Revised Far Trader

[GypsyComet]

It looks cool, but I'd miss having an air raft.

Then the standard Mongoose version won't be ideal for you either. Their versions of the A and A2 are both lacking the Air/Raft that was present in earlier editions.

Not every stop a Free or Far Trader makes is going to have an Avis Rent-A-Barge, and those also tend to be the places you'd want one. Which variation of the Tramp Steamer of Space you buy should always be neighborhood dependent.

 

[F33D]

Probably a better use for one of the hard-point tons would be for luxuries or a LB.

 

[simonh]

The sheer volume of the air raft, an open-topped vehicle no less, never made any sense. By the stats as 4 dtons they're enormous, twice the volume of an M113 armoured personnel carrier, and this for an open-topped vehicle. Most of the illustrations I've seen seem to be around half a dton, or a dton at most.

To hazard a guess, I think the only thing that makes sense is if the 4 dtons was orriginaly supposed to be the size of the garage space you'd need to set aside in a ship design, rather than the actual volume of the vehicle itself. Of course that doesn't fit well with the principles applied to small craft, which only take up their actual displacement under CT rules. With Mongoose the rules on small craft are a bit more nuanced, with options for hangars and such as well as 'form fitting' small craft bays, but the specifics of how arbitrary vehicle garages and bays should be handled has never IIRC been properly addressed.

Simon Hibbs

 

[wbnc]

It's probably not a top of the line model...but for a workhorse vessel it would do the job. the Turrets make mail packet contract a possible income source.

I'd probably use it as a starter vessel for a new crew. cheap, with room for improvement. Of course could also see it as a ship a medium sized company would use to service routes that are less profitable, say support to facilities off the main trade routes.

It's of the same quality (but higher TL and thus, better amenities,) as the Far Trader in the rule book. It is for the Marches. You wouldn't have the hard point tonnage set asides in the Core areas.

I was thinking of it operating in the same area, between the larger worlds and smaller worlds in the region. I think used the wrong words .

I'd be happy to have it for one of my characters. which is about the best I can say...

Of course I'd probably drop 2 weeks of fuel capacity, and the air raft to make room for more cargo, or free up space for munitions and extra sensors/electronics systems.....I've seldom had to operate a ship for 4 weeks on a flight. and if I did I could usually find a fuel source I could skim....now if I had a tight schedule to keep or had to do a lot of insystem hops the extra duration on reactor fuel would come in handy.

 

[F33D]

It's probably not a top of the line model...but for a workhorse vessel it would do the job. the Turrets make mail packet contract a possible income source.

I'd probably use it as a starter vessel for a new crew. cheap, with room for improvement. Of course could also see it as a ship a medium sized company would use to service routes that are less profitable, say support to facilities off the main trade routes.

It's of the same quality (but higher TL and thus, better amenities,) as the Far Trader in the rule book. It is for the Marches. You wouldn't have the hard point tonnage set asides in the Core areas.

I was thinking of it operating in the same area, between the larger worlds and smaller worlds in the region. I think used the wrong words .

I'd be happy to have it for one of my characters. which is about the best I can say...

Of course I'd probably drop 2 weeks of fuel capacity, and the air raft to make room for more cargo, or free up space for munitions and extra sensors/electronics systems.....I've seldom had to operate a ship for 4 weeks on a flight. and if I did I could usually find a fuel source I could skim....now if I had a tight schedule to keep or had to do a lot of insystem hops the extra duration on reactor fuel would come in handy.

Good point about the fuel. For some reason I always put at least 4 weeks PP fuel. Maybe it should be 2 weeks and let people use a collapsible tank in cargo if they want more?

 

[GypsyComet]

Of course I'd probably drop 2 weeks of fuel capacity, and the air raft to make room for more cargo, or free up space for munitions and extra sensors/electronics systems.....I've seldom had to operate a ship for 4 weeks on a flight. and if I did I could usually find a fuel source I could skim....now if I had a tight schedule to keep or had to do a lot of insystem hops the extra duration on reactor fuel would come in handy.

Good point about the fuel. For some reason I always put at least 4 weeks PP fuel. Maybe it should be 2 weeks and let people use a collapsible tank in cargo if they want more?

Ships built at Glisten, and especially tramps, stand a good chance of being taken into District 268 or down into Tobia's neighborhood. More fuel is probably a survival option.

You could split the difference and put in three weeks, since even one extra week above the transit minimum should be enough for most possibilities.

