High Guard across the TLs

[Sigtrygg]

I mentioned in a thread that I once wrote an essay on how LBB:5 High Guard changes the nature of space warfare as TLs advance.

There was some interest in this, but it is written in paper, so I get the job of typing it up.

This actually is a good thing.

Bear in mind this is not MgT HG and there are some differences that will be obvious to the gearheads.

Where I have made mistakes help me out and I will edit.

Abstract – a study of the changing nature of space warfare across the range of TLs detailed in High Guard.

Section 1 Overview of TL changes.

TL7 Computer model 2 limits the hull size to no larger than 3,999t, the maneuver drive maximum of 2 also limits agility to a maximum of 2, power plants require 4t per EP. Armour is 4+4a.
Weapon systems are limited to the 100t missile bay and turret mounted lasers (pulse and beam), missiles, and sandcasters.

Bridge 2%

PP+fuel 5%

M-drive 2%, 5%

Armour 8->32%

TL8 ships are limited in the same way as TL 7 with regards to size, power plant and armour, but they may now have a maneuver drive 5 and hence agility of 5.
An additional weapon becomes available, the 100t PA bay, and the turret mounted sandcaster increases in effectiveness.

Note there is a spinal PA available, but it is larger than the biggest ship that can be constructed at TL8, and the power plant to power it would be half the 3,999t ship

Bridge 2%

PP+fuel 5%

M-drive 2%, 5%, 8%, 11%, 14%

Armour 8->36%

TL9 ship may now be built up to 9,999t, the maneuver drive achieves its 6g agility 6 maximum, and power generation is more efficient requiring 3t per EP. The main breakthrough is the jump drive, and weapon wise the spinal mount remains too large to be ship mounted on the hull size available.

Bridge 2%

PP+fuel 4%

M-drive 2%, 5%, 8%, 11%, 14%, 17%

J-drive 2% +10% fuel

Armour 8->40%

TL10 ship building makes enormous progress. Ships may now be constructed up to 49,999t and can at last carry spinal PA weapons. Armour becomes lighter at 3+3a. In addition to the spinal PA ships can now mount 100t repulsors for missile defence, while 100t bay missile launchers and PA are more effective, and the turret mounted sandcaster increases in capability once again. This TL also sees the introduction of the 50t bay and plasma gun weapons. The 50t bay may mount PA, missile and plasma weapon systems, with plasma guns also available as turret mounts in slightly larger turrets.

Bridge 2%

PP+fuel 4%

M-drive 2%, 5%, 8%, 11%, 14%, 17%

J-drive 2% +10% fuel

Armour 6->33%

TL11 Maximum ship size almost doubles to 99,000t, the meson spinal mount becomes available, and plasma guns of all types improve. Jump 2 is now achievable.

Bridge 2%

PP+fuel 4%

M-drive 2%, 5%, 8%, 11%, 14%, 17%

J-drive 2% +10% fuel, 3% + 20% fuel

Armour 6->36%

TL12 Ship size now reaches its effective maximum of 999,999t, although at higher TLs bigger ships may be constructed.

100t and 50t bay weapons improve across the board, the plasma turret improves once again, and fusion guns are available in 50t bays and turret mounts. Armour becomes lighter at 2+2a. Jump drive performance increases to 3 parsecs. The nuclear damper and meson screen systems come online.

Bridge 2%

PP+fuel 4%

M-drive 2%, 5%, 8%, 11%, 14%, 17%

J-drive 2% +10% fuel, 3% + 20% fuel, 4% + 30% fuel

Armour 4->26%

TL13 Ship size is now unrestricted, 100t missile are more effective achieving their maximum rating, and the meson gun is introduced. The 50t fusion gun is more effective. Turret mounted missiles and laser improve. Screens improve, and the power plant becomes more efficient. Jump 4.

Bridge 2%

PP+fuel 3%

M-drive 2%, 5%, 8%, 11%, 14%, 17%

J-drive 2% +10% fuel, 3% + 20% fuel, 4% + 30% fuel, 5% + 40% fuel

Armour 4->28%

TL14 Ship size remains unrestricted, 100t bays are more effective. 50t bay weapons are more effective, and the repulsor is introduced. The turret mounted fusion gun improves and the PA barbette is introduced. Screens improve, armour becomes lighter and jump 5 can be achieved.

