Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > Traveller

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-15-2019, 08:21 AM   #1
hal
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Buffalo, New York
Default Optimizing Traveller Ship designs Post TRAVELLER: STARSHIPS

Hello Folks,
As I look into updating all of my Traveller ship examples from the classic books printed prior to GURPS TRAVELLER: STARSHIPS, I got to wondering...

Most of the ship designs from the earlier books were not "optimized" in that they didn't use the compact bridge option nor the Small Utility option (for hulls less than 500 dTons in volume). Those two options alone generate 1 additional dTon worth of volume that can be taken up with another ship system (such as a sickbay, extra cargo capacity etc).

For many, this extra 1 dTon capacity will not much matter - and will not be worth updating with an "optimized" design.

However - one of the things that bothered me about the original design system for TL 10 maneuver drives was the fact that the designers wanted to keep the math simple and have the drive only supply 40 sTons of thrust. When I compared the amount of volume utilized in a TL 12 Maneuver drive and contrasted it against that of the TL 10 version, I found that the TL 10 version under-utilizes the available space by a significant margin.

As a consequence of that, I redesigned the module such that it provides 49 sTons of thrust instead of 40. This brought the TL 10 Maneuver drive in line with the TL 12 (as far as volume utilized) and had the following result:

10 standard TL 10 Maneuver drives provide 400 sTons of thrust. 9 Improved TL 10 Maneuver drives will provide 441 sTons of thrust.

For a 100 dTon Sulieman scout using 20 Maneuver Drives for its 800 sTon trust engine, we can simplify that to 17 Improved Maneuver drives providing 833 sTons of thrust.

In short, we optimize the old design by increasing its available extra volume from the original by as much as 4 dTons that can be utilized for other purposes.

Would it be a problem if I were to post a few optimized designs for the older craft based upon GURPS TRAVELLER: STARSHIPS? Would it even be worth anyone's time?
hal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2019, 09:05 PM   #2
ak_aramis
 
ak_aramis's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Alsea, OR
Default Re: Optimizing Traveller Ship designs Post TRAVELLER: STARSHIPS

Quote:
Originally Posted by hal View Post
Would it be a problem if I were to post a few optimized designs for the older craft based upon GURPS TRAVELLER: STARSHIPS? Would it even be worth anyone's time?
Given that GT is available from FFE on CD, it's probably worthwhile, if you enjoy doing it or are doing it for your own campaign anyway.
ak_aramis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2019, 11:37 PM   #3
hal
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Buffalo, New York
Default Re: Optimizing Traveller Ship designs Post TRAVELLER: STARSHIPS

Quote:
Originally Posted by ak_aramis View Post
Given that GT is available from FFE on CD, it's probably worthwhile, if you enjoy doing it or are doing it for your own campaign anyway.
As it stands now...

I had a friend download the GMV software for use on his Windows 10 computer - just to see if it would run or not, and it appears that it does.

My optimizations will of course, require that I specify the what of the optimization, and the why of it.

I sent an email to the moderator for this section of the Forums asking if it would be a copyright violation to post those optimization items here on the thread. I've yet to hear back from him. (Seeing as it is less than 24 hours since I sent the message, I'm not worried as yet).

But, that is precisely what I'm doing ship by ship - optimizing it using the compact bridge, small utility, and small engineering modules. Using the 49 sTon thrust TL 10 maneuver drives frees up more volume.

Here is a sample of the optimized Sulieman Scout:

Design: 100 ton SL hull, DR 200, Heavy Compartmentalization, Basic Stealth, Basic Emission Cloaking, 1 turret (Dr 100)

Modules: Basic Bridge - compact Option, Sm Engineering, 3 Jump Drive, 16 Maneuver Drive (784 sTons thrust), 20 Jump Fuel tank, 19 Hold, 1 spacedock

Statistics:
Emass 250 sTons, LMass 365 sTons, Cost: MCr 25.25 HP: 15,000 (DT: 1,500), Size Modifier +8, HT 12, Maint 4 Hrs (24.1 Man-hrs per day).

Performance: Jump-2, sAccel 2.15 G Air Speed: 2,050 mph, Dodge 1 + 1/2 Pilot Skill (-4 vs Meso Fire).

The big differences between the old version and the optimized version are:

25.25 Mcr vs 26.4 (original rules)
19 Hold vs 12.5 Hold (Original Rules)

sAccel of 2.15 vs original 2.3 This is due to being able to carry more cargo capacity, which in turn increases it overall mass when fully laden.

Note: In using only 16 Maneuver Drives rated at 49 sTons of thrust, 16 x 49 = 784 vs 20 x 40 sTons or 800 sTons of thrust. My optimized version is 16 sTons less in thrust than the original. Easy fix would be to change the number of Thrusters from 16 to 17, and remove 1 dTon of cargo capacity.

Last edited by hal; 05-15-2019 at 11:41 PM. Reason: Added additional reason why sAccel was less than original... (in blue)
hal is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.