 

[Condottiere]

If boarding was external, you could have the raft in a drawer that slides out, located next to the airlock.

 

[F33D]

Of course I'd probably drop 2 weeks of fuel capacity, and the air raft to make room for more cargo, or free up space for munitions and extra sensors/electronics systems.....I've seldom had to operate a ship for 4 weeks on a flight. and if I did I could usually find a fuel source I could skim....now if I had a tight schedule to keep or had to do a lot of insystem hops the extra duration on reactor fuel would come in handy.

Good point about the fuel. For some reason I always put at least 4 weeks PP fuel. Maybe it should be 2 weeks and let people use a collapsible tank in cargo if they want more?

Ships built at Glisten, and especially tramps, stand a good chance of being taken into District 268 or down into Tobia's neighborhood. More fuel is probably a survival option.

You could split the difference and put in three weeks, since even one extra week above the transit minimum should be enough for most possibilities.

True enough. That area of space is dicey at times, even for military ships.

 

[phavoc]

I'm curious about how you arrived at your lower numbers. It looks like the tonnages remained constant from the CRB, but the prices declined. According to the TL rules on pg 53 of HG, when you increase the TL of a component, tonnages goes DOWN, but prices go UP. This rule goes for jump drives and maneuver drives as well as power plants (though the TL range bands and specifics are slightly different).

Assuming the jump drive B is a TL11 item, and you were building at TL15, you could reduce the tonnage to 75% of normal, but your cost would double.

 

[F33D]

I'm curious about how you arrived at your lower numbers. It looks like the tonnages remained constant from the CRB, but the prices declined. According to the TL rules on pg 53 of HG, when you increase the TL of a component, tonnages goes DOWN, but prices go UP.

You missed the TL price reduction rules. You are reading the TL tonnage reduction rules for higher TL's. See HG for more details.

 

[phavoc]

I'm curious about how you arrived at your lower numbers. It looks like the tonnages remained constant from the CRB, but the prices declined. According to the TL rules on pg 53 of HG, when you increase the TL of a component, tonnages goes DOWN, but prices go UP.

You missed the TL price reduction rules. You are reading the TL tonnage reduction rules for higher TL's. See HG for more details.

\

No, I did not "miss" the rules. I specifically pointed out the tables I was referencing and provided the page number. Drives and power plants have dedicated tables associated with them that spell out the costs and tonnage changes on a per tech level basis. As I mentioned previously (and was quoting from the table in the previously specified page) jump drives and maneuver drives do NOT provide cost reductions with changes in TL - at least not when you are buying older tech at a higher TL world.

On the previous page, in the intro section to "Primitive and Advanced Spacecraft" there is a section that lists cost reductions. To quote"

There is a 5% price discount per TL for older technology devices if bought new at the source, to a maximum of –30%. Characters can buy second–hand outdated technology for a fraction of the price (10% to 75%, depending on condition and usability). For example, a character buying a new TL8 engine at a TL10 world gets a 10% discount. A character buying TL8 engines from a scrapyard could pick them up for 50% of their original cost.

I am assuming from your answer that you looked at this paragraph and did not flip the page to see the tables that contradict what is listed (pg 52 for your reference).

On pg53 the tables list the following:

For jump and maneuver drives, the tonnage is 95%/cost is 110% for a single TL difference, tonnage is 90%/cost is 125% for a two TL difference, and tonnage is 75%/cost is 200% for three or greater TL difference.

For fusion power plants, the tonnage is based on TL, not differences in TL. For TL 8-10, tonnage is 125%/cost is 100%, for TL 11-14 tonnage is 100%/cost is 100% (i.e. the norm), and for TL15 fusion plants tonnage is 75%/cost is 200%.

I can see where your confusion is coming from, and that you chose to follow the rules listed on page 52 rather than the tables listed on page 53. I checked the errata and the only thing that changes is the TL bands (8-11,12-14,15+)

You should point out that you are disregarding the table data and going with the conflicting text instead. That way others can follow things more clearly.

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Capital Class Engines and Production Costs

Since I'm working on my Jumo engines for variable tech levels, I've considered this issue.

For jump and manoeuvre drives, if you construct the drives using a lower technological process at a higher technological level, the price reduction stands as you aren't miniaturizing them.

With power plants it's a bit more complex, but if you use the base production tech levels, at eight, eleven, and if you want, fifteen, you can still utilize the tech level price reductions.