Bridge 2%

PP+fuel 3%

M-drive 2%, 5%, 8%, 11%, 14%, 17%

J-drive 2% +10% fuel, 3% + 20% fuel, 4% + 30% fuel, 5% +40% fuel, 6% +50% fuel

Armour 2->15%

TL15 Ship size remains unrestricted, 100t meson and repulsor bays are more effective. 50t bay meson guns are introduced and repulsors are more effective. The turret mounted PA is available. Screens improve, jump 6 can be achieved.

Bridge 2%

PP+fuel 2%

M-drive 2%, 5%, 8%, 11%, 14%, 17%

J-drive 2% +10% fuel, 3% + 20% fuel, 4% + 30% fuel, 5% +40% fuel, 6% +50% fuel, 7% +60% fuel

Armour 2->16%

 

[Nelphine]

Where did the ship size limits come from? It's something I've always wondered about (and which as far as i know done exist in mongoose) but I am young and foolish and know not of these things.

 

[Vormaerin]

High Guard 1980 pg 26 has a table that shows minimum computer ratings for certain hull sizes.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Yup, the computer model table includes a column that reads ship size that needs this size of computer as a minimum. So the maximum size of a ship one TL lower is the minimum size of the TL above -1 ton. I would struggle to come up with a more clunky. poorly described but really important rule.

 

[Nelphine]

Lol

OK fair, so computer rating determined how many dtons of ship you could admin effectively, giving a defacto limit on ship size. That.. actually sounds reasonable, given how complex life support, internal power, and internal gravity could be. Maybe also monitoring for stresses particularly while accelerating? And general control of the M drive.

I'd probably wish to make it a lot more complex than it appears (though I don't have the actual chart), so that if someone wanted to build a larger ship at an earlier TL, they could do so by giving up something like life support.

I also like the idea that ship admin based on tonnage just eats some of the computer bandwidth, limiting what larger ships could run as software. Also links nicely to the 'dim for jump' effect. Unfortunately, links directly to the thread on 'why can't we put unlimited computers on a ship'. Would need to create a house rule for extra computers taking up tonnage.

 

[MasterGwydion]

Lol

OK fair, so computer rating determined how many dtons of ship you could admin effectively, giving a defacto limit on ship size. That.. actually sounds reasonable, given how complex life support, internal power, and internal gravity could be. Maybe also monitoring for stresses particularly while accelerating? And general control of the M drive.

I'd probably wish to make it a lot more complex than it appears (though I don't have the actual chart), so that if someone wanted to build a larger ship at an earlier TL, they could do so by giving up something like life support.

I also like the idea that ship admin based on tonnage just eats some of the computer bandwidth, limiting what larger ships could run as software. Also links nicely to the 'dim for jump' effect. Unfortunately, links directly to the thread on 'why can't we put unlimited computers on a ship'. Would need to create a house rule for extra computers taking up tonnage.

I have always thought that the rules forbidding more than one computer working at the same time and computers having no volume was stupid. Same with the "Chassis system". It makes it unmoddable. What moron thought that a Computer/5 was the same size as a Core/100? They just went, computers are magic! They don't take up space or power. Also, because we made the stupid rule that computers do not use space and do not use power, now we need to make other stupid rules to limit how computers can be used on a ship. The problem is entirely self-created by the writers. Give computers a scalable and stackable system, such as this type of computer takes up x tons and uses y power points. Easy. Simple. Need more processing power? Add more computers.

 

[Takei]

I have always thought that the rules forbidding more than one computer working at the same time and computers having no volume was stupid. Same with the "Chassis system". It makes it unmoddable. What moron thought that a Computer/5 was the same size as a Core/100? They just went, computers are magic! They don't take up space or power. Also, because we made the stupid rule that computers do not use space and do not use power, now we need to make other stupid rules to limit how computers can be used on a ship. The problem is entirely self-created by the writers. Give computers a scalable and stackable system, such as this type of computer takes up x tons and uses y power points. Easy. Simple. Need more processing power? Add more computers.

