Revised Far Trader

[simonh]

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

He's using the standard published rules on page 52 in the book, which you quote. They are two different rules for two different situations. The text on page 52 applies to old designs built at later TLs. They are the same size (they're the same old design) but cheaper because they're made using the latest manufacturing techniques. In other words at later tech levels you can keep making the exact same old thing but cheaper.

That's what F33D is doing. Think old engine design that works exactly the same as the orriginal, made using the same materials and the same size, but made using the latest manufacturing equipment and lean production processes.

The table on page 53 is for a different situation, it's for making a new design of engine with the same performance, made using the latest technology. Think new engine made with the latest materials and engine management processors, with the same power output, but in a more compact form factor and more expensive. It's a new thing with the same performance but smaller and more expensive.

Both are viable options requiring different rules.

Simon Hibbs

 

[Condottiere]

While I can't speak for Mongoose's intent, neither rule contradicts each other. And the lowering cost makes inherent sense.

 

[simonh]

While I can't speak for Mongoose's intent, neither rule contradicts each other. And the lowering cost makes inherent sense.

Not to argue with you in any way, you're quite right, but while the rules are not contradictory it's also I think fair to say that they are not mutually compatible. What I mean is that you can't apply both rules at the same time to the same component. You can use one, or the other, but not both.

You could use on rule for one component (latest, smallest, more expensive Jump drive built using the table on p.53) and the other rule for another component (old design power plant with same size but cheaper, using the rule on page 52). That would be a bit of an odd thing to do, but there's nothing to stop you.

EDIT: WRONG!

Actualy, you could quite happily apply both rules at the same time. Don't know what I was thinking.

First you apply the table on page 53 to work out the size and cost of a drive design at a particular Tech level. Then, if you're actually on a world with a higher TL than that, you apply the cost reduction factor for higher tech manufacturing.


Simon Hibbs

 

[Condottiere]

Works if you know the base tech levels involved.

 

[F33D]

First you apply the table on page 53 to work out the size and cost of a drive design at a particular Tech level. Then, if you're actually on a world with a higher TL than that, you apply the cost reduction factor for higher tech manufacturing.


Simon Hibbs

So, spec a TL 13 M-drive (at reduced tonnage & increased price). Then, take that product and manufacture at TL 15 for a 10% price reduction? Interesting. Should work out without game problems.

 

[GypsyComet]

Should work out without game problems.

Not as long as you document the steps. Otherwise in three years you'll be just as much in the dark as anyone else trying to use the ship with all those numbers that don't match.

"Cap'n, the Jump Drive'll need a lot of parts if we want to move again, but its one of those Strouden Technics Custom jobs, and I have no idea where we're going to get those parts."

 

[simonh]

"Cap'n, the Jump Drive'll need a lot of parts if we want to move again, but its one of those Strouden Technics Custom jobs, and I have no idea where we're going to get those parts."

Yup. Just suggesting you could do it, not that it would in actual practice be a good idea.

I think what F33D is doing is interesting though. If Far Traders (just as an example) are a fairly standard common thing in the Imperium, it does make sense that there would be different models and variants over time.

Economies of scale imply that few ships will be entirely custom one-off jobs, but on the other hand I can certainly believe that each yard will have a specific local variant of the basic design. After all a Far Trader built at Regina at TL 13 is unlikely to be exactly the same as one built at Glisten at TL 15 at the other end of the sector. So you'll have the Regina Far Trader and the Glisten far Trader, with perhaps a new sub-variant coming along every 5-10 years*. Many parts might be exchangeable because they're built to Imperial standards, but many won't be.

Simon Hibbs

* But if you can, try to get the 1106 edition from Glisten. It's otherwise the same as the 1104-1109 models, but that's the only year they fitted Deniflex Holographics console displays as standard.

 

[phavoc]

I don't see how you can justify using both sets of rules/examples when they each say something different.

