4+ Years on, how is the underlying math of MGT2E holding up? (especially in the Starship and Vehicle construction rules)

[ShawnDriscoll]

Every time I try to figure out T5, my migraines get worse. I'm sure it would eventually make sense - with a computer. maybe. But T5 would require inhuman patience to learn. There needs to be compromises, and for the most part, Mongoose manages this where T5 aims for a purist level of complexity combined with obtuse text and tables that make it unworkable.

Do you think that maybe some parts of T5 can be used that are less complex and will still get the job done, without all the details?

[Geir]

Every time I try to figure out T5, my migraines get worse. I'm sure it would eventually make sense - with a computer. maybe. But T5 would require inhuman patience to learn. There needs to be compromises, and for the most part, Mongoose manages this where T5 aims for a purist level of complexity combined with obtuse text and tables that make it unworkable.

Do you think that maybe some parts of T5 can be used that are less complex and will still get the job done, without all the details?

Probably. it's a presentation problem. Can't eat the elephant; don't know where to start. I think it would help if it started with simple things, like: here's what everything has: mass, cost, TL. Some things have power costs or other prerequisites. Some things create certain effects. And here's how to put the parts together. And here's some options you can add. And here's some more...

But mechanics-wise T5 is far from a 2D6 roll-playing system. Mongoose is much closer to Classic Traveller, where honestly, it was often: "Roll 2D6. Okay, yeah, that looks good enough." You can roll-play off of that. I mean, I like building stuff and worldbuilding, but it should serve a purpose at some point.

[paltrysum]

Mongoose's starship and vehicle design sequences are not integrated but both work well independently. The fact that the vehicle design rules are not founded on the same principles as the starship rules irks some fans but I will say this: MgT2 vehicle design is fun and produces usable vehicles for your game. I've designed everything from SUVs to submarines and they've all worked out pretty well so far.

[Geir]

Mongoose's starship and vehicle design sequences are not integrated but both work well independently. The fact that the vehicle design rules are not founded on the same principles as the starship rules irks some fans but I will say this: MgT2 vehicle design is fun and produces usable vehicles for your game. I've designed everything from SUVs to submarines and they've all worked out pretty well so far.

I agree, the systems both work well enough independently. And making starships and vehicles is fun. I think the vehicle design rules work well in isolation, but because power, locomotion, and fuel are abstracted away, the two systems can never be compatible. It does irk me that armor types are one TL lower for vehicles than starships, and that vehicle nuclear power plants work like you'd expect them to (like effectively forever), but are actually larger than the smallest you can fit on a starship, so you can't even squeeze in a smaller fusion plant that 'only' runs for a month - again, because of different underlying assumptions, there's no way to reconcile things like that. That and I still don't know what the base armor of a starship should be against small arms. Can't be zero, and going by the minimum 3-4 value for vehicles seems too low. And then there's the question of 'wilderness refueling' of vehicles. Not really dealt with, so for example a ride across Fulacin in a standard ATV wouldn't work well.

Now try to design a surface base. The rules in the Drinaxian Companion are based more on starship components (and the labor numbers don't add up - but that's another issue). A coherent one-size-fits-all Fire Fusion and Steel or Thingmaker approach could be done in a way that's not too daunting (I think), but it would be a clean slate. Keeping it simple enough to be playable is a challenge. And here Mongoose does succeed. Highguard works well enough except for some unclear and occasionally broken rules. The vehicle rules make decent vehicles, but even in published vehicles, I see mistakes in costs over things that are per space instead of per vehicle. Robots, I hope they deal with eventually, because the vehicle rules don't really cover them in any useful way. And if design rules could back into, for instance, the cost of a custom pressurized shelter, then that would be ideal.

[Ursus Maior]

I would rather see Mongoose tweaked, with smoother progression from vehicle to spacecraft (and let's add robots and, well, '"thingmaker" rules based on simple, extensible principles).

Maybe this would be a good contribution to the new JTAS volumes? I'd love to see a semi-official quasi-houserule being published in shiny form with maybe a couple of professional pictures added into.

[AnotherDilbert]

That and I still don't know what the base armor of a starship should be against small arms. Can't be zero, and going by the minimum 3-4 value for vehicles seems too low.

The base armour is hidden in the "divide by 10, drop fractions" damage scaling mechanism.

The first nine points of damage just bounce.

[Geir]

That and I still don't know what the base armor of a starship should be against small arms. Can't be zero, and going by the minimum 3-4 value for vehicles seems too low.

The base armour is hidden in the "divide by 10, drop fractions" damage scaling mechanism.

The first nine points of damage just bounce.

How many years and that never occurred to me? Okay, yes, that makes sense. So the answer is 9.

[arcador]

I sometimes rule a stray shot inside a ship will deal dmg to internals, ignoring armor (i.e. laser deals 17 dmg, ~1 dmg to ship).

Although both books are not math-tight as my obsessive balance nature would like, they are pretty usable books. Unlike Ed.1 Vehicle and robot books. The vehicle book is actually usable, although sometimes might require some tweaks when working with extremes.