As a counterpoint, I've always thought that having to add a computer to fly the ship is daft as the description of the bridge says it includes the controls needed to operate the ship, including comms and basic sensors. In my Traveller experience computers have been used 99% of the time for their combat capability only. IIRC TNE did it well with FFS. Everything needed to fly the ship is part of the bridge tonnage, if you want to fight the ship then add Master Fire Directors. Without an MFD all fire control is in individual turrets/bays.

 

[MasterGwydion]

As a counterpoint, I've always thought that having to add a computer to fly the ship is daft as the description of the bridge says it includes the controls needed to operate the ship, including comms and basic sensors. In my Traveller experience computers have been used 99% of the time for their combat capability only. IIRC TNE did it well with FFS. Everything needed to fly the ship is part of the bridge tonnage, if you want to fight the ship then add Master Fire Directors. Without an MFD all fire control is in individual turrets/bays.

I agree, but adding Master Fire Directors breaks the "No more than one computer running at a time rule". Which is a stupid rule IMO

Although, you basically just agreed with Me instead of a counterpoint. Your solution is to add more computers, same as My solution.

 

[Condottiere]

In the same network.

 

[Nelphine]

So..

Computers to limit ship size..

Current computers:

TL 5
Computer/0 500kg

TL 6
Computer/0 50kg
Computer/1 200kg

TL 7
Computer/0 5kg
Computer/1 20kg
Computer/5 up to 4000 dtons

TL 8
Computer/1 2kg
Computer/2 50kg

TL 9
Computer/1 1kg
Computer/2 5kg
Computer/10 up to 10000 dtons
Core/40

TL 10
Computer/2 0.5kg
Computer/3 50kg
Computer/10 up to 50000 dtons
Core/50

TL 11
Computer/2 0.5kg
Computer/3 5kg
Computer/4 50kg
Computer/15 up to 100000 dtons
Core/60

TL 12
Computer/3 0.5kg
Computer/4 5kg
Computer/5 50kg
Computer/20 up to 1000000 dtons
Core/70

TL 13
Computer/4 0.5kg
Computer/5 5kg
Computer/25 no limit
Core/80

TL 14
Computer/5 0.5kg
Computer/30 no limit
Core/90

TL 15
Computer/5 0.5kg
Computer/35 no limit
Core/100


Thoughts then:
I don't like the core computer at TL9. I think that should start at TL10, and is part of why there's such a big jump in ship size.
I don't know what 'maximum size' means at TL12, which is somehow different to unrestricted at TL13+. Therefore, I'm going to guess that it simply means you can build a Tigress at TL12, and therefore, the largest size written in the game is allowed, and therefore, is actually a 500000 dton limit. However, this actually ends up meaning its just as big a jump as TL10, which I don't want, so I'm going to change it to 200000. This also means that TL will drop to 400000, TL14 800000, TL15 1600000. Edit: Now that I know TL12 is 1000000, I don't like that, in the same way I don't like my original guess of 500000. I will leave the rest of the discussion the same.

For the most part, the ship computer is 5 times the 5kg computer of the TL. If we assume each extra computer power is a factor of 10 heavier, than this means that ship computers are:
TL 9: 500,000,000 kg. that seems .. excessive.

Ok, so we can't really go by mass/tonnage. Lets look at cost.