As regards the smallcraft and adventure class alphabet engines, it's too vague to give anything but an opinion. Even with jump drives, since performance is more determined by computer and software, capability, rather than the tech level of the hardware.

 

[F33D]

You should point out that you are disregarding the table data and going with the conflicting text instead. That way others can follow things more clearly.

No. I am applying a DIFFERENT rule. YOUR misunderstanding of the rules is making it unclear for YOU.

 

[phavoc]

You should point out that you are disregarding the table data and going with the conflicting text instead. That way others can follow things more clearly.

No. I am applying a DIFFERENT rule. YOUR misunderstanding of the rules is making it unclear for YOU.

Lol. Don't be disingenious and state that it's in the CRB/HG. If it is, cite it so others can check/verify your claims. Otherwise it's YOUR house rule. Period.

You are real big on insulting anyone who doesn't agree with you, yet you rarely ever come back with the actual rules/information. Instead you just try and insult everyone. Just FYI, that's not winning you any admirers.

 

[Anonymous]

The Ignore List is your friend.

Yeah, I know it's got nothing to do with the thread.

I do wish there was a greater moderator presence here.

 

[F33D]

Don't be disingenious and state that it's in the CRB/HG.

:lol: What is "disingenious".

 

[phavoc]

Don't be disingenious and state that it's in the CRB/HG.

:lol: What is "disingenious".

Ah, so it's your own personal rule, not something found in the rulebooks. Gotcha.

 

[F33D]

Ah, so it's your own personal rule, not something found in the rulebooks. Gotcha.

Now you are just babbling. :roll: Take your meds, or stop taking them. Whatever works.

 

[Subzero001]

OK from my RAW reading from HG:

from HG pg 52 rule A and B" For example, a character buying a new TL8 engine at a TL10 world gets a 10% discount. A character buying TL8 engines from a scrapyard could pick them up for 50% of their original cost. " from the above example you would get a TL 12 jump drive "engine" for about 15-20% (5% per TL) cost savings if built on a TL 15 planet same with the power plant and maneuver units (5% per TL) but at the same dtonage as the original. Or " Characters can buy second–hand outdated technology for a fraction of the price (10% to 75%, depending on condition and usability) " I would guess the GM would determine the discount since your picking up a junkers equipment unit like the "Millennium Falcon" in Star Wars, or from a place like "Spinward Salvage" that remanufactures the units for sale to the military and civilian patrons. Like how we have remanufactured computers, cars parts, etc... in today's society



What was quoted on page 53 rule C is if you wish to buy a top of the line "prototype" miniaturized version of the unit jump drive, power plant or maneuver drive where the dtonage of the unit decreases but the cost increases.



One rule A is buying overstock / on the self units built at a higher TL than needed or rule B is a remanufacture units or salvaged from a junkers, and the other rule C is buying a prototype unit that is smaller than the original unit but your paying the high price to the designer for example (The vacuum-tube triode and the modern day transistor) is a classic example of this miniaturizing that page 53 HG is talking about.

This also corresponds with what Condottiere has written as well.

 

[phavoc]

Now you are just babbling. :roll: Take your meds, or stop taking them. Whatever works.

Another failed argument by you. It shows because you can't shut up, and you can't put up. That works for me.

OK from my RAW reading from HG:
What was quoted on page 53 rule C is if you wish to buy a top of the line "prototype" miniaturized version of the unit jump drive, power plant or maneuver drive where the dtonage of the unit decreases but the cost increases.

The tables on pg 53 are referencing new equipment, but not necessarily prototype gear. That would depend on what you want and what tech level you are currently at. It's not one or the other. The tables go both up and down the TL tree.

One rule A is buying overstock / on the self units built at a higher TL than needed or rule B is a remanufacture units or salvaged from a junkers, and the other rule C is buying a prototype unit that is smaller than the original unit but your paying the high price to the designer for example (The vacuum-tube triode and the modern day transistor) is a classic example of this miniaturizing that page 53 HG is talking about.


This also corresponds with what Condottiere has written as well.

Not sure where you are getting three different rule sets. There is the information presented on pg52 which talks about the 5% discount, up to a maximum discount of 30%, and then there are the tables on the next page that contradict what is presented on pg 52.

As I read Condottiere's statement, that's what he is doing for his own Traveller setting and it's not canon material he is quoting. But if I'm misunderstanding what he's stating he can clairify it.