			    TRAVELLER Digest 463

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) Re: Fortuity fighter laser by Steven Bonneville <bonnevil@itlabs.umn.edu>
  2) Re: Dark Traveller by Bri <bri@teleport.com>
  3) Re: TRAVELLER digest 462 by Joni M Virolainen <jonimv@evitech.fi>
  4) Re: Fortuity fighter laser by "Brendan O'Donovan" <Brendan@odonovan.demon.co.uk>
  5) Request for proposal. by toad@ugcs.caltech.edu (Benjamin Lane)
  6) Bunch-o-missiles by merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Oct 1995 13:50:34 -0500
From: Steven Bonneville <bonnevil@itlabs.umn.edu>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Fortuity fighter laser
Message-ID: <199510251850.NAA08917@natasha.itlabs.umn.edu>

Merrick Burkhardt corrected me:

>If the laser isn't grav focused the HPG is only 30.8kl.

And, on inspection, the laser is an xray laser that is also *not*
grav focused, so it gets those efficiency bonuses that grav-focus
lasers don't, and the design is ok.  With a workstation, the laser
is only slightly bigger than standard turret size, and it's at the
TL*50 DE limit.  Verrrry interesting.

  Steve Bonneville
  <bonn0015@tc.umn.edu>
 

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Oct 1995 12:49:07 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bri <bri@teleport.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Dark Traveller
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.951025124441.28586E-100000@linda.teleport.com>


  T:NE could definitley be construed as "Dark Trav", but, as some have 
pointed out, it could also be used as "hopeful" Traveller.
  It all comes down to how you want to play it, wich is one of the 
beauties of this universe. It can support a magnitude of "atmospheres".
 The "Ghouls" mentioned in the RSB, I'll admit, do remind me alot of 
Vampire: The Masquerade. But this isn't nessiciliariley a bad that, VTM 
is actualley a quite good game.
 The thing we have to rember is, that certin groups(Ala Nobles) are in a 
decline, and going through a state of angst now, while other groups are 
filled with hope. The best way(IMHO, of cours) to imagine it is "growing 
pains" of sorts. You could play a city based Cyberpunk game, or a VTM 
game, or a Foundation game, or a CT(ish) game, just depends on how you 
use it, and how much your willing to throw awya some stuff in the 
suppilments.
 

bri


------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Oct 1995 23:51:19 +0200 (EET)
From: Joni M Virolainen <jonimv@evitech.fi>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest 462
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9510252329.A25152-0100000@evitech.evitech.fi>

I have also noticed that to reduce fire fights in TNE, you have to make 
them more lethal. In fact I have modified Cyberpunk 2020 combat system, 
and that's lethal. I have not yet play-tested it, but I suppose it serves 
well. Of course PC:s need also more advanced medical gear than TL 7 
doctor's medical kit. I really don't understand why there isn't better 
medical equipment than that (that is meant to be carried on the mission).

Some one complained some time ago that all the missions have correct 
Intel. So what's the problem? Change the Intel if you want to use the 
'adventure', or change the 'adventure' and use the mission briefing. That 
is if you don't want to write your own adventures.

I admit that in my games there are lots of fighting, but as my players 
like it I don't complain. But I could use some good espionage and/or 
scouting adventures that are detailed enough.

"I'll be bag"
-Arnie the Alligator

Joni Virolainen
jonimv@evitech.fi



------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Oct 1995 19:08:27 GMT
From: "Brendan O'Donovan" <Brendan@odonovan.demon.co.uk>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Fortuity fighter laser
Message-ID: <113@odonovan.demon.co.uk>

In your message dated Tuesday 24, October 1995 you wrote :

> >Fortuity-class light fighter FF-24 & FF-25
> [...]
> >Displacement: 8 tons
> >Config      : Sphere SL                 Tech level      :15
> [...]
> >        FF-25:740MJ Laser turret (Locs 6-12; Arcs:All; 4.9MW)
> >
> >                Short         Medium      Long          Extreme
> >        750MJ   10:1/22-68    20:1/11-34  40:1/5-17     80:1/3-9
> [...]
> 
> The laser looks like it is broken.  A 740 MJ laser should have over
> nine displacement-tons of homopolar generators alone, which is more
> than the entire fighter displaces.  I suspect that Brendan used DE
> instead of IE in the calculation, reducing the HPG bank size by a
> factor of five in error.  My design for the largest laser legal at
> tech-15 under TL*50 came in at twelve tons with a rapid-fire 2400 Mm
> range tunable lens.  I'll post the design shortly.
> 
>   Steve Bonneville
>   <bonn0015@tc.umn.edu>
>  