TL 7: Computer/1 = 2,500. Computer/5 = 30,000 -> multiple by 12
TL 8: Computer/2 = 50,000. Computer/5 = 30,000 -> yeah this makes no sense. Just buy a ship computer
TL 9: Computer/2 = 5,000. Computer/10 = 160,000 -> multiple by 16
TL 10: Computer/2 = 500. Computer/3 = 100,000 (ha, again, just buy a ship computer/5). Computer/10 = 160,000. -> multiple by 160. Core/50 (x5) = 60,000,000 -> multiple 375
TL 11: Computer/3 = 10,000. Computer/15 = 2,000,000 -> multiple by 200 . Core/60 (x4) = 75,000,000 = multiple 37.5
TL 12: Computer/4 = 15,000. Computer/20 = 5,000,000 -> multiple by 333. Core/70 (x3.5) = 80,000,000 = multiple 16
TL 13: Computer/5 = 50,000. Computer/25 = 10,000,000 -> multiple by 200. Core/80 (x3.2) = 95,000,000 = multiple 9.5
TL 14: Computer/6 = 100,000? Computer/30 = 20,000,000 -> multiple by 200. Core/90 (x3) = 120,000,000 = multiple 6
TL 15: Computer/7 = 200,000? Computer/35 = 30,000,000 -> multiple by 150. Core/100 (x2.8) = 130,000,000 = multiple 4.3

Thoughts: Computer/20 costs too much. It should probably be 3,000,000. TL14 Computer/5 and Computer/25 also cost too much but they're good compared to each other so meh. I like the core prices in general BUT.. it really shows that it would make sense to have bigger cores past TL10. (TL10 is probably just fine as the maximum size the ship can get.)

So, for cores.. i think there needs to be grades.

I'd probably do a Core/x2, Core/x3, Core/x4, Core/x5, rather than specific core values. Doesn't matter which TL you're at, the actual values are based on that TL ship computer. Start to be available only at TL10+. Make the costs x3/x10/x40/x350. You can't get bigger than core/x5.

So, TL10 would have Computer/10 for 160k. Core/x2 = Core/20 for 480k. Core/x3 = Core/30 for 1,600,000. Core/x4 = Core/40 for 6,400,000. Core/x5 = Core/50 for 56,000,000.

For TL14, Computer/30 for 20,000,000. Core/x2 = Core/60 for 60,000,000. Core/x3 = Core/90 for 200,000,000. Core/x4 = Core/120 for 800,000,000. Core/x5 = Core/150 for 7,000,000,000


Ok, so we have a system to get higher than the current one. But a) this doesn't address the original topic (how can we determine maximum ship size), and b) this doesn't address why it APPEARS we can just take distinct computers which would be a billion times cheaper. It also leaves wierd examples like 'why would I waste time on a TL14 Computer/30 when I can just take a lower TL10 Core/30??'


So going back to the original idea, that you need a certain amount of computer, to admin a ship of a certain size, I want to add in software for the following, all of which require higher bandwidth based on the ship tonnage:

Maneuver (I know it exists, I want to expand on it)
Life Support
Power Plant
Internal Gravity

So remembering the baseline is that computer/5 should allow up to 4000 dtons, computer/10 up to 10000 dtons, etc:

I think it should be that at TL9 or 10, each 0.25 of your computer (or core) rating permits you to run maneuver drive/life support/power plant/internal gravity for 1000 dtons of ship, without taking any bandwidth. If you want to run it for more than that, it costs 0.25 bandwidth for each additional 1000 dtons you want to cover, for each of those 4 systems you want to run. For TL7 or 8 its 800 dtons. For TL11, its 1333 dtons. For TL12 its 2000 dtons. TL13 its 3200 dtons. TL14 is 5333 dtons. TL15 is 9143 dtons.

These numbers are awful though. We need something intuitive. Lets try..
TL7 = 800. (max dtons without using bandwidth = 4,000)
TL8 = 875. (4,375)
TL9 = 1000. (10,000)
TL10 = 1250 (max without bandwidth and without a core = 12,500. With a core, this could be up to 60,000)
TL11 = 1500 (22,500; 112,500)
TL12 = 2000 (40,000; 200,000)
TL13 = 3000 (75,000; 375,000 -> Tigress is now possible, but requires 125 bandwidth just to operate its standard requirements)
TL14 = 5000 (150,000; 750,000)
TL15 = 9000 (315,000; 1,575,000)

That's pretty good.

The max without a core seems pretty good for civilian ships, and we have a nice growth in military ships with cores.


So to address 'why not just use a lower TL core instead of a higher TL computer', we can say that software can't be higher TL than the computer it runs on. (Good chance this is already a rule, but this makes it explicit as to why this works.)


