Modules for the Modular Cutter

A modular hull costs half of a normal ship's hull. So if the listing comes to the same price as a 30 ton craft/station with the same loadout, It has the hull of a 30 ton station. Otherwise, treat it as a pressurized vehicle or go with your gut as above.
 
Hull factor/zero.

Since you can't add hull armour.

Hull points would correspond to volume.

Damage would mirror that of the hull area hit.

Turrets and bays need to correspond to external hull openings.
 
Turrets and bays need to correspond to external hull openings.

That is an issue with several modules they have components that need to extend out of the surrounding hull. They would need to be in a hull configured especially for that module not generic like the Modular Cutter. One of them uses "blades" from the vehicle design book (that I don't have) used to dig trenches while mounted within the cutter (while in combat), another drops marines in Assault Capsules while within the cutter. Seems to me that they would need to be deployed to function and not all of them have power of their own. Alternately they have to extend through the hull which seems problematic and vulnerable to direct attack. But they are written up for the Modular Cutter not a customized vehicle.
 
The outpost module is built using module rules, meaning it is not sturdy enough for spaceflight on its own. Checked the construction both ways.
It further violates the construction rules by including a drive and a power plant.
I rationalize this in the same way as the base modules. They are meant to be deployed to operate, so are just cargo that fit into a modular cutter's module bay until then.
 
You know, I overlooked that.

Technically, that is in violation of the design rules.

However, I don't think I noticed any with a a drive, manoeuvre or jump.

You could give it internal power from either Vehicles or Central Supply, and put wheels on it.
 
What is the purpose of the docking clamps in the light fighter module in High Guard? Seems to me that you would be better fitting 4x 6 ton fighters in dedicated docking spaces at 7 (or 6.6 tons as small craft use fractional tons) per bay and ditch the docking clamps. You potentially gain some space and free access to the fighters, they are quicker to launch (1d minutes rather then d3 rounds - assuming these are space rounds).

The only advantage I can see is that this arrangement is 1MCr1 cheaper, which is not so much when compared to the cost of the fighters.

I had assumed that docking clamps held the auxiliary ship on the outside, if so why is 24 tons interior space allocated to the fighters. Is the idea that the module is like a bomb bay with the fighters just hanging off the clamps but inside a big open space (like tie fighter in a star destroyer)? If they are inside why does the module make the cutter un-streamlined? Surely it can benefit from the same clamshell arrangement as any other module?
 
What is the purpose of the docking clamps in the light fighter module in High Guard?
They are recreating the CT "Modular" Cutter, that had external "modules" using the mechanism of MgT internal "modules".

The result is a bit confused...


The CT Modular Cutter would be better recreated using MgT Breakaway Hull or a streamlined Docking Clamp.
 
A grandfathered design and they changed the rules.

If every single ship were brought up to standard with the new rules you would no longer recognize the legacy designs in anything but name.
 
I had assumed that docking clamps held the auxiliary ship on the outside, if so why is 24 tons interior space allocated to the fighters. Is the idea that the module is like a bomb bay with the fighters just hanging off the clamps but inside a big open space (like tie fighter in a star destroyer)? If they are inside why does the module make the cutter un-streamlined? Surely it can benefit from the same clamshell arrangement as any other module?

CT A7 Broadsword, p22:
8. Fighter Frame. This framework module contains attachments to hold four 6-ton fighters. The module, as installed on a cutter, allows quick launch of all four fighters for the protection of the cruiser. Unlike the other modules, the fighter framework module is not streamlined and the cutter mounting the module cannot enter atmosphere. MCr2.0.
 
That is an issue with several modules they have components that need to extend out of the surrounding hull. They would need to be in a hull configured especially for that module not generic like the Modular Cutter. One of them uses "blades" from the vehicle design book (that I don't have) used to dig trenches while mounted within the cutter (while in combat), another drops marines in Assault Capsules while within the cutter. Seems to me that they would need to be deployed to function and not all of them have power of their own. Alternately they have to extend through the hull which seems problematic and vulnerable to direct attack. But they are written up for the Modular Cutter not a customized vehicle.
Since the modular cutter in un-streamlined without the module and the cutter has no armour, there isn't any indication that the module section has any sort of covering (not withstanding artwork and previous canon). I had assumed so since without the module, access to the engineering section is troublesome.

