Egil Skallagrimsson
Mongoose
nats said:Egil Skallagrimsson said:CSC is a bit of a bugbear of mine, a lot of the stats seem awry and my copy is now covered in amendments and corrections. Egil
Funnily enough Ive just spent the last few days using CSC stats to correct all the core book weapons pages which are all over the place. I havnt found anything much wrong with CSC to date other than two refs to PGMPs which should have been FGMPs. And I love the refs to SAP, AP and ST ammo and the way it treats grenades/stuns etc. Really all makes sense to me. Of course its worth its weight in gold just for the SMGs which have always been my favourite Traveller weapon for some reason.
I suspect that you took CSC to be the baseline for equipment, and upgraded quite a lot of weapons, whereas I took the Core Book to be the standard, and down graded a lot of weapons.
So, e.g., CSC rates SMGs as assault weapons (very generously, look at the ranges), auto rifles have been upgraded to "rifle" ranges, a number of rifles have gained extra + 3 dam, the ACR stats are substantailly different, zero-G weapons conflict with core book (and have become over complicated), some of the costs for weapon accessories are illogical, with some of the larger kinetic kill weapons no account is made for loss of power over range, FGMPs and PGMPs becoming magazine weaponss (with very limited capacity) rather than having their own generators (though I like the idea of limiting some of the lower tech ones to 1 shot per 2 rounds) etc etc.
ST, SAP and AP are fine, not sure about some of the fancy ammo type for small arms, e.g. a DSAP 5mm round that can generate a super AP effect.
Some of this, especially about weapons that don't exist (and may never exist!) is a case of style, but, IMHO, CSC seems to add inconsistencies and inaccuracies along with lots of new kit.
Egil