CT Only: TECHNOLOGY LEVELS and Spaceships

[Straybow]

True, but I would also stipulate that it's a bit more nuanced than that.
This is where the LBB2 vs LBB5 debate comes in handy.

LBB2 "ship stuff" is basically "commercial off the shelf" technology, meaning this kind of "import and it's all good" like you're talking about will DEFINITELY APPLY to LBB2 components.

LBB5 "ship stuff" is ... custom made ... for the the specific ship class. That means that you're basically putting a floor on the minimum tech level of your support logistics. Wherever you go to for maintenance and overhauls, they have to be able to manufacture and supply (locally) the tech level of the ship they're going to be working on ... because it's a CUSTOM BUILD. This creates a kind of "one way ratchet" in terms of supportable tech. Go "too high tech" and you're basically "tethered" to a support infrastructure of that tech level or higher, every single year.

Not so. If I want a gasoline motor with a certain amount of horsepower, I can find it. Depending on the HP, I almost certainly have a choice between multiple form factors: number of cylinders; in-line vs flat opposed vs V; high torque low RPM vs lower torque higher RPM. I could even look at diesel options just in case.

In the same way, there could be as many starship drive and power plant manufacturers as there are industrialized planets, or more than one on a planet in some cases. There would be an aftermarket for parts, as well as designs for on-demand manufacturing. It's thirty centuries in the future, man.

 

[BlackBat242]

Krypto was the first of the Vargr, being exposed to cosmic rays, as a pioneer of the space race.

Eventually, better radiation shielding was integrated in spacecraft hulls.

After retirement, he launched a fintech start up.

What the *$*# are you talking about?

 

[Grav_Moped]

Not so. If I want a gasoline motor with a certain amount of horsepower, I can find it. Depending on the HP, I almost certainly have a choice between multiple form factors: number of cylinders; in-line vs flat opposed vs V; high torque low RPM vs lower torque higher RPM. I could even look at diesel options just in case.

In the same way, there could be as many starship drive and power plant manufacturers as there are industrialized planets, or more than one on a planet in some cases. There would be an aftermarket for parts, as well as designs for on-demand manufacturing. It's thirty centuries in the future, man.

The thing LBB5 brings in is differentiation by tech level (power plant size/cost and capabilty-ceilings, mostly on jump range). Ignoring that factor removes one of that system's constraints and thereby alters the game universe. You may, or may not, want that.

That gasoline motor might be a high-tech, high-rpm turbocharged and fuel injected unit, or a big old carbureted, naturally-aspirated, slow-revving V8. Same power output, maybe, but different weight and different cost for the same HP at the rear wheels. Local shade-tree mechanic out in the boonies could probably clean out a fouled carburetor, or fix the linkage to its butterfly valve, mostly with common hand tools. A failed fuel injector on a newer engine would have him mail-ordering a replacement.

 

[kilemall]

Not so. If I want a gasoline motor with a certain amount of horsepower, I can find it. Depending on the HP, I almost certainly have a choice between multiple form factors: number of cylinders; in-line vs flat opposed vs V; high torque low RPM vs lower torque higher RPM. I could even look at diesel options just in case.

In the same way, there could be as many starship drive and power plant manufacturers as there are industrialized planets, or more than one on a planet in some cases. There would be an aftermarket for parts, as well as designs for on-demand manufacturing. It's thirty centuries in the future, man.

Don’t agree, but well argued.

LBB2 would be like classic Ford or Chevy V6 and V8 built in the millions, no electronic injection, readily fixable even in the boondocks in Africa with plentiful parts. On a larger form factor, something like the Alco or EMD engines used in both locomotives and boats.

LBB5 would be higher performance electronics managed turbo engines and gas turbines/jet engines, top end nuclear reactors- more bang for the dton with better fuel use but at the cost of a greater logistics demand to keep them flying.

Underpinning this view are two external factors.

Figured out that MCr1 per dton or better cargos ship well over dozens of parsecs so IND planets can sell them at 30% less and everyone can make a profit at both ends (while fitting a narrative of distant powerful planets suppressing frontier competition).

And TL/IND matters when it comes to starports. TL is commonly used equipment and transportation, my view is it’s more a function of what economic activity supports that TL. Starport level is arguably an outlier oasis of high tech by definition, indicating activity or funding to sustain it. Non-Ind means no way there is local production of any major capacity, all parts have to be imported. This is a very TCS perspective.

