Condottiere wrote:1. Rules as written are meant to be levelling the playing field for everyone, especially in wargames or designing weapon systems since you do not want anyone to have undue advantages and you'd like the design process to have some consistency.
Yes, as Traveller is a collection of somewhat interrelated Mini games you think they would be more consistent between each other. (Hint the only edition to ever do this was TNE, T5 might but that book is such a mess, Who could tell?)
Condottiere wrote:4. My goal is creating legal designs; which wouldn't discourage me from exploiting loopholes, pointing these out and/or commenting on and suggesting solutions for inconsistencies, illogical concepts or bottlenecks.
Without a consistent Mini-game for starship combat what defines legal? Or in another perspective legal is what works for your Traveller game, it has always been a broad framework. The only time specifics where ever invoked where for the CT era High Guard tournament in the early 80's. And to be honest one could pick and choose which design system works for them and express the results of that in Mongoose terms and a majority of people out there wouldn't bitch much...
[Hint I have been more than half tempted to use the 81 edition of CT High Guard to build a base framework for ships and then pull in appropriate bits from other editions to flesh said designs out]
Condottiere wrote:5. Bottlenecks occur when I come across some hindrance to my vision, for example a Jump1/Power 1/Man 1 hundred ton starship.
6. Actually, I'd like to construct smaller ones, but the rule is absolute about hundred tons.
7. The rules are less absolute about drive factors, as demonstrated by the existence of smallcraft engines.
8. There is also no logical reason for not taking the engines out of a dual sectioned 2001 capital ton hull and placing them in a 2000 ton single section adventure hull, the controversy in my mind is whether you actually need the second command module either in the 2001 hull or in the 2000 hull.
9. Gravitic drives may be referenced for starships, but no design process exists to construct them. As such, I list both them and the normal reaction drives as options which as such isn't RAW.
Ok, all of these and a bunch of other little details all stem from a fact that there isn't a over riding tech document for the Mongoose edition, it is a mass of one off rules that riff on two or three mini games none of which have been completely published, edited or referred to by the author of the section in question. Unfortunately this is kinda par for the course over the life of Traveller the RPG.
Condottiere wrote:10. Torpedo barbettes are a rather egregious example; are we looking at an enlarged missile turret or the more traditional torpedo tube agglomeration you can witness on our destroyers? If so, why can't we clump five tubes together? If not, where's the space for the launching equipment? Regardless, the barbette doesn't have space for one ton of fire control, and not quite sure how the torpedoes are going to be reloaded.
Ok, the rules kinda state one thing and indicate another, in that it states a Torpedo barbette has room for two torpedoes, thus from a volume point of view some of that gotta hang outside in the same space turrets languish. Note if you ask me I exactly how big a Torpedo is I would say 1.25 dTons i.e. 1.5 meters square by 7.5 meters long and the other half of the listed space would be the auto loader.
But the is a bigger issue here in that the Torpedo Barbette has two battery rounds, How many do the other missile launchers? (Note in other editions this was nominally 3 per launcher in the turret (both Sand and missiles))
Condottiere wrote:11. If fire control is half a ton for operator space and half a ton for the associated electronics that would be logical. Combined with a single turret, you still have half a ton that can't be accounted for, assuming that the actual space the turret now occupies is half a ton, and there is no space for a gunner.
12. Pop ups provide another problem when calculating volume. For example, a pop up on a hundred ton scout, is the scout 101 tons when it pops, or 99 tons when it depops?
13. Do we allow barbettes to be operated at source? Traveller tropism would indicate so, so that's at least half a ton of operator space that should be allocated. Anything that the weapon system doesn't really need can be eliminated and the remaining tonnage can then be mounted, saving volume at the expense of independent targeting.
14. Bays are easy, because we allocate a lot of space, and the only variable we have to worry about is physical ordnance, if any. No one expects the operator to sit inside one, and even if he did there's more than enough place.
This is a tradition question, mostly it used to be settled that "Fire control" was the volume of the turret, again reaching in to the 81 edition, where turrets had a fixed volume that you accounted for weather or not the Hard-point was occupied. Which in this edition is nebulous.
Condottiere wrote:15. Triple turrets only indicate that you could squeeze in three weapon systems, which just helps to approximate their weight, less than 166 kilos each. A single turret could use the empty sections as a spare linen closet.
Er? Oh I get it.... Rule of thumb, Starship mass is 10 metric tons per Displacement Ton of Volume
Lastly Yes i go into earlier edition for a number of my answers and thoughts, couple major reasons, first and foremost is in a lot of ways Mongoose wrote a good draft based off the material the licencor provided, unfortunately it was the draft that they published. With that and knowing generally what information Marc was drawing on to provide them with the mother document, I as a long time Traveller Game Master can make some general suppositions. I am not claiming any special knowledge here just the experience 25+ years of discussions about the game with my fellow fans and the creators of the game.
Condottiere you make some great observations and requests. I hope this gives you some insight....