I have seen the cutter depicted with clamshells, the MGT2 version seems to have a removeable half-shell but if fitted they could also be modular and could be removed as necessary for specific modules. To my mind you should only lose streamlining if the module you have fitted specifically adds a component that imposes that trait. An empty cutter can just close up its module bay to be streamlined.

It depends if you are thinking in terms of a Thunderbird 2, a space shuttle or an Eagle Transporter configuration for your modular cutter. You could have any of those ideas built to carry the same module but you might have a massive hole with poor aerodynamics, a simple gantry that would have less effect on the aerodynamics or a ship that looked the same and had the same aerodynamics with or without the module.
 
A grandfathered design and they changed the rules.

If every single ship were brought up to standard with the new rules you would no longer recognize the legacy designs in anything but name.
I understand but if we are just going to use the old designs we might as well just use the old books. When using an older edition ships I don't bother to convert them, I just use them as is. The past is a foreign country, they do things differently there.

If there is a new book with a design system then it would be better to either leave out the old designs completely or uplift them to the new design method and rename them.
 
A grandfathered design and they changed the rules.
It's not the same type of "modules". There were no rules for modules in CT, which didn't stop anyone from using them...

MgT modular hull models this type of CT module:
CT S7, p16:
Interior Details: The deck plan indicates the interior layout for the typical scout/courier. The staterooms (4, 5, 6, and 7) are large and spacious, an essential consideration when the crew may be forced to spend long hours together. The common area (8) contains recreation equipment, a galley, and eating facilities. The rear section (13) serves many purposes; on scouts, it carries laboratory and sensor equipment; on couriers, it carries communication equipment and data banks; on detached duty ships, it is cleared out and become a lounge for the crew.
CT S9, p42:
Troops: Normally, the Kokirraks do not carry troops. It is possible to install modular quarters for up to 2,000 troops (usually only 1,000 are carried) in the cargo hold.


The closest mechanism in MgT to model the CT Modular Cutter is Breakaway Hull.
 
I understand but if we are just going to use the old designs we might as well just use the old books. When using an older edition ships I don't bother to convert them, I just use them as is. The past is a foreign country, they do things differently there.
The picture and deckplan is from MgT2'16 where the module was internal, inside a clamshell cover.
Skärmavbild 2025-02-03 kl. 11.11.png


In MgT2'22 it is now external, not really following the rules for "Modular Hull", but some sort of inverted Docking Clamp (streamlined while carrying, unstreamlined while not and recalculating drive performance). It follows its own unwritten rules, just as the original in CT.
 
No rules for modules you say - that is very debatable. No construction rules perhaps but plenty of rules for the modular cutter and the modules it can carry.
"Three interchangeable modules are routinely available for the modular cutter.
The ATV module (which includes an operational ATV) is 30 tons. It can land (and retrieve) an ATV on a world surface from orbit. The module can serve as an ATV storage location, if desired. It costs MCr 1.8.
The fuel module, with 30 tons of fuel tankage, serves as a a fuel skimming vehicle and storage tank. It costs MCr 1.
The open module is a customizable frame with 30 tons of excess space which can be allocated to passenger couches, fuel, cargo, cabin, or staterooms. It costs MCr2"

