Refits-Traveller

[tytalan]

So there seems to be some confusion over refits according to HG 2022. Under major refits it says “ Major refits cover changes in power plant, manoeuvre or jump drive, as well as changes to spinal mounts or launch facilities (such as launch tubes).” To me that’s pretty clear it costs a lot of time and money but you can change these things how you want. The problem comes under the minor refit category

Under minor refit it says this “ Minor refits are changes to any other components aboard the ship, such as weapon mounts or staterooms.” But it later says this “ Armour and other parts of the ship integral to the hull (such as configuration or reinforced structure) cannot be changed under any refit.” Which should probably be stated elsewhere in the section but it makes this next line confusing by being placed under the minor refit paragraph as is this next line “ Those items covered under a major refit cannot be increased in size but they can be reduced.”

Now the way I read it under a major refit you can increase the size of the of Jump drive, Manuever drive, Power plant, spinal mounts and Launch facilities because your moving bulkheads and restructuring the inside of the hull literally rebuilding the inside of the ship which makes sense the navy does it from time to time and it fits with the cost and time requirements. While under a minor refit you can only decrease the size of these components because you’re not doing major structural changes. But it’s been argued that you can’t increase the size of these components under and refit major or minor but the Hero class far trader is literally a refit of the Beowulf class free trader with larger jump drive. So which is it?

 

[Sigtrygg]

With foresight, you modularize everything that can be modularized.

I agree, modular, breakaway, pods, whatever you want to call them, replace a cargo pod/module with a jump drive pod...

 

[tytalan]

As to the rules, they are in need of an edit but they are clear in intent, want me to explain them to you again?

Armour/hull - no changes allowed
Major - drives, spinal and launch facilities only, may be reduced in size but can not be increased
Minor - cargo, staterooms, other stuff, refit away.

notice I am not yelling...

Again your telling the rest of us that you’re interpretation is the only way it can be Interpreted! I’ve actually posted the rules of grammar yet you still refute a very valid interpretation. In addition your telling us mongooses intention do you work for mongoose? Can you give us a link to a post where they support your interpretation? Without either of these things your giving us your opinion and telling us it is fact. Well opinions are just that opinions and we know yours but there are other equally valid ones.

 

[tytalan]

You need actual help in understanding the nature of polite communication.

Maybe you should consider the fact that you telling others their equally valid opinions are wrong without supporting of mongoose shows little in the way of polite communication and can also be interpreted as yelling

 

[tytalan]

Let’s break down the paragraph like we did in elementary school

Minor refits are changes to any other components aboard the ship, such as weapon mounts or staterooms.(the paragraph is talking about minor refits) Removing these components costs 0.1 times the cost of the original system, while removing them and installing new ones costs 1.1 times the cost of the new system. (Explaining the costs of minor refits) This takes one tenth of the time required to build a new ship of the same size.(Explaining the costs of minor refits) Armour and other parts of the ship integral to the hull (such as configuration or reinforced structure) cannot be changed under any refit.( bad placement since it indicates it talks about both minor refits and major refits) Those items covered under a major refit cannot be increased in size but they can be reduced.(again talking about minor refits and the restrictions placed on minor refits with no indications at all that these restrictions are also placed on major refits) Other components can be increased in size if there is tonnage available. (Explaining more rules of minor refits) If several systems or components are being removed or replaced in a single refit, all replacements are made simultaneously; therefore, it only takes the time required for the longest job to be completed. (Explaining more rules of minor refits)

This is literally how the paragraph breaks down there is no reason or indication that this sentence “ Those items covered under a major refit cannot be increased in size but they can be reduced.” refers to major refits especially since the only sentence that refers to both minor and major refits specifically calls out that it does “ Armour and other parts of the ship integral to the hull (such as configuration or reinforced structure) CANNOT BE CHANGED UNDER ANY REFIT.” in no way does this sentence determines the other especially since every other sentence refers specifically to minor refits.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Again your telling the rest of us that you’re interpretation is the only way it can be Interpreted!

No, I am telling you what the rules state, in black and white.

