TIE/LN à la Traveller

Discuss the Traveller RPG and its many settings
EldritchFire
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 216
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 1:18 pm
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA
Contact:

TIE/LN à la Traveller

Postby EldritchFire » Wed Jan 25, 2017 12:54 pm

I'm working on a Star Wars conversion to Traveller (MGT2e) and thought I'd share my TIE fighter. I went with a sphere hull since it's partially streamlined—I can't imagine those flat wings make it easy to manoeuvre in atmosphere!
And yes, I know some people say you can't have two weapons on a firmpoint. But this is Star Wars, where weapons rarely come in singles.

Image


TL12 (MCr9.815; 4 hull points)
  • Hull: 10dT sphere; MCr0.4
  • Armour: Titanium: 4; 1dT; MCr0.04
  • M-Drive: Thrust: 6; 0.6dT; MCr1.2
  • Power: Fission (TL6): 18 power; 2dT; MCr0.8
    • basic systems: 2; M-drive: 6; sensors: 2; weapons: 6
  • Fuel: 4 weeks; 1dT; MCr–
  • Bridge: Cockpit; 2.5dT; MCr0.015
  • Computer: Comp/10; –dT; MCr.16
    • Evade/1 (MCr1); library; manoeuvre/0
  • Sensors: Military grade; 2dT; MCr4.1
  • Weapons: Firmpoint-mounted dual pulse lasers; –dT; MCr2.1
  • Cargo: 0.9dT
Last edited by EldritchFire on Wed Jan 25, 2017 2:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Currently working on a Star Wars conversion for Traveller 2e! Details here.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 2824
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: TIE/LN à la Traveller

Postby AnotherDilbert » Wed Jan 25, 2017 2:14 pm

Prejudice:
This is a small and cheap, but fragile fighter. I would say the evil Imperial juggernaught deserves better. This is more of a keystone cop?


Technical notes:
If you use Crystaliron you save some space, for very little extra cost. You might have more armour.

A tech advantage or three on the lasers would increase the firepower, at some cost.
Reynard
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3155
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: TIE/LN à la Traveller

Postby Reynard » Wed Jan 25, 2017 2:28 pm

Remember the TIE fighters in the original movie were quantity over quality. They blew up left and right but there were swarms of them.
GamingGlen
Mongoose
Posts: 157
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 5:59 am

Re: TIE/LN à la Traveller

Postby GamingGlen » Wed Jan 25, 2017 2:35 pm

The two lasers could each be weaker, their combined power is equivalent to a single Traveller laser. It's a matter of aesthetics, and dealing with fiction that didn't bother having any rules.

You're going to have to deal with quad turbo lasers in turret mount at some point, and decide what turbo means (some tech upgrade/advantage, perhaps?).
Glen
locarno24
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 2958
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 7:46 pm
Location: Wildly Variable

Re: TIE/LN à la Traveller

Postby locarno24 » Wed Jan 25, 2017 2:43 pm

EldritchFire wrote:And yes, I know some people say you can't have two weapons on a firmpoint. But this is Star Wars, where weapons rarely come in singles.
You also can't have "quad lasers" in a single turret. When I did something similar, I found the easiest thing to do was to consider "beam lasers" to be a linked pair of lasers whilst a 'pulse laser' is a single mount (so the falcon has a twin beam laser turret, and the E-wing had one beam and one pulse).
Remember the TIE fighters in the original movie were quantity over quality. They blew up left and right but there were swarms of them.
That was definitely a spin that subsequent books and games put on them, but in fairness, in the original film, the TIE fighters do pretty nearly as well as the Rebels....

I'd definitely go for Crystaliron armour. The Empire didn't use awesome high-tech armour of expensiveness, but TL12 is not unreasonable for "modern day" tech for a spacefaring society, and, as noted, either you can have more armour for less volume, or (more likely) the same armour in less volume.

4 weeks fuel seems a little excessive for a short-ranged fighter.
Understand that I'm not advocating violence.
I'm just saying that it's highly effective and I strongly recommend using it.
Condottiere
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 6232
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: TIE/LN à la Traveller

Postby Condottiere » Wed Jan 25, 2017 3:01 pm

The TIE fighters trade armour for maneuverability, so the engines can be technological level thirteen with maximum propulsion.
EldritchFire
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 216
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 1:18 pm
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA
Contact:

Re: TIE/LN à la Traveller

Postby EldritchFire » Wed Jan 25, 2017 3:43 pm

AnotherDilbert wrote:Prejudice:
This is a small and cheap, but fragile fighter. I would say the evil Imperial juggernaught deserves better. This is more of a keystone cop?


Technical notes:
If you use Crystaliron you save some space, for very little extra cost. You might have more armour.