Wrong. Sorry, I feel I need to defend this, as the use of non GF lasers is one 
of the more interesting features of my designs. As mentioned in the notes, the 
laser is non grav focused. Your massive HPG would be completely true if this 
was a grav focused design where the IE is five times the discharge energy. 
_However_ you may have noticed that the range performance of the laser is 
somewhat inferior to that which you would expect from a TL-15 X-Ray laser. The 
reason for this is because the laser is not grav focused. It has a somewhat 
larger than normal focal array to compensate, but X-Rays really don't need grav 
focusing. When you don't use grav focusing the energy efficiency at TL-15 is 
0.85.
In case you don't believe me, here are the calculations:
DE =750 MJ
IE =750 / 0.85 = 882.35MJ
Volume of 883 MJ HPG = 0.035 * 883 = 30.9kl
Still fairly big, but at least it fits in the fighter.

-- 
Brendan 


------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Oct 1995 20:09:46 -0700 (PDT)
From: toad@ugcs.caltech.edu (Benjamin Lane)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Request for proposal.
Message-ID: <199510260309.UAA03455@chop.ugcs.caltech.edu>

Hi all,
	I am not sure how we are supposed to handle design competitions,
but I thought perhaps it was time to air an idea that has been floating
around in my head for a while. As I don't really have access to BR nor 
BL, and I have been very busy lately, I haven't worked out an FF&S design 
myself yet. and I'll spare you the MT one.
So, if anyone thinks this idea is worth pursuing, I would 
be very grateful. but first some background;

Around 1100 the Imperial Navy began to undergo a large organizational
change, related above all to the deployment patterns of it's fighting
units. In particular, a large-scale changeover to Battle Rider units
was undertaken. At the same time, the defensive strategy of the Navy
went from "hard shell" to "mobile defense". This meant that most of 
the fighting strength of the Navy was well to the interior of the 
Imperium - leaving Colonial Reserve  units as the front line defence. 
This approach had many advantages - above all, it was cheaper, more 
flexible, and allowed a rapid change of emphasis from defence to  
offence, should the Imperial High command choose such an option.
It was also economically advantageous for several Megagcorporations
which had heavily invested in the new battle rider technology. 
However, there were disadvantages to this approach as well, theworst
being the increased risk to frontier planets. (It was also a prime reason
the Civil War was so destructive.)

The increased risk to the frontiers was felt most strongly in the Domain 
of Deneb, which was always very much at risk from Zhodani attack.
Following intense political pressure from Domain leaders, the navy began 
to investigate the possibility of rapid reinforcement of the Domain defences.
Several measures were implemented - refueling caches along j-4 and j-6 routes
was probably the most effective. 
However, it was at the time felt that there was a need for a new type of 
combat vessel, capable of J-6 deployment, extended operations behind 
invading forces, and a high degree of operational flexibilty.
This new ship would also be able to take on whatever heavy Zhodani units 
it might encounter, or if badly enough outnumbered, it should be able 
to outrun it's opponents.

The TL-15 design settled upon was the Cheetah Class Strike Battleship, a fast 
battleship in the 300,000-ton range, capable of carrying 4x 20,000 
battle riders with a performance of J-4, M-6G( ship, not rider), or 
2x20,000 tn riders and two Jump Extension modules giving a J-6, M-4G
performance. Each Jump extension Module replaced one rider and carried 
fuel and power plant for an additional parsec in jump. THus three riders 
and one JEM would give J-5, M-5. the Cheetah could also carry the 
more common 30,000 ton riders if necessary, as long as total tonnage carried 
did not exceed 80,000 tons.
  the Cheetah also carried a battalion of Marine Armoured 
Cavalry complete with a company of grav tanks, as well as 4 squadrons 
of mid-size fighters. This combination of capabilities made the Cheetah 
quite well suited for fast reinforcement,  delaying operations, as well 
as behind-the-lines raiding, force interdiction, and other high-mobility 
operations.  


