far-trader
SOC-14 10K
From a question by Andy Fralix I thought I'd break it off to it's own discussion. Please post how you think it should be done or why you like one way better than others. I've coverd in brief the different ways it's done, in all the rules except GURPS (don't have it). If someone would add that I'd be grateful. I'll get around to posting my preference later, now the brief outline...
Let's see, where to begin, CT Book 2 I s'pose...
In the most basic rules there is no difference if a sub-craft is internal or external, in fact there is no mention of which of the original starships use which method. All we have to go by are the illustrations. The starships with carried craft show 2 clearly external examples, the sub-merchant and the lab ship. The sub-liner, mercenary cruiser and patrol cruiser are debatable. Only the safari ship clearly shows a hanger bay. All these ships are carried with no cost to the build and only the tonnage of the carried small craft deducted from the hull.
Next up is High Guard (CT Book 5)...
The first printing is not much different from Book 2 and superseded by the second printing anyway (adding some fighter launch rules) so we'll use that. As noted by Fritz88 this seems to be the first mention of placement in hanger or externally BUT it is only Dispersed configuration hulls that carry externally and the only difference is that all carried craft can launch in one turn. Here small craft require tonnage from the hull equal to the craft UNLESS the mothership is over 1000tons in which case the small craft requires 130% of it's tonnage from the hull of the mothership. The required tonnage now requires a cost of Cr2000 per ton. Large craft (over 100tons) may also be carried now but require 110% of their tonnage from the hull of the mothership and also cost Cr2000 per ton required. A couple of notes. First note the bizarreness of the requirements if you carry a Shuttle (95t) and a Scout (100t). On a small ship the Shuttle needs 95t and the Scout needs 110t. Seems reasonable but now let's put the same carried craft on a large ship. Now the Shuttle needs 123.5t while the Scout still needs only 110t. Seems silly to me.
Let's jump to T20 next since it is bred from HG. Unfortunately that means T20 uses the same rules as above with a new wrinkle. Now externally carried craft always need 130% the rated tons and your streamlining suffers. Who would want this? Well maybe huge battle-rider/tender ships.
MegaTraveller, no matter the errata, did a better job. They actually imagined that carried vehicles, craft and ships would all need a little extra room to fit inside. 50% extra for vehicles, 30% extra for craft and 10% extra for ships. And external craft were only on Dispersed config but took no extra volume. So a little better but still that Shuttle vs Scout conundrum. And no mention of how any of that affects the jump grid which is iirc introduced in MT.
Next came TNE, and an improvement again but a different take too. Now you had to factor surface area as a limit in addition to volume. And you had more choices. There were minimal hangers (200% volume)which allowed maintenance but with difficulty, spacious hangers (400% volume) that allowed regular maintenance without difficulty, docking rings (100% volume) that did not allow maintenance, and external grapples in various streamlining efficiencies (and 110%, 130% or 150% volume) and of course allowed no maintenance. Again the problem is unless you want to operate without the carried craft the grapples are silly, you're better off with the docking ring. And again no mention made of the jump grid effects for grapples but I'm not sure the concept was included in TNE.
My last examples are from T4 which are nearly identical to TNE. The differences being that minimal hangers no longer allow maintenance and there are no docking rings. Guess somebody figured no one would use spacious hangers if maintenance could be done in a minimal hanger and that with docking rings no one would use the grapples so they were dropped.
Let's see, where to begin, CT Book 2 I s'pose...
In the most basic rules there is no difference if a sub-craft is internal or external, in fact there is no mention of which of the original starships use which method. All we have to go by are the illustrations. The starships with carried craft show 2 clearly external examples, the sub-merchant and the lab ship. The sub-liner, mercenary cruiser and patrol cruiser are debatable. Only the safari ship clearly shows a hanger bay. All these ships are carried with no cost to the build and only the tonnage of the carried small craft deducted from the hull.
Next up is High Guard (CT Book 5)...
The first printing is not much different from Book 2 and superseded by the second printing anyway (adding some fighter launch rules) so we'll use that. As noted by Fritz88 this seems to be the first mention of placement in hanger or externally BUT it is only Dispersed configuration hulls that carry externally and the only difference is that all carried craft can launch in one turn. Here small craft require tonnage from the hull equal to the craft UNLESS the mothership is over 1000tons in which case the small craft requires 130% of it's tonnage from the hull of the mothership. The required tonnage now requires a cost of Cr2000 per ton. Large craft (over 100tons) may also be carried now but require 110% of their tonnage from the hull of the mothership and also cost Cr2000 per ton required. A couple of notes. First note the bizarreness of the requirements if you carry a Shuttle (95t) and a Scout (100t). On a small ship the Shuttle needs 95t and the Scout needs 110t. Seems reasonable but now let's put the same carried craft on a large ship. Now the Shuttle needs 123.5t while the Scout still needs only 110t. Seems silly to me.
Let's jump to T20 next since it is bred from HG. Unfortunately that means T20 uses the same rules as above with a new wrinkle. Now externally carried craft always need 130% the rated tons and your streamlining suffers. Who would want this? Well maybe huge battle-rider/tender ships.
MegaTraveller, no matter the errata, did a better job. They actually imagined that carried vehicles, craft and ships would all need a little extra room to fit inside. 50% extra for vehicles, 30% extra for craft and 10% extra for ships. And external craft were only on Dispersed config but took no extra volume. So a little better but still that Shuttle vs Scout conundrum. And no mention of how any of that affects the jump grid which is iirc introduced in MT.
Next came TNE, and an improvement again but a different take too. Now you had to factor surface area as a limit in addition to volume. And you had more choices. There were minimal hangers (200% volume)which allowed maintenance but with difficulty, spacious hangers (400% volume) that allowed regular maintenance without difficulty, docking rings (100% volume) that did not allow maintenance, and external grapples in various streamlining efficiencies (and 110%, 130% or 150% volume) and of course allowed no maintenance. Again the problem is unless you want to operate without the carried craft the grapples are silly, you're better off with the docking ring. And again no mention made of the jump grid effects for grapples but I'm not sure the concept was included in TNE.
My last examples are from T4 which are nearly identical to TNE. The differences being that minimal hangers no longer allow maintenance and there are no docking rings. Guess somebody figured no one would use spacious hangers if maintenance could be done in a minimal hanger and that with docking rings no one would use the grapples so they were dropped.