"The 50-ton cutter is essentially of two piece construction: a 20-ton frame and a 30-ton module. The combination is capable of 4-G operations and carries a crew of two (pilot and gunner). The cutter has a four ton bridge installed and mounts a Model/1 computer. It is armed with a single missile rack. Total craft cost, less module: MCr 31.5.
When the cutter is operated without the module, it has a smaller total displacement and thus greater performance: its 4-G acceleration is increased to 6G.
The range of commonly produced modules covers eight designs. Each has its own purpose.
1. ATV Cradle. Carries one All Terrain Vehicle in a streamlined and shielded cradle; upon landing, the exterior shutters of the cradle retract and allow the ATV to be placed on a -world surface. MCrl.8 (including the ATV, which is of standard wheeled design).
2. Personnel Transport. Contains passenger seats for sixty personnel. MCr 2.0.
3. Cargo Transport. Contains cargo space for 25 tons, plus passenger seats for ten
individuals. MCr 1.0.
4. Fuel Skimmer. Intended to dive into gas giants and skim their hydrogen gas
for fuel. It may be used to dip water from oceans as well. Carries 28 tons of fuel.
MCr 1.0.
5. Assault Boat Module. Contains basic positions for 16 troops in two sections, each with a bottom mounted door. Upon landing, power spades scoop out emergency entrenchments; the troops jump down into the hasty foxholes and the cutter with module immediately moves out of the battle area. MCr2.5.
6. Pressurized Shelter. An independent living quarters module for eight persons, complete with galley, power supply, environment recyclers, and sanitary facilities.
This shelter is commonly used in the establishment of advanced site bases, or where the troops are expected to be away from the ship for extended periods; it can be used to increase living quarters and total troop complement on board. MCr 4.5.
7. Weapons Module. A self-powered, independent weapons mount with the ability to be fitted with a variety of weapons. This module is typically used to provide close support for the ship's ground troops. Equipped with a computer Model/1 for fire control and a triple laser turret. MCr 8.
8. Fighter Frame. This framework module contains attachments to hold four 6-ton fighters. The module, as installed on a cutter, allows quick launch of all four fighters for the protection of the cruiser. Unlike the other modules, the fighter framework module is not streamlined and the cutter mounting the module cannot enter atmosphere. MCr2.0."

"The fighter framework module is treated as a standard module for attachment and reattachment (see below). All four fighters may be launched simultaneously, and the process takes less than a minute. Fighters, however, reattach themselves to the frame individually, and each reattachment takes about two minutes."

"Deployment: The major drawback of the modular cutter design in the Broadsword class is the problem of timely deployment of modules. Each cutter can be launched in a matter of minutes. However, the handling of individual modules is hampered by the fact that the only access to them is through the cutter wells. In order to change a module, the following procedure must be followed.
Assume that a fuel skim module is currently installed in a cutter and that a passenger module is stored within the ship. The cutter leaves the well and detaches the fuel skim module, leaving it lying free in space. It then reenters the cutter well and attaches the passenger module. The cutter leaves the well and detaches the passenger module; it then reattaches the fuel skimmer and reenters the cutter well, finally depositing the fuel skimmer within the interior of the ship. At this point, the cutter can leave the well and attach the passenger module for needed operations.
The procedure can become quite a shuffling match, and the ship captain must give a lot of attention to the exact placement of modules for use in any current mission.
Having the modules in the correct positions can become of overriding importance.
The times required for performance of basic cutter procedures are shown in the following chart.

Enter cutter well- five minutes.
Leave cutter well- five minutes.
Detach module in free space- two minutes.
Attach module in free space- five minutes.
Detach module in cutter well- two minutes.
Attach module in cutter well- two minutes.
Move cutter from orbit to world surface- twenty minutes.
Move cutter from world surface to orbit- twenty minutes.

As can be seen, the procedure can take about 37 minutes to complete. Planning is thus essential for efficient operations. Of course, with two cutters, simultaneous operations are possible.
Troop and pilot boardings are best performed within the ship. Pilots should be embarked in fighters before the fighter framework leaves the ship. Troops should be embarked in assault boat modules or passenger modules before they leave the ship."

Hardly any rules at all...
 
No rules for modules you say - that is very debatable. No construction rules perhaps but plenty of rules for the modular cutter and the modules it can carry.
CT had no rules for building your own modular ship, as we agree, or even building your own cutter modules.

More specifics about the "LSP Modular Cutter" can be found in JTAS#5.
 
Last edited:
Using LBB2 rules its pretty easy, since smallcraft take up no extra volume in ships.
Just extrapolate from the thirty ton module carrier.
20t ship +30t module 50t modular cutter
20t ship with 2x20t modules 70t slow twin modular cutter
30t ship with 2x30t module 90t twin module cutter

A thirty ton module can be installed in a starship in place of a 30t smallcraft
A 200t starship could be constructed that carries many 30t modules.

Lots of potential, all the rules that are needed are already there.
 
There are options for various modes of modularization in High Guard.

The concept, though, in it's entirety, is a mess.

Now, the power plant could be installed in a module.

Considering how the jump drive seems to function, that, probably, as well.

Maybe inherent structural weakness prevents either the manoeuvre drive or reactionary rockets.
 
Back
Top