Civilian Vehicles

[Lord High Munchkin]

I would say that the frame of a Model T is actually chiefly wood with a percentage of steel.

Most of the body was made of wood with only a few light sheets of metal laid over the structure. If you ever see film of the production-line this becomes obvious, as does the light flimsy build of the metal parts of the base frame.

Which leads on to another issue in 'Civilian Vehicles'. I think that there are far too few materials in the available materials list—as well as noticing the price problem (not as bad as the costing issues in 'Space Opera' though... which is actually the game I play).

 

[aspqrz]

I would say that the frame of a Model T is actually chiefly wood with a percentage of steel.

No, actually.

The Cab has wooden parts, but I don't know how much. However, the car has a solid Chassis of metal, something modern cars don't have. Most of the mass will be in the latter.

So it really doesn't solve the massively over the mark mass you get with the system as it exists!

I did the best I could to represent this somewhat limited flimsiness by giving it the possibility of the Lightweight quality ... which really didn't help much :wink:

Which leads on to another issue in 'Civilian Vehicles'. I think that there are far too few materials in the available materials list

What could be done, as I suggested, is to have some sort of expanded materials list which would include interpolations for mixed materials ... but you're dead right, as I said, there are far, far too few materials.

... as well as noticing the price problem (not as bad as the costing issues in 'Space Opera' though... which is actually the game I play).

But we didn't really have a vehicle design system for Space Opera and the prices are generally pretty reasonable for what we knew (or thought we knew) about how technology would likely develop back in 1980 when it was being written :wink:

When I get around to doing something along the lines of SOII there probably still won't be a design system like Civilian Vehicles, Stuff, or Fusion, Fire and Steel for non-spacecraft.

The closest I came to (and will likely ever come to) is a system I was working on many years ago when the old TML was still active, based loosely on R Talsorian Games' Maximum Metal which allowed you to design things around some standard/basic chassis designs for various different vehicle types, from Ground Cars through Tracked Vehicles to Aerodynes and Flyers.

Which is, I think (FWIW), the best way to do such a thing. Modifications within limited parameters.

(I also noted that I forgot to multiply the power value of the engine for the Model T by 100, which means that the speeds are out by that factor, which makes then about 25% to high.)

I've been working on modelling a HMMWV and the mass is close - depending on how you model it. As Rugged it comes out as 2108 kg and as Very Rugged it comes out as 2456 kg, whereas the real thing (unarmoured) masses between 2340-2680 kg.

Cost, this time, is too low - around 16000 Cr for Rugged and 21500 Cr for Very Rugged compared to a unit cost of $65000 for the unarmoured model. At 1 Cr = $2.5 that's $32000-43000, considerably under.

Looks like I'll still be sticking with Stuff :wink:

Phil

 

[Lord High Munchkin]

I would say that the frame of a Model T is actually chiefly wood with a percentage of steel.

No, actually.

The Cab has wooden parts, but I don't know how much. However, the car has a solid Chassis of metal, something modern cars don't have. Most of the mass will be in the latter.

Hmm, no offence, but have you seen a Model T chassis?

The chassis is made up of only a pair of straight, light (I'd say almost flimsy, but it obviously sufficed) RSJ-type "I" bars with a pair of downward-facing end arches of the same. It's really basic. There are a few added on items such as: a forward leaf-spring, a rear one, the two axles, and about four light rod struts. That's it.

Well, going back to 'Civilian Vehicles' and materials, I assumed that one could use multiple materials as it isn't stated that one can't. I just use the various proportions to come out with a final figure.

You are "dead-on", as I see it, about being limited by canon OTU. I think that this is the real problem behind the scenes—it isn't a "universal" or "generic" system book, but a supplement squarely aimed at the OTU.

I don't like the way that, for a "generic" book, it assumes that one buys completely into the OTU technology curve. I have other ideas (or at least should have the possibility to have other ideas). There being no alternative tech.

