Travellers Needed! High Guard Updates

[Sigtrygg]

The Traveller turret missile has been 50kg in mass since CT in 77, the only time it changed was for TNE. It is around the size of an AGM=114 Hellfire missile.

If you want "realism" then missiles need to be constructed as vehicles or small spaceships and have maneuver drives, power reserves, electronics and the like.

Another option would be an electromagnetic or gravitic launcher for the missile to impart its initial velocity, with its own drive system held in reserve until in ranhe of its target.

 

[Sigtrygg]

So will the next version of High Guard include all the new rules from Cluster Truck?

 

[Endie]

I think you're missing what I was trying to get at. Traveller uses volume as it's unit of measure in spacecraft. High guard says that missile turrets have sufficient space for 12 missiles PER LAUNCHER in a 1 ton (14 cubic meter) space! You'll note that I gave the example of the AMRAAM to illustrate how big a modern day missile actually is! And you're certainly NOT going to fit 36 of them in a 14 cu. Meter turret! My assumption is that Starship missiles would probably be at least as big as a modern era missile!

The whole discussion of weapon mounts on fighters was to say get rid of the limitation you sited above! (At a minimum!)

Ah well, in that direction I think your problem is that you are assuming that the designer wants a simulationist approach.

That's not the case, and Traveller is not a simulationist system. It's a game. Limitations are all there for balancing the game within the limits of credibility. Given how rare your complaint is (it's been posted before, sure, but only once in a while) it's not a big issue on credibility.

 

[wintertraveller]

So will the next version of High Guard include all the new rules from Cluster Truck?

I agree this would be helpful. I'd like to see these rules presented more clearly perhaps outline in steps like the steps to build a spaceship in HG. I'd also like to see some related new rules added:
- construction, cost, and functions of (sub-shipyard) rigs.
- clarity if there is a distinction of function between rigs named in the Cluster Truck: docking, construction, salvage
- A new rule for how much salvage a derelict/wreck/hulk of a ship could generate and the time to salvage it
- what is the difference in time a 2nd or more salvage drones could make? What is the time and tools needed to salvage by hand?
- how does building a rig connect to the rules for building a base (Drinax Companion)
- starting with nothing, no shipyard, no rig, how do you bootstrap-build a space station?

 

[mavikfelna]

I agree this would be helpful. I'd like to see these rules presented more clearly perhaps outline in steps like the steps to build a spaceship in HG. I'd also like to see some related new rules added:
- construction, cost, and functions of (sub-shipyard) rigs.
- clarity if there is a distinction of function between rigs named in the Cluster Truck: docking, construction, salvage
- A new rule for how much salvage a derelict/wreck/hulk of a ship could generate and the time to salvage it
- what is the difference in time a 2nd or more salvage drones could make? What is the time and tools needed to salvage by hand?
- how does building a rig connect to the rules for building a base (Drinax Companion)
- starting with nothing, no shipyard, no rig, how do you bootstrap-build a space station?

All of this.

Also, we need examples to clarify alot of things.

 

[phavoc]

There's no way MGT can do a 'minor' update of High Guard and incorporate all these suggestions. These are wholesale and fundamental changes to the book that would need to be a complete re-write of the rules.

My suggestion would be to:
1) Fix the errata in the new version
2) Incorporate all the additional published rules and equipment spread out in the supplements and other already-published materials
3) Review the content to make sure it doesn't conflict with existing rules. If it does either fix the rule or toss out the addition.
4) Get some additional editors looking at this so we don't encounter some of the previously seen issues
5) Publish this in PDF format FIRST, before you begin typesetting it for print format. Even with a great round of testing and review things will get missed


Once you have your draft, do like Geir did and consult with a group of players on the format and playability of the changes. You want to look at this separately, as the playability is important, but so to is the format. There's no real point in making something playable if it violates the spirit of the game (example - ion weapons in 3I setting). You want a diverse set of opinions that will provide meaningful feedback that can be usefully incorporated into the new book. Objections that are based in "that's not accepted IMTU" isn't helpful. BUT... if you ask for input then you have to be willing and ready to accept it and make reasonable changes. Your initial sales are going to be mostly to the people who probably own all the previous content - and you need their assistance to sell updates to a 50+ year old game.

 

[Terry Mixon]

There's no way MGT can do a 'minor' update of High Guard and incorporate all these suggestions. These are wholesale and fundamental changes to the book that would need to be a complete re-write of the rules.

My suggestion would be to:
1) Fix the errata in the new version
2) Incorporate all the additional published rules and equipment spread out in the supplements and other already-published materials
3) Review the content to make sure it doesn't conflict with existing rules. If it does either fix the rule or toss out the addition.
4) Get some additional editors looking at this so we don't encounter some of the previously seen issues
5) Publish this in PDF format FIRST, before you begin typesetting it for print format. Even with a great round of testing and review things will get missed


Once you have your draft, do like Geir did and consult with a group of players on the format and playability of the changes. You want to look at this separately, as the playability is important, but so to is the format. There's no real point in making something playable if it violates the spirit of the game (example - ion weapons in 3I setting). You want a diverse set of opinions that will provide meaningful feedback that can be usefully incorporated into the new book. Objections that are based in "that's not accepted IMTU" isn't helpful. BUT... if you ask for input then you have to be willing and ready to accept it and make reasonable changes. Your initial sales are going to be mostly to the people who probably own all the previous content - and you need their assistance to sell updates to a 50+ year old game.

@MongooseChris -- I think, though it might have been @MongooseMatt -- said elsewhere that what isn't used in the minor update is being made note of for the next major update.

I was one of @Geir's beta readers and testers, and I and others have volunteered our help in doing the same here. I know that I would love to help. We'll see what happens.