I’ve actually posted the rules of grammar yet you still refute a very valid interpretation.

They prove my point, not yours.

In addition your telling us mongooses intention do you work for mongoose?

I am stating what the rules say.

Can you give us a link to a post where they support your interpretation?

They are written in the book, you don't need anymore verification than that. You have a comprehension issue.

Without either of these things your giving us your opinion and telling us it is fact.

The rules as written are a fact.

Well opinions are just that opinions and we know yours but there are other equally valid ones.

My opinion is:
the rules as written need editing
the rules as written stifle player agency.

What is written in the book is not opinion, it is the rules as written.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Let’s break down the paragraph like we did in elementary school

Minor refits are changes to any other components aboard the ship, such as weapon mounts or staterooms.(the paragraph is talking about minor refits) Removing these components costs 0.1 times the cost of the original system, while removing them and installing new ones costs 1.1 times the cost of the new system. (Explaining the costs of minor refits) This takes one tenth of the time required to build a new ship of the same size.(Explaining the costs of minor refits) Armour and other parts of the ship integral to the hull (such as configuration or reinforced structure) cannot be changed under any refit.( bad placement since it indicates it talks about both minor refits and major refits) Those items covered under a major refit cannot be increased in size but they can be reduced.(again talking about minor refits and the restrictions placed on minor refits with no indications at all that these restrictions are also placed on major refits) Other components can be increased in size if there is tonnage available. (Explaining more rules of minor refits) If several systems or components are being removed or replaced in a single refit, all replacements are made simultaneously; therefore, it only takes the time required for the longest job to be completed. (Explaining more rules of minor refits)

This is literally how the paragraph breaks down there is no reason or indication that this sentence “ Those items covered under a major refit cannot be increased in size but they can be reduced.” refers to major refits especially since the only sentence that refers to both minor and major refits specifically calls out that it does “

No it doesn't, it does not state that at all.

Armour and other parts of the ship integral to the hull (such as configuration or reinforced structure) CANNOT BE CHANGED UNDER ANY REFIT.” in no way does this sentence determines the other especially since every other sentence refers specifically to minor refits.

You have just proven that everything I wrote is correct.

It flat out states Those items covered under a major refit cannot be increased in size but they can be reduced.

 

[Sigtrygg]

The text states that
"Those items covered under a major refit* cannot be increased in size but they can be reduced. Other components** can be increased in size if there is tonnage available."

* items covered by a major refit - drives, spinals, launch facilities.
**Other components refers to those items that can be changed by a minor refit.

It is clear as that.

Before you retort look at what it states earier:
"Minor refits are changes to any other components aboard the ship,"

So there you go, other components refers to not the drives, spinal or launch facilities..

 

[tytalan]

The text states that
"Those items covered under a major refit* cannot be increased in size but they can be reduced. Other components** can be increased in size if there is tonnage available."

* items covered by a major refit - drives, spinals, launch facilities.
**Other components refers to those items that can be changed by a minor refit.

It is clear as that.

Before you retort look at what it states earier:
"Minor refits are changes to any other components aboard the ship,"

So there you go, other components refers to not the drives, spinal or launch facilities..

Other components can be changed and drives, spirals,launch facilities can only be decreased. You literally are ignoring the way a paragraph is read to support you interpretation of the rules. I even posted an actual breakdown of the paragraph and in no way does it say what you want it to. Nothing you’ve said here is accurate your completely ignoring paragraph and sentence structure. The paragraph in about minor refits in only one case do it refers major refits and it specifically mentions major refits. “ Those items covered under a major refit cannot be increased in size but they can be reduced. “ this literally reads as those items covered under a major refits cannot be increased in size but they can be reduced in a minor refit. If it was referring to both a minor and major refit it would be worded similar to this “ Armour and other parts of the ship integral to the hull (such as configuration or reinforced structure) cannot be changed under any refit. “ specifically stating that the items covered under major refit can not be increased in size under any refit but it doesn’t say that while it does for armor and structure. Do you see the difference in the wording? Paragraph structure specifically indicates what the paragraph is talking about I posted the grammar rules for both sentences and paragraphs. The only time it refers to something outside of the paragraph it will specify as in the statement UNDER ANY REFIT this is not the case. This any other edition of Traveller and the RAW do not support you.