6 of these vessles were built before the FFW, deployed together with 6 Javelin
class Strike Cruisers in the 1st Strike Wing of BatRon 667, operating out 
of Depot/Deneb. the unit performed well beyond expectations, blunting the 
joint sword worlds/ Zhodani thrust along the Vilis/Mora/Glisten Axis. Several 
holding actions were performed, as well as deep strikes and raids.
as a result of the excellent performance of the Cheetah class, production contracts were signed in 1114, and long-lead items began to be ordered. 
 Unfortunately, the Rebellion intervened, and Domain resources were diverted to 
more pressing needs. 

now, 80 years later, the  regency yet again is in need of a fast, flexible and 
long-legged strike unit. 
for this reason the following request for proposal has been issued;

Type: Strike Battleship, (SBU)
Tech Lvl: 16. Limited 17 - if unit has adequate backup. eg. sensors may be TL-17 if TL-16 backups are carried.  .
Displacement range: 200,000-350,000 tons std.
Maneuver Rating: minimum 4G sustained.
Jump: 6 Parsecs, 4 if carrying full rider complement.
Capabilities: 

Defeat in ship-to-ship combat any two Zhodani units up to 300,000tons each.
Carry up to 4 Connard P, M , E or F class 20,000 battle riders with J-4 performance.

Carry a battalion or more of armoured cavalry.
Carry 4 squadrons of fighters, i.e. approximately 80 craft.

be capable of long term operations with little or no support beyond fleet
tenders and tankers.

Be able to wilderness refuel.
be able to rapidly approach a planetary target for  bombardment and/or 
Marine deployment - in the latter case it shoudl also be capable of 
providing fire support for ground units.

JEM module technology is available and can be provided if your company
 is unfamiliar with the technology.

proposals that make use of antimatter technology will be considered 
independantly - convince us it is feasible and a contract may be 
awarded.

Contracts will be awarded based on results of a Regency Navy evaluation.
price, combat capabilities, flexibility of operations, and maintainability 
will be prime factors in the evaluation. 


End RFP.

What was it someone said? "Food for thought."?
have fun...
/ben


------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Oct 1995 22:39:05 -0600 (MDT)
From: merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM (traveller)
Subject: Bunch-o-missiles
Message-ID: <9510260439.AA20369@Rt66.com>


Here are a bunch of HEPlaR missiles to play with.  All have 500kt det-laser 
warheads.  The maximum gs are listed in a slightly different format than
you're used to.  Any gs number in () is the "real" value calculated
using the actual mass of the missile.  If the design also has a number
out of the parenthesis, that is the max gs of a straight FFS design (you
can tell this by the fact that the mass is less than 7.5 which is the
15*disp maximum) using the slop rule.  The designs are only valid for
the figure in parenthesis, however due to the internal structure.  Done
in the FFS way the gs would be between the two figures given if the
bracing were done for the intermediate value.

All missiles have an armor value of 3, and are fully braced for the gs
in the parenthesis.  I included the ffs gs to hem in the possibilities
for these guys.


Damage
------------
1/25-79

				gs			
TL/type		Mass	Cost	ffs("real")	gturns	Sensor	sigs
----------	------	-----	-----------	------	------	--------------
16 S/FIM	8.046	2.225	(30)		96	2P	+4/+3/+4/+3/+1
16 S/FIM	7.456	2.178	42 (28)		109	2P	" "
16 Cont.	10.202	1.833	(39)		46	-	" "
15 S/FIM	7.488	2.318	31 (20)		126	2P	" "
15 Cont.	8.576	1.671	(25)		112	-	" "
15 S/FIM	7.079	1.902	29 (21)		135	1P	" "	
14 S/FIM	7.221	1.916	16 (11)		142	1P	" "
13-14Cont.	12.277	1.887	(14)		82	-	" "
13 S/FIM	7.348	2.161	16 (10)		137	1P	" "
12 S/FIM	7.446	2.11	13 (8)		147	1P	" "	
12 S/FIM 	10.487	2.246	(10)		119	1P	" "


SIM = Semi-Independent Missile
FIM = Fully Independent Missile
Cont. = Controlled

Controlled missiles were optimized to have the biggest gmax possible.

Tactically they are used almost as direct fire weapons.  S/FIMs are used
for longer range applications, and by small craft.  If there is a missile
at the TL with a lower mass, it is more likely to be used on a fighter
since they are also performance limited by their total mass.  

Most S/FIMs are actually used in a target-designated role within sensor
range of the firing craft.  If the launcher has a Lock-On on the target
with an active sensor, use the active sensors short range for the
missile's attempt to lock the target.  They are also used in a
Anti-Radiation Missile role (ARM).  If the target is active, use *twice*
the short range of the target's active sensor, TL differences are treated as
the jamming task is.

BTW, I use the term "slop rule" because it allows design slop (a good
thing), not as an editorial comment (I'll set rant mode on for those
:-)

-Merrick

------------------------------

End of TRAVELLER Digest 463
***************************
