Building Lower TL Starcraft?

[Sturn]

I took a look at building some TL 12 starcraft for a Miliue 0 campaign using MGT's core book rules. With the rules as is, there won't be a big difference beteen a TL15 Free Trader and a Tl12 one. Some differnces of course, but the big tickets like power, manuveur, jump drive, don't have TL differences.

High Guard going to have more details that will allow for lower TL ships actually being different? Or should I start making some house rules based on older rulesets?

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

The thing that will limit Jump range under MGT is the computer program. Unfortunately, the TL of the programs was left off of the table (it is in the erratta list for fixing).

Until we know better, I would use the HG tech limits on Jump. I don't see Mongoose changing that basic tenant of the OTU.

 

[pasuuli]

Seems that sensors would vary by TL, too. I suppose it doesn't make much of a gameplay difference - not enough to matter, perhaps.

And no, MGT probably ought not to change jump-by-TL assumptions.

 

[Sturn]

I was aware of the jump drive range difference. What I mean is a TL 10 craft and a TL 15 craft are nearly the same except for jump range. The sensors and computer capabilites will change, but over 5 TL's you still have the same sized MD, same size JD, same size PP, and thus same cargo space, etc. The MD and PP will even perform just as well with the same tonnage.

I'm hoping the starcraft construction system in HG will give us some more details without being FF&S. Crews could be detailed, other MD options (fusion drive, Helplar, etc), and other PP options without too much complexity being added to the system as is. It was nice they gave us the fusion plant at a lower TL, but possibly some earlier versions of the standard fusion powerplant could be given for non-TL15 craft between TL 9-15. That's a large range with nothing much different but an astrogation computer and some sensors.

 

[pasuuli]

I know what you mean. In my mind, MGT's ship system is for a TL15 milieu; these drives are TL12, middle of the road, and available everywhere (but maybe I'm wrong and they're TL15 instead). I'd expect a TL10 setting to have inferior drives. But then I'd expect military ships to have superior drives to any civilian ship regardless of milieu. So I can see what you mean.

Yeah... maybe something like this:

Type       TL     Volume    Cost
Prototype  TL-4    x4.0     x4.0
Basic      TL-2    x2.0     x2.0
Standard   TL      x1.0     x1.0
Improved   TL+2    x0.8     x1/3
Advanced   TL+4    x0.6     x1/5

Where the basic TL for the drives listed in MGT is 12. So in a TL10 setting, drives would be twice the volume and twice the cost. And the TL14+ ships are 60% of the volume and 20% of the cost.

I wonder how much it really matters, though? Maybe there's better ways to detail the differences between two technologies.

I want to see the differences come from different technologies, too, at times. Enabling technologies or something.

For example, maybe in my ATU, Stutterwarp enters a Prototype stage at TL16, becoming Standard at TL20. I'd re-use the Jump Drive volume and cost table, but use Stutterwarp rules for operations and fuel usage. Or in my Babylon 5 Traveller Universe, the ability to open jump points enters Prototype stage at TL10.

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

Classic Traveller had the same TL problem. Even High Guard didn't fix the fact that a maneuver drive cost the same (in volume and cost) at all tech levels.

The only way to make it work would be a 2D table that listed Performance on one axis and TL on the other, with %Hull as the contents.

Something like this for the M-Drive:

G's   TL8   TL9   TL10 ETC
1      5     3      2
2     11     6      4
3     20    10      6
4      -    13      8
ETC

In my quickly made-up table acceleration above 3gs is not possible at TL8 due to lack of Gravitics. Obviously a HUGE table would have to be created for each drive (and PP) and then another list for the COST per ton, which should go down at lower TL.

THEN the players have the trade off: Low TL means low performance and higher cost, but lots of places to get things fixed. High TL is good performance, low cost and few spares.

NOT something that you probably want to include in a basic book.

I don't know what MGT HG has in mind for this issue...

 

[pasuuli]

The only way to make it work would be a 2D table that listed Performance on one axis and TL on the other, with %Hull as the contents.

Them's big tables.

I see two distinct issues here.

One is improvements, which is what RTT and I tabled out above. I don't see any good reason to have finely detailed rules for improvements. But I think working through these rules is jumping the gun slightly. Not that I don't like to see ideas posted!


The real issue I think is differentiation by milieu, and by empire, and by race. The terms are generally interchangeable in this context. And I think part of the solution comes from TNE and T20.

MGT's drive tables represent drives produced and shipped everywhere in the Imperium, and perhaps neighboring empires. Common, and excellent.

So I think differentiation should come in

(1) via Quality (which RTT could suggest as an add-on, right Hunter?, or Marc could suggest as well). This attribute or set of attributes could be retro-applied to all equipment and vehicles as well, assuming it can be mechanically integrated into MGT;

(2) via "milestones" by which drives are incrementally bulkier or svelter. But I think they're best implemented with multipliers, even as simple as [base TL / current TL ] * base volume -- though I maybe prefer only two "early" stages and only two "late" stages, generically applicable and relative to the "baseline" TL for whatever technology you're working with.

(3) via "new" technology. Power plants are a big example of this: Fission through TL8, Fusion from TL9, and Antimatter after that, and who-knows-what after that. M-drives are less easy to replace, but I bet they could be. Force ships to use HEPlaR until TL11. Or not. Then phase out the M-drive around TL18. Replace it with Stutterwarp (just kidding, but you know what I mean). J-drives ... well, they're J-drives. I don't care if they ever change.


All three of these working in tandem could create a rich design environment without requiring huge tables or hard math. It would frame your design efforts by milieu, and guide your decision-making process too.



...of course, there's always the game-mechanic offset solution as well: if your ship is of an inferior TL, you get a -DM. If it's superior, you get a +DM. Simple and effective.

 

[Zowy]

If you start changeing costs by TL, for standerized / moddular components and equipment. Then you allso need to start mucking around with currency exchance rates. Do you want to do that much work?

 

[SSWarlock]

If you start changeing costs by TL, for standerized / moddular components and equipment. Then you allso need to start mucking around with currency exchance rates. Do you want to do that much work?

No, you don't. There's no currency exchange within the Imperium since the Credit is the standard unit of currency. No, really! Page 86 says so.

*grin*

Having price breakpoints based on the number of TLs above the TL of introduction is easy. After all, it's not like Traveller is trying to simulate reality. Emulate some of its aspects, yes; simulate it, no.

 

[pasuuli]

Yah, I wouldn't bother changing the prices of things, unless it's just to set price dependent on volume.

The real reason you have differentiation with drives (et al) is military.

First, superiority. That patrol boat can whip that corsair even though they're loaded out similarly. This pocket empire is small, but advanced, so the neighboring barbarian starfarers can't touch them.

Second, strategic and tactical effects. The Ziru Sirka's armada fought differently than the combatants in the Fifth Frontier War. Interesting variations in one Traveller package.