On Sun, 9 Aug 2009 04:20:32 +0800, "Antony Farrell"
<> wrote:
>Vehicles tend to come out much too heavy with the construction rules as they
>are. Some of this is a direct result of workstations being much larger than
>they are in real life thus requiring an increased vehicle volume (Original
>Striker was better for this). If you ever get the chance have a look at the
>size of the workstations inside an armoured vehicle.
>
I usually use cramped workstations in vehicles.
>Power plants appear to be too large and heavy for a given power ouput and
>should also incorporate both scale efficiencies and tech level improvements
>ie the engine on a modern TL8 4 cylinder car is both lighter, more fuel
>efficient and generates more power than an equivelant sized engine on a TL6
>car for example. Fix for this is simply add a scale efficiency and tech
>level bonus system to the other engine types.
I agree to this. Most low tech powerplants should have scale
efficiency tables. Maybe some of them should have max size too.
>
>Solar panels and fuel cells need some work too, technology in these areas
>seems to have advanced quite a lot recently.
>
Both of these seems to get very little use in Traveller, so I would
not prioritize this.
>Some missing bits, what goes into a fully independent space missile? It's
>not in FF&S1.
I have a proposal for this www.travellerfreeport.com First link in the
latest article section.
>
>Some clarrification on battledress and how the wearers strength effects what
>can be carried. Ie the suit has a total mass that it can carry but this does
>not appear to include the wearer so what is and is not carried by the suit
>and what by the strength of the wearer. The suit supposedly doubles the
>wearers strength so does that mean the wearers enhanced/unenhaced carrying
>capacity is added to the suit or not.
In my oppinion battledresses should have an inherent strenght based on
TL and skeleton type. Extra strength could be made available with
either increase skeleton frame and/or increase the battery drain.
>Plasma and Fusion guns as starship weapons in a TNE universe.
In TNE plasma and fusion weapons require ammunition. I am not so sure
if I would like to carry that onboard a turret.
>Spinal Disintegrators: these never made an appearance in TNE but in theory
>they are there since some Voroshilev class vessels were fitted with them.
>Effectively another particle accelerator, take one standard NPAW add a
>nuclear damper box holding anti-matter, accelerate to relativistic speeds
>should make a very nice fire work as it hits the matter going through it. OK
>then take one Meson gun add a nuclear damper box containing a source of
>anti-whatever mesons and fire as a meson gun. Should give a bigger bang than
>a standard meson gun but try not to get hit in your anti-matter store.
>Maneuver Drives need some work as well. HePlaR is way too efficient and
>perhaps should not be used on vehicles which it currently can. Perhaps a
>minimum size.
That depends on if you use ship volume or ship mass to determine the
size of the maneuverdrive and ship design.
I once did a comparizon between TNE designs where the rating was based
on craft volume and recalculated the actual G based on the actual
thrust in tonnes vs mass of the craft. Most crafts gained more than a
g, but a few (SDB among them) lostmaneuver rating. The SDB lost
actually more than 2G.
Roger Malmstein
www.travellerfreeport.com