LBB Vehicles

[jappel]

I finally had a chance to play around a bit with this tonight. So far I've banged out a ground car, a gun jeep, and a TL-6 armored car with an autocannon and coaxial MG. I feel like I'm creating a Traveller version of "Rat Patrol".

Haven't totalled up prices or performance stats yet, will do that later tonight or tomorrow.

In the meantime, a few quick comments, questions & suggestions. I apologize for being a bit terse - I like the system, recognize this is an early version, no slam intended, just not much time to post right now!

- The listed system costs on my copy are CR 100K/space for wheels, Cr 10k/space for tracks, and Cr 1k/space for air cushion and grav. These seem considerably out of whack, but I haven't dug into Striker yet to see how that matches up. Still, this seems intuitively wrong.

- I think you're waaay too generous in the space requirements for extending the duration of standard power plants. I'll try to recreate a Bradley CFV (I'm an old cavalryman) and see how that plays out, but at the moment don't have more specific suggestions other than "You're giving way too much duration for space".

- Are pintel/pedastel weapon mounts assumed in the "body mount" class? Looks that way, but an explicit mention might be nice.

- I was able to puzzle out the weapon space / turret rules and table, but I think the mention of turret space requirements should be moved into the body of the rule for clarity.

- Chrome: off-road suspensions for wheeled & track.

- Chrome / use suggestion: borrow the maintenance point system from Striker (and give that guy with Mech-2 something to do!)

Will try to work up some other designs and post in the next few days. I'm also inspired to finish up that catalog of Striker Tac Missle designs this weekend and send it on.

Piper - hat's off to you, sir. Wish I'd had this 20 years ago, or the gumption to make it myself.

- John

 

[Piper]

Originally posted by jappel:
- The listed system costs on my copy are CR 100K/space for wheels, Cr 10k/space for tracks, and Cr 1k/space for air cushion and grav. These seem considerably out of whack, but I haven't dug into Striker yet to see how that matches up. Still, this seems intuitively wrong.

Yes, the entries on the table are reversed. I'll send you a current copy.

- I think you're waaay too generous in the space requirements for extending the duration of standard power plants...

You may be right; I'll take another look at it. To keep it as simple as possible, I was aiming for an average; something between an M1 Abrams and a Ford Fiesta

- Are pintel/pedastel weapon mounts assumed in the "body mount" class? Looks that way, but an explicit mention might be nice.

Yes. I'll add that in the next pass.

- I was able to puzzle out the weapon space / turret rules and table, but I think the mention of turret space requirements should be moved into the body of the rule for clarity.

The newest version should clear this up.

The chrome suggestions are good. I'll take a look at fitting them in.

Good feedback, John and not a slam at all.
Thanks!

 

[The Oz]

This is excellent work, Piper, and here's some suggestions.

1. Body should have some cost, perhaps Cr1000 per space.

2. Wheeled drive should be the cheapest and smallest of all low-tech drives. I'd reduce the space requirement to B x .15 (min 1) and cost to Cr 500 per space.

3. Add Legs as a type of drive, with these characteristics:
</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;"> Std. Legs
Tech Level 9
Space needed B x 0.25(min 1)
System cost Cr 2,000 per space
Cruise speed 60kph
Max speed 80kph
Off-road speed 60kph
Rough Terrain speed 40kph</pre>[/QUOTE]4. Change the fuel needed for fuel cell power systems to hydrogen. Fuel cells combine hydrogen and oxygen to get power and so fuel cells will only work in atmosphere types 4 to 9, unless you double the size of the fuel requirements to add a supply of oxygen. This option (adding oxygen supply) might be something you could make available to all the air-breathing power plants.

5. You mention "Drone control systems" but did not specify them. I would borrow them from STRIKER and say that drone control systems are available at TL13, take up 1 space, cost Cr 2,000,000 and allow remote operation at a -2 DM.

6. Accomodations should have a cost.

Crew position Cr 1000
Passenger station Cr 100
Extended accomodations Cr 1000 each

7. Fusion power systems should become available at TL 9, not TL 8.

Here's a TL15 battle tank I built in this system.