That leaves only 'why can't we just stick 5 computer/30s on a ship rather than wasting time with an ultra-expensive core/x5 that is core/150'

So, for this, i think we have to assume that computers actually do use up tonnage. So for any component on a ship, some portion of it is dedicated to the computers (and to internal gravity, life support, power distribution, stress handling for jump and m drive).

I think it's reasonable to say then that.. 25% of all tonnage goes into these nebulous systems. I'm fairly certain other editions calculate all this, so I'm completely open to better numbers.

But in theory, that means that to get a new ship computer or core, requires 5% of your tonnage. On the other hand, if you can manage to fit it on a standard computer, go ahead. (Generally that means, at TL15, up to computer/7 items, you can just buy a separate handheld computer for. But any ship computer or core is designed for mass distribution across the whole ship.) So, you can buy as many as you want, but each one takes 5% of your tonnage.


This leaves a wierd gap, where things that seem to be extremely focused on one task (like fire control that only improves one weapon), should be able to be added on without as much tonnage. That feels like something that needs to be fleshed out more, but.. I'll leave it like this for now to see thoughts.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Sorry I forgot the number, the ship size at TL12 is 999,999t, at TL13+ ship size is 1,000,000+, at TL14+ there is no limit at all.

 

[MasterGwydion]

So..

Computers to limit ship size..

Current computers:

TL 5
Computer/0 500kg

TL 6
Computer/0 50kg
Computer/1 200kg

TL 7
Computer/0 5kg
Computer/1 20kg
Computer/5 up to 4000 dtons

TL 8
Computer/1 2kg
Computer/2 50kg

TL 9
Computer/1 1kg
Computer/2 5kg
Computer/10 up to 10000 dtons
Core/40

TL 10
Computer/2 0.5kg
Computer/3 50kg
Computer/10 up to 50000 dtons
Core/50

TL 11
Computer/2 0.5kg
Computer/3 5kg
Computer/4 50kg
Computer/15 up to 100000 dtons
Core/60

TL 12
Computer/3 0.5kg
Computer/4 5kg
Computer/5 50kg
Computer/20 maximum size?
Core/70

TL 13
Computer/4 0.5kg
Computer/5 5kg
Computer/25 no limit
Core/80

TL 14
Computer/5 0.5kg
Computer/30 no limit
Core/90

TL 15
Computer/5 0.5kg
Computer/35 no limit
Core/100


Thoughts then:
I don't like the core computer at TL9. I think that should start at TL10, and is part of why there's such a big jump in ship size.
I don't know what 'maximum size' means at TL12, which is somehow different to unrestricted at TL13+. Therefore, I'm going to guess that it simply means you can build a Tigress at TL12, and therefore, the largest size written in the game is allowed, and therefore, is actually a 500000 dton limit. However, this actually ends up meaning its just as big a jump as TL10, which I don't want, so I'm going to change it to 200000. This also means that TL will drop to 400000, TL14 800000, TL15 1600000.

For the most part, the ship computer is 5 times the 5kg computer of the TL. If we assume each extra computer power is a factor of 10 heavier, than this means that ship computers are:
TL 9: 500,000,000 kg. that seems .. excessive.

Ok, so we can't really go by mass/tonnage. Lets look at cost.

TL 7: Computer/1 = 2,500. Computer/5 = 30,000 -> multiple by 12
TL 8: Computer/2 = 50,000. Computer/5 = 30,000 -> yeah this makes no sense. Just buy a ship computer
TL 9: Computer/2 = 5,000. Computer/10 = 160,000 -> multiple by 16
TL 10: Computer/2 = 500. Computer/3 = 100,000 (ha, again, just buy a ship computer/5). Computer/10 = 160,000. -> multiple by 160. Core/50 (x5) = 60,000,000 -> multiple 375
TL 11: Computer/3 = 10,000. Computer/15 = 2,000,000 -> multiple by 200 . Core/60 (x4) = 75,000,000 = multiple 37.5
TL 12: Computer/4 = 15,000. Computer/20 = 5,000,000 -> multiple by 333. Core/70 (x3.5) = 80,000,000 = multiple 16
TL 13: Computer/5 = 50,000. Computer/25 = 10,000,000 -> multiple by 200. Core/80 (x3.2) = 95,000,000 = multiple 9.5
TL 14: Computer/6 = 100,000? Computer/30 = 20,000,000 -> multiple by 200. Core/90 (x3) = 120,000,000 = multiple 6
TL 15: Computer/7 = 200,000? Computer/35 = 30,000,000 -> multiple by 150. Core/100 (x2.8) = 130,000,000 = multiple 4.3

