1st ed. CRB/MRB Common Spacecraft >=100 tons

[snrdg121408]

Morning PST all,

I checked final and maintenance costs for the twelve common spacecraft >=100 tons on pp. 114-131 of the 1st ed. CRB/MRB PDF update 02/25/16. I tallied up the costs for the listed components, applied the standard discount of 10% and calculated the maintenance cost using the formula 1/12 of 0.1% of the ship's purchase price/month. I did three tallies, paper and pencil without a calculator, paper and pencil with a calculator, and using MS Excel 2010. Of the twelve hulls the Corsair was the only Hull I matched. Okay, I also matched the yacht's number using the air/raft cost of Cr600,000. I also discovered that the ATV cost for yacht of Cr300,000 does not match the 1st ed. CRB/MRB Vehicles and Drones Table on p. 111 of Cr50,000.

I am thinking about uploading the spreadsheet, if there is a section any way, to have others verify that I got numbers right. However, I would rather not take up space if there is no interest in errata for the 1st ed. CRB/MRB. An alternative might be to email me and I'll send interested members my work.

Feedback would be appreciated one way or another.

 

[phavoc]

Welcome to Traveller! You will find the exact same misses across all the versions, even after errata is published.

The examples listed in the books rarely follow the published design rules.

 

[AndrewW]

Welcome to Traveller! You will find the exact same misses across all the versions, even after errata is published.

The examples listed in the books rarely follow the published design rules.

This will hopefully be taken care of with the new version.

 

[snrdg121408]

Hello phavoc,

Welcome to Traveller! You will find the exact same misses across all the versions, even after errata is published.

The examples listed in the books rarely follow the published design rules.

The costs for the installed components, with the exception of the air/raft and ATV, used in the examples match the costs in the design rules. The difference I found occurred during the final tally of the final costs, discounts, and maintenance costs, with the exception of the Corsair.

My recollection for the other Traveller version design rules that stepped through an example was that my some of my component costs did not match the examples on a regular basis. Tons occasionally failed to match up with the examples, too. To be honest I tried to get a handle on both CT LBB 2 1977 and CT LBB 5 1979 design rules when I could not match the design examples and gave-up. CT LBB 5 1980 I faired much better, but still rarely matched cost.

Thank you for the reply.

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

I spent a lot of time finding 2nd edition examples that needed updates after a rule was updated. But after so many rule updates... we'll see how the hardcover turned out.

 

[snrdg121408]

Hi AndrewW,

Welcome to Traveller! You will find the exact same misses across all the versions, even after errata is published.

The examples listed in the books rarely follow the published design rules.

This will hopefully be taken care of with the new version.

In theory the Players Guide, shipdeckplanpt1.PDF and shipdeckplanpt2.PDF was supposed to have corrected the numbers Looking at the examples my opinion is that the 1st ed. Players Guide and other sources did not correct the material. When the new HG is available I will use the examples in 2nd ed. CRB to run through the new HG rules. I'm hoping that I'll be able to match them.

Thank you for the reply.

 

[snrdg121408]

Hello ShawnDriscoll,

I spent a lot of time finding 2nd edition examples that needed updates after a rule was updated. But after so many rule updates... we'll see how the hardcover turned out.

I'm hoping that your efforts are more successful than they were in the other Traveller versions. Regardless, I want say thank you for your efforts. I'm also hoping that I can follow the rules to match a published example.

 

[AndrewW]

When the new HG is available I will use the examples in 2nd ed. CRB to run through the new HG rules. I'm hoping that I'll be able to match them.

They should. Most of the stuff that has changed in High Guard doesn't effect the common spacecraft found in the Core Rulebook, but the full stats for those ships will be included in High Guard and updated if need be. Also a lot of additional ships will be included.

 

[snrdg121408]

Late afternoon PST AndrewW,

When the new HG is available I will use the examples in 2nd ed. CRB to run through the new HG rules. I'm hoping that I'll be able to match them.

They should. Most of the stuff that has changed in High Guard doesn't effect the common spacecraft found in the Core Rulebook, but the full stats for those ships will be included in High Guard and updated if need be. Also a lot of additional ships will be included.

