Pirates of Drinax - GMs thread

[MasterGwydion]

So a 'Small Bulk Cargo' ship is usually about US $1 million to US $5 million; but a Free/Far Trader is about 50MCr -- the ship prices in HGU are too high by 10x or 50x. Add to that the exchange rate between US $ and the CrImp (US $5 = 1 Cr), and the prices are 50x to 250x too high. Or use TL differences in value of currency between TL-8 & TL-12, and end up in the same (or worse) place.

Not sure where you are going with 'Average Value of Cargo' -- that seems to be completely unrelated to the price to haul a dTon of Freight. What did I miss?

I was pointing out that on Earth currently the average value of the ship is directly related to the average value of its cargo.

With the numbers I gave above, (no idea if they are accurate or not. I used Copilot after all.)...

1,000-TEU capacity ship is about 10 million or roughly 10 thousand per TEU.

Average value of the cargo per TEU is 54,500. Over 5 times the value of the ship per TEU that it is capable of carrying on average.

Price correlation between ship and average cargo carried is nowhere close to this in Traveller.

Average price per ton in Traveller is about 15,000Cr across all of the goods on the Spec Trade chart.

For the Fat Trader which carries 200 tons of cargo, this value is 3MCr. 200 tons x 15,000Cr/ton

The Fat Trader costs 78MCr.

So, average cargo ship on Earth is valued at 545% of the value of the cargo it carries on average.

An average cargo ship in Traveller is valued at 3.8% the value of the cargo.

So, either cargo needs to get more expensive, causing the least amount of changes to the Traveller system, or ships needs to be cheaper, which changes pretty much every Traveller book ever produced.

Seems to be easier to change the cargo values.

I have no idea if I wrote this well enough for anyone to understand it. If I failed, please let me know and I will try and do better.

 

[J. L. Brown]

I was pointing out that on Earth currently the average value of the ship is directly related to the average value of its cargo.

With the numbers I gave above, (no idea if they are accurate or not. I used Copilot after all.)...

1,000-TEU capacity ship is about 10 million or roughly 10 thousand per TEU.

Average value of the cargo per TEU is 54,500. Over 5 times the value of the ship per TEU that it is capable of carrying on average.

Price correlation between ship and average cargo carried is nowhere close to this in Traveller.

Average price per ton in Traveller is about 15,000Cr across all of the goods on the Spec Trade chart.

For the Fat Trader which carries 200 tons of cargo, this value is 3MCr. 200 tons x 15,000Cr/ton

The Fat Trader costs 78MCr.

So, average cargo ship on Earth is valued at 545% of the value of the cargo it carries on average.

An average cargo ship in Traveller is valued at 3.8% the value of the cargo.

So, either cargo needs to get more expensive, causing the least amount of changes to the Traveller system, or ships needs to be cheaper, which changes pretty much every Traveller book ever produced.

Seems to be easier to change the cargo values.

I have no idea if I wrote this well enough for anyone to understand it. If I failed, please let me know and I will try and do better.

Yeah, okay; I understand your reasoning now. But if your contention is that 'Compared to the value of Cargo Hauled, Traveller ships are way too expensive', then I think we are just coming at this from different directions.

A Fat Trader carries 200 dTons (~400 TEU) of cargo, and that cargo 'should be' about 5.45x the price of the ship.

If we assume 15KCr per dTon, the cargo is 3MCr. The ship 'should be' about 550KCr; but it is 166MCr, more than 300x too much. Of course this approach also depends on the very wonky 'Speculative Trade' rules, which are also known to be unrealistic -- but they tend to make Speculative Cargo very valuable, so maybe that just emphasizes the original point.

 

[MasterGwydion]

Yeah, okay; I understand your reasoning now. But if your contention is that 'Compared to the value of Cargo Hauled, Traveller ships are way too expensive', then I think we are just coming at this from different directions.

I think so, but if you change the ship price, you have to make changes in every single book. You must also change other rules such as ship maintenance. (This rule should be changed anyway, since maintenance should be more than 0.01% of total value per month.) If you simple raise the prices of the Trade Goods, you just change one chart in one book.