What I do like about the book is the level of complexity (i.e. not too much), but it misses out a lot of things (mainly added equipment, but also TL modifiers) that could have been added with little effort.

 

[aspqrz]

I would say that the frame of a Model T is actually chiefly wood with a percentage of steel.

No, actually.

The Cab has wooden parts, but I don't know how much. However, the car has a solid Chassis of metal, something modern cars don't have. Most of the mass will be in the latter.

Hmm, no offence, but have you seen a Model T chassis?

Not in the flesh, so to speak, but, yes ... photos of a bare chassis.

The chassis is made up of only a pair of straight, light (I'd say almost flimsy, but it obviously sufficed) RSJ-type "I" bars with a pair of downward-facing end arches of the same. It's really basic. There are a few added on items such as: a forward leaf-spring, a rear one, the two axles, and about four light rod struts. That's it.

Indeed, however, the whole thing, including coachwork, is only 560 kilos -- and most of that is in the engine and chassis rather than the coachwork. It's certainly nowhere near the 2000 or so kilos "Civilian Vehicles" would have us believe!

Even if it was all wood (chassis, cab, engine, propulsion -- everything), you'd only reduce the mass calculated from CV by about 30%, down to 1400 kilos, which is still 3x too much :shock:

So the problem remains.

Well, going back to 'Civilian Vehicles' and materials, I assumed that one could use multiple materials as it isn't stated that one can't. I just use the various proportions to come out with a final figure.

But it doesn't even come close to solving the problem, as noted above!

You are "dead-on", as I see it, about being limited by canon OTU. I think that this is the real problem behind the scenes—it isn't a "universal" or "generic" system book, but a supplement squarely aimed at the OTU.

But it doesn't even fill that role, as it has to purport to be able to design any vehicle from TL1 through to TL15 ... and it fails, miserably, when compared to historical examples.

I don't like the way that, for a "generic" book, it assumes that one buys completely into the OTU technology curve. I have other ideas (or at least should have the possibility to have other ideas). There being no alternative tech.

What I do like about the book is the level of complexity (i.e. not too much), but it misses out a lot of things (mainly added equipment, but also TL modifiers) that could have been added with little effort.

Lack of complexity is fine (I preferred GURPS Vehicles #1 rather than #2 because it was simpler, and prefer Stuff! to CORPS VDS for the same reason), but it has to at least resemble reality. With all the above systems you could come close to real world vehicle specifications, with CV, based on my attempts with the Model T you can't in any respect, and with the Hummer, you can for mass and speed, but not for cost.

I agree, there should have been options for a non-OTU tech curve ... and even the materials available make no sense ... you're not going to use Bonded Superdense for any sort of civilian (and for noncombat, and maybe even combat, military) vehicles ... it would be like suggesting that a 1941 Ford should be made out of Armourplate Steel as used in the Iowa class ... silly to anyone who has a clew as to the differences.

Any vehicles I design will be designed with Stuff, with my own mods to some aspects of that system, as far as mass and performance stats are concerned, and I'll use my own prices, based on the reasonable assumption that Traveller (and Space Opera, too, I guess) have never, ever, seriously (or otherwise) used ... that things get cheaper, in relative and absolute terms.

A Model T of 1909 cost $850 at a time when the average wage was under $1000 -- close to 90% give or take. A compact car today costs around $12000 when the Average wage is around $40000, or around 30%. And if you call a Tata Nano a Model T equivalent, at $2500 that's around 6%.

Assuming the salaries given in the MongTrav Core Rules are based on Average Interstellar societies (say TL13) ... or Average Salary 14400 Cr per year (page #87), that would mean that a cheap Ground Car equivalent should cost no more than, at a guess, 10% of that ... about 1500 Cr, say, or that a cheap Grav Raft should probably cost no more than 25% of that, or around 3750 Cr.