TL-15 Grav Tank
</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">Body 56 spaces Cost Cr 56,000
Turreted Main weapon 9 spaces Pen 60 Cost Cr 325,000
Turreted light weapon 3 spaces Pen 15 Cost Cr 42,500
5 TAC missiles 5 spaces Pen 45 Cost Cr 112,500
Extended crew of 3 12 spaces Cost Cr 6,000
Double anti-grav 14 spaces Cost Cr 2,800,000
Fusion power plant 7 spaces Cost Cr 1,400,000
Armor value 54 6 spaces Cost Cr 90,000
Totals 56 spaces Cost Cr 4,507,000</pre>[/QUOTE]

 

[Piper]

Originally posted by The Oz:
1. Body should have some cost, perhaps Cr1000 per space.

Part of the problem here is low-end vehicles, like a groundcar. They're Cr4000 in CT and can be built for less than that in MT. With a cheaper wheel drive part of the problem goes away.

2. Wheeled drive should be the cheapest and smallest of all low-tech drives. I'd reduce the space requirement to B x .15 (min 1) and cost to Cr 500 per space.

I'll try out these numbers for light wheeled drives. For off-road drives, the issue here is the ATV. In both CT and MT (101 Vehicles) there's no real difference in the end price or carrying capacity between wheels and tracks.

3. Add Legs as a type of drive...

Yes; this is a keeper. Thanks!

4. Change the fuel needed for fuel cell power systems to hydrogen...

This is another area that's giving me fits and, once again, the ATV is the culprit. CT gives them a 50 hour duration at TL 6 in the full range of atmosphere types. MT dodged this by producing 2 versions, an internal combustion version at TL 6 and a fusion version at TL10.
The simplest fix might be to handwave a TL8 "advanced electric" power system that would allow an extended duration of 1 week before requiring recharge.
The atmosphere limits for IC engines was caught by another tester and is corrected in the latest revision.

5. You mention "Drone control systems" but did not specify them.

Drone systems have been moved to a future rules set concentrating on military systems.

6. Accomodations should have a cost.

This also goes back to low end vehicles. Passengers have an inherent cost which is reflected in the drive and power systems. I'll look into reducing the drive cost and adding crew/passenger costs and see how it works out.

I've been noticing that high-end military vehicles seem to be too cheap. Adding a significant cost for gunnery stations on main weapons might even that up. I'm also considering increasing the power system requirement for vehicles with energy weapons. A sliding scale cost for armor, increasing as you add more, might also help with this.

I'm also wondering if high levels of armor should take up more space. It looks as though it's too easy to produce invulnerable vehicles.

7. Fusion power systems should become available at TL 9, not TL 8.

Oops ... good catch. Thanks!

Here's a TL15 battle tank I built in this system ...

Looks good, and it does point out the price issue. I'm thinking a vehicle like this should cost 3 to 4 times as much to bring it more in line with MT.
It looks like I have to run some more numbers.

One point; turret weapons don't require the additional space, just the turret itself. Perhaps adding space requirements for large turrets might be one way to up the price and keep the armor in line.

Great feedback! Thank you very much.

 

[The Oz]

Perhaps you could set up a difference between "civilian" and "military" vehicles (or perhaps use the terms "light duty" and "heavy duty") for things like Body, Accomodations, Controls and Sensors (which I would add) and other such things.

"Civilian" stuff would be much cheaper but not as durable and should have penalties for combat use/damage. "Civilian" stuff should be easier to maintain, though.

"Military" stuff would be much more expensive but tougher and more durable, though needing more maintenance.

I would add in some Sensors and Controls, to bring up the cost of "military" vehicles. You could get the costs from MT or STRIKER, or just have them based on TL, which I think would be easier. If you had "civilian" and "military" sensor systems it would fit nicely with the starship sensors of CT, and then classifying them by TL would make it easy to have simple rules for sensor use, with relative TLs giving DMs for making contact, etc.

I would require "military" controls on any vehicle with a max speed of more than about 300 kph, for instance.