A Fat Trader carries 200 dTons (~400 TEU) of cargo, and that cargo 'should be' about 5.45x the price of the ship.

If we assume 15KCr per dTon, the cargo is 3MCr. The ship 'should be' about 550KCr; but it is 166MCr, more than 300x too much. Of course this approach also depends on the very wonky 'Speculative Trade' rules, which are also known to be unrealistic -- but they tend to make Speculative Cargo very valuable, so maybe that just emphasizes the original point.

Fat Trader is 79MCr after the discount. Yeah. Spec Trade rules are sketchy to say the least, but I was just trying to use the chart, not actually the trade rules.

 

[J. L. Brown]

I think so, but if you change the ship price, you have to make changes in every single book. You must also change other rules such as ship maintenance. (This rule should be changed anyway, since maintenance should be more than 0.01% of total value per month.) If you simple raise the prices of the Trade Goods, you just change one chart in one book.

True, but changing the price of ships helps answer 'why does piracy exist'? If Pirates come out ahead -- legally, and with no risk -- from just selling their own (starter) ship, then nobody would ever do it. For 'piracy' to work the ships need to be cheap, and the cargo valuable. Right now, cargo is cheap and ships are valuable. Making cargo valuable, while keeping ships valuable, only goes part of the way to solving the issue.

We already know that there needs to be a 3e; a complete rework from the ground up -- might as well pile this on the list of things to do.

Fat Trader is 79MCr after the discount. Yeah. Spec Trade rules are sketchy to say the least, but I was just trying to use the chart, not actually the trade rules.

Oops. Yeah, that affects things; the ship is only about 141 times too valuable. The more I look at this, the more I think knocking two decimals off of all prices in High Guard (and dividing all 'passage' and 'freight' prices by 50) is a good starting point.

 

[Condottiere]

A lot of freighters have a fifteen year working life, so you'll want return on investment plus a healthy net profit, and likely, replacement cost, minus scrap.

Comparatively Traveller spacecraft are supposedly longer in service.

 

[MasterGwydion]

A lot of freighters have a fifteen year working life, so you'll want return on investment plus a healthy net profit, and likely, replacement cost, minus scrap.

Comparatively Traveller spacecraft are supposedly longer in service.

Good point. We often see Traveller ships still working after 200 years

 

[mavikfelna]

Good point. We often see Traveller ships still working after 200 years

But rarely is the ship still in service with the original owner. Though that's peripheral to what you're talking about.

 

[MasterGwydion]

But rarely is the ship still in service with the original owner. Though that's peripheral to what you're talking about.

What you say is true, but on Earth most ships aren't even floating after 200 years. In Traveller they often operate of hundreds of years. Since the TL isn't changing and all they have to do is keep replacing stuff with easy to find parts. Parts in Traveller never become obsolete. How old in Canon are some of these designs? That means that parts have been getting made for them for just as long. Buying a part on Earth now for a 200-year-old engine would be tough.

 

[mavikfelna]

What you say is true, but on Earth most ships aren't even floating after 200 years. In Traveller they often operate of hundreds of years. Since the TL isn't changing and all they have to do is keep replacing stuff with easy to find parts. Parts in Traveller never become obsolete. How old in Canon are some of these designs? That means that parts have been getting made for them for just as long. Buying a part on Earth now for a 200-year-old engine would be tough.

The basic Free Trader design is older than the Imperium. So it's not unreasonable that a ship could last 1000 years, though it would be a ship of Theseus at that point. But, from the setting, it appears that the typical ship is retired at somewhere between 40 and 100 years, depending on the general condition and operator's need. And the typical owner holds it for about 20 of those years, with each subsequent owner paying a reducing percentage of the original cost and somewhat increasing operating costs.
I have no idea how this affects the economics of trade. I would suspect that the older the hull, the farther from the core of civilization it moves and the harder to maintain it becomes. But since it's moving further out, the trade it carries is worth more since the buyers are probably paying more for it because of the distance away it is from the easy manufacturing of the core. This isn't modeled in any way but is likely too complex for a game anyway.

