Rock: 300 Ton Asteroid ship

[PsiTraveller]

Not sure if this has been note yet, but page 120 has a 300 Ton Asteroid ship. Your hull point calculator has been fed wrong info it looks like.

The tons is listed as 60 in the Hull section, showing the 60 Tons of space the planetoid hull loses because it is an asteroid ship. The hull points show 24 hull points, which is 60/2.5

 

[AndrewW]

Not sure if this has been note yet, but page 120 has a 300 Ton Asteroid ship. Your hull point calculator has been fed wrong info it looks like.

Nope, hadn't been but is now.

 

[PsiTraveller]

Another couple of questions about the Rock ship:
Jump Drives: the math has 12.5 tons of drives costing 18.75 MCr. The ship shows 13 tons costing the same amount. Are you supposed to round up in determining tonnage for Jump Drive tonnage? I know you have to for Docking space (as the Pebble has been rounded up to 28 tons instead of 27.5).

When you round up, do you calculate cost on the original half ton number or the final rounded up price. It is the 12.5 tons in the example. I just want to check.
Cargo is at 26.5 tons. If you add everything up you get 300.5 (the extra .5 tons is in the Jump Engine) Should the Cargo be reduced or the Jump Drive tonnage?


Armor: Base Armor of a Planetoid is 2 (4 if buffered). 4 points of CrystalIron got added to the Planetoid. The natural 2 points of armor is ignored, correct? What if only 2 points of CrystalIron was added? Would the 2 points of natural armor be counted at anytime if extra armor is added?

And for more of a "why do it that way" kind of question. You have a ship with 91 tons of fuel tankage and 26 tons of cargo space. Yes it can go 3 Jumps without refueling, but easier ways exist to get that.
If you install 30 tons of fuel space for Jump, and put the extra 60 tons into cargo space you could still carry 60 tons of extra fuel either in Collapsible fuel bladder, Demountable tanks, or in 60 tons of water jugs and pipe the water into the Jump fuel tank for magical conversion into refined fuel. If you did that and did not need the extra fuel you have a lot more cargo room. (except for Demountable tanks, they take up space all the time.) I just like the options a big cargo hold gives.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

The rounding is probably just an issue with displayed precision (in the spreadsheet presumably used). The jump drive should be 12.5 dT and cost MCr 18.75.

I have assumed that cost is based on actual tonnage. A 13 dT jump drive would cost MCr 19.5.

Armour is added, up to the limit for the type of armour. The ship should have armour 6 (2 natural + 4 added).

 

[Sigtrygg]

And for more of a "why do it that way" kind of question. You have a ship with 91 tons of fuel tankage and 26 tons of cargo space. Yes it can go 3 Jumps without refueling, but easier ways exist to get that.
If you install 30 tons of fuel space for Jump, and put the extra 60 tons into cargo space you could still carry 60 tons of extra fuel either in Collapsible fuel bladder, Demountable tanks, or in 60 tons of water jugs and pipe the water into the Jump fuel tank for magical conversion into refined fuel. If you did that and did not need the extra fuel you have a lot more cargo room. (except for Demountable tanks, they take up space all the time.) I just like the options a big cargo hold gives.

The answer is because that is the way the ship was designed for the original CT adventure it appeared in - A6:Expedition to Zhodane. At the time the ship was designed the other methods of carrying fuel were just making an appearance for military use in CT Adventure 5: T.C.S.
it wasn't until the Traveller Adventure that it became canonical for their to be civilian use of demountable tanks.

 

[PsiTraveller]

Thank you both for the answers.

regarding the armor. This concept was explored during playtest IIRC. Is there a limit for armor and the base 2 of a planetoid? I recall an asteroid based ship that was maxed out on superdense and with the +2 or +4 from being a planetoid the ship was immune to pretty much everything except a salvo of missiles. I made one that was reflective as well. I envisioned this big rock wrapped in tinfoil. I called it the baked potato.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

All hulls start with armour Protection 0, though this can be improved upon.
...
Planetoid hulls provide a ship with armour Protection 2 (Protection 4 if they are Buffered Planetoids).

The Hull Armour table shows how much of the hull’s tonnage is consumed per point of armour Protection added, along with its costs. A minimum TL is required for each type of armour, and there is a maximum amount that can be attached to a hull – this includes any armour the ship had prior to modification.

Crystaliron has a max of TL (or 13, whichever is less). A planetoid has a basic Protection of 2, so at TL 12 I can add another 10 using crystaliron, for a total of Protection 12. That is my interpretation at least.

 

[AndrewW]

Just to confirm:

Another couple of questions about the Rock ship:
Jump Drives: the math has 12.5 tons of drives costing 18.75 MCr. The ship shows 13 tons costing the same amount. Are you supposed to round up in determining tonnage for Jump Drive tonnage? I know you have to for Docking space (as the Pebble has been rounded up to 28 tons instead of 27.5).

