[1e] Core vs Central Supply Catalog

[Saladman]

So I'm digging into CSC again, with an eye to coming up with a campaign equipment list somewhere in between it and Core in number of options. A couple questions arise.

Has anyone done an edited list like this? Or is CSC an open book to your players if you're using it?

I notice that, in regards to guns, some (but not all) of the damage numbers change from core to CSC for the same model. I would assume by default that the later product is correct, but I don't see any obvious rhyme or reason to the changes, so I have enough doubt to ask. Was CSC a rewrite of the gun numbers, or was it intended to work off Core as a base and fill in the gaps?

It doesn't help that CSC has a couple of obvious sweetheart options - one example is the Heavy Rifle, Bolt dealing 4d6+4 damage and the Big Game Rifle dealing 3d6+3. They have identical TL's and recoil, and the big game rifle costs more. I don't demand everything be equal, but when one's superior in every way I can't help think maybe there's a typo somewhere in damage, TL or recoil on one of them. Leave the sweethearts in, or "fix" them?

I guess more directly, are there errata documents for the 1e print books anywhere? But I'm curious about the above questions in their own right.

 

[Condottiere]

I would assume that when you have a whole bunch of similar stuff displayed on a spreadsheet, rather than some distinct items, you have to try to figure out how to balance them, so that what they get tends to correspond to what it costs the players.

 

[Saladman]

I get that, but the Big Game Rifle is the one that costs more (by 3 1/2 times). If there was anything at all it was better at I would assume it was on purpose, but when one is better in every way I start to wonder if there's a misprint. I almost wonder if the Big Game was supposed to be TL 4 and got misfiled, but the Heavy is the one that stands out at it's TL.

Anyway, I didn't set out to get hung up on this one gun, it's just the one I happened to remember out of several instances. For my purposes, since my whole purpose is a shorter list, and since the Heavy Rifle, Bolt is the one exception to TL rifles dealing 3d6+/-x damage, I expect I'll drop it and let the role be filled by something of higher TL.

I remain curious about how other groups are using the CSC, though - open book, or limited resource?

 

[Condottiere]

You can always adjust the prices at retail level, if they don't seem kosher.

If players point at that discrepancy, hint at economics 101.

 

[locarno24]

Was CSC a rewrite of the gun numbers, or was it intended to work off Core as a base and fill in the gaps?

Very much intended to replace - it changes quite a few rules in a fundamental way (like giving armour piercing traits to pretty much every slug weapon, and giving a clip capacity to the PGMP).

Some of the weapons in the CSC are 'just better'. To be honest, I've always just used the core book and mercenary for the most part. Yes, there's an ABC rifle and an XYZ rifle, but the exact niff-naff and trivia difference between two 'makes' are largely irrelevant given how lethal a gunshot wound generally is.

 

[dragoner]

Here is an equipment price list pdf I made (down load link): http://dragonersdomain.com/forum/download/file.php?id=539

This is a WIP, as there is a huge amount of stuff in the Central Supply Catalogue. List updated. Again. Last update 5/1. May add some other stuff later, it lacks CSC ammo costs, and I may go through some of the other career books like Agent, Scoundrel, or Scout.

 

[Saladman]

Very much intended to replace - it changes quite a few rules in a fundamental way (like giving armour piercing traits to pretty much every slug weapon, and giving a clip capacity to the PGMP).

Thanks, that was a big part of my question.

Ironically given I'm trying to use CSC, my plan was to drop armor piercing and ammo types entirely, as being more fiddly than I like. But I still want a list than longer than core but shorter than "anything out of CSC", so maybe I'll dig out Merc again and take a look.

Here is an equipment price list pdf I made (down load link): http://dragonersdomain.com/forum/download/file.php?id=539

This is a WIP, as there is a huge amount of stuff in the Central Supply Catalogue. List updated. Again. Last update 5/1. May add some other stuff later, it lacks CSC ammo costs, and I may go through some of the other career books like Agent, Scoundrel, or Scout.