For example, from the explanation given for jump drives:

For example, a Jump–2 drive becomes commonly available at TL11. Prototype versions are available at TL10, but cost 50% more and are twice as big. A character who wants to buy a Jump–2 drive using the most advanced technology available would pay twice as much as normal, but the drive would be 25% smaller.

As I read this table, it specifically states how you should calculate the cost and tonnage of your jump (and maneuver) drive. There's nothing here that says you should apply the tech level cost decrease in order to get reduced tonnage AND reduced costs.

Just because something is 'older tech' doesn't necessarily guarantee it's cheaper. For example, dot matrix printers were somewhat expensive when they first came out, then they got cheap, and now they are just as expensive (or more) as when they first came out. Why? Because (a) the manufacturing of them doesn't equate to economies of scale, (b) there aren't as many companies making them, and (c) people that want/need them have a very specific reason and have to pay higher prices to get them.

The book examples aren't much help. I went to look at the 70ton Bomber, which mounts a 50 ton missile bay, that only takes up 30 tons due to TL changes. The problem is that the design cherry picks the reduced tonnage rule, but neglects to apply an cost changes (the price remains the normal MCr 24). They had to use the 3 tech level difference rule to get the 60% size reduction. Missile bays are TL6, which means it would have to be built at a minimum of TL9. According to the table the price should be MCr 48. If you apply the maximum cost reduction of 30% you are left with a price of either MCr 33.6, or MCr 16.8.

In either case, at least by the rules, you can't get the cost listed in the example. Because contradictions are all over the place I don't see a valid answer except doing it by house rules. Which is fine, but I cannot see calling any design canon when the rules can't even define what that is.

 

[F33D]

In either case, at least by the rules, you can't get the cost listed in the example.

:roll: :lol:

If you don't like my house rules I had Mongoose include in the HG book, don't use them...

 

[phavoc]

Yup. Just suggesting you could do it, not that it would in actual practice be a good idea.

I think what F33D is doing is interesting though. If Far Traders (just as an example) are a fairly standard common thing in the Imperium, it does make sense that there would be different models and variants over time.

Economies of scale imply that few ships will be entirely custom one-off jobs, but on the other hand I can certainly believe that each yard will have a specific local variant of the basic design. After all a Far Trader built at Regina at TL 13 is unlikely to be exactly the same as one built at Glisten at TL 15 at the other end of the sector. So you'll have the Regina Far Trader and the Glisten far Trader, with perhaps a new sub-variant coming along every 5-10 years*. Many parts might be exchangeable because they're built to Imperial standards, but many won't be.

The intro paragraph for the section in question somewhat addresses this concept:

The Traveller core rulebook gives rules for building spacecraft as they are built in most shipyards across the Imperium – a mix of common off–the–shelf components, lowest–contractor–offer hulls,
and electronics imported from high–tech or industrial worlds across the subsector. The overall tech level of the resulting spacecraft is roughly TL12, regardless of where it was built. Many techniques and components are standardised across the Imperium. That said, characters may wish to purchase cutting–edge ships using the latest in advanced materials and technologies. Isolated or interdicted worlds may construct their own vessels without importing components from outside. Explorers may run into Ancient derelicts or warships built by primitive species.

And elsewhere, in other books, there is mention of standardization of parts across the Imperium (don't remember if it's in MGT, or GURPS, or both). So your your TL11 jump drive needs standard TL11 parts built by Corellian Engineering, or Pabst Starships or whoever.

But that's not to say if your widget breaks down your enterprising engineer cannot creatively use a TL10 widget, or a TL12 widget to get it working on a short-term basis. Necessity is the mother of invention and some, ah, "engineers" are able to cobble together some amazing things. Not that I'd want to trust it to get me from one end of the sector to the other, but maybe it could last long enough to get me to a port where I can buy the right widget to permanently fix things.

 

[Condottiere]

Part of the problem is the vast spread of tech levels, when current experience tends to indicate we regard these products as obsolete.

But in the more compressed time period, an example would be the production of electronic transistors and parts, where Intel promises to get to ten nanometres in a couple of years, is currently at fourteen, and will eventually get to seven.