The way it reads is minor refits are changes to any other component and decreasing the size of the components covered under a major refits. That how it reads otherwise there would be no reason to include this sentence under minor refit “ Those items covered under a major refit cannot be increased in size but they can be reduced.” Instead this sentence would be part of the major refit paragraph because it would be indicating a limitation to major refit. A ‘. ‘ does not change the focus of a paragraph especially not in technical writing which is what rules are.

 

[tytalan]

I’ve go another question for you. Where is the ONLY in this sentence “ Minor refits are changes to any other components aboard the ship, such as weapon mounts or staterooms.”? I don’t see one because that the entirety of your argument is that these are the only components that can be modified in a minor refit but this sentence does not say that.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Other components can be changed and drives, spirals,launch facilities can only be decreased.

Correct.

You literally are ignoring the way a paragraph is read to support you interpretation of the rules.

No, I am applying the rules of english comprehension.

I even posted an actual breakdown of the paragraph and in no way does it say what you want it to.

Yes it does, your own posts show it does.

Nothing you’ve said here is accurate your completely ignoring paragraph and sentence structure.

The sentences are clear.

The paragraph in about minor refits in only one case do it refers major refits and it specifically mentions major refits. “ Those items covered under a major refit cannot be increased in size but they can be reduced. “ this literally reads as those items covered under a major refits cannot be increased in size but they can be reduced in a minor refit.

No, it means that major refits can only be replaced with same size or smaller, only other components can be increased, but at the cost of reducing others.

If it was referring to both a minor and major refit it would be worded similar to this “ Armour and other parts of the ship integral to the hull (such as configuration or reinforced structure) cannot be changed under any refit. “

Which it does.

specifically stating that the items covered under major refit can not be increased in size under any refit but it doesn’t say that while it does for armor and structure. Do you see the difference in the wording?

The wording is clear, major refits can be reduced in size.

Paragraph structure specifically indicates what the paragraph is talking about I posted the grammar rules for both sentences and paragraphs.

You don't understand them.

The only time it refers to something outside of the paragraph it will specify as in the statement UNDER ANY REFIT this is not the case. This any other edition of Traveller and the RAW do not support you.

The sentences are clear.

The way it reads is minor refits are changes to any other component and decreasing the size of the components covered under a major refits.

No it doesn't.

That how it reads otherwise there would be no reason to include this sentence under minor refit “ Those items covered under a major refit cannot be increased in size but they can be reduced.”

Pretty clear isn't it.

Instead this sentence would be part of the major refit paragraph because it would be indicating a limitation to major refit. A ‘. ‘ does not change the focus of a paragraph especially not in technical writing which is what rules are.

The paragraphs could be improved with editing, but the intent is clear.

 

[Sigtrygg]

I’ve go another question for you. Where is the ONLY in this sentence “ Minor refits are changes to any other components aboard the ship, such as weapon mounts or staterooms.”? I don’t see one because that the entirety of your argument is that these are the only components that can be modified in a minor refit but this sentence does not say that.

The word only is not needed.

I repeat my direct quotes:

Minor refits are changes to any other components aboard the ship...
Other components can be increased in size if there is tonnage available

The text is clear, minor refits refers to other components, other components that are not drives, spinal or launch facilities, can be increased if there is space available. Major refit items can not be increased in size, which you have now quoted many times over.

At this point I don't see what the issue is.

 

[tytalan]

The word only is not needed.

I repeat my direct quotes:

Minor refits are changes to any other components aboard the ship...
Other components can be increased in size if there is tonnage available

The text is clear, minor refits refers to other components, other components that are not drives, spinal or launch facilities, can be increased if there is space available. Major refit items can not be increased in size, which you have now quoted many times over.

At this point I don't see what the issue is.

That’s not how the English language works. I suggest you talk to someone with an appropriate degree because you are obviously not listening to what I’ve posted. I myself have had to do both business and technical writing and you are wrong