Thoughts: Computer/20 costs too much. It should probably be 3,000,000. TL14 Computer/5 and Computer/25 also cost too much but they're good compared to each other so meh. I like the core prices in general BUT.. it really shows that it would make sense to have bigger cores past TL10. (TL10 is probably just fine as the maximum size the ship can get.)

So, for cores.. i think there needs to be grades.

I'd probably do a Core/x2, Core/x3, Core/x4, Core/x5, rather than specific core values. Doesn't matter which TL you're at, the actual values are based on that TL ship computer. Start to be available only at TL10+. Make the costs x3/x10/x40/x350. You can't get bigger than core/x5.

So, TL10 would have Computer/10 for 160k. Core/x2 = Core/20 for 480k. Core/x3 = Core/30 for 1,600,000. Core/x4 = Core/40 for 6,400,000. Core/x5 = Core/50 for 56,000,000.

For TL14, Computer/30 for 20,000,000. Core/x2 = Core/60 for 60,000,000. Core/x3 = Core/90 for 200,000,000. Core/x4 = Core/120 for 800,000,000. Core/x5 = Core/150 for 7,000,000,000


Ok, so we have a system to get higher than the current one. But a) this doesn't address the original topic (how can we determine maximum ship size), and b) this doesn't address why it APPEARS we can just take distinct computers which would be a billion times cheaper. It also leaves wierd examples like 'why would I waste time on a TL14 Computer/30 when I can just take a lower TL10 Core/30??'


So going back to the original idea, that you need a certain amount of computer, to admin a ship of a certain size, I want to add in software for the following, all of which require higher bandwidth based on the ship tonnage:

Maneuver (I know it exists, I want to expand on it)
Life Support
Power Plant
Internal Gravity

So remembering the baseline is that computer/5 should allow up to 4000 dtons, computer/10 up to 10000 dtons, etc:

I think it should be that at TL9 or 10, each 0.25 of your computer (or core) rating permits you to run maneuver drive/life support/power plant/internal gravity for 1000 dtons of ship, without taking any bandwidth. If you want to run it for more than that, it costs 0.25 bandwidth for each additional 1000 dtons you want to cover, for each of those 4 systems you want to run. For TL7 or 8 its 800 dtons. For TL11, its 1333 dtons. For TL12 its 2000 dtons. TL13 its 3200 dtons. TL14 is 5333 dtons. TL15 is 9143 dtons.

These numbers are awful though. We need something intuitive. Lets try..
TL7 = 800. (max dtons without using bandwidth = 4,000)
TL8 = 875. (4,375)
TL9 = 1000. (10,000)
TL10 = 1250 (max without bandwidth and without a core = 12,500. With a core, this could be up to 60,000)
TL11 = 1500 (22,500; 112,500)
TL12 = 2000 (40,000; 200,000)
TL13 = 3000 (75,000; 375,000 -> Tigress is now possible, but requires 125 bandwidth just to operate its standard requirements)
TL14 = 5000 (150,000; 750,000)
TL15 = 9000 (315,000; 1,575,000)

That's pretty good.

The max without a core seems pretty good for civilian ships, and we have a nice growth in military ships with cores.


So to address 'why not just use a lower TL core instead of a higher TL computer', we can say that software can't be higher TL than the computer it runs on. (Good chance this is already a rule, but this makes it explicit as to why this works.)