 

[Fluffy Bunny Feet]

So, either cargo needs to get more expensive, causing the least amount of changes to the Traveller system, or ships needs to be cheaper, which changes pretty much every Traveller book ever produced.

Seems to be easier to change the cargo values.

I have no idea if I wrote this well enough for anyone to understand it. If I failed, please let me know and I will try and do better.

Another option is to extend the used ship table so that you can get an old ship for MUCH less upfront cost. It is the price to PCs that is most important (the 250 year old free trader might be 5 MCr, 20% down, mortgage about 17K per month).

Gives a smaller mortgage (but you might have it be higher interest or shorter term making it proportionally higher), lower cargo fees (less trusted) so less money for speculative trading beyond very small tonnages. Set a minimum broker fee to eat into the small speculative trades profits. The maintenance cost might be increased due to everything being on the verge of break down all the time (double it to about 9K/month).

If you really want to be mean various ship systems might be given a "budget" penalty with increasing the mass not being an option. The J-Drive for example unless overhauled might use 30% more power requiring a power increase or a DEEP Jump dimming (going 0 g to jump maybe). Your ships computer might be a little "wonky" giving a -1 or more to your astogator roll. You might have civilian sensors performing as basic. Lots of issues with your old vessel.

A new jump drive would cost more than you paid for the ship a new M-Drive installed might cost more.
Crews pooling their money to buy one would be more common. Shared staterooms to let you either carry more passengers or cargo would be more common. Owners might dream of buying that ship that is only 150 years old.

A small edit. Such an old ship might only get a 10 year mortgage and assuming 20% down on a 5 MCr ship the mortgage would be about 68K/month.

 

[Condottiere]

Maintenance is like shedding dandruff, assuming you only ever have to pay one thousandth of cost price per annum.

If the spacecraft is lucky, it will end up with ten harmless quirks.

 

[MasterGwydion]

Maintenance is like shedding dandruff, assuming you only ever have to pay one thousandth of cost price per annum.

If the spacecraft is lucky, it will end up with ten harmless quirks.

per month, not per annum.

 

[Vormaerin]

All of this is complicated by the fact that maintenance and mortgage in game don't just represent the maintenance and mortgage costs. Just like a stateroom implies some of the space is used for hallways, kitchens, and other such things, the mortgage and maintenance is designed to incorporate all the expenses that would actually go into operating a business on a ship: licensing fees, insurance, registration, and all the assorted random fees, expenses, and whatnot that businesses accumulate just for existing. Because no one wants spend time on that in game.

You could cut ship costs way down and bring down the cost of trade goods as well. Fixing the difference in scale between adventuring money and shipping money would simplify aspects of campaign play, certainly.

The whole system is designed to make gameplay easy, not to model anything. Original Traveller trade rules were designed so that free traders had to speculate/smuggle/adventure or they'd go bankrupt pretty reliably and high jump tradeships were not really feasible. Because that was the sort of gameplay they were trying to model. Mongoose has changed up the trade rules so that free traders and high jump vessels can actually make money just doing their freighting thing.

But it probably would have been better to just flat out redo the pricing sub-1000ton vessels to be more gameplay friendly. But that's a pretty huge retcon.

 

[mavikfelna]

All of this is complicated by the fact that maintenance and mortgage in game don't just represent the maintenance and mortgage costs. Just like a stateroom implies some of the space is used for hallways, kitchens, and other such things, the mortgage and maintenance is designed to incorporate all the expenses that would actually go into operating a business on a ship: licensing fees, insurance, registration, and all the assorted random fees, expenses, and whatnot that businesses accumulate just for existing. Because no one wants spend time on that in game.

You could cut ship costs way down and bring down the cost of trade goods as well. Fixing the difference in scale between adventuring money and shipping money would simplify aspects of campaign play, certainly.

The whole system is designed to make gameplay easy, not to model anything. Original Traveller trade rules were designed so that free traders had to speculate/smuggle/adventure or they'd go bankrupt pretty reliably and high jump tradeships were not really feasible. Because that was the sort of gameplay they were trying to model. Mongoose has changed up the trade rules so that free traders and high jump vessels can actually make money just doing their freighting thing.