When you round up, do you calculate cost on the original half ton number or the final rounded up price. It is the 12.5 tons in the example. I just want to check.
Cargo is at 26.5 tons. If you add everything up you get 300.5 (the extra .5 tons is in the Jump Engine) Should the Cargo be reduced or the Jump Drive tonnage?

Just a display error, the jump tonnage should be 12.5 tons and was figured at that.

Armor: Base Armor of a Planetoid is 2 (4 if buffered). 4 points of CrystalIron got added to the Planetoid. The natural 2 points of armor is ignored, correct? What if only 2 points of CrystalIron was added? Would the 2 points of natural armor be counted at anytime if extra armor is added?

It is added together.

And for more of a "why do it that way" kind of question. You have a ship with 91 tons of fuel tankage and 26 tons of cargo space. Yes it can go 3 Jumps without refueling, but easier ways exist to get that.
If you install 30 tons of fuel space for Jump, and put the extra 60 tons into cargo space you could still carry 60 tons of extra fuel either in Collapsible fuel bladder, Demountable tanks, or in 60 tons of water jugs and pipe the water into the Jump fuel tank for magical conversion into refined fuel. If you did that and did not need the extra fuel you have a lot more cargo room. (except for Demountable tanks, they take up space all the time.) I just like the options a big cargo hold gives.

Done based on the original in A6 Adventure to Zhodane

 

[Sigtrygg]

In CT HG TCS it was clarified that the free armour from a planetoid/buffered planetoid hull was not counted against the TL limitation. So a TL15 buffered planetoid in the old game could have an armour value of 21.
Reading the new rules I have no reason to believe it to be any different.

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

While I appreciate that Mongoose put all the old ship designs in HG. I was a bit disappointed that they didn't FIX those designs. I don't mean from a rules point of view but from a FUNCTIONAL point of view.

What good is a Battlecruiser with ZERO armor? It will get smashed by the first ship that come along.

Given the mission of the ships, I would have really liked to see the designs redone correctly.

Maybe that is a TAS project for later...

 

[AnotherDilbert]

In CT HG TCS it was clarified that the free armour from a planetoid/buffered planetoid hull was not counted against the TL limitation. So a TL15 buffered planetoid in the old game could have an armour value of 21.
Reading the new rules I have no reason to believe it to be any different.

MgT1 changed it's mind on this point:

Planetoid and Buffered Planetoid hulls do not add their integral armour to the maximum armour allowed – it is included in this limit (so, in the example, the additional crystaliron armour takes it up to the maximum of 10 – it could not take it up to 12).

That is pretty clear, I do not think I can misunderstand that even if I try.

MgT2 also seems pretty clear to me:

..., and there is a maximum amount that can be attached to a hull – this includes any armour the ship had prior to modification.

The bonus armour from the planetoid configuration is included in the armour max.

Perhaps Matt or Andrew can correct me if I am wrong?

 

[Sigtrygg]

Andrew already has - a couple of posts back - they are added together, as per the CT HG TCS interpretation rather than the incorrect MgT HG1 errata (heh heh errata that is wrong).

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Andrew already has - a couple of posts back - they are added together, as per the CT HG TCS interpretation rather than the incorrect MgT HG1 errata (heh heh errata that is wrong).

Of course we add them, but the sum still cannot exceed the maximum for that TL. Why would the MgT1 errata be wrong?

I think we are talking past each other, I do not see what you see, or vice versa.

Planetoid hulls provide a ship with armour Protection 2 (Protection 4 if they are Buffered Planetoids).

The Hull Armour table shows how much of the hull’s tonnage is consumed per point of armour Protection added, along with its costs. A minimum TL is required for each type of armour, and there is a maximum amount that can be attached to a hull – this includes any armour the ship had prior to modification.

I see that as pretty clear, the armour values are added, but the sum cannot exceed the max.

I do not see that CT has any direct bearing on how MgT works?

 

[dmccoy1693]

My read on this agrees with AnotherDilbert. An asteroid of TL 10 can install up to 8 points of crystaliron armor since it gets 2 from the asteroid itself.

 

[allanimal]

While I appreciate that Mongoose put all the old ship designs in HG. I was a bit disappointed that they didn't FIX those designs. I don't mean from a rules point of view but from a FUNCTIONAL point of view.

What good is a Battlecruiser with ZERO armor? It will get smashed by the first ship that come along.

Given the mission of the ships, I would have really liked to see the designs redone correctly.

I agree... The most disappointing thing I have heard said about it was "that's how it was in a previous edition".
Isn't one of the reasons to have a new edition to have a better game? In most ways, I think it is.

And I hope I don't sound like I am complaining too much - I do like the new 2nd edition and the new High Guard.
My biggest gripe is what Rikki Tikki Traveller summed up in the quote above.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Oh I agree with him too - the new rule is pretty clear that the TL is the armour max regardless of how you get to it.