I am also working up some ideas on how to allow designers to build weapons with more Penetration, since it's pretty easy to build "invulnerable" vehicles in your system (if I took off the TAC missiles from my tank and used the spaces for armor my vehicle would be invulnerable to any TL15 weapon designed in this system). You might also have a simple rule that the armor value this system gives is for the "front" facing and that the other aspects of the vehicle are at 1/2 of this value.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

Ah, yes, Oz - Sensors & Controls would be a big reason for the price difference between Civilian and Military vehicles. The other is the durability issue. Those two items should account for most of the price difference.

As far as maintenance, the civilian version should be easier to maintain, but require less actual time for maintenance. Military vehicles (well, most) are made for quick maintenance that can be done in the field with a minimum of tools. But, they are doing harder duty than most civilian vehicles and require more maintenance because they get more beat up.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

Originally posted by Piper:
For those interested, playtest version 6 is now available.

Ummmm, where and what?

 

[Piper]

Revision 6 of the LBB vehicle design/combat system is available. Anyone interested, please PM me with an e-mail address. (220k .rtf file)

 

[Fritz_Brown]

Ahhh. PM'ing now.

 

[Piper]

LBB Vehicles is available in pdf.
Link

My sincere thanks to those who contributed.
The next supplement dealing with military operations is under way and should be ready for playtest in about a week.

 

[The Oz]

Nice presentation, Piper!!!

 

[Berg]

Very Professional

It's nice when these ideas come to fruition...
I could show this to players and say "Of course it's canon...Just look at it"

 

[Golan2072]

Looking great!
I'm going to design a few vehicles for MTU soon, using your system and LBB4 weapons.

 

[robject]

I haven't used the PDF, only read through it, so forgive if these comments are bad.

Antimatter should probably be set at TL18, not 16. If in doubt, ask Daryen (that's his COTI handle) to verify, since he's the local Darrian/TL16 expert.

Would it be 'better' if the tables were integrated with the text? I remember FFS2 being sort of difficult due to all of the tables being at the back...

 

[mike wightman]

Antimatter is a TL17 development in CT, MT, TNE, T4, and T20.

 

[Piper]

Originally posted by robject:
Antimatter should probably be set at TL18, not 16.

Yes, antimatter probably should be TL18. I'll pull and edit the file.

Would it be 'better' if the tables were integrated with the text? I remember FFS2 being sort of difficult due to all of the tables being at the back...

Given the simplicity of the design system, you shouldn't need the text after doing a design or two; just the tables.

 

[robject]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
Antimatter is a TL17 development in CT, MT, TNE, T4, and T20.

You're right. Why was I thinking 18? I remember the Darrians tinkered with AM at TL16 but didn't get the returns they wanted, and that their small craft were actually produced at TL17. Brain must've hiccoughed.

 

[far-trader]

Originally posted by robject:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
Antimatter is a TL17 development in CT, MT, TNE, T4, and T20.

You're right. Why was I thinking 18? I remember the Darrians tinkered with AM at TL16 but didn't get the returns they wanted, and that their small craft were actually produced at TL17. Brain must've hiccoughed. </font>[/QUOTE]My first thought was MT Antimatter Missiles were TL18 and that's where we both got it from but I looked and it doesn't seem to have a TL in the Ref's Manual or errata. Maybe it's what we both house ruled for them?

 

[Maksim-Smelchak]

Hi Guys,

I don't think that there is a specific and consistent "canon" reference for anti-matter (AM).

Several different sources place it at different TLs. The only real consistency is that AM happens at a TL over 15.

AM really changes the equations of Classic Traveller.

As it is, without cybertech and nanotech, power armor has strong limitations.

Shalom,
Maksim-Smelchak.

 

[mike wightman]

TL chart LBB3.1 TL17
TL chart LBB3.2 TL17
TL chart TTB TL17
TL chart SE TL17
TL chart GC TL17
MT RM power plant tables TL17
TL chart MT RC TL17
TNE FF&S TL17
T4 FF&S TL17
T20 TL17