But it probably would have been better to just flat out redo the pricing sub-1000ton vessels to be more gameplay friendly. But that's a pretty huge retcon.

I just redid the the Type M Subsidized Liner, 600 tons, to be fully compliant to the HG22 rules. With a mortgage and buying refined fuel, assuming it runs full with middle passages for 2 jump 3s a month it makes about 830KCr in profit. On the other hand, if it only runs full for jump 1s, it loses 193KCr a month. That is a crazy difference. Mortgage is 661KCr/mo.

With no mortgage, that jump 1 route jumps to 467KCr profit. So we need to determine how much of that mortgage is working cost and how much is debt servicing.

 

[Vormaerin]

Once they introduced Fuel/cargo containers, there probably shouldn't be any general purpose ships with higher than jump 1 that isn't using them. Unless you know you are always jumping 3 (or whatever) because that's your route, giving up that cargo space when you have to go J1 or J2 is just going to hurt your profitability in a major way.

The M liner is still paying for 20% of the their ship to be sitting idle if it running J1. Granted, it is intended to be subsidized if its running short routes, but otherwise you absolutely must be making full use of its range if freelance.

 

[Condottiere]

A ship needs maintenance, which costs 0.1% of the total purchase price of the ship per year. Maintenance should be carried out every Maintenance Period (divide the year’s maintenance cost by 12 to find the Maintenance Period cost. Once per year this should be performed at a shipyard.

 

[Uqbarian]

If a ship is stolen, the pirates shouldn't be getting the sticker price if they sell it. They'd be going through a fence and getting maybe 10% to 30% of the value on a good day (along with possible markdowns for damage etc.).

(Obviously that doesn't help much if you think ship prices are 100x to 250x too high. In that case, you could peg the fenced value for ships at 1-3% and leave non-ship goods at 10-30%.)

 

[Fluffy Bunny Feet]

The M liner is still paying for 20% of the their ship to be sitting idle if it running J1. Granted, it is intended to be subsidized if its running short routes, but otherwise you absolutely must be making full use of its range if freelance.

That is why a number of my J-2 and higher ships use mountable fuel tanks for the fuel above J-1. You only have mounted the tanks for the route you run. All J-1 and you remove the J-2 and J-3 mountable tanks giving back cargo space. The 600 ton J-3 ship has 2 tanks of 60 tons each and the fuel tank has fuel for J-1. The 200 ton far trader has a 20 ton tank so they can boost their cargo by 20 tons if they end up doing a J-1 route.

The tanks are dirt cheap and you can cut them out much quicker than the 30 days to remove them for storage. If needed you buy a new one and spend the 30 days installing it.

 

[mavikfelna]

That is why a number of my J-2 and higher ships use mountable fuel tanks for the fuel above J-1. You only have mounted the tanks for the route you run. All J-1 and you remove the J-2 and J-3 mountable tanks giving back cargo space. The 600 ton J-3 ship has 2 tanks of 60 tons each and the fuel tank has fuel for J-1. The 200 ton far trader has a 20 ton tank so they can boost their cargo by 20 tons if they end up doing a J-1 route.

The tanks are dirt cheap and you can cut them out much quicker than the 30 days to remove them for storage. If needed you buy a new one and spend the 30 days installing it.

All my merchants have fuel/cargo tanks. Mountable tanks are nice, but under the current rules they take a minor refit to put up or take down, so it costs both time and money, which is why I don't use them.

 

[Vormaerin]

Yeah. There has been a steady escalation of 'ease of use'.

Originally, you used 100% of your fuel any time you jumped no matter what distance.
Then they changed it to just the fuel needed for the distance you were going.
Then they fooled around with really unreliable drop tanks.
Then they added the mountable tanks that were a big hassle.
Much later, they added the inflatable gas bags in your cargo hold, which were only good for mulitple jumps not one long jump.

Then they obsoleted basically all of that with fuel/cargo containers. Which, like fuel purifiers, are so cost effective that not having them on anything not purpose built for a specific use is just kind of dumb.