In combination, that says to me that an A-TL B starport can fix and make any letter drive ship and build/maintain TL B LBB5 ships. But an A-TL 8 Non-Ind starport can build letter drive ships only through imports and only maybe repair kludge something together to get your LBB5 ship to a properly equipped planet. An A-TL 8 starport with enough pop can sustain at least rare imported makers to emergency repair LBB5 ships but still isn’t a maintenance station for them.

Creates a picture of TL15 ships being rarely in private hands outside of megacorps and powerful/rich people, which suits me. Not everyones cup of tea.

 

[Spinward Flow]

Creates a picture of TL15 ships being rarely in private hands outside of megacorps and powerful/rich people, which suits me. Not everyones cup of tea.

Also creates a condition in which "TL=15 MINIMUM ONLY!" LBB5.80 starships are effectively "tethered" to the logistics support infrastructure of a very limited number of worlds. This then limits the "useful range" of such ships under civilian ownership, since they need to return every year for annual overhaul maintenance to that same limited number of worlds capable of maintaining such high technology.

That then creates the necessarily "lower tech" space to operate in that can drive a determination to "go as low tech as you can" while still retaining the performance features you desire and consider essential.

It's a lowest common denominator vs highest common denominator kind of comparison ... one that is well suited to making "adventures out on the fringes" FEEL more ... adventure-y ... when you aren't (because you "can't") permanently angling for the Munchkin Option of TL=15 EVERYTHING by default.

Once you get past THAT hurdle in thinking and perspective, and start looking at Sector Maps, the whole Nature Of The Game changes rather dramatically. Suddenly, the campaign universe has a lot more texture and variety to it, adding a lot more flavor and richness to the setting in different colors and ranges of possibility. TL=15 Or Nothing(!) actually turns into a very boring munchkin experience pretty quickly, because when you set your threshold at "only the best!" you make more than 99% of your setting turn into Vendor Bait/Trash.

 

[Sir Brad]

You end up with "Hold Back Conspiracies" where the best tech world in a cluster doesn't advance because if they do they will loose half their Export Market bacause all of a sudden their coustomers can't afford to upgrade and or the new TL is too far removed for Backwards Compatibility.

 

[Straybow]

LBB2 would be like classic Ford or Chevy V6 and V8 built in the millions, no electronic injection, readily fixable even in the boondocks in Africa with plentiful parts. On a larger form factor, something like the Alco or EMD engines used in both locomotives and boats.

LBB5 would be higher performance electronics managed turbo engines and gas turbines/jet engines, top end nuclear reactors- more bang for the dton with better fuel use but at the cost of a greater logistics demand to keep them flying.

Not really. LBB2 was an earlier version of a GAME. LBB5 is a later version of a GAME. Anyone playing the game can use either set of rules, or neither in favor of house rules.

I don't understand why so many people bend over backwards to justify things from a set of game rules that are, arguably, broken.

 

[infojunky]

Not really. LBB2 was an earlier version of a GAME. LBB5 is a later version of a GAME. Anyone playing the game can use either set of rules, or neither in favor of house rules.

It's all part and parcel of the different ship scale paradigms, i.e. Small vs Large ship universes.

Though if one looks closely After Book5 most ship where designed with Book5. Though Book2 drives are more size efficient as the ship volume goes up.

I don't understand why so many people bend over backwards to justify things from a set of game rules that are, arguably, broken.

Neither are broken, but they use different assumptions. Consider this Book2 effectively only has two drives Jump and Manuver/Power as originally written. Then the fact that Book2 is about ships and ship combat whilst Book5 is about Fleets and fleet elements.

 

[Straybow]

I'm looking at the whole, not just the idea that drive units only exist in specific discrete sizes. Consider only six "standard" hull configurations, with no consistent pricing discount. Some "standard" configurations have engineering sections that don't fit the most obvious drive and power plant combinations, but instead have several tons of wasted space (since the rules state that the extra engineering space can't be used for cargo).

Don't get me started about per jump pricing...

 

[Condottiere]

The Kalashnikov of starships is the hundred tonne Scoutship - if you assume that the Scout Service hasn't altered the blueprints in a thousand years, it should be in mass production, with lots of civilian accessories for surplus ones.

 

[kilemall]

Not really. LBB2 was an earlier version of a GAME. LBB5 is a later version of a GAME. Anyone playing the game can use either set of rules, or neither in favor of house rules.

I don't understand why so many people bend over backwards to justify things from a set of game rules that are, arguably, broken.

I’m fully aware it’s a game. Selling rules justification whether RAW or house is IMO a primary referee skill for player buy in. I’m exercising mine in the way I see fit for my table.

Game effect is what counts.