That is very handy, thank you.

 

[Condottiere]

The advanced combat rifle and gauss rifle seem to be way too cheap.

 

[steve98052]

The ACR and Gauss rifle are low cost for their capabilities in part because they're mass market standard weapons at their respective technology levels, because high TL credits are worth more than low TL credits, and because prices in Traveller were mostly not thought through comprehensively (except in the GURPS edition).

 

[dragoner]

The price of the ACR and Gauss Rifle don't include the legal fees incurred when you are caught with one in your possession. :mrgreen:

 

[Condottiere]

There's some leeway with the advanced combat rifle.

I think a line can be drawn between shells and caseless.

 

[dragoner]

Availability is an issue, for example the gun store might not have a phased-plasma rifle in the 40-watt range, or if you popped over to Germany and tried to buy HK416 with an under-slung granatwerfer, you might have a nice discussion with white hats while sitting in a glass room. Otherwise, being a bean counter is somewhat boring.

 

[h1ro]

Or pay a noble who's having financial trouble to head a merc company that's just a shell then buy your armoury thru the shell.

Failing that, try to play a game where you don't play a sociopath who kills a lot of people.

 

[Annatar Giftbringer]

try to play a game where you don't play a sociopath who kills a lot of people.

Wait, what? Is that... is that an option? :shock:

:lol:

 

[Condottiere]

End user certification.

My view is that the advanced combat rifle would be the equivalent of what an assault rifle is to us, and that there are a wide variety of options and builds, so that one variant would be very rugged, and another one highly accurate but finicky when it comes to cleaning.

It's likely there are civilian variants, but these would be modified to limit ammunition capacity, either five or ten maximum, and make it semi-automatic; this would make it way superior to lower technological level rifles.

I'm going to speculate that caseless ammunition for semi automatics is technological level eight, and automatic at nine, due to the need to deal with heat and cook off.

Advanced combat rifles may have both options, though with a lower ammunition capacity: this is to allow lower technological level worlds to manufacture their own ammunition, or as a way to control civilian access.

 

[h1ro]

I agree with the notion that the ACR is thought of just as we'd think of an assault rifle. Same way no one today looks at muskets as a viable weapon for "serious use". Technology moves on.

 

[Condottiere]

The advanced combat rifle is a kilo lighter and has the double the range of an assault rifle.

It has three quarters of the range of a gauss rifle, and not quite it's punch.

Essentially, good enough against non armoured opponents at medium and close range.

 

[dragoner]

It's good enough; small arms only account for 2-3% of enemy casualties anyway. Ever notice that rifles post WW2 became lighter with the idea that the average soldier could carry more ammunition? Then look at the load outs in their kit and see that they are carrying the same or less ammo than before; because the extra ammo they carry is for the squad machine gun, because it causes more casualties than all the rifles combined. Just don't tell the average soldier that they are an ammo humper and not the hero. The future will likely continue this trend with ortillery and such.

 

[h1ro]

Which is true for "Big Army" engagements, if we're talking small numbers of people (most traveller groups aren't going to amount to even small unit tactics) who don't necessarily have access to the heavier weapons it isn't really relevant. Add to that that ammo use in Traveller is poorly "simulated" and fewer groups actually track loadouts and I'm not sure your point.

It's an interesting argument to counter another current thread where people are talking about reducing the damage of weapons.

 

[dragoner]

It's relevant to the price; compare a Garand next to a modern M4 and the cost in labor and materials is higher for the Garand. The Garand was built with the old every infantryman a rifleman theory in mind, the M4 wasn't, so that the price points change; the only way that changes is if that the theory goes backward in the future. MWM, posits in T5 the availability of "disposable" Gauss Rifles in the future, save even more on your armorer costs by just pitching the rifle after a certain number of rounds have been fired through it, and then print more rifles as needed.

How all this interacts with the players toting rifles is up to the referee and how the players use them.