Twenty eight nanometres is still popular for some products, since it's an existing process and comparatively cheap.

 

[simonh]

I don't see how you can justify using both sets of rules/examples when they each say something different.

For example, from the explanation given for jump drives:

For example, a Jump–2 drive becomes commonly available at TL11. Prototype versions are available at TL10, but cost 50% more and are twice as big. A character who wants to buy a Jump–2 drive using the most advanced technology available would pay twice as much as normal, but the drive would be 25% smaller.

As I read this table, it specifically states how you should calculate the cost and tonnage of your jump (and maneuver) drive. There's nothing here that says you should apply the tech level cost decrease in order to get reduced tonnage AND reduced costs.

I'm not saying you should do anything. It's an option. I'll explain in more detail what option I'm suggesting below.

The rules do say different things. I think you can only realy use them in one specific order.

Just because something is 'older tech' doesn't necessarily guarantee it's cheaper. For example, dot matrix printers were somewhat expensive when they first came out, then they got cheap, and now they are just as expensive (or more) as when they first came out. Why? Because (a) the manufacturing of them doesn't equate to economies of scale, (b) there aren't as many companies making them, and (c) people that want/need them have a very specific reason and have to pay higher prices to get them.

You're quite right here. The cost of manufacture of a technology can swing quite wildly over time. I'm not really trying to justify or support the rules as written, but figure out what they mean and how they can be applied. I haven't examined the examples in detail.

Lets go with a TL J-2 drive as you mention, which first becomes commonly available at TL 11. According to p.53 if this drive is built as a TL 13 design two TL later, the tonnage of the drive should be 90% of standard, and the cost should be 125% of standard. OK so far? We have redesigned and updated the materials and techniques used and produced a state of the art TL 13 jump drive that is more compact but more expensive. This part could be built on any TL 13 world.

But let's say we actualy want to build this TL 13 part on a TL 15 world. According to P.52 older technology devices, which this drive is, get a 5% per TL discount. So on Glisten at TL 15 we can build this part 10% cheaper than we could at a TL 13 world. The size stays the same because it's the same TL 13 design. The total price modifier over the standard basic price would be (1.25 * 0.9) * 100 = 112.5% of base price.

Does that seem ok? I don't see how it contradicts either rule.

Note that I don't think it would make any sense to try to apply these rules in the opposite order. The p.52 rule is a modifier you apply to old technology devices built at a later TL. It wouldn't make any sense to apply that modifier, then apply the rules on p53 which do involve changing the technology of the drive.

Simon Hibbs

 

[wbnc]

Once I knew which rule sets F33d was using it took me about three minutes t figure out exactly what he had done. Reducing cost through use of older, or surplus drives and components makes sense to me.

I have to admit I wish I had came up with the idea for several ships I put together. It would have made several vessels I built work even better since they were supposed to be low cost alternatives to other vessels.( Don't let it go to yer head F33d ) Although I might have had to do a bit of work to get the idea accepted by the guys at Mongoose...

I can actually think of a real world example of the practice of using surplus parts to build new machines.
While I was working at a transfer yard for freightliner trucks a batch of freightliner truck was produced using Mercedes Benz small diesel engines. they were cheaper than the larger highway diesels but lacked the power for use in a large truck.
the result was a less expensive truck that had issues when used for highway use. they were serviceable but not very popular when more reliable more powerful trucks were available.I seem to remember that many were exported to South America where the market for trucks was less competitive and the Series was viable in that market.
Yes, I know it's a stretch to justify the idea, but if a shipyard ended up with a surplus of older less popular drives it could mitigate its losses by building a batch of low cost vessels and shipping them off to a market that would be more favorable..somewhere like the Spinward Marches...where people might be willing to put up with the older drives and systems to get a new ship that avoided the major headaches a used ship might cause.

Another less successful example would be the purchase of surplus Kuznetsov NK-33 engines to build the Antares series of commercial boosters. It wasnt a successful idea since the engines were never very good to begin with.