A tech advantage or three on the lasers would increase the firepower, at some cost.
They are minions, quantity over quality. But it's still better than the light fighter in HG.
GamingGlen wrote:The two lasers could each be weaker, their combined power is equivalent to a single Traveller laser. It's a matter of aesthetics, and dealing with fiction that didn't bother having any rules.

You're going to have to deal with quad turbo lasers in turret mount at some point, and decide what turbo means (some tech upgrade/advantage, perhaps?).
Turbolasers are more barbettes or bay weapons, not turret weapons.
locarno24 wrote:
EldritchFire wrote:And yes, I know some people say you can't have two weapons on a firmpoint. But this is Star Wars, where weapons rarely come in singles.
You also can't have "quad lasers" in a single turret. When I did something similar, I found the easiest thing to do was to consider "beam lasers" to be a linked pair of lasers whilst a 'pulse laser' is a single mount (so the falcon has a twin beam laser turret, and the E-wing had one beam and one pulse).
Actually you can. Quad turrets appear in the High Technology chapter of HG.
locarno24 wrote:
Remember the TIE fighters in the original movie were quantity over quality. They blew up left and right but there were swarms of them.
That was definitely a spin that subsequent books and games put on them, but in fairness, in the original film, the TIE fighters do pretty nearly as well as the Rebels....

I'd definitely go for Crystaliron armour. The Empire didn't use awesome high-tech armour of expensiveness, but TL12 is not unreasonable for "modern day" tech for a spacefaring society, and, as noted, either you can have more armour for less volume, or (more likely) the same armour in less volume.
Why go for costlier armour when I have the room for cheaper armour? TIEs aren't technological marvels. They're cheap ships.
locarno24 wrote:4 weeks fuel seems a little excessive for a short-ranged fighter.
1dT is the minimum, and that's 4 weeks for a ship this size.
Condottiere wrote:The TIE fighters trade armour for maneuverability, so the engines can be technological level thirteen with maximum propulsion.
If you want maximum propulsion, you want the TIE interceptor, not the TIE fighter.
Currently working on a Star Wars conversion for Traveller 2e! Details here.
wbnc
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1551
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 7:57 pm

Re: TIE/LN à la Traveller

Postby wbnc » Wed Jan 25, 2017 3:50 pm

I like it. The TIE was always seen as hopelessly out matched by the X-wing. and it was. The X-wing was just that good. Until the X-wing was introduced the TIE was a terror for rebel forces. It was faster than the Y-wing, and Z-95 headhunter, and had plenty of firepower for its small size. And the Empire built LOTS of them.
locarno24
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 2958
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 7:46 pm
Location: Wildly Variable

Re: TIE/LN à la Traveller

Postby locarno24 » Thu Jan 26, 2017 9:08 am

Turbolasers are more barbettes or bay weapons, not turret weapons.
Definitely. I'd say Barbette - there are occasional shuttle or fighter-class ships (like the TIE Lancet or TIE Big-gun) which manage to fit in a single turbolaser, but it's always a struggle. There are 'heavy turbolasers' (the big-ass turrets on an ISD) which are more bay weapon level.


They are minions, quantity over quality. But it's still better than the light fighter in HG.
Which it should be. TIE fighters were mass-produced, but still kicked pirate and merc Z-95s, separatist holdout droid fighters, and similar fighters in the teeth when put in the hands of professional navy crews.

Why go for costlier armour when I have the room for cheaper armour? TIEs aren't technological marvels. They're cheap ships.
To each their own. Bonded superdense would be 'technological marvel' to me. The TIE fighter may not be an expensive ship but it's still built to military grade, and 'normal' military grade to a TL12-14 society is crystaliron.
Understand that I'm not advocating violence.
I'm just saying that it's highly effective and I strongly recommend using it.
dmccoy1693
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1242
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 3:23 am
Location: South Jersey
Contact:

Re: TIE/LN à la Traveller

Postby dmccoy1693 » Thu Jan 26, 2017 10:17 am

I noticed they didn't have solar panels for power. That's what the wings are, solar panels.
EldritchFire
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 216
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 1:18 pm
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA
Contact:

Re: TIE/LN à la Traveller

Postby EldritchFire » Thu Jan 26, 2017 10:44 am

dmccoy1693 wrote:I noticed they didn't have solar panels for power. That's what the wings are, solar panels.

Right, but solar panels aren't powerful enough to be used in combat, so I omitted them.

"Extendible solar panels provide backup power for a ship's power plant…extending their range and endurance."

