isn't.


Hans

Hans, in all fairness THERE IS NO CANON. Not when Marc changes it with EVERY new addition to the game.

In MgT was it? There were FTL drives that got you there in less than a week.

 

[McPerth]

See this is a definite disagreement.

Saying it can't be canon if it's more advanced than the 1 week per jump, jump drive isn't really fair to Traveller.

Marc always said that Traveller is about being able to do anything in a Science Fiction setting. Alright, it may not be third Imperium canon, but why couldn't it fall under TNE(if that works) or Galaxiad canon? At the time of writing, surely no reason at all?

To me, saying it can't be 'Traveller Canon' full stop, is to say, there are many who would limit what Traveller can and can't be. Why would you want to do that?

I would not say faster FTLs would be canon destroying, for other settings tan the OTU, but will sure be setting destroying (and so canon destroying as for OTU canon, not for rules canon).

In any case, Traveller assumes time delay to reach news, and I'm afraid faster FTL would need some rules adapting to any setting using Traveller as basis, at least for the Trade rules that I asume in T5 are also based on the premise that information is outdated for 2 weeks at least...

 

[robject]

Two thoughts. No, three.


(1) If you have an idea for an interstellar drive, it's a relatively simple matter to create an entry for it in the manner of all drives in Traveller. The simplest place to start is to show its volume progression by letter, its cost schedule (easiest would be a flat number of MCr per ton, but there are plenty of ways to make that complicated), and its energy or fuel requirements, if any. Post that to a new dedicated thread and get feedback on it.

(2) It does seem that BCS is the best place for elements pulled from the T5 draft -- reaction engines and inertialess drives for example.

(3) The T5 BBB does have Stutterport (it was as close as Marc would get to Stutterwarp).



My free advice for anyone wanting to do (1) is: Keep It As Simple As You Possibly Can. If the volume progression is geometric, then there must be a compelling reason for that. If the cost is nonlinear, there must be a compelling reason for that. Put another way: deviations from flat rates and percentages must represent something critically important.

As an example, the jump drives in Book 2 and T5 have a 5 ton "overhead" to an otherwise standard percentage progression. That 5 tons pretty much only exists to lightly impose design constraints in the 100t and 200t hulls. I like that. As a counterexample, the maneuver drives and power plants in Book 2 and T5 have a -1 and +1 ton "overhead", respectively, that have little or no useful meaning (they tend to cancel one another out).

 

[whulorigan]

(3) The T5 BBB does have Stutterport (it was as close as Marc would get to Stutterwarp).

Stutterport ???

My T5 BBB does not have anything mentioning this under drives.
The term is mentioned under psionics, however . . .

I take it Stutterwarp is not even being considered as an alternate drive technology for non-specific setting purposes?

 

[dalthor]

IIRC Hop drives (if you use them) are base of hop-1, which equates to Jump-10, and takes ONE DAY, and minimum of 10 parsecs! Fuel use is also greatly reduced.

Even with governor on drive, would still need 2 hops (using triangulation) to go less than 10 parsecs. Still takes 2 days + drive recovery time, but still WAY better than jump.

For other FTL drives types, I've used a logarithmic scale. May not be canon, but it is MTU.

My 2 creds worth...

 

[rancke]

Hans, in all fairness THERE IS NO CANON. Not when Marc changes it with EVERY new addition to the game.

Mike, that sentence contradicts itself. How can Marc change something that doesn't exist? If he can change it, obviously it exists. It used to be whatever it was before it was changed and now it is what it has been changed to.

In MgT was it? There were FTL drives that got you there in less than a week.

Canon concerns the OTU setting. Are there any FTL drives in the Third Imperium that gets you there in less than a week? No, there is not. Are there any jump-2 ships that jumps on 15% of hull volume jump fuel? No, there are not. Is the standard maneuver drive HePLaR? No, it is thrusters. 20% fuel for J2 is canon, 15% fuel for J2 is not canon. Did the Maghiz occur in -927, -925, or -924? It happened in -924. Did the Darrians and the Sword Worlders fight several wars over pssession of the Entropic worlds or over the Cunnonic worlds? They fought over the Entropic worlds.

That's how canon works.


Hans

 

[Vladika]

Mike, that sentence contradicts itself. How can Marc change something that doesn't exist? If he can change it, obviously it exists. It used to be whatever it was before it was changed and now it is what it has been changed to.

Poor choice of words then Hans, BUT, IF physics works in the OTU, 3I or not, shouldn't it remain constant?

Canon concerns the OTU setting. Are there any FTL drives in the Third Imperium that gets you there in less than a week? No, there is not. Are there any jump-2 ships that jumps on 15% of hull volume jump fuel? No, there are not. Is the standard maneuver drive HePLaR? No, it is thrusters. 20% fuel for J2 is canon, 15% fuel for J2 is not canon. Did the Maghiz occur in -927, -925, or -924? It happened in -924. Did the Darrians and the Sword Worlders fight several wars over pssession of the Entropic worlds or over the Cunnonic worlds? They fought over the Entropic worlds.

That's how canon works.


Hans

OK I was under the impression that what was canon in CT was altered by MT canon, then altered by every other game version, every time.

Take FTL Drives as an example. Jump Drive is the only drive. Then there are Stutterwarp, Warp, Teleport, JumpGate, etc. The Last (T5) incarnation is Hop, Skip and Jump...

Oh, and let's not forget that "magic pixie dust" is now readily available since the Annic Nova gave up her secrets...

Nothing but vast, quick consumption of LHyd can power Jump capacitors...except for "magic pixie dust" of course.

So...I have a canon Warp Drive with a fission power plant, then I don't...

I have a 1dton maneuver drive...then it's 2dt

Jump takes 10% of hull volume per jump number, until...MT jump drives are twice as efficient (5%). Then, somehow, the plans and specs were lost and we are back to 10%...

Jump Drive doesn't need a separate power plant, then it does...

I can't jump, or hop, a ship using fission power, but, I can sure skip it...

Maneuver Drive now don't work past 1000 diameters... (Relatively ineffective beyond 100) So, deep space maneuver is now impossible, as is outer system (as well as in-system asteroid), Oort Cloud and Comet refueling...

I have .5dton low berths, then 1dt, now .5dton...again...

Double use of Staterooms will tax the life support system, but then...spacer niches and bunks...

Ship systems don't require (extra) power, then they do, and then they don't and now they? God Knows.

Weapons work, then they don't...

Computers are huge...Then they need extra power...then they don't...then they are smaller.

I certainly do NOT object to all the changes, BUT, can we stabilize the Universe? Or have we all miss-jumped and stared into J space to long?

 

[robject]

Stutterport ???

My T5 BBB does not have anything mentioning this under drives.
The term is mentioned under psionics, however . . .

Good, I got you looking for it. That was my hope.

It's not mentioned under drives, because it's not a drive per se, but it is an interesting way to move starships. Want to start a thread on that?

 

[mike wightman]

When T2300 was released they toyed with the idea of the next version of Traveller switching to Stutterwarp (I read that in an interview with one of the old GDW employees, no idea if the quote can still be found).

I do know that the switch to Heplar in TNE was because the reaction less drive of MT was disliked by folks at GDW - it's mentioned in the ask Dave thread.