 

[F33D]

Once I knew which rule sets F33d was using it took me about three minutes t figure out exactly what he had done. Reducing cost through use of older, or surplus drives and components makes sense to me.

Thanks, but that isn't what I did. I reduced prices by using NEW parts. (up to 30% reduction) If you use USED parts you can go up to 75% reduction.



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).

The ship yards can just import the lower TL items for the ships they build. This also means that those lower TL Industrial planets have a good export potential.

N.B. this is an example of how real businesses operate.

 

[Condottiere]

Nosing around for second hand parts is probably much more fun if you're a Vargr. And likely cheaper.

 

[F33D]

Nosing around for second hand parts is probably much more fun if you're a Vargr. And likely cheaper.

:lol:

 

[Condottiere]

Junkyard dog takes a whole new meaning. I have to share this. Vargr share things. I must be a Vargr.

 

[phavoc]

Lets go with a TL J-2 drive as you mention, which first becomes commonly available at TL 11. According to p.53 if this drive is built as a TL 13 design two TL later, the tonnage of the drive should be 90% of standard, and the cost should be 125% of standard. OK so far? We have redesigned and updated the materials and techniques used and produced a state of the art TL 13 jump drive that is more compact but more expensive. This part could be built on any TL 13 world.

But let's say we actually want to build this TL 13 part on a TL 15 world. According to P.52 older technology devices, which this drive is, get a 5% per TL discount. So on Glisten at TL 15 we can build this part 10% cheaper than we could at a TL 13 world. The size stays the same because it's the same TL 13 design. The total price modifier over the standard basic price would be (1.25 * 0.9) * 100 = 112.5% of base price.

Does that seem ok? I don't see how it contradicts either rule.

Note that I don't think it would make any sense to try to apply these rules in the opposite order. The p.52 rule is a modifier you apply to old technology devices built at a later TL. It wouldn't make any sense to apply that modifier, then apply the rules on p53 which do involve changing the technology of the drive.

Simon Hibbs

My point has always been the rules state two polar opposites of how to calculate costs. On one page it says you can get cheaper goods by buying them on higher tech worlds. Nothing wrong with that because it mirrors reality. And just like it says in the rules, it works up to a point.

However, the book also states something entirely opposite, as in sure, you can get smaller items, but you pay more for them, regardless of the tech level advantage. Cherry picking the bonuses from both rule sets seems like cheating to me. If you want to use one, you probably shouldn't use the other.

Can someone pick one rule over the other? Of course. Does it make it canonical? No. Mostly because the canon rules are broken because of their contradictory nature. The other issue is that the costs listed in the CRB are meant to be average costs. A CRB-built ship is assumed to be built to the average TL-12 standard - regardless of where it is built. HG allows for truly customized ships with varying costs. This discrepancy is something that has remained broken in all the versions because the rule sets have never been aligned/fixed. And it doesn't help that the inconclusive rules have been perpetuated in the designs, which (in theory) should be referencable by everyone to see how it's supposed to be done.

So stating "it's in the rules" is not really an accurate statement. It's one way to interpret a broken rule. Which makes it, essentially, a house rule. We all have those, and that is a great and wonderful thing because it can make the game more flavorful and fun.

 

[F33D]

So stating "it's in the rules" is not really an accurate statement. It's one way to interpret a broken rule. Which makes it, essentially, a house rule.

Yes, since its a rule YOU don't like it is really a house rule. :roll:
:lol: :lol:

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

Air rafts are cool but, no merchant worth his business acumen would sacrifice 3 tons of cargo space for the extremely rare times that he needs an air raft.

3 tons?! Wow, that's the displacement of an M1A2 Main Battle Tank. Probably be better to get a 4 passenger, 1 ton model and load it last into the cargo hold. Or, just rent one for a few hundred credits for thoserare times when you need one.

Depends on the port visited. Air rafts come in handy at various ports/worlds.