The 1st ed. CRB/MRB Scout on p. 115 has a Total cost is MCr27.5455 with a monthly maintenance cost of Cr2,754 compared to the 2nd ed. CRB Scout's. p. 40 of MCr36.769 and monthly maintenance cost of Cr3,064. At least for the 2nd ed. scout I appear to be able to calculate the monthly maintenance cost correctly.

The 1st ed. Scout has 34 tons of fuel compared to the 2nd ed. Scout's 23 tons.

The 1st ed. Scout has 8 tons of cargo capacity to the 2nd ed. Scout's 12 tons.

The 1st ed. Scout's air/raft uses 4 tons of space while 2nd ed. scout's has the air/raft in a 5 ton docking space and adds a 6 ton workshop.

If the differences between the 1st ed. and 2nd ed. CRB scout is an indication then I think the new HG design rules have made changes to the earlier design rules in 1st ed. CRB Spacecraft Design, 1st ed. HG Spacecraft Options, Small Craft Design, and Capital Ship design rules. In a different topic I was informed that the new HG design rules combined the four 1st ed. rules into one system, that is a major change in my opinion.

I'm really hoping that I can recreate the 2nd ed. examples using the new rules. Thank you for the information.

 

[snrdg121408]

Hello all,

My guess is that there is no interest in the material I created so I'll not waste space on the appropriate page and anyone that is interested can get a copy via email.

Thank you for the replies.

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

The 1st ed. Scout has 34 tons of fuel compared to the 2nd ed. Scout's 23 tons.

The 1st ed. Scout has 8 tons of cargo capacity to the 2nd ed. Scout's 12 tons.

The 1st ed. Scout's air/raft uses 4 tons of space while 2nd ed. scout's has the air/raft in a 5 ton docking space and adds a 6 ton workshop.

What's going on here? What's the problem? I thought you knew that 1st and 2nd edition are different rulesets by now. You're going to need to pick one to game in. Not two.

 

[AndrewW]

If the differences between the 1st ed. and 2nd ed. CRB scout is an indication then I think the new HG design rules have made changes to the earlier design rules in 1st ed. CRB Spacecraft Design, 1st ed. HG Spacecraft Options, Small Craft Design, and Capital Ship design rules. In a different topic I was informed that the new HG design rules combined the four 1st ed. rules into one system, that is a major change in my opinion.

I'm really hoping that I can recreate the 2nd ed. examples using the new rules. Thank you for the information.

Yes changes have been made. Most of the options are still there along with entirely new ones. Yes, small craft through capital ships and space stations have been integrated into one design system.

 

[Condottiere]

Post printing, have someone maintain a running errata pdf, hosted on Mongoose.

 

[snrdg121408]

Hello Shaw Driscoll,

The 1st ed. Scout has 34 tons of fuel compared to the 2nd ed. Scout's 23 tons.

The 1st ed. Scout has 8 tons of cargo capacity to the 2nd ed. Scout's 12 tons.

The 1st ed. Scout's air/raft uses 4 tons of space while 2nd ed. scout's has the air/raft in a 5 ton docking space and adds a 6 ton workshop.

What's going on here? What's the problem? I thought you knew that 1st and 2nd edition are different rulesets by now. You're going to need to pick one to game in. Not two.

The problem is that the new HG design rules were only available in the CRB Beta which is now the CRB 2nd edition. The CRB Beta is no longer available and since I am not able to get a hold of the new HG design rules I was advised that I could still use the first edition design rules.

Next, I was also advised the 1st edition designs, with the exception of combat, where otherwise compatible with the 2nd edition. The examples I used suggests very strongly that the 1st ed. designs are not compatible.

When Mongoose releases the new High Guard design rules for purchase I will be able to decide which game system I will game. Unfortunately, since the only 2nd edition rule set is in the new CRB I do not have any options on which spacecraft design rules I am using.

Thank you for your reply and recommendation of choosing one rule set, which at least for me will only be possible when the new High Guard is released

 

[snrdg121408]

Hello again AndrewW,

If the differences between the 1st ed. and 2nd ed. CRB scout is an indication then I think the new HG design rules have made changes to the earlier design rules in 1st ed. CRB Spacecraft Design, 1st ed. HG Spacecraft Options, Small Craft Design, and Capital Ship design rules. In a different topic I was informed that the new HG design rules combined the four 1st ed. rules into one system, that is a major change in my opinion.