That leaves only 'why can't we just stick 5 computer/30s on a ship rather than wasting time with an ultra-expensive core/x5 that is core/150'

So, for this, i think we have to assume that computers actually do use up tonnage. So for any component on a ship, some portion of it is dedicated to the computers (and to internal gravity, life support, power distribution, stress handling for jump and m drive).

I think it's reasonable to say then that.. 25% of all tonnage goes into these nebulous systems. I'm fairly certain other editions calculate all this, so I'm completely open to better numbers.

But in theory, that means that to get a new ship computer or core, requires 5% of your tonnage. On the other hand, if you can manage to fit it on a standard computer, go ahead. (Generally that means, at TL15, up to computer/7 items, you can just buy a separate handheld computer for. But any ship computer or core is designed for mass distribution across the whole ship.) So, you can buy as many as you want, but each one takes 5% of your tonnage.


This leaves a wierd gap, where things that seem to be extremely focused on one task (like fire control that only improves one weapon), should be able to be added on without as much tonnage. That feels like something that needs to be fleshed out more, but.. I'll leave it like this for now to see thoughts.

This looks like an amazing start! My brain hurts too much to pick it apart and look at it in detail at the moment, but I like where you are going with this!

 

[Condottiere]

One reason size limitations were removed, might be because of space stations.

 

[Nelphine]

One reason size limitations were removed, might be because of space stations.

Agreed. This version would mean that the space station could get 25% larger because it doesn't need to have the maneuver drive 'space' in the computer. Is 25% enough bigger? Probably not. ... it probably needs to be like.. 10 times bigger. One solution would be to make maneuver 91% of the computer 'space' instead of 25%, but that seems a bit contrived?

 

[MasterGwydion]

Agreed. This version would mean that the space station could get 25% larger because it doesn't need to have the maneuver drive 'space' in the computer. Is 25% enough bigger? Probably not. ... it probably needs to be like.. 10 times bigger. One solution would be to make maneuver 91% of the computer 'space' instead of 25%, but that seems a bit contrived?

Probably needs to be a lot bigger than that. How big is the Mora Starport? It is supposed to be one of the biggest in the Marches.

 

[Nelphine]

Yeah, i was thinking 'do you need more than a 15 million dton space station' but.. i've personally made things bigger than that, so I agree. Which means space stations Need Something Else.

 

[Terry Mixon]

Probably needs to be a lot bigger than that. How big is the Mora Starport? It is supposed to be one of the biggest in the Marches.

3 billion tons.

 

[Nelphine]

Any thoughts? Can Mora Starport be multiple starports that happen to have permanent attached bridges? Hum.. that could work actually.

Ok, so, for purpose of computers, the computer can only control so much space. So, something like Mora Starport, simply has to have 200 of the biggest core computers to run it. But, those computers literally can't help another section if one goes down. Or more accurately, they can't cover multiple sections (and so would normally only be able to do their own section).

Would that work?

 

[Condottiere]

You're paying an arm and a leg for wiring up your hull.

That's the control interface.

Of course, cockpitting is free.

 

[OldGuy59]

Just throwing a spitball into the mix.

Why is there a rule for 'Only one computer on the ship'? In High Guard, it allows for a second computer, but 'the second must have a lower Processing score than the primary.' What is this?

Just for comparison, a TL8 multi-mode fly-by-wire fighter jet built in 1982 had two "Main Computers" that are equal and redundant, and 27 total computers running all sorts of parts, that fed into the Main Computers and then to the pilot. Attitude and Environment, communications, engines, electronic warfare sensors, flight controls, maintenance monitoring (fault detection and reporting), multi-spectral sensors, navigation, radars, recorders, etc...

BTW: Has anyone looked at the analog Fire Control or Gun Direction system on a B-29 Superfortress Bomber?
Link-> The B-29’s Central Fire Control System
For its time, the system was pretty complex.

IMHO, It is currently much better to design Robot Gunners and use them, than attempting to automate Fire Control systems on a ship.

It is really obvious that Traveller was created before personal computers. Watches and phones are now more powerful than any computers envisioned in 1977.

Where will ships be in 5200 AD?