Extended range/endurance isn't something a starfighter needs.
Currently working on a Star Wars conversion for Traveller 2e! Details here.
locarno24
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 2958
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 7:46 pm
Location: Wildly Variable

Re: TIE/LN à la Traveller

Postby locarno24 » Thu Jan 26, 2017 10:44 am

They are, but solar panels generating enough power for an energy-weapon armed space dogfighter is....questionable. Certainly it's not possible within traveller rules.
Understand that I'm not advocating violence.
I'm just saying that it's highly effective and I strongly recommend using it.
Tom Kalbfus
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 2372
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:56 pm

Re: TIE/LN à la Traveller

Postby Tom Kalbfus » Thu Jan 26, 2017 1:31 pm

locarno24 wrote:They are, but solar panels generating enough power for an energy-weapon armed space dogfighter is....questionable. Certainly it's not possible within traveller rules.
I still question the fission power, you would think the Galactic Empire would use something better. Also a lot of these fighters are equipped with hyperdrives.
Jeraa
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 537
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 10:01 pm

Re: TIE/LN à la Traveller

Postby Jeraa » Thu Jan 26, 2017 2:04 pm

Tom Kalbfus wrote:
locarno24 wrote:They are, but solar panels generating enough power for an energy-weapon armed space dogfighter is....questionable. Certainly it's not possible within traveller rules.
I still question the fission power, you would think the Galactic Empire would use something better. Also a lot of these fighters are equipped with hyperdrives.
A TL 12 Fusion plant would fit better. You can run at only 1/2 the base power rating by shutting off non-essentials, and if I remember right normal TIE fighters didn't even have life support. A reduced basic power rating would seem to fit. That brings power requirements down to a max of 15/round. A single TL 12 fusion plant produces 15 power, but does cost a bit more than 2 fusion plants (MCr1 compared to MCr0.8 ). Make it a Budget plant reduces the fusion plant cost to MCr0.75, cheaper than the fission plant. With the Increased Size disadvantage, you gain back 0.75 tons of space. So it is cheaper and more efficient to use a budget TL 12 fusion plant over a fission plant.

As for hyperdrives, regular TIE fighters didn't have any.
Reynard
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3155
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: TIE/LN à la Traveller

Postby Reynard » Thu Jan 26, 2017 2:16 pm

I'm looking over the Wookiepedia description for the TIE/LN. It has a power source for the weapons and a primary power source for other needs so maybe those are solar panels for a Traveller version. No life support so it can run on half power. Pilot wears a space suit. (These guys are cheap!) Max acceleration.... 4,100gs!! Give it Maneuver 9.

"TIEs were designed to attack in large numbers, overwhelming the enemy craft. Standard attack squadrons consisted of 12 fighters while full attack wings were made up of six squadrons." Yeah, that's winning by attrition. The ejection seats made it easier for the pilots to willingly climb inside "knowing' they would be rescued.
EldritchFire
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 216
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 1:18 pm
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA
Contact:

Re: TIE/LN à la Traveller

Postby EldritchFire » Thu Jan 26, 2017 2:46 pm

Reynard wrote:I'm looking over the Wookiepedia description for the TIE/LN. It has a power source for the weapons and a primary power source for other needs so maybe those are solar panels for a Traveller version. No life support so it can run on half power. Pilot wears a space suit. (These guys are cheap!) Max acceleration.... 4,100gs!! Give it Maneuver 9.

"TIEs were designed to attack in large numbers, overwhelming the enemy craft. Standard attack squadrons consisted of 12 fighters while full attack wings were made up of six squadrons." Yeah, that's winning by attrition. The ejection seats made it easier for the pilots to willingly climb inside "knowing' they would be rescued.
I'd be very careful of using Wookiepedia as a definitive source of information. For one, the 4.1k G acceleration you cited is legends material not canon. Legends stuff is from old games, books, comics, etc that are not part of the canon story. I'm going by what we see on-screen, not what some obscure book claimed (most likely with no evidence to substantiate said claim) in the late '80s or early '90s.

As for the solar panels, regardless of what Wookiepedia says, according to HG solar panels are not usable for starfighters (bold added for emphasis):

"A ship equipped with solar panels consumes power plant fuel at one–quarter the normal rate so long as it is only engaged in minimal manoeuvring and does not fire any weapons. Minimal manoeuvring does not include long periods at full thrust, so solar power alone is useless for most commercial and military vessels."

And the basics of the craft is based off of the light fighter in HG. Hence thrust 6.
Currently working on a Star Wars conversion for Traveller 2e! Details here.
EldritchFire
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 216
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 1:18 pm
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA
Contact:

Re: TIE/LN à la Traveller

Postby EldritchFire » Thu Jan 26, 2017 2:47 pm

Jeraa wrote:
Tom Kalbfus wrote:
locarno24 wrote:They are, but solar panels generating enough power for an energy-weapon armed space dogfighter is....questionable. Certainly it's not possible within traveller rules.
I still question the fission power, you would think the Galactic Empire would use something better. Also a lot of these fighters are equipped with hyperdrives.
A TL 12 Fusion plant would fit better. You can run at only 1/2 the base power rating by shutting off non-essentials, and if I remember right normal TIE fighters didn't even have life support. A reduced basic power rating would seem to fit. That brings power requirements down to a max of 15/round. A single TL 12 fusion plant produces 15 power, but does cost a bit more than 2 fusion plants (MCr1 compared to MCr0.8 ). Make it a Budget plant reduces the fusion plant cost to MCr0.75, cheaper than the fission plant. With the Increased Size disadvantage, you gain back 0.75 tons of space. So it is cheaper and more efficient to use a budget TL 12 fusion plant over a fission plant.

As for hyperdrives, regular TIE fighters didn't have any.
This is some great advice! I'll be sure to use these modifications on my next revision, thanks!
Currently working on a Star Wars conversion for Traveller 2e! Details here.
Tom Kalbfus
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 2372
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:56 pm

Re: TIE/LN à la Traveller

Postby Tom Kalbfus » Thu Jan 26, 2017 3:01 pm

Jeraa wrote:
Tom Kalbfus wrote:
locarno24 wrote:They are, but solar panels generating enough power for an energy-weapon armed space dogfighter is....questionable. Certainly it's not possible within traveller rules.
I still question the fission power, you would think the Galactic Empire would use something better. Also a lot of these fighters are equipped with hyperdrives.
A TL 12 Fusion plant would fit better. You can run at only 1/2 the base power rating by shutting off non-essentials, and if I remember right normal TIE fighters didn't even have life support. A reduced basic power rating would seem to fit. That brings power requirements down to a max of 15/round. A single TL 12 fusion plant produces 15 power, but does cost a bit more than 2 fusion plants (MCr1 compared to MCr0.8 ). Make it a Budget plant reduces the fusion plant cost to MCr0.75, cheaper than the fission plant. With the Increased Size disadvantage, you gain back 0.75 tons of space. So it is cheaper and more efficient to use a budget TL 12 fusion plant over a fission plant.

As for hyperdrives, regular TIE fighters didn't have any.
There is the scene from the Force Awakens Po and Finn escaped a Star Destroyer in a Tie Fighter, it would have been a very short escape if there were no life support or hyperdrive. Finn seemed to think the Tie Fighter had a hyperdrive as he wanted to jump to another system, and they weren't wearing spacesuits so there must have been life support.
EldritchFire
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 216
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 1:18 pm
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA
Contact:

Re: TIE/LN à la Traveller

Postby EldritchFire » Thu Jan 26, 2017 3:23 pm

Tom Kalbfus wrote:
Jeraa wrote:
Tom Kalbfus wrote: I still question the fission power, you would think the Galactic Empire would use something better. Also a lot of these fighters are equipped with hyperdrives.
A TL 12 Fusion plant would fit better. You can run at only 1/2 the base power rating by shutting off non-essentials, and if I remember right normal TIE fighters didn't even have life support. A reduced basic power rating would seem to fit. That brings power requirements down to a max of 15/round. A single TL 12 fusion plant produces 15 power, but does cost a bit more than 2 fusion plants (MCr1 compared to MCr0.8 ). Make it a Budget plant reduces the fusion plant cost to MCr0.75, cheaper than the fission plant. With the Increased Size disadvantage, you gain back 0.75 tons of space. So it is cheaper and more efficient to use a budget TL 12 fusion plant over a fission plant.

As for hyperdrives, regular TIE fighters didn't have any.
There is the scene from the Force Awakens Po and Finn escaped a Star Destroyer in a Tie Fighter, it would have been a very short escape if there were no life support or hyperdrive. Finn seemed to think the Tie Fighter had a hyperdrive as he wanted to jump to another system, and they weren't wearing spacesuits so there must have been life support.
And that would be the TIE/SF, not the TIE/LN.

The SF has shields, a hyperdrive, a gunner and turret. The LN is the 'classic' TIE seen in the original trilogy as well as the Star Wars: Rebels TV show.
Currently working on a Star Wars conversion for Traveller 2e! Details here.
EldritchFire
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 216
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 1:18 pm
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA
Contact:

Re: TIE/LN à la Traveller

Postby EldritchFire » Thu Jan 26, 2017 3:28 pm

Also, if anyone is interested, the home for my Star Wars conversion can be found here. Any and all updates will be made there.

Link is also in my sig.
Currently working on a Star Wars conversion for Traveller 2e! Details here.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AndrewW, NOLATrav, Sigtrygg and 9 guests