I'm really hoping that I can recreate the 2nd ed. examples using the new rules. Thank you for the information.

Yes changes have been made. Most of the options are still there along with entirely new ones. Yes, small craft through capital ships and space stations have been integrated into one design system.

Looking at the difference in the purchase cost for the scout the calculations some of the components have different costs and/or are calculated differently. Unfortunately, I have no way of determining what has changed until Mongoose releases the new High Guard.

Thank you for the additional information.

 

[snrdg121408]

Hello Condottiere,

Post printing, have someone maintain a running errata pdf, hosted on Mongoose.

That is a good idea that I agree with and in theory several first edition MgT books do have errata PDFs. Unfortunately, I do not think that they were kept up-to-date, which is not surprising with the amount of material that Mongoose has published since 2008.

A belated thank you to all the Mongoose Publishing staff for the material you have published.

 

[AndrewW]

The problem is that the new HG design rules were only available in the CRB Beta which is now the CRB 2nd edition. The CRB Beta is no longer available and since I am not able to get a hold of the new HG design rules I was advised that I could still use the first edition design rules.

Next, I was also advised the 1st edition designs, with the exception of combat, where otherwise compatible with the 2nd edition. The examples I used suggests very strongly that the 1st ed. designs are not compatible.

Sorry for the confusion. I never meant the design rules where compatible, just that the ships would still be usable even if they didn't match the ships built with the new design system.

 

[snrdg121408]

Hello again AndrewW,

The problem is that the new HG design rules were only available in the CRB Beta which is now the CRB 2nd edition. The CRB Beta is no longer available and since I am not able to get a hold of the new HG design rules I was advised that I could still use the first edition design rules.

Next, I was also advised the 1st edition designs, with the exception of combat, where otherwise compatible with the 2nd edition. The examples I used suggests very strongly that the 1st ed. designs are not compatible.

Sorry for the confusion. I never meant the design rules where compatible, just that the ships would still be usable even if they didn't match the ships built with the new design system.

No apologies are needed, I did not understand what you met and worked on a bad conclusion.

To me the 1st ed. ships are not usable with the 2nd edition since there are different requirements. For example the 2nd edition fuel requirements are obviously determined differently than in the 1st ed. Another example is that the 2nd ed. tonnage for the J-drive, M-drive, and Power Plant are more compact than for the same 1st ed. systems.

According to CT LBB 5 1980 ships can use CT LLB 2 1977/1981 J-drive, M-drive, and power plants. I did a spreadsheet that I could select CT LBB 2 systems. In CT I go with CT LBB 5. Then there is the Express Boat in CT Supplement 7 that can not be built using either CT LBB 5 1988 or CT LBB 2 1977/1981 rules. In my opinion the Express could not have been built using CT LBB 2 1977 rules either. I did send snail mail to GDW asking about the Express Boat not having a power plant back in 1978, unfortunately I do not know if I got a reply. During that period I was stationed on the USS Thomas Alvin Edison home ported at Pearl Harbor and usually flying to Guam to take over from the opposite crew.

Thank you for the clarification, at least my state of confusion has one less point to worry about.

 

[AndrewW]

In my opinion the Express could not have been built using CT LBB 2 1977 rules either. I did send snail mail to GDW asking about the Express Boat not having a power plant back in 1978, unfortunately I do not know if I go a reply.

That ship should be included in the new High Guard. There was a little bit of discussion about it. The one for the new High Guard was built with the same rules as the rest of the ships.

 

[snrdg121408]

In my opinion the Express could not have been built using CT LBB 2 1977 rules either. I did send snail mail to GDW asking about the Express Boat not having a power plant back in 1978, unfortunately I do not know if I got* a reply.

That ships should be included in the new High Guard. There was a little bit of discussion about it. The one for the new High Guard was built with the same rules as the rest of the ships.

Please stop torturing me with all of these hints of what the new HG design rules will revise, I feel bad enough snoozing when the beta edition was in circulation.;-)

*changed go to got