The idea that Grav Propulsion costs 100-200kCr at TL8 and never gets any cheaper is simply and astoundingly ridiculous ... unless, of course, there is actually no technological progress between TL8 and TL15 ... even if it only represents better manufacturing methods (nanofacs coming online to replace mere production line robotics) such as reduced the price of the Model T from $850 to $290 in ten years, whereas in Traveller you're talking hundreds of years, many many hundreds.

Nope, regardless of whether its canon or not, it is frankly downright unbbelievable ... :roll:

Things get cheaper, they do not get more expensive.

YMMV of course :mrgreen:

Phil

 

[Darkspawn]

As a shop owner I can tell you that 28mm scale will sell far more minis that the other scales, and it will also generate interest in the game. There will be far more crossovers from other SciFi based games. If a wide range of Tech Level ranged minis is made then that will also be a draw in for players from other games. Different genre based game players would buy the minis, and maybe then would be interested on trying a game of Traveller (in which case they burn all their other game books and switch to Traveller.)

Seriously, a large crossover effect would be great if MGP did try to enter any kind of agreement with a company.

True 28 would provide the customer base that is already there; eagerly awaiting their first Aslan mini (I know I am)

All due respect intended to the aficionados of the other scales. This was just a marketing suggestion from a game shop owner.

Thanks

 

[Darkspawn]

Hmmm... definitely 'cartoony' and not my style (thanks for the link rust)

...Sure the bases were big compared to some of the figures but many of the figures were very cool and very inexspensive. (Unless they were a hot popular item.)...

Are those plastic? I haven't done minatures in 20-odd years - I painted model railroad scenes in painted H.O. scale - but for gaming I must say metal just 'feels' right... and paint seemed to stick longer (though I guess one wouldn't be painting those figures...).

On the contrary, paint chips off metal minis far more easily than the hard plastic ones. Both need to be washed with a medium bristle tooth brush in soapy water (removes the residue that they applied to get the molds to release the minis) before applying a base coat; either black or white. I have done both; using white with a "bright" character such as a High Elf or a black spray paint with a darker minis such as a Wraith.

The undercoat it the key to a good paint job on your mini. Use a cheap undercoat and your minis will have globs of paint on them Use a higher price undercoat specially design for minis of this scale and you will be far happier.

After painting your minis just the way you want them after the primer coat dries you should wait 24 hours and then spray a High Gloss coat on your mini. This actually helps protect the mini if it gets dropped on the floor. After a few hours and your Gloss coat is dry, paint a good dull coat sealant on your mini. This will again help protect it from any accidental scrapes. Intentional damage cannot be mitigated in any way using these methods. Don't apply a scratch test after painting a mini like this.

One action that can be skipped on 28mm scale man sized HARD PLASTIC minis is that they usually don't need a High Gloss coat. The Dull Coat will protect it easily enough. You can apply it if you want, but the more coats of paint or sealant s on the mini will affect its detail adversely.

I was a metal mini man only for years but I feel plastic is the way to go, now. They are easier to convert if you wish, paint stays on them better, and they are nowhere near as heavy so you can transport three times as many plastic as metal.

And as time passes, the hard plastic minis are getting just as good as the metal ones and in some cases are better.

Admittedly there is not much that can be done to any of the soft plastic minis. I would not try to repaint one of the Clix minis or one of WOTC' soft plastic minis. Maybe I would try one if I primered it black, but I have so much other stuff that requires my puny little mined.

Just my 2 Elmonits...

 

[BP]

Wow - that's a lot of extra work - the paints I used on metal were still good last I checked (they are in storage for over 10 years now) - and they were over 13 years old! I never primered, or anything - just cleaned (alchohol IIRC) and painted. Granted they didn't get used much over the years - mostly just sat on display after couple years...

Of course, these were in Tester(?) oil paints I think and in general a lot of older stuff holds up better than more modern stuffs...

My plastic paint experience was simply HO scale model railroad figures - and they tended to flake off after some time - and they didn't get handled much - probably because I didn't do the things you mentioned... Model planes and the like didn't seem to have this problem - but I used airbrush and maybe different paints on them... and now that I think about